Obama Will Take Your Guns

[Tarsonis Survivors]

Since when has banning worked on...well anything?

Worked okay on guns in Europe and smoking on school property at the school I used to attend.

http://www.ncpa.org/sub/dpd/index.php?Article_ID=17847

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article ... a-U-S.html


yeah banning guns work so well.

thats why Switzerland that has a 99.9% armed rate has one of the lowest violent crime rates in the world.

[The New Lowlands]

No, just ask how the hell he got his hands on explosives.

Explosives are easier to get than weapons, actually.

And naturally, just as easy to deploy effectively.
The above statement is sarcastic.

[Spreewerke]

So why not put a restriction on the crazies being able to get them? You are admitting that it is the crazies causing the problem, yes? Instead of just "ban guns because someone poisoned the waterhole!," why not just focus on properly addressing said "crazies" mental conditions, diagnosing them, giving them the correct form of attention, and then bar them from firearms purchases if necessary?

Taking someone's gun won't make them any less crazy. Addressing their mental state and prescribing a treatment will. If they are still unfit to purchase a firearm, have them entered into the NICS database as such. Then if they ever try to buy one, when the FFL calls in the Form 4473 to NICS, they will be given a denial of sale.

NO GUN FOR YOU!

I'm sorry, I didn't know the US had such great healthcare.

Do you think it'd be easier to pass a law about healthcare that's actually effective, or one banning firearms that does not solve the root of the problem?

You seem to be okay with banning guns, but, I'm sorry, I didn't know the US had such a great opposition to firearms. Not like they're mentioned in our Constitution or anything. Denying the sale of firearms to those mentally unfit to handle them is addressing the issue. Banning "assault weapons" because they have scary-looking features is not. Completely banning firearms solves nothing, while restricting all shooting sports enthusiasts.

[Tarsonis Survivors]

i'll make you one for 20 bucks

Do it, oh internet badass.

alright give me a gass tank, and a fuel injector from a car. Ill supply a battery and some duct tape, with a fan motor and you got yourself a jury rigged flamethrower.

[The New Lowlands]

Worked okay on guns in Europe and smoking on school property at the school I used to attend.

http://www.ncpa.org/sub/dpd/index.php?Article_ID=17847

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article ... a-U-S.html


yeah banning guns work so well.

thats why Switzerland that has a 99.9% armed rate has one of the lowest violent crime rates in the world.

The Daily Mail; famed for it's reliability.
Source for Switzerland's armed rate?
And yes, in the majority of cases, it does; the first refers to Britain being the worst in the EU as far as it concerns violent crime, and makes no mention of gun crime. Besides, I'm not advocating a total gun ban in the US, although it would be nice.

[Raeyh]

Do it, oh internet badass.

alright give me a gass tank, and a fuel injector from a car. Ill supply a battery and some duct tape, with a fan motor and you got yourself a jury rigged flamethrower.

And you'll be more likely to put yourself on fire than anything you are aiming at.

[Tarsonis Survivors]

Since when has banning worked on...well anything?

Yeah, banning never works! Legalize murder and rape, because keeping them banned just wasn't working.

You're comparing apples to chairs. Banning weapons won't stop criminals from owning them, it will only take weapons out of law abiding citizens hands, and leave them vulnerable to the now solely armed criminals. Case in point, Australia....and Chicago.

[The New Lowlands]

I'm sorry, I didn't know the US had such great healthcare.

Do you think it'd be easier to pass a law about healthcare that's actually effective, or one banning firearms that does not solve the root of the problem?

You seem to be okay with banning guns, but, I'm sorry, I didn't know the US had such a great opposition to firearms. Not like they're mentioned in our Constitution or anything. Denying the sale of firearms to those mentally unfit to handle them is addressing the issue. Banning "assault weapons" because they have scary-looking features is not. Completely banning firearms solves nothing, while restricting all shooting sports enthusiasts.

I like the idea of totally banning civilian weapon ownership; that's not to say I advocate it. Increased regulation of ownership and reduction of the availability of weapons will both impact the gun crime rate.

[The New Lowlands]

Yeah, banning never works! Legalize murder and rape, because keeping them banned just wasn't working.

You're comparing apples to chairs. Banning weapons won't stop criminals from owning them, it will only take weapons out of law abiding citizens hands, and leave them vulnerable to the now solely armed criminals. Case in point, Australia....and Chicago.

1. Acquire funding from drug legalization (specifically, drug tax).
2. Watch as cartels and criminals lose profit.
3. Don't universally ban weaponry; reduce availability of larger weapons.
4. Pump money into police.
5. Acquire lower crime rate.

[Grave_n_idle]

Worked okay on guns in Europe and smoking on school property at the school I used to attend.

http://www.ncpa.org/sub/dpd/index.php?Article_ID=17847

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article ... a-U-S.html


yeah banning guns work so well.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gun_politi ... arms_crime

Seems to work quite well.

[Raeyh]

Yeah, banning never works! Legalize murder and rape, because keeping them banned just wasn't working.

You're comparing apples to chairs. Banning weapons won't stop criminals from owning them, it will only take weapons out of law abiding citizens hands, and leave them vulnerable to the now solely armed criminals. Case in point, Australia....and Chicago.

Don't forget that group of law abiding citizens who are trained to deal with criminals and are empowered to make arrests. The ones that are actually paid to do that sort of thing.

[Spreewerke]

You're comparing apples to chairs. Banning weapons won't stop criminals from owning them, it will only take weapons out of law abiding citizens hands, and leave them vulnerable to the now solely armed criminals. Case in point, Australia....and Chicago.

1. Acquire funding from drug legalization (specifically, drug tax).
2. Watch as cartels and criminals lose profit.
3. Don't universally ban weaponry; reduce availability of larger weapons.
4. Pump money into police.
5. Acquire lower crime rate.

Please define "larger weapons."

[The New Lowlands]

You're comparing apples to chairs. Banning weapons won't stop criminals from owning them, it will only take weapons out of law abiding citizens hands, and leave them vulnerable to the now solely armed criminals. Case in point, Australia....and Chicago.

Don't forget that group of law abiding citizens who are trained to deal with criminals and are empowered to make arrests. The ones that are actually paid to do that sort of thing.

I laughed harder at that than I should have.

[The New Lowlands]

1. Acquire funding from drug legalization (specifically, drug tax).
2. Watch as cartels and criminals lose profit.
3. Don't universally ban weaponry; reduce availability of larger weapons.
4. Pump money into police.
5. Acquire lower crime rate.

Please define "larger weapons."

Rifles and shotguns and such.

[Grave_n_idle]

Yeah, banning never works! Legalize murder and rape, because keeping them banned just wasn't working.

You're comparing apples to chairs. Banning weapons won't stop criminals from owning them, it will only take weapons out of law abiding citizens hands, and leave them vulnerable to the now solely armed criminals. Case in point, Australia....and Chicago.

viewtopic.php?f=20&t=191458&p=10221806&hilit=straw+purchase#p10221806
viewtopic.php?f=20&t=191458&p=10231537&hilit=straw+purchase#p10231537
viewtopic.php?f=20&t=191458&p=10279180&hilit=straw+purchase#p10279180
viewtopic.php?f=20&t=191458&p=10313843&hilit=straw+purchase#p10313843
viewtopic.php?f=20&t=191458&p=10416979&hilit=straw+purchase#p10416979

The myth that banning weapons doesn't limit criminal access to guns, and only impacts law-abiding owners has been thoroughly debunked.

[Gauthier]

1. Acquire funding from drug legalization (specifically, drug tax).
2. Watch as cartels and criminals lose profit.
3. Don't universally ban weaponry; reduce availability of larger weapons.
4. Pump money into police.
5. Acquire lower crime rate.

Please define "larger weapons."

MIltary grade weapons seem to sound right. Then again with how the current laws are easy to skirt a BAR could be called a hunting rifle.

[The New Lowlands]

No they don't they buy them from a illegal party like they always have with almost everything, they don't just go away. There an illegal group, they can hide where they make the guns, it wouldn't take much for them to churn out AKM knockoffs and sell them.

And if the cartels could make their own guns why the fuck would they need to buy guns from the U.S? MOAR PROFIT, got it?

I hang my head in shame that this didn't occur to me.

[The UK in Exile]

The original counter-argument yet stands.

You can buy barrels and have them mailed to your door.

which would mean you haven't made it in a garage.

[Saiwania]

Rifles and shotguns and such.

Handguns are used in crimes more often than rifles or shotguns, why not restrict those more instead?

[The New Lowlands]

Rifles and shotguns and such.

Handguns are used in crimes more often than rifles or shotguns, why not restrict those more instead?

Because 2nd amendment. Handguns, as I recall, aren't used often in the mass shootings, and smaller weapons are generally less likely to kill.

[Ygganda]

Oh noes, guns are te reason people get hurt!!!1!11!! We should ban them!!!1!!1!
Just like we should
Ban cars because of car accidents
And ban fertilizer because if it's use in explosives
And ban planes because of 9/11
And ban beef because mad cow disease
And ban the Internet because it contains illegal material like child porn
And ban kitchen knives because of stabbings,
And ban baseball bats because of beatings,
And ban certain kinds of glue and markers because they are sniffed,
And ban pet dogs because they have bitten people,
And ban electricity because of electrocutions.


We know it will work because banning drugs has eradicated drug abuse, and drug-related violence!

[Grave_n_idle]

Oh noes, guns are te reason people get hurt!!!1!11!! We should ban them!!!1!!1!
Just like we should
Ban cars because of car accidents
And ban fertilizer because if it's use in explosives
And ban planes because of 9/11
And ban beef because mad cow disease
And ban the Internet because it contains illegal material like child porn
And ban kitchen knives because of stabbings,
And ban baseball bats because of beatings,
And ban certain kinds of glue and markers because they are sniffed,
And ban pet dogs because they have bitten people,
And ban electricity because of electrocutions.


We know it will work because banning drugs has eradicated drug abuse, and drug-related violence!

Oh no! A Wild Strawman appeared!

[The New Lowlands]

Oh noes, guns are te reason people get hurt!!!1!11!! We should ban them!!!1!!1!
Just like we should
Ban cars because of car accidents
And ban fertilizer because if it's use in explosives
And ban planes because of 9/11
And ban beef because mad cow disease
And ban the Internet because it contains illegal material like child porn
And ban kitchen knives because of stabbings,
And ban baseball bats because of beatings,
And ban certain kinds of glue and markers because they are sniffed,
And ban pet dogs because they have bitten people,
And ban electricity because of electrocutions.


We know it will work because banning drugs has eradicated drug abuse, and drug-related violence!

Nobody is advocating a total ban.
Please read the sources listed by Grave n' Idle, here.

[Spreewerke]

You can buy barrels and have them mailed to your door.

which would mean you haven't made it in a garage.

True, but if you can order in bulk, why produce? If it came down to it, you could just go smoothbore and still be effective out to 75-100m.

[The New Lowlands]

which would mean you haven't made it in a garage.

True, but if you can order in bulk, why produce? If it came down to it, you could just go smoothbore and still be effective out to 75-100m.

And then get shot by the Policía Federal while smithing away in your garage.