If someone has it in their mind they want to commit a massacre with a gun they will find a way. If they can't get one legally they will get one illegally.
What a gun ban would do is stop a lot of crimes of passion. Someone who gets pissed off over something and they happen to have a gun on them and boom they kill someone. But the times we tend to see the highest body count is for the planned stuff.
Lord Lucien, what about bows? Bows have been used for hunting and war (for example the Battle of Agincourt: English Archers killed 5,000 French Knights) during the 100 years war. Maybe we should ban bows too! How bout slingshots too? The IRA used those to blind British troops during the 80s and The Troubles.
Robtard, I understand your frustration. I try to provide evidence to the other side to provide evidence that guns are not the only common product that can kill. My ex-fiancé used to abuse medication and prescription medication can kill too. If someone wants to kill bad enough, then they are going to figure out way to commit the crime.
People who have criminal records (and I don't mean speeding or parking tickets) or mental illness absolutely should not have firearms. Only responsible law abiding citizens
Originally posted by Robtard
Hell, why do we have any laws when some people just break them. No bans! No laws!These "*object* kill too" type of rebuttals are sad and make it nigh impossible to have a sensible conversation on the matter.
Perhaps I am missing something here but your response about no laws or anything sounds just as silly as the argument you seem to take issue with.
Originally posted by Lord LucienThe technology is not the issue. Its a constitutional right to defend against the tyrannical government. Whether its drones nuclear arms or muskets. Kinda like how BLM fight against the police. Do you get it now?
Because lord knows we all trust and bow to your great authority. Careful fellas, this one's the real deal!So because something worked in a bygone era, it's going to work today? Your founding fathers fought a war and created a country with the right to bare arms when "arms" were muskets that highly trained troops took forever to load and fire a single, highly inaccurate, low-range spherical slug. Not semi-automatic assault rifles that send 30 conical rounds to an effective range of ~600m that any shmuck with a box of ammo and some free time can get in to a good grouping. Your constitution's "right to bare arms" is an outdated law from a time that couldn't predict the obstacles and dangers of the modern age. Dangers such as approximately one firearm per U.S. citizen. All 324 million of you.
Poor argument.
DT,
I don't feel the "if someone wants to kill, they'll find a way" stance as valid reasons to not have gun reform, which by that I mean look at our current laws and current state of gun selling practices and see if we can do something to lower gun related deaths. eg the gun show loophole is one that is rediculous and should be revamped or done away with entirely. The length of time for background checks should probably be extended; possibly wait times a well. Are there more? I'd bet on it.
Sure, I can agree with that, but as it is now, mental people and even violent criminals can potentially walk into a gun seller and walk out with a gun in states that have more relaxed laws.
Originally posted by Robtard
I don't feel the "if someone wants to kill, they'll find a way" stance as valid reasons to not have gun reform, which by that I mean look at our current laws and current state of gun selling practices and see if we can do something to lower gun related deaths. eg the gun show loophole is one that is rediculous and should be revamped or done away with entirely. The length of time for background checks should provably be extended; possibly wait times a well. Are there more? I'd bet on it.Sure, I can agree with that, but as it is now, mental people and even violent criminals can potentially walk into a gun seller and walk out with a gun in states that have more relaxed laws.
You are indeed right the fact if someone wants to kill they will find a way doesn't mean gun reform shouldn't be attempted. However, for a lot of these big massacres that really get people talking about guns..those are usually the times when reform wouldn't work.
Or even worse they are the instances where guns aren't the #1 issue, like in Orlando. We have murders everyday that should spawn these discussions, but the politicians usually pounce on the cases where it wouldn't of done anything.
Originally posted by Withsensibility
Lol, ridiculous post. There is less gun crimes in lax states than strict states.The second amendment is to defend against a tyrannical government. Your gun control will just produce more gun owners. Good. Luck. With. That.
If you make a claim you should support it, this is one of the many reasons no one takes you seriusly and you're mocked, XYZ.
Anyhow: http://www.factcheck.org/2015/10/gun-laws-deaths-and-crimes/
Originally posted by Robtardstop posting jewish links.
If you make a claim you should support it, this is one of the many reasons no one takes you seriusly and you're mocked, XYZ.Anyhow: http://www.factcheck.org/2015/10/gun-laws-deaths-and-crimes/
To be honest I don't quite understand the oppositions argument to reform. I can see being opposed to a ban obviously but why would anyone(but gun sellers) be upset at things like..a better vetting process? Or better background checks?
I mean at least when it comes to something like the whole fiasco with people on the "no fly" list being banned from buying guns..the opposition could at least say that people have been wrongfully put on the list in the past(even a baby made it on there somehow) and it is hard to get off the list so if you're a legit innocent decent person you might be denied the ability to buy a gun. But..a better background check would not deny a decent person their shot at a firearm.
Also technically I could go purchase a gun and once I pass the background check or whatever I'd get it even if I've literally never even handled a gun before or fired off a shot. That seems strange.
Originally posted by Surtur
If someone has it in their mind they want to commit a massacre with a gun they will find a way. If they can't get one legally they will get one illegally.What a gun ban would do is stop a lot of crimes of passion. Someone who gets pissed off over something and they happen to have a gun on them and boom they kill someone. But the times we tend to see the highest body count is for the planned stuff.
It's not as easy as it sounds. It won't be easy for a 13 year-old boy to acquire a gun illegally, tbh.