Gun Control

[MarioNintendo]

Re: Gun Control

It still is a relevant study, and I don't think it should be brushed off.

no, it fucking doesn't work
no, it fucking won't work

I'll say it again, america is directly north of this fancy country called mexico that exports massive amounts of illegal weapons (and drugs) to criminals
what countries does australia have nearby that has those same exports? new guinea? fuckin new zealand?

illegal use of weapons is a huge issue here in america, and it cannot be fixed by taking away legal use of weapons.

if gun control worked, gun free zones would be the safest fuckin places in the entirety of the country, and yet a huge number of shootings have been where? gun free zones

Yet, Omar Mateen got his guns legally. Probably a completely different debate, it still amazes me. He didn't even need to resort to these illegal weapons you're speaking of.

Look, I'm not American. I don't live near the border. I don't know what it's like to live there. To be quite honest, I don't even know the full circumstances around the recent shooting. It just baffles me how the USA is constantly the country with the most shootings.

[MarioNintendo]

Re: Gun Control

BTW, I highly enjoy the videos sickufully posted

[choof]

Re: Gun Control

Yet, Omar Mateen got his guns legally. Probably a completely different debate, it still amazes me. He didn't even need to resort to these illegal weapons you're speaking of.

this debate is why gun control is such a touchy subject
I think that deeper background checks, mental health exams, and rigorous courses on the use of a gun

It just baffles me how the USA is constantly the country with the most shootings.

because it's easier in america to put a weapon in the hands of someone who will use it for wanton violence

I also think it's related to the failed war on drugs but I'd have to research that

[choof]

Re: Gun Control

it might be a relevant study to australia, who has a significantly less violent history and has an entirely different culture
but it's not relevant to america at all

[DaBackpack]

Re: Gun Control

this debate is why gun control is such a touchy subject
I think that deeper background checks, mental health exams, and rigorous courses on the use of a gun


because it's easier in america to put a weapon in the hands of someone who will use it for wanton violence

I also think it's related to the failed war on drugs but I'd have to research that

This is my evaluation too imo

And as much as I hate to admit it I think there are a lot of factors that contribute to gun violence that don't exactly apply to Australia (in my knowledge at least)

some of these being income inequality and the ubiquity of mental health disorders

That said, I do seem to recall reading a study that posited that gun control actually lowers suicide rates (not just GUN-related suicide rates, but suicide rates altogether)

The common argument is "well somebody who can't kill themselves with a gun will find another way to do it" but this is verifiably wrong

[adlp]

Re: Gun Control

It still is a relevant study, and I don't think it should be brushed off.



Yet, Omar Mateen got his guns legally. Probably a completely different debate, it still amazes me. He didn't even need to resort to these illegal weapons you're speaking of.

yes he got them legally, but the gun vendor notified the fbi that he was a suspicious individual and the FBI either lacked the resources to respond or consciously neglected to act to be politically correct

[Frank Munoz]

Re: Gun Control

yes he got them legally, but the gun vendor notified the fbi that he was a suspicious individual and the FBI either lacked the resources to respond or consciously neglected to act to be politically correct

the fbi can't deny Omar of his right to bear arms though

they mentioned their reason for discontinuing their investigations too(you can find info on this quite easily, any info regarding the orlando shooting is literally one google search away) which was something along the lines of he had no connections to any terrorist related activities or ISIS after multiple interrogations.

but he had a history of violent verbal outburst, and domestic violence(which is illegal in the US, that makes him a criminal) if a thorough background check were made Mateen would have never been able to purchase any firearm.

law breakers/heavily mentally unstable/violent people shouldn't have access to guns is what i believe gun control should be about.

[Mollocephalus]

Re: Gun Control

When you try to acquire gun license in Italy, well before you can even set foot in a gun store and buy one, you go through multiple checks. Failing just one of them will prevent you from ever getting the license or even join the military or the police.

The criteria are:

- Everyone in your family has to be clean. Cousin got jailed 20 years ago? no gun license for you.
- You are pressured multiple times by the police answering why do you need that license and what are you going to do with a gun, then go through a mental check.

Starting from these premises, which seem very logical to me, i always look at America as the odd one when it comes to gun regulations. The thing is guns are part of your culture in a way similar to how corrida is part of spanish culture. You love your guns and fabricate reasons why you need them, but it's quite apparent than even in self defense chances are you're safer without firearms.

[-JiZ53-]

Re: Gun Control

repost of one of my posts from somewhere else, but relevant:


martial law and fascism is just around the corner if we continue to pay attention to what the media and facebook shove in our faces. it is too easy to orchestrate a political event through these channels. it is too easy to manipulate such a large number of people. we can all agree that what happened was horrible and wrong, but we are naive if we think that some gun control law will stop similar thing from happening. it is a cultural problem. those in power would rather disarm the populace than admit that their method of government and the way of life that they support is to blame for all of these dramatic acts of violence. humans will always commit atrocities, and really, what happened is very small in the big picture of things. it only seems large because of the media that you pay attention to; that is the only reason why this seems so important to people. who couldnt disagree with such an unjustifiable act of violence? the only reason this act seems so depraved is because the general public opinion is opposed to it. even people who speak ambiguously about what happened are judged for their lack of passion. had it been another group of people killed similarly for a reason deemed "justified" by the general media, people would cheer and celebrate. we all condone murder under the proper circumstances. we are all hypocrites when we call this a tragedy. are we not the very reason this happened at all? is our culture of destruction not to blame for the ways in which this type of dehumanization becomes possible? why do we blame guns? simply because that is the tool that is most commonly used? if guns are to be taken away, they can only be taken away from everyone. to only allow some to possess guns and others to not is to create a new hierarchy within a society with enough hierarchy as it is. shame on you who have taken advantage of what happened. shame on you who wish to put the general populace under the rule of a government gun. is the gun not what you preach against???? why then is it that you only wish a certain strata of society have access to guns?? is this not similar to the idea of only allowing a certain strata of society to vote? is this not simply an attempt to remove even more power from the voting populace? we fought for voting rights and we should fight similarly for gun rights. it should be noted, felons are not allowed to vote or possess guns. are we all judged as felons all(whether felons are judged justly or injustly is another matter)? all men are created equal, so therefore all men should have access to guns, or no men should have access to guns. will the war on guns be the new war on drugs??? there is too much emotion involved when discussing this topic... stop being so easily swayed. stop paying attention to these poison media voices and read the ideas of the founding fathers. once we start to discredit the founding fathers, we discredit the very basis of our government. revisionism will be one of the first steps towards fascism. we should be able to have faith in the courts. if that fails, then we have faith in protest. but, our judges will not even uphold the constitution. while cases on privacy and warrantless intrusions into the lives and information of innocent citizens go unheard, we rejoice over a decision on marriage and say to ourselves "look our court is just"(i do not disagree with the gay marriage decision, only the fact that the court ever had the ability to preside over the rights of marriage at all). where do we go when the courts will not even hear our cases? where do we go when the federal government has become so massive that even the supreme court dare not oppose it?? was it not states rights that led the way for the supreme court's decision on gay marriage?? is it not the history of states rights that was attacked through the emotionalization of a violent act similar to the one that has happened most recently(i am talking of the trend of removing confederate monuments and discrediting the motives of secessionists after the attack on the black church in charleston)? is there not a trend of the erosion of rights through emotional manipulation whenever a violent attack occurs in our country? look at the obvious, please. please, ignore the media that has tainted our views and played with your emotions. do not forget the history of our country. dont let the emotional aspect of these type of murders drive you to a frenzied decision. remember your history. read your history. PLEASE!!!!!!

[Contrapasso]

Re: Gun Control

domestic violence blacklists you on gun purchases
dont remember the law name but it was a huge thing in the military

big ups to chef boyardee for popping into the thread, rly love hearing ur opinions on something u dont know anything about

[Contrapasso]

Re: Gun Control

repost of one of my posts from somewhere else, but relevant:


martial law and fascism is just around the corner if we continue to pay attention to what the media and facebook shove in our faces. it is too easy to orchestrate a political event through these channels. it is too easy to manipulate such a large number of people. we can all agree that what happened was horrible and wrong, but we are naive if we think that some gun control law will stop similar thing from happening. it is a cultural problem. those in power would rather disarm the populace than admit that their method of government and the way of life that they support is to blame for all of these dramatic acts of violence. humans will always commit atrocities, and really, what happened is very small in the big picture of things. it only seems large because of the media that you pay attention to; that is the only reason why this seems so important to people. who couldnt disagree with such an unjustifiable act of violence? the only reason this act seems so depraved is because the general public opinion is opposed to it. even people who speak ambiguously about what happened are judged for their lack of passion. had it been another group of people killed similarly for a reason deemed "justified" by the general media, people would cheer and celebrate. we all condone murder under the proper circumstances. we are all hypocrites when we call this a tragedy. are we not the very reason this happened at all? is our culture of destruction not to blame for the ways in which this type of dehumanization becomes possible? why do we blame guns? simply because that is the tool that is most commonly used? if guns are to be taken away, they can only be taken away from everyone. to only allow some to possess guns and others to not is to create a new hierarchy within a society with enough hierarchy as it is. shame on you who have taken advantage of what happened. shame on you who wish to put the general populace under the rule of a government gun. is the gun not what you preach against???? why then is it that you only wish a certain strata of society have access to guns?? is this not similar to the idea of only allowing a certain strata of society to vote? is this not simply an attempt to remove even more power from the voting populace? we fought for voting rights and we should fight similarly for gun rights. it should be noted, felons are not allowed to vote or possess guns. are we all judged as felons all(whether felons are judged justly or injustly is another matter)? all men are created equal, so therefore all men should have access to guns, or no men should have access to guns. will the war on guns be the new war on drugs??? there is too much emotion involved when discussing this topic... stop being so easily swayed. stop paying attention to these poison media voices and read the ideas of the founding fathers. once we start to discredit the founding fathers, we discredit the very basis of our government. revisionism will be one of the first steps towards fascism. we should be able to have faith in the courts. if that fails, then we have faith in protest. but, our judges will not even uphold the constitution. while cases on privacy and warrantless intrusions into the lives and information of innocent citizens go unheard, we rejoice over a decision on marriage and say to ourselves "look our court is just"(i do not disagree with the gay marriage decision, only the fact that the court ever had the ability to preside over the rights of marriage at all). where do we go when the courts will not even hear our cases? where do we go when the federal government has become so massive that even the supreme court dare not oppose it?? was it not states rights that led the way for the supreme court's decision on gay marriage?? is it not the history of states rights that was attacked through the emotionalization of a violent act similar to the one that has happened most recently(i am talking of the trend of removing confederate monuments and discrediting the motives of secessionists after the attack on the black church in charleston)? is there not a trend of the erosion of rights through emotional manipulation whenever a violent attack occurs in our country? look at the obvious, please. please, ignore the media that has tainted our views and played with your emotions. do not forget the history of our country. dont let the emotional aspect of these type of murders drive you to a frenzied decision. remember your history. read your history. PLEASE!!!!!!

reported for plagarism

[-JiZ53-]

Re: Gun Control

the fbi can't deny Omar of his right to bear arms though

they mentioned their reason for discontinuing their investigations too(you can find info on this quite easily, any info regarding the orlando shooting is literally one google search away) which was something along the lines of he had no connections to any terrorist related activities or ISIS after multiple interrogations.

but he had a history of violent verbal outburst, and domestic violence(which is illegal in the US, that makes him a criminal) if a thorough background check were made Mateen would have never been able to purchase any firearm.

law breakers/heavily mentally unstable/violent people shouldn't have access to guns is what i believe gun control should be about.

in much the following post, i am addressing your language and your lack of specification and qualification... i do not condone or support the shooter. it is not hard to agree that what he did was wrong.... that said:


misdemeanors should not be included in the list of crimes that prevent someone from gun ownership. i would argue that non-violent felonies should be excluded as well. And if verbal outbursts are an indication of "instability", every sane human on earth could be thought unstable. if we reach a point where a man who speaks with passion is thought to be insane, we will have lost all hope.

i want to attack your grouping of "law breakers" with the "mentally unstable" and violent. instead of "law breakers", you should say, "those found guilty in a court of law"; there is a distinction between the two. if we were to include "law breakers" we would have to ask ourselves, which code of law are we referring to? there are many aspects of the federal government that are immune to the law for reason of "national security". there are also many instances where our government itself has broken international law. are you suggesting that we disarm the police and the military? i think you probably mean "found guilty of any crime in a court of law within the united states of america" when you say "lawbreakers". maybe i am wrong

i also ask you to define "mentally unstable". that term is so silly in my opinion. i could argue that those who make use of such terms are "mentally unstable" themselves for using such ambiguous terminology and not having proper definitions to back them up. what your definition will ultimately boil down to is that instead of "mentally unstable", you mean "socially unstable", and by "socially unstable", you mean that in some way this person's behavior is not congruent with our society's idea of what constitutes normal behavior. when we start to apply these types of terms to legal decisions such as laws and regulations, we really must take notice of the ambiguity of these terms. if you look at the history of the use of insanity in legal cases, our definition of insanity becomes quite unstable. i am of the opinion that our definition of insanity in the law is not clear enough and that perhaps it should be completely removed from legal terminology

[Soundwave-]

Re: Gun Control

It's got a bayonet, it's actually arguably deadlier!

- Everyone in your family has to be clean. Cousin got jailed 20 years ago? no gun license for you.

This makes absolutely no sense. I hope I don't have to explain why.

- You are pressured multiple times by the police answering why do you need that license and what are you going to do with a gun, then go through a mental check.

Ohnoes them blues are getting in our business like its their job or something to do whatever they can to protect the public.

You love your guns and fabricate reasons why you need them, but it's quite apparent than even in self defense chances are you're safer without firearms.

Just kinda reminded me, since I feel like this is discredited: people sometimes own guns because when you use and store them responsibly, they can be fun, and an interesting hobby, and the freedom to choose to have that responsibility is kinda important.

[adlp]

Re: Gun Control

big ups to chef boyardee for popping into the thread, rly love hearing ur opinions on something u dont know anything about

fkn lol

[MixMasterLar]

Re: Gun Control

Greetings, I bring you a fruitbowl of bump. Mmmm Peaches.


I am personally all for more background checks. I think the guidelines with what Dev was saying would probably make a good blueprint on what we can do. The issue that people have with more regulations like that, though, is that we have a pretty bad trust issue in the states.

We are really use to everyone pulling the "gain the inch, then take the mile" trick to try and swing everything to their preferred liking: Our bosses do it with scheduling us for work, giving us gradually shittier and shittier hours; our schools do it to us in up-charging everything a little year after year after year until the price is absolutely sickening; Bush tells us we won't be in Iraq much longer, then just wait a little bit, a little bit, a little bit.

So whenever you hear people (especially people who have made it clear they rather not have guns at ALL) talk about "Well we'll just do this one common sense thing! C'mon don't be unreasonable" the first thing anyone is going to think is what kind of cascade bullshit is this going to lead to and do I want to set this precedent? Legally, at least in the states, precedents means alot and laws affect future laws more then we like to admit, and why agree to law Y when you feel that it's going to make stopping law X impossible?

So alot of gun owners try to sidestep the whole issue by just shutting down the conversation. I ain't trying to say it's right or that that side of the debate couldn't do better, but that's the logic. And when people throw serious aggression to gunowners it just doesn't make them want to give the benefit of the doubt.


As an aside, can we stop treating the NRA like they are some big scary black government branch that pulls the strings to arm as many rednecks as possible? Because they're not. If anything, the NRA is way more focused on safety and responsibility then any lawmaker I know of, and while I hate saying an absolute statement, I don't recall any mass shootings having been committed by an NRA member. Ever.

The thing is guns are part of your culture in a way similar to how corrida is part of spanish culture. You love your guns and fabricate reasons why you need them, but it's quite apparent than even in self defense chances are you're safer without firearms.

No, no it's not even a little bit apparent that we would be safer. Please refer to previous post made by Choof that we have a pretty big illegal importin' biz of weapons coming in here from our lovely southern neighbors. As someone who lives in Florida (aka not terribly far off from that border in the scheme of things: RIP my Texas brethren) I can promise you that the villain always has a weapon and I am not doing anyone any favors but not being as equally armed.

That said, full disclaimer I was never an NRA member and I don't currently own a gun at the moment. Just about everyone in my trailerpark does, though, and both my dad and brother are lifelong NRA members. Take my stance on things as you will.