Where Do You Stand On Gun Control/Second Amendment?

Discussion in 'Politics & Current Events' started by BenjaminW, Feb 19, 2018.

Where Do You Fall On Gun Control

  1. For

    51 vote(s)
    71.8%
  2. Against

    20 vote(s)
    28.2%
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. MaxOfMetal

    MaxOfMetal Likes trem wankery. Super Moderator

    Messages:
    32,098
    Likes Received:
    13,168
    Joined:
    Aug 7, 2008
    Location:
    Racine, WI
    A lot of the seemingly useless laws trying to regulate firearm sales would work if they were at the federal level.

    As it is now, whenever one state or county enacts restrictions the state or county next door sees dollar signs and becomes more lenient and happily sells the stuff that's banned or regulated the town over.

    This argument is like socialized medicine. It works wonderfully just about everywhere else, yet American Exceptionalism keeps the naysayers going.

    Nowhere is ever going to be tragedy proof, but how about we make it a little harder to kill multiple people at long range with a finger pull?

    The idea that "oh people will find a way" and "well knives kill people too" are a viable defense for no/limited gun control is either an insult to my intelligence or an indicator of your own. Cognitive dissonance is one hell of a drug.
     
    Last edited: Feb 19, 2018
  2. KnightBrolaire

    KnightBrolaire Build the Wall of Sound™

    Messages:
    12,032
    Likes Received:
    9,759
    Joined:
    Mar 19, 2015
    Location:
    MN, USA
    A number of those supposed 18 shootings were accidental/negligent discharges, and not actual shootings.
    https://www.washingtonpost.com/loca...1d91fcec3fe_story.html?utm_term=.55438c7fcca4
    According to Everytown (a gun control advocacy group), "any time a firearm discharges a live round inside a school building or on a school campus or grounds," it counts as a school shooting, regardless of whether or not the shooting results in injury or death." - This is why there's a big dispute over the last couple of days as to what entails a shooting.
    https://www.cnbc.com/2018/02/15/her...eport-of-18-school-shootings-breaks-down.html
    CNN at least sets up their criteria for a school shooting (unlike everytown) and claims 8 shootings (though some are accidental discharges).
    https://www.cnn.com/2018/02/01/us/school-shootings-in-2018/index.html
     
  3. MaxOfMetal

    MaxOfMetal Likes trem wankery. Super Moderator

    Messages:
    32,098
    Likes Received:
    13,168
    Joined:
    Aug 7, 2008
    Location:
    Racine, WI
    Thank goodness only eight school shootings! I was getting worried.
     
    JSanta, Chiba666, Seybsnilksz and 2 others like this.
  4. iamaom

    iamaom SS.org Regular

    Messages:
    315
    Likes Received:
    441
    Joined:
    Sep 3, 2016
    Location:
    Washington
    I agree to an extent but I don't think those are completely comparable. Guns can do a lot of damage in a short time at a long distance, I don't think the recent school shooting or the las vegas shooting could have happened with knives or acid. Even with a car/truck I'd argue the las vegas shooter couldn't have killed as many people because the panic of not knowing where bullets are coming from vs knowing exactly where a multi-ton vehicle is will make a lot of difference in evasive maneuvers. There are also other uses for knives, acid, and vehicles other than being killing tools. I come from a moderate gun family, they have a few and like to hunt or go to the range a few times a year, so I understand the hobby and community aspect but I'm not sure if that fun is worth the amount of lives we've lost. I think it'd be near impossible to get rid of guns completely, and I wouldn't be comfortable with something that extreme, but the US has a huge problem. No, it's certainly not just guns and banning guns wouldn't magically solve everything, but better gun regulation should be a part of a grander solution.
     
    zappatton2, JoshuaVonFlash and Dcm81 like this.
  5. Dcm81

    Dcm81 SS.org Regular

    Messages:
    500
    Likes Received:
    84
    Joined:
    Jul 5, 2012
    Location:
    Victory Castle, Germany
    This is so funny and at the same time just sad;

     
    Seybsnilksz and zappatton2 like this.
  6. KnightBrolaire

    KnightBrolaire Build the Wall of Sound™

    Messages:
    12,032
    Likes Received:
    9,759
    Joined:
    Mar 19, 2015
    Location:
    MN, USA
    I don't see how this is a point of contention. Highly motivated people are going to do whatever it takes to enact their plans, whether with knives, guns, bombs or trucks. I wasn't implying that we should regulate trucks, knives or acid more, merely that people will find a way to kill each other no matter what they have at their disposal. I'm not completely opposed to gun regulation, but I'd prefer that it was actually effective instead of just being a placebo until the next shooting. There's no magic cure all for this particular problem. It's easy to say MORE REGULATION, but it's far harder to implement effective regulation when everybody has a knee jerk reaction to either ban all the guns or go deeper into their Murica-Rambo mentality.
     
  7. Lorcan Ward

    Lorcan Ward 7slinger

    Messages:
    5,160
    Likes Received:
    1,698
    Joined:
    May 15, 2009
    Location:
    Ireland
    Trying to control guns in the US is like trying to control alcohol consumption in Ireland. We have so many strict laws, penalties, constant prices increases, health warnings campaigns, strict buying hours etc yet it does absolutely f**k all. Once something is embedded in your culture it could take decades before you see any change and thats only if the correct measures are taken.
     
    possumkiller and KnightBrolaire like this.
  8. iamaom

    iamaom SS.org Regular

    Messages:
    315
    Likes Received:
    441
    Joined:
    Sep 3, 2016
    Location:
    Washington
    My argument is that guns are a uniquely effective method of doing so. I could go on a plastic spoon stabbing spree and maybe kill a few people but it wouldn't as effective as a tool made for killing. So saying you could do anything with anything isn't really a valid argument against gun control.

    I've thought about it since my last post and I think there is, we can just shoot everyone who owns a gun.
     
  9. KnightBrolaire

    KnightBrolaire Build the Wall of Sound™

    Messages:
    12,032
    Likes Received:
    9,759
    Joined:
    Mar 19, 2015
    Location:
    MN, USA
    I never made it as an argument against gun control, it was more in support of the fact that regulating things to death doesn't stop people from doing things they're not supposed to. Motivated individuals are still going to find ways to circumvent laws and regulations and these issues will still pop up from time to time.
    Look at drunk driving/ texting while driving laws, it's the same kind of idea where we try and enforce the rules, but barring catching someone swerving in and out of their lane or doing something else that's obvious, it's kind of hard to enforce other than with sobriety checkpoints. People have come up with ideas like cell jammers that are activated while the car is in motion and other equally idealistic concepts, which have been met with more realistic proposals like hands-free headsets. Same idea with guns. Some people have proposed RFID tags or biometric tags to lock firearms to one owner (both concepts have been hacked pretty quickly), some have proposed mandatory registration of secondhand firearms (difficult to enforce barring an audit), etc.
    Guns are only as effective as the user makes them, same as any other tool/weapon. Granted, the skill barrier for shooting clustered up civilians at close range isn't exactly high, but neither is hopping behind the wheel of a delivery van and running people over :shrug: Perhaps if we find a way to control all handguns and semi-automatic rifles the number of shootings will decrease, but let's not forget about the 1966 University of Texas-Austin shooting, where the shooter (an ex-USMC sharpshooter) used a bolt action rifle and killed 14 people/injured 31 others. I'll admit though, that between that shooting and the DC sniper shootings, they're outliers as far as user skill goes, but still something to think about nonetheless.
     
  10. bostjan

    bostjan MicroMetal Contributor

    Messages:
    15,314
    Likes Received:
    3,237
    Joined:
    Dec 7, 2005
    Location:
    St. Johnsbury, VT USA
    I think that the second amendment is possibly the least understood piece of the US Constitution by both sides of this debate. Does it say that I, as an American, have a protected right to buy weapons; or does it say that I have the right to use a musket if I join one of the militias?

    I think anyone who looks into it knows that the wording and passage of the Second Amendment by the founders was heavily debated back in the 18th century. But whatever the case, and no matter of how insane you may think it is, the Second Amendment is worded in such a way to lead the reader to believe that an individual has the right to own ("keep") weapons ("arms") and carry ("and bear") them around. The model at the time was that people would be encouraged to have weapons to defend their property and themselves, and to have some civic duty to protect their neighbours as well. The idea, at the time, was based off of the model that won the Revolutionary War, in which the individual right to self defense was expanded to a collective duty to defend the municipality and even the nation, and that a standing army was really only necessary in times of war, because the people would be ready and willing to band together quickly and respond as minutemen in the case of a surprise attack. But really, that model fell apart in a matter of a decade or two. What's interesting is that even though the model fell apart, the law remained the same, and since the 1990's, the argument has gone off the deep end.

    People here in the USA are crazy, collectively. Mental health resources here are pretty close to nil, unless you are quite a bit wealthier than average, and guns are incredibly cheap and still very easy to obtain. The culture here is that everyone should own a gun, and also that your mental health is your own responsibility. Gun safety education is prevalent, but also not difficult to avoid. Popular culture elevates vigilantism and self defense against "bad guys" without putting any stress on educating people about what any of that means. The USA used to have a public education system that was up there with the best in the world, but now high school graduates might not even know how to read or find the nation's capital on a map. Education here has very quickly gone right down the toilet, mental health is out of control, and guns are ubiquitous - what the hell should we expect to happen?

    So, to the people on the right, who say that the issue is mental health, you are correct, and to the people on the left who say that the issue is lax gun control, you are also right. Both arguments make valid points, but the crazy thing is that these problems are not mutually exclusive.

    Seeing how the government has dropped the ball on education, pulled the rug out from under mental health services, and refused to take difficult actions to keep guns out of the hands of uneducated and highly unstable people, we might be onto something if we are hesitant to trust the government here to pull off any action currently that won't screw everyone over later...

    So, right now, in most places in the USA, it is considered a human right to be able to own a firearm. But here's an honest question: would you give a firearm to a child? If you answered yes, then I guess just stop reading there, because I've got no logical response to that. But if you said "no," then would you give a firearm to an adult with the mental and emotional capacities of a child? If you answered yes that time, then you have to at least acknowledge that there is a real cognitive dissonance happening there, and it puts your logic into question, but, on the other hand, if you answered no, that opens up a can of worms where you now need to assess something about a person before allowing that person to handle a powerful weapon. I think we can agree that the NRA would not support an IQ test related to gun ownership. Certainly we don't want to limit the rights of people who are disadvantaged, but we can't be so irresponsible as to encourage people to possess a deadly weapon unless they have the cognizance to recognize what that weapon is capable of doing.

    I think that trying to repeal or replace the second amendment would potentially cause another civil war, so that's why some states are just flat out ignoring it.

    So, mental health problems in the USA really haven't changed since the early 1980's, largely due to partisan politics causing friction and people being stubborn about their political viewpoints and ignoring logic. But gun violence has gotten much worse more recently.

    Education in the USA is steadily declining, but how long has it been since public education really addressed gun safety?

    The second amendment has existed for ~250 years, and this gun violence epidemic has only been as bad as this for a few years.

    And that leads me to my conclusion that the gun violence in the USA is primarily attributable to bipartisan conflict. Bipartisan conflict is worse now than it has ever been in my lifetime, gun violence is worse now than it's ever been in my lifetime. Who are these shooters? Generally, they are folks with crazy political views. But crazy political views are actually the new normal. Maybe political extremism is itself rooted in faulty education, but one could argue that faulty education is a symptom of political extremism taking over the nation. I think this whole mess, either way, would largely diminish if we could all just learn how to fucking compromise with each other instead of this "my way or the highway" culture that itself is strongest in congress.
     
    Dcm81 and BenjaminW like this.
  11. vilk

    vilk Very Regular

    Messages:
    5,662
    Likes Received:
    1,826
    Joined:
    Apr 30, 2013
    Location:
    Chicago
    No one is suggesting that we ban all guns or take away all guns. And whenever you hear someone bring up either notion in their anti-gun-control rhetoric it is a red herring, or a straw man.

    "If there's a will there's a way" is also a red herring. No one is debating that point. We're talking about curbing overarching trends in gun-related death. No one is suggesting that if we pass some law that all gun deaths will absolutely go away.
     
  12. n4t

    n4t SS.org Regular

    Messages:
    204
    Likes Received:
    32
    Joined:
    Dec 21, 2012
    Location:
    La Crosse, WI
    Same old shit different day. Anyone involved in a 'Gun Control' debate is a moron and part of the problem. Just what the government wants. A diversion from the facts - the True American Way.

    Let's not look at;
    - Failed healthcare
    - Failed school systems
    - Failed American culture.

    No no no no. Lets make gun laws! Cuz that'll fix it! (It worked so well for drugs!!!)

    Idiots.

    If you aren't going to look closely at what is actually producing these broken people and doing something about it, you are just wasting everyone's time.
     
  13. MaxOfMetal

    MaxOfMetal Likes trem wankery. Super Moderator

    Messages:
    32,098
    Likes Received:
    13,168
    Joined:
    Aug 7, 2008
    Location:
    Racine, WI
    Them some big words for a post that is in itself a logical fallacy.

    We need to work on multiple problems. We have the capability, we just don't seem to want to do anything about anything.
     
  14. narad

    narad SS.org Regular

    Messages:
    7,766
    Likes Received:
    6,580
    Joined:
    Feb 15, 2009
    Location:
    Tokyo
    Yea, exactly. People are just going to find a way to do what they want any way, which is why we don't have laws that prohibit the purchase or use of drugs, etc.

    Oh man, this is the shittiest of arguments. What if I told you knife violence in the UK outpaced US per capita by a factor of 2. I am far more worried of being stabbed in Baltimore than I was in London. I'll cut some slack since you're not in the UK, but there's knife violence and it sucks, but it's not an epidemic. It's crumbs compared to gun violence in the US.

    And way to pick a single instance of terrorism as an argument against policy. This is like wondering if we should have stricter knife control in the UK and saying, well, they're just going to find a way to kill people anyway -- look at 9/11.
     
    xzacx, zappatton2 and JoshuaVonFlash like this.
  15. narad

    narad SS.org Regular

    Messages:
    7,766
    Likes Received:
    6,580
    Joined:
    Feb 15, 2009
    Location:
    Tokyo
    Ah yes, let's just pass a bill to change American culture. On the other hand, republicans would probably accept that faster than they would healthcare reform.
     
  16. BenjaminW

    BenjaminW SS.org Regular

    Messages:
    489
    Likes Received:
    298
    Joined:
    May 9, 2017
    Location:
    San Francisco, California
    When I look back on it now, I do find it to be dull reason and I can happily offer to backtrack on what I said.

    Here's where I can explain myself. First I'll start off with the Second Amendment. The way it's written can be left to the reader's interperation. Such as if the amendment only protects militias or people as a whole to keep and bear arms? How I see it, it's written to protect both parties. When it comes to this right being one that "shall not be infringed upon", Does it mean that gun control laws are unconstitutional? No. The Supreme Court has previously prohibited the carrying of dangerous and unusual weapons. Such as machine guns or assault rifles. The Court also has this to say about the Second Amendment:
    In addition, if the "freedom" argument sounds familiar to you @Explorer, you and I could agree on that argument in itself is ridiculous. If you aren't aware of it, I'll explain it. The "freedom" argument pretty much entails that people should be able to use their possessions without government interference. Does that sound good on paper? Depends on how you look at it but some or most could say yes. Does it work in practice? Not really. This section from an article The Hill posted can further explain the "freedom" argument:
    I find it to somewhat backtrack on what I said about having a "Founding Father" like view on the Second Amendment and gun control. I originally said that with the intention of stating that I believe the way America is like how the Fathers envisioned it. Such as life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. Hopefully that should clear things up for you.
     
  17. Spaced Out Ace

    Spaced Out Ace 0 0 1 0 0 6 5 0 3\

    Messages:
    5,685
    Likes Received:
    2,152
    Joined:
    Jan 27, 2010
    Location:
    Washington
    Mental health is the issue, but yes, please, let's go after guns.
     
    cwhitey2 likes this.
  18. narad

    narad SS.org Regular

    Messages:
    7,766
    Likes Received:
    6,580
    Joined:
    Feb 15, 2009
    Location:
    Tokyo
    Last I checked people weren't being blasted with telekinetic waves.
     
    Seybsnilksz, Mr Violence and StevenC like this.
  19. vilk

    vilk Very Regular

    Messages:
    5,662
    Likes Received:
    1,826
    Joined:
    Apr 30, 2013
    Location:
    Chicago
    *semi-automatic/assault rifles and huge ammo mags
     
    Last edited: Feb 19, 2018
  20. bostjan

    bostjan MicroMetal Contributor

    Messages:
    15,314
    Likes Received:
    3,237
    Joined:
    Dec 7, 2005
    Location:
    St. Johnsbury, VT USA
    It is legal for a mentally ill person to buy a weapon capable of killing dozens of people in seconds.

    The shooter involved in the Marjory Stoneman Douglas shooting had a history of mental illness, had, on record, made several threats to other students there, was expelled from the school, and had even been reported to the FBI for threatening to do exactly what he ended up doing.

    It makes me feel ill to say it, but this is routine now. Columbine has been playing on repeat every couple of years and nothing congress has done has been at all effective in stopping it. So what do we do to stop it? What can we do? More importantly, what can we do to stop this problem from getting worse - either in frequency or in scale?

    The Republican Party's answer: Nothing. Do nothing. ...and that's what they've been doing for decades now, and it is getting worse.

    So @Spaced Out Ace , what do you propose?
     
    xzacx likes this.
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page

  1. This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.