Second Amendment Repeal / Gun Control

[Washington Resistance Army]

Like hell nuclear warheads preserved peace! Their proliferation nearly ended the human race before you were even born. Don't give that kind of shit. You may think gun control advocates are fools, but remember that they are the ones learning at the top schools while Farmer Joe (by no fault of his own) can't send his kids to high school.

"What's a barrel shroud, and why should they be regulated?"
"I actually don't know what a barrel shroud is."
"Because it's in your legislation..."
"I believe it's a shoulder thing that goes up."

Top schools, amirite?

Thanks for that, I needed a laugh.

[Scomagia]

Like hell nuclear warheads preserved peace! Their proliferation nearly ended the human race before you were even born. Don't give that kind of shit. You may think gun control advocates are fools, but remember that they are the ones learning at the top schools while Farmer Joe (by no fault of his own) can't send his kids to high school.

I can't seem to recall the big players on the world stage getting into wars with each other since the advent of Nuclear Weapons. Must be coincidence, eh?

High schools in most developed countries are free. Also, Farmer Joe likely earns more than you think. Agriculture is a lucrative business.

Lastly, if you're going to continue posting (and I have a terrible feeling in my stomach that you are) you'd do well to use that handy little reply button in people's posts.

[Oil exporting People]

Like hell nuclear warheads preserved peace! Their proliferation nearly ended the human race before you were even born. Don't give that kind of shit. You may think gun control advocates are fools, but remember that they are the ones learning at the top schools while Farmer Joe (by no fault of his own) can't send his kids to high school.

First off, let's recall the last time major nations went ape on each other was in WWII, and that was right before the invention of atomic munitions. Since that time, no German armies have invaded France, the Russkies haven't attempted to push through the Fulda Gap, the Chinese wearily accept Taiwan's current status, etc... In short, MAD has indeed kept another major bloodbath from happening. For all the tragedy of say, the Vietnam War or Iraq 2003, the death tolls have been nowhere near the killing fields of Flanders a hundred years ago or Nanking in 1937.

Next, most of those kids going to top schools are unemployed or make a lot less than the average farmer. Successful farmers can make bank big time in this day and age.

[Scomagia]

Like hell nuclear warheads preserved peace! Their proliferation nearly ended the human race before you were even born. Don't give that kind of shit. You may think gun control advocates are fools, but remember that they are the ones learning at the top schools while Farmer Joe (by no fault of his own) can't send his kids to high school.

They did in fact avert many potential armed conflicts with their presence on numerous occasions.

>defensive about people allegedly thinking gun control advocates are fools
>proceeds to stereotype all pro gun advocates as uneducated farmers

Stay classy.

Considering his record of shitposts, are you surprised?

[Bezkoshtovnya]

They did in fact avert many potential armed conflicts with their presence on numerous occasions.

>defensive about people allegedly thinking gun control advocates are fools
>proceeds to stereotype all pro gun advocates as uneducated farmers

Stay classy.

Considering his record of shitposts, are you surprised?

Nothing much surprises me on NSG anymore.

[Wallenburg]

> Claims that I stereotype gun nuts when I am simply using hypothetical examples
> Extrapolates to generalize about gun control advocates, aka stereotyping
Top notch logic.

[The United Dark Republic]

The problem isn't guns.

It's fucktarded people with fucked brains that think they can kill anyone they want.

The absence of a gun is not going to change someone's fucked up brain, their brain is fucked they are fucked they are going to do some fuckery one way or another

I agree entirely, however I wouldn't have been so blunt in saying it.

[Bezkoshtovnya]

> Claims that I stereotype gun nuts when I am simply using hypothetical examples
> Extrapolates to generalize about gun control advocates, aka stereotyping
Top notch logic.

Your "hypothetical example" is nothing but stereotyping, and that is not hard to see. Especially given your history to do such things to the pro gun crowd in this thread.

[Sevvania]

> Claims that I stereotype gun nuts when I am simply using hypothetical examples
> Extrapolates to generalize about gun control advocates, aka stereotyping
Top notch logic.

You basically seem to be saying that your arguments are directed against a hypothetical, exaggerated image of some uneducated hillperson who's incapable of accepting basic logic, rather than actual pro-gun rights advocates.

Are you really allowed to criticize the logic of other people so soon after saying that your opinion is more valid than a Supreme Court decision, though?

[Wallenburg]

Yes, nuclear weapons were a key factor in preserving peace! Militaristic logic: if you can destroy the world, people won't fuck with you.
Because we had the Cuban Missile Crisis in the bag...DEFCON 2 is so overrated...

[Galloism]

They did in fact avert many potential armed conflicts with their presence on numerous occasions.

>defensive about people allegedly thinking gun control advocates are fools
>proceeds to stereotype all pro gun advocates as uneducated farmers

Stay classy.

Considering his record of shitposts, are you surprised?

Well, and what's terribly interesting is that those with the highest AND lowest education tend to before more in favor more gun control, while those who have only some college tend to be more in favor of gun rights.

http://www.pewresearch.org/files/old-as ... l-2011.pdf

Also age is an interesting factor: older people tend to be more in favor of gun rights, while younger ones in favor of more control. Also, those at the top of the income scale and the very bottom of the income scale favor more control, while those in the middle favor more rights. Married people tend to favor more rights, while single people tend to favor more control.

It's really not an intelligence thing. Lots of factors.

[Bezkoshtovnya]

Yes, nuclear weapons were a key factor in preserving peace! Militaristic logic: if you can destroy the world, people won't fuck with you.
Because we had the Cuban Missile Crisis in the bag...DEFCON 2 is so overrated...

As has already been stated numerous times, name how many times major powers engaged in armed conflict with one another after the production of nuclear weapons. As much as I do not exactly approve of nuclear weapons myself, I am not blind to this fact.

[Sevvania]

Yes, nuclear weapons were a key factor in preserving peace! Militaristic logic: if you can destroy the world, people won't fuck with you.
Because we had the Cuban Missile Crisis in the bag...DEFCON 2 is so overrated...

The Cuban Missile Crisis is what caused the United States to go to full-scale war with the Soviet Union + Cuba.*

*Except not really.

[Roski]

Yes, nuclear weapons were a key factor in preserving peace! Militaristic logic: if you can destroy the world, people won't fuck with you.
Because we had the Cuban Missile Crisis in the bag...DEFCON 2 is so overrated...

The Cuban Missile Crisis was resolved when American flew F-14s in with nuclear-tipped Air-to-Ground missiles over the Soviet Fleet attempting to defend Cuba.

[Wallenburg]

And what was your image of the gun control advocate?
Oh yeah, a shaggy guy in baggy, multicolored clothes, smoking pot, and carrying a peace sign.
Yeah, you're really hitting the mark on accurate depiction of your opponent.

This is typical of people who refuse logic. Demand the opponent respects their image entirely, down to the minutiae, and then set up a straw man against those same opponents.

[Spirit of Hope]

Yes, nuclear weapons were a key factor in preserving peace! Militaristic logic: if you can destroy the world, people won't fuck with you.
Because we had the Cuban Missile Crisis in the bag...DEFCON 2 is so overrated...

So where is the nuclear war? Honestly the Cuban Missile Crisis did not bring the situation as close to nuclear war as people like to pretend.
Also since then steps have been taken to reduce the chance of nuclear war.

[Roski]

And what was your image of the gun control advocate?
Oh yeah, a shaggy guy in baggy, multicolored clothes, smoking pot, and carrying a peace sign.
Yeah, you're really hitting the mark on accurate depiction of your opponent.

This is typical of people who refuse logic. Demand the opponent respects their image entirely, down to the minutiae, and then set up a straw man against those same opponents.

Not a single person has said a single thing like that but you.

You are literally the only person making generalizations right now.

[Bezkoshtovnya]

And what was your image of the gun control advocate?
Oh yeah, a shaggy guy in baggy, multicolored clothes, smoking pot, and carrying a peace sign.
Yeah, you're really hitting the mark on accurate depiction of your opponent.

This is typical of people who refuse logic. Demand the opponent respects their image entirely, down to the minutiae, and then set up a straw man against those same opponents.

No one at all made a statement stereotyping control advocates in such a way.

You can hardly say people are refusing logic, when you have brought none to refuse in the first place.

[Wallenburg]

You assume that simply because nuclear proliferation did not bring about the end times that they not only couldn't have done so, but that they helped in averting nuclear war.
Nuclear weapons averted nuclear war.

[Roski]

You assume that simply because nuclear proliferation did not bring about the end times that they not only couldn't have done so, but that they helped in averting nuclear war.
Nuclear weapons averted nuclear war.

That doesn't make sense.

Please, I know you are what those children call "an offencive", but you're doing nothing more than making yourself look like an idiot on of the more non-reddit accessed sites.

[Sevvania]

And what was your image of the gun control advocate?
Oh yeah, a shaggy guy in baggy, multicolored clothes, smoking pot, and carrying a peace sign.
Yeah, you're really hitting the mark on accurate depiction of your opponent.

This is typical of people who refuse logic. Demand the opponent respects their image entirely, down to the minutiae, and then set up a straw man against those same opponents.

I don't recall trying to depict my opponent in any way, shape, manner, or form. I've just been pulling lines from your posts and linking/providing evidence that shows you why they're wrong. You then ignore this evidence and repeat your perspective in another way, and the process repeats itself. If you do respond to being proven wrong, your comment is, "Well, I'm not really wrong, the evidence is wrong." Even though you have no evidence of your own to support this stance.

[Kernen]

You assume that simply because nuclear proliferation did not bring about the end times that they not only couldn't have done so, but that they helped in averting nuclear war.
Nuclear weapons averted nuclear war.

And you argued that nuclear weapons had absolutely no basis in preventing the Cuban Missile Crisis. Incorrectly.

[Folgers]

Its not a sacred right.
Plenty of democracies don't have a right to bear arms constitutionalized. Clearly, it can be taken off the table without undue prejudice.

It is completely unnecessary. It does not defend gun rights. It reads "A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed."

This means that the right to bear arms is only meant to maintain state militias against invasion or federal tyranny. In the modern United States, the state militias are the individual National Guards for each state. Therefore, it does not defend individual ownership of weapons. If you really distrust the federal government and want to be able to defend your rights in the event of a dictatorship, join the national guard. Otherwise, gun ownership is a privilege that has gone too far already.

Individual gun owners are a menace to society. How do we know you won't overreact to someone "following" you and shoot them up like every other white guy in the South? (sarcasm, duh) How can we trust you not to go on a rampage at a school or an airport? How can you be sure you will keep your children away from your automatic weapons and light artillery? According to the Gun Violence Archive, 12495 people died in 2014 due to gun violence, 2979 of them children under the age of 18. Is your "god-given right" to carry firearms important enough to justify these statistics?

From this logic, I see no reason to repeal the Second Amendment, but I sure as hell see reason to restrict gun ownership to light firearms owned only by sane and well-tested individuals who can prove beyond a reasonable doubt that they can use a gun responsibly, and that they can keep it away from those who cannot.

It is completely unnecessary. It does not defend gun rights. It reads "A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed."

This means that the right to bear arms is only meant to maintain state militias against invasion or federal tyranny. In the modern United States, the state militias are the individual National Guards for each state. Therefore, it does not defend individual ownership of weapons. If you really distrust the federal government and want to be able to defend your rights in the event of a dictatorship, join the national guard. Otherwise, gun ownership is a privilege that has gone too far already.

I think you have forgotten who makes up the militia, THE PEOPLE. The National Guard is in place to help out in case of a natural disaster, uprising, and border protection. The national guard and a militia are two different things, the National Guard is a state run operation and a militia is a group of people who defend their town and is not run by a state or any kind of government, it is run by the members of it.

Individual gun owners are a menace to society. How do we know you won't overreact to someone "following" you and shoot them up like every other white guy in the South? (sarcasm, duh) How can we trust you not to go on a rampage at a school or an airport? How can you be sure you will keep your children away from your automatic weapons and light artillery? According to the Gun Violence Archive, 12495 people died in 2014 due to gun violence, 2979 of them children under the age of 18. Is your "god-given right" to carry firearms important enough to justify these statistics?

So by your logic I am a menace to society because I own firearms. If you do not trust the firearm owning society then your not trusting 45% percent of the American households. The only way for someone to be able to own a fully automatic weapon is if you have a class 3 license, pay a 200 dollar tax stamp, get finger printed, wait for a year and a half, register the firearm, and also pay the price for the gun. The only way to own artillery is by doing the same thing but you have to have a face to face interview with a ATF agent. The numbers you stated include gang shootings, police shootings, and defensive situations so those numbers are invalid and also the Gun Violence Archive is one sided on the issue so pick a better source.

From this logic, I see no reason to repeal the Second Amendment, but I sure as hell see reason to restrict gun ownership to light firearms owned only by sane and well-tested individuals who can prove beyond a reasonable doubt that they can use a gun responsibly, and that they can keep it away from those who cannot.

Gun ownership is already restricted to light firearms and the only way to own a heavy firearm is by doing paper work after paper work and having a lot of money. We cannot effectively keep firearms from the criminals and mentally unstable people, because there is such a thing as the black market.

[Wallenburg]

Really Roski, Besko? You haven't done anything to straw man me? Because it looks more like every other post against me is a straw man or ad hominem.

[Bezkoshtovnya]

You assume that simply because nuclear proliferation did not bring about the end times that they not only couldn't have done so, but that they helped in averting nuclear war.
Nuclear weapons averted nuclear war.

No one said anything like that. Please, stop making up shit to attack in lieu of attacking what is actually there. People hqbe merely stated that they have indeed preserved peace between powers in response to your claim that they did not. No one said they cannot possibly bring great destruction.