Second Amendment Repeal / Gun Control

[Planeia]

Definitely not repealed, due to the "shall not be infringed" part, but regulated, stop letting unstable kids like Adam Lanza have them. Have people state their intentions when applying for a permit, require that permit to be renewed every month or year (depending on caliber and magazine size), have people check in with the proper authorities every once in a while to rule out suspicions, keep tabs on every single bullet, have each one accountable, for instance if you start off with seven bullets and end up with six bullets by the end of the month, you need to tell where that one bullet went or get your permit revoked. All this in addition to psych evaluations.

This is honestly the type of stuff police have to go through with their guns, you know like in TV whenever a cop laments that he has to do paperwork after shooting or killing someone? If cops have to go through it, citizens should be no different.

But don't just take the guns away altogether. I'd like to be able to shoot North Koreans, zombies, or aliens should the need arise.

[Rhoderberg]

There are only so many variants of the Uzi, though, and it's not like you can fire all eighty Uzis at once.

Personally, I'd rather have eighty FALs.

Same, but still.

Well, I'm glad we can agree on something.

Anyways, they haven't stopped producing Uzis, have they?

[Paddy O Fernature]

Perhaps I'll never come to understand the need for the second amendment in the modern-age, but it seems to me that a right that was ratified for the times of 1791 might be a little outdated for a modern-day world, and many countries get on just fine without similar universal rights. Although it's difficult to compare crime on a country-by-country basis, overall, I don't think America is any better or worse, on average, so there's no strong argument either way on that front.

I think more safeguards should be put in place on who can carry arms, but beyond that I don't have a strong opinion on the subject. Too many variables. It comes down to whether it makes law-abiding citizens safer or less safe, on average.

I have to ask, do you think hunting is outdated as well? What about population control for invasive species? Sporting and recreation? How about monetary investing for a rainy day? These are but a few of things that Americans can choose to legally and harmlessly partake in involving firearms thanks in no small part to the 2nd Amendment.

And before people respond with "How is hunting harmless" statements, like certain vocal users who refuse to acknowledge the simple fact that all meat regardless of venue comes from somewhere have before on these threads, be aware that I don't really give a single feels if the Bambi that sourced the fat steak sitting on my plate was harmed or not in the process. All meat has to come from somewhere, and I prefer it to be all natural and not filled with artificial additives like most store bought meat is these days.

[Imperializt Russia]

Definitely not repealed, due to the "shall not be infringed" part, but regulated, stop letting unstable kids like Adam Lanza have them. Have people state their intentions when applying for a permit, require that permit to be renewed every month or year (depending on caliber and magazine size), have people check in with the proper authorities every once in a while to rule out suspicions, keep tabs on every single bullet, have each one accountable, for instance if you start off with seven bullets and end up with six bullets by the end of the month, you need to tell where that one bullet went or get your permit revoked. All this in addition to psych evaluations.

This is honestly the type of stuff police have to go through with their guns, you know like in TV whenever a cop laments that he has to do paperwork after shooting or killing someone? If cops have to go through it, citizens should be no different.

But don't just take the guns away altogether. I'd like to be able to shoot North Koreans, zombies, or aliens should the need arise.

Adam Lanza owned no firearms.

The Second Amendment states that the right to bear arms shall not be infringed. If the Second Amendment were repealed, that right would no longer exist and can no longer be infringed upon.
This is like saying that after Prohibition was repealed, the police still had the right to bust licensed, law-abiding bars.

[Ranoria]

K, Imma say this here.
The 2nd allows everyone to legally have guns. Without it, only bad guys have guns, and they are a very small group against the now all powerful government assuming it is repealed.
Best ways to explain it.

I'd like to be able to shoot North Koreans, zombies, or aliens should the need arise.

right here with you on that one, lol

[Imperializt Russia]

Obama does not oppose the right to bear arms and Hitler relaxed gun control in Nazi Germany for the vast majority of the population.

[Ranoria]

Obama does not oppose the right to bear arms and Hitler relaxed gun control in Nazi Germany for the vast majority of the population.

Not for the Jews. The other people supported killing the Jews.

[Imperializt Russia]

Obama does not oppose the right to bear arms and Hitler relaxed gun control in Nazi Germany for the vast majority of the population.

Not for the Jews. The other people supported killing the Jews.

"Vast majority".

Does make comparing Hitler to Stalin or Obama that touch more absolutely idiotic, regardless.

[Kernen]

This is honestly the type of stuff police have to go through with their guns, you know like in TV whenever a cop laments that he has to do paperwork after shooting or killing someone? If cops have to go through it, citizens should be no different.

Civilians have to go through just as much paperwork if they kill in self defense, and they don't have judicial entities predisposed to sympathize with them, unlike police officers.

[Grey Earth]

If you outlaw guns, only outlaws will have guns. Repealing the 2nd amendment is not the solution to anything.

[Imperializt Russia]

If you outlaw guns, only outlaws will have guns. Repealing the 2nd amendment is not the solution to anything.

For what it's worth, few states have actually outlawed firearms.

[Grey Earth]

If you outlaw guns, only outlaws will have guns. Repealing the 2nd amendment is not the solution to anything.

For what it's worth, few states have actually outlawed firearms.

Places with stricter gun restrictions usually have higher crime rates.

[Benian Republic]

For what it's worth, few states have actually outlawed firearms.

Places with stricter gun restrictions usually have higher crime rates.

Sources please.

[Draakonite]

For what it's worth, few states have actually outlawed firearms.

Places with stricter gun restrictions usually have higher crime rates.

If i remember correctly, there seems to be no connection at all between gun restrictions and crime rates. I doesn't matter in which direction you go.

[Great Confederacy of Commonwealth States]

K, Imma say this here.
The 2nd allows everyone to legally have guns. Without it, only bad guys have guns, and they are a very small group against the now all powerful government assuming it is repealed.
Best ways to explain it.
(Image)
(Image)

I'd like to be able to shoot North Koreans, zombies, or aliens should the need arise.

right here with you on that one, lol

Luckily, the world has a large experiment going on in Europe and Japan. There, all forms of firearms are banned, except for some recreational use. If you own a gun, you need to have a psychiatric test, and your gun needs to be locked either at the range or in a secure time-locked vault in your own home. There are no 'concealed carry permits' or 'allowed open carry laws', all guns are banned outside of those places. And you know what? Here, bad guys lack guns as well. Because they are banned. And laws are enforced. I get why people want guns, and their recreational use is perfectly legitimate, but don't come with a Godwin and a 'good guy bad guy'-dichotomy, because that doesn't work. Like, at all.

[The Empire Of Dolmite]

no this is so dumb

[Kernen]

K, Imma say this here.
The 2nd allows everyone to legally have guns. Without it, only bad guys have guns, and they are a very small group against the now all powerful government assuming it is repealed.
Best ways to explain it.
(Image)
(Image)

right here with you on that one, lol

Luckily, the world has a large experiment going on in Europe and Japan. There, all forms of firearms are banned, except for some recreational use. If you own a gun, you need to have a psychiatric test, and your gun needs to be locked either at the range or in a secure time-locked vault in your own home. There are no 'concealed carry permits' or 'allowed open carry laws', all guns are banned outside of those places. And you know what? Here, bad guys lack guns as well. Because they are banned. And laws are enforced. I get why people want guns, and their recreational use is perfectly legitimate, but don't come with a Godwin and a 'good guy bad guy'-dichotomy, because that doesn't work. Like, at all.

To be fair, the historical background of firearms ownership and geography of Europe/Japan lends itself to more successful restriction of certain contraband. The US already has more guns in public circulation than Europe has probably ever had, which is in itself a massive problem when it comes to enforcing a ban, and it has massive, relatively unsecure borders by which a black market could effectively move. We're not an island, nor are we historically used to significant border control.

There are other issues, but those are the big ones I immediately draw when comparing Europe and Japan to the US in terms of gun ban practicality.

[Great Confederacy of Commonwealth States]

Places with stricter gun restrictions usually have higher crime rates.

Sources please.

Here! One source that proves that places where guns are outlawed have lower homicide rates.

Ow..., wait...

[Great Confederacy of Commonwealth States]

Luckily, the world has a large experiment going on in Europe and Japan. There, all forms of firearms are banned, except for some recreational use. If you own a gun, you need to have a psychiatric test, and your gun needs to be locked either at the range or in a secure time-locked vault in your own home. There are no 'concealed carry permits' or 'allowed open carry laws', all guns are banned outside of those places. And you know what? Here, bad guys lack guns as well. Because they are banned. And laws are enforced. I get why people want guns, and their recreational use is perfectly legitimate, but don't come with a Godwin and a 'good guy bad guy'-dichotomy, because that doesn't work. Like, at all.

To be fair, the historical background of firearms ownership and geography of Europe/Japan lends itself to more successful restriction of certain contraband. The US already has more guns in public circulation than Europe has probably ever had, which is in itself a massive problem when it comes to enforcing a ban, and it has massive, relatively unsecure borders by which a black market could effectively move. We're not an island, nor are we historically used to significant border control.

There are other issues, but those are the big ones I immediately draw when comparing Europe and Japan to the US in terms of gun ban practicality.

Oh, yeah, and I totally agree with you. I'm not saying a ban should be enforced, or that the European thing would work in the US. It would clearly not. But the statement that banning guns will leave only bad guys with guns, and that it leads to tyranny are just blatantly wrong. I'm saying that certain restrictions could be applied, and that this doesn't automatically lead to Lord of the Flies.

[Kernen]

Sources please.

Here! One source that proves that places where guns are outlawed have lower homicide rates.

Ow..., wait...

I'm looking for statistics to back this up, but within the US, the trend is reversed. Places with significant anti-gun laws, such as Detroit, D.C., and SF, tend to have higher crime rates then areas with comparatively nonexistent firearms laws, like the entire state of Vermont.

[Great Confederacy of Commonwealth States]

Here! One source that proves that places where guns are outlawed have lower homicide rates.

Ow..., wait...

I'm looking for statistics to back this up, but within the US, the trend is reversed. Places with significant anti-gun laws, such as Detroit, D.C., and SF, tend to have higher crime rates then areas with comparatively nonexistent firearms laws, like the entire state of Vermont.

Yeah, I have to admit that crime statistics are generally not as reliable as one might expect. If you look at world crime statistics, for example, you'd see that India is somewhere at the bottom, while Iceland is right there on top, with about two hundred times the crime rate per capita. So, crime statistics... Yeah... Homicides are easily accounted for, because you have a body, and homicides are generally recorded by the police, but even they don't give a good picture of the situation.

What's important is what is actually banned in these states. Is it owning a gun, for instance, or selling a gun? That's really important. as you say, Vermont has a lot of crime. But is this due to their lack of guns, or guns brought from across state borders, or black market? Just crime statistics don't really prove that much. So, neither my link nor any statistics can really sway this argument one way or another.

[Kernen]

I'm looking for statistics to back this up, but within the US, the trend is reversed. Places with significant anti-gun laws, such as Detroit, D.C., and SF, tend to have higher crime rates then areas with comparatively nonexistent firearms laws, like the entire state of Vermont.

Yeah, I have to admit that crime statistics are generally not as reliable as one might expect. If you look at world crime statistics, for example, you'd see that India is somewhere at the bottom, while Iceland is right there on top, with about two hundred times the crime rate per capita. So, crime statistics... Yeah... Homicides are easily accounted for, because you have a body, and homicides are generally recorded by the police, but even they don't give a good picture of the situation.

What's important is what is actually banned in these states. Is it owning a gun, for instance, or selling a gun? That's really important. as you say, Vermont has a lot of crime. But is this due to their lack of guns, or guns brought from across state borders, or black market? Just crime statistics don't really prove that much. So, neither my link nor any statistics can really sway this argument one way or another.

Which was, essentially, my point. At least in the US, banning guns =/= less crime on the face. Its a very nuanced issue that guns are, in all likelihood, not even a significant portion of.

Vermont has nearly no instances of homocide or assault, IIRC from my time living there, but has virtually no laws governing firearms, where DC has outright banned handguns and is riddled with homocide and violent assault. I'd still rather live in DC than bumfuck Vermont any day, but by looking at firearms prevalence alone, the data doesn't correlate to international examples.

In general, I personally feel that international statistics and examples really ought to be left out of US gun control debates, because the US is just so damn different than most of the developed world in terms of size, demographics, and socioeconomic disparity.

EDIT: Not that I disagree at all with your assessment that the claim that guns are the magic shield against all Bad Things is patently ridiculous.

[Washington Resistance Army]

K, Imma say this here.
The 2nd allows everyone to legally have guns. Without it, only bad guys have guns, and they are a very small group against the now all powerful government assuming it is repealed.
Best ways to explain it.
(Image)

Hitler relaxed gun restrictions, Obama doesn't oppose the 2nd Amendment and I'm pretty damn sure Lenin supported people owning weapons so they could form militias if necessary.

[Imperializt Russia]

K, Imma say this here.
The 2nd allows everyone to legally have guns. Without it, only bad guys have guns, and they are a very small group against the now all powerful government assuming it is repealed.
Best ways to explain it.
(Image)
(Image)

right here with you on that one, lol

Luckily, the world has a large experiment going on in Europe and Japan. There, all forms of firearms are banned, except for some recreational use. If you own a gun, you need to have a psychiatric test, and your gun needs to be locked either at the range or in a secure time-locked vault in your own home. There are no 'concealed carry permits' or 'allowed open carry laws', all guns are banned outside of those places. And you know what? Here, bad guys lack guns as well. Because they are banned. And laws are enforced. I get why people want guns, and their recreational use is perfectly legitimate, but don't come with a Godwin and a 'good guy bad guy'-dichotomy, because that doesn't work. Like, at all.

Nearly everything you said is wrong.
Highlighted is the one correct part of firearms regulation in Britain.

[Great Confederacy of Commonwealth States]

Luckily, the world has a large experiment going on in Europe and Japan. There, all forms of firearms are banned, except for some recreational use. If you own a gun, you need to have a psychiatric test, and your gun needs to be locked either at the range or in a secure time-locked vault in your own home. There are no 'concealed carry permits' or 'allowed open carry laws', all guns are banned outside of those places. And you know what? Here, bad guys lack guns as well. Because they are banned. And laws are enforced. I get why people want guns, and their recreational use is perfectly legitimate, but don't come with a Godwin and a 'good guy bad guy'-dichotomy, because that doesn't work. Like, at all.

Nearly everything you said is wrong.
Highlighted is the one correct part of firearms regulation in Britain.

I should have elaborated, correct. I was talking about one particular law system I am familiar with, in the Netherlands. For that, what I said holds true. Well, not exactly, there a nuances with security forces and policing, but in general, everything I said is true for that system. I don't know the specifics for the rest of Europe, I assumed it would be in the same range.