Guns & Gun Violence

[curious2garden]

Mass shootings are just getting more common. The answer is not in doing nothing. Something has to be done.

We could pass out more guns to see if that would solve the problem. Or we could do nothing. Neither of those will work, in my opinion.

Straw man and then binary options, if you wanna argue politics sweetie you gotta up your game.

 

[cannabineer]

Mass shootings are just getting more common. The answer is not in doing nothing. Something has to be done.

We could pass out more guns to see if that would solve the problem. Or we could do nothing. Neither of those will work, in my opinion.

I say this calls for science.

Let's indeed pass out some guns. (Me! Me! Me!)

Let's actually evaluate the outcome.

THEN let's pontificate.

 

[whitebb2727]

Why is it the ones crying for more gun control are the ones fighting for more rights for these assholes?

They oppose the death penalty and let these monsters back out on the street.

 

[curious2garden]

I say this calls for science.

Let's indeed pass out some guns. (Me! Me! Me!)

Let's actually evaluate the outcome.

THEN let's pontificate.

Unless pontificating is your doing something

 

[curious2garden]

I think that went well

 

[cannabineer]

Unless pontificating is your doing something

 

[see4]

Would people still be the problem without the guns?

Would a ban on firearms do away with all guns? I think your argument assumes that a ban on guns means the eradication of them, nobody will ever have them. And we know that not to be possible.

 

[bearkat42]

Yes. You know that. Look at history. Humans are a violent species.

We kill, rape, plunder, and destroy the world.

Maybe enforce the laws already on the books a little better and improve mental health services and we might get somewhere.

I'll play along for a second. OK, we ban guns. Who turns their guns over? The criminals won't. They are a criminal.

I don't know what the answer is but taking guns from law biding citizens is not the answer.

My point is not that violence wouldn't occur. That would be ridiculous. But the killings would (in my opinion) have to decrease simply because of the proximity required to commit said killings.
I also don't really buy the "bad guys would still have guns" argument either. All of you armed cowboys running around bragging about your weaponry, who exactly are you stopping? What crimes are you preventing?

 

[cannabineer]

I’m in Texas, and I like guns OK. ANd I love Texas. The old joke about guns in Texas goes like this:

A man and his family are driving thru Texas for the first time. A cop stops them for a license check. The cop asks the driver if he has any guns in the car. The driver says “No officer. Absolutely no guns in this car”. The officer says “ok, here, take mine, just turn it in when you leave the state”.

But you are speaking as if the "stricter checks" get anything DONE.
I contend that they do not and are playing into the disarmers' agenda, the death of our civil rights by ten thousand mouse bites.

You cannot simultaneously hold both views.

 

[curious2garden]

.........snip.........

You cannot simultaneously hold both views.

Oh, Yess you can.

 

[cannabineer]

Oh, Yess you can.

 

[guardiangk]

Criminals do not obey laws.

 

[see4]

Now See, you're just trying to be provocative.

You know damn well none of your weapons have ever charged themselves and got up taken position and discharged on a target all on there own.

The question ought to be, how to detect and dispose of all the fucked up humans.

Right, guns themselves don't kill people; people do. A very valid argument.

Who can have a gun, and who cannot?

Currently, if you've committed a felony violent crime or beat your wife, which I suppose is a misdemeanor in some places, you can't has. No gun for you! (seinfeld)
If you are currently smoking the pot [or other drugs], illegally or otherwise, you can't has.
If you wanted to hang yourself, you can't has.

But it asks nothing about, "Are you a Jihadist?" or "Are you currently, or ever plan on, being off your rocker?"

How do you control that? Do you make it subjective to the gun dealer selling the firearm? Then you open the door for profiling.

Gun control is a very tough argument, in either direction. Obviously we can't get rid of guns, we can't ban them and we can't profile people. So what do we do?

 

[Flaming Pie]

Subbed. The big boys and girls are here.

See4, c2g and cannibineer all in one thread???

This is gonna be good.

 

[bearkat42]

Would a ban on firearms do away with all guns? I think your argument assumes that a ban on guns means the eradication of them, nobody will ever have them. And we know that not to be possible.

Never in history has more guns ever been the answer. Cowboy mentality aside, the numbers absolutely do not support that claim. Less guns equal less killings.

 

[Flaming Pie]

Never in history has more guns ever been the answer. Cowboy mentality aside, the numbers absolutely do not support that claim. Less guns equal less killings.

Not in russia. Those civilians have almost no gun deaths but have a lot of homicide.

Twice as much as the US with half the population as us.

They like their knives.

 

[curious2garden]

Right, guns themselves don't kill people; people do. A very valid argument.

Who can have a gun, and who cannot?

Currently, if you've committed a felony violent crime or beat your wife, which I suppose is a misdemeanor in some places, you can't has. No gun for you! (seinfeld)
If you are currently smoking the pot [or other drugs], illegally or otherwise, you can't has.
If you wanted to hang yourself, you can't has.

But it asks nothing about, "Are you a Jihadist?" or "Are you currently, or ever plan on, being off your rocker?"

How do you control that? Do you make it subjective to the gun dealer selling the firearm? Then you open the door for profiling.

Gun control is a very tough argument, in either direction. Obviously we can't get rid of guns, we can't ban them and we can't profile people. So what do we do?

We realize some problems are bigger than us and go smoke a joint. I think the real question is with the internet and our ability to represent ourselves anywhere do we really need politicians. I think that might be the right question?

Dunno this batch of GG#4 is epic so I'm probably to stoned to participate anymore here, so I'm going back to TnT, waving............

 

[see4]

Never in history has more guns ever been the answer. Cowboy mentality aside, the numbers absolutely do not support that claim. Less guns equal less killings.

Definitely true. I'm not arguing with you on that.

But, there are enough guns out there to feed the black market for quite some time. How do you control that?

 

[bearkat42]

I'm the first to admit far fewer gun crimes and therefore fewer gun related fatalities.

Isn't that what we're discussing?

 

[see4]

We realize some problems are bigger than us and go smoke a joint. I think the real question is with the internet and our ability to represent ourselves anywhere do we really need politicians. I think that might be the right question?

Dunno this batch of GG#4 is epic so I'm probably to stoned to participate anymore here, so I'm going back to TnT, waving............

Somebody needs to send me some god damn GG4 - a cut, some shatter, some nugs... god damnit. I get no love. damnit.