NATION

PASSWORD

How did we go 24 pages w/o a gun control debate?

For discussion and debate about anything. (Not a roleplay related forum; out-of-character commentary only.)

Advertisement

Remove ads

User avatar
Modern Outlaws
Bureaucrat
 
Posts: 51
Founded: Jan 18, 2009
Ex-Nation

Re: How did we go 24 pages w/o a gun control debate?

Postby Modern Outlaws » Tue Jun 09, 2009 9:06 pm

Secruss wrote:As a side note...

I'm 18 and have yet to buy my first gun.

Which one should I get? (Reasonable, please.)


Where do you live? Build yourself an AR. Learn how things work, cheaper than buying one outright, have that pleasing smugness of "I built this!" (a.k.a. built not bought). And you can make it exactly what you want.

User avatar
Secruss
Ambassador
 
Posts: 1232
Founded: May 06, 2009
Ex-Nation

Re: How did we go 24 pages w/o a gun control debate?

Postby Secruss » Tue Jun 09, 2009 9:06 pm

NVM.

I started a new topic.
"How now!" cried Jupiter "Are you not yet content? You have what you asked for and so you have only yourselves to blame for your misfortunes."

User avatar
Gun Manufacturers
Powerbroker
 
Posts: 9330
Founded: Jan 23, 2006
Inoffensive Centrist Democracy

Re: How did we go 24 pages w/o a gun control debate?

Postby Gun Manufacturers » Tue Jun 09, 2009 9:07 pm

Secruss wrote:As a side note...

I'm 18 and have yet to buy my first gun.

Which one should I get? (Reasonable, please.)


What are you planning on doing with it? Self defense, hunting, target shooting? Rifle, pistol, or shotgun?
Any accident you can walk away from is one I can laugh at.

DOJ's interpretation of the 2nd Amendment: http://www.justice.gov/sites/default/fi ... -p0126.pdf

Natapoc wrote:...You should post more in here so I don't seem like the extremist...


Auraelius wrote:If you take the the TITANIC, and remove the letters T, T, and one of the I's, and add the letters C,O,S,P,R, and Y you get CONSPIRACY. oOooOooooOOOooooOOOOOOoooooooo


Maineiacs wrote:Give a man a fish and he eats for a day, teach a man to fish and he'll sit in a boat and get drunk all day.


Luw wrote:Politics is like having two handfuls of shit - one that smells bad and one that looks bad - and having to decide which one to put in your mouth.

User avatar
The South Islands
Diplomat
 
Posts: 983
Founded: Apr 02, 2009
Ex-Nation

Re: How did we go 24 pages w/o a gun control debate?

Postby The South Islands » Tue Jun 09, 2009 9:08 pm

Secruss wrote:As a side note...

I'm 18 and have yet to buy my first gun.

Which one should I get? (Reasonable, please.)


A moist nugget is the only responsible choice.
IL Ruffino: The wind flows / The hair on TSI's ass glides as if airborn / Smell the freshly cut grass
Gravlen: If I can blame you? Of course I can! I mean, you're like a walking cathalyst for homosexuality, driving otherwise straight men to write haikus about your ass hair...

So it's a wonder that your presence alone in any thread don't derail them and lead to debates about world leaders and homoerotic desires.


Sarkhaan: You. Put your pants back on.

User avatar
NERVUN
Game Moderator
 
Posts: 29377
Founded: Mar 24, 2005
Right-wing Utopia

Re: How did we go 24 pages w/o a gun control debate?

Postby NERVUN » Tue Jun 09, 2009 9:10 pm

greed and death wrote:Really before 1934(The National Firearms Act), it was possible to match the government in destructive power.
Artillery pieces were purchasable as were

Oh, of course, how foolish of me. I compleatly forgot the civilian Great White Fleet composed of civilian bought and armed battleships following after the Navy. And of course we all know about how right after getting a Model T, many proud people went out and got a tank next. :roll:

The history of the country where Civilians could not match the government is less then 1/3 of the entire countries existence.
As for human history it is a very slim margin indeed.

And we have had nuclear weapons for just over 60 years, which is a blink in the terms of human warfare, so obviously we should promote the battlefield tactics of Ceaser, because we all fought on foot and with horses a whole hell of a lot longer, right?

However a look at Vietnam, and possibly Iraq today shows enough people with AK-47's willing to die shows that technology can be overcame.

Except the proper way to look at it would be the US Civil War. the government can't just go back home, because it IS home. Also, if there were such an occation as, say, a military dictatorship in the US, the chances are that they are not going to want to play nice due to political reprocutions.
To those who feel, life is a tragedy. To those who think, it's a comedy.
"Men, today you'll be issued small trees. Do what you can for the emperor's glory." -Daistallia 2104 on bonsai charges in WWII
Science may provide the means while religion provides the motivation but humanity and humanity alone provides the vehicle -DaWoad

One-Stop Rules Shop, read it, love it, live by it. Getting Help Mod email: nervun@nationstates.net NSG Glossary
Add 10,145 to post count from Jolt: I have it from an unimpeachable source, that Dark Side cookies look like the Death Star. The other ones look like butterflies, or bunnies, or something.-Grave_n_Idle

Proud Member of FMGADHPAC. Join today!

User avatar
Zutroy
Diplomat
 
Posts: 925
Founded: May 01, 2004
Iron Fist Socialists

Re: How did we go 24 pages w/o a gun control debate?

Postby Zutroy » Tue Jun 09, 2009 9:11 pm

Secruss wrote:
Zutroy wrote:precisely, the civilians have been 'knocked out of the box' as they say in baseball.

i wouldnt mind my government having a monopoly on crime if it meant my doors didnt need locks and my children could run around freely, if all governments commit "crimes" and already have a monopoly on laws then why not advance that to its logical conclusion?

You'd trade freedom for "safety"? Safety in a gulag?

Read some Solzhenitsyn.
Image


stalin would be so ashamed of your bourgeois revisionism... :palm: :p

i was merely stating that the present situation should be carried to its logical confusion one way or the other, switzerland seems to work well with heavy private ownership and knowledge
"The USA is the most suitable country for socialism. Communism will come there sooner than in other countries."
- Vyacheslav Molotov, 3 June 1981

User avatar
NERVUN
Game Moderator
 
Posts: 29377
Founded: Mar 24, 2005
Right-wing Utopia

Re: How did we go 24 pages w/o a gun control debate?

Postby NERVUN » Tue Jun 09, 2009 9:14 pm

Brogavia wrote:
NERVUN wrote:
Bluth Corporation wrote:Bill Gates could easily afford to purchase (if not maintain and operate) a fleet of aircraft carriers.

Any weapons system is within the reach of civilians who want to pool their resources.

Um, no. The last Nimitz class carries was 6.2 billion. Bill could afford a few, but that's just to build them, not crew and arm one.

To reach the capasity to actually challege the US military would take the money of the US government. No, civilians can't just get togther and buy one.


There is a difference between aircraft carriers and American Supercarriers.

He could easily do it if it was a Russian one...

He would be facing a US supercarrier group, a lot of them, with fully trained crews and that are fully armed as well.

I don't see Bill going out to buy them now, do you?
To those who feel, life is a tragedy. To those who think, it's a comedy.
"Men, today you'll be issued small trees. Do what you can for the emperor's glory." -Daistallia 2104 on bonsai charges in WWII
Science may provide the means while religion provides the motivation but humanity and humanity alone provides the vehicle -DaWoad

One-Stop Rules Shop, read it, love it, live by it. Getting Help Mod email: nervun@nationstates.net NSG Glossary
Add 10,145 to post count from Jolt: I have it from an unimpeachable source, that Dark Side cookies look like the Death Star. The other ones look like butterflies, or bunnies, or something.-Grave_n_Idle

Proud Member of FMGADHPAC. Join today!

User avatar
NERVUN
Game Moderator
 
Posts: 29377
Founded: Mar 24, 2005
Right-wing Utopia

Re: How did we go 24 pages w/o a gun control debate?

Postby NERVUN » Tue Jun 09, 2009 9:16 pm

Bluth Corporation wrote:I never realized the Taliban or the Mujahideen or the Mahdi Army or what-have-you had budgets in the trillions of dollars...

Are you seriously claiming that the Taliban is in any way, shape, or form, able to millitarily topple the US government?
Last edited by NERVUN on Tue Jun 09, 2009 9:16 pm, edited 1 time in total.
To those who feel, life is a tragedy. To those who think, it's a comedy.
"Men, today you'll be issued small trees. Do what you can for the emperor's glory." -Daistallia 2104 on bonsai charges in WWII
Science may provide the means while religion provides the motivation but humanity and humanity alone provides the vehicle -DaWoad

One-Stop Rules Shop, read it, love it, live by it. Getting Help Mod email: nervun@nationstates.net NSG Glossary
Add 10,145 to post count from Jolt: I have it from an unimpeachable source, that Dark Side cookies look like the Death Star. The other ones look like butterflies, or bunnies, or something.-Grave_n_Idle

Proud Member of FMGADHPAC. Join today!

User avatar
BunnySaurus Bugsii
Ambassador
 
Posts: 1232
Founded: Nov 15, 2007
Ex-Nation

Re: How did we go 24 pages w/o a gun control debate?

Postby BunnySaurus Bugsii » Tue Jun 09, 2009 9:17 pm

Parthenon wrote:as for the gun control debate... GUN CONTROL LAWS DON'T WORK. PERIOD.
It's the law abiding citizens these laws hurt, not the criminals.


The last two pages have had lots of discussion about whether "gun control" should be abolished to allow private citizens to own working tanks, aircraft, anti-aircraft missiles etc.

Indeed, the 2nd amendment doesn't make any distinction between those and a personal firearm.

BUT, the fact that the weapons used in crime are almost without exception weapons which can be legally bought somewhere in the States has to show you something. Gangs aren't shooting it out with artillery or bombers because they can't buy them on the black market ... and they can't buy them on the black market because they aren't available on the legal market.

The usual approach to showing that gun control does work is to compare entire countries by their crime (and particularly murder) rates, and by their gun-control laws. That argument is fairly conclusive to me: gun control works.

But it isn't even necessary to make that argument. Control of the sale of heavy weapons means that criminals in the States very rarely have heavy weapons. If they want such weapons, they have to steal them from the military or smuggle them into the country, and in practice that almost never happens. That's "gun" control working right there.
Lucky Bicycle Works ⊂ BunnySaurus Bugsii ⊂ Nobel Hobos

More sig:
Saboteur: A well-meaning idiot, walking into the future barefoot.
...

The moongoose step: a combination of can-can, goose-step, and moon-step. I haven't perfected it yet.

I can however do John Cleese's Silly Walk, with elements of falling on my arse.

...
When we hear our future selves, we are humbled. We are willing servants.

User avatar
NERVUN
Game Moderator
 
Posts: 29377
Founded: Mar 24, 2005
Right-wing Utopia

Re: How did we go 24 pages w/o a gun control debate?

Postby NERVUN » Tue Jun 09, 2009 9:18 pm

Parthenon wrote:as for the gun control debate... GUN CONTROL LAWS DON'T WORK. PERIOD.
It's the law abiding citizens these laws hurt, not the criminals.

Damn straight! It's why Japan, with its draconian gun control laws is such a haven for crime and it's gun shooting deaths are... er... wait... The whole nation has less gun deaths than New York City.

My bad.
To those who feel, life is a tragedy. To those who think, it's a comedy.
"Men, today you'll be issued small trees. Do what you can for the emperor's glory." -Daistallia 2104 on bonsai charges in WWII
Science may provide the means while religion provides the motivation but humanity and humanity alone provides the vehicle -DaWoad

One-Stop Rules Shop, read it, love it, live by it. Getting Help Mod email: nervun@nationstates.net NSG Glossary
Add 10,145 to post count from Jolt: I have it from an unimpeachable source, that Dark Side cookies look like the Death Star. The other ones look like butterflies, or bunnies, or something.-Grave_n_Idle

Proud Member of FMGADHPAC. Join today!

User avatar
Imota
Ambassador
 
Posts: 1826
Founded: Dec 19, 2007
Ex-Nation

Re: How did we go 24 pages w/o a gun control debate?

Postby Imota » Tue Jun 09, 2009 9:19 pm

I believe that the best way to counter gun crime is to make the possession of a firearm during the commission of a crime a capital crime. This way, law-abiding citizens who carry guns are free to do so, while criminals would be deterred by the fact that even being in possession of a firearm during the commission of a crime would lead to a death sentence. As a side note, I feel the government does have an interest in restricting the ability for convicted felons, sex offenders, and the insane from carrying guns, and that children should need the permission of their parents or legal guardians to carry guns.
Mallorea and Riva should resign
Ameriganastan has no taste.

User avatar
Techno-Soviet
Senator
 
Posts: 3785
Founded: Jan 19, 2009
Ex-Nation

Re: How did we go 24 pages w/o a gun control debate?

Postby Techno-Soviet » Tue Jun 09, 2009 9:22 pm

BunnySaurus Bugsii wrote:
Parthenon wrote:as for the gun control debate... GUN CONTROL LAWS DON'T WORK. PERIOD.
It's the law abiding citizens these laws hurt, not the criminals.


The last two pages have had lots of discussion about whether "gun control" should be abolished to allow private citizens to own working tanks, aircraft, anti-aircraft missiles etc.

Indeed, the 2nd amendment doesn't make any distinction between those and a personal firearm.

BUT, the fact that the weapons used in crime are almost without exception weapons which can be legally bought somewhere in the States has to show you something. Gangs aren't shooting it out with artillery or bombers because they can't buy them on the black market ... and they can't buy them on the black market because they aren't available on the legal market.

The usual approach to showing that gun control does work is to compare entire countries by their crime (and particularly murder) rates, and by their gun-control laws. That argument is fairly conclusive to me: gun control works.

But it isn't even necessary to make that argument. Control of the sale of heavy weapons means that criminals in the States very rarely have heavy weapons. If they want such weapons, they have to steal them from the military or smuggle them into the country, and in practice that almost never happens. That's "gun" control working right there.


This.
[align=center]Economic Tyranny/Libertarian: 6.38
Social Libertarian/Tyranny: -3.33

User avatar
The South Islands
Diplomat
 
Posts: 983
Founded: Apr 02, 2009
Ex-Nation

Re: How did we go 24 pages w/o a gun control debate?

Postby The South Islands » Tue Jun 09, 2009 9:24 pm

NERVUN wrote:
Parthenon wrote:as for the gun control debate... GUN CONTROL LAWS DON'T WORK. PERIOD.
It's the law abiding citizens these laws hurt, not the criminals.

Damn straight! It's why Japan, with its draconian gun control laws is such a haven for crime and it's gun shooting deaths are... er... wait... The whole nation has less gun deaths than New York City.

My bad.

To be fair, you are comparing apples and mangoes here. Japan is significantly different in History, Culture, and in general Socio-Economic conditions compared to the United States. Furthermore, compare firearms ownership in Sweden and Finland, where there are many firearms in civilian hands (a good portion unregistered), but orders of magnitude less gun crime (or crime in general).

Addressing crime by frivolous bans on firearms is nothing but a feeble attempt at addressing a symptom of a deeply rooted problem in American cities.
Last edited by The South Islands on Tue Jun 09, 2009 9:41 pm, edited 2 times in total.
IL Ruffino: The wind flows / The hair on TSI's ass glides as if airborn / Smell the freshly cut grass
Gravlen: If I can blame you? Of course I can! I mean, you're like a walking cathalyst for homosexuality, driving otherwise straight men to write haikus about your ass hair...

So it's a wonder that your presence alone in any thread don't derail them and lead to debates about world leaders and homoerotic desires.


Sarkhaan: You. Put your pants back on.

User avatar
Gun Manufacturers
Powerbroker
 
Posts: 9330
Founded: Jan 23, 2006
Inoffensive Centrist Democracy

Re: How did we go 24 pages w/o a gun control debate?

Postby Gun Manufacturers » Tue Jun 09, 2009 9:26 pm

BunnySaurus Bugsii wrote:
Parthenon wrote:as for the gun control debate... GUN CONTROL LAWS DON'T WORK. PERIOD.
It's the law abiding citizens these laws hurt, not the criminals.


The last two pages have had lots of discussion about whether "gun control" should be abolished to allow private citizens to own working tanks, aircraft, anti-aircraft missiles etc.

Indeed, the 2nd amendment doesn't make any distinction between those and a personal firearm.

BUT, the fact that the weapons used in crime are almost without exception weapons which can be legally bought somewhere in the States has to show you something. Gangs aren't shooting it out with artillery or bombers because they can't buy them on the black market ... and they can't buy them on the black market because they aren't available on the legal market.

The usual approach to showing that gun control does work is to compare entire countries by their crime (and particularly murder) rates, and by their gun-control laws. That argument is fairly conclusive to me: gun control works.

But it isn't even necessary to make that argument. Control of the sale of heavy weapons means that criminals in the States very rarely have heavy weapons. If they want such weapons, they have to steal them from the military or smuggle them into the country, and in practice that almost never happens. That's "gun" control working right there.


Please google Philip Luty.
Any accident you can walk away from is one I can laugh at.

DOJ's interpretation of the 2nd Amendment: http://www.justice.gov/sites/default/fi ... -p0126.pdf

Natapoc wrote:...You should post more in here so I don't seem like the extremist...


Auraelius wrote:If you take the the TITANIC, and remove the letters T, T, and one of the I's, and add the letters C,O,S,P,R, and Y you get CONSPIRACY. oOooOooooOOOooooOOOOOOoooooooo


Maineiacs wrote:Give a man a fish and he eats for a day, teach a man to fish and he'll sit in a boat and get drunk all day.


Luw wrote:Politics is like having two handfuls of shit - one that smells bad and one that looks bad - and having to decide which one to put in your mouth.

User avatar
Brogavia
Negotiator
 
Posts: 5271
Founded: Sep 03, 2008
Ex-Nation

Re: How did we go 24 pages w/o a gun control debate?

Postby Brogavia » Tue Jun 09, 2009 9:48 pm

BunnySaurus Bugsii wrote:
Parthenon wrote:as for the gun control debate... GUN CONTROL LAWS DON'T WORK. PERIOD.
It's the law abiding citizens these laws hurt, not the criminals.


The last two pages have had lots of discussion about whether "gun control" should be abolished to allow private citizens to own working tanks, aircraft, anti-aircraft missiles etc.

Indeed, the 2nd amendment doesn't make any distinction between those and a personal firearm.

BUT, the fact that the weapons used in crime are almost without exception weapons which can be legally bought somewhere in the States has to show you something. Gangs aren't shooting it out with artillery or bombers because they can't buy them on the black market ... and they can't buy them on the black market because they aren't available on the legal market.

The usual approach to showing that gun control does work is to compare entire countries by their crime (and particularly murder) rates, and by their gun-control laws. That argument is fairly conclusive to me: gun control works.

But it isn't even necessary to make that argument. Control of the sale of heavy weapons means that criminals in the States very rarely have heavy weapons. If they want such weapons, they have to steal them from the military or smuggle them into the country, and in practice that almost never happens. That's "gun" control working right there.



Ok, so instead of looking at the US, lets look at Mexico.

Very, very tough gun laws. And yet, the America Mexico Border isn't all rainbows and sunshine on the Mexican side. With the number of guns in America, and by your arguement, the American side should be the bloodbath, not the Mexican one. Mexican gun bust fequently show full automatic weaponry, hand grenades, and anti-armor weapons. All of these are illegal in America. So how are they getting them? The black market.

Your arguement that you can't get them on the black market is because you can't get them on the legal market, must also mean that because you can't get crack cocaine on the legal market, you can't get it on the black market.
Playing NS since Jan of 2006

1010102, Unjustly Deleted

Agent of the Timegate, if you expose me I'll kill you

User avatar
Parthenon
Senator
 
Posts: 3512
Founded: Antiquity
Ex-Nation

Re: How did we go 24 pages w/o a gun control debate?

Postby Parthenon » Tue Jun 09, 2009 9:53 pm

BunnySaurus Bugsii wrote:
Parthenon wrote:as for the gun control debate... GUN CONTROL LAWS DON'T WORK. PERIOD.
It's the law abiding citizens these laws hurt, not the criminals.


The last two pages have had lots of discussion about whether "gun control" should be abolished to allow private citizens to own working tanks, aircraft, anti-aircraft missiles etc.

Indeed, the 2nd amendment doesn't make any distinction between those and a personal firearm.

BUT, the fact that the weapons used in crime are almost without exception weapons which can be legally bought somewhere in the States has to show you something. Gangs aren't shooting it out with artillery or bombers because they can't buy them on the black market ... and they can't buy them on the black market because they aren't available on the legal market.

The usual approach to showing that gun control does work is to compare entire countries by their crime (and particularly murder) rates, and by their gun-control laws. That argument is fairly conclusive to me: gun control works.

But it isn't even necessary to make that argument. Control of the sale of heavy weapons means that criminals in the States very rarely have heavy weapons. If they want such weapons, they have to steal them from the military or smuggle them into the country, and in practice that almost never happens. That's "gun" control working right there.

There is a very sizable black market for heavy weapons. American criminals realize these aren't necessary given the abundance of people like you working to keep firearms out of the hands of law abiding citizens.
Last edited by Parthenon on Tue Jun 09, 2009 10:00 pm, edited 2 times in total.
The Parthenese Confederation
Parthenon
Intergallactic Hell
The Bleeding Roses
West Parthenon
Former GDODAD/Metus Member

User avatar
Illydea
Political Columnist
 
Posts: 2
Founded: Jun 06, 2009
Ex-Nation

Re: How did we go 24 pages w/o a gun control debate?

Postby Illydea » Tue Jun 09, 2009 10:03 pm

I think that it's pretty much pointless to effect any sort of ban on weaponry... Those who want to protect themselves will lose their means of doing so, and those who want to do bad stuff with guns will find a way to get those guns on the black market. Of course, there are exceptions to this laissez-faire policy -- rocket launchers and tanks are definitely out of the list of allowed civilian weaponry.

User avatar
Brogavia
Negotiator
 
Posts: 5271
Founded: Sep 03, 2008
Ex-Nation

Re: How did we go 24 pages w/o a gun control debate?

Postby Brogavia » Tue Jun 09, 2009 10:05 pm

Illydea wrote:I think that it's pretty much pointless to effect any sort of ban on weaponry... Those who want to protect themselves will lose their means of doing so, and those who want to do bad stuff with guns will find a way to get those guns on the black market. Of course, there are exceptions to this laissez-faire policy -- rocket launchers and tanks are definitely out of the list of allowed civilian weaponry.


why?
Playing NS since Jan of 2006

1010102, Unjustly Deleted

Agent of the Timegate, if you expose me I'll kill you

User avatar
The South Islands
Diplomat
 
Posts: 983
Founded: Apr 02, 2009
Ex-Nation

Re: How did we go 24 pages w/o a gun control debate?

Postby The South Islands » Tue Jun 09, 2009 10:08 pm

Brogavia wrote:
Illydea wrote:I think that it's pretty much pointless to effect any sort of ban on weaponry... Those who want to protect themselves will lose their means of doing so, and those who want to do bad stuff with guns will find a way to get those guns on the black market. Of course, there are exceptions to this laissez-faire policy -- rocket launchers and tanks are definitely out of the list of allowed civilian weaponry.


why?


Tanks get piss poor gas mileage, and probably wouldn't meet EPA guidelines for emissions.
IL Ruffino: The wind flows / The hair on TSI's ass glides as if airborn / Smell the freshly cut grass
Gravlen: If I can blame you? Of course I can! I mean, you're like a walking cathalyst for homosexuality, driving otherwise straight men to write haikus about your ass hair...

So it's a wonder that your presence alone in any thread don't derail them and lead to debates about world leaders and homoerotic desires.


Sarkhaan: You. Put your pants back on.

User avatar
Brogavia
Negotiator
 
Posts: 5271
Founded: Sep 03, 2008
Ex-Nation

Re: How did we go 24 pages w/o a gun control debate?

Postby Brogavia » Tue Jun 09, 2009 10:10 pm

The South Islands wrote:
Brogavia wrote:
Illydea wrote:I think that it's pretty much pointless to effect any sort of ban on weaponry... Those who want to protect themselves will lose their means of doing so, and those who want to do bad stuff with guns will find a way to get those guns on the black market. Of course, there are exceptions to this laissez-faire policy -- rocket launchers and tanks are definitely out of the list of allowed civilian weaponry.


why?


Tanks get piss poor gas mileage, and probably wouldn't meet EPA guidelines for emissions.



I guess there's that.
Playing NS since Jan of 2006

1010102, Unjustly Deleted

Agent of the Timegate, if you expose me I'll kill you

User avatar
Greed and Death
Post Czar
 
Posts: 48837
Founded: Mar 20, 2008
Compulsory Consumerist State

Re: How did we go 24 pages w/o a gun control debate?

Postby Greed and Death » Tue Jun 09, 2009 10:15 pm

The South Islands wrote:
Brogavia wrote:
Illydea wrote:I think that it's pretty much pointless to effect any sort of ban on weaponry... Those who want to protect themselves will lose their means of doing so, and those who want to do bad stuff with guns will find a way to get those guns on the black market. Of course, there are exceptions to this laissez-faire policy -- rocket launchers and tanks are definitely out of the list of allowed civilian weaponry.


why?


Tanks get piss poor gas mileage, and probably wouldn't meet EPA guidelines for emissions.

Unless you register it as a farm vehicle. then your exempt from EPA guidelines. Now how to haul hay with my tank with out ruining my field is the question.
"Trying to solve the healthcare problem by mandating people buy insurance is like trying to solve the homeless problem by mandating people buy a house."(paraphrase from debate with Hilary Clinton)
Barack Obama

User avatar
Brogavia
Negotiator
 
Posts: 5271
Founded: Sep 03, 2008
Ex-Nation

Re: How did we go 24 pages w/o a gun control debate?

Postby Brogavia » Tue Jun 09, 2009 10:19 pm

greed and death wrote:Unless you register it as a farm vehicle. then your exempt from EPA guidelines. Now how to haul hay with my tank with out ruining my field is the question.


It probably has less ground pressure than a tractor, you should be find.
Playing NS since Jan of 2006

1010102, Unjustly Deleted

Agent of the Timegate, if you expose me I'll kill you

User avatar
Greed and Death
Post Czar
 
Posts: 48837
Founded: Mar 20, 2008
Compulsory Consumerist State

Re: How did we go 24 pages w/o a gun control debate?

Postby Greed and Death » Tue Jun 09, 2009 10:21 pm

Brogavia wrote:
greed and death wrote:Unless you register it as a farm vehicle. then your exempt from EPA guidelines. Now how to haul hay with my tank with out ruining my field is the question.


It probably has less ground pressure than a tractor, you should be find.


if farming with an M1 Abrams is the only way to avoid EPA regulations.

Though technically EPA emissions standards are only for when you drive on public roads. and if your doing that your missing the entire point of owning a tank.
"Trying to solve the healthcare problem by mandating people buy insurance is like trying to solve the homeless problem by mandating people buy a house."(paraphrase from debate with Hilary Clinton)
Barack Obama

User avatar
BunnySaurus Bugsii
Ambassador
 
Posts: 1232
Founded: Nov 15, 2007
Ex-Nation

Re: How did we go 24 pages w/o a gun control debate?

Postby BunnySaurus Bugsii » Tue Jun 09, 2009 10:44 pm

Imota wrote:I believe that the best way to counter gun crime is to make the possession of a firearm during the commission of a crime a capital crime. This way, law-abiding citizens who carry guns are free to do so, while criminals would be deterred by the fact that even being in possession of a firearm during the commission of a crime would lead to a death sentence.


The presumption in carrying a gun while "committing a crime" is that the carrier is prepared to shoot someone to carry out the crime or to escape. While in most cases, threatening with a gun would be all that is necessary, the threat is meaningless without preparedness to carry it out, ie shoot someone.

So your suggestion makes some sense. Essentially, you would automatically add 'conspiracy to murder' to any other charge, if the perpetrator is carrying a gun.

I think you have to add a proviso that the gun is actually instrumental to the crime. If they point it at someone and make a demand, then yes it is. But if it remains hidden in their bag or in a shoulder-holster? If they don't actually threaten anyone with it ... how does possession of a gun become part of the crime, that a court can punish it so harshly? If it's not part of the crime, I can't see how it doesn't remain a right as due to any law-abiding citizen, if the local jurisdiction allows such to carry weapons.

I'm not a lawyer. But I do understand that denying someone a right retrospectively (as a criminal, which isn't a legal definition until they have been convicted) is going to be tricky.

Already, use of a gun (or even some other weapon) in a crime, aggravates the crime. The only unique feature of your suggestion is that the aggravation (making worthy of harsher punishment) should outweigh the crime itself, by the maximum imaginable amount.

If I were to menace you right now (eg, threaten to shoot you dead) and if that menace were credible (eg, I were to use your real world name, and show some photographs I took of you to demonstrate that I have physical access to you) that would quite rightly be a crime. I would probably get a month of community service or some such, or perhaps only a suspended sentence since I have never been convicted of any crime before.

Does it really make sense, that I should be liable for the death penalty, if I was in possession of a gun while committing that crime?
Lucky Bicycle Works ⊂ BunnySaurus Bugsii ⊂ Nobel Hobos

More sig:
Saboteur: A well-meaning idiot, walking into the future barefoot.
...

The moongoose step: a combination of can-can, goose-step, and moon-step. I haven't perfected it yet.

I can however do John Cleese's Silly Walk, with elements of falling on my arse.

...
When we hear our future selves, we are humbled. We are willing servants.

User avatar
BunnySaurus Bugsii
Ambassador
 
Posts: 1232
Founded: Nov 15, 2007
Ex-Nation

Re: How did we go 24 pages w/o a gun control debate?

Postby BunnySaurus Bugsii » Tue Jun 09, 2009 10:52 pm

The South Islands wrote:
Brogavia wrote:
Illydea wrote:I think that it's pretty much pointless to effect any sort of ban on weaponry... Those who want to protect themselves will lose their means of doing so, and those who want to do bad stuff with guns will find a way to get those guns on the black market. Of course, there are exceptions to this laissez-faire policy -- rocket launchers and tanks are definitely out of the list of allowed civilian weaponry.


why?


Tanks get piss poor gas mileage, and probably wouldn't meet EPA guidelines for emissions.


:o ... :lol:

Maybe that's the way to get around the 2nd! Own as many guns as you like, but no gunpowder allowed. All that sulphurous shit has to be bad for the environment!
Lucky Bicycle Works ⊂ BunnySaurus Bugsii ⊂ Nobel Hobos

More sig:
Saboteur: A well-meaning idiot, walking into the future barefoot.
...

The moongoose step: a combination of can-can, goose-step, and moon-step. I haven't perfected it yet.

I can however do John Cleese's Silly Walk, with elements of falling on my arse.

...
When we hear our future selves, we are humbled. We are willing servants.

PreviousNext

Advertisement

Remove ads

Return to General

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: American Princedoms, Ard al Islam, Astrobolt, Black Moon Sodality, Bloodshade, Bruke, Cappuccina, Concordla, D V, De Nederland, FelrikTheDeleted, Forumland, Galloism, Great Algerstonia, Greater Miami Shores, Greater vakolicci haven, Ifreann, Jack Thomas Lang, Kortunal, Lakes Beach, Latvijas Otra Republika, Loben The 2nd, Neon District, Novus America, Orange-Transvaal, Pacomia, Paddy O Fernature, Panama Coalition, Purgatio, Samudera Darussalam, Taihei Tengoku, Telconi, Tengoto, The Empire of Pretantia, The Greater Ohio Valley, The Wasatch, Thepeopl, Uiiop, World Anarchic Union

Advertisement

Remove ads