Second Amendment Repeal / Gun Control

[Pharthan]

None of the anti- or pro-gun arguments seem to address the real issue.

We suck. We as a people, Americans, suck. Our culture produces killers. Gun crime isn't inherent to owning or not owning guns. It's inherent to cultures, which is why laws and restrictions don't work. Some facet of liberal culture seems to be driving people to gun-crime, apparently. Many of the cities with high gun crime in the states are predominantly liberal and have liberal government leadership presiding. Some of them have extremely strict gun laws as well (See: Chicago). Those cities with looser gun laws and predominantly conservative leadership experience less gun crime.
Removing guns from the equation or controlling them harsher doesn't remove the fact that our culture produces killers. You're always going to have some, obviously.
Other nations don't have the problems we do, though admittedly we aren't actually all that bad when it comes to crime. We could be much worse off.

[Kubra]

Yes folks, lets delve into the mind of an idiot, by the likes of Rep. Rosa DeLauro (D-Conn.)
Bill would pay gun owners to hand over assault weapons, and offer a $2000 tax credit. Now I don't know about you but this proposal is just down right fucking stupid and would be ripe to be abused.
http://thehill.com/regulation/legislati ... ult-rifles

Step #1: Buy a cheap 'assault rifle' for about $500.
Step #2: Turn it in.
Step #3: Get your $2000 tax credit.
Step #4: Laugh at this pathetic administration.
Step#5: Buy a good quality weapon with your new found tax credit money complete with accessories.
Step#6: Win.

Step five should be to repeat step one thrice, and repeat the whole process to achieve infinite money.

I want to say "there's no way they would be dumb enough to let this happen" buuuuuut
http://www.wsj.com/articles/SB126014168569179245

step 1: buy coins with frequent flyer credit card
step 2: pay off credit card with coins
rinse and repeat

so i guess shit like this can happen

[Autonomous Titoists]

None of the anti- or pro-gun arguments seem to address the real issue.

We suck. We as a people, Americans, suck. Our culture produces killers. Gun crime isn't inherent to owning or not owning guns. It's inherent to cultures, which is why laws and restrictions don't work. Some facet of liberal culture seems to be driving people to gun-crime, apparently. Many of the cities with high gun crime in the states are predominantly liberal and have liberal government leadership presiding. Some of them have extremely strict gun laws as well (See: Chicago). Those cities with looser gun laws and predominantly conservative leadership experience less gun crime.
Removing guns from the equation or controlling them harsher doesn't remove the fact that our culture produces killers. You're always going to have some, obviously.
Other nations don't have the problems we do, though admittedly we aren't actually all that bad when it comes to crime. We could be much worse off.

Chicago has one of the highest gun crime rates in the US. Read a book. And statistically gun crime rates have been going down since teh 1920s and are at the lowest point in the last hundred years. Strawman argument
http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2014/04 ... read-this/

[Sevvania]

None of the anti- or pro-gun arguments seem to address the real issue.

We suck. We as a people, Americans, suck. Our culture produces killers. Gun crime isn't inherent to owning or not owning guns. It's inherent to cultures, which is why laws and restrictions don't work. Some facet of liberal culture seems to be driving people to gun-crime, apparently. Many of the cities with high gun crime in the states are predominantly liberal and have liberal government leadership presiding. Some of them have extremely strict gun laws as well (See: Chicago). Those cities with looser gun laws and predominantly conservative leadership experience less gun crime.
Removing guns from the equation or controlling them harsher doesn't remove the fact that our culture produces killers. You're always going to have some, obviously.
Other nations don't have the problems we do, though admittedly we aren't actually all that bad when it comes to crime. We could be much worse off.

Chicago has one of the highest gun crime rates in the US. Read a book. And statistically gun crime rates have been going down since teh 1920s and are at the lowest point in the last hundred years. Strawman argument
http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2014/04 ... read-this/

It's like you're addressing an imaginary poster who said the exact opposite of what Pharthan said. You're telling him to read a book when it doesn't even look like you read his post.

[Autonomous Titoists]

Chicago has one of the highest gun crime rates in the US. Read a book. And statistically gun crime rates have been going down since teh 1920s and are at the lowest point in the last hundred years. Strawman argument
http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2014/04 ... read-this/

It's like you're addressing an imaginary poster who said the exact opposite of what Pharthan said. You're telling him to read a book when it doesn't even look like you read his post.

How did I not read his post? I've pulled from it he believes Chicago has a low gun crime rate because of "conservative leaders" and that can't be farther from the truth. Unless he was just having a random spout of sarcasm that I failed to pick up on.

[Sevvania]

How did I not read his post? I've pulled from it he believes Chicago has a low gun crime rate because of "conservative leaders" and that can't be farther from the truth. Unless he was just having a random spout of sarcasm that I failed to pick up on.

Many of the cities with high gun crime in the states are predominantly liberal and have liberal government leadership presiding. Some of them have extremely strict gun laws as well (See: Chicago).

[Spirit of Hope]

Many of the cities with high gun crime in the states are predominantly liberal and have liberal government leadership presiding. Some of them have extremely strict gun laws as well (See: Chicago). Those cities with looser gun laws and predominantly conservative leadership experience less gun crime.

It's like you're addressing an imaginary poster who said the exact opposite of what Pharthan said. You're telling him to read a book when it doesn't even look like you read his post.

How did I not read his post? I've pulled from it he believes Chicago has a low gun crime rate because of "conservative leaders" and that can't be farther from the truth. Unless he was just having a random spout of sarcasm that I failed to pick up on.

I think you completely misread the quoted portion that says effectively: "Chicago has high crime, and strong anti gun laws."

[Imperializt Russia]

It's like you're addressing an imaginary poster who said the exact opposite of what Pharthan said. You're telling him to read a book when it doesn't even look like you read his post.

How did I not read his post? I've pulled from it he believes Chicago has a low gun crime rate because of "conservative leaders" and that can't be farther from the truth. Unless he was just having a random spout of sarcasm that I failed to pick up on.

That is literally the opposite of what he said.
Literally, the opposite.

[Autonomous Titoists]

Many of the cities with high gun crime in the states are predominantly liberal and have liberal government leadership presiding. Some of them have extremely strict gun laws as well (See: Chicago). Those cities with looser gun laws and predominantly conservative leadership experience less gun crime.

How did I not read his post? I've pulled from it he believes Chicago has a low gun crime rate because of "conservative leaders" and that can't be farther from the truth. Unless he was just having a random spout of sarcasm that I failed to pick up on.

I think you completely misread the quoted portion that says effectively: "Chicago has high crime, and strong anti gun laws."

That's possible

[Goodclark]

I don't think it's the guns that are the problem, it's how we treat the poor. We need things like better education opportunities for the less fortunate, universal healthcare, etc. Removing guns is only a temporary solution. Just look at Switzerland, they have gun laws very similar to that of the US but yet they are an extremely peaceful population.

[Otokodate]

It's like you're addressing an imaginary poster who said the exact opposite of what Pharthan said. You're telling him to read a book when it doesn't even look like you read his post.

How did I not read his post? I've pulled from it he believes Chicago has a low gun crime rate because of "conservative leaders" and that can't be farther from the truth. Unless he was just having a random spout of sarcasm that I failed to pick up on.

It looks like you did misread the persons post in question.
This is a summary in my own words:
we suck, guns aren't the problem. Our culture is. Liberal cities with liberal leaders (like Chicago) have high crime, with lots of gun control. Conservative cities with less gun control have less crime. We're just a violent culture, the gun isn't relevant to Thst problem.

[Kernen]

I don't think it's the guns that are the problem, it's how we treat the poor. We need things like better education opportunities for the less fortunate, universal healthcare, etc. Removing guns is only a temporary solution. Just look at Switzerland, they have gun laws very similar to that of the US but yet they are an extremely peaceful population.

I've always thought the issue was class based and not gun based. The argument could be made that the Swiss require training for those weapons through compulsory military service, and that makes them safe, but I've known a couple soldiers from several countries that shouldn't be trusted with a firearm in any capacity. Anecdotal perhaps, but there it is.

[Tule]

None of the anti- or pro-gun arguments seem to address the real issue.

We suck. We as a people, Americans, suck. Our culture produces killers. Gun crime isn't inherent to owning or not owning guns. It's inherent to cultures, which is why laws and restrictions don't work. Some facet of liberal culture seems to be driving people to gun-crime, apparently. Many of the cities with high gun crime in the states are predominantly liberal and have liberal government leadership presiding. Some of them have extremely strict gun laws as well (See: Chicago). Those cities with looser gun laws and predominantly conservative leadership experience less gun crime.
Removing guns from the equation or controlling them harsher doesn't remove the fact that our culture produces killers. You're always going to have some, obviously.
Other nations don't have the problems we do, though admittedly we aren't actually all that bad when it comes to crime. We could be much worse off.

On some points you are right, on others you are way off, on some you are both right and wrong.



The entire US south has a higher homicide rate on average than the entire US average. Many "liberal" states however, especially those with strict gun control like Hawaii, Connecticut, New Jersey and New York all have a below average homicide rate.

Guns are not admittedly the whole story. Vermont, New Hampshire, Maine and many Midwestern states have very low homicide rates despite having permissive gun laws. But they do vary from being liberal to conservative.

One theory put forward by historian Randolph Roth in his book "American Homicide", attempts to explain causes of homicide rates finds that homicide rates are most strongly correlated with trust in government and social cohesion.

When people don't recognize their government's authority for reasons of perceived legitimacy, ability, corruption, or all these three factors combined: People feel more like they can't settle disputes with the help of the justice system and will do so themselves. They may also subconsciously feel more insecure, more isolated, and thus reactor more strongly when offended.

Research by others certainly supports the idea that more income inequality and less trust in a given society increases murder rates.

[Wallenburg]

I am personally uncomfortable around guns. I have less than an inch of trust in anyone with the capacity to kill me before I even have the chance to shout out in terror.
However, my personal preferences should not shape government policy. Given the failure to show even a correlation between gun ownership and crime, I cannot say either side has any good evidence to support themselves. Therefore, I have no reason to support regulation by the purpose or type of firearm. My individual fears should have no influence on the rights of the people.
I'll support the rights of responsible individuals to own guns as long as they prove said responsibility.

[Caille]

I fully support the second amendment, and believe that individuals have the right to own firearms.

That said, it is wise to have certain safety policies in place. Universal background checks and reviewing firearm transfers are good mediums between liberty and security. Organizations such as the NRA are too hostile to compromise and evidence. However, I would oppose any effort to restrict gun ownership outside of a reasonable cause (mental incapacity or previous criminal record).

[Big Jim P]

I fully support the second amendment, and believe that individuals have the right to own firearms.

That said, it is wise to have certain safety policies in place. Universal background checks and reviewing firearm transfers are good mediums between liberty and security. Organizations such as the NRA are too hostile to compromise and evidence. However, I would oppose any effort to restrict gun ownership outside of a reasonable cause (mental incapacity or previous criminal record).

The GCF organizations are even more hostile, less prone to compromise, and often noted for manufacturing evidence to support their cause (while ignoring any evidence that doesn't).

[Vandario]

I think my signature tells where i stand, and will leave with the quote part from my signature "A free people is an armed people, because only an armed people has the means to remain free. Slaves are forbidden weapons; free people carry them openly. A society in which only the police carry weapons is a police state."

[Prussia-Steinbach]

Absolutely not. Keep it as is. And strike down local laws banning possession of guns or open carry.

[Sevvania]

Organizations such as the NRA are too hostile to compromise.

I think I kinda agree with you in that the NRA could be considered a bit extremist in their views. Personally, I don't really like the NRA even though I'm in favor of gun rights. But I feel like they're a necessary entity, because of opposition that can be equally extreme and nonsensical on the other end of the spectrum. So I guess as long as we have one side advocating that "The only thing that can stop a bad guy with a gun is a good guy with a gun," and the other side advocating that black rifles are fully-automatic murder machines, things'll kinda balance out.

[Steamtopia]

Scrap it. Not because guns should be entirely banned, but because gun ownership shouldn't be an inherent right.

[Caille]

I fully support the second amendment, and believe that individuals have the right to own firearms.

That said, it is wise to have certain safety policies in place. Universal background checks and reviewing firearm transfers are good mediums between liberty and security. Organizations such as the NRA are too hostile to compromise and evidence. However, I would oppose any effort to restrict gun ownership outside of a reasonable cause (mental incapacity or previous criminal record).

The GCF organizations are even more hostile, less prone to compromise, and often noted for manufacturing evidence to support their cause (while ignoring any evidence that doesn't).

If what you say is substantiated, then I agree. It goes both ways, hence why I identify strongly as a centrist.

[United Prefectures of Appia]

None of the anti- or pro-gun arguments seem to address the real issue.

We suck. We as a people, Americans, suck. Our culture produces killers. Gun crime isn't inherent to owning or not owning guns. It's inherent to cultures, which is why laws and restrictions don't work. Some facet of liberal culture seems to be driving people to gun-crime, apparently. Many of the cities with high gun crime in the states are predominantly liberal and have liberal government leadership presiding. Some of them have extremely strict gun laws as well (See: Chicago). Those cities with looser gun laws and predominantly conservative leadership experience less gun crime.
Removing guns from the equation or controlling them harsher doesn't remove the fact that our culture produces killers. You're always going to have some, obviously.
Other nations don't have the problems we do, though admittedly we aren't actually all that bad when it comes to crime. We could be much worse off.

You can trace gun problems by following the money and in the end, it shares many of the same problem in American government, influence of money corrupts politics. The politicians seeking to deregulate more and more gun control laws, whose pockets do you think they're in, hmm? Lemme give you a hint, the murdering culprit's name has 3 letters.

BTW, the gun issues in Chicago only supports the arguments of gun control advocates, NOT gun rights activists! Same goes for Switzerland.

[New Skaaneland]

Hold on to your rights.

[Ehhhhhhhh]

Pew Research Center recently found that 2 years after Newtown there was a slight increase in the number of people who support the right to own guns and a slight decrease in the amount of people who think there should be a control on gun ownership.

52% say it is more important to protect the right of Americans to own guns, while 46% say it is more important to control gun ownership

They also found

a shift in attitudes about whether gun ownership in this country does more to protect people or put people’s safety at risk. Nearly six-in-ten Americans (57%) say gun ownership does more to protect people from becoming victims of crime, while 38% say it does more to endanger personal safety. In the days after Newtown, 48% said guns do more to protect people and 37% said they placed people at risk

This is interesting because most people I know believe it is the opposite.

Source:

http://www.people-press.org/2014/12/10/growing-public-support-for-gun-rights/

[Occupied Deutschland]

None of the anti- or pro-gun arguments seem to address the real issue.

We suck. We as a people, Americans, suck. Our culture produces killers. Gun crime isn't inherent to owning or not owning guns. It's inherent to cultures, which is why laws and restrictions don't work. Some facet of liberal culture seems to be driving people to gun-crime, apparently. Many of the cities with high gun crime in the states are predominantly liberal and have liberal government leadership presiding. Some of them have extremely strict gun laws as well (See: Chicago). Those cities with looser gun laws and predominantly conservative leadership experience less gun crime.
Removing guns from the equation or controlling them harsher doesn't remove the fact that our culture produces killers. You're always going to have some, obviously.
Other nations don't have the problems we do, though admittedly we aren't actually all that bad when it comes to crime. We could be much worse off.

You can trace gun problems by following the money and in the end, it shares many of the same problem in American government, influence of money corrupts politics. The politicians seeking to deregulate more and more gun control laws, whose pockets do you think they're in, hmm? Lemme give you a hint, the murdering culprit's name has 3 letters...

Yes, a civil rights organization opposes additional actions that infringe on civil rights. What a shock.
It's odd that they, and all those politicians who they have in their pocket, don't seem interested in repealing the NFA act, the 1938 Federal Firearms Act, the '68 gun control act, the Hughes Amendment, the Undetectable Firearms Act or the Brady Gun Control Act, though. In fact, the NRA, and most of these supposed politicians they have in their pocket, have even voiced their support for these laws, with some criticism of specific elements where changes could occur to make things more efficient, fair, or effective. Either that or they have just remained silent, such as in the case of the NRA wrt the Undetectable Firearms Act. I should think It would be hard for there to be a pro-gun conspiracy to repeal gun-control laws if they don't talk about something. Or is the NRA capable of telepathically pushing for these things and you just can't 'hear' it?
...
Seems more likely you just want a boogeyman you can attribute a conspiracy to...It's also rather telling you don't seem to bemoan the presence of money in politics when it comes from Bloomberg. But it seems corruption of money in politics only occurs within the group that has the telepathic nonverbally-communicatted conspiracy contradicting their verbal and written public statements and stances on the matter.