Tuco
I got Tuco'd!
- 47,447
- 81,059
"You can't use gun proliferation to blindly account for reduced crime, but I can use gun control to account for it!"
Gun control
- Thread starter Saladus
- Start date
-
Guest, it's time once again for the massively important and exciting FoH Asshat Tournament!
Go here and give us your nominations!Who's been the biggest Asshat in the last year? Give us your worst ones!
Loser Araysar
Chief Russia Reporter. Stock Pals CEO. Head of AI.
- 80,162
- 160,373
You needed a study to tell you this?
The autobahn still has a smaller fatality rate than US highways. You know why? Because speed limits increase the accident rate dramatically and an accident at 65 mph is just as likely to be fatal as a 90 mph accident. But the kicker is that autobahn has a much more smaller accident rate overall because of a lack of speed limits so their overall fatality rates (not just total fatalities but the fatality rates) are lower.
Its the same reason why red light cameras which claim to reduce accidents actually increase accidents as people slam on the brakes at yellows to avoid a $100 ticket by going through a yellow/red thereby significantly increasing the number of rear endings. But a red light cameras has nothing to do with safety and everything with generating revenue for the city.
Addressing the root cause of violence and gun legislation are not mutually exclusive. I am not sure you are understanding that I am suggesting to address both. Obviously the end goal is to reduce violence overall. The reason guns are targeted, and not other tools like knives, bows and whatever, is that the efficiency and ease of killing is so stark with firearms.
The rest of your post is just self righteous blithering about the degradation of the moral fiber of society and is designed to obfuscate the fact that citizens are unwilling or unable to act responsibly with their guns.
The rest of your post is just self righteous blithering about the degradation of the moral fiber of society and is designed to obfuscate the fact that citizens are unwilling or unable to act responsibly with their guns.
I already mentioned that I wrote gun deaths instead of murder. Your statement should read " you cant use gun proliferation to blindly account for reduced murders, but I can use gun control to account forreduced gun death".
Loser Araysar
Chief Russia Reporter. Stock Pals CEO. Head of AI.
- 80,162
- 160,373
They are not mutually exclusive by same logic as teaching students how to spell and banning pencils at the same time to prevent future mass misspellings.
One clearly makes sense, the other one is being idiotic and does nothing to combat the problem as evidenced by mountains of statistical data.
lol u mad. u mad i figured you out.
It wasn't easy but at the same time it wasn't hard. It wasn't easy to look inside myself over the years and come to some logical conclusions that directly contradicted my preconceived notions. But it also wasn't hard to see my 19 year old self in people like you and know exactly where you are coming from. When I was 19 I didn't think anyone had a good reason to own a gun either.
While they aren't, they mostly are. Violence =/= guns. You are too wrapped up in imbuing a tool with nefarious powers. A gun is a tool. This has already been address enough. You should get it. Why don't you get it, man?
Again, already addressed. You can and should have a debate about regulating guns. But along logical and understood lines. Regulation that is backed by study, not pitchfork shaking reactionary halfwits. You want to talk about regulating things like AR-15 pistols, AOW shotguns, silencers, hollowpoint rounds, drum magazines; I'd be open to discussing the merits of those - but blanket regulation that is both knee-jerk and just plain ignorant, well, that I won't stand for. NY's bill is just that: it's a scared ignorant reaction to an event. You can't legislate away the boogieman.splorge_sl said:
Honestly, I thought his whole post was on the money. Addressing the societal and psychological causes for these events is the true way of "fixing" them. Gun laws are the easy way out. They do little more than placate ignorant quarterwits.splorge_sl said:
Yet another ridiculous analogy that totally fails to describe whatsoever the actual reality of the discussion. A more accurate analogy would be to teach your kid proper behaviour with scissors, in an effort to reduce scissor related injuries. When a kid cannot demonstrate proper behaviour you ban scissors.
congrats on your cathartic revelation...but i respectfully remain unconvinced.
Loser Araysar
Chief Russia Reporter. Stock Pals CEO. Head of AI.
- 80,162
- 160,373
you know whats really a ridiculous analogy?
someone equating gun bans to speed limits. who made that one?
well, thats because you're an idiot. hopefully some day you will grow out of it.
People have had guns in America since the dawn of this country. Yes, times have changed (Indians aren't running around wild and generally, we don't hunt for our own food), however, the founders of this country had an inherent distrust of governments in general and believed people should have the ability to defend themselves with firearms if necessary from threat of death. I look for the best in people but realize there are always some people who will try to take advantage or do the worst possible things for personal gain or other fucked up reasons. I do not believe the current laws should change much (if at all) because a few nut jobs went on a shooting rampage. On the surface, I am not opposed to background checks / mental health checks...however, it's silly to think that will make a huge difference since many crazy people aren't diagnosed as mentally illl or have a criminal record and can use other means to exact terrible violence (Timothy McVeigh).
Required registration (so the government knows where all the guns are), requiring lock boxes when your gun is not in use (someone is breaking in to possibly rape and kill me---let me unlock my gun....great idea), limiting magazine size (do you realize how easy it is to reload a new magazine?), banning certain gun types, etc. won't make a big difference and at worse will probably lead to a slippery slope of further restrictions and could eventually lead to an outright attempted gun ban, which I'm sure many of you idiots hope happens. Heinous crimes will always exist and further gun restrictions will do little to stop violent crime in America and at worst will simply hurt law abiding citizens since the bad guys aren't giving up their guns (gun registrations only started in the 70s and there is a huge black market).
Ultimately, I think the libtards want to ban all guns. If you do not want to own a gun, don't own a gun, however, stop telling law abiding citizens that they can't own guns or must follow some new retarded restrictions that won't cure fuck all and at worst could eventually morph the citizens of this nation into unarmed, defenseless sheep. The 2nd amendment exists for a reason (fuck your well-regulated militia interpretation) and true patriots will never relinquish their RIGHT to bear arms since it's a RIGHT citizens of this nation have always had. If you want to be a sheep and live in fantasy land and not own a gun, feel free to do so but don't ask others to go along for the ride.
Chicago, a city which bans hand guns, had over 500 homicides in 2012, most by guns. Why didn't the hand gun ban and other strict gun restrictions in Chicago curb the gun violence? Me no understandy.
P.S. I see dumb people.
Required registration (so the government knows where all the guns are), requiring lock boxes when your gun is not in use (someone is breaking in to possibly rape and kill me---let me unlock my gun....great idea), limiting magazine size (do you realize how easy it is to reload a new magazine?), banning certain gun types, etc. won't make a big difference and at worse will probably lead to a slippery slope of further restrictions and could eventually lead to an outright attempted gun ban, which I'm sure many of you idiots hope happens. Heinous crimes will always exist and further gun restrictions will do little to stop violent crime in America and at worst will simply hurt law abiding citizens since the bad guys aren't giving up their guns (gun registrations only started in the 70s and there is a huge black market).
Ultimately, I think the libtards want to ban all guns. If you do not want to own a gun, don't own a gun, however, stop telling law abiding citizens that they can't own guns or must follow some new retarded restrictions that won't cure fuck all and at worst could eventually morph the citizens of this nation into unarmed, defenseless sheep. The 2nd amendment exists for a reason (fuck your well-regulated militia interpretation) and true patriots will never relinquish their RIGHT to bear arms since it's a RIGHT citizens of this nation have always had. If you want to be a sheep and live in fantasy land and not own a gun, feel free to do so but don't ask others to go along for the ride.
Chicago, a city which bans hand guns, had over 500 homicides in 2012, most by guns. Why didn't the hand gun ban and other strict gun restrictions in Chicago curb the gun violence? Me no understandy.
P.S. I see dumb people.
Big Phoenix
Pronouns: zie/zhem/zer
- 46,401
- 98,659
Because they wherent strict enough god damnit dont you see Brawndo? If they laws are too lax they will have no affect!
This argument is absurd. You think we should ban rifles, even though they're used in less murders than blunt objects, because they're more efficient at killing?
Ok, so you selectively choose a single type of firearm, and compare it to an ambiguous impossible to regulate category called blunt objects, in a lame attempt to paint it a non issue.
Or are you suggesting that its easier to commit murder with a blunt object than a firearm? Because all those mass murders with blunt objects are evidence enough...oh yeah, and since more people died from "hands and feet" than from "rifles" we should worry about regulating those dangerous hands and feet. And while we are doing that, we will just conveniently ignore that 6220 deaths by handguns figure and 1500 deaths by unstated firearm.
Big Phoenix
Pronouns: zie/zhem/zer
- 46,401
- 98,659
Furry
🌭🍔🇺🇦✌️SLAVA UKRAINI!✌️🇺🇦🍔🌭
- 21,923
- 28,674
I believe in freedom. Freedom for gays to marry, freedom for people to do weed, freedom for people to own guns. The only gun control laws I can support are ones that limit to responsible use, or restrict them from places of public contention, or places where one person could easily cause considerable harm. EG, I don't think guns should be allowed in court rooms, political places, airplanes, but I am okay with teachers being armed, pilots being armed, ect. Criminals and insane people obviously shouldn't have funs, and I'm okay with them doing back ground checks or requiring waiting periods that are reasonable for guns.
Simple fact is, people are always gunna murder each other. Improve society if you want to reduce that. Removing weapons has never worked, and never will work.
Simple fact is, people are always gunna murder each other. Improve society if you want to reduce that. Removing weapons has never worked, and never will work.
Also, harsher penalties for crimes involving firearms. Punishing criminals and not innocent firearms owners would be a great start!
Gavinmad
Mr. Poopybutthole
- 43,756
- 52,331
