Gun Control 2023 (V) - ATF Shenanigans, States Fight Back!

[Thermodolia]

What's utterly pathetic is you keep parading this "friend" around like we're supposed to care about him (if he even exists), and using that emotional appeal to try to dictate to us how how to be.

You want his name and location? Why would I tell you that?

I wouldn’t make that up and if he had ended up wheelchair bound your lot would have gone oh well it’s a necessary trade off for my stupid guns.

I’ve had friends wind up in wheelchairs because of guns, they are still pro gun

[Nils the Cook]

I know responsible gun owners and I know non-responsible gun owners. From what I’ve seen from the non-responsible gun owners a good place to start is media to stop glorifying guns (easier said than done), and mandatory safety and responsibility courses before buying a firearm. Not too controversial start in my opinion.

[American Legionaries]

I know responsible gun owners and I know non-responsible gun owners. From what I’ve seen from the non-responsible gun owners a good place to start is media to stop glorifying guns (easier said than done), and mandatory safety and responsibility courses before buying a firearm. Not too controversial start in my opinion.

That sounds horrible.

[Trans-Mississippi]

We protect celebrities, presidents, government employees, banks, and more with guns. But the future of our country, children, we don't. Every school needs trained officers on campus ready to defend the children if the need arises.

[Nils the Cook]

I know responsible gun owners and I know non-responsible gun owners. From what I’ve seen from the non-responsible gun owners a good place to start is media to stop glorifying guns (easier said than done), and mandatory safety and responsibility courses before buying a firearm. Not too controversial start in my opinion.

That sounds horrible.

To get a license to drive you need to pass a knowledge and safety test don’t you? I don’t see why it should be different with a gun.

[American Legionaries]

That sounds horrible.

To get a license to drive you need to pass a knowledge and safety test don’t you? I don’t see why it should be different with a gun.

First off, I do not need a driver's license to buy a car. Secondly, this would be a valid point of argument if the government wasn't simultaneously rabidly anti-gun, and horrifyingly untrustworthy.

[Grinning Dragon]

That sounds horrible.

To get a license to drive you need to pass a knowledge and safety test don’t you? I don’t see why it should be different with a gun.

Well for starters one falls under a constitutional right the other is a privilege when one decides to drive on public roads, whereas one does not need one to drive on private land nor needs one to buy a vehicle.

The other; there is no historical analog where such a scheme was implemented at the time of founding and ratification.

[Nils the Cook]

To get a license to drive you need to pass a knowledge and safety test don’t you? I don’t see why it should be different with a gun.

Well for starters one falls under a constitutional right the other is a privilege when one decides to drive on public roads, whereas one does not need one to drive on private land nor needs one to buy a vehicle.

The other; there is no historical analog where such a scheme was implemented at the time of founding and ratification.

My suggestion utilizes the shall-issue principle which was declared to not be an infringement of the 2A by the Supreme Court, so my suggestion doesn’t interfere with that right.

[Nils the Cook]

To get a license to drive you need to pass a knowledge and safety test don’t you? I don’t see why it should be different with a gun.

First off, I do not need a driver's license to buy a car. Secondly, this would be a valid point of argument if the government wasn't simultaneously rabidly anti-gun, and horrifyingly untrustworthy.

The point of analogy is to say when your dealing with something where acting like an idiot has a high likelihood to kill other people, (firing into the sky then the bullet falls down and kills someone), it’s reasonable to mandate people understand how to behave in a responsible manner.

[American Legionaries]

First off, I do not need a driver's license to buy a car. Secondly, this would be a valid point of argument if the government wasn't simultaneously rabidly anti-gun, and horrifyingly untrustworthy.

The point of analogy is to say when your dealing with something where acting like an idiot has a high likelihood to kill other people, (firing into the sky then the bullet falls down and kills someone), it’s reasonable to mandate people understand how to behave in a responsible manner.

Who decides what's considered responsible? Me? The state? The federal legislature? The current director of the ATF?

[Nils the Cook]

The point of analogy is to say when your dealing with something where acting like an idiot has a high likelihood to kill other people, (firing into the sky then the bullet falls down and kills someone), it’s reasonable to mandate people understand how to behave in a responsible manner.

Who decides what's considered responsible? Me? The state? The federal legislature? The current director of the ATF?

State Legislature

[American Legionaries]

Who decides what's considered responsible? Me? The state? The federal legislature? The current director of the ATF?

State Legislature

Well they're horrible, so no.

[Nils the Cook]

State Legislature

Well they're horrible, so no.

Correct me if I’m wrong but you seem to think everyone in power is horrible so things should just left as is, even if an issue is pressing?

[American Legionaries]

Well they're horrible, so no.

Correct me if I’m wrong but you seem to think everyone in power is horrible so things should just left as is, even if an issue is pressing?

Not everyone, just gun grabbers.

And is there an issue that's pressing?

[Nils the Cook]

Correct me if I’m wrong but you seem to think everyone in power is horrible so things should just left as is, even if an issue is pressing?

Not everyone, just gun grabbers.

And is there an issue that's pressing?

What I’m suggesting though is not grabbing guns.

And I would say the drastic increase in U.S gun deaths over the past decade is a pressing issue.

[American Legionaries]

Not everyone, just gun grabbers.

And is there an issue that's pressing?

What I’m suggesting though is not grabbing guns.

And I would say the drastic increase in U.S gun deaths over the past decade is a pressing issue.

You suggested that the legislature of the state of California should be able to arbitrarily define who can and cannot possess a firearm.

This is about as reasonable as if you created a policy allowing the Knights of the Ku Klux Klan to decide triage policy at the hospital.

[Washington Resistance Army]

Not everyone, just gun grabbers.

And is there an issue that's pressing?

What I’m suggesting though is not grabbing guns.

And I would say the drastic increase in U.S gun deaths over the past decade is a pressing issue.

Gun deaths haven't drastically increased over the past decade. The number in 2022 was, like, 2,000 higher than it was in 2010. A slight increase, certainly, but "drastic" is very much a loaded term that doesn't reflect the reality.

[Nils the Cook]

What I’m suggesting though is not grabbing guns.

And I would say the drastic increase in U.S gun deaths over the past decade is a pressing issue.

You suggested that the legislature of the state of California should be able to arbitrarily define who can and cannot possess a firearm.

This is about as reasonable as if you created a policy allowing the Knights of the Ku Klux Klan to decide triage policy at the hospital.

I’ll say it’s not arbitrary since it’s a test that would apply equally to everyone based on what should be simple knowledge. Otherwise I don’t think we’re changing eachother’s views so I’ll end the conversation but thank you for the discussion

[American Legionaries]

You suggested that the legislature of the state of California should be able to arbitrarily define who can and cannot possess a firearm.

This is about as reasonable as if you created a policy allowing the Knights of the Ku Klux Klan to decide triage policy at the hospital.

I’ll say it’s not arbitrary since it’s a test that would apply equally to everyone based on what should be simple knowledge. Otherwise I don’t think we’re changing eachother’s views so I’ll end the conversation but thank you for the discussion

Equal application doesn't mean the test isn't arbitrary. If the state said that anyone who completed a forty-thousand hour training course could buy a gun, and subsequently applied that to everyone, that policy would be both equally applied, and arbitrarily absurd.

[Nils the Cook]

What I’m suggesting though is not grabbing guns.

And I would say the drastic increase in U.S gun deaths over the past decade is a pressing issue.

Gun deaths haven't drastically increased over the past decade. The number in 2022 was, like, 2,000 higher than it was in 2010. A slight increase, certainly, but "drastic" is very much a loaded term that doesn't reflect the reality.

I’d call the rate increase drastic. https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jamane ... le/2799021

[Nils the Cook]

I’ll say it’s not arbitrary since it’s a test that would apply equally to everyone based on what should be simple knowledge. Otherwise I don’t think we’re changing eachother’s views so I’ll end the conversation but thank you for the discussion

Equal application doesn't mean the test isn't arbitrary. If the state said that anyone who completed a forty-thousand hour training course could buy a gun, and subsequently applied that to everyone, that policy would be both equally applied, and arbitrarily absurd.

My suggestion is based on the assumption the test would be reasonable.

[Tarsonis]

Gun deaths haven't drastically increased over the past decade. The number in 2022 was, like, 2,000 higher than it was in 2010. A slight increase, certainly, but "drastic" is very much a loaded term that doesn't reflect the reality.

I’d call the rate increase drastic. https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jamane ... le/2799021

Rate increases can be misleading. 1 to 2 is a 100% rate increase

[American Legionaries]

Equal application doesn't mean the test isn't arbitrary. If the state said that anyone who completed a forty-thousand hour training course could buy a gun, and subsequently applied that to everyone, that policy would be both equally applied, and arbitrarily absurd.

My suggestion is based on the assumption the test would be reasonable.

A rather childish assumption, given that you proposed handing the criteria over to state legislatures.

[Washington Resistance Army]

Gun deaths haven't drastically increased over the past decade. The number in 2022 was, like, 2,000 higher than it was in 2010. A slight increase, certainly, but "drastic" is very much a loaded term that doesn't reflect the reality.

I’d call the rate increase drastic. https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jamane ... le/2799021

You would be incorrect. In 2010 there were about 44,000 gun deaths. In 2022 there was a bit over 46,000. The rate hasn't changed drastically since the early 2000s when the crack epidemic finally began to dissipate and violent crime decreased with it.

[Nils the Cook]

I’d call the rate increase drastic. https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jamane ... le/2799021

You would be incorrect. In 2010 there were about 44,000 gun deaths. In 2022 there was a bit over 46,000. The rate hasn't changed drastically since the early 2000s when the crack epidemic finally began to dissipate and violent crime decreased with it.

Where are you getting that data? According to the CDC in 2010 31,672 firearm deaths and 45,222 in 2020 (last year of their data). If using 2019, since 2020 was weird it was 39,707.