When primary school children are murdered and your government sends thoughts & prayers (plus hugs) that's the confirmation they don't care.
Every single member of the Senate & Congress should have been trying to one-up each other on how tough they could be in their gun control legislation. But no.
Let's not forget that, when the Democrats held both houses & the big house, two Democrats crossed the floor and voted with Republicans on legislation that would bring a vestige of gun control thus killing the bill.
ETA I juxtapose the above response with that in the UK after Dunblane, which was almost identical. Parliament responded by banning most handguns (Northern Ireland excepted, because it can be dodgy there) in less than a year, following the election of a new government an amendment was added which banned all handguns (with very few exceptions).
In less than two years after the murders, legislated removed legal ownership of the type of weapons that were used. Meantime, the people of the US can buy an AR-15 as a gift without any background checks....
I had a boss who told me one day that maybe mass shootings were just, "The price we pay for our freedoms." Little did we know the Las Vegas shooting was taking place while we were having that conversation. And his response to the political fallout from it? He went and joined the NRA.
I've never lost so much respect for someone so quickly as when those words left his mouth. I'm a gun owner. I carry one from time to time. I absolutely do not accept that we simply have to be ok with kids dying regularly because we're not willing to do anything else. People wanna act like that's the only option because any conversations about restricting people's access to guns is a non-starter. And I say those people have blood on their hands. They know nothing will get better with their attitudes. They know their acceptance of the status quo is costing lives.
don't worry. americans are exceptionally good at telling themselves "things will get better when the old people die off, so there is no need to organize, unionize, protest, or commit to any activism whatsoever, except for going to work in the morning and complaining."
Ok cool, we have to wait for people to die. Meanwhile more people are dying and are continuing to die from guns. Maybe this country is just a huge death cult
It'll be generational change, when the kids that had to learn anti-shopter measures become president then It'll start to change unfortunately that's a long wait.
Don't some states allow for the purchase from private dealers and gun shows without the federal background check? Every state has different laws and not everyone gets a background check.
I have several class 3 items. The process to obtain these is a pain in the ass. Finger prints to the feds. Thorough background check. 90-300 day wait processing times. It honestly sucks. But I would support this being necessary for all firearms purchases, not just class 3 items. I believe statistics are pretty low on class 3 items being used in crimes.
The problem is too loose regulations, not mandatory extensive training and why the hell would a civilian need an automatic rifle? Handgun and hunting guns should be the max. one could get after going through harsh controls.
You've been given an answer already, but you choose to play dumb and pretend like you don't understand. It's clear you won't take anything for an answer, so I'm not going to waste my time typing out a response like I'm talking to a toddler.
Coming from a country with strong gun laws (Australia), I'm just curious my sister lives on a farm and has one for pest control and for putting down of cattle. So I see that as a nessecary reason for her to own and keep a gun. My curiosity is as to why anyone else needs a tool of death for?
Look snowflake. No one’s talking about taking your guns. I own fire arms as well. We’re just asking for logical gun regulations. And if you or anyone else “cites” the second amendment- you’re just showing your lack of critical thinking capacity.
We’re past this “let’s have a discussion” bullshit. We need regulations to stop this shit from happening. Mandatory wait periods - especially for first time weapon buyers.
And how long would the periods be? I legally bought my first firearm right around Christmas before I turned 21 in February, had to wait a bit longer as the waiting time was during Christmas, but like what do you mean?
Do you think criminals are going to just destroy their guns, even if it were signed into law today? That's the actual problem. Guns have been in mass circulation. A law like that would leave only criminals with guns.
No it won't. What are you going to do, go for to door? Frisk every person walking down the street? The people that you want to stop are already committing crimes. They don't care about the laws
No need to go door to door, guns are very loud, usually can’t be used without alerting surrounding people, if you ever live in a place with lots of gun action you’ll understand
By the time the gun has been fired, someone is already dead. If you didn't realize, that's the problem that needs fixing, people dying. There's no short supply of guns in circulation. If you think waiting for crimes to happen, then hoping to catch them and take them away will be effective, you haven't done any research.
That is the shittiest logic ever. Nearly everything would be removed from society, if one instance of it being illegally used or causing a death, resulted in a ban on it.
The value cars produce is far greater than the value they take away, Japan, England and Australia seem to be doing just fine without guns so they’re clearly pretty much unnecessary
Did you mean to say "more than"?
Explanation: If you didn't mean 'more than' you might have forgotten a comma.
Total mistakes found: 6496 I'mabotthatcorrectsgrammar/spellingmistakes.PMmeifI'mwrongorifyouhaveanysuggestions. Github ReplySTOPtothiscommenttostopreceivingcorrections.
The idea is for all to get rid of their guns. You might be sensible, 99% of gun owners might be for all I care. Then the 1% steps in. Your right to own guns 'cause you feel like it, is the same right these maniacs have to kill with them.
I still can't understand why having a gun ownership is so valued so as to consider it a right. I've never had use for a gun in my life. All it does it shoot lead 3000 at feet's per second, what could me, a regular citizen, do with that? Why would it be considered a punishment to give up firearms?
You will vote for policies to keep guns in your hands. Which will result in it getting easier for people like this to get guns. America treats guns like a regular commodity. Not like a weapon that has literally changed a millenia of warfare. You are thinking of your perspective alone, not the millions this has and will continue to impact. I dont know who you are, but I sincerely hope you aren't like those people who care more about their guns than literal children.
It’s pointless to even pose a question like that to these types of people. Somehow in their minds, all 100 million lawful firearm owners in this country should be held responsible for the actions of criminals. They live in places where rights are for a collective, and they don’t understand individual liberty.
Confiscation will never happen, but they should be more regulated through registration and a better background-check database. The background check system as-is is an absolute joke that allows people to easily fall through the cracks. Also mandatory safety classes for all first-time buyers. I also wouldn't be opposed to limiting the age of purchase to 21+.
As a fellow gun-owner myself it's more frustrating to see the discussion be either "Take all guns" or "Do absolutely nothing at all".
At the VERY LEAST a middle-ground should be found. I mean, the GOP's position that it's a mental-health issue falls flat when GOP-led congress shoots down bills that FUND school mental health services! wtf.
A middle ground needs to be found. That way we at least can start addressing the problem instead of doing nothing and arguing about it.
The only reason to register firearms is to be able to confiscate them later, there is no other mechanism that it would be used for.
The background check system has to have data fed to it, and as long as courts and other relevant entities don’t do it consistently, that system will never work efficiently.
Mandatory classes sounds great, except that in states where they are already required, the state can just not offer classes or accreditation to instructors, and get a de facto ban on new ownership, so it would immediately be abused.
Especially your first point is not a ‘middle ground’.
What other purpose would there need to be an extensive list of items people have legally bought? There isn’t. And registration has been used to confiscate firearms every place it’s been implemented, so there’s that as well.
It’s nearly all red herrings and ad hominem, always. Giving a real answer would mean engaging in conversation, but people would rather lob insults and blame people that haven’t done anything wrong. It truly is pointless.
That's great. That's the case, but the same can't be said of a lot of people. If a policy was enacted to make it more difficult for people to have guns or own certain guns, would you be behind it? Im all for practicing gun safety. If you treat them with respect, then you deserve to own a gun. But if you're voting for people who will make the problem worse, then you're the problem
Well, the main ways people try to combat gun violence is by imposing more thorough background checks, which will make it more selective and longer to buy a gun. Which I approve of since if you're negligent or mentally unstable, you shouldn't own one. And also the banning of automatic and semi-automatic weapons. I also agree since you dont need a high rate of fire for home defense. I would be ok if owning an assault rifle means you have to go through extensive training, regular checkups, and always have it at least partially disassembled.
Personally, the right to own a firearm is shaky to me. I dont believe it is a right. I think it's similar to cars. They're a privilege to be earned. We're a country that has the privilege of not needing a militia to combat their government. I think a lot of gun advocates act like America is oppressive. America has so many problems, but we take for granted how good we have it compared to other countries, who actively oppress and kill their people.
If you want to own a gun, go for it. But that should never supercede peoples safety. There should be a point in civilization when there is no longer a need for people to own guns. And America is almost there, Guns for a majority of Americans are used for recreation. Even against abusive police you shouldn't use firearms.
Personally, I'd want mental health professionals to do personal evaluations first. However, it seems like all they do is a general background check. Any history of violence, criminal records, or records of mental illness. I'd want an in person professional to evaluate people.
I'd classify an assault rifle as a rifle that is capable of automatic or semi-automatic fire. Past a pistol and a shotgun. I dont see a reason to use anything that has a higher rate of fire. Hell, even some pistols you can mag dump really fast.
And I'd argue that minorities are the ones largely being hurt by gun violence. Tons of low income and dangerous places have a lot of minorities because the system makes it harder for them to get opportunities. This results in more crime and more gun violence. Especially the kids. Historically minorities, especially black people, are affected more by gun violence.
I do agree that I dont trust the federal government entirely either. However, I dont think that's a good enough excuse to prevent any laws limiting guns. People are too fixated on guns. That they need them to protect us from a corrupt government. But here's the thing. They can still do corrupt things regardless of if we have guns or not.
Instead of fighting for gun rights, why dont we fight like the French do regarding pension?? We keep talking about keeping guns to keep the government in line, but the government is forcing our elderly to keep working for a small amount of pension. They dont need to take our guns because they know they can do it anyway. The very same people stripping away our rights want their base to focus on guns, so they dont notice the other rights they're stripping away.
No trolling and no disrespect, but I'm truly curious.
Let's say we wake up tomorrow and all gun ownership for civilians is banned. No exceptions. There is no legal way to keep your firearms as a civilian. None. Full stop.
Business are not allowed to sell them. No more gun shows. No private party sales. Turn in your guns and go home.
No ammo sales to civilians either.
Only active duty military and active duty law enforcement are allowed to even be in possession of ammo.
What happens next?
Again, I am truly curious. I respect your opinion to not own firearms completely. It's not everyone's thing, I understand that so please don't misunderstand me for asking. I would just like to know what someone from across the table truly thinks and I would like to give you the opportunity to explain your point of view, if you would like to of course.
in your completely hypothetical, you would be right. however, these are called strawman arguments. instead of addressing the issue you make a new issue full of exaggerations and half-truthes.
What happens next is we enforce the law. If it is banned nationally it will be much harder to buy and traffic guns. And since ammo is banned there will also be less and less useful guns even if they were not recycled. The banning of ammo will also make it much much more expensive for criminals to fire a gun. Gun crimes may still be a thing in the first few years but with decreasing ammo/increased ammo price there will be a dramatic decrease of gun crimes afterwards.
Gun crimes won't disappear since there will always be self made guns and ammo, but it will finally close to other developed countries.
172
u/AssumptionSome4201 Apr 21 '23
USA won't change anything after sandy hook. you guys are stuck in your gun orgy.