Beside the point? It is the point. But Bordy covered it, so I won't belabor it.
Gun Control
- Thread starter larryselbows
- Start date
Beside the point? It is the point. But Bordy covered it, so I won't belabor it.
Yeah, because food has never been regulated!
:rolls eyes:
:rolls eyes:
but anyhow, I'm a little verklempt, talk amongst yourselves...
I'm not taking any positions because the issue is difficult and anything more than general ideas is way beyond my level of expertise. I honestly don't know what is the best approach. I do know that making a decision based on faulty paradigms or naked statements of rights is unlikely to be a good approach, because that's never a good approach. As for the focus of my disagreement, outside of moevillini (who hasn't put forth any policy proposals recently), the people in here doing the arguing are very much focused on the pros of owning guns, with nearly an outright dismissal of victims, in some cases. Naturally, by comparison, I'll seem focused on the victims.
Just a couple of pages ago, I said that if all gun owners behaved as Stoked described himself behaving, then I would see no need for gun control. Considering that, do you really think there is no pleasing me?
What is the overboard regulation being considered?
What specific stringent limit have I endorsed? At most, I said I could see why a ban on university property is reasonable.
The AWB and clip/magazine restrictions.
For info on this it is right here in this thread, usually provided in the best detail by Gameface.
Not an argument on what might happen, but one on what does happen with measurable frequency.
So, you're saying this great, law-abiding gun culture will decide that laws aren't worth obeying after all, and that at heart they are criminals?
If people did not feel they were benefiting from texting while driving, they would not be doing it.
Given that, when I made the comparison to hand washing, I explicitly said that gun ownership had more benefits than not washing hands and the issue was more complex, your statement of what I will or will not acknowledge is demonstrably false.
Very clever. At heart they will stand up for their freedoms regardless of wether others think they will have it.
As for the "...what does happen with measurable frequency..." How many CC holders have commited murder or attempted to with their weapon at a university campus? How will banning 6 cosmetic features on a weapon stop shootings? How are gun free zones working out?
From what's been in this thread so far, the AWB restriction was inappropriate because there's no good definition of an AWB (and the last ban had some illogical and ill-considered restrictions), and I never did get a good reason why limiting magazine sizes was some huge inconvenience, since the main argument against such limits seems to be that magazines can be seapped out quickly. I agree badly defined legislation is not worth having, but that doesn't make a ban itself an overreach (for example, I believe fully automatic weapons are banned), the overreach will be based on the definition provided for an AWB in this bill.
So, why do you consider these overboard regulations? Can you contrast them with regulations you do not consider an overboard, to help illustrate the difference?