Gun Control

[SaltyDawg]

Ugh, no one wants to "disarm the law-abiding public" FFS. Just make it so "the law-abiding public" can't buy the more intense and capable of guns. I don't give a **** if you have a pistol in your shoebox, but I do care when a guy can buy endless rounds of ammo online for his high capacity killing machine. So don't get it twisted.

Why is it any of your business what I buy?

Sure, you probably have a vested interest in how I use my guns, but what guns I actually own is none of your business. Why I decide to buy guns is none of your business. What someone says my gun was designed to do is none of your business.

It's already against the law to kill innocent people. No need for laws that target legal, responsible, tax paying citizens.

Can someone please define "police state" for me please? I keep hearing how we might someday be on the road to becoming a police state, but we might actually already be one.

And isn't it weird how as we strip our citizens of their guns, we're arming citizens in Syria/Libya/Egypt/etc with much more powerful weaponry? Wake up people.

I remember watching a show about the civil war on the history channel a year or 2 ago. As the northern troops were matching through the southern states freeing slaves, one was asked if they would join the war if they were all given guns. His response was that if they all had guns, there never would have been a war.

 

[One Brow]

My point being is that I do not think it will be effective. Keep in mind all the large ammo clips already out there. Hell I just saw a russian shotgun for sell with a 30 round drum. The thousands and thousands of high ammo clips already out there will still be out there. If they pass a law outlawing those will everyone turn them in? No.
Connecting mental health records to background checks and making firearms training available are much better ways to combat gun violence in my opinion.

I'm OK with passing laws that have a long-term effect, if there is no viable way to accomplish a goal in the short term.
Which of the recent shootings (say in the past two years) do you see having been prevented by this mental health database?

 

[One Brow]

Some people just want to ignore those inconvenient truths though.

Other people like to claim unrelated occurrences are related.

 

[Qman]

Ugh, no one wants to "disarm the law-abiding public" FFS. Just make it so "the law-abiding public" can't buy the more intense and capable of guns. I don't give a **** if you have a pistol in your shoebox, but I do care when a guy can buy endless rounds of ammo online for his high capacity killing machine. So don't get it twisted.

Until in 10 years that pistol is a 'baby-killing machine' inspired by the devil.

 

[Qman]

Just like that man in NE who shot his own son whom he thought was an intruder. Be careful man, life's not a video game

I see this as a question of training. Proper use of a tactical light would make this very unlikely. Note that tactical style 'assault' rifles with a rail that can mount light are much safer in dark situations. A rifle is easier to aim than a pistol and with a light you can see exactly what you are shooting at.

 

[MoTappin]

Criminals don't care about the gun laws, which is why they are criminals. If law abiding Americans can't own guns, the only people who did have them would be the bad guys. They outlawed homicide, assault, burglary etc. long ago and guess what? If people want to kill somebody, they'll do it however they can: gun, knife, poison, beating, whatever. If somebody with bad intentions wants to score a gun, there are 10 more people willing to sell it to them. I'm a strong supporter of 2nd amendment rights. An un-armed people invites tyranny because the government no longer fears the public.

Government officials don't worry about it because they have armed guards to protect them. They will always have access to that. Nobody else is assigned to protect my kids, so the responsibility is mine & I'll take it. People worry about criminals with guns going after them or their kids, so they scream for more gun control. But what about when those same kind of people come into your house (having scored weapons illegally) or go into public places and start shooting? I don't know about you guys, but I'd rather have the ability to defend the innocent with the same means the criminals will always get access to, like it or not.

People wonder how others can store guns in a house where they are raising kids. With secure locks for one thing, and also with education. I would rather have them than not have them. That's my opinion and everyone is entitled to theirs. That's what makes America great.

 

[Stoked]

Other people like to claim unrelated occurrences are related.

So gun laws have no relation to gun violence?

Then we cans top this gun control debate right now.

 

[Stoked]

Ugh, no one wants to "disarm the law-abiding public" FFS. Just make it so "the law-abiding public" can't buy the more intense and capable of guns. I don't give a **** if you have a pistol in your shoebox, but I do care when a guy can buy endless rounds of ammo online for his high capacity killing machine. So don't get it twisted.

https://www.foxnews.com/politics/20...l-package-in-nation-passed-by-new-york-state/

Read the 5th paragraph. IT is very much talked about and desired by some people.

 

[One Brow]

If law abiding Americans can't own guns, the only people who did have them would be the bad guys.

In countries with strict gun laws, criminals don't have guns, either.

 

[One Brow]

you've brought the stats which show that where it's legal to carry guns, violent crime of all kinds markedly declines. ...

So gun laws have no relation to gun violence?

You do understand there is a difference between "violent crimes of all kinds" and "gun violence", correct?

I do think that the rate of violent crimes has many more factors than gun ownership, quite possibly to the point were gun laws have no effect on the rate of violent crimes. That doesn't mean they have no effect on severity of violent crimes. For example, in a domestic dispute, a violent altercation involving a gun is several times more likely to be fatal than one that does not.

 

[Stoked]

You do understand there is a difference between "violent crimes of all kinds" and "gun violence", correct?

I do think that the rate of violent crimes has many more factors than gun ownership, quite possibly to the point were gun laws have no effect on the rate of violent crimes. That doesn't mean they have no effect on severity of violent crimes. For example, in a domestic dispute, a violent altercation involving a gun is several times more likely to be fatal than one that does not.

Considering that the stats being provided are singling out "gun violence" that seems like a silly question.

To me if a person wanted to stop gun violence then they would be far more against pistols than "assault rifles". Pistols kill more people each year in more shootings than "assault rifles" do.

Don't believe me? Go look it up.

 

[Hartsock]

In countries with strict gun laws, criminals don't have guns, either.

I find this borderline impossible to believe. I would like to see the facts. The only facts I've seen are the ones that show violence increasing when guns are outlawed, but those may have been pushed on me by the conservatives so I'm open and willing to take in any other facts and statistics.