The Great Gun Control Debate Megathread

[Cassius]

You can make a compelling argument for gun control while not being blatantly incorrect. If anything having a solid handle on terminology makes your argument look stronger.

I'm certain I have shared this link somewhere in this thread, but it is as relevant today as it was when it was written:

https://www.popehat.com/2015/12/07/t...ly-about-guns/

Of course that matters less now that a lot of gun control advocates who used to try to use a soft touch have finally come out and said what they really wanted: strangle, make firearms culturally unacceptable, limit places where firearms can be carried or used, and eventually confiscate or "breed it out of us."

[Diesel_tke]

Holy shit. I thought this was made up, when it came up on my socials. It's real.

Virginia politician "explaining," the difference between an assault rifle and a hunting rifle.

Holy shit. He goes deeper, but I haven't found a full video on the tubez of u, yet.

I hope he becomes one of the spokespersons of the AWB movement. That will help the opposition out, a lot! Does he have a formal education? That guy did an impressive job of completely bull shitting a topic he is completely ignorant of. I remember guys in high school doing that when they were doing speeches about books they didn't read. Funny as hell.

[BKR]

You can make a compelling argument for gun control while not being blatantly incorrect. If anything having a solid handle on terminology makes your argument look stronger.

Yeah, I've done that here. It's pretty simple, really.

Federal law banning private ownership of firearms, or at least severely restrict said ownership.

Grace period to turn them in.

Confisticate all civilian/non police owned firearms. Firearms violence will go down dramatically, guaranteed. Until they had killed/arrested all the gun owners who shoot back...

The easiest way to do that would be to suspend the 4th Amendment relative to said legislation and confistication.

Of course, suspending the 4th would be really helpful to fight crime overall, too.

See, easy-peasey !

[ghost55]

Yeah, I've done that here. It's pretty simple, really.

Federal law banning private ownership of firearms, or at least severely restrict said ownership.

Grace period to turn them in.

Confisticate all civilian/non police owned firearms. Firearms violence will go down dramatically, guaranteed. Until they had killed/arrested all the gun owners who shoot back...

The easiest way to do that would be to suspend the 4th Amendment relative to said legislation and confistication.

Of course, suspending the 4th would be really helpful to fight crime overall, too.

See, easy-peasey !

Nah, Id make similar arguments but phrase them differently. Explain how increasing population density combined with the internet's ability to radicalize people has created an unforeseeable pressure cooker where allowing the easy ownership of semi-automatic firearms itself poses an existential threat to the stability of society. Move for laws requiring licensing involving psych evals for gun ownership. As gun crime doesn't go down (because gun control doesn't work), I'd argue for increasingly stringent standards including increasingly stringent training programs and more and more invasive psych evals just to legally maintain your license. Rather than actively confiscate large numbers of guns at once the point would just be to make the act of simply possessing a gun so difficult and unpleasant that gun culture would be dead in america inside a generation or two. And it would all be for that- wait what? I'm just describing gun laws in the UK? Fuck.

[BKR]

Nah, Id make similar arguments but phrase them differently. Explain how increasing population density combined with the internet's ability to radicalize people has created an unforeseeable pressure cooker where allowing the easy ownership of semi-automatic firearms itself poses an existential threat to the stability of society. Move for laws requiring licensing involving psych evals for gun ownership. As gun crime doesn't go down (because gun control doesn't work), I'd argue for increasingly stringent standards including increasingly stringent training programs and more and more invasive psych evals just to legally maintain your license. Rather than actively confiscate large numbers of guns at once the point would just be to make the act of simply possessing a gun so difficult and unpleasant that gun culture would be dead in america inside a generation or two. And it would all be for that- wait what? I'm just describing gun laws in the UK? Fuck.

No, silly, you are overthinking it. In order for firearms violence to be reduced, you reduce the number of firearms.

Your proposal does not reduce the number of firearms drastically, it just makes it difficult to legally own one.

There would still be huge amounts of firearms in circulation, legally owned or otherwise.

We need a FEDERAL law written such that states cannot override it. And even if the states could override by not enforcing federal law (which they are not currently required to do), the Feds would need to beef up ATF and the FBI, and maybe create a national police force, in order to begin the mass confistication.

Appealing the 2A would help as well, but that is a long term project that won't get fast results.

Fewer Firearms Equals Fewer Firearms Crimes.

It's stupid simple.

[ghost55]

No, silly, you are overthinking it. In order for firearms violence to be reduced, you reduce the number of firearms.

Your proposal does not reduce the number of firearms drastically, it just makes it difficult to legally own one.

There would still be huge amounts of firearms in circulation, legally owned or otherwise.

We need a FEDERAL law written such that states cannot override it. And even if the states could override by not enforcing federal law (which they are not currently required to do), the Feds would need to beef up ATF and the FBI, and maybe create a national police force, in order to begin the mass confistication.

Appealing the 2A would help as well, but that is a long term project that won't get fast results.

Fewer Firearms Equals Fewer Firearms Crimes.

It's stupid simple.

That's too obvious. You need to think like a slimy ratfuck of a politician. Not like Karen.

[BKR]

That's too obvious. You need to think like a slimy ratfuck of a politician. Not like Karen.

I was not trying to think like a slimy ratfuck politico


I can't be that stupid.

[Grotty]

ooh boy, i remembered my password finally lofl. Okay, my credentials and background. I live in Canada. I grew up with firearms. By the time I was 19 I owned eleven rifles, two shotguns, a Beretta 0.25 automatic and a crossbow. I was in the army reserves for a number of years and fired, tossed and blew up all kinds of things. I like guns. I also now hunt, mainly bow, mainly turkeys and small game.

Now that that's behind me, and you don't know I'm a full on left wing anti-gun guy, I support Canadian style "gun control". Its different than you may believe. You can buy legal weapons if you pass a firearms safety course. Not unreasonable. You need to store them properly, in a locked cabinet, trigger locks. Reasonable. Handguns are allowed to be owned but there are additional permits required as well you have to in all cases not be a person with a criminal record. REASONABLE. Certain weapons are banned. Full auto for example. Reasonable. In the same way that cars from Europe (like mine) that CAN drive over 200km/h are speed restricted in Canada to 180 km/h (which is odd since top speed limit here is 100 km/h lol).

Now don't get me wrong. I like shooting things. It's fun. But we don't have the "gun culture" here that US people do. We also don't have the issues you guys have with personal property concerns, crime and such. So for us, its irritating because I'd love to go in the woods and shoot up pumpkins with a full auto MP5 but its okay. It works.