A gun in every house is a must

[A-Series-Of-Tubes]

Not having to work around that ridiculous 2A right, I'm quite comfortable with denying guns to anyone that there's the least reason not to trust. So for me, it's more "consigning ex-felons to the same defenselessness that the majority of people choose" as a way of re-introducing them to society. Rather than letting them go back to carrying a gun because it seemed necessary to stay safe in the life they lived before. Damn right I want them to live in fear of guns, if that means they have to move to a different city (at least until their gun rights are restored) then it may well save their life.

Legally it's quite easy too. Ex-felons don't have all their rights back until they've completed parole. Perhaps you'd rather they stay in prison?

I know I would. If a prisoner is too dangerous to be allowed to exercise his/her full rights, then they are too dangerous to be paroled.

Once they've served their sentence, they should not continue to be punished.

That's not very coherent. Say someone holds up a convenience store with a used syringe. That's a violent crime, right? Will you insist they stay in prison for (say) 5 years despite their 2 year non-parole sentence, rather than paroling them at 2 years (assuming perfect behavior in prison, etc) with the condition they're not allowed to buy a gun in a shop?

And if you don't believe in parole for violent crimes, how else do you propose to punish bad behavior in prison? Or reward good behavior?

[Big Jim P]

Why two separate rifles for hunting and defence?

Especially since the AR can do both.

So can most pistols.

[Big Jim P]

I know I would. If a prisoner is too dangerous to be allowed to exercise his/her full rights, then they are too dangerous to be paroled.

Once they've served their sentence, they should not continue to be punished.

That's not very coherent. Say someone holds up a convenience store with a used syringe. That's a violent crime, right? Will you insist they stay in prison for (say) 5 years despite their 2 year non-parole sentence, rather than paroling them at 2 years (assuming perfect behavior in prison, etc) with the condition they're not allowed to buy a gun in a shop?

And if you don't believe in parole for violent crimes, how else do you propose to punish bad behavior in prison? Or reward good behavior?

It is exceptionally coherent: do the crime, do the time. Once the sentence is done, no further punishment.

Punishing bad behavior is easy: solitary. Good behavior should be considered the norm.

[Big Jim P]

I will be damned. An honest gun grabber.

If you mean "one who would take weapons away, based on changes in the law" then yes. Something like a hundred million guns have been stockpiled by "law abiding gun owners" and this is a fault in previous law. I want to change the law, and take those guns, because the alternative is to change the law and let those gun speculators cash in, selling guns to criminals.

This is not your business now. Care for your wife and family. Do some recreational shooting and don't worry. The gun grabbers don't want your shotgun or rifle, they only want you to register the damn thing. The Great Cause of Guns is a folly of your youth. It's a battle for young men, who care about guns more than life itself. For you, it's time to move on.

I have seen reasonable estimates that put the number of privately owned gun in America as 660-750 million. With the current record sales (about 2-4 million a month), we ashould hit a billion before too long.

Gun grabbers do in fact (and have stated) that they want to take our guns. You yourself just posted that. Registry is off the table as that is both the first step, and it is no ones business if I own or how many I own.

[A-Series-Of-Tubes]

That's not very coherent. Say someone holds up a convenience store with a used syringe. That's a violent crime, right? Will you insist they stay in prison for (say) 5 years despite their 2 year non-parole sentence, rather than paroling them at 2 years (assuming perfect behavior in prison, etc) with the condition they're not allowed to buy a gun in a shop?

And if you don't believe in parole for violent crimes, how else do you propose to punish bad behavior in prison? Or reward good behavior?

It is exceptionally coherent: do the crime, do the time. Once the sentence is done, no further punishment.

No sex offender's register, because it enables further punishment by the community. No publicly accessible criminal record, because that enables employers to punish by denying employment. Are we on the same page?

Punishing bad behavior is easy: solitary. Good behavior should be considered the norm.

Not really. However this isn't very relevant to the subject. I shouldn't have brought it up.

[ImperialRussia]

Yes you will never need it case of a emergency.

[Big Jim P]

It is exceptionally coherent: do the crime, do the time. Once the sentence is done, no further punishment.

No sex offender's register, because it enables further punishment by the community. No publicly accessible criminal record, because that enables employers to punish by denying employment. Are we on the same page?

Punishing bad behavior is easy: solitary. Good behavior should be considered the norm.

Not really. However this isn't very relevant to the subject. I shouldn't have brought it up.

Point one: yes. A criminal record really should be between the offender and victim (and state/society).

[Cereskia]

Here we Have Arnold Schwarzenegger

And Tony Montana

[The Remote Islands]

Here we Have Arnold Schwarzenegger
And Tony Montana

Badass post. I was gonna come in here and say guns should be outlawed in the US except for minigun emplacements in every house to deter burglars, but you stole the thread.

[Great Pacific Switzerland]

That's not very coherent. Say someone holds up a convenience store with a used syringe. That's a violent crime, right? Will you insist they stay in prison for (say) 5 years despite their 2 year non-parole sentence, rather than paroling them at 2 years (assuming perfect behavior in prison, etc) with the condition they're not allowed to buy a gun in a shop?

And if you don't believe in parole for violent crimes, how else do you propose to punish bad behavior in prison? Or reward good behavior?

It is exceptionally coherent: do the crime, do the time. Once the sentence is done, no further punishment.

Punishing bad behavior is easy: solitary. Good behavior should be considered the norm.

Solitary is corporal punishment and should becomplete banned as an inhumane way to treat prisoners. If you want punishment for misbehaviour, send them for hard labour, lock up, scrub the toilets clean or peel 2000 potatos

[Christian Confederation]

Seeing how all mass shootings happen in gun free zones the answer is obvious

[Grinning Dragon]

Seeing how all mass shootings happen in gun free zones the answer is obvious

Who wudda thought a shitbrick would pick a target rich environment with little resistance. Ban gfz.

[Picairn]

Seeing how all mass shootings happen in gun free zones the answer is obvious

That statement is disputable. The only study that says mass shootings mostly happen in gun-free zones are from John Lott's More Guns, Less Crime book, and it has been heavily criticized for methodology flaws and data manipulation. More recent studies conclude that mass shootings actually mostly happen in places where no restrictions are placed on citizens' carry, such as Rampage Nation by Louis Klarevas. https://www.politifact.com/factchecks/2 ... ree-zones/

[A-Series-Of-Tubes]

No sex offender's register, because it enables further punishment by the community. No publicly accessible criminal record, because that enables employers to punish by denying employment. Are we on the same page?



Not really. However this isn't very relevant to the subject. I shouldn't have brought it up.

Point one: yes. A criminal record really should be between the offender and victim (and state/society).

It's nice to agree on something. Sort of agree. A criminal background check should be forbidden by default, but certain industries should be able to check the relevant part of a prospective employee's record.

Most obviously, daycares, schools etc should be able to screen out child physical abusers and child sex offenders. Former drug dealers or manufacturers should be screened from working with pharmaceuticals or precursor chemicals. Tax cheats should not be allowed to work as tax accountants. Etc. It doesn't really limit their freedom that much, it would reduce recidivism and even if it is difficult for them to change careers it will do them good in the long term not to be around temptation and get themselves another, longer, sentence.

Then there's no need for the sex offender's register, or city bans around schools etc. It can be dealt with by extended parole conditions tailored better to the individual case: eg they can walk by a school except at certain hours (school in, school out), or they can walk by anytime but not drive by in a van. Parole conditions can also be indefinitely extended, dealing with the most difficult case of parents who offended against their own children. They can have supervised visits, until the children are adults (maybe +2 years) and then the ex-offender is out of parole.

Still, we do agree that a widely accessible criminal record register does more harm than good. Seriously limiting someone's employment prospects will make "rejoining society" nearly impossible.

[Crysuko]

Seeing how all mass shootings happen in gun free zones the answer is obvious

seeing as how countries which enforce tight gun laws (UK, Japan) aren't Somalia, I think you're fibbing.

[Great Pacific Switzerland]

Seeing how all mass shootings happen in gun free zones the answer is obvious

seeing as how countries which enforce tight gun laws (UK, Japan) aren't Somalia, I think you're fibbing.

In the UK you still have mass stabbings and terror attacks. In Japan you have the yakuza, most recent shooting in japan was 2 years with some really weird AR pistol

[Greater Cesnica]

Seeing how all mass shootings happen in gun free zones the answer is obvious

seeing as how countries which enforce tight gun laws (UK, Japan) aren't Somalia, I think you're fibbing.

Sure, in the UK and Japan they have vehicle ramming and stabbing attacks.

[The Two Jerseys]

seeing as how countries which enforce tight gun laws (UK, Japan) aren't Somalia, I think you're fibbing.

Sure, in the UK and Japan they have vehicle ramming and stabbing attacks.

Don't forget the sarin gas attacks.

[Great Pacific Switzerland]

Sure, in the UK and Japan they have vehicle ramming and stabbing attacks.

Don't forget the sarin gas attacks.

Shit is something you see from an anime lmfao. Doomsday cult causing mass murder

[Miku the Based]

Don't forget the sarin gas attacks.

Shit is something you see from an anime lmfao. Doomsday cult causing mass murder

Well Zankyo no terror and psycopass came a good 5-6 years after the attacks take away one or two years as per ordinary anime production and it takes about 3-4 years for anime to replicate real life.

[Neanderthaland]

Sure, in the UK and Japan they have vehicle ramming and stabbing attacks.

Don't forget the sarin gas attacks.

Much as I disagree with the poster in question, I'm not sure pointing to something that happened once, 25 years ago, is a great counter-argument.

To me, it doesn't even matter. I'm willing to grant that removing people's guns might make us safer. Although it hasn't been proven to me. I'll go further and say that we would probably be safer as a society if we just ditched free speech, and jailed anti-vaxxers. But we don't do these things because we respect the rights of individuals, even if they don't always use them responsibly.

[A-Series-Of-Tubes]

seeing as how countries which enforce tight gun laws (UK, Japan) aren't Somalia, I think you're fibbing.

In the UK you still have mass stabbings and terror attacks. In Japan you have the yakuza, most recent shooting in japan was 2 years with some really weird AR pistol

Terrorism in the West is an insignificant threat to life, compared to common murder. Gang violence is significant, at about a third of murders in the US. But neither of them is a good example of violence that could be prevented by law-abiding citizens owning guns.

The average person has a 50% chance of being able to run away from a knife attack. That right there makes knives less of a threat than guns.

[Washington Resistance Army]

In the UK you still have mass stabbings and terror attacks. In Japan you have the yakuza, most recent shooting in japan was 2 years with some really weird AR pistol

Terrorism in the West is an insignificant threat to life, compared to common murder. Gang violence is significant, at about a third of murders in the US. But neither of them is a good example of violence that could be prevented by law-abiding citizens owning guns.

The average person has a 50% chance of being able to run away from a knife attack. That right there makes knives less of a threat than guns.

I'm not sure that's a real statistic.

[Odreria]

In the UK you still have mass stabbings and terror attacks. In Japan you have the yakuza, most recent shooting in japan was 2 years with some really weird AR pistol

Terrorism in the West is an insignificant threat to life, compared to common murder. Gang violence is significant, at about a third of murders in the US. But neither of them is a good example of violence that could be prevented by law-abiding citizens owning guns.

The average person has a 50% chance of being able to run away from a knife attack. That right there makes knives less of a threat than guns.

If it was impossible for a gunshot to miss somebody than this would be a great point.

[Great Pacific Switzerland]

In the UK you still have mass stabbings and terror attacks. In Japan you have the yakuza, most recent shooting in japan was 2 years with some really weird AR pistol

Terrorism in the West is an insignificant threat to life, compared to common murder. Gang violence is significant, at about a third of murders in the US. But neither of them is a good example of violence that could be prevented by law-abiding citizens owning guns.

The average person has a 50% chance of being able to run away from a knife attack. That right there makes knives less of a threat than guns.

Running away at close knifepoint in a robbery is difficult to do unless you are trained in a way for disarming e.g JuJitsu. But stabbings randomly occur as a terror threat by running and stabbing as much as you can to someone and running away which is difficult