GUN CONTROL is STUPID. HELL YEAH

[Revolution 9]

I'm with you there. But how is "Less guns less guns violence. It's pretty simple." an adult way of tackling the topic? It's not nearly that simple.

That statement is just how I feel. Obviously more factors go into it than that. Well lets break down where we know that is true. If you put a gun into your home you are bringing in potential threat. The presence of a firearm in the home increases the risk of unintentional firearm related death among children no?

 

[Revolution 9]

Lets just throw out an example here. Lets say that some faction of the US Government tried to put us into camps or something like, just because we disagreed with them.

Would it be easier for them to do that if we did not have weapons?

This isn't about disarming the United States. I am not for that. Personally I don't want a weapon but it doesnt mean you cant. Can we not look at the current state of guns in our country. Are you ok with what is allowed to be purchased? I personally dont feel any fear going into a Mall here, bank, gas station or Movie theater. I do not feel the same way in the US right now.

 

[Hantlers]

This isn't about disarming the United States. I am not for that. Personally I don't want a weapon but it doesnt mean you cant. Can we not look at the current state of guns in our country. Are you ok with what is allowed to be purchased? I personally dont feel any fear going into a Mall here, bank, gas station or Movie theater. I do not feel the same way in the US right now.

Of course I'm ok with what can be purchased.

Semi-automatic weapons, bolt-action and lever-action weapons.

In order to get a fully automatic weapon you have go through extensive background checks, pay a **** ton of money, and your name will be registered with the government and you're probably going to be monitored a little more closely. That's if you do it legally of course. Not much you can do about how people purchase them illegally. Plus they're all pre-86, so it's not like these are modern guns. Still lethal, but as far as I know, nobody who has purchased them legally has ever done anything they shouldn't with them.

Tell me, what weapons do you have a problem with in the US?

 

[Revolution 9]

1. You said gun violence, not gun accident.

2. Gun accident rate is so low it's meaningless to bring it up.

3. North Dakota's homicide rate is consistently low and comparable to the best Euro countries'. ND has a top five gun ownership rate among US states. More guns clearly in itself does not equal more gun violence.


The US violence/homicide problem is largely a southern states problem (that many professors link to pride among whites, and not to guns).

1. Gun accidents are gun violence.
2. Wrong. The rate of gun violence is so high that the accident %s are low, but not meaningless. 75 kids die a year from completely preventable deaths. 600 adults. Not meaningless at all.
3. Ive lived in North Dakota. Not a good example.

 

[Revolution 9]

Of course I'm ok with what can be purchased.

Semi-automatic weapons, bolt-action and lever-action weapons.

In order to get a fully automatic weapon you have go through extensive background checks, pay a **** ton of money, and your name will be registered with the government and you're probably going to be monitored a little more closely. That's if you do it legally of course. Not much you can do about how people purchase them illegally. Plus they're all pre-86, so it's not like these are modern guns. Still lethal, but as far as I know, nobody who has purchased them legally has ever done anything they shouldn't with them.

Tell me, what weapons do you have a problem with in the US?

What purpose does an assault rifle serve? Why do we need this?

 

[colton]

That statement is just how I feel. Obviously more factors go into it than that. Well lets break down where we know that is true. If you put a gun into your home you are bringing in potential threat. The presence of a firearm in the home increases the risk of unintentional firearm related death among children no?

Sure, that's *one* of the consequences, but it's not the *only* consequence. So some types of violence go up with increased gun ownership. But not all type of violence. And it's very possible (in my opinion) that the number of lives saved (in e.g. preventing state violence against citizens) could be greater than the number of lives lost.

 

[Revolution 9]

Sure, that's *one* of the consequences, but it's not the *only* consequence. So some types of violence go up with increased gun ownership. But not all type of violence. And it's very possible (in my opinion) that the number of lives saved (in e.g. preventing state violence against citizens) could be greater than the number of lives lost.

Colton I completely respect that opinion. That is the argument of people for guns. That the lives guns do protect, outweigh the accidental deaths. I get that. In some areas guns are needed more, and in some situations guns allow hunters to provide for their families. The rural people who depend on this food from hunting.

For me I feel safer around less guns. That statement was not complete obviously because there are more factors. It's more of a personal statement as well. I feel less safe with a weapon in the house than I do without one. America has 10 times the amount of gun deaths than Germany. I feel safer here. I think the real here question is what is reasonable for the needs of citizens.

 

[Hantlers]

What purpose does an assault rifle serve? Why do we need this?

Ugh. Just because it looks like a weapon an army might use, does not mean that it is a weapon an army would use.

For example: these two rifles are essentially the same thing. Semi-automatic .22 rifles, made by the same company (Ruger). One of them just looks "scarier".




Now to answer your question, I use them for hunting. I'll use an AR version of a .22 to shoot things like rockchucks, gophers, squirrels...small things like that. It's nice to not have to reload as often, and AR types are very accurate, which is nice for small game. I would use a .223 AR version to shoot wolves or coyotes. Fast animals where it's nice not to have to reload with a bolt or lever action in order to shoot again, because they can get away from you quick.

Now tell me this, what is wrong with having them? Because people abuse them? Better get rid of alcohol too then. Hell, we better get rid of cars. Removing things just because people abuse them is not the right answer.

 

[franklin]

1. Gun accidents are gun violence.
2. Wrong. The rate of gun violence is so high that the accident %s are low, but not meaningless. 75 kids die a year from completely preventable deaths. 600 adults. Not meaningless at all.
3. Ive lived in North Dakota. Not a good example.

1. Changing definitions is trying too hard.

2. 600 deaths out of 330,000,000 people is inconsequential. More people die falling out of bed (650), and twice as many falling down stairs (1307). Accidents have no place in the adult conversation on gun control. Dragging it in is fear mongering and going to earn you more pushback than acceptance.

3. Anecdotally convenient to match your viewpoint?

 

[franklin]

Ugh. Just because it looks like a weapon an army might use, does not mean that it is a weapon an army would use.

For example: these two rifles are essentially the same thing. Semi-automatic .22 rifles, made by the same company (Ruger). One of them just looks "scarier".

View attachment 3216 View attachment 3217


Now to answer your question, I use them for hunting. I'll use an AR version of a .22 to shoot things like rockchucks, gophers, squirrels...small things like that. It's nice to not have to reload as often, and AR types are very accurate, which is nice for small game. I would use a .223 AR version to shoot wolves or coyotes. Fast animals where it's nice not to have to reload with a bolt or lever action in order to shoot again, because they can get away from you quick.

Now tell me this, what is wrong with having them? Because people abuse them? Better get rid of alcohol too then. Hell, we better get rid of cars. Removing things just because people abuse them is not the right answer.

I bet AR's/AK's/Mac's are outlawed from new manufacturing/purchase within 20 years. They're too deadly in crowded areas for congress to do nothing. Of course, at that point they'll be replaced with handguns in the mass shootings, which can be much more deadly in the hands of a trained killer.

 

[colton]

This isn't about disarming the United States. I am not for that. Personally I don't want a weapon but it doesnt mean you cant. Can we not look at the current state of guns in our country. Are you ok with what is allowed to be purchased? I personally dont feel any fear going into a Mall here, bank, gas station or Movie theater. I do not feel the same way in the US right now.

No offense, but I think that says more about you than it does about the U.S. I've never felt fear going into a mall, bank, gas station, or movie theater in the U.S.

 

[Hantlers]

A handgun is far more effective for a mall/school shooting than a rifle is. The only reason people want AR's banned is because they don't know what the hell they are.