Gun Control II

Off Topic Politics & World Issues
834

[quote]usmccds423 wrote:
^ interesting. Seems there might be a reliability issue on the research, but I buy there is a decline. Just look at the overall gun climate in America. Instead of guns people buy iphones, it makes sense ownership is down. [/quote]

You buy wrong…
Right now gun ownership is at an all time high. Gun manufacturers cannot keep up with demand, ammo shortage has been a problem for a long time now.
Obama’s threats on gun ownership has made this country more armed than it has ever been in history.

I recently jumped in to the fray purchased 3 firearms…I love each one like a child :slight_smile:

835

[quote]pat wrote:

[quote]usmccds423 wrote:
^ interesting. Seems there might be a reliability issue on the research, but I buy there is a decline. Just look at the overall gun climate in America. Instead of guns people buy iphones, it makes sense ownership is down. [/quote]

You buy wrong…
Right now gun ownership is at an all time high. Gun manufacturers cannot keep up with demand, ammo shortage has been a problem for a long time now.
Obama’s threats on gun ownership has made this country more armed than it has ever been in history.

I recently jumped in to the fray purchased 3 firearms…I love each one like a child :)[/quote]

Can you prove gun owenership is up, I’d like to see the #'s.

836

I can’t say that I have a firm stance on gun control. I used weapons in the Army but I haven’t owned any since I retired, I don’t even keep one in the bar for self-defense. That being said, I think the fact that there are 300+ million weapons (at least) in the hands of a citizenry that, truth be told, strikes me as a bit untrustworthy, means that more restrictive gun laws are not going to have a substantial effect on reducing gun crime. It may stop Joe Citizen from buying an AK, but it sure as hell won’t stop hardened criminals from having access to weapons, unless those 300,000,000 guns all magically disappear.
Making laws in response to isolated tragedies is not good governance, it is public relations.

837

[quote]Villalobos wrote:
I can’t say that I have a firm stance on gun control. I used weapons in the Army but I haven’t owned any since I retired, I don’t even keep one in the bar for self-defense. That being said, I think the fact that there are 300+ million weapons (at least) in the hands of a citizenry that, truth be told, strikes me as a bit untrustworthy, means that more restrictive gun laws are not going to have a substantial effect on reducing gun crime. It may stop Joe Citizen from buying an AK, but it sure as hell won’t stop hardened criminals from having access to weapons, unless those 300,000,000 guns all magically disappear.
Making laws in response to isolated tragedies is not good governance, it is public relations.[/quote]

BUT WHAT ABOUT THE CHILDREN!!! WE HAVE TO SAVE THE CHILDREN FROM THOSE WHITE CHRISTIANS WITH THEIR GUNS!!!

838

[quote]MaximusB wrote:
[
Someone who spent a few years in a mental facility is not going to bother pursuing legal methods of getting a gun. They will either steal one, buy one on the street, or acquire one through some other unscrupulous method.

[/quote]

What are you basing this on? My old neighbor who had been in and out of mental hospitals since the early 70’s bought his AR legally and then had it confiscated when the voices kicked in and he started chasing his buddy around with it. Not only that he bought another one several years later, both legally. Great guy when he took his meds.

839

If we start trying to justify gun ownership based on crime statistics, we will eventually lose guns. Self-defense(gun ownership) is a right, not a privilege. It does not have to be justified. I am guessing that the rate of criminal use of firearms is pretty low in prisons. When we try to justify a right based on safety, that is where we are headed.

840

[quote]dmaddox wrote:

[quote]Villalobos wrote:
I can’t say that I have a firm stance on gun control. I used weapons in the Army but I haven’t owned any since I retired, I don’t even keep one in the bar for self-defense. That being said, I think the fact that there are 300+ million weapons (at least) in the hands of a citizenry that, truth be told, strikes me as a bit untrustworthy, means that more restrictive gun laws are not going to have a substantial effect on reducing gun crime. It may stop Joe Citizen from buying an AK, but it sure as hell won’t stop hardened criminals from having access to weapons, unless those 300,000,000 guns all magically disappear.
Making laws in response to isolated tragedies is not good governance, it is public relations.[/quote]

BUT WHAT ABOUT THE CHILDREN!!! WE HAVE TO SAVE THE CHILDREN FROM THOSE WHITE CHRISTIANS WITH THEIR GUNS!!![/quote]

That sounds very reasonable, whitey is a known offender.

Hector

841

[quote]NickViar wrote:
If we start trying to justify gun ownership based on crime statistics, we will eventually lose guns. Self-defense(gun ownership) is a right, not a privilege. It does not have to be justified. I am guessing that the rate of criminal use of firearms is pretty low in prisons. When we try to justify a right based on safety, that is where we are headed.[/quote]

Nick,

Is it really a right? Should everyone be allowed to buy a gun? I guess that is where I struggle with this issue. The 2nd Amendment isn’t exactly clear on this either is it?

“A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed.”

I think you can read this in a number of ways, first a well regulated militia is similar to a states National Guard, so maybe gun ownership should be confined to the “Nasty Girls”. However if you read it as there should be no laws restricting gun ownership (as a defined constitutional right) how do we justify waiting periods, background checks, the inability of felons to purchase firearms etc. A right is a right and it always remains a right, gun ownership appears to be more of a privilege in modern America doesn’t it?

I am not sure what I think about this, as a non-gun owner I have no skin in the game, it would be nice to see less people getting shot though, locally it is all black and brown teenagers getting shot by other black and brown teenagers, white people locally tend to kill via DWI.

842

[quote]Villalobos wrote:
Is it really a right? …The 2nd Amendment isn’t exactly clear on this either is it?[/quote]

In 2008, the United Supreme Court held in District of Columbia v. Heller that “the Second Amendment protects a personal right to keep and bear arms.”

So, no, it’s binding law of the United States that the right to bear arms is a personal, not a collective, right. Liberals attempted your argument and lost.

843

[quote]Testy1 wrote:

[quote]MaximusB wrote:
[
Someone who spent a few years in a mental facility is not going to bother pursuing legal methods of getting a gun. They will either steal one, buy one on the street, or acquire one through some other unscrupulous method.

[/quote]

What are you basing this on? My old neighbor who had been in and out of mental hospitals since the early 70’s bought his AR legally and then had it confiscated when the voices kicked in and he started chasing his buddy around with it. Not only that he bought another one several years later, both legally. Great guy when he took his meds.
[/quote]

If they are mentally unhinged to the point that they are spending time in and out of mental hospitals, it is a reasonable to believe they will not use rational thinking to acquire a gun if they want one.

844

[quote]Villalobos wrote:
Nick,

Is it really a right? Should everyone be allowed to buy a gun? I guess that is where I struggle with this issue. The 2nd Amendment isn’t exactly clear on this either is it?

“A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed.”

I think you can read this in a number of ways, first a well regulated militia is similar to a states National Guard, so maybe gun ownership should be confined to the “Nasty Girls”. However if you read it as there should be no laws restricting gun ownership (as a defined constitutional right) how do we justify waiting periods, background checks, the inability of felons to purchase firearms etc. A right is a right and it always remains a right, gun ownership appears to be more of a privilege in modern America doesn’t it?

I am not sure what I think about this, as a non-gun owner I have no skin in the game, it would be nice to see less people getting shot though, locally it is all black and brown teenagers getting shot by other black and brown teenagers, white people locally tend to kill via DWI.[/quote]

Yes, it is. The right to self defense was not given by the Constitution of the United States. It is a basic, God-given right. We have already allowed that right to be greatly infringed on(felons who have served their time still lose the right, citizens have to jump through hoops to own the same small arms the military has). The Second Amendment is totally clear on this; our elected officials, however, are not. The militia spoken of in the Second Amendment was the whole body of citizens capable of being called upon to serve in a military capacity.

There is no way to justify the things you mentioned, that’s the problem. A right is a right, that’s why I said we have allowed it to be viewed as a privilege.

There are plenty of countries where citizens are not allowed to own firearms, government runs all businesses, etc. I’m not sure why those that want those things don’t just go to those countries instead of screwing up this one.

845

[quote]MaximusB wrote:

[quote]Testy1 wrote:

[quote]MaximusB wrote:
[
Someone who spent a few years in a mental facility is not going to bother pursuing legal methods of getting a gun. They will either steal one, buy one on the street, or acquire one through some other unscrupulous method.

[/quote]

What are you basing this on? My old neighbor who had been in and out of mental hospitals since the early 70’s bought his AR legally and then had it confiscated when the voices kicked in and he started chasing his buddy around with it. Not only that he bought another one several years later, both legally. Great guy when he took his meds.
[/quote]

If they are mentally unhinged to the point that they are spending time in and out of mental hospitals, it is a reasonable to believe they will not use rational thinking to acquire a gun if they want one.

[/quote]

It’s also reasonable to believe that they can’t legally chase people around while wielding a firearm. That is a crime. Owning a piece of metal and polymer is not. Let’s try to be a little less Minority Report and a little more United States of America.

846

[quote]NickViar wrote:

[quote]Villalobos wrote:
Nick,

Is it really a right? Should everyone be allowed to buy a gun? I guess that is where I struggle with this issue. The 2nd Amendment isn’t exactly clear on this either is it?

“A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed.”

I think you can read this in a number of ways, first a well regulated militia is similar to a states National Guard, so maybe gun ownership should be confined to the “Nasty Girls”. However if you read it as there should be no laws restricting gun ownership (as a defined constitutional right) how do we justify waiting periods, background checks, the inability of felons to purchase firearms etc. A right is a right and it always remains a right, gun ownership appears to be more of a privilege in modern America doesn’t it?

I am not sure what I think about this, as a non-gun owner I have no skin in the game, it would be nice to see less people getting shot though, locally it is all black and brown teenagers getting shot by other black and brown teenagers, white people locally tend to kill via DWI.[/quote]

Yes, it is. The right to self defense was not given by the Constitution of the United States. It is a basic, God-given right. We have already allowed that right to be greatly infringed on(felons who have served their time still lose the right, citizens have to jump through hoops to own the same small arms the military has). The Second Amendment is totally clear on this; our elected officials, however, are not. The militia spoken of in the Second Amendment was the whole body of citizens capable of being called upon to serve in a military capacity.

There is no way to justify the things you mentioned, that’s the problem. A right is a right, that’s why I said we have allowed it to be viewed as a privilege.

There are plenty of countries where citizens are not allowed to own firearms, government runs all businesses, etc. I’m not sure why those that want those things don’t just go to those countries instead of screwing up this one.[/quote]

I understand what you are saying, personally I think it is too late to become super restrictive with gun laws since the aforementioned 300 million guns on the street make it seem unlikely that restricting ownership at this juncture will have a big impact on gun crimes/availability etc. My thought is that a right doesn’t change (freedom of speech or religion for example) but guns seem to be a bit trickier.

847

[quote]Villalobos wrote:
I understand what you are saying, personally I think it is too late to become super restrictive with gun laws since the aforementioned 300 million guns on the street make it seem unlikely that restricting ownership at this juncture will have a big impact on gun crimes/availability etc. My thought is that a right doesn’t change (freedom of speech or religion for example) but guns seem to be a bit trickier.
[/quote]

Your thought on a right not changing is correct. Gun ownership need not be a trickier issue than freedom of speech or religion. In the same way that I can’t kill a homosexual or adulterer and be legally justified by the first amendment, I can’t misuse a gun and be justified by the second amendment.

Your right to swing your fist ends where my nose begins, it does not end as soon as you move your fist. Restrictive gun laws are criminalizing not only the movement of the fist, but the existence of the fist itself.

848
849

[quote]MaximusB wrote:

[quote]Testy1 wrote:

[quote]MaximusB wrote:
[
Someone who spent a few years in a mental facility is not going to bother pursuing legal methods of getting a gun. They will either steal one, buy one on the street, or acquire one through some other unscrupulous method.

[/quote]

What are you basing this on? My old neighbor who had been in and out of mental hospitals since the early 70’s bought his AR legally and then had it confiscated when the voices kicked in and he started chasing his buddy around with it. Not only that he bought another one several years later, both legally. Great guy when he took his meds.
[/quote]

If they are mentally unhinged to the point that they are spending time in and out of mental hospitals, it is a reasonable to believe they will not use rational thinking to acquire a gun if they want one.

[/quote]

Sorry but I don’t understand what you are saying.

If what I think you are getting at is that being mentally unstable sometimes, makes it impossible to pull it together enough to buy a gun that’s rubbish. The guy was really really smart when he took his meds, but could be seen pacing for hour upon hour in his bathrobe and wig, rubbing his hands together, mumbling and snickering like he was going to take over the world when he wasn’t on them.

850

[quote]NickViar wrote:

[quote]MaximusB wrote:

[quote]Testy1 wrote:

[quote]MaximusB wrote:
[
Someone who spent a few years in a mental facility is not going to bother pursuing legal methods of getting a gun. They will either steal one, buy one on the street, or acquire one through some other unscrupulous method.

[/quote]

What are you basing this on? My old neighbor who had been in and out of mental hospitals since the early 70’s bought his AR legally and then had it confiscated when the voices kicked in and he started chasing his buddy around with it. Not only that he bought another one several years later, both legally. Great guy when he took his meds.
[/quote]

If they are mentally unhinged to the point that they are spending time in and out of mental hospitals, it is a reasonable to believe they will not use rational thinking to acquire a gun if they want one.

[/quote]

It’s also reasonable to believe that they can’t legally chase people around while wielding a firearm. That is a crime. Owning a piece of metal and polymer is not. Let’s try to be a little less Minority Report and a little more United States of America.[/quote]

You know what happens to crazy people that do this? They take away your gun and lock you away for 90 days. And you are not prohibited from going and buying another one. Prohibiting that is not minority report, it’s common fucking sense.

851

[quote]cstratton2 wrote:

Ghey

852

[quote]Testy1 wrote:
You know what happens to crazy people that do this? They take away your gun and lock you away for 90 days. And you are not prohibited from going and buying another one. Prohibiting that is not minority report, it’s common fucking sense.[/quote]

I understand. What you want is stiffer penalties for crime or mental illness. If someone is free, they get to exercise their rights.

You do understand that what you’re saying is something like, “The government does not do its job, so we should give it even more power,” right?
-How long do you think a business that operates like that would exist? “Bob can’t flip burgers or fill drink cups, so let’s make him a manager.”

853

[quote]NickViar wrote:

[quote]Testy1 wrote:
You know what happens to crazy people that do this? They take away your gun and lock you away for 90 days. And you are not prohibited from going and buying another one. Prohibiting that is not minority report, it’s common fucking sense.[/quote]

I understand. What you want is stiffer penalties for crime or mental illness. If someone is free, they get to exercise their rights.

You do understand that what you’re saying is something like, “The government does not do its job, so we should give it even more power,” right?
-How long do you think a business that operates like that would exist? “Bob can’t flip burgers or fill drink cups, so let’s make him a manager.”[/quote]

No, you don’t understand. What I want is for guns to be kept out of the hands of people that have been deemed a danger to society when they have them. To the best of our ability.

To use a twist on a gun nut phrase, Guns don’t kill people, crazy people with guns kill people.