Gun Issues

2293 posts

Flag Post

Discuss Past, and Present Gun Issues Here

 
Flag Post

MW, I fully understand yer concern…I really do.
This crap is highly analogous to being in Middle Eastern cities and having fucking-ass suicide bombers blow yer asses off.

BUT, for here in the U.S., how many more drunk-driving deaths to innocents are there going to be fore booze sales restrictions are enforced?

OR, more specifically…the already strong legal controls on repeat offenders.
AND, let’s make them even stronger….eh?
I’m not gonna look up the number of such deaths & injuries…
BUT, I’m gonna make a very safe bet that they are much, MUCH higher than the gun incidents ya’re touting.

SO, bottom line….while I’m a strong advocate of protecting gun RIGHTS via sensible, reasonable, rational CONTROLS,,,I say let’s NOT go overboard w/ silly “knee-jerking-off”.
Let’s keep in mind the many other “stoooopid-human-tricks” that are equally as bad or worse and do some due diligence on what a COMPREHENSIVE effort at making our societies much safer might be and do what is necessary to “make it so”.

 
Flag Post

It’s hard to want to participate in these discussions when one thread’s topic reads like a paranoid schizophrenic’s concerns, and the other is alarmist fearmongering.

This discussion and level of hyperbole would be more appropriate for vehicle homicides committed by children in the US which is also higher than any other place. We need a more comprehensive and understanding situation of gun violence that doesn’t throw blankets over the situation.

 
Flag Post

YUPBSG,
this thread probably ought to be moved to the “Liberal Democrats taking away guns” thread consisting of 235 pages,,,,
which have been attempting to do what ya’re proposing….
and very likely is “in there somewhere”. LOL

 
Flag Post
Originally posted by karmakoolkid:


which have been attempting to do what ya’re proposing….
and very likely is “in there somewhere”. LOL

Yes, my own arguments in particular, were always along those lines. I was calling for guns to be tagged and tracked. The biggest objections to that came from Jhco, as the forum’s NRA representative, who was trying to explain how such tagging would be a bad idea. His arguments boiled down to the following three reasons:

1. It is much harder to go concealed-carry if people can easily check to see if there is a gun in the area near where you are.
2. It makes it much harder to shoot someone on the quiet and forget it ever happened if the police can track your firearm back to the homicide location at the time of the shooting.
3. Any level of militia regulation is against the law laid down by the second amendment.

Against that kind of determination not to allow any tracking to take place, I’m not sure what can be done to reach a compromise.

 
Flag Post
Originally posted by vikaTae:
Originally posted by karmakoolkid:


which have been attempting to do what ya’re proposing….
and very likely is “in there somewhere”. LOL

Yes, my own arguments in particular, were always along those lines. I was calling for guns to be tagged and tracked. The biggest objections to that came from Jhco, as the forum’s NRA representative, who was trying to explain how such tagging would be a bad idea. His arguments boiled down to the following three reasons:

1. It is much harder to go concealed-carry if people can easily check to see if there is a gun in the area near where you are.
2. It makes it much harder to shoot someone on the quiet and forget it ever happened if the police can track your firearm back to the homicide location at the time of the shooting.
3. Any level of militia regulation is against the law laid down by the second amendment.

Against that kind of determination not to allow any tracking to take place, I’m not sure what can be done to reach a compromise.

You want tracking chips in guns?
That looks like something out of ‘The equilibrim’ movie

 
Flag Post

If you would stop comparing real life to the movies, it would help. Reality doesn’t usually work the same way as hollywood shows.

 
Flag Post
Originally posted by vikaTae:

If you would stop comparing real life to the movies, it would help. Reality doesn’t usually work the same way as hollywood shows.

Yeah I know
I don’t know which fool said

Any one who will trade freedom for security deserves neither
and Why american Idiots take it to extreme.

 
Flag Post

What ‘freedom’ would it be trading though?

Freedom to carry a gun undetected? Remind me again why that is a good thing?

 
Flag Post
Originally posted by dd790:

What ‘freedom’ would it be trading though?

Some of americans will go crazy over their privacy as vika has said.
You can’t have freedom and security at same time, you have to find an equilibrum between them.

 
Flag Post

Because for some reason tracking guns is wrong but tracking mobile phones is fine….

 
Flag Post

Any one who will trade freedom for security deserves neither

None. The quote is

They who can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety.

A morea reasonable point, and not one that helps the gun libertarians much, as it permits sensible gun control measures.

 
Flag Post

Hmm, how many shootings have there been in New Zealand, where gun ownership is restricted? Literally 0 this entire millennium.

How many in Sweden? 0 this entire millennium.

Iceland? Finland? Denmark? Australia? Not many, if any.

UK? Germany? France? Italy? About a dozen or so, sometimes less.

America? Oh, a couple of hundred this millennium. Seriously America, it is your time to progress. Do you want progress or people dead? For many right-wingers it seems people dead is the priority here. What a disgust that is.

 
Flag Post
How many more “Public” shootings is it going to take before Gun Control is Enforced? So far there have been shootings in Schools, Movie Theaters, and now Malls. This really annoys me that people still don’t push for Gun Control. I’m pretty sure you wouldn’t want to be shot at your school, mall, or while seeing a Movie, or loosing a family or relationship there either.

I’m pretty sure if I was being shot at, I would want a gun with me.


For many right-wingers it seems people dead is the priority here.

That’s actually going to become the NRA’s new motto: The only people we like are dead people.

 
Flag Post
Originally posted by dd790:

Freedom to carry a gun undetected? Remind me again why that is a good thing?

I have no idea. I would have thought that was a very bad thing, as that’s what criminals do, and it was criminal use of guns we were trying to stop. But apparently the average homeowner (in the far-right’s perception) also has the need to carry a gun without anyone knowing it is there, and to use it without being tracked or the bullet matched to a gun they confess to owning, or anything of that nature.

It does make me wonder if perhaps these individuals are a bit more criminal in their own intent than they are letting on.

 
Flag Post
I have no idea. I would have thought that was a very bad thing, as that’s what criminals do, and it was criminal use of guns we were trying to stop.

Because it’s a crime deterrent.

 
Flag Post

yeah, the argument is that criminals settle disputes with guns (legal or not) because being born as criminals (that’s what a criminal is, they’re born that way) means they have no scrupulous about using guns, and therefor every good citizen also needs to carry guns which they can safely do because they are not born as a criminal (so they will never use it wrongly, and if they do use it wrongly, then that makes them a criminal, hence we then know they were born as a criminal and therefor would have carried a gun anyway, legal or not), so that they can stop the criminals from doing harm with their guns.

of course, that does mean everyone should wear one to be responsible…you can’t have a situation where only one group of people will have that much sway while the rest is vulnerable, so everyone should be responsible and carry guns. except children of course. and uhm…teenagers and adolescents, and borderlline senile seniors…well, lets not get too far into detail, please.

and yeah maybe criminals will then instead of regular firearms use fully automatics, so obviously those need to be legal too. therefor sawn off shotguns should also be legal, as should tanks and tactical nukes.

^that is the argument of the gun lobbyists. it’s fucking stupid, but hey, at least we can feel safe by clinging paranoidly to our guns and ignoring all the stats that say that owning a gun increases the risk of being shot rather than reduces it, for instance because your gun can get found by a burglar…

 
Flag Post
Originally posted by OmegaDoom:

for instance because your gun can get found by a burglar…

Which if it is tracked, isn’t such a big problem. You report the burglary, or you report it as being stolen, and the cops can track where it’s been since it was stolen. Most likely return it to you, and likely unearth some extra goodies – such as the location of a fence, or where the burglars live by visiting the locations they know the weapon has been in.

It makes stealing a gun much less desirable, as the more intelligent would-be thieves know they are stealing a great big flashing beacon as to their location.

As thijser pointed out, your phone is tracked in real-time from the moment you turn it on to the moment you turn it off, assuming you ever do, so why not your gun? Its not like you’re going to commit a crime with it, right?

 
Flag Post

that’s not what i meant. i mean that there is a possibility that you get shot with your own gun that you thought would protect you, for instance if the burglar find your gun and uses it on you. or if he wrestles it off of you. or if he does have a gun of his own, sees you have one and shoots you.

 
Flag Post

Yes, especially if its not properly secured most of the time, and they find it lying about the house (as happens all too often).

Having a gun of their own would be a bit problematic if all companies are forced by law to make them with trackers inbuilt. There’ll be quite a few old ones knocking around without trackers for some years, but their numbers will decrease with time. Esp as they are destroyed by the police when seized if they don’t comply with the legislation.

We would eventually get to the point where a burglar would be too scared to carry a firearm, as they’d know it would lead a glowing trail to all the houses they’ve burgled, and could be used to tie them to thoe crimes and convict them. Meanwhile, the law-abiding homeowners? Most still have their lisenced, tracked guns.

So the criminal’s looking at going unarmed into a situaion where they are likely to face a firearm – and if they steal a firearm, it will lead the cops straight to them.


There are of course other ways of checking if an illicit firearm is about to enter the house. An electronic nose tuned to detect gunpowder residue will trigger with just a few ppm in the air – a loaded weapon moving the air as it moves past the sensor would be a high enough concentration. Place that outside the property with a silent alarm to the cops if you don’t own a gun yourself. A less silent alarm to you indoors.

Before they’ve even broken in, the cops are en-route. Another incentive not to bring a gun, if the sniffers are used commonly enough. You’re just cutting down on you own ransacking time.

 
Flag Post

Vik that’s actually a pretty good idea that I’ve never thought about. I just don’t see it happening though and you are forgetting that. Their are guns that don’t come from licensed manufactures. And people could figure out how to remove these and sell them or keep them. Sorry I’m not trying to ruin your idea but it just probly would never work and be a waste of time and money.

 
Flag Post

And to answer the original post their will never be true gun control regardless of laws. And an example that should make sense to everyone is this. Drugs are illegal, yet if I tried hard enough I guarantee you I could find some drugs today. More gun control would simply put more money in the black market just like with drugs.

 
Flag Post

Anecdotal evidence is shitty evidence. On the other hand, stricter gun control laws is correlated with an increase in violent crime.

Case closed.

 
Flag Post
Originally posted by MyTie:

Anecdotal evidence is shitty evidence.

Only bested by no evidence.

 
Flag Post

I think we should ban knives.

Here are some facts about how deadly knives are:
1. every year, millions of people get hurt by knives.
2. sometimes people go on stabbing sprees.
3. There is NO reason to own a knife other than to HARM OTHER PEOPLE!!!

Discuss these flawless reasons of why guns should be banned. Oops, I meant “knives”, not “guns” :>