Don't ban guns

[[MPGH]Cursed]

Statistically, sure. We're talking about why people are scared of the big scary AR-15 and that's because 1) it looks scary 2) it sounds scary 3) it can fuck up a whole lot more people in a short period of time vs a pistol. Every hit from an AR-15 is life altering.

When it comes down to it the bullet does damage, but the gun it is shot out of makes a big difference. Longer barrel = more accuracy and velocity



Coming back to reality now, we live in America. Banning the AR-15 or any military styled weapons don't make any sense if you factor in the drivers of the economy and other similar guns. If you're going to ban military styled rifles you better ban all rifles.

TBH there was no reason for you to reply, I agree with everything here. Just because I don't specifically say something, doesn't mean I do not believe it.

[niggo]

Guns were essential since the first pilgrims set their foot on America and they continue to be essential today

to kill minorities and keep america for the white people you mean?

Because Japan, UK, Australia, Canada, etc are not up to par with America's rights.

just wondering how those countries are in any way worse in terms of rights compared to the US?

[[MPGH]Cursed]

to kill minorities and keep america for the white people you mean?

The amount of retardation exuded into this one sentence is more than even I can handle. But to argue with misinformed foreigners that spew this kind of rhetoric would be stooping low on my part. As these kind of posts are widely posted just to illicit a reaction by baiting, but if you're being legit it's just sad and not worth anyone's time.

just wondering how those countries are in any way worse in terms of rights compared to the US?

Considering I just posted paragraphs about the importance of the second amendment to myself and the country I live in, it should be self explanatory... But something I also heavily support is the freedom of speech. These countries may claim they have freedom of speech, but in none of these countries is it truly practiced. If you say something unfavorably in those countries, there are instances of jail time or fines from claimed 'hate speech'. The USA is the only country of those that actually has freedom of speech(NOT FREEDOM OF RELIGION) written into the constitution.

[Ferris Bueller]

I will preface this by saying that I'm not for an outright ban of a specific gun/rifle, I just wanted to respond to some things I thought were interesting with what you said.

Sure the AR-15 can do more damage, but statistically pistols are the 'gun problem' in America.

Statistically, more people die to guns. This is true. It is not fair though in my opinion for you to frame it this way.

America does not have a "pistol" problem per se. The entire problem people are talking about right now is the mass shootings not homicides. The reason I say this is because America is ranked 83 for homicides according to one metric. Compare this to America being ranked 10 in mass shootings. So when people bring up the AR-15 it's for that reason.

Of course, you and I know that the focus on AR-15 as being the devil is foolish, however the focus on mass shootings as opposed to homicides is not. When it comes to developed countries and mass shootings, we really are an outlier.

If these fucker's wanted to inflict evil, laws would not stop them.

I was also interested in what you meant by this. What exactly do you think the purpose of laws is? Should we not outlaw murder, since if someone really wanted to they would do it anyway? Should we not outlaw stealing since people will steal anyway? Makes no sense to me...

An effective law accomplishes what it is set out to do. Therefore, we should work towards finding good legislation that would stop the mass shooters. However, simply saying "they're going to get them anyway" and then remaining complacent seems very dangerous to me.

Not only is this complacency dangerous, it has been proven to be so by other countries. Australia responded to a mass shooting crisis plaguing them from 1984-1996 with swooping reform and a gun buyback program. It fixed their problem. Japan also laid down some serious gun laws quite early on and they have next to no gun violence. There are many other "success stories" as well...

Of course I am not saying that the US is should do exactly what these countries did, the US is different from these countries. However, what I'm saying is we need a solution and we need it soon. The gun issue is not an insurmountable one, it just needs to be tackled with nuance and a pro-active legislature.

[Charion]

to kill minorities and keep america for the white people you mean?



just wondering how those countries are in any way worse in terms of rights compared to the US?

When it comes to the gun violence in those said countries, then those countries have a lot of less gun violence, however Japan has stabbing issue, but still...
- It just amazes me how America government and Donald Fucking Trump keeps calling out that video games cause violence, but when showing them a graph and statistics, then America has a huge damn issue, not to mention other countries around the world may not have gun community or were risen around guns, don't have the same problem, American's government is finding most pathetic excuses and blame irrelevant things, part of me wishes governments around the world weren't brain dead.

[niggo]

The amount of retardation exuded into this one sentence is more than even I can handle. But to argue with misinformed foreigners that spew this kind of rhetoric would be stooping low on my part. As these kind of posts are widely posted just to illicit a reaction by baiting, but if you're being legit it's just sad and not worth anyone's time.

lmao shouldve added a /s to make it obv its a troll

Considering I just posted paragraphs about the importance of the second amendment to myself and the country I live in, it should be self explanatory... But something I also heavily support is the freedom of speech. These countries may claim they have freedom of speech, but in none of these countries is it truly practiced. If you say something unfavorably in those countries, there are instances of jail time or fines from claimed 'hate speech'. The USA is the only country of those that actually has freedom of speech(NOT FREEDOM OF RELIGION) written into the constitution.

what does having the freedom of speech have to do with the rights to have weapons?
also those countries have the freedom of speech just as the US does
what youre talking about is hate speech just as you have said and that certainly is not at all part of freedom of speech
and just cause you have the right to say what you want does not mean that people have to listen to it and most certainly not that you can say things that are insulting or hate speech

if you looked 2minutes at the EU for example it is part of the constitution and therefore binding right that freedom of speech must be a part of all member countries

- - - Updated - - -

I was also interested in what you meant by this. What exactly do you think the purpose of laws is? Should we not outlaw murder, since if someone really wanted to they would do it anyway? Should we not outlaw stealing since people will steal anyway? Makes no sense to me...

also to piggy back on this
gun advocates always talk about the good guys having guns to defend themselves

if someone in fucking texas of all places can go to a walmart and make a mass shooting then and have noone shoot back then what is this argument even worth afterall

- - - Updated - - -

When it comes to the gun violence in those said countries, then those countries have a lot of less gun violence, however Japan has stabbing issue, but still...
- It just amazes me how America government and Donald Fucking Trump keeps calling out that video games cause violence, but when showing them a graph and statistics, then America has a huge damn issue, not to mention other countries around the world may not have gun community or were risen around guns, don't have the same problem, American's government is finding most pathetic excuses and blame irrelevant things, part of me wishes governments around the world weren't brain dead.

problem with trump and most republican politicians is that the NRA is so far up their ass that they cant say anything else
you wouldnt blame guns if you get money from the gun lobby or your party is hugely sponsored by them

also dont wanna lose your gun loving voters

[[MPGH]Cursed]

I was also interested in what you meant by this. What exactly do you think the purpose of laws is? Should we not outlaw murder, since if someone really wanted to they would do it anyway? Should we not outlaw stealing since people will steal anyway? Makes no sense to me...

An effective law accomplishes what it is set out to do. Therefore, we should work towards finding good legislation that would stop the mass shooters. However, simply saying "they're going to get them anyway" and then remaining complacent seems very dangerous to me.

Not only is this complacency dangerous, it has been proven to be so by other countries. Australia responded to a mass shooting crisis plaguing them from 1984-1996 with swooping reform and a gun buyback program. It fixed their problem. Japan also laid down some serious gun laws quite early on and they have next to no gun violence. There are many other "success stories" as well...

Of course I am not saying that the US is should do exactly what these countries did, the US is different from these countries. However, what I'm saying is we need a solution and we need it soon. The gun issue is not an insurmountable one, it just needs to be tackled with nuance and a pro-active legislature.

You have a very valid point. I shouldn't have phrased it in such a way, but I personally see if there was a ban on purchasing AR-15s(or-alike), these shooters could still get them through non-FFL dealers. If they cannot find an AR-15, they will use the next best thing they can find. You'd be punishing an entire country for the actions of a few if a ban was enacted. I'm up for a solution, but what truly is the solution? We've seen these mass atrocities carried out in higher death tolls with a 9mm + .22. And right now demented minds know if they commit these heinous actions they will be glorified, in a sense... Which breeds delusion of having importance even when they're the biggest PoS alive.

what does having the freedom of speech have to do with the rights to have weapons?
also those countries have the freedom of speech just as the US does
what youre talking about is hate speech just as you have said and that certainly is not at all part of freedom of speech
and just cause you have the right to say what you want does not mean that people have to listen to it and most certainly not that you can say things that are insulting or hate speech

if you looked 2minutes at the EU for example it is part of the constitution and therefore binding right that freedom of speech must be a part of all member countries

Niggo, are you being serious right now? Let me repost what YOU asked:

just wondering how those countries are in any way worse in terms of rights compared to the US?

Yea... You asked me about rights, not specifically gun control. Already shown they don't have the right to bear arms, but also mentioned the fact they do not have true freedom of speech. You cannot ask a broad question about a countries' rights then I give you examples and you wonder why the fuck they're construed together.
The fact you say this:

also those countries have the freedom of speech just as the US does

And then say this in the next sentence:

what youre talking about is hate speech just as you have said and that certainly is not at all part of freedom of speech

doesn't make any sense
These countries apparently have the freedom of speech just as the US does, yet you say they have defined hate speech that isn't a part of free speech... To be this confused must fall under ignorance, and you know how they say ignorance is bliss. Reevaluate what you just said and figure out why it's so stupid. America does not have defined hate speech, we have FREE SPEECH. Something you just admitted these countries do not have due to the fact they have defined hate speech. Speech you can be jailed and fined for. The only speech America limits is that of the call to action. For example:
We can legally and without legal problem(such as fine/jail), though social/public problems are to be expected, say something like; "I hate ******s, they are not humans and I wish they were all dead."
Where this speech would be a problem in those countries, the only way it'd be a problem in the US is if it was something like; "I hate ******s, they are not humans and I'll pay anyone $5k to get me a scalp."

See, this speech is a call to action. I don't think speech can be offensive enough to warrant a fine/jail time without there being an explicit call to action.

blah blah all talk, no solutions or sensibility.. but yet no reply to guy asking me question

Called it Gooba:

I'll be awaiting your reply, if I get one at all, as I know it'll just be some bullshit.

[Solvi]

You have a very valid point. I shouldn't have phrased it in such a way, but I personally see if there was a ban on purchasing AR-15s(or-alike), these shooters could still get them through non-FFL dealers. If they cannot find an AR-15, they will use the next best thing they can find. You'd be punishing an entire country for the actions of a few if a ban was enacted. I'm up for a solution, but what truly is the solution? We've seen these mass atrocities carried out in higher death tolls with a 9mm + .22. And right now demented minds know if they commit these heinous actions they will be glorified, in a sense... Which breeds delusion of having importance even when they're the biggest PoS alive.







Niggo, are you being serious right now? Let me repost what YOU asked:

Yea... You asked me about rights, not specifically gun control. Already shown they don't have the right to bear arms, but also mentioned the fact they do not have true freedom of speech. You cannot ask a broad question about a countries' rights then I give you examples and you wonder why the fuck they're construed together.
The fact you say this:

And then say this in the next sentence:

doesn't make any sense
These countries apparently have the freedom of speech just as the US does, yet you say they have defined hate speech that isn't a part of free speech... To be this confused must fall under ignorance, and you know how they say ignorance is bliss. Reevaluate what you just said and figure out why it's so stupid. America does not have defined hate speech, we have FREE SPEECH. Something you just admitted these countries do not have due to the fact they have defined hate speech. Speech you can be jailed and fined for. The only speech America limits is that of the call to action. For example:
We can legally and without legal problem(such as fine/jail), though social/public problems are to be expected, say something like; "I hate ******s, they are not humans and I wish they were all dead."
Where this speech would be a problem in those countries, the only way it'd be a problem in the US is if it was something like; "I hate ******s, they are not humans and I'll pay anyone $5k to get me a scalp."

See, this speech is a call to action. I don't think speech can be offensive enough to warrant a fine/jail time without there being an explicit call to action.







Called it Gooba:

lol k stupid american

[Ferris Bueller]

You have a very valid point. I shouldn't have phrased it in such a way, but I personally see if there was a ban on purchasing AR-15s(or-alike), these shooters could still get them through non-FFL dealers. If they cannot find an AR-15, they will use the next best thing they can find. You'd be punishing an entire country for the actions of a few if a ban was enacted. I'm up for a solution, but what truly is the solution? We've seen these mass atrocities carried out in higher death tolls with a 9mm + .22. And right now demented minds know if they commit these heinous actions they will be glorified, in a sense... Which breeds delusion of having importance even when they're the biggest PoS alive.

I think right now I would not be opposed a gun buyback program. The reason I say this is because there millions of guns in circulation right now that were bought through gun show loopholes and that have been acquired through antiquated laws. What I mean by that is from the mid 2000s on we have started gradually legislating stricter gun laws. However during that transitionary period and even to this day, guns have been bought through gun show loop holes, guns have been passed down from father to son, many guns exist in households where mentally ill people live(ie father is healthy and has a license but son is mentally ill and has access to said legally acquired guns), etc...

The only way to deal with all of these guns i think would be a form of buyback. After the buyback is complete(this would take years) and strictly enforced, you can start allowing people to buy guns again but this time with nation-wide strict background checks, nation-wide legislation that doesn't have loopholes, and just all around a more modern gun control system that allows people to practice their second amendment right, but at the same time keeps us safe.

[MoneyMachine]

We don't have guns in Europe and we are doing just fine without them

[Vicarious]

We don't have guns in Europe and we are doing just fine without them

Can confirm. We tend to stab each other.

[sasori~]

Government plan for takeover:

1) Takes all military grade weapons from civilians, leave them with only pistols and low cal hunting rifles
2) Invade civilian territories with military grade weaponry
3) profit???

For real though, guns are not only for self protection, but also for protection in case of civil wars. Criminals/gangs/murders will always get their hands on guns to commit acts of crime regardless of laws/regulations. All that a gun restriction/ban would do is put civilians in even more danger in the case of a shooting/coo. Look up statistics on how many crimes are committed WITH guns by felons who shouldn't have been able to have a gun in the first place.

Liberals are fucking brain-dead.

[Ferris Bueller]

For real though, guns are not only for self protection, but also for protection in case of civil wars. Criminals/gangs/murders will always get their hands on guns to commit acts of crime regardless of laws/regulations. All that a gun restriction/ban would do is put civilians in even more danger in the case of a shooting/coo. Look up statistics on how many crimes are committed WITH guns by felons who shouldn't have been able to have a gun in the first place.

Just literally puking out misinformation.

Criminals/gangs/murders will always get their hands on guns to commit acts of crime regardless of laws/regulations.

So you're implying that because criminals will get guns regardless of laws, we should just not have gun laws.

Let's test your logic:

Criminals/gangs/murders will always steal regardless of laws/regulations. We should not have theft laws.

Criminals/gangs/murders will always rape regardless of laws/regulations. We should not have rape laws.

Criminals/gangs/murders will always launder money regardless of laws/regulations. We should not have money laundering laws.

Criminals/gangs/murders will always get their hands on guns to commit acts of crime regardless of laws/regulations. We should not have gun laws.

Do any of these make sense to you? The answer should be no.

We have laws, and then we have law enforcement. This happens through police/intelligence agencies. We outlaw theft and people steal anyway. However when that happens we have law enforcement to take down the perp and his accomplices. Same thing would happen if guns are outlawed and the criminals/gangs/murderers are forced to go through much more trouble to get these guns. Once they are found with guns that have been made illegal, they can be arrested and then an investigation happens on when and where they got these guns.

All that a gun restriction/ban would do is put civilians in even more danger in the case of a shooting/coo.

Except this is demonstrably false. Not a single study backs this statement.

In countries with strict gun restrictions, gun crimes are down. Crazy right?

Look up statistics on how many crimes are committed WITH guns by felons who shouldn't have been able to have a gun in the first place.

A completely unfounded statement. Many crimes are in fact committed by felons with guns. What should this prove? Your earlier point that felons will get guns anyway? And your solution to that is less gun regulation. So we should just have a free for all where both good guys and bad guys have access to guns and the strongest wins?

Felons do end up getting guns. Funny enough though this is a direct result of how easily available guns are in general. What ends up happening is a person who is not a felon but is a bad guy with no record gets a whole lot of legal guns, and then distributes said guns to bad guys with records(felons). Even the national institute of justice(an institute that is completely cucked by the NRA) seems to agree that stricter logging requirements might not deter acquisition of guns by felons, but would make it easier to stop them. In all cases, smarter gun laws reduce not just mass shootings, but the very same felons that you are mentioning.

Liberals are fucking brain-dead.

Unironically only thing i agree with you on.

[cipher3301]

i like guns

[niggo]

doesn't make any sense
These countries apparently have the freedom of speech just as the US does, yet you say they have defined hate speech that isn't a part of free speech... To be this confused must fall under ignorance, and you know how they say ignorance is bliss. Reevaluate what you just said and figure out why it's so stupid. America does not have defined hate speech, we have FREE SPEECH. Something you just admitted these countries do not have due to the fact they have defined hate speech. Speech you can be jailed and fined for. The only speech America limits is that of the call to action. For example:
We can legally and without legal problem(such as fine/jail), though social/public problems are to be expected, say something like; "I hate ******s, they are not humans and I wish they were all dead."
Where this speech would be a problem in those countries, the only way it'd be a problem in the US is if it was something like; "I hate ******s, they are not humans and I'll pay anyone $5k to get me a scalp."

See, this speech is a call to action. I don't think speech can be offensive enough to warrant a fine/jail time without there being an explicit call to action.

how is saying something like that even in the slightest way something you need to say
free speech is being able to publicly state critic on the current system or people in it without fear of getting into jail for just saying this
you in no way need to insult anyone with that

i literally cannot wrap my mind around how anyone is able to defend the right to insult and defamate others and thinks its a right that makes the US (a country which i despise more and more every single day due to various factors) better than others

im not gonna argue with you ever again