Jazzta
Guest
Take all the guns away, lol
El Paso Shooting
- Thread starter Scat
- Start date
Take all the guns away, lol
I guarantee that’ll lead to civil war. Sure, some people will turn in their guns but most wont. It’ll start in small towns like Coldwater, MS and Panguitch, UT. Citizens there will simply refuse to turn them in. You think those local sheriffs are going to confiscate them? Not going to happen. We’ve already got sheriffs refusing to enforce red flag laws in Colorado for instance.
So then what? Door to door searches by federal agents? National guard? Take southern Utah for example. The triple deuce unit from southern Utah won’t raid house in southern Utah. They’re not kicking down doors of their neighbors, friends and family. So what, other stats fairs units come in? How many local police forces will stand for door to door searches?
I’m all for buy back programs and the like. Pay more, offer tax breaks, company discounts...whatever. But if you think criminalizing gun ownership is the answer you’re in for a massive surprise.
Also, making something illegal doesn’t make people consider those doing it to be bad people. Take marijuana for example. Just because it’s illegal doesn’t make people label them “bad guys” or even think of them that way.
Somethings I’d like to see.
Linking mental health to back ground checks.
2-3 wait for more extensive back ground checks
Require a gun training course for CC permits.
Stiffer penalties for lazy gun ownership resulting in harm or crime.
Red flag laws that have to go through a judge.
Linking mental health to back ground checks.
2-3 wait for more extensive back ground checks
Require a gun training course for CC permits.
Stiffer penalties for lazy gun ownership resulting in harm or crime.
Red flag laws that have to go through a judge.
Zombie
Well-Known Member
Australia yeah, not so sure about the UK, what with the Brexit debacle and all. And I'd put money on Scottish independence happening before any fracturing of the US.
In any case my point was that the US is closer to those countries than say Sri Lanka, which another poster brought up.
Getting Traded
Banned
Duh, Gun control laws, like they have in Europe. What kind of a question is that? Like more rigid requirements for gun ownership, registration, licensing, gun training / requirement to a pass a gun license test, like is done for motor vehicles -- mental illness and violent history should rule out gun ownership, e.g. Banning assault rifles, or any automatic-type weapons for those not in law enforcement.
Last edited:
Zombie
Well-Known Member
Yeah I agree. There's no way a bill for gun confiscation would even get to the floor of the senate without a violent uprising.
Aggressive buy back programs I think will have some success. Although even that is either going to require a filibuster proof Dem majority, or abandonment of it altogether.
And even if any type of law outlawing guns or requiring their confiscation would require reworking the constitution. The Supreme Court has several rulings supporting gun rights.
So reworking the constitution requires an amendment and unless massive changes in our representatives happen that won’t pass. So that leaves a constitutional convention. But that opens a whole new can of worms as anything else can be changed as well.
Are their any other options for changing the constitution? Serious question.
I’m all for aggressive buy back programs. Hell make them mandatory for every state. I’m down with that.
Naw, I think changing the simple base discussions about guns is where we start. Create a healthy, mutually respected discussion and culture around guns. Then pass laws, within the constitution, reflecting that.
Otherwise change the constitution, stand pat or start armed conflict over guns.
I know which of those two options are total non starters for me.
Safetydan
Well-Known Member
Thanks for the reply. I was more joking than serious. It was more a crack at the old "criminals won't give their guns up" trope. They have guns now, they'll have guns in the future. Civilians with guns don't stop criminals with guns anyways. I don't see it as a legitimate argument.
If I was sure it wouldn't lead to a civil war or a large contingent of violent resistance, then, yeah, I'm for taking all the guns away. Considering white culture in America now, I completely agree with your post below:
Good start in my opinion. I wonder what a society would look like if every citizen, in addition to most of the above, was allotted a single standard issue rifle for general hunting and armed militia use in the case of invasion.
Archie Moses
Well-Known Member
No, I got you, man. I get it. We're on the same side and I know regardless of how it's dissected, both you and I think any sort of mass killings is disgusting and we should do everything within our powers to stop them.
I just don't get why people are so adamant about owning AR guns, or even pistols for the matter. I own a few guns - a 1944 Mosan Nogant I restored, a 12 gauge shotgun, and a pellet gun that shoots 1400 fps (It can kill wild boars easily) and I'd be glad to give them up. I only use them to hunt and I don't hunt that often because I don't enjoy killing things. I would never own a pistol unless it had some sort of history like the peace maker. I'd be much more prone to blowing my head off than using it for home protection (I'm not suicidal, but statistics definitely say both you, I or anyone else are more likely to do that too.)
I don't even enjoy going out in large crowds anymore because I'm constantly thinking what would Jason Bourne look for and do if some maniac started shooting up the place.
Mass killings shake me. They're depressing and I'm not even a victim to them. I can't imagine living through it, having a friend or family or someone I knew get killed. Life is so precious and to have someone rob you of that based on skin color, political beliefs, religion, emotional distress, etc is just sadistic af.
I hate guns.
Archie Moses
Well-Known Member
You have to register your guns every year or so. You can be audited/house searched for guns. No more private sales. If you're caught with guns and don't follow the process, you're hit with fines, stripped of gun rights and possible jail (I don't like jailing people for victimless crimes though.) Give money for guns turned in.
You got to start somewhere. There's no perfect solution, but what we have right now obviously is not working.
Haynes v US, 7-1 decision saying that only those who make, manufacture, or important guns must register them. A gun registry would go against a SC decision. One with a significant overwhelming majority.
Right back to the constitution angle I’ve been mentioning.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_firearm_court_cases_in_the_United_States
List of US court cases dealing with, or touching, the 2nd amendment.
List of US court cases dealing with, or touching, the 2nd amendment.
Archie Moses
Well-Known Member
Amendments are meant to be changed.
Our constitution was written in the 1700s. Some of that **** is outdated and needs to be changed to reflect 2019.
Owning a gun shouldn't be a right. It should be a monitored regulated privilege. It's clear that something has to change.
None of that changes my point. Passing a law like that goes nowhere. It’s wasted time and effort.
What would be productive is changing the constitution. As I’ve previously said. But that also carries extreme risk.
If we want change we have to be smart about it and do it the right way. Otherwise we simply spin our wheels and go nowhere.
I would be in favor of having gun owners be of a certain age (like 19, 21 or 24), have to take formal training, and pass a basic certification for gun safety. Owning and operating a higher powered weapon should then have a higher set of requirements. It would be a renewable license with different levels of classification, like a driver's license.
However, what we're dealing with in these mass-shooting cases, is a pretty rare, nihilistic type of person who is willing to commit mass murder and be shot dead on the scene. This type of person isn't likely to be overly swayed by gun laws, or any other laws for that matter. It's an extreme outlier case where someone literally has the mentality of a suicide bomber. I think it's a case that requires its own analysis, and it can't be used as a guide for the general population.
However, what we're dealing with in these mass-shooting cases, is a pretty rare, nihilistic type of person who is willing to commit mass murder and be shot dead on the scene. This type of person isn't likely to be overly swayed by gun laws, or any other laws for that matter. It's an extreme outlier case where someone literally has the mentality of a suicide bomber. I think it's a case that requires its own analysis, and it can't be used as a guide for the general population.
LogGrad98
Well-Known Member
Contributor
2020-21 Award Winner
2022 Award Winner
2023 Award Winner
2024 Award Winner
I did a dna test. I'm 67% Scandinavian, 32% British, 1% from the Balkans. If white exists I'm about as white as you can get.
Archie Moses
Well-Known Member
How do you know it would go no where? To me, being smart is taking the risk to change our gun laws and rights we have no. We have a huge problem and it needs to be changed and fixed. What we have now enables mass shootings and gun violence.
Because it is against a SC decision. And not a 5-4 one. It’s already been tried and rejected as against the constitution.
Haynes v US, 7-1 against.