Gun Related News/Control

[purbeast]

Rip the ****ing bandaid off.

 

Ban all semi-automatic weapons. (for personal use obviously, not police/military)

 

Have a buy back program for them.

 

If you are found with one outside of the buy back program, then you serve mandatory jail time and/or a huge fine, and your gun is confiscated.

 

This won't infringe on your right to own guns, because you can still get a non-semi-automatic gun.

[ixcuincle]

The problem is the NRA sees any gun control as illegal. And they have a very powerful lobby.

 

The NRA should be made illegal. Then they won't line politician's pockets and they'd be free to actually make meaningful legislation.

[TheGreatBuzz]

There we go.  A textbook example of why it isn't even worth participating in this thread.  Let's just shout **** out that has a less than zero chance of ever happening.   

 

Why not just rip the ****ing bandaid off and issue every child their own protective magic fairy?  That has about the same chance of happening. 

[purbeast]

58 minutes ago, TheGreatBuzz said:

There we go.  A textbook example of why it isn't even worth participating in this thread.  Let's just shout **** out that has a less than zero chance of ever happening.   

 

Why not just rip the ****ing bandaid off and issue every child their own protective magic fairy?  That has about the same chance of happening. 

It only won't happen because of all the dumb ****s we have running the country and supporting those same idiots.

 

It's also not my job to come up with a solution but anything is better than doing nothing for the 1000th time.

 

And why don't you suggest something instead of throwing your hands up and saying "SEE... NOTHING CAN BE DONE!!"

[TheGreatBuzz]

5 minutes ago, purbeast said:

And why don't you suggest something instead of throwing your hands up and saying "SEE... NOTHING CAN BE DONE!!

 

Tell me you haven't been participating in gun discussions here without telling me you haven't been participating in gun discussions here. 

[purbeast]

Muh bad I didn't realize you needed a certain amount of clout to post in certain threads.

[TheGreatBuzz]

3 minutes ago, purbeast said:

Muh bad I didn't realize you needed a certain amount of clout to post in certain threads.

 

You missed my point.  I have made a ton of suggestions.  I have been very active in the conversation over the years.  I'm just over it for the most part.

 

No need for the sarcasm.  You probably made an emotional post that wasn't great in hindsight.  **** happens.  I just totally contradicted myself earlier and got called on it.  Acknowledge and move on.  Don't get pissy.  

[purbeast]

4 minutes ago, TheGreatBuzz said:

 

You missed my point.  I have made a ton of suggestions.  I have been very active in the conversation over the years.  I'm just over it for the most part.

 

No need for the sarcasm.  You probably made an emotional post that wasn't great in hindsight.  **** happens.  I just totally contradicted myself earlier and got called on it.  Acknowledge and move on.  Don't get pissy.  

Me too, which is why I say we just do what pretty much every other developed nation that does not have a gun problem has done - get rid of the guns and move on.  You can it can't be done, but it clearly can, since we're the only developed country with this problem.  The solution has been staring us in the face for decades.

 

And I'm not even saying all of them - just the semi automatic ones.  Start with semi auto rifles to begin and go from there. I don't care, just some kind of action that will make it so tomorrow there are less guns in circulation than there are today.

 

People will be mad but they will get have to get over it.  Or go to jail for breaking the law. 

 

If there is one thing we know, the 99.99% of the "tough" MAGA gun nutters aren't tough when push comes to shove.

[TheGreatBuzz]

27 minutes ago, purbeast said:

since we're the only developed country with this problem.  

 

We are also the only one with the 2nd amendment so not really apples to apples.  

 

[purbeast]

3 minutes ago, TheGreatBuzz said:

 

We are also the only one with the 2nd amendment so not really apples to apples.  

 

Something that was written over 200 ****ing years ago when technology was 200 years older than it is now.  We also had slaves 200 years ago.

 

It's also called an "amendment" which by definition, means we can amend it or add another one to the constitution to make some changes to account for the technology changes over those 200+ years.

[Captain Wiggles]

Fully automatic firearms aren't banned so I don't see how legislation banning semi automatic ones would even be possible.

 

Treating them both the same would certainly be realistic tho. Federal background check, registering them with ATF, and requiring local law enforcement to sign off on it. Tho NC just did away with that last one for pistols so we're going in the wrong direction down here for sure. 😒

11 minutes ago, purbeast said:

 

It's also called an "amendment" which by definition, means we can amend it or add another one to the constitution to make some changes to account for the technology changes over those 200+ years.

 

I agree. Unfortunately the reality is that in my almost 44 years on this planet the only ammendment passed by the US Congress was that they can vote on pay raises for themselves. 🤦‍♂️

[Dont Taze Me Bro]

3 hours ago, TheGreatBuzz said:

There we go.  A textbook example of why it isn't even worth participating in this thread.  Let's just shout **** out that has a less than zero chance of ever happening.    

 

Which is why I had my original thread locked.  All of us regular participants have offered numerous suggestions/solutions/etc. over the years, nothing really left to say.

[bearrock]

31 minutes ago, Dont Taze Me Bro said:

 

Which is why I had my original thread locked.  All of us regular participants have offered numerous suggestions/solutions/etc. over the years, nothing really left to say.

 

There was a lot of intelligent discussion in that thread.  Problem in the real world isn't  shortage of ideas but a my way or the high way approach to gun regulation.  It seems like every reasonable, rational, worthy gun regulation gets shot down by a string of excuses on why it won't work.  So non gun owners' response to "you just can't thread this perfect set of conditions so let's do nothing" is to say fine, trash all the guns then.  Now we have increasingly polarized viewpoints on guns, pitting total ban vs free for all. 

 

All political pendulums swing and given that it just requires 5 people in the right place to say that the 2nd amendment no longer means what it currently means, the chances of a drastic about face is much more likely than a persistent nuanced problem solving approach to gun violence.  I'm not sure who deserves the blame, but I'm not sure who is absolved of blame either.  We have mastered the art of letting perfection be the enemy of good.

[Larry]

4 hours ago, TheGreatBuzz said:

There we go.  A textbook example of why it isn't even worth participating in this thread.  Let's just shout **** out that has a less than zero chance of ever happening.   

 

Why not just rip the ****ing bandaid off and issue every child their own protective magic fairy?  That has about the same chance of happening. 

There we go. Another textbook example of why it's useless to even discuss the issue. 
 

People who demand that nothing whatsoever be discussed unless there's a chance that the NRA would allow it to happen. 

[Larry]

1 hour ago, TheGreatBuzz said:

 

We are also the only one with the 2nd amendment so not really apples to apples.  

 

 

We are the only one with the NRA's modern interpretation of the Second Amendment. 
 

If you don't want to compare the US against France, then how about comparing the US against the US, 50-75 years ago?  When people could own a gun. But they owned one. And it stayed at home. When carrying a concealed weapon was a major crime, unless you had been granted a license, and there were maybe a dozen people in town who were allowed. When standing in a public place with a gun got you arrested. 
 

When a city had the authority to just ban carrying a gun in the city, period. They didn't always do so. But they could. 
 

 

[TheGreatBuzz]

3 hours ago, Larry said:

We are the only one with the NRA's SCOTUS's modern interpretation of the Second Amendment. 

 

FTFY

[Berggy9598]

6 hours ago, Larry said:

 

We are the only one with the NRA's modern interpretation of the Second Amendment. 
 

If you don't want to compare the US against France, then how about comparing the US against the US, 50-75 years ago?  When people could own a gun. But they owned one. And it stayed at home. When carrying a concealed weapon was a major crime, unless you had been granted a license, and there were maybe a dozen people in town who were allowed. When standing in a public place with a gun got you arrested. 
 

When a city had the authority to just ban carrying a gun in the city, period. They didn't always do so. But they could. 
 

 

How did The Criminals not take over the country?! Terrifying stuff 

[Berggy9598]

I watched the bodycam footage from Nashville, and it brought me back to the armed guards and armed teacher solution, as it was a first hand look into the level of competence required to prevent further loss of life and take out an active shooter in a real life situation. When you actually think about what it would entail, it becomes even more ridiculous. 

 

According to Google, there are just under 140,000 schools (k-12) in the U.S. For argument's sake we'll remove the K's (even though before Sandy Hook we would have never imagined elementary school shootings would be a thing) which leaves us at about 90,000. That's a minimum of 90,000 individuals that must be trained, physically and psychologically, to be able to take out an active shooter, have a squeaky clean background check and a squeaky clean mental health record. Now, I went to high school in Los Angeles and one armed guard in a high school that size might as well be a puppy carrying a chew toy, and there are thousands of schools that size in the country, so now we're talking about a very conservative 200,000 individuals that fit the above characteristics and would be willing to take the job 

 

On to the millions of teachers employed in the U.S. Gun safety training and practice are a complete waste of time in the context of gaining the competence of trained law enforcement personnel tasked with taking out an active shooter, so the idea is to do what, put them all through SWAT training? 

 

Better than nothing right? 

Edited April 1, 2023 by Berggy9598

[Fergasun]

There is an obvious solution but we lack the stones to shame and push for it.  Partially because people say, "It can't be done here".    Tell the pro gun people to eff off, assault weapon ban, semi auto ban and go full Australia, or at least Germany.  

 

Less that raise the age limit for gun ownership to 25. 

 

Grandfather current gun owners of course and crack down on all the black market stuff. 

 

Sure gun manufacturers will be mad... so what.  They are killing us. Build a 2nd Amendment monument and etch the names of gun violence victims to it.  

[Berggy9598]

1 minute ago, Fergasun said:

There is an obvious solution but we lack the stones to shame and push for it.  Partially because people say, "It can't be done here".    Tell the pro gun people to eff off, assault weapon ban, semi auto ban and go full Australia, or at least Germany.  

 

Less that raise the age limit for gun ownership to 25. 

 

Grandfather current gun owners of course and crack down on all the black market stuff. 

 

Sure gun manufacturers will be mad... so what.  They are killing us. Build a 2nd Amendment monument and etch the names of gun violence victims to it.  

Quite a few school shootings would be prevented just by raising the legal age to 25. They’d refuse to take measures to help prevent school shootings specifically, let alone gun violence in general. 

[Jabbyrwock]

18 hours ago, TheGreatBuzz said:

There we go.  A textbook example of why it isn't even worth participating in this thread.  Let's just shout **** out that has a less than zero chance of ever happening.   

 

Marijuana is slowly becoming legal across the country.

 

 LGBTQ rights, including marriage, are generally expanding as well...despite the recent hiccup.

 

Both of these things I would've said had less than zero chance of ever happening thirty years ago.

[purbeast]

10 hours ago, Berggy9598 said:

Quite a few school shootings would be prevented just by raising the legal age to 25. They’d refuse to take measures to help prevent school shootings specifically, let alone gun violence in general. 

"But they would just obtain the guns illegally under the age of 25."

 

...said gun nutters with absolutely zero evidence of this ever happening.

[Berggy9598]

1 hour ago, purbeast said:

"But they would just obtain the guns illegally under the age of 25."

 

...said gun nutters with absolutely zero evidence of this ever happening.

It’s possible I suppose but it’s a zero sum prop for them as if any law or regulation is abided by 100%. Also the general profile of the kids that carry this stuff out isn’t exactly conducive to obtaining illegal arms. 

[purbeast]

30 minutes ago, Berggy9598 said:

It’s possible I suppose but it’s a zero sum prop for them as if any law or regulation is abided by 100%. Also the general profile of the kids that carry this stuff out isn’t exactly conducive to obtaining illegal arms. 

Yeah I know, but that is always their response.

 

The problem with that assumption is that these mass shooters are criminals before they do their shootings.  The high majority of them are NOT criminals prior to that, in the sense they are involved in the gun black market.  And it's not like that is an easy market to just get into for these people with huge mental health issues.

[Berggy9598]

32 minutes ago, purbeast said:

Yeah I know, but that is always their response.

 

The problem with that assumption is that these mass shooters are criminals before they do their shootings.  The high majority of them are NOT criminals prior to that, in the sense they are involved in the gun black market.  And it's not like that is an easy market to just get into for these people with huge mental health issues.

It’s not an assumption so much as it is a piper’s tune. Purposely vague scary buzzword to make an empty contextless argument