Gun Control

[waif]

After another massacre in Finland, I think everyone should look at their own nations gun control...here in the States it's the most easiest place to get any kind of weapon..that's how psychopath's go on a rampage...I think the only gun that should be legal is a hunting rifle, where you have to reload to fire the bullet. It gives time for the victim to respond. Also I think if someone wants to fire semi-automatics and handguns they should have a firing range where you can only shoot their and you can you have to leave the premises without the weapon.

This is pretty much exactly what I think.
But since this is unachievable with the NRA and the gun companies that care more about profit and alleged constitutional liberties than human life, I'd settle for this:
-firearm training (with a huge emphasis on storage and safety etc) made mandatory not just for everyone who buys a gun in the future but everyone who currently owns one should be forced to register it and pass a test or have it confiscated (yes, this wouldn't work with criminals, I'm aware)
-6 month waiting period (I'd settle for "waiting period" in general)
-background check - any convictions or mental health issues and you can't buy
-trigger locks etc be made mandatory, no armor-piercing bullets sold to civilians
-no automatic weapons - handguns only, semi-auto I guess, but really why would you need that?
-ABSOLUTELY NO FUCKING CONCEALED CARRY! What possible legal reason is there for a private citizen to need to carry a concealed firearm?
-On that note, no sawed-off shotguns, silencers, and other shit that could only be used for criminal reasons
-Records kept on all guns (it's possible to trace a bullet to a gun, but thanks to the NRA law requires that records of the gun's unique trace be thrown out after 24 hours afaik)
-A massive liberal dominated organization to provide shittons of oversight on all of this
This is the absolute bare minimum we can do.

It happened in a school. Schools are usually "Gun Free Zones"

The Virginia Tech campus was a "Gun Free Zone" and look what happened.

The problem was they were surrounded by "Gun Zones"

 

[cookiecutter]

I think it's obvious that automatic weapons should not be allowed in private hands. There is no reason anyone needs an assault rifle. As for other gun control I am a little more hesitant. Clearly something needs to be done. I think there should be an objective, scientific look at what the most effective way to combat gun violence is and if banning guns is the most effective method so be it. I don't think ideology should matter when we are talking about people's lives. Assholes like Krig and the NRA just complicate the issue by acting like it is somehow important to own such a dangerous piece of equipment.

EDIT: I agree, Concealed Carry sounds like a horrible idea. Please spare us the self-defense argument as well. They have found that more people die in gun accidents than are saved by having a gun. Also using a gun to defend yourself when your life is not in danger (ex: a mugging perhaps) is morally ambiguous to me.

 

[waif]

And the gun companies are fiercely resistant to any restraints, of course.

One thing that bugs me is when they talk about the constitutional right to bear arms. Regardless of how we interpret that, I don't see why we need to try to "follow the intentions of the framers." The framers never intended that women or blacks should vote or even wear pants/be free, respectively. If the framers were around today, they'd be the biggest assholes you'd ever met. So why do we ignore their views on every other issue but cling to it on this?

 

[cookiecutter]

I agree, although I wouldn't be so harsh on the framers. Contemporary reality and the problems we have to face are different than they were in the 1780s. The amendment can also be interpreted in many different ways. I mean it is talking about militia and muskets, not some fatass in St. Louis and his pistol fetish.

 

[Krigloch the Furious]

not touching this thread

 

[viewerfromnihil]

oh krig, please do

 

[Krigloch the Furious]

nope. because no matter what I say, it will be wrong in the minds of all these guys.

 

[viewerfromnihil]

why do you think i've been keeping my mouth shut?

 

[Matt]

I think it's obvious that automatic weapons should not be allowed in private hands. There is no reason anyone needs an assault rifle. As for other gun control I am a little more hesitant. Clearly something needs to be done. I think there should be an objective, scientific look at what the most effective way to combat gun violence is and if banning guns is the most effective method so be it. I don't think ideology should matter when we are talking about people's lives. Assholes like Krig and the NRA just complicate the issue by acting like it is somehow important to own such a dangerous piece of equipment.

EDIT: I agree, Concealed Carry sounds like a horrible idea. Please spare us the self-defense argument as well. They have found that more people die in gun accidents than are saved by having a gun. Also using a gun to defend yourself when your life is not in danger (ex: a mugging perhaps) is morally ambiguous to me.

The 2nd amendment is outdated anyway, there really needs to be a revision to the rule. There is no need to own a gun. Use a bow and arrow for fucks sake if you hunt, that actually gives the animal a chance anyway.

 

[rms]

is need and right the same thing?

 

[waif]

I agree, although I wouldn't be so harsh on the framers. Contemporary reality and the problems we have to face are different than they were in the 1780s. The amendment can also be interpreted in many different ways. I mean it is talking about militia and muskets, not some fatass in St. Louis and his pistol fetish.

I'm not saying they were assholes in their day, but they'd seem like total dicks now. But regardless, I really don't think we should give a shit about what they thought because the world has changed and we need to adapt to that.

is need and right the same thing?

Do you have a right to endanger the lives of others?
Because having a weapon in the house endangers the lives of others. Thus while you have the right to own a gun, any moral (or, as ein will point out, rational) person will keep their weapons ownership to the minimum that they need (this phrasing doesn't make sense, I know).

 

[chuj666]

Someone needs to define Law-abiding citizen...One day any citizen can snap, I live in Florida here you can have a gun in your car with a permit. I have a baseball bat in the bedroom. I think if you own a gun you attract guns. I mean i understand if you live somewhere in a ghetto, where the police will come in 30 minutes or something. I dunno but our society is so paranoid it's like everyone needs a gun for protection, but from what? If you live in a fairly good neighborhood, and don't show-off your toys, and your not insecure everything should flow as normal thru life.

 

[The Ozzman]

I just found out that you don't need to register a firearm in Ohio. That's kinda scary..

 

[chuj666]

I just found out that you don't need to register a firearm in Ohio. That's kinda scary..

But it's too late because culturally we are accustumed to guns and violence, it's too late to deregulate gun laws

 

[Deicidal]

The Virginia Tech campus was a "Gun Free Zone" and look what happened.

I think all are.

But I think I'll quote that, if you're OK with it.

 

[zabu of nΩd]

But it's too late because culturally we are accustumed to guns and violence, it's too late to deregulate gun laws

Just imagine if people said this about things like slavery, contraception, gay rights, and religious tolerance.

"Fuck it, we're used to treating Blacks as property - it's too late to change that."

 

[V.V.V.V.V.]

 

[wandering_taco]

Ive done a bit of research about guns and gun control for a paper I wrote last year on the second amendment. For one thing I do not support gun control other than no fully auto's for civilians and a few other minor things. If you dig around a bit you will find that violent crimes involving guns are higher in areas where there is more gun control than areas without.

 

[zabu of nΩd]

Except you also have to balance the number of violent crimes with the number of fatal accidents involving guns. The latter will probably be higher in areas with less gun control.

 

[cookiecutter]

violent crimes involving guns are higher in areas where there is more gun control than areas without.

That is a correlation which as we know does not equal causation. A place like Washington DC for example would have lots of crime with or without its gun ban. For all we know the gun ban has reduced the crime. Crime is notoriously hard thing to quantify. This is part of the reason I said earlier that I am reserving judgment at the moment on some things.