Gun Control

[Telconi]

The government tends to seize illegal property y'know.

Yeah but when ideally if they said "You can do this, it's now legal" they'd keep their word on it... And not turn around and decide that now you can't have what they said you could

[Senkaku]

If it turns out that nice shoes or wireless earbuds or whatever expensive accessories I have are actually menaces to society and intended to do nothing but make it easier for people to kill other people en masse at speed from long range, I'll gladly turn them over or destroy them when the government says to do so.

TIL bullet buttons make it easier to kill people...

Quote nesting is a bitch
I followed quotes back up as far as I could and it looked like we were discussing bump whatevers again, since above it was just a bunch of Keshiland's incoherent bullshit

[Senkaku]

The government tends to seize illegal property y'know.

Yeah but when ideally if they said "You can do this, it's now legal" they'd keep their word on it... And not turn around and decide that now you can't have what they said you could

Yeah, it's unfortunate and frustrating, but it happens. Pick a different hobby, if you're mad about changing regulations costing you money. Otherwise, that's just gonna be how things go sometimes.

[Telconi]

Yeah but when ideally if they said "You can do this, it's now legal" they'd keep their word on it... And not turn around and decide that now you can't have what they said you could

Yeah, it's unfortunate and frustrating, but it happens. Pick a different hobby, if you're mad about changing regulations costing you money. Otherwise, that's just gonna be how things go sometimes.

"Sorry black folks, voting is now prohibitively expensive, pick a different hobby"

^your view's in the Jim Crow south...

[Senkaku]

Yeah, it's unfortunate and frustrating, but it happens. Pick a different hobby, if you're mad about changing regulations costing you money. Otherwise, that's just gonna be how things go sometimes.

"Sorry black folks, voting is now prohibitively expensive, pick a different hobby"

^your view's in the Jim Crow south...

Nope! Try again, babe.

[Telconi]

"Sorry black folks, voting is now prohibitively expensive, pick a different hobby"

^your view's in the Jim Crow south...

Nope! Try again, babe.

But the law said they had to pay a poll tax... and sometimes laws do that. I think it's "just the way the cookie crumbles"

[Hurtful Thoughts]

Silencers is a question I struggle with. Any policy on silencers has to be Federal, not piecemeal state-by-state, but... on one hand, the use of silencers to lessen hearing loss and damage is perfectly legitimate and silencers don't work like Hollywood 'plink plink' kind of bullshit. It turns a roar into a bark. It's not exactly a sneaky-beaky murder weapon. On the other hand, turning a roar into a bark is sometimes enough combined with background ambiance to conceal the firing of a gun in circumstances where a gun should not be fired, which is... problematic.

*yawns*

Considering that while still well within lethal range of a firearm, many people tend to mistaken gunfire for fireworks; and vice-versa. The only other bit is it tends to make locating muzzle-flashes a tad near impossible. But not going deaf because you went hunting and didn't have time to cram an earplug in five seconds before shooting is a thing.

US military is seeing similar benefits for making suppressors as commonplace as red-dots and ACOGs. Not so much not being detected, as being able to resume a normal conversation after the shooting is over.

If it turns out that nice shoes or wireless earbuds or whatever expensive accessories I have are actually menaces to society and intended to do nothing but make it easier for people to kill other people en masse at speed from long range, I'll gladly turn them over or destroy them when the government says to do so.

It's not "seizing your property because reee muh ebul gubmint", it's declaring a thing illegal and telling you to destroy it or turn it in because it's a menace to public safety with no other purpose than to help murder people efficiently. And the bill hasn't even been put forward.

Water softeners tend to increase the amount of lead in drinking-water. Add that to a water-heater and you can have unsafe levels of lead if you prefer your water a bit on the pre-boiled side without fussing with those pesky radioactive microwaves.

And what bill are we proposing today, Senka-kun?

Because someone's going to have to go through the hilarity of amending/repealing one of the first ten constitunional amendments before anything will really get anywhere. (and then what about those other pesky nine?)
-We'd also need to line-item veto a few articles of the US Constitution, itself.

Not that it hasn't ever been done before, but we're still paying reparations for the war that got started when the 3/5ths compromise was repealed.

[Telconi]

Silencers is a question I struggle with. Any policy on silencers has to be Federal, not piecemeal state-by-state, but... on one hand, the use of silencers to lessen hearing loss and damage is perfectly legitimate and silencers don't work like Hollywood 'plink plink' kind of bullshit. It turns a roar into a bark. It's not exactly a sneaky-beaky murder weapon. On the other hand, turning a roar into a bark is sometimes enough combined with background ambiance to conceal the firing of a gun in circumstances where a gun should not be fired, which is... problematic.

*yawns*

Considering that while still well within lethal range of a firearm, many people tend to mistaken gunfire for fireworks; and vice-versa. The only other bit is it tends to make locating muzzle-flashes a tad near impossible. But not going deaf because you went hunting and didn't have time to cram an earplug in five seconds before shooting is a thing.

US military is seeing similar benefits for making suppressors as commonplace as red-dots and ACOGs. Not so much not being detected, as being able to resume a normal conversation after the shooting is over.

If it turns out that nice shoes or wireless earbuds or whatever expensive accessories I have are actually menaces to society and intended to do nothing but make it easier for people to kill other people en masse at speed from long range, I'll gladly turn them over or destroy them when the government says to do so.

It's not "seizing your property because reee muh ebul gubmint", it's declaring a thing illegal and telling you to destroy it or turn it in because it's a menace to public safety with no other purpose than to help murder people efficiently. And the bill hasn't even been put forward.

Water softeners tend to increase the amount of lead in drinking-water. Add that to a water-heater and you can have unsafe levels of lead if you prefer your water a bit on the pre-boiled side without fussing with those pesky radioactive microwaves.

And what bill are we proposing today, Senka-kun?

Because someone's going to have to go through the hilarity of amending/repealing one of the first ten constitunional amendments before anything will really get anywhere. (and then what about those other pesky nine?)
-We'd also need to line-item veto a few articles of the US Constitution, itself.

You'd think the constitution might cause trouble, but every judge appointed by an executive with a "D" after their name seems to think that keeping and bearing arms doesn't fall within the right to keep and bear arms...

[Bombadil]

You'd think the constitution might cause trouble, but every judge appointed by an executive with a "D" after their name seems to think that keeping and bearing arms doesn't fall within the right to keep and bear arms...

No one does, all sorts of arms are illegal to own.

[Zakuvia]

*yawns*

Considering that while still well within lethal range of a firearm, many people tend to mistaken gunfire for fireworks; and vice-versa. The only other bit is it tends to make locating muzzle-flashes a tad near impossible. But not going deaf because you went hunting and didn't have time to cram an earplug in five seconds before shooting is a thing.

US military is seeing similar benefits for making suppressors as commonplace as red-dots and ACOGs. Not so much not being detected, as being able to resume a normal conversation after the shooting is over.


Water softeners tend to increase the amount of lead in drinking-water. Add that to a water-heater and you can have unsafe levels of lead if you prefer your water a bit on the pre-boiled side without fussing with those pesky radioactive microwaves.

And what bill are we proposing today, Senka-kun?

Because someone's going to have to go through the hilarity of amending/repealing one of the first ten constitunional amendments before anything will really get anywhere. (and then what about those other pesky nine?)
-We'd also need to line-item veto a few articles of the US Constitution, itself.

You'd think the constitution might cause trouble, but every judge appointed by an executive with a "D" after their name seems to think that keeping and bearing arms doesn't fall within the right to keep and bear arms...

I think it's more about the idea of how 'well-regulated militias' aren't a thing in the 21st Century, and how that Amendment only applied to them.

[Hurtful Thoughts]

You'd think the constitution might cause trouble, but every judge appointed by an executive with a "D" after their name seems to think that keeping and bearing arms doesn't fall within the right to keep and bear arms...

I think it's more about the idea of how 'well-regulated militias' aren't a thing in the 21st Century, and how that Amendment only applied to them.

Trump-wagon

Section 3. Definitions.

(a) “Militia” has the meaning given the term in Title 10, Section 311 of the United States Code to include the Unorganized Militia, as well as the meaning given to the term “Militia” under equivalent State statutes.

The militia of the United States consists of all able-bodied males at least 17 years of
age and, except as provided in section 313 of title 32, under 45 years of age who are, or
who have made a declaration of intention to become, citizens of the United States and of
female citizens of the United States who are members of the National Guard.

Unorganized militia removes the Nat'l Gaurd stipulation for women.

[Telconi]

You'd think the constitution might cause trouble, but every judge appointed by an executive with a "D" after their name seems to think that keeping and bearing arms doesn't fall within the right to keep and bear arms...

I think it's more about the idea of how 'well-regulated militias' aren't a thing in the 21st Century, and how that Amendment only applied to them.

Except they are a thing. And it doesn't only apply to them. 0/2 but you get a gentleman's C- for effort.

[Senkaku]

*yawns*

Considering that while still well within lethal range of a firearm, many people tend to mistaken gunfire for fireworks; and vice-versa. The only other bit is it tends to make locating muzzle-flashes a tad near impossible. But not going deaf because you went hunting and didn't have time to cram an earplug in five seconds before shooting is a thing.

US military is seeing similar benefits for making suppressors as commonplace as red-dots and ACOGs. Not so much not being detected, as being able to resume a normal conversation after the shooting is over.


Water softeners tend to increase the amount of lead in drinking-water. Add that to a water-heater and you can have unsafe levels of lead if you prefer your water a bit on the pre-boiled side without fussing with those pesky radioactive microwaves.

And what bill are we proposing today, Senka-kun?

Because someone's going to have to go through the hilarity of amending/repealing one of the first ten constitunional amendments before anything will really get anywhere. (and then what about those other pesky nine?)
-We'd also need to line-item veto a few articles of the US Constitution, itself.

You'd think the constitution might cause trouble, but every judge appointed by an executive with a "D" after their name seems to think that keeping and bearing arms doesn't fall within the right to keep and bear arms...

"those democrats confiscated my nuclear arms after i spent millions to buy them from some sketch russian dude! i'm outraged this violates muh rights"

[Ifreann]

The GOP says bump-stocks might be worth banning. There, see? They do care.

about damn time, also you know what they should ban, pink, yellow, red, blue, green, orange, or purple colored guns, you know the ones that attract children!

That's no fun. What you do is require that all guns carried in public be fluorescent pink. Call it a safety feature, lets people see guns from afar, but really it's to troll super-serious militia types.

[Holy Tedalonia]

about damn time, also you know what they should ban, pink, yellow, red, blue, green, orange, or purple colored guns, you know the ones that attract children!

That's no fun. What you do is require that all guns carried in public be fluorescent pink. Call it a safety feature, lets people see guns from afar, but really it's to troll super-serious militia types.

[Ecanya]

am i the only nation that never agree to use any type of gun that hes enemys use,and use the guns that are made by us

[Ecanya]

am i the only nation that doesnt use any weapon or guns that hes enemies use,and use weapons or guns that are made by us

[Holy Tedalonia]

Farn's right though. It's all pretty moot. Despite the pro-gun crowd crapping themselves at the thought of an accessory being banned, the gun debate in the US has already been won by them.

The best that can be hoped for is some reasonable concessions that most of us can agree on, like background checks and the like. Obviously those would not have stopped the LV shooting, since Paddock would have passed any and all such health and background checks. The things which would have prevented it (heavy gun control or banning guns - all of the guns and accessories used were apparently legally obtained) are unacceptable to most of American culture, and so it is what it is.

I'll still support sensible gun control measures, but in the end that horse has already bolted.

There is background checks

[Holy Tedalonia]

I know automatic weapons are legal, but honestly you can't even get good automatic weapons anymore, since you can't buy ones past 1986 since a very important bill specifically says new automatics can't be bought, and I'm not even mentioning the amount of background checks and health checks into getting one.

[Sovaal]

You'd think the constitution might cause trouble, but every judge appointed by an executive with a "D" after their name seems to think that keeping and bearing arms doesn't fall within the right to keep and bear arms...

"those democrats confiscated my nuclear arms after i spent millions to buy them from some sketch russian dude! i'm outraged this violates muh rights"

>Comparing nukes to guns
Thing is, they are in noway at all comparable. Nuclear weapons require such an immense amount of infrastructure and personnel to support it that if a private entity was even capable of actually use on it really doesn't matter if it's legal or not, as they would obviously be above the law.

[Telconi]

"those democrats confiscated my nuclear arms after i spent millions to buy them from some sketch russian dude! i'm outraged this violates muh rights"

>Comparing nukes to guns
Thing is, they are in noway at all comparable. Nuclear weapons require such an immense amount of infrastructure and personnel to support it that if a private entity was even capable of actually use on it really doesn't matter if it's legal or not, as they would obviously be above the law.

But if the straw man is big enough then victory counts for something right?

[Ifreann]

"those democrats confiscated my nuclear arms after i spent millions to buy them from some sketch russian dude! i'm outraged this violates muh rights"

>Comparing nukes to guns
Thing is, they are in noway at all comparable. Nuclear weapons require such an immense amount of infrastructure and personnel to support it that if a private entity was even capable of actually use on it really doesn't matter if it's legal or not, as they would obviously be above the law.

Countless billions in infrastructure and personnel support required.

[Sovaal]

>Comparing nukes to guns
Thing is, they are in noway at all comparable. Nuclear weapons require such an immense amount of infrastructure and personnel to support it that if a private entity was even capable of actually use on it really doesn't matter if it's legal or not, as they would obviously be above the law.

Countless billions in infrastructure and personnel support required.

Well shit, the Fat Man exists. Still appears to be a crewed service weapon, nor would I expect such weapons to be cheap, putting it in the realm of people who have enough power to not care about laws.

[Spirit of Hope]

>Comparing nukes to guns
Thing is, they are in noway at all comparable. Nuclear weapons require such an immense amount of infrastructure and personnel to support it that if a private entity was even capable of actually use on it really doesn't matter if it's legal or not, as they would obviously be above the law.

Countless billions in infrastructure and personnel support required.

You seem to be missing the fact that you need the equipment to make the nuclear warhead, something nations have taken decades and millions of dollars to do. The only way to make a usable warhead either requires your own nuclear reactor, or buying up/building centrifuges who's only purpose is for enriching nuclear materials and are incredibly expensive and complex. And you need a lot of them.

[Stonok]

>Comparing nukes to guns
Thing is, they are in noway at all comparable. Nuclear weapons require such an immense amount of infrastructure and personnel to support it that if a private entity was even capable of actually use on it really doesn't matter if it's legal or not, as they would obviously be above the law.

Countless billions in infrastructure and personnel support required.

That thing was in Metal Gear Solid 3. "Remember the Alamo!