Let's face it, the real problem is handguns

[Jonathan_Chance]

Right this minute I’m declaring the term ‘ammosexual’ off-limits. Mock gun owners all you like, but we have a specific rule that one cannot imply that another poster derives sexual gratification from their position.

No warning this time. But let’s not let it happen again.

[doorhinge]

@BrainGlutton

However you define an “assault weapon,” it is not the real problem. Long-guns often are used in the mass shootings that get all the press – but most gun-crime in America is done with handguns for the simple reason that handguns are concealable.
We won’t begin to get a handle on this until the 2nd Amendment is either repealed or reinterpreted to allow for some heavy regulation of handgun ownership/possession.

And all this time I was under the impression that the real problem was the psychopathic personality of the monsters who chose to blow people up, or shoot them. Whatever it took as long as they murdered people.

[Tom_Tildrum]

@BrainGlutton

We won’t begin to get a handle on this until the 2nd Amendment is either repealed or reinterpreted to allow for some heavy regulation of handgun ownership/possession.

Presumably you wouldn’t agree with a suggestion to revoke constitutional protections for the vast majority of law-abiding American Muslims because of the actions of a few violent extremists. Why should the analysis be different as to gun owners?

[BrainGlutton]

@doorhinge

And all this time I was under the impression that the real problem was the psychopathic personality of the monsters who chose to blow people up, or shoot them. Whatever it took as long as they murdered people.

Most gun-violence is not done by psychopaths.

[Bricker]

@Stoneburg

I’m sure there are gun owners who are not ammosexuals or gundamentalists. And I don’t really care what sort of emotional or psychological relationship you have with yours, as long as you keep it away from me. What you and your gun gets up to in the safety of your own home is none of my business. If you say that you don’t feel the gun to be an extension of your penis or masculinity I will take your word for it.

I decline your invitation.

In my state, open carry of firearms is perfectly legal. Why in the world should I inconvenience myself by not carrying a firearm when it’s convenient for me, merely to assuage your fears?

In this country, we have representative democracy as our government. That means that our laws are made by elected representatives, not you. The people of my state have made their views clear on the matter. What possible enticement could you offer me to dismiss that consensus in favor of your view?

[BrainGlutton]

@Tom_Tildrum

Presumably you wouldn’t agree with a suggestion to revoke constitutional protections for the vast majority of law-abiding American Muslims because of the actions of a few violent extremists. Why should the analysis be different as to gun owners?

Because not all “constitutional protections” are of equal value.

[Sam_Stone]

Canada is swimming in guns - including ‘assault weapons’ and handguns. Yet our firearms homicide rate is much lower than in the U.S. This might be a clue that the problem is something other than gun ownership.

BTW, there are so many handguns around now that there are long waiting lists to join gun ranges.

[Voyager]

@purplehearingaid

The Boston Marathon bombers didn’t use guns they used pressure cookers
should we put a ban on pressure cookers too??? People will end up buying black market weapons and this would only help supports illegal activities .

Horrible as it was, they killed fewer people than in the last incident. And fewer if they had the kind of weapons the last batch did.

Note that the kind of fertilizer that can be used to make bombs like the Oklahoma City one is regulated.

[CarnalK]

@Sam_Stone

Canada is swimming in guns - including ‘assault weapons’ and handguns. Yet our firearms homicide rate is much lower than in the U.S. This might be a clue that the problem is something other than gun ownership.

BTW, there are so many handguns around now that there are long waiting lists to join gun ranges.

Compared to the U.S., Canada is not swimming in guns. Less than a third of U.S. levels.

[Stoneburg]

@XT

What a complete load of horseshit.

I agree. It’s what is commonly referred to as an “opinion”. They kind of suck, really. At least I tried to make this one funny and original. Sometimes you hit, sometimes you miss (end everyone’s an offing critic…).

[Stoneburg]

@Bricker

I decline your invitation.

In my state, open carry of firearms is perfectly legal. Why in the world should I inconvenience myself by not carrying a firearm when it’s convenient for me, merely to assuage your fears?

In this country, we have representative democracy as our government. That means that our laws are made by elected representatives, not you. The people of my state have made their views clear on the matter. What possible enticement could you offer me to dismiss that consensus in favor of your view?

Dude, as long as you don’t have access to ICBM’s I actually don’t give a shit. I live on the other side of the ocean and if you guys are hell bent on killing each other that is up to you. Just don’t start firing stuff outside your own borders.

But to think that there is not a direct connection between gun ownership and gun usage is… c-r-a-z-y. You may decide that having guns freely available is cool, that it’s worth some extra deaths, and I am totally fine with that (since I don’t live where you do, here I would not be fine with it). But I do think it would be nice if you could admit that that is what you’re doing, and that you at least see the connection between guns and people being shot by guns. It’s right there.

[Ibn_Warraq]

@CarnalK

Compared to the U.S., Canada is not swimming in guns. Less than a third of U.S. levels.

And vastly, vastly less when it comes to handguns.

[Stoneburg]

@Jonathan_Chance

Right this minute I’m declaring the term ‘ammosexual’ off-limits. Mock gun owners all you like, but we have a specific rule that one cannot imply that another poster derives sexual gratification from their position.

No warning this time. But let’s not let it happen again.

Gundamentalist still ok?
Also, lol at the italics.

[octopus]

@Stoneburg

You can only take peoples guns away from them if you claw them from their cold dead hands after they commit a school massacre. If you do it before that you are infringing on the rights of the ammosexuals and the gundamentalists. And as we know, my right to own a tool made specifically for killing humans fast an efficiently is more important than your right not to be shot by me when I lose my mind.

It’s not a problem of rationality and can’t be solved rationally, because everyone who is actually rational already agrees with you. It’s a symptom of collective mental illness that needs to be addressed. For some reason a part of the US population is so afraid that they need guns to feel safe. They are simply put paranoid, either thinking that the government or other people are “out to get them”. When you try to take their guns away they freak out. You need to calm them down and make them feel safe first. To them the gun is “magic” and represents “safety” or “manliness” or something. You can’t reason with them rationally, they have a magic stick that they can kill you with, and they won’t let you have it because they’re afraid you’re going to kill them.

I’m not sure what needs to happen for people to let go of their magic sticks. Obviously regular mass murder isn’t enough. And from what I understand the pro-gun politicians refuse to talk about it because that would be to “politicize” a tragedy. Which is pretty much the most retarded argument ever. When is the right time to talk about gun-control according to these people? Well obviously we have to wait for the mass murdering to stop before we can start talking about what to do about it…

How many straw men can you fit in one post?

[octopus]

@Stoneburg

Dude, as long as you don’t have access to ICBM’s I actually don’t give a shit. I live on the other side of the ocean and if you guys are hell bent on killing each other that is up to you. Just don’t start firing stuff outside your own borders.

But to think that there is not a direct connection between gun ownership and gun usage is… c-r-a-z-y. You may decide that having guns freely available is cool, that it’s worth some extra deaths, and I am totally fine with that (since I don’t live where you do, here I would not be fine with it). But I do think it would be nice if you could admit that that is what you’re doing, and that you at least see the connection between guns and people being shot by guns. It’s right there.

The supply of ammo and weaponry in the USA is ridiculously large. Yet the vast majority of gun owners and potential gun owners go through life with no incident. It’s more of a cultural problem than an availability problem.

[HurricaneDitka]

@CarnalK

Compared to the U.S., Canada is not swimming in guns. Less than a third of U.S. levels.

How are you determining this? Is this % of households that own guns, or is it (imo much sillier) “guns per 100 people”?

[Stoneburg]

@octopus

How many straw men can you fit in one post?

Is it a dare?

@octopus

The supply of ammo and weaponry in the USA is ridiculously large. Yet the vast majority of gun owners and potential gun owners go through life with no incident. It’s more of a cultural problem than an availability problem.

I’d say it’s a combination of cultural factors and social ones. The US seems to have a very fear and anger based culture. Add guns to that and you get more deaths. This math is so incredibly simple that I have to intentionally blind yourself in order to not see it. I suspect that some people refuse to see it because they think that if they admit there is a correlation, they will lose their guns. And they don’t want to lose their guns. Kind of like fundamentalists who don’t want to learn about religion, because it might lead to them losing their god.

[CarnalK]

@HurricaneDitka

How are you determining this? Is this % of households that own guns, or is it (imo much sillier) “guns per 100 people”?

Guns per capita, but by household it is still far lower than in the States - under half as many. Handgun owning households is a much bigger difference. The only number I can quickly find is from 2005, where 3% of Canadian households had a handgun compared to America’s 18% at that time.

[katpohl]

@Stoneburg

You can only take peoples guns away from them if you claw them from their cold dead hands after they commit a school massacre. If you do it before that you are infringing on the rights of the ammosexuals and the gundamentalists. And as we know, my right to own a tool made specifically for killing humans fast an efficiently is more important than your right not to be shot by me when I lose my mind.

It’s not a problem of rationality and can’t be solved rationally, because everyone who is actually rational already agrees with you. It’s a symptom of collective mental illness that needs to be addressed. For some reason a part of the US population is so afraid that they need guns to feel safe. They are simply put paranoid, either thinking that the government or other people are “out to get them”. When you try to take their guns away they freak out. You need to calm them down and make them feel safe first. To them the gun is “magic” and represents “safety” or “manliness” or something. You can’t reason with them rationally, they have a magic stick that they can kill you with, and they won’t let you have it because they’re afraid you’re going to kill them.

I’m not sure what needs to happen for people to let go of their magic sticks. Obviously regular mass murder isn’t enough. And from what I understand the pro-gun politicians refuse to talk about it because that would be to “politicize” a tragedy. Which is pretty much the most retarded argument ever. When is the right time to talk about gun-control according to these people? Well obviously we have to wait for the mass murdering to stop before we can start talking about what to do about it…

I’m a gun owner , and I have been around guns all my life

[Latimera]

@XT

And, it just so happens that there is provision for repealing an amendment in our system. We HAVE done the ‘heavy regulation of handgun’ thingy btw and it doesn’t seem to really do all that much. In DC for instance but most large cities have pretty heavy regulation to complete bans on handguns.

The REAL problem, from the gun control/gun banners perspective is the 2nd…and the attitudes of the majority of Americans who don’t want bans on broad categories of guns, including hand guns. Trying to figure out how to get around those problems has been an ongoing process for the gun control types for decades now. They know they can’t get the 2nd repealed, and their attempts to reinterpret by fiat haven’t worked out all that well thus far, and really what’s been attempted have actually made it more difficult to get any sort of additional regulation put in an uphill battle, since most gun rights people don’t trust most of the gun control types any further than they can throw a dead horse.

Large cities can regulate gun ownership all they want, but it isn’t going to work when guns are readily available by driving out of the city, or to another state. The problem, it seems to me, is the lack of strong, consistent regulations across the country.