And you could have avoided all of that by taking a road trip to Arkansas. See, that’s the thing - there’s no law against carrying legally owned firearms across state lines, and many states have loopholes you could drive an Airbus 380 filled to the brim with firearms through. And meanwhile, I’m rather at a loss as to why you consider it so incredibly onerous to have some basic protections in place, such as making you wait a day or two before you can own a gun (a tool most commonly designed first and foremost for killing people) so that they can make sure you don’t have a history of spousal abuse, mental disorder, or terrorist activity - except that none of these things actually disqualify someone from buying a firearm!
Hunting rifles, sure. But most handguns, and definitely all assault rifles? No. They are designed with one thing in mind: efficiently incapacitating and killing humans.
I don’t disagree. Shame that having guns around typically doesn’t make this Problem any better. Where was the “good guy with a gun” in any of These recent shootings?
I hope you clean your gun after you’re done masturbating with it. What the fuck is wrong with you?
So, just to be clear, unless you have the right at any time and under any circumstances to own a gun, you don’t actually have the right to bear arms.
What a childish and asinine interpretation of the law. Based on what you just said, I’d have to wonder how you feel about allowing the sale of guns to known terrorists.
No, I asked. Hence the question mark at the end of my sentence.
So, for the third time, what is the purpose of gun regulations if not to keep some people from owning guns?
So, was it “The People” whom I had to pay to be fingerprinted and investigated in order to buy a gun and apply for a concealed carry permit? Cause I could have sworn I was in the county courthouse when all that happened.
Clearly, it wasn’t “The People”, but even if it were, it wouldn’t make it right for my freedoms to be impinged upon.
In what way is getting a driver’s license more restrictive than buying a gun?
As other posters have noted, by that “logic” nobody in a non-anarchic society is “really free” to do anything.
If the government regulates what kind of milk can be offered for sale, then you’re not “really free” to buy milk. If the government requires you to be over a certain age in order to purchase alcohol, then you’re not “really free” to purchase alcohol.
If that’s the impossible and ridiculous standard that the already hyper-privileged “gun rights” advocates want to apply to gun ownership, then they’ve disqualified themselves from any reasonable and realistic debate.
I dunno if your opinion on the government makes you a terrible person, but your crummy analogy certainly does.
I’ve always wondered why people think the argument equating cars and guns is a good one. Yeah, cars kill people, but as a society we’ve accepted this as a trade off for the benefits they bring. Kinda like living in a city before modern sanitation was developed. Guns may have multiple uses, but a large number of those can be traced directly back to inflicting harm, or threatening to do so, on someone.
On top of it all, cars are pretty fucking regulated already. Maybe compare guns to something that’s not, like synthetic cannabinoids.
Right, if your ability to perform an action, buying milk or a gun for instance, is circumscribed by government, you’re not “really free” to do that thing. It’s clear by the plain meaning of the language.
If you’re okay giving away your freedom, great. I’m not, and the moral idiocy displayed in the OP in this thread, and by several subsequent posters, is not persuasive.
It all boils down to your side yelling “more government, less freedom.” It’s no more sophisticated, logical, or nuanced than my stance of “more freedom, less government.”
You value security over freedom. That’s a callow worldview, and I’ll do what I can not to be ruled by it.
Up until last year (almost 20 years after Port Arthur) when I sold off my guns (to a private gun shop mind, didn’t have to hand them into the police - in fact when I tried they weren’t interested and told me to go to the local gun shop to get rid of them) I was able to own guns in Australia with a minimum of hassle.
So, yeah, you’re so full of shit I bet your eyes are brown.
It’s stated in a part you already quoted, but let me repeat it: the medical restrictions are tougher. In my country, to get my bow license, I was waived a medical exam for the weapons license because I’d already passed the more-limiting medical exam required to get a driving license. My mother would not be able to pass the medical exam for a driving license but she would qualify for a weapons license (her back is a disqualifier for the first, not for the second).
:dubious: So, you live in a society where the government doesn’t regulate what kind of milk can be offered for sale? Or do you just not buy milk? Do you refrain from driving a car or otherwise using the roads because your ability to do so is “circumscribed” by the government’s traffic laws?
Let’s make sure we’ve got this clear: There is essentially no action you can perform in a society with the rule of law that is not to some extent circumscribed by government. Accepting that government regulates what kind of milk you can buy but throwing a tantrum about government regulating when and how you can buy guns doesn’t make you any kind of noble freedom fighter. It just makes you a whiny overprivileged hypocrite.
No, like any reasonable person, I just recognize that there are always tradeoffs between security and freedom. If I’m willing to accept that those tradeoffs exist for milk drinkers, it would be hypocritical to refuse to accept that they exist for gun owners too.
On the whole, I’ve always been in favor of fairly permissive gun ownership laws for law-abiding trustworthy gun owners. But this constant masturbatory refrain of “BECUZ FREEEEEEEEDUMB” on the part of many “gun rights” advocates is shortening my patience. If your argument is nothing more than "If the government has any say in the conditions of my gun ownership then I’M NOT WEALLY FWEEEEEE!!! WAAAAAHHHH IT’S NOT FAIR TO CONSTWAIN MY FWEEEEEEDUM!!!"", then I think it’s okay for the grownups to stop listening.
Help me to understand. People can own guns in Australia, in your words, with a minimum of hassle. Yet, since the law change in the wake of the massacre, there have been no mass shootings. What did the law change that led to the elimination of mass shootings? People can still own guns according to you, so it wasn’t the ability to own guns that stopped mass shootings.
Yes, the sale of milk and driving are regulated where I live. I’m not really free to do those things, because my rights are limited by government action.
But, I still practice those things insofar as I can.
I don’t accept the regulation of milk any more than I accept gun control. Nothing about that makes a hypocrite.
No, you are ruled by a callow worldview. What’s worse, you want to limit my rights because of your worldview.
I’m not willing to accept those tradeoffs for milk or guns. Quit projecting.
This thread started with an idiot equating not agreeing with his views on gun control with unmitigated evil. You’re just the latest in a string of morons who picked up his theme and ran with it.
That’s whining, not me calling bullshit.
There’s nothing grownup about what you’re advocating.
BRNO .22 BA 5 or 10 shot mag 4x scope
Gecko .22 BA single shot
CMC .223 BA 5 shot mag - 3-9x scope
SMLE .303 Mk5 10 shot mag
BRNO U/O 12 gauge shotgun
.223 full-bore target rifle
After Port Arthur I ended up handing in (and being compensated for) a Marlin 995 semi-auto .22 and a Mossberg 8-shot pump action shotgun. The money from those paid for the U/O shotgun and BRNO .22
In the 20 odd years I never once really needed a higher-capacity mag ('cause I can shoot straight ).
In order to own guns I needed to:
[ul]
[li]Be a member of a gun club (SSAA in my case)[/li][li]Pass a safety course[/li][li]Own and store the guns in proper gun safe (with ammo stored separately).[/li][li]Have a firearms license issues by the police[/li][li]Shoot on an approved range four times a year[/li][li]Renew my license every 5 years[/li][li]If I was a hunter I needed written permission from the property owner on whose land I was shooting.[/li][/ul]
Terrible, terrible impositions by the Guvmint’ I know.
The main restriction post- Port Arthur was on semi-auto and pump action firearms. Thats it. Even then professional shooters/cullers can own them if they need them in the line of work.
I was as skeptical as hell about the laws having any effect but the fact is since the regulation change and the removal of semi-auto firearms and magazines over about 10 shots there have been no mass-shooting of the kind that led up to Port Arthur.
The majority of people who want to shoot or hunt still can - in fact shooting sports and gun ownership is having a bit of an upswing at the moment - reported quite breathlessly and with a slight amount of panic by some in the media.
Imagine that I am a convicted serial killer released from jail on probation. Imagine I have made it very clear that I want to kill again. Should I be allowed to buy an AR-15 with no questions asked?
:rolleyes: So you’re a posturing pretend-anarchist who benefits from the advantages of the rule of law in a civilized society, with all its inevitable accompanying governmental restrictions, while claiming that you’re nonetheless staunchly opposed to all such restrictions.
And the only restrictions you actually care about enough to complain about are the ones on gun ownership.
Yes, that does indeed make you a hypocrite. Not to mention a rather vieux jeu one. I thought all you libertarian-stylee posturing pretend-anarchists crawled back into your holes after Katrina and the 2008 market crash, but apparently there are still a few who think indiscriminate cries of “FREEEEEDUMB” are adequate justification for policy positions.
Damuri, Shagnasty, here’s a fine example for you. Waymore is one of you. He exemplifies your pro-murder stance. He thinks what you do, he shares the idea that exercising your shared fetish is more important than life itself. Except, unlike you psychos, he has the courage to say it.
This pitting was really of the non-psychos who preen about their concern but won’t fucking act on it, but yes, the problem they need to act on is *you, *and the disease you and so many other American suffer from. You do need to have your toys and the amendment you cower behind taken away from you.
It’s my understanding that France is fairly gun friendly, in regards to firearm regulation, especially vis a vis the rest of Europe, and rates of gun ownership are fairly high.
).