Gun Control
#1
Alright, I get it, democartic systems a bit too cerebral for you guys. Surely gun control must be a point of contention among some of you. 

Do you own a gun? What do you think should be the barrier to gun ownership? Do you have a specific country you think has good gun ownership laws?
Cool
Reply
#2
i know how to handle a gun, and i think it's a useful skill to have, but there are definitely bad people that do not deserve to own a gun. that being said, i've lived in environments where guns are prevalent; the dominican republic, especially the country-side of it, is brimming with guns, and i don't feel safe there anymore. despite there being the impression of a lot of gun control, there isn't, and kids as young as 14 nowadays get a hold of guns and assault random people on highways or in the streets just to take their motorcycles and/or phones, and it's an everyday thing. while the crime situation in the dominican republic is definitely its own separate issue, i believe that there should be a little more incentive towards making guns less readily available to the public in countries like mine.
[Image: KyOqqFO.jpg]
Reply
#3
People I know that advocate for gun ownership seem to use guns to parade the identity found in possessing a gun but veil this with the self-defense argument. This kind of thinking defends narcissism, but not anything worth caring about, like family. That's just something I notice, which makes me consider that guns aren't ultimately the problem, but the cultural mindset surrounding guns.
Reply
#4
Ban guns.

Unban knives.
Reply
#5
The only thing that beats a bad guy with a guy, is a gay guy with a gun.
 
Reply
#6
Hahaha
Reply
#7
I remember writing a thesis essay on gun control back in twelvth grade in the months after Sandy Hook, and the basic gist of it is that while gun control seems to be a logical solution to the mass shooting problem, the gun control laws that have been passed over the years have had little to no effect on the amount of gun violence and homicide. I don't know if it would still hold up or have any relevance today, but my thought is that gun control, especially with regards to the cultural mindset Taco Belle mentioned, can only do so much, and can only be as effective as the Prohibition was in the 1920s, which I know is a really cliché argument, but people who are going to use guns to commit violent crimes are going to find a way to either get the guns they need or find something that can do just as much damage.

If I sound a bit ignorant or naïve, let me know
Reply
#8
http://www.theonion.com/article/no-way-t...this-36131
Reply
#9
[Image: tumblr_mr71nmFki81svou4fo1_1280.jpg]
 
Reply
#10
Some ideas that I have heard that I think are worth talking about:
1. Closing the gun show loophole
2. Must have a license in order to buy a gun
3. Anyone guilty of any kind of domestic violence barred
4. Bar anyone on the terror watchlist from buying a gun
5. Require comprehensive safety training in order to get a gun license 
6. Make "private" background checkless sales illegal, but set up an easy way for a private seller to check the background of a buyer.
7. End the drug war
8. End private prisons

Now many of these ideas have their own problems, (not even taking into account how hard they would be to get passed as laws) and these wouldn't fix the gun violence problem in our country, but I think it is a good starting point for a debate.
Reply
#11
Gun control is inefficient, sees little success in many parts of the world, and doesn't even begin to scrape any of the real issues, IMO.

Most of the time, from my experience anyways, leftists/gun control advocates poison their arguments with anecdotal evidence and emotional platitudes. That being said, I can admit that there's a point somewhere in there. Guns need to be mediated to some degree, but trying to 'control' firearms is a very naive solution that won't fix the real issue, that being how people think and react to change and/or local culture.

Call me heartless, but I think that gun violence in general is not as big of an issue as people make it out to be. Considering that violent crime has been dropping steadily over the past 50 years in america, reaching about half of what it was in 1970 iirc, I'm somewhat astonished that so many people are still obsessed with method over methodology. It's one giant case of tunnel vision, and sometimes it pisses me off.

Mass shootings are horrible, yes, but they make up a fraction of gun violence, and although it might sound a little ignorant to some people, I honestly just think there isn't any way to prevent them. You can't realistically analyze every last person in america, and sociopaths/psychopaths can easily circumvent psychiatric evaluation at its current state of development. I'm just trying to think realistically here, and I've been told several times that this type of thought process is harmful, but as far as I'm concerned, the only harmful ideologies are the ones based on emotional backlash.

At any rate, I don't own a gun, I don't want a gun, and I'm not even american, lol.
Discount Jontron
Reply
#12
That's a wall of text and I'm drink.
So. Lemme... No this is a sober conversationzxxx
Reply
#13
(06-29-2016, 05:37 AM)SouthernDiscomfort Wrote: That's a wall of text and I'm drink.
So. Lemme... No this is a sober conversationzxxx

Get out, Qoorl! I'm piss!
Reply
#14
You're piss? So like actually composed of urine...
Eh. I've met worse people.
Reply
#15
Urine trouble now!
Reply
#16
(06-29-2016, 05:06 AM)Tex Wrote: Gun control is inefficient, sees little success in many parts of the world, and doesn't even begin to scrape any of the real issues, IMO.

Most of the time, from my experience anyways, leftists/gun control advocates poison their arguments with anecdotal evidence and emotional platitudes. That being said, I can admit that there's a point somewhere in there. Guns need to be mediated to some degree, but trying to 'control' firearms is a very naive solution that won't fix the real issue, that being how people think and react to change and/or local culture.

Call me heartless, but I think that gun violence in general is not as big of an issue as people make it out to be. Considering that violent crime has been dropping steadily over the past 50 years in america, reaching about half of what it was in 1970 iirc, I'm somewhat astonished that so many people are still obsessed with method over methodology. It's one giant case of tunnel vision, and sometimes it pisses me off.

Mass shootings are horrible, yes, but they make up a fraction of gun violence, and although it might sound a little ignorant to some people, I honestly just think there isn't any way to prevent them. You can't realistically analyze every last person in america, and sociopaths/psychopaths can easily circumvent psychiatric evaluation at its current state of development. I'm just trying to think realistically here, and I've been told several times that this type of thought process is harmful, but as far as I'm concerned, the only harmful ideologies are the ones based on emotional backlash.

At any rate, I don't own a gun, I don't want a gun, and I'm not even american, lol.

Britain and Australia both heavily control firearms ownership and restrictions and have had barely any gun crime, virtually no mass shootings, since.
Reply
#17
(06-29-2016, 06:27 AM)King Wrote:
(06-29-2016, 05:06 AM)Tex Wrote: Gun control is inefficient, sees little success in many parts of the world, and doesn't even begin to scrape any of the real issues, IMO.

Most of the time, from my experience anyways, leftists/gun control advocates poison their arguments with anecdotal evidence and emotional platitudes. That being said, I can admit that there's a point somewhere in there. Guns need to be mediated to some degree, but trying to 'control' firearms is a very naive solution that won't fix the real issue, that being how people think and react to change and/or local culture.

Call me heartless, but I think that gun violence in general is not as big of an issue as people make it out to be. Considering that violent crime has been dropping steadily over the past 50 years in america, reaching about half of what it was in 1970 iirc, I'm somewhat astonished that so many people are still obsessed with method over methodology. It's one giant case of tunnel vision, and sometimes it pisses me off.

Mass shootings are horrible, yes, but they make up a fraction of gun violence, and although it might sound a little ignorant to some people, I honestly just think there isn't any way to prevent them. You can't realistically analyze every last person in america, and sociopaths/psychopaths can easily circumvent psychiatric evaluation at its current state of development. I'm just trying to think realistically here, and I've been told several times that this type of thought process is harmful, but as far as I'm concerned, the only harmful ideologies are the ones based on emotional backlash.

At any rate, I don't own a gun, I don't want a gun, and I'm not even american, lol.

Britain and Australia both heavily control firearms ownership and restrictions and have had barely any gun crime, virtually no mass shootings, since.

Not sure if this is still the case, but Britain's violent crime involving weapons like knives and whatnot had skyrocketed since the handgun ban. 

Australia's gun violence and homicide rates had been steadily decreasing if you look at the trend circa 1996 when the gun control laws were put into place. The reasoning for this was strictly due to a series of mass shootings in the past few years I think, but there's no real evidence to suggest that the gun control laws had any significant effect on violent crime aside from mass shootings. None that I can find evidence for, anyways. Correlation does not imply causality, Australia is nothing like America, Kangaroos are deadly, etc etc...

Regardless, we can't use anecdotal evidence collected from other countries. It's important to take into account that America's culture is significantly different from Europe's/Australia's/Norway's/etc. The same gun control laws implemented elsewhere could possibly flop just as hard as they did in Britain. I do agree that more thorough gun control could be a good idea, but it's not going to fix anything, and for all we know, it could actually make homicides using other weapons more prevalent. It needs to be implemented very carefully.
Discount Jontron
Reply
#18
If knives are equally as deadly as find, you'll have to inform me of how the British took over South Africa
Cool
Reply
#19
(06-29-2016, 11:27 PM)Slam Ander Wrote: If knives are equally as deadly as find, you'll have to inform me of how the British took over South Africa

I don't think it's that knives are deadlier than guns; it's more that the intent to do as much harm as possible is still there.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Mass_stabbings
Reply
#20
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Mass_stabbings

Quote:The following 36 pages are in this category, out of 36 total

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Mass_shootings

Quote:The following 96 pages are in this category, out of 96 total.
Cool
Reply
#21
(06-30-2016, 01:08 AM)Slam Ander Wrote: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Mass_stabbings

Quote:The following 36 pages are in this category, out of 36 total

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Mass_shootings

Quote:The following 96 pages are in this category, out of 96 total.

That doesn't really change my point though about the intent
Reply
#22
I'm unsure of what point that really makes. You could give humans rocks and they would still try to kill each other sometimes
Cool
Reply
#23
(06-29-2016, 11:27 PM)Slam Ander Wrote: If knives are equally as deadly as find,  you'll have to inform me of how the British took over South Africa

What Uganda Said. 'Guns are more dangerous than Knives' is a very common strawman in the gun control debate.

People who want to commit homicide are going to find ways to do it regardless of the laws in place. Mass shootings turn into mass bombings, stabbings, etc.

Hell, the amount of stabbings that occurred in Britain after the handgun ban was actually worse than the amount of shootings iirc, which actually increased the rate of violent crime over several years. I might be wrong about that, it's been a while since I've looked it up, but I think it's accurate.

Fun fact about mass shootings in America: did you know that the majority of them have less than 5 deaths records, and some of them have zero deaths recorded? I hardly think a situation where 4 people were wounded and nobody died should be considered a 'mass shooting'. The term is very dishonest.
Discount Jontron
Reply
#24
(06-30-2016, 01:21 AM)Slam Ander Wrote: I'm unsure of what point that really makes. You could give humans rocks and they would still try to kill each other sometimes

What I was trying to get at is that while guns are a very effective and often used way to kill people, and sometimes a lot of people, it's not necessarily the root of the problem because there's other ways people could carry out (mass) violence
Reply
#25
(06-30-2016, 01:33 AM)Tex Wrote:
(06-29-2016, 11:27 PM)Slam Ander Wrote: If knives are equally as deadly as find,  you'll have to inform me of how the British took over South Africa

What Uganda Said. 'Guns are more dangerous than Knives' is a very common strawman in the gun control debate.

People who want to commit homicide are going to find ways to do it regardless of the laws in place. Mass shootings turn into mass bombings, stabbings, etc.

Hell, the amount of stabbings that occurred in Britain after the handgun ban was actually worse than the amount of shootings iirc, which actually increased the rate of violent crime over several years. I might be wrong about that, it's been a while since I've looked it up, but I think it's accurate.

Fun fact about mass shootings in America: did you know that the majority of them have less than 5 deaths records, and some of them have zero deaths recorded? I hardly think a situation where 4 people were wounded and nobody died should be considered a 'mass shooting'. The term is very dishonest.

(06-30-2016, 01:34 AM)Uganda Pikachu Wrote:
(06-30-2016, 01:21 AM)Slam Ander Wrote: I'm unsure of what point that really makes. You could give humans rocks and they would still try to kill each other sometimes

What I was trying to get at is that while guns are a very effective and often used way to kill people, and sometimes a lot of people, it's not necessarily the root of the problem because there's other ways people could carry out (mass) violence

I can understand this, but wouldn't you say it's much harder to carry out mass violence with a gun, than the 3-4 people you might get to kill with a knife?
Cool
Reply


Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)