Field Reporter and Cameraman shot

[CTALNH]

Japan gun laws enough said.

[Esternial]

Japan gun laws enough said.

You'd have to break down the U.S, exterminate a large fraction of its population and rebuild it from the ground up to even get an attempt to impose similar regulations.

[New Grestin]

Japan gun laws enough said.

You'd have to break down the U.S, exterminate a large fraction of its population and rebuild it from the ground up to even get an attempt to impose similar regulations.

Well, we do have nuclear weapons, if you want to go the extra mile.

It'd be at least a little bit ironic.

[Esternial]

You'd have to break down the U.S, exterminate a large fraction of its population and rebuild it from the ground up to even get an attempt to impose similar regulations.

Well, we do have nuclear weapons, if you want to go the extra mile.

It'd be at least a little bit ironic.

Quite ironic, yes.

I do believe that a prerequisite for taking away America's guns would require its military to be as toned down as Japan's, and the absence of American brawn on a global level would have fewer ups than downs.

So rather than get hung up on that people should seek for ways to limit the degree of senseless gun deaths. Make people scared of guns again, scared enough to recognize them for what they are: a tool for killing that is helpful for defending oneself against people using the same tool against you, but does not discriminate between friend or foe and may harm you or your loved ones too if not treated with due diligence.

I think the laxity regarding guns that some people exhibit is very worrying. I feel some regulations simply shouldn't have to be enforced because they just make a lot of sense - not just that, but maybe trying to enforce some of them might make some anti-government folks deliberately ignore them for the sake of being petulant.

I personally don't see any kind of improvement on the table. Gun owners will continue to feel oppressed while guns simultaneously lack proper regulations because they're not being enforced or simply absent. There still a shitload of other things in the way that need to be dealt with first, one being the large degree of disconnect between parts of the population and the government.

Adding to that, I also don't think that anyone should start regulating guns that are already in people's ownership. It's a drag, and I can understand it might be very annoying. Instead any kind of new legislation should just be focused on new purchases, at least that'll limit new guns landing into the wrong hands in the future. Working retroactively isn't really workable.

Sorry I broke out into a lengthy exposition here.

[New Grestin]

-snippy-

If I'm perfectly honest, everything you just typed was music to my ears. I mean, you're preaching to the choir, really, but still.

The biggest problem is, in my eyes, that the Anti-Gun Control crowd is so committed to dying on the hill of "muh freedom" that they don't see any kind of bigger picture beyond that.

The stubbornness that is inherent in American culture working against itself, basically.

[Esternial]

-snippy-

If I'm perfectly honest, everything you just typed was music to my ears. I mean, you're preaching to the choir, really, but still.

The biggest problem is, in my eyes, that the Anti-Gun Control crowd is so committed to dying on the hill of "muh freedom" that they don't see any kind of bigger picture beyond that.

The stubbornness that is inherent in American culture working against itself, basically.

People don't want to co-operate, that is the bigger issue. Gun control activists don't want to hear what gun owners have to say - they just want more visible, tangible results from gun control and think gun owners just want to play with their toys and don't want to compromise - they just want their right to bear arms upheld no matter the cost. Gun owners don't want to listen to gun control activists because they think they just want to take away their guns and don't want a compromise.

Both sides are right to a limited degree, and both are wrong.

Mind you this is a generalized perspective.

[North Calaveras]

when it involves the weapons themselves, sure does

Okay, how has every effort to fix the system specifically involved the weapons themselves, and how we fix the system without doing so?

Many regulations target the weapons themselves: severe magazine restrictions, ammunition restrictions, acessory restrictions, "bullet buttons" These things don't help anyone and don't deter crime, they only punish legal gun owners.

[New Grestin]

-snippy-

You know, I'd say it's weird that compromise is a radical notion in this whole thing, but then I remembered literally all of history.

I don't see why new legislation to keep track of firearms and maintaining a ban on automatics is unreasonable, while also allowing people who already own firearms to keep them (excluding the aforementioned automatics) and requiring licenses for new owners.

All the current system really needs is a bit of screw tightening and maintenance to be effective.

[North Calaveras]

-snippy-

You know, I'd say it's weird that compromise is a radical notion in this whole thing, but then I remembered literally all of history.

I don't see why new legislation to keep track of firearms and maintaining a ban on automatics is unreasonable, while also allowing people who already own firearms to keep them (excluding the aforementioned automatics) and requiring licenses for new owners.

All the current system really needs is a bit of screw tightening and maintenance to be effective.

Oh so it's totally cool to limit me to 10 round magazines and have bullet buttons?

[New Grestin]

You know, I'd say it's weird that compromise is a radical notion in this whole thing, but then I remembered literally all of history.

I don't see why new legislation to keep track of firearms and maintaining a ban on automatics is unreasonable, while also allowing people who already own firearms to keep them (excluding the aforementioned automatics) and requiring licenses for new owners.

All the current system really needs is a bit of screw tightening and maintenance to be effective.

Oh so it's totally cool to limit me to 10 round magazines and have bullet buttons?

You say that like I'm taking away your favorite Transformer or something.

Yes. It is totally cool. If you can't live with handguns, rifles, or shotguns, then that's your problem. Keeping Assault weapons and high capacity magazines out of the civilian market is a policy that should be maintained.

[Washington Resistance Army]

Oh so it's totally cool to limit me to 10 round magazines and have bullet buttons?

You say that like I'm taking away your favorite Transformer or something.

Yes. It is totally cool. If you can't live with handguns, rifles, or shotguns, then that's your problem. Keeping Assault weapons and high capacity magazines out of the civilian market is a policy that should be maintained.

Why? More people are beaten to death by other peoples bare hands every year than are killed by 'assault weapons'.

[New Grestin]

You say that like I'm taking away your favorite Transformer or something.

Yes. It is totally cool. If you can't live with handguns, rifles, or shotguns, then that's your problem. Keeping Assault weapons and high capacity magazines out of the civilian market is a policy that should be maintained.

Why? More people are beaten to death by other peoples bare hands every year than are killed by 'assault weapons'.

Can your fists shoot smaller fists that, in turn, punch more people?

No. They can't. Unless you're a superhero. I think.

The point is that they just shouldn't be in the civilian market. If you absolutely need an M4 Carbine, then you're probably up to no good anyway. There's no reason people can't live with bolt-action, lever-action, semi-automatic or pump action firearms.

[Washington Resistance Army]

Why? More people are beaten to death by other peoples bare hands every year than are killed by 'assault weapons'.

Can your fists shoot smaller fists that, in turn, punch more people?

No. They can't. Unless you're a superhero. I think.

The point is that they just shouldn't be in the civilian market. If you absolutely need an M4 Carbine, then you're probably up to no good anyway. There's no reason people can't live with bolt-action, lever-action, semi-automatic or pump action firearms.

Oh, you mean full automatic weapons? That just makes your case even weaker, legally owned automatics have been used in crime twice in the past 70 years. There's literally no reason to put even more restrictions on them.

[Gun Manufacturers]

Why? More people are beaten to death by other peoples bare hands every year than are killed by 'assault weapons'.

Can your fists shoot smaller fists that, in turn, punch more people?

No. They can't. Unless you're a superhero. I think.

The point is that they just shouldn't be in the civilian market. If you absolutely need an M4 Carbine, then you're probably up to no good anyway. There's no reason people can't live with bolt-action, lever-action, semi-automatic or pump action firearms.

An "assault weapon" IS only semi auto.

[Gun Manufacturers]

Can your fists shoot smaller fists that, in turn, punch more people?

No. They can't. Unless you're a superhero. I think.

The point is that they just shouldn't be in the civilian market. If you absolutely need an M4 Carbine, then you're probably up to no good anyway. There's no reason people can't live with bolt-action, lever-action, semi-automatic or pump action firearms.

Oh, you mean full automatic weapons? That just makes your case even weaker, legally owned automatics have been used in crime twice in the past 70 81 years. There's literally no reason to put even more restrictions on them.

Fixed for accuracy.

[Washington Resistance Army]

Oh, you mean full automatic weapons? That just makes your case even weaker, legally owned automatics have been used in crime twice in the past 70 81 years. There's literally no reason to put even more restrictions on them.

Fixed for accuracy.

Damn, I knew I was close

[Imperializt Russia]

Fuckin gun control freaks!

I'm all for gun rights, but I can see why Yanks want more gun control. In Switzerland, our laws are fairly lax, but that's because we have a more tight knit, homogeneous culture with low levels of crime and inequality. As the US doesn't have this, I can see why some may argue for gun control.]

Anyways, I read about this in my morning Zeitung, this is unfortunate.

stop asking for gun control, and talk more about mental health.

This used to be my opinion.

Then I realised it was deflection, since a vast amount of the killings made with firearms in the US have nothing to do with mental health issues and can be boiled down almost entirely to access (escalation of arguments accounting for almost half of all firearm homicides in 2011). And also that it just continually feeds into the stigmatisation of mental health. The assumption that all mental health problems are dangerous, particularly with regards to supposed autism, is frankly ridiculous.

[Benuty]

So I just saw the video of the shooting on reddit.

Not sure what I can even say about it to be honest.

[North Calaveras]

stop asking for gun control, and talk more about mental health.

This used to be my opinion.

Then I realised it was deflection, since a vast amount of the killings made with firearms in the US have nothing to do with mental health issues and can be boiled down almost entirely to access (escalation of arguments accounting for almost half of all firearm homicides in 2011). And also that it just continually feeds into the stigmatisation of mental health. The assumption that all mental health problems are dangerous, particularly with regards to supposed autism, is frankly ridiculous.

I think many people with mental health issues could still posess firearms, not every "issue" is dangerous in nature, but there is no "gun problem" that requires further restriction/regulation, in fact, many areas are going towards deregulation(places like detroit in fact)

[Jamzmania]

-snippy-

You know, I'd say it's weird that compromise is a radical notion in this whole thing, but then I remembered literally all of history.

I don't see why new legislation to keep track of firearms and maintaining a ban on automatics is unreasonable, while also allowing people who already own firearms to keep them (excluding the aforementioned automatics) and requiring licenses for new owners.

All the current system really needs is a bit of screw tightening and maintenance to be effective.

It starts with, "We'll only regulate a few guns, and leave current owners alone (besides owners of automatic guns, we'll kick their doors in)." Then it moves to more restrictions, more regulations, more bans.

Also, you know why new gun laws leave current owners alone? Because gun confiscations would lead to shootouts.

[North Calaveras]

You know, I'd say it's weird that compromise is a radical notion in this whole thing, but then I remembered literally all of history.

I don't see why new legislation to keep track of firearms and maintaining a ban on automatics is unreasonable, while also allowing people who already own firearms to keep them (excluding the aforementioned automatics) and requiring licenses for new owners.

All the current system really needs is a bit of screw tightening and maintenance to be effective.

It starts with, "We'll only regulate a few guns, and leave current owners alone (besides owners of automatic guns, we'll kick their doors in)." Then it moves to more restrictions, more regulations, more bans.

Also, you know why new gun laws leave current owners alone? Because gun confiscations would lead to shootouts.

Yup, it's always one more "compromise" with the gun-control crowd

You don't need 30 rounds right? then 20...then your stuck with 10 and then they bitch and act like gun owners never compromised when that's all the gun community has been doing.

[Galloism]

Why? More people are beaten to death by other peoples bare hands every year than are killed by 'assault weapons'.

Can your fists shoot smaller fists that, in turn, punch more people?

No. They can't. Unless you're a superhero. I think.

The point is that they just shouldn't be in the civilian market. If you absolutely need an M4 Carbine, then you're probably up to no good anyway. There's no reason people can't live with bolt-action, lever-action, semi-automatic or pump action firearms.

I don't think you know what an assault weapon is.

An assault weapon, per the law, is generally something that contains 2 or more of these features:

"Semi-automatic firearm capable of accepting a detachable magazine[14][11]
Folding or telescoping (collapsible) stock,[14] which reduces the overall length of the firearm[16]
Pistol grip, whether rifle, shotgun, or pistol[14]
Bayonet lug,[14] which allows the mounting of a bayonet
Threaded barrel, which can accept devices such as a flash suppressor, Suppressor,[14] compensator or muzzle brake
Grenade launcher[14]
Barrel shroud, which prevents burning of shooter's arm or hand as a safety device."

It has nothing to do with range, velocity, number of bullets, or how fast you can fire them. It's how many of these largely cosmetic features they have (except, arguably, the grenade launcher. a grenade launcher is not cosmetic, but it's also basically unheard of in the civilian market).

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Assault_w ... _and_usage

[North Calaveras]

Can your fists shoot smaller fists that, in turn, punch more people?

No. They can't. Unless you're a superhero. I think.

The point is that they just shouldn't be in the civilian market. If you absolutely need an M4 Carbine, then you're probably up to no good anyway. There's no reason people can't live with bolt-action, lever-action, semi-automatic or pump action firearms.

I don't think you know what an assault weapon is.

An assault weapon, per the law, is generally something that contains 2 or more of these features:

"Semi-automatic firearm capable of accepting a detachable magazine[14][11]
Folding or telescoping (collapsible) stock,[14] which reduces the overall length of the firearm[16]
Pistol grip, whether rifle, shotgun, or pistol[14]
Bayonet lug,[14] which allows the mounting of a bayonet
Threaded barrel, which can accept devices such as a flash suppressor, Suppressor,[14] compensator or muzzle brake
Grenade launcher[14]
Barrel shroud, which prevents burning of shooter's arm or hand as a safety device."

It has nothing to do with range, velocity, number of bullets, or how fast you can fire them. It's how many of these largely cosmetic features they have (except, arguably, the grenade launcher. a grenade launcher is not cosmetic, but it's also basically unheard of in the civilian market).

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Assault_w ... _and_usage

I would also say that these cosmetic features are silly to regulate and ban. Many of these features help people(barrel shroud, supressor for your ears etc etc)

[Sam Hyde]

Looks like they got culturally enriched.

[Imperializt Russia]

Can your fists shoot smaller fists that, in turn, punch more people?

No. They can't. Unless you're a superhero. I think.

The point is that they just shouldn't be in the civilian market. If you absolutely need an M4 Carbine, then you're probably up to no good anyway. There's no reason people can't live with bolt-action, lever-action, semi-automatic or pump action firearms.

I don't think you know what an assault weapon is.

An assault weapon, per the law, is generally something that contains 2 or more of these features:

"Semi-automatic firearm capable of accepting a detachable magazine[14][11]
Folding or telescoping (collapsible) stock,[14] which reduces the overall length of the firearm[16]
Pistol grip, whether rifle, shotgun, or pistol[14]
Bayonet lug,[14] which allows the mounting of a bayonet
Threaded barrel, which can accept devices such as a flash suppressor, Suppressor,[14] compensator or muzzle brake
Grenade launcher[14]
Barrel shroud, which prevents burning of shooter's arm or hand as a safety device."

It has nothing to do with range, velocity, number of bullets, or how fast you can fire them. It's how many of these largely cosmetic features they have (except, arguably, the grenade launcher. a grenade launcher is not cosmetic, but it's also basically unheard of in the civilian market).

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Assault_w ... _and_usage

IIRC "Grenade launcher" is usually taken to mean both rifle-grenade compatible (various muzzle devices on service-pattern rifles) or fitted with grenade launcher mounting brackets, which is the same argument as a bayonet lug.