Originally posted by Surtur
And there is a lack of consistency on both sides. Either it's okay to blame a group or it isn't. There is no "you can't blame all muslims" then followed up by "this is republicans fault!".A choice needs to be made, I do not care which they choose, but a choice needs to be made nonetheless.
Do not push back on blaming an entire group and then turn around and...blame an entire group. It just doesn't fly.
They insist it is solely a mental illness issue, in spite of serious doubts from mental illness experts, yet have made it easier for those who are indeed clinically mentally ill to purchase guns, and are not doing anything to make it any more affordable for people to get the care and treatment they need. At the same time, they have done nothing to make it harder to obtain and modify the types of weapons used in these mass killings, but instead, they want to make it easier. The narrative there is, "Well, he was a lone-wolf, who clearly had to be crazy to do something like this. Nothing we can do about it. Better gun control won't work because of stuff and reasons that don't necessarily make sense, but there you go..."
Originally posted by Rockydonovang
Wait, gun manufacturers are given immunity?
It's not a complete immunity from legal action, but it's close enough, and far more protection than any other industry has:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Protection_of_Lawful_Commerce_in_Arms_Act
The Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act (PLCAA) is a United States law which protects firearms manufacturers and dealers from being held liable when crimes have been committed with their products. However, both manufacturers and dealers can still be held liable for damages resulting from defective products, breach of contract, criminal misconduct, and other actions for which they are directly responsible in much the same manner that any U.S. based manufacturer of consumer products is held responsible. They may also be held liable for negligent entrustment when they have reason to know a gun is intended for use in a crime.
Originally posted by Robtard
I believe largely yes, but there is a law that allows in specific cases where manufacturers could be held accountable for negligence. Unsure if that has happened.If I'm wrong, no problem. Am I?
Originally posted by RobtardYou are correct. Every gun policy in America is encompassed in these legislation
I believe largely yes, but there is a law that allows in specific cases where manufacturers could be held accountable for negligence. Unsure if that has happened.If I'm wrong, no problem. Am I?
National Firearms Act ("NFA"😉 (1934): Taxes the manufacture and transfer of, and mandates the registration of Title II weapons such as machine guns, short-barreled rifles and shotguns, heavy weapons, explosive ordnance, silencers, and disguised or improvised firearms.
Federal Firearms Act of 1938 ("FFA"😉: Requires that gun manufacturers, importers, and persons in the business of selling firearms have a Federal Firearms License (FFL). Prohibits the transfer of firearms to certain classes of persons, such as convicted felons.
Omnibus Crime Control and Safe Streets Act of 1968 (1968): Prohibited interstate trade in handguns, increased the minimum age to 21 for buying handguns.
Gun Control Act of 1968 ("GCA"😉: Focuses primarily on regulating interstate commerce in firearms by generally prohibiting interstate firearms transfers except among licensed manufacturers, dealers and importers.
Firearm Owners Protection Act ("FOPA"😉 (1986): Revised and partially repealed the Gun Control Act of 1968. Prohibited the sale to civilians of automatic firearms manufactured after the date of the law's passage. Required ATF approval of transfers of automatic firearms.
Undetectable Firearms Act (1988): Effectively criminalizes, with a few exceptions, the manufacture, importation, sale, shipment, delivery, possession, transfer, or receipt of firearms with less than 3.7 oz of metal content.
Gun-Free School Zones Act (1990): Prohibits unauthorized individuals from knowingly possessing a firearm at a place that the individual knows, or has reasonable cause to believe, is a school zone.
Brady Handgun Violence Prevention Act (1993): Requires background checks on most firearm purchasers, depending on seller and venue.
Federal Assault Weapons Ban (1994–2004): Banned semiautomatics that looked like assault weapons and large capacity ammunition feeding devices. The law expired in 2004.
Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act (2005): Prevent firearms manufacturers and licensed dealers from being held liable for negligence when crimes have been committed with their products.
Originally posted by Rockydonovang
Rob, could you post those state by state state stats you had for the gun homicide rates in states in places with stronger gun control vs without?
Did it a few years ago, iirc, the higher death rate states tended to be states with more relaxed gun laws, though there where a few outliers. But that might have been overall gun deaths and not just homicides, which would muddy what you're specifically asking for.
Originally posted by snowdragon
I think one of the loopholes though is that you can purchase guns from private individuals without background checks (think gun shows.) I don't know all the nuances since I'm not a gun buyer or seller but it seems to me on a quick search that is one thing our legislators can shore up.
Our "Legislators" couldn't Shore up a Picket Fence. That kind of law would have STOPPED NOTHING!
LAWS DO NOT STOP CRIME!!!!!!
Originally posted by Robtard
Did it a few years ago, iirc, the higher death rate states tended to be states with more relaxed gun laws, though there where a few outliers. But that might have been overall gun deaths and not just homicides, which would muddy what you're specifically asking for.
Yeah iirc there’s a negative correlation between gun control and gun death rates, but no correlation between gun control and gun homicide rates.
Originally posted by Robtard
I believe largely yes, but there is a law that allows in specific cases where manufacturers could be held accountable for negligence. Unsure if that has happened.If I'm wrong, no problem. Am I?
You're right. Newsweek tracks this and has a map for it.
http://www.newsweek.com/gun-crime-and-gun-control-firearm-laws-mapped-between-states-613990
Edit - Holy shit, my page wasn't fresh and lots of responses happened. Odd.
Originally posted by snowdragon
I think one of the loopholes though is that you can purchase guns from private individuals without background checks (think gun shows.) I don't know all the nuances since I'm not a gun buyer or seller but it seems to me on a quick search that is one thing our legislators can shore up.
Exactly, gun shows all you really need is a smile and money and a assault rifle can be yours on the spot.
Nothing going to change anytime soon though. US Muslims could potentially do something about our gun laws though, if they started walking around armed in large groups in states that allow 'open-carry', we could see a change. It's happened at least once, in California with the Mulford Act in 1967 (when Reagan was Gov).
In short: Ca used to be an open-carry state and Red, then the Black Panthers started arming themselves and walking around with guns and suddenly, almost like magic, the law changed.
only in reference to a militia.
👆
I want to address this myth the second amendment calls for heavy gun regulations and is
That leaves the "mah rights are being attacked" line of argumentation quite silly looking since not one poster here has proposed a removal of anyone's right to bear arms.
None of your quotes argue anything regarding how well regulated or unregulated guns should be. The quote that comes closest is from Ben Franklin. However that still get syou nowhere because the key qualifiers present are "temporary" and "essential". As the constitution doesn't protect guns from regulation, unregulated guns aren't "essential" liberties.
"I prefer dangerous freedom over peaceful slavery."
- Thomas Jefferson, letter to James Madison, January 30, 1787"The laws that forbid the carrying of arms are laws of such a nature. They disarm only those who are neither inclined nor determined to commit crimes.... Such laws make things worse for the assaulted and better for the assailants; they serve rather to encourage than to prevent homicides, for an unarmed man may be attacked with greater confidence than an armed man."
- Thomas Jefferson, Commonplace Book (quoting 18th century criminologist Cesare Beccaria), 1774-1776"The Constitution of most of our states (and of the United States) assert that all power is inherent in the people; that they may exercise it by themselves; that it is their right and duty to be at all times armed."
- Thomas Jefferson, letter to to John Cartwright, 5 June 1824“They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety."
- Benjamin Franklin, Historical Review of Pennsylvania, 1759"I ask who are the militia? They consist now of the whole people, except a few public officers."
- George Mason, Address to the Virginia Ratifying Convention, June 4, 1788
Simply put, your quotes are meaningless and aren't relevant to what I'm arguing.
Furthermore, none of this addresses that the constitution itself calls for regulation of the "militia" which as you've addressed applies to all people now.
Originally posted by Rockydonovang
That's all that's needed.
Originally posted by Rockydonovang
It's harder to commit suicide, gives you more time to change your mind regarding suicide, and gives more time for people to save you when you aren't able to instantly commit suicide with a gun.There's also the matter of accidental gun deaths.
So yea, it's still a good thing.
Show me the statistics proving suicides as a whole decrease in a statistically significant way due to gun control or your point is irrelevant.
Originally posted by Emperordmb
Not really. If I want to kill myself and you take away a gun from me, I could go to the top of a 14 floor building right now and swan dive off the roof, and I wouldn't survive.
B. gives more time for outside intervention
You know how it's easier to resist eating unhealthy food when it isn't in your fridge than when it is in your fridge?
The same thing applies here.
Also, accidental gun death is a thing.
Show me the statistics proving suicides as a whole decrease in a statistically significant way due to gun control or your point is irrelevant.
More gun control-> less gun death
Either that's suicide or homicide based.
We have reason to think it could work, so we should try it.