I just wanna say Kable’s arguments have convinced me.
When the gun grabbing begins, I will recommend his guns be scheduled to be picked up in the first wave.
More fun news, lets ban gun control legislation :smack:
Molon labe
I would just like to point out, not having a gun on me hardly makes me “defenseless” and the fact that you seem to support the claim that you *are *defenseless without a Smith &Wessen Penis Compensator explains so much.
(Means: ‘Come and take it.’)
Hmm. Will you shoot me if I do?
You’ll have to try and find out.
Isn’t it hard to aim with one hand?
So if someone wants to shoot you with a gun, what are you going to use to protect yourself? Karate?
If someone comes after a senior citizen with a club, what would you have them use? Brazilian Jujitsu?
I agree that nobody should rape, but murder is another word for a killing, and some people need killing. You can kill for self defense, you can kill to protect land and property sometimes, and in some states you can kill if you feel threatened. We carve out these exemptions to legally do something we believe most people should not be allowed to do and we can do the same for guns. If you need a gun, we can say you are allowed to have one for self-defense, but limit that to hand guns and shot guns. If its for hunting, we can carve out an exemption for that as well. We don’t need to give blanket immunity to people owning the item, we need to have laws for exceptions and ban the rest. You will still get your guns for self-defense and for any legal thing, but the result is that most items unsuited for such uses are banned.
Also, consider the comparison with drugs. We ban things like pot and heroin even though there are proper uses of those drugs in medicine and, some would say, for recreation. Drugs can be abused just like guns but they can have legitimate uses too. Plus, with a lot of drugs, you can make your own easier than you can machine together metal pieces for a gun. Why do we ban most drugs, even ones legal in pharmaceutical situations? Because we understand that the item lends itself to horrible abuse.
If you want to keep going, we ban plenty of other things as well. You can’t own bombs or bazookas, child porn, biological agents, chemicals, or even move large amounts of legal items like cash when traveling. On its own, you can say each one of these items are surely only dangerous if misused, but if by some happenstance you come across a case of ricin in your deceased uncle’s trailer, or some working munitions from grandpa George who fought in WW2, and the authorities found out about it, you could be in trouble if you simply wanted it. There’s no reason why the law cannot compel us not to own something if they believe misuse or illegal use of it can be dangerous. Hell, you know that for most people, its even illegal to own eagle feathers? Feathers!
The only differences I see with guns are twofold. One, its the only thing listed that is in the Constitution (though one could argue that bazookas count too), so people seem to feel that as long as its there, they cannot be denied any version of it for legal ownership. And two, guns protect you from other guns so people fear being outgunned and that fear messes with their thinking. Obviously having drugs doesn’t help you or hurt you with other drugs, and neither does having child porn do anything against others who have it. So people tend to believe that they can only protect themselves with guns, and if at any time they are outgunned, that’s reason to get panicky. Well, I disagree. It doesn’t matter of criminals have guns, you have the right to protection using a preset pool of guns. You don’t need heavier firearms, that’s what the police are for. And if they can’t handle it, well, do you worry about what if the police can’t confiscate everyone else’s drugs so you need to have drugs so that not only criminals have it? No? Then its ok with guns too
How do you know grandpa isn’t going to be a problem? Can you foretell the future? Plenty of people who used to own guns legally misuse them later. And plenty of people, without gun registration and background checks, get guns who shouldn’t have gotten them in the first place. In another topic, I mentioned that I don’t subscribe to the magical supervillain theory. All criminals are not going to be able to get a gun if some of it is restricted. Some will be caught, some will give up finding the hassle is not worth it, some will still get the guns they want, and some will get ones that limit their uses like having a magazine restriction. It is not a given that all criminals, or even most criminals, will be unaffected by a gun registration and background checks. And it is not a given that the number of criminal use is miniscule. With Congress making it impossible for the CDC to do studies on gun violence, I would suspect anybody on that side of the argument if they bring a statistic like that
That’s one scenario. Or, the future criminal does, commits or tries to commit a crime, and gets his guns taken away. Or the criminal registers and gets his gun taken away because of background checks. Or the cops find a lot of guns registered to a legal owner and traces a source of illegal guns and puts a stop to it. All those things are equally possible. I think registration will help precisely those many other scenarios. And so what if we only tracked legally registered guns? We track legally purchased goods without adding smuggling to our GDP. As a variable of information, its good to have a count of how many legal guns we have in the US just as its good to know how much Big Macs McDonald’s is selling each year. Why are you so against information?
Of course its an impediment! Do all rapists kill their victims? That certainly would make it harder to identify them. Why wouldn’t a gun registration violation not catch some criminals, and deter others? Some won’t register, but some will and will get caught, and others will and may be less likely to commit a crime knowing their guns could be traced back to them. If I had an unregistered gun, I could just as easily shoot someone and drop the thing so that I can’t be tied to the gun. If its registered, I’d think twice about committing that crime, at least with that gun. I swear, you people think that all criminals have this power that they get simply by the fact of being criminals. I don’t see any one of the scenarios you gave as the most likely but you choose to focus only on that and ignore everything else.
And really, all it would take for you to comply with the law is a few bucks and some paperwork. If you’re really a law-abiding citizen, then you would hardly even notice new gun control proposals. Unless you plan to commit a crime
How about target shooting?
How about the comparison with alcohol?
They also protect you against knives, hammers, bats and zykon B, don’t they?
Which ones?
Weren’t Hitlers SS mostly all law-abiding citizens?
As it happens, I am a master of Cringing Mantis Kung-Pao. Also, I have the reflexes of a cat, given a warm and cushy spot, I can curl up and be sound asleep in seconds!
Elucidator, I’m glad you are back, but you never answered my question. How do you think gun control laws should be changed?
Rent a gun from the range
Alcohol, properly used, can actually help your health. Unlike a gun, when properly used, generally puts a slug of lead into someone’s fleshy body, which unless you’re Bullet Absorbing Man, doesn’t help your health.
Zyklon B is illegal for you to own or use. And sure, guns do protect you from some of those things, I never claimed they didn’t. Also, I never claimed we can get a ban on all guns through, you can still protect yourself against knives, hammers, and bats, with your handgun or shotgun. Good enough for you, who apparently lives in a Mega Man level
Short answer: the legal ones. Long answer: you can protect yourself with guns deemed sufficiently efficient for self defense such as handguns and shotguns
I’m sure Hitler’s SS ate food and drank water. Tell you what, I’ll agree you’re right but you have to stop eating and drinking permanently. You know, to be less like Hitler. Me? I’ll agree that Hitler had some merits with the whole delicious German bratwursts thing
I am still firmly in the Keep the Goodam Things If They Mean That Fucking Much to You Caucus. There’s too many, they don’t rot, they don’t go away. So, “grabbing” won’t work.
I do very much favor any effort to change our culture from the violence addled state it currently suffers, but that is a long, slow slog.
That said, there appears to be a rough and general consensus forming about minimal requirements. Not at all sure it will do any good, but see no good reason to oppose it.
Thank you for your interest. I suspect you are most likely looking for a point to nitpick at, but hearing my opinion can only be helpful to you, and I am a generous soul by nature.
That sounds like you would like to get rid of some or all guns but just don’t think you can. What would you wish to have banned or confiscated, like say, if you had the power to do it?
How would you do that?
What do you mean by that?
So handguns that are more often used in crimes and accidents are cool, but you would ban target guns that are hardly ever used for homicide or in accidents? What’s the point of that?
I don’t know about that. Murder is bad for your health and a gun can prevent you from being murdered. Sounds healthful to me.
It was legal in Nazi Germany wasn’t it?
So an uzi-pistol is cool? http://world.guns.ru/handguns/hg/isr/uzi-pistol-e.html
What are you talking about?
Its unrealistic to have a handgun ban and if we take one target gun out of the hands of criminals, its fine
More guns means you’re more likely to be murdered. Owning a gun makes you more likely to get shot
Lucky we’re not both 70 years back in time and tens of thousands of miles away
Nah, let’s ban those too, just for fun
I dunno, you brought up Hitler, I was just trying to keep up
Does that mean you really want a handgun ban, but will just settle for rifles?
According to the anti-gun research like the study by Kellerman only owning a handgun made you more likely to get shot, owning a rifle made you less likely. Didn’t you know this, or do you just not care?
I hope we stay lucky, in the meantime I’ll keep my guns, all of them thanks.
Why? It’s just a handgun?
Yeah, and I had a point to do so. What’s your point?
Stupid guys bring up Hitler. Smart guys bring up Heisenberg. Maybe.
But you didn’t bring up Hitler? Elucidator, tell me about the gun laws you really want.