Page 5 of 10 FirstFirst ... 34567 ... LastLast
Results 41 to 50 of 100

Thread: Gun Law in America

  1. #41



    Aska's Avatar
    Joined
    Mar 2014
    Posts
    1,575
    Userbars
    12
    Thanks
    2,638
    Thanked
    1,416/683
    DL/UL
    81/0
    Mentioned
    191 times
    Time Online
    45d 20h 47m
    Avg. Time Online
    18m
    I come from a redneck area, so taking guns away is never going to happen. Banning the stock thing he used? Congrats people still will make them. We, as an American society, are too far gone to save in that regard.

    So what's left to do? Tougher gun laws? Been there, done that. This guy bought 30+ guns in the matter of months and no one caught onto that. If the system really worked, then why was nothing flagged? Private sales can have quick criminal checks but what's that going to stop? Sure, the person selling is still liable if the buyer commits crime with the gun/is a convicted felon, but that still does not stop the violence from happening.

    GIANT METEOR 2017

  2. #42
    jawlong's Avatar
    Joined
    Jun 2017
    Posts
    75
    Userbars
    3
    Thanks
    19
    Thanked
    5/5
    DL/UL
    145/0
    Mentioned
    4 times
    Time Online
    6d 16h 29m
    Avg. Time Online
    3m
    Own weapons for personal use is prohibited in my country. The discussion here is if it would be good for us, since the violence rate is ridiculous high here in South America.

  3. #43
    Sugar Rush's Avatar
    Joined
    Sep 2015
    Posts
    307
    Userbars
    6
    Thanks
    669
    Thanked
    433/153
    DL/UL
    27/0
    Mentioned
    28 times
    Time Online
    21d 21h 31m
    Avg. Time Online
    10m
    Since we're here, let's talk about the Lawbreaker Paradox, since it always comes up:

    1. Law-abiding citizens obey the law
    2. Criminals are lawbreakers, and thus do not obey the law
    3. Laws impose restrictions on the behavior of only those that follow them
    4. Laws restrict and, therefore, only hurt law-abiding citizens

    This literally applies to 100% of laws. It's true for the same reason that it's totally useless in discussing a proper course of action--it's a redundant, self-reinforcing pretense of truth by necessity of its definition (ie. "lawbreakers").

    So instead of over-politicizing the crap out of the issue to satisfy our lame tribal tendencies and clinging to pointless arguments like the Lawbreaker Paradox to make our point (BOTH sides are guilty of oversimplification and logical fallacies, btw, that just happened to be a convenient example), let's agree that the 2nd amendment is here to stay, but people are dying a lot and we can do more than just *shrug*. We're smarter and better than that.

    Here's some basic suggestions to get started:

    1. Increase funding for research on gun violence, safety, and laws. Good research informs good, sensible policy, and our is kinda pathetic. Let's re-evaluate the Dickey Amendment while we're at it, because the idea that you can research an issue, but not use that research to inform or shape policy, is just idiotic. Considering the financial burden gun violence costs us in addition to loss of lives, we can afford to step it up to at least a level of concern consistent with its mortality rate.

    2. Improve resources necessary to actually enforce the law. Even though no laws are 100% effective, they're a lot less effective when we can't enforce them, wouldn't you say? Quit hamstringing agencies like the ATF by cutting funding and imposing restrictions that undermine their ability to properly enforce the laws we already have.

  4. The Following User Says Thank You to Sugar Rush For This Useful Post:

    Misha (10-12-2017)

  5. #44
    Misha's Avatar
    Joined
    Jan 2014
    Posts
    2,496
    Userbars
    24
    Thanks
    1,047
    Thanked
    2,191/1,137
    DL/UL
    37/0
    Mentioned
    376 times
    Time Online
    57d 23h N/A
    Avg. Time Online
    22m
    Quote Originally Posted by Diablos View Post
    This whole thread has been an eye opener for me. All that we have plastered over here in the U.K. whenever an event like Vegas happens is how crazy the US are, why Guns should be banned etc etc.

    It's all one sided so we never see any of the reasoning behind why people support the right to own a weapon and the benefits. So it's been good to see it from the other side of the fence. I've never held a gun, but next time I'm in the US I'm going to make a point of visiting a gun range. I want to experience it!
    Come to minnesota. Ill show you a good time.

  6. #45

    Integra's Avatar
    Joined
    Nov 2013
    Posts
    213
    Userbars
    3
    Thanks
    53
    Thanked
    45/32
    DL/UL
    25/0
    Mentioned
    12 times
    Time Online
    4d 18h 34m
    Avg. Time Online
    1m
    I'm an Aussie, admittedly I haven't lived abroad, but I do honestly prefer a scenario where automatic and semi-automatic weapons restricted or not allowed at all.

    There have been shootings since, but none to the extent of say Port Arthur, the worst recorded massacre in Australian history.

    I'll also leave this several year old but still highly-relevant/accurate comedy piece here for everyone, just for good measure, produced by American's:
    (you need an account to see links)

  7. #46

    Joined
    Nov 2017
    Posts
    63
    Userbars
    1
    Thanks
    2
    Thanked
    2/2
    DL/UL
    6/0
    Mentioned
    1 time
    Time Online
    10h 17m
    Avg. Time Online
    N/A
    Banning guns will make it harder for the random civilian to stop a shooting if it happens. Think about what would have happened in that church in texas if the two dudes didn't have a gun?

  8. #47
    Misha's Avatar
    Joined
    Jan 2014
    Posts
    2,496
    Userbars
    24
    Thanks
    1,047
    Thanked
    2,191/1,137
    DL/UL
    37/0
    Mentioned
    376 times
    Time Online
    57d 23h N/A
    Avg. Time Online
    22m
    Quote Originally Posted by franbow View Post
    Banning guns will make it harder for the random civilian to stop a shooting if it happens. Think about what would have happened in that church in texas if the two dudes didn't have a gun?
    If the two guys were in the church at the time of the shooting, 20 something lives could have been saved.

  9. #48


    Raichuu's Avatar
    Joined
    May 2013
    Posts
    161
    Userbars
    4
    Thanks
    57
    Thanked
    58/37
    DL/UL
    2/0
    Mentioned
    24 times
    Time Online
    23d 9h 16m
    Avg. Time Online
    8m
    I think some extra regulations are in order. We could do without automatic weapons, certainly. I don't think banning all together would solve the issue by any means. Unfortunately this is just like drugs, the people you want to keep this away from will always find a way. In places where they've banned many times the gun problems are all the worse. There is no perfect solution. /:

  10. #49

    Joined
    Oct 2017
    Posts
    9
    Userbars
    0
    Thanks
    1
    Thanked
    1/1
    DL/UL
    15/0
    Mentioned
    Never
    Time Online
    14h 25m
    Avg. Time Online
    N/A
    Guns should most certainly not be banned. There is plenty of evidence out there that shows gun-free zones do not work.

    In a lot of instances of mass shootings, it can be argued that if people with guns (as well as trained in the safe use of guns) were present, they could have stopped the shooter before they could kill unimpeded or at least stop the shooter from doing as much damage as they do.

    Strict gun laws will not stop criminals from getting their hands on guns. Criminals illegally acquire various things they should not have by illegal means. Making new laws telling them they can't have guns isn't going to stop a criminal from breaking the law and getting guns anyway. In my opinion, the solution should be to get guns in the hands of law-abiding citizens and training more people in the safe-handling of guns.

    Having a gun is deterrent, and it makes people think twice about commiting a crime around someone with a gun. No one (at least I don't think anyone is) is suggesting everyone takes their guns and starts shooting criminals like vigilantes. People have guns because it's a deterrent. If a shoplifter, a mugger, or even a mass shooter knew that people were going to be armed and were able to defend themselves. They wouldn't commit the crime, because they know they will be stopped.

    TL;DR: More guns and gun safety training for law-abiding citizens.

  11. The Following User Says Thank You to yosup90210 For This Useful Post:

    Arabelle (02-14-2018)

  12. #50
    Sci_Girl's Avatar
    Joined
    Dec 2011
    Posts
    2,206
    Userbars
    14
    Thanks
    982
    Thanked
    1,594/987
    DL/UL
    34/0
    Mentioned
    315 times
    Time Online
    49d 2h 15m
    Avg. Time Online
    16m
    To be frank the only way gun dependency and frequent gun violence will diminish is in the change of mindset of those living in it. There is a shift becoming more and more abundant towards the "guns are not needed" category but it has a ways to go. In order for it to go the current thinkers and teachers of this dependency will have to die off. That is the bitter pill to swallow truth. If violence is to decrease the mindset of violence is required needs go be gone. Teach current generation kids that you do not need to fight those you disagree with, flashing a weapon in a disagreement is not necessary, crime is bad, be a good person, respect others and so forth. Teach kids now to be good and maybe just may be society as a whole can come up to current speed as has happened in so so many other Countries so far regarding gun laws.


Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •