Second Amendment Repeal / Gun Control

[Gun Manufacturers]

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.

ATF?

[Sevvania]

@United Prefectures of Appia: I can't think of any politicians who have been pushing for the de-regulation of firearms. What does come to mind, though, is an uncomfortable number of politicians who use ignorance, misinformation, and untruths to lobby against aesthetics.

[Kernen]

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.

That's a very interesting reversal of your previously held opinion. Heartening, too.

If you're ever looking to cure some of that discomfort, and if you ever get the chance to go with somebody you trust, try going out to a shooting range and plinking with something manageable, like a .22LR. You may just find that you have a lot of fun.

[Robert Magoo]

The second amendment isn't the problem, but it's interpretation. It doesn't grant any rights. It only says that the federal government can't legislate where guns are concerned. States can, or at least, are supposed to be able to. Federal government trying to force them to recognize "gun rights" is a violation in itself. I say this as somebody who is very pro-gun, and thinks most gun laws are a bad idea. But they aren't all a bad idea. Federal gun laws are completely unconstitutional though. The NFA, departments like the ATF, etc. have no constitutional basis. There was nothing truly against the second amendment though in the near-ban that existed in Chicago, for example. The supreme court just decided they didn't like that, when it's really not their business, but the business of Chicago and Illinois, and their citizens.

[United Prefectures of Appia]

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.

Oh yeah you're right, back in the good 'ol days when NRA was actually a legitimate organization that cared about gun control reforms and helped pushed said laws into action like the ones you mention [cough]even though you 'failed' to mention that in the late 70's some of the nra members who were extreme right-wingers toppled the leadership overnight in a coup de tat and perverted everything the NRA once stood fo and now two union soldiers who fought in the american civil war are now rolling in their graves.[/cough]

Yeah you think any gun control laws passed today isn't gonna be underminded in some ways or another? A couple of years ago when the White House were discussing what measure to increase gun control, they turned into pavlov mongrels begging to suck Walmart's smelly dick to pass these gun control reforms and in exchange, they could make profit by allowing firearms to be sold in their retail stores. The only boogeymen that exist the US are in the paranoid minds of gun nuts who are willing to shoot anything that moves, and alot that don't. If you really think money in politics corrupting the government isn't on the top of the list of America's major problems, then I suggest you get with the program unless you wanna drown in a sea of old fart knockers that make up the vast majority of Faux News viewers.

[Sevvania]

Again, personally, not a big fan of the NRA, but between your post and Occupied Deutschland's, it looks like the NRA helped pass some reasonable gun laws (but you seem to dismiss these because they happened in the past), while most of the proposed gun control laws I see today are silly things like "assault weapons" bans that fail to address the issue in a meaningful, beneficial way in favor of appealing to the fears of the uninformed.

[Robert Magoo]

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.

Oh yeah you're right, back in the good 'ol days when NRA was actually a legitimate organization that cared about gun control reforms and helped pushed said laws into action like the ones you mention [cough]even though you 'failed' to mention that in the late 70's some of the nra members who were extreme right-wingers toppled the leadership overnight in a coup de tat and perverted everything the NRA once stood fo and now two union soldiers who fought in the american civil war are now rolling in their graves.[/cough]

Yeah you think any gun control laws passed today isn't gonna be underminded in some ways or another? A couple of years ago when the White House were discussing what measure to increase gun control, they turned into pavlov mongrels begging to suck Walmart's smelly dick to pass these gun control reforms and in exchange, they could make profit by allowing firearms to be sold in their retail stores. The only boogeymen that exist the US are in the paranoid minds of gun nuts who are willing to shoot anything that moves, and alot that don't. If you really think money in politics corrupting the government isn't on the top of the list of America's major problems, then I suggest you get with the program unless you wanna drown in a sea of old fart knockers that make up the vast majority of Faux News viewers.

There are gun rights organizations far more "extreme" than the NRA, like, for example, the National Association for Gun Rights. You might have some legitimate points if you went after them instead.

[United Prefectures of Appia]

Again, personally, not a big fan of the NRA, but between your post and Occupied Deutschland's, it looks like the NRA helped pass some reasonable gun laws (but you seem to dismiss these because they happened in the past), while most of the proposed gun control laws I see today are silly things like "assault weapons" bans that fail to address the issue in a meaningful, beneficial way in favor of appealing to the fears of the uninformed.

I haven't dismissed NRA's past actions, did you read my post? Or were you referring to Occupied Deutschland?

...while most of the proposed gun control laws I see today are silly things like "assault weapons" bans that fail to address the issue in a meaningful, beneficial way in favor of appealing to the fears of the uninformed.

And I'm pretty sure these silly and ineffective measures are the type the NRA and gun makers wanted in the first place. Again, you think they wouldn't try to undermine the efforts of any gun laws being passed into legislation?

[United Prefectures of Appia]

There are gun rights organizations far more "extreme" than the NRA, like, for example, the National Association for Gun Rights. You might have some legitimate points if you went after them instead.

I wouldn't be surprise if there are fringe gun nut organizations like the one you just mention, but don't expect to give NRA a free pass. Sorry pal, but no dice.

[Sevvania]

Again, personally, not a big fan of the NRA, but between your post and Occupied Deutschland's, it looks like the NRA helped pass some reasonable gun laws (but you seem to dismiss these because they happened in the past), while most of the proposed gun control laws I see today are silly things like "assault weapons" bans that fail to address the issue in a meaningful, beneficial way in favor of appealing to the fears of the uninformed.

I haven't dismissed NRA's past actions, did you read my post? Or were you referring to Occupied Deutschland?

...while most of the proposed gun control laws I see today are silly things like "assault weapons" bans that fail to address the issue in a meaningful, beneficial way in favor of appealing to the fears of the uninformed.

And I'm pretty sure these silly and ineffective measures are the type the NRA and gun makers wanted in the first place. Again, you think they wouldn't try to undermine the efforts of any gun laws being passed into legislation?

You referred to the NRA as the puppetmaster behind politicians seeking to deregulate firearms, when, as Occupied Deutschland pointed out, it seems that they actually helped put reasonable regulations into place.

Why in the world would the NRA and/or gun manufacturers want an "assault weapons" ban? Surely they try to undermine efforts to pass such laws, not simply due to a knee-jerk "WE MUST OPPOSE ALL GUN CONTROL" mentality, but because such bans are silly and arbitrary and infringe upon law-abiding gun owners while having little-to-no measurable effects on gun crime rates.

[Gun Manufacturers]

I haven't dismissed NRA's past actions, did you read my post? Or were you referring to Occupied Deutschland?


And I'm pretty sure these silly and ineffective measures are the type the NRA and gun makers wanted in the first place. Again, you think they wouldn't try to undermine the efforts of any gun laws being passed into legislation?

You referred to the NRA as the puppetmaster behind politicians seeking to deregulate firearms, when, as Occupied Deutschland pointed out, it seems that they actually helped put reasonable regulations into place.

Why in the world would the NRA and/or gun manufacturers want an "assault weapons" ban? Surely they try to undermine efforts to pass such laws, not simply due to a knee-jerk "WE MUST OPPOSE ALL GUN CONTROL" mentality, but because such bans are silly and arbitrary and infringe upon law-abiding gun owners while having little-to-no measurable effects on gun crime rates.

I can't stand the current one in CT. Of course, after Sandy Hook, there was NO WAY our Democrat Governor and Democrat (super-majority) General ASSembly wasn't going to pass something even more ridiculous than we already had. At least we didn't go FULL RETARD like NY did with the SAFE Act.

[United Prefectures of Appia]

You referred to the NRA as the puppetmaster behind politicians seeking to deregulate firearms

Because they are. But the true puppetmasters however are actual gun makers.

it seems that they actually helped put reasonable regulations into place.

Did you read my post, I've already acknowledged their efforts to push for gun control laws, unless of course you're referring to periods after the '70's in which case I haven't found any example where the NRA pushed for gun control reforms yet.

Why in the world would the NRA and/or gun manufacturers want an "assault weapons" ban? Surely they try to undermine efforts to pass such laws

Never heard of diluting an alcohol drink with water?

not simply due to a knee-jerk "WE MUST OPPOSE ALL GUN CONTROL" mentality, but because such bans are silly and arbitrary and infringe upon law-abiding gun owners while having little-to-no measurable effects on gun crime rates.

I don't advocate bans on all guns, just reasonable gun control laws like other civilized developed first world nations have. Leave the knee-jerking mentality to gun nuts.

[Spirit of Hope]

You referred to the NRA as the puppetmaster behind politicians seeking to deregulate firearms

Because they are. But the true puppetmasters however are actual gun makers.

it seems that they actually helped put reasonable regulations into place.

Did you read my post, I've already acknowledged their efforts to push for gun control laws, unless of course you're referring to periods after the '70's in which case I haven't found any example where the NRA pushed for gun control reforms yet.

Why in the world would the NRA and/or gun manufacturers want an "assault weapons" ban? Surely they try to undermine efforts to pass such laws

Never heard of diluting an alcohol drink with water?

not simply due to a knee-jerk "WE MUST OPPOSE ALL GUN CONTROL" mentality, but because such bans are silly and arbitrary and infringe upon law-abiding gun owners while having little-to-no measurable effects on gun crime rates.

I don't advocate bans on all guns, just reasonable gun control laws like other civilized developed first world nations have. Leave the knee-jerking mentality to gun nuts.

What is reasonable gun control laws? Because what I believe is reasonable and what you believe are reasonable are probably very different.

[The Empire of Pretantia]

Because they are. But the true puppetmasters however are actual gun makers.


Did you read my post, I've already acknowledged their efforts to push for gun control laws, unless of course you're referring to periods after the '70's in which case I haven't found any example where the NRA pushed for gun control reforms yet.


Never heard of diluting an alcohol drink with water?


I don't advocate bans on all guns, just reasonable gun control laws like other civilized developed first world nations have. Leave the knee-jerking mentality to gun nuts.

What is reasonable gun control laws? Because what I believe is reasonable and what you believe are reasonable are probably very different.

Isn't he the guy who said we should hunt with paintball guns?

[Gun Manufacturers]

What is reasonable gun control laws? Because what I believe is reasonable and what you believe are reasonable are probably very different.

Isn't he the guy who said we should hunt with paintball guns?

No, that's someone else.

[The Empire of Pretantia]

Isn't he the guy who said we should hunt with paintball guns?

No, that's someone else.

Ah, you're right. Sorry.

[Sevvania]

I don't understand your parralels between the alleged support for assault weapons ban from the NRA and diluting alcohol.

Everyone wants "reasonable" gun control laws. But what some people view as "reasonable," others view as "ridiculous". Hence the debate.

You say "Leave the knee-jerking mentality to gun nuts" as if the issue of finding a balance between gun control and gun rights can be simplified to a simple black-and-white perspective of "This side is good and that side is bad, and what one side might do from time to time, the other side would totally never do".

[United Prefectures of Appia]

What is reasonable gun control laws? Because what I believe is reasonable and what you believe are reasonable are probably very different.

How about for one, stop giving dangerous firearms to kids like fucking candy. Too bad common sense is not ubiquitous in 'Murica. Implement bullet microstamping on all guns sold. Hell, let's make this easier, why not follow some of the gun laws in Australia for example?

[Robert Magoo]

What is reasonable gun control laws? Because what I believe is reasonable and what you believe are reasonable are probably very different.

How about for one, stop giving dangerous firearms to kids like fucking candy. Too bad common sense is not ubiquitous in 'Murica. Implement bullet microstamping on all guns sold. Hell, let's make this easier, why not follow some of the gun laws in Australia for example?

Microstamping is virtually impossible, and meant (by its creators, not necessarily all supporters like yourself) as a backdoor method of effectively banning guns altogether.

[United Prefectures of Appia]

I don't understand your parralels between the alleged support for assault weapons ban from the NRA and diluting alcohol.

It means that they'll put their hands in legislation and revise it so much that by the time it's passed, the law itself becomes ineffective and moot after having any effective measures removed prior to passing it. They do this with education as well.

[Spirit of Hope]

What is reasonable gun control laws? Because what I believe is reasonable and what you believe are reasonable are probably very different.

How about for one, stop giving dangerous firearms to kids like fucking candy. Too bad common sense is not ubiquitous in 'Murica. Implement bullet microstamping on all guns sold. Hell, let's make this easier, why not follow some of the gun laws in Australia for example?

Where do we hand out firearms like "fucking candy?

What will bullet microstamping add? I don't necessarily think it is bad but wonder about it.

What Australian gun laws? The ones banning, buying and destroying a large number of firearms? The one that has had little to no effect on gun homicide and a debatable effect on gun suicide?

[The Empire of Pretantia]

What is reasonable gun control laws? Because what I believe is reasonable and what you believe are reasonable are probably very different.

How about for one, stop giving dangerous firearms to kids like fucking candy.

We don't

Too bad common sense is not ubiquitous in 'Murica.

I take offense to that.

Implement bullet microstamping on all guns sold. Hell, let's make this easier, why not follow some of the gun laws in Australia for example?

We've been over this. Australia's gun ban shows little evidence of improvement.

[United Prefectures of Appia]

Microstamping is virtually impossible, and meant (by its creators, not necessarily all supporters like yourself) as a backdoor method of effectively banning guns altogether.

That is a complete lie from the righties. They've been testing this experiment for several years and it has proven to be effective. Smith and Wesson got a hissy fit when California was proposing to implement this technology. So like little snot-faced temper-tantrum whiny brats, they threatened to pull their business out of the state, the 7th largest economy in the country.

[United Prefectures of Appia]

We've been over this. Australia's gun ban shows little evidence of improvement.

Apparently you haven't. Australia's gun control laws were very effective. When was the last time they had a mass gun murder that even came close to the one that slaughtered the town over 20 years ago?

[Robert Magoo]

Microstamping is virtually impossible, and meant (by its creators, not necessarily all supporters like yourself) as a backdoor method of effectively banning guns altogether.

That is a complete lie from the righties. They've been testing this experiment for several years and it has proven to be effective. Smith and Wesson got a hissy fit when California was proposing to implement this technology. So like little snot-faced temper-tantrum whiny brats, they threatened to pull their business out of the state, the 7th largest economy in the country.

Yes, they've been testing it. It can be done, but not at scale. Every single firing pin has to be made unique. That's not even close to realistic. It wasn't a hissy fit, but a realization that to continue selling in California would mean either MASSIVELY more expensive guns, or losing tons of money on California gun sales.