Mr. Ambien Posted July 25, 2015 Share Posted July 25, 2015 Stricter gun laws don't really help. Chicago has some of the strictest gun laws in the country...handguns are flat out illegal within Chicago city limits. Yet, gang members are constantly shooting each other with handguns within the city limits. So how effective are these strict gun laws really? Most of these guns gang members/criminals possess have been obtained illegally. Stricter gun laws wont help because they're not the ones going into the store and buying them, they get them from people who can obtain them legally no matter how strict the laws. The stricter laws only make selling the guns to people who can't get them on their own a more lucrative business. The real problem is that once a person takes the necessary and legal steps to purchase firearms, they can purchase as many friggin firearms as they want. In my opinion, limiting the number of firearms a person can have registered to their name is a start. No reason a person should need more than three guns...so why let them buy 50 of them. Its insane. People will always be able to obtain guns legally, the right to bear arms isn't changing any time soon. The least they can do is prevent people from bearing other people with arms though. Having no limit on the number of guns one can possess is basically allowing any person with a FOID card to become illegal gun distributors. in b4 "you just need it nationally"/"get rid of second amendment" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hugor Hill Posted July 25, 2015 Share Posted July 25, 2015 Just change the 2nd amendment. It's an amendment. It can be changed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RUPERTKBD Posted July 25, 2015 Share Posted July 25, 2015 Most normal, rational and sane people don't suddenly wake up one day and go, "Oh hey, I wanna go down to the local theater, pay $10 for a movie ticket, perhaps grab some popcorn.... and while sitting, I'm gonna go and shoot up the place." It probably means there's some mental issues going on. The key is to have programs and support to help people who are suffering. Banning guns doesn't mean unstable folks won't do bad things. Some guy in China killed like 20+ people with a knife a few years back.... then there's the beheading on a Greyhound bus.... both cases are related to mental disease, not a knife problem. Yet if a firearm was used... it would be labeled as a gun problem. Guns are used as the last resort. The presence of a firearm is primarily used as a deterrence. So, the takeaway from this is that you don't believe the US has a gun problem, rather they have a mental health problem...is that about it? I don't disagree with the second, although I've seen no statistics that tell me there are bigger mental health issues in the USA than there are in other first world countries. OTOH, I wholeheartedly disagree that the US doesn't have a gun problem. No-one is talking about banning guns, either. Make them difficult to get. Restrict the type of weapons that can legally be sold. Put restrictions on the types of ammunition one can possess. You know......common sense regulations. Stricter gun laws don't really help. Chicago has some of the strictest gun laws in the country...handguns are flat out illegal within Chicago city limits. Yet, gang members are constantly shooting each other with handguns within the city limits. So how effective are these strict gun laws really? It doesn't do a lot of good to place regulations on something, when people can drive an hour and get it anyway. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RUPERTKBD Posted July 25, 2015 Share Posted July 25, 2015 Just change the 2nd amendment. It's an amendment. It can be changed. I believe the pertinent word is "amend". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr. Ambien Posted July 25, 2015 Share Posted July 25, 2015 I believe the pertinent word is "amend". Obviously he knows little about the Constitution. Hence why no court would listen to those arguments. As for amending, it would require a significant portion of Congress and the states, and that has a snowball's chance in hell of happening, given so many states are vehemently against most types of gun control, never mind any amendment that would change the second amendment in any way other than strengthening gun rights. Anyways, this goes back to our old debates about guns, you focus solely on the gun aspect, but miss the "violence" portion of it. Guns are only one means of violence, and they aren't even the most prominent one. While I've been sceptical of the "mental health" claims regarding mass shooters, just like how these events are few and far between when it comes to violent crimes, they are a microcosm of a culture that is indeed one that seems to turn to violence rather quickly. Attacking guns doesn't even address the violence problem, and it's obviously a non-starter as the extreme vast majority of people who own guns wish to do so for the sake of defending themselves, family, and property against violent criminals, not to commit crimes or shoot people or go on a rampage with. Unfortunately in cases like this people get so latched onto guns they don't step back and see the forest from the trees. That's why you guys get continuously get rejected in the US when it comes to the courts. The way to make the gun issue less of one is to go after the underlying problem of violence. However, the people that tend to be anti-gun also tend to be pro-rioting and burning buildings down when it comes to crap like Ferguson or Baltimore. So trying to extract any semblance of logic is quite a task.. rational arguments don't find their way to the forefront. The US as far as violence goes, is still extremely high for first world countries, but it's one that's been consistently improving since it was at it's worst a few decades back. The discussion about how to curb violence and try to get people to act more rationally is not one you will find, no one wants to have that discussion. So.. it is what it is. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hugor Hill Posted July 25, 2015 Share Posted July 25, 2015 Change the constitution. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
skolozsy2 Posted July 25, 2015 Share Posted July 25, 2015 So, the takeaway from this is that you don't believe the US has a gun problem, rather they have a mental health problem...is that about it? I don't disagree with the second, although I've seen no statistics that tell me there are bigger mental health issues in the USA than there are in other first world countries. OTOH, I wholeheartedly disagree that the US doesn't have a gun problem. No-one is talking about banning guns, either. Make them difficult to get. Restrict the type of weapons that can legally be sold. Put restrictions on the types of ammunition one can possess. You know......common sense regulations. It doesn't do a lot of good to place regulations on something, when people can drive an hour and get it anyway. Laws and regulations can only do so much...technically I shouldn't be able to drive anywhere in the country and purchase cocaine, but I bet if I really wanted it, I wouldn't even have to drive an hour to find it. Not saying you don't have a point, just saying laws and regulations or making something illegal can only do so much. People will find a way to get what they want. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted July 25, 2015 Share Posted July 25, 2015 Obviously he knows little about the Constitution. Hence why no court would listen to those arguments. As for amending, it would require a significant portion of Congress and the states, and that has a snowball's chance in hell of happening, given so many states are vehemently against most types of gun control, never mind any amendment that would change the second amendment in any way other than strengthening gun rights. Anyways, this goes back to our old debates about guns, you focus solely on the gun aspect, but miss the "violence" portion of it. Guns are only one means of violence, and they aren't even the most prominent one. While I've been sceptical of the "mental health" claims regarding mass shooters, just like how these events are few and far between when it comes to violent crimes, they are a microcosm of a culture that is indeed one that seems to turn to violence rather quickly. Attacking guns doesn't even address the violence problem, and it's obviously a non-starter as the extreme vast majority of people who own guns wish to do so for the sake of defending themselves, family, and property against violent criminals, not to commit crimes or shoot people or go on a rampage with. Unfortunately in cases like this people get so latched onto guns they don't step back and see the forest from the trees. That's why you guys get continuously get rejected in the US when it comes to the courts. The way to make the gun issue less of one is to go after the underlying problem of violence. However, the people that tend to be anti-gun also tend to be pro-rioting and burning buildings down when it comes to crap like Ferguson or Baltimore. So trying to extract any semblance of logic is quite a task.. rational arguments don't find their way to the forefront. The US as far as violence goes, is still extremely high for first world countries, but it's one that's been consistently improving since it was at it's worst a few decades back. The discussion about how to curb violence and try to get people to act more rationally is not one you will find, no one wants to have that discussion. So.. it is what it is. You're right, the subtext which leads to gun violence needs to be addressed. Absolutely no argument from me. In the meantime, let's get rid of the &^@#ing guns. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Red Light Racicot Posted July 25, 2015 Share Posted July 25, 2015 NRA= No Rational Argument Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bill Sikes Posted July 25, 2015 Share Posted July 25, 2015 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr. Ambien Posted July 25, 2015 Share Posted July 25, 2015 CDC translation: Ban guns. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted July 25, 2015 Share Posted July 25, 2015 Translation: Ban guns. Why don't you respond to a Dalai Lama quote with a picture of Stalin? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr. Ambien Posted July 25, 2015 Share Posted July 25, 2015 Why don't you respond to a Dalai Lama quote with a picture of Stalin? You've already got enough problems, last thing I want to do is make you jealous. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Red Light Racicot Posted July 25, 2015 Share Posted July 25, 2015 Smashing idea. But until people buy into this, let's get rid of the &^@#ing guns. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted July 25, 2015 Share Posted July 25, 2015 You've already got enough problems, last thing I want to do is make you jealous. And what problems would those be? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr. Ambien Posted July 25, 2015 Share Posted July 25, 2015 Smashing idea. But until people buy into this, let's get rid of the ???? guns. But people and the courts in the US are going to buy into that? Man, I wish I could go to this imaginary land, where getting rid of guns solves the US' problems. Except, I don't believe in fairy tales. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RUPERTKBD Posted July 25, 2015 Share Posted July 25, 2015 Laws and regulations can only do so much...technically I shouldn't be able to drive anywhere in the country and purchase cocaine, but I bet if I really wanted it, I wouldn't even have to drive an hour to find it. Not saying you don't have a point, just saying laws and regulations or making something illegal can only do so much. People will find a way to get what they want. Of course they will. However, making guns harder to get (and certain types impossible) will cut down on a significant portion of firearm deaths, such as crimes of passion, accidental shootings and suicides. No-one is claiming that the problem can be miraculously solved, but with some common sense applied and a relaxing of this ridiculous adherence to one's "right to bear arms" (which for some reason, people have interpreted to mean any type of weapon, available to any American citizen) it seems reasonable to think that the problem can be dramatically mitigated. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RUPERTKBD Posted July 25, 2015 Share Posted July 25, 2015 But people and the courts in the US are going to buy into that? Man, I wish I could go to this imaginary land, where getting rid of guns solves the US' problems. Except, I don't believe in fairy tales. I don't know....you seem to believe in the fairy tale that says more guns equals a safer society... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr. Ambien Posted July 25, 2015 Share Posted July 25, 2015 I don't know....you seem to believe in the fairy tale that says more guns equals a safer society... Well no, I don't believe guns inherently make a society safer. I believe that, in a society (US) where people are violent regardless of the weapons used, emphasizing an already (and by 2015, long standing) existing right to use a gun to defend yourself in a country where it's far more likely to need to do so than other first world countries, the ability to defend yourself and your family with lethal force is more than an adequate necessity. You can either imagine the world for what you want it to be (re: fairy tale) or you can deal with is as it is. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RUPERTKBD Posted July 25, 2015 Share Posted July 25, 2015 Well no, I don't believe guns inherently make a society safer. I believe that, in a society (US) where people are violent regardless of the weapons used, emphasizing an already (and by 2015, long standing) existing right to use a gun to defend yourself in a country where it's far more likely to need to do so than other first world countries, the ability to defend yourself and your family with lethal force is more than an adequate necessity. You can either imagine the world for what you want it to be (re: fairy tale) or you can deal with is as it is. Right. Because there's absolutely no middle ground, even though the proof is all around, in the form of other countries who don't cling to their guns like Americans do. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.