Page 1 of 358

Gun Control III - the Gunnening

PostPosted: Tue Mar 27, 2018 1:59 pm
by Len Hyet
Previously, on Gun Control.

Part I, Part II

Original Post & Thread by Conservative Morality:


Been gone from NSG recovering from a little accident (nothing major) so I thought I'd return to the forums with a true classic - gun control.

I speak on this issue as an American, and thus I necessarily refer back to the 2nd Amendment here. The 2nd Amendment is culturally important - practically, less so. In an age of effective nonlethal self-defense weapons, 'self-defense' rings somewhat hollow as a justification; in an age of the MIC, 'combat readiness' for the civilian population doubly so; and anyone who thinks that their militia is going to resist the tyranny of the Feds with small arms is loony enough that they probably shouldn't own any guns. One must remember that even in the American Revolutionary War it was not private firearms which provided the majority of the firepower of American forces; such firearm ownership was primarily the province of skirmishers and some irregulars.

I could care less, to be honest, about long guns. We aren't the Wild West. We aren't some wartorn third-world country. Even fully automatic long guns don't concern me too much. Our problems with firearms are overwhelmingly concerned with the tracking of individuals who misuse them, not so much the disarmament of individuals with firearms. We don't live in a country where militias and gangs can resist the force of the State without using the institutions of the State (judicial process, presumption of innocence, civil rights).

Registration and tracking of firearms is all-important, as is licensing for individuals. I'm not sure that there are many circumstances I would support a full ban on a person's right to own firearms, but restricting ownership of certain firearms for certain individuals is probably useful. Acquiring a license to own handguns in particular, I think, is a good idea. Criminal activity is overwhelmingly reliant on concealment of weaponry.

I do think a limitation on different 'classes' of weapons is useful - but the current definitions of 'assault' weapons are asinine and borderline useless. Restrictions on semiautomatic long guns should be based primarily on ease of concealment - 'tactical' attachments, bayonet lugs, that shit doesn't matter. Collapsing stocks and shortened barrels and extended magazine capacity is more important, and even then I don't believe in a complete ban on such things.

Private and government property, naturally, can restrict what comes onto their property. Your rights end where another's begin. If the city doesn't want your glock in the local social services department, leave it at home and quitcher bitchin'.

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.

Open carry is an issue that I think should mostly be regulated by the individual states, with some exceptions. There is no fucking reason you need to open carry a fully automatic weapon in public, full stop. Keep that shit on private property. I'd prefer it if people didn't carry their AR-15 dick replacements into the local department stores with tactical webbing and camo from head to toe either, but I guess that's more a personal preference.

So? Agree? Disagree? Am I just rambling?

PostPosted: Tue Mar 27, 2018 2:00 pm
by Torrocca
Image

PostPosted: Tue Mar 27, 2018 2:02 pm
by Sovaal
Torrocca wrote:

I’ve got a pro-arms quote from a well known socialist, am I good?

PostPosted: Tue Mar 27, 2018 2:03 pm
by Torrocca
Sovaal wrote:
Torrocca wrote:

I’ve got a pro-arms quote from a well known socialist, am I good?


As long as you're cool with lefty-libertarians, yes. :^)

PostPosted: Tue Mar 27, 2018 2:04 pm
by Sovaal
Torrocca wrote:
Sovaal wrote:I’ve got a pro-arms quote from a well known socialist, am I good?


As long as you're cool with lefty-libertarians, yes. :^)

Anything’s better then authoritarians.

PostPosted: Tue Mar 27, 2018 2:06 pm
by Telconi
Sovaal wrote:
Torrocca wrote:
As long as you're cool with lefty-libertarians, yes. :^)

Anything’s better then authoritarians.


Pretty much...

PostPosted: Tue Mar 27, 2018 2:09 pm
by The New California Republic
Len Hyet wrote:Previously, on Gun Control.

Part I, Part II


Is this thread going to have a poll?

PostPosted: Tue Mar 27, 2018 2:11 pm
by Washington Resistance Army
I demand a poll.

PostPosted: Tue Mar 27, 2018 2:11 pm
by Chernoslavia
''The Gunnening'' really dude?

PostPosted: Tue Mar 27, 2018 2:13 pm
by Valgora
Washington Resistance Army wrote:I demand a poll.


Should the poll be like the other two, or should we have a completely new poll?

Chernoslavia wrote:''The Gunnening'' really guys?


A better name is possible.

If it is a reference to The Happening, then I would really prefer it if we didn't name our thread after a shitty movie.

PostPosted: Tue Mar 27, 2018 2:56 pm
by Greater Redosia
breathes in deeply That new thread smell of gunpowder

PostPosted: Tue Mar 27, 2018 2:57 pm
by Hammer Britannia
Torrocca wrote:

>Virgin/Chad
>Uses the wrong format

Didn't know Gulags made your IQ drop aswell.

PostPosted: Tue Mar 27, 2018 2:59 pm
by Torrocca
Hammer Britannia wrote:
Torrocca wrote:

>Virgin/Chad
>Uses the wrong format

Didn't know Gulags made your IQ drop aswell.


Doesn't have to use the right format to be factually correct :^)

PostPosted: Tue Mar 27, 2018 3:00 pm
by Hammer Britannia
Torrocca wrote:
Hammer Britannia wrote:>Virgin/Chad
>Uses the wrong format

Didn't know Gulags made your IQ drop aswell.


Doesn't have to use the right format to be factually correct incorrect:^)

ftfy

PostPosted: Tue Mar 27, 2018 3:02 pm
by Torrocca
Hammer Britannia wrote:
Torrocca wrote:
Doesn't have to use the right format to be factually correct incorrect:^)

ftfy


False; Marx is more correct than the 2nd Amendment. :^)

PostPosted: Tue Mar 27, 2018 3:03 pm
by Hammer Britannia
Torrocca wrote:
Hammer Britannia wrote:ftfy


False; Marx is more correct than the 2nd Amendment. :^)

Marx called the bourgeoisie the rich capitalist

Their literal translation is "City-person" or in English "Middle-Class"

PostPosted: Tue Mar 27, 2018 3:04 pm
by Greater Redosia
Torrocca wrote:
Hammer Britannia wrote:ftfy


False; Marx is more correct than the 2nd Amendment. :^)


Wait..if the second amendment came before Marx...what if Marx simply took that and put it in his own words....just without the whole well regulated militia part and simply was like Marx: lolz all workers and proletariat gets gunz. my tired mind works like a charm for sure.

PostPosted: Tue Mar 27, 2018 3:05 pm
by Tule
Here comes the boogeyman, this thread isn't christened until the first gun grabber shows his fangs:

Handguns and pump-action/semi-automatic centrefire rifles need to be restricted and licenses given on a strict need basis.

Bump stocks, trigger cranks and hellfire triggers should be restricted to the same extent as machine guns.

PostPosted: Tue Mar 27, 2018 3:05 pm
by Torrocca
Hammer Britannia wrote:
Torrocca wrote:
False; Marx is more correct than the 2nd Amendment. :^)

Marx called the bourgeoisie the rich capitalist

Their literal translation is "City-person" or in English "Middle-Class"


Marxist terms =/= dictionary terms friendo :^)

Pick up some Das Kapital sometime.

Greater Redosia wrote:
Torrocca wrote:
False; Marx is more correct than the 2nd Amendment. :^)


Wait..if the second amendment came before Marx...what if Marx simply took that and put it in his own words....just without the whole well regulated militia part and simply was like Marx: lolz all workers and proletariat gets gunz. my tired mind works like a charm for sure.


The people are the militia, comrade. :^)

PostPosted: Tue Mar 27, 2018 3:07 pm
by Torrocca
Tule wrote:Here comes the boogeyman, this thread isn't christened until the first gun grabber shows his fangs:

Handguns and pump-action/semi-automatic centrefire rifles need to be restricted and licenses given on a strict need basis.

Bump stocks, trigger cranks and hellfire triggers should be restricted to the same extent as machine guns.


Negative; restricting weaponry doesn't resolve socioeconomic or mental health ailments and violence, among the various other issues that lead to violence.

PostPosted: Tue Mar 27, 2018 3:07 pm
by Hammer Britannia
Torrocca wrote:Marxist terms =/= dictionary terms friendo :^)

So your saying Marx was too lazy/stupid to pick up a dictionary and instead resorted to pulling definitions out of his ass?

PostPosted: Tue Mar 27, 2018 3:07 pm
by Greater Redosia
Torrocca wrote:
Hammer Britannia wrote:Marx called the bourgeoisie the rich capitalist

Their literal translation is "City-person" or in English "Middle-Class"


Marxist terms =/= dictionary terms friendo :^)

Pick up some Das Kapital sometime.

Greater Redosia wrote:
Wait..if the second amendment came before Marx...what if Marx simply took that and put it in his own words....just without the whole well regulated militia part and simply was like Marx: lolz all workers and proletariat gets gunz. my tired mind works like a charm for sure.


The people are the militia, comrade. :^)


Indeed they are my friend, indeed we are....

PostPosted: Tue Mar 27, 2018 3:07 pm
by Washington Resistance Army
Tule wrote:Here comes the boogeyman, this thread isn't christened until the first gun grabber shows his fangs:

Handguns and pump-action/semi-automatic centrefire rifles need to be restricted and licenses given on a strict need basis.

Bump stocks, trigger cranks and hellfire triggers should be restricted to the same extent as machine guns.


Tbqh I'd actually do this in a heartbeat if Hughes was removed.

PostPosted: Tue Mar 27, 2018 3:09 pm
by Torrocca
Hammer Britannia wrote:
Torrocca wrote:Marxist terms =/= dictionary terms friendo :^)

So your saying Marx was too lazy/stupid to pick up a dictionary and instead resorted to pulling definitions out of his ass?


No, what I'm saying is Marx has very specific, very concise points going on that A) aren't suited for a thread on gun control and B) better explained in his works than by a random internet plebeian.

Greater Redosia wrote:
Torrocca wrote:
Marxist terms =/= dictionary terms friendo :^)

Pick up some Das Kapital sometime.



The people are the militia, comrade. :^)


Indeed they are my friend, indeed we are....


Destroy the system flippantly when comrade? :^)

PostPosted: Tue Mar 27, 2018 3:15 pm
by Telconi
Washington Resistance Army wrote:
Tule wrote:Here comes the boogeyman, this thread isn't christened until the first gun grabber shows his fangs:

Handguns and pump-action/semi-automatic centrefire rifles need to be restricted and licenses given on a strict need basis.

Bump stocks, trigger cranks and hellfire triggers should be restricted to the same extent as machine guns.


Tbqh I'd actually do this in a heartbeat if Hughes was removed.


Actual compromises aren't allowed. Only demands called compromises.