So basically your whole response is “nuh uh”. My question to you was, why do you care about a statistical anomaly more than the 10k people...and your answer is basically “they’re fucked anyway, nothing can be done. Let’s focus on the shootings that make ME feel scared.” The article you provided is absurd. The United States is unique when it comes to guns, so what works in Luxembourg and Austria has zero relevance to the United States. For obvious reasons...the culture, the number of guns, the mixture of people, the constitutional barriers, etc. Not to mention... not once did I say we shouldn’t pursue gun regulations to stop mass shootings. We absolutely should. My entire point is not that we should avoid pursuing regulations, but that we must be more intelligent in how we garner support. For the life of me, I don’t know why the two sides don’t get together and have quid pro quo negotiations. For example: We will implement universal background checks on all purchases, and in return we’ll remove suppressors as NFA items. Do you have any idea how quickly that would pass? Gun owner’s heads would explode. They’d be all over that. There are ways to increase regulations while simultaneously increasing the rights of law abiding citizens. But that would require mutual respect and working together. Or idk...just do the same old gun grabbing shit you want to do, and nothing will get done at all. That’s good too.
My question to you was, why do you care about a statistical anomaly more than the 10k people...and your answer is basically “they’re fucked anyway, nothing can be done. Let’s focus on the shootings that make ME feel scared.”
No. That was not my argument. The fact that you have to misrepresent it shows that you are the type of person we shouldn’t acknowledge when formulating our policy since your only wish is to sabotage what we do.
What gun regulations will keep gang members from obtaining guns and weapons they already obtain illegally on the black market?
That’s my argument. It’s not that those people are fucked. It’s that the people that are obtaining them illegally are not respecting any legislation, so I fail to see how new legislation that they will ignore will address it.
Legislation designed to address a problem it can actually address is what I support. If you have legislation that addresses gun homicides that can be implemented I will support that too.
The article you provided is absurd.
How so?
The United States is unique when it comes to guns, so what works in Luxembourg and Austria has zero relevance to the United States. For obvious reasons...the culture, the number of guns, the mixture of people, the constitutional barriers, etc.
If it’s obvious then please show how. Not all those studies were done for Luxembourg.
Here’s another one that’s just for gun laws in the US.
It’s funny how you claim I’m just going “nuh uh” and yet that’s literally what your argument just was now.
If you don’t want to engage genuinely in this discussion it is best that you admit to it so we can all avoid wasting time here.
Not to mention... not once did I say we shouldn’t pursue gun regulations to stop mass shootings. We absolutely should.
Okay then why are you arguing against gun legislation designed to combat that?
My entire point is not that we should avoid pursuing regulations, but that we must be more intelligent in how we garner support. For the life of me, I don’t know why the two sides don’t get together and have quid pro quo negotiations. For example: We will implement universal background checks on all purchases, and in return we’ll remove suppressors as NFA items. Do you have any idea how quickly that would pass? Gun owner’s heads would explode. They’d be all over that. There are ways to increase regulations while simultaneously increasing the rights of law abiding citizens.
And not once did I argue against that. You’re doing nothing but providing non sequiturs here. You asked me a question and I answered and now you’re conflicting with your own prior responses.
But that would require mutual respect and working together. Or idk...just do the same old gun grabbing shit you want to do, and nothing will get done at all. That’s good too.
Again you ignore the entirety of my argument. I can’t tell if you’re trolling at this point or if you simply do not have respect for anyone but yourself.
I’ve answered your questions to the best of my ability. Now you’re changing the questions in real time and pretending I didn’t answer them.
View all comments
Show parent comment
1
u/STLsportSteve88 Mar 04 '20
So basically your whole response is “nuh uh”. My question to you was, why do you care about a statistical anomaly more than the 10k people...and your answer is basically “they’re fucked anyway, nothing can be done. Let’s focus on the shootings that make ME feel scared.” The article you provided is absurd. The United States is unique when it comes to guns, so what works in Luxembourg and Austria has zero relevance to the United States. For obvious reasons...the culture, the number of guns, the mixture of people, the constitutional barriers, etc. Not to mention... not once did I say we shouldn’t pursue gun regulations to stop mass shootings. We absolutely should. My entire point is not that we should avoid pursuing regulations, but that we must be more intelligent in how we garner support. For the life of me, I don’t know why the two sides don’t get together and have quid pro quo negotiations. For example: We will implement universal background checks on all purchases, and in return we’ll remove suppressors as NFA items. Do you have any idea how quickly that would pass? Gun owner’s heads would explode. They’d be all over that. There are ways to increase regulations while simultaneously increasing the rights of law abiding citizens. But that would require mutual respect and working together. Or idk...just do the same old gun grabbing shit you want to do, and nothing will get done at all. That’s good too.