Did you read your first sentence? That making it harder to acquire a gun in the US will reduce the number of gun related deaths? OF COURSE IT WILL.
Any reduction in the number of guns out there will help reduce the number of killings. Sure, there are already shitloads of guns. Get the government to do a buy-back (like they did in Aus after the Port Arthur Massacre) and you’ll get guns out of the community. Introduce a strict registration system to be able to buy a gun, and it will reduce the number of guns even more. Anyone with a previous record, mental health issues, already owns more guns than a reasonable person should need…shitcan them. No guns for YOU.
It’s not banning guns. It’s making sure that only those who have a legitimate need to own a gun have access to them. Seriously, the gun fetish in the US is sick and weird.
Bullshit. It says right in the second amendment “well regulated”. Historically, there were a plenty of gun laws and gun control in this country.
The second amendment shouldn’t be the only right allowed to over-run such basic things as the right to be alive. Funny - the Republicans are so damn eager to save unborn babies, but once those babies are in school they care more about guns than the lives of children. Bunch of death cult hypocrites is what they are.
Lots of viable legislation has been drafted and sent to legislative bodies on both the state and Federal level. Republicans consistently oppose it. And refuse to draft what they would consider reasonable because, apparently, their only goal is a gun in every hand.
The “Kabuki theater” is the constant drumbeat of Republicans stating they’re “pro-life” and doing jackshit about about caring for people who are actually born.
And you know what’s NOT allowed in that NRA venue? Guns…
No, it’s not. It’s proof we have some serious problems in this country, that we are NOT #1, that we need some major reforms and rethinking of our society.
The Republicans refuse to look at the gun violence (or lack of it) elsewhere and refuse to look at the gun laws of other nations because they claim they wouldn’t work here because we’re special like that.
The refuse to look because that would put a lie to their position.
Exactly. Doesn’t violate the Second Amendment, doesn’t infringe the ownership of firearms, but now, we know who owns what. And if Joe Blow of Des Moines, Iowa buys a gun and it later turns up in the hands of Bill Smith of Richmond, Virginia, questions should be asked. It may be a legitimate transfer, but why was the register not told?
A register doesn’t infringe your right to own, as per the Second Amendment. There is no infringement of that right. There is only tracking, as to what you do with it, and who you sell/give it to.
The thing you’re going to come up against is that, unlike most other places in the world, “Self-Defence” is not only a legitimate need to own a gun in the US, it’s often the main reason for someone to own a gun.
It’s not like here (Australia) or most other Western countries where people have guns mostly for hunting or target shooting or pest control.
The thing we’ve discovered in Australia is that the registers are incredibly inaccurate, which opens licensees up to issues where sales of guns aren’t properly recorded - eg they’ve legally purchased a gun but it’s not registered against their licence, or they’ve sold a gun but the system still says they’ve got it.
Personally I like the Canadian or former NZ system - get a licence, and once you’ve got a licence there’s no registration, but you’re going to be in a fuckton of trouble if you get caught with a gun and you don’t have a licence.
Money for the NRA and money for the politicians in their pocket. Screw the rest of us, of course. The people don’t matter, only the money.
It isn’t, of course
Because the Republicans are a hypocritical death cult.
I am not convinced the Founding Fathers would be impressed or convinced by your argument given how many kept other human beings the same as they kept cattle and regarded the Natives as sub-humans they could slaughter like animals. They weren’t all like that, but many of them were. They were already armed to protect them from people who didn’t look or talk like them out of fear those people would return the treatment they had been given.
Self defence is only a legitimate need to own a gun in an outlaw state, of which the US now fits the description. If only the registered own guns, you won’t need one for self-defence (unless you’re a gang-banger, in which case you can shoot your adversary with my blessing). If everyone has a gun, then of course YOU need a gun too, just in case.
Not immediately. As you note, there is now a vast pool of weapons already distributed throughout the country. Gun violence is such a big problem in the US that nothing is going to solve the problem quickly.
But making it harder to acquire and keep firearms is a start. Minimal grandfathering, especially in urban areas. People in rural/wilderness areas do have reasons to have firearms, but that would have to be part of the new rules about who can and can’t own a gun. City people? Why do you “need” a gun in a city? Avid target shooter? Other nations have regulations around that sport, maybe we should look at them and see what works.
That’s a problem of the system, though, isn’t it, Martini? I agree with you, but the simple fact that the gun shop says, “Okay, now I’ll need your paperwork…” might make some think twice.
I’m reminded of the Simpsons episode where Homer is disappointed where he cannot buy and take a handgun home immediately. “Oh, but I’m angry now!” That’s what we need to avoid, and any delay (including registration) might make some people think, “Do I really need this thing?”
Americans have a Second Amendment right to guns. But it seems to me that the more difficult it is to access that right, the safer Americans will be. That’s what gun control should concentrate on: “Yes, you have the right under the Second Amendment. Now, show us some ID, and give us your full name and SSN on these forms, and a passport photo, and we’ll just get the serial number of the firearm, while you fill out this questionnaire about what you’re going to do with it, and we can process all this during a waiting period of three, four days. We’ll call you when you can pick it up, assuming all goes well.”
Doesn’t violate the Second Amendment, but it makes it more difficult to access that right.
I really loathe John Howard for all sorts of reasons, but I do give him kudos and extreme admiration for his actions post Port Arthur. The man had balls, AND came up against our own mad gun nuts here, but they finally succumbed to reason. Hopefully the US can do the same??
The issue as I see it isn’t gun shops saying “I need your paperwork”, it’s someone who has filled in the appropriate paperwork taking their gun home and then - whether it’s that evening or years later - providing that gun to someone else who didn’t get the appropriate clearances (and might not be able to).
I don’t know if it’s possible to legislate against that because everyone knows bureaucracy simply couldn’t handle every single firearm transaction - even between family members - needing to go through some Department of Firearms, and you’d run into people being punished for breaking the law through no fault of their own - for example, they’ve given a gun to an (adult) sibling who is allowed to have it, the appropriate paperwork was filed, but it got lost or the serial number was typed in incorrectly or something like that, and hey presto someone’s up on an unregistered firearms charge through no fault of their own.
The thing with a gun licence is it’s a very clear “Is this person allowed a gun Y/N?” thing. I’m not a fan of registration, but I do support firearms licensing.
I find it interesting that the focus in this thread is on guns, and not problems such as bullying in schools, and more funding and access for mental heath care.
Alright, guys, listen up. I’ve done 20 years of arguing usually the pro-gun side of the gun issue. I don’t really give a shit about guns at this point. I mean, I think liberals rushing to disarm themselves while alt-right types arm up and start using guns to publically intimidate people with the tacit support of the police is very dangerous and I don’t think anything you do is going to change them being armed, but whatever, I’m definitely not arguing from a right wing gun nut point of view.
Republican strategists are desperately wishing for you to make gun control the issue of the 2022 elections. They would fucking love it, absolutely jump for joy - if you make a big push for gun control right now. We’re in the middle of a republican coup. The republicans have unleashed unprecedented levels of misinformation and disinformation. They are actively rolling back constitutional/civil rights. They are putting people in place on election boards and other critical infrastructure so that their attempt at extra-legal election fuckery is better supported this time around. Our democracy is probably already lost, but if it isn’t, if we lose the 2022 elections, it will be. They will forever enshrine themselves in power, and then everything is fucked. Gun laws get more permissive. Climate change gets off the table. Civil rights for women and minorities get rolled back. Wealth inequality accelerates. Pretty much everything bad in this country gets worse. They’re pretty much evil on every single issue.
We are literally facing an existential crisis to our democracy and to the world. Some school shootings are not going to collapse the United States. It is not even remotely in the category of existential threat. But we are facing real existential threats. And if you make the political fight over gun control - one of the most divisive issues you can have that loses over and over again - instead of being about our last chance to defeat a fascist takeover - you will lose any shot we have at keeping any pretense of a democracy.
This is a distraction. This is a losing issue. When you force gun control to be an issue that we spend political capital on, that we run on for the elections, not only are you going to lose our country to republicans who will never give up power again, but you’ll never even be able to pass your gun reforms anyway because by running on that issue you’ve given them permanent control of government. There is nothing to gain by trying to make this a political issue, and an incredible amount to lose. Even if your primary goal is gun control - and that is crazy, given what else is on the table right now - you’re still less likely to have those gun control laws passed by running on them for the election because it makes it far less likely you win the election to be able to implement any laws at all.
I’m not saying this as a gun rights advocate. I would give up all my guns in a second if it meant the permanent defeat of the fascist republican party of today. I’m saying this as someone who sees that we are facing an existential crisis as a semi-functioning democracy and who has seen democrats choose terrible strategies over and over again and constantly lose. Not only are there more important things to argue over than gun control, it is a loser. It is a gift to the republicans. It is just the ticket they need to end our democracy.
No, it isn’t, and that’s absurd. The US could maintain the current level of gun violence and never collapse in a million years. There’s no sudden massive crisis - there’s always been gun violence in the US. This isn’t anything outside the norm. It is not an existential threat at all. The US could easily have 10 times the number of mass shootings it currently has and not significantly affect its status as a nation state. Probably a thousand. You are confusing “things I viscerally react to” and “things that present an existential crisis to a powerful nation-state democracy”
However, we are in the middle of a fascist coup. That truly is an existential threat. A crisis that is coming to a head. If that is not solved, the consequences are severe and likely permanent. We will regress as a society in countless ways that cause incredible amounts of damage both to the US itself and to the world.
And as a world, we are facing an existential crisis for the human race on the issue of climate change, and again, if the republicans take permanent control of the US, the world is permanently fucked on that one. Gun violence in the US is utterly trivial compared to policy on climate change alone.
No, I don’t think it is. Guns might not helping, but the lack of social security and health support for people is a bigger existential threat to the US, IMO.
I hear that as an argument to do nothing on gun control
I hear a similar argument as to why we shouldn’t do anything regarding reproductive rights.
I hear a similar argument for a number of things, and they all boil down to “don’t rock the boat or the Republicans win”.
That argument sounds to me like appeasement - give the bully what he wants and he’ll leave you alone. Except he won’t. He’ll be back for more.
The Republicans want it ALL. Everything. If we acquiesced to all of their demands and tantrums they’d just be back for another slice of the rights and lives of everyone who isn’t White cisgender male Christians of the “proper” ethnic descent.
At what point do you suggest we start actually opposing their agenda rather attempting to appease them?
