Posts: 1,202
Reputation:
4
About: to blow some phat clouds brah
06-18-2016, 12:35 AM
Here's a thread since Diehard's being a biggole baby.
I think it's a really complicated issue that may never be solved, especially since there's so much money from lobbyists skewing the whole thing. On one hand I think there should be more restrictions, and maybe something can be done about the 'loophole.' But as diehard said, how can you enforce a law against private sellers? They're probably gonna do it anyway. The only way to stop SOME of it would be to set up sting operations where police pretend to be buyers, and arrest the seller, but that's fucking stupid and will not have an effect in the long run. You're simply not going to keep people from getting what they want if there's money to be made. Drugs, prostitutes, guns, etc. On the other hand, there are so many guns in the country already I'm not sure how much of a difference restrictions would make as far as violent crimes go. Maybe for future generations but people seem to want an answer right now.
I was watching a clip of Colbert's tonight show and I actually think Bill O'Reilly has a somewhat reasonable solution.
The one and only king of cums.
•
Posts: 1,202
Reputation:
4
About: to blow some phat clouds brah
06-18-2016, 12:40 AM
The reason I don't want guns to be LESS restricted should be obvious. There are certain people who just should not own a deadly weapon. I understand that a life and death situation is fluid, but if someone wants to take your wallet or your purse, I'd just let them have it. I will not be pulling my gun out for some shit like that. but I know a couple anxiety-ridden people that I'm pretty certain would pull out their weapon and maybe not think prior to pulling the trigger. I don't know, fuck. it's not easy.
The one and only king of cums.
•
Posts: 1,352
Reputation:
5
About: no pussy gettin homo that post a lot
06-18-2016, 12:56 AM
i think the issue is the following:
-obviously, there should be restriction
-there IS restriction in theory, but in practice it is not enforced
-making MORE laws, rallying behind people who say they will make more laws, saying without any concrete meaning that you want "gun control", spitting on people who disagree with you, and etc are all not solving this problem
how do you better enforce the laws that we have? this is a funny issue in my eyes because where i think the executive branch (as this is an executive problem and NOT a legislative or judicial) is often grasping for power they dont deserve, this is literally their problem. i think that if, within your state as a governor, something like this happens when the laws would have stopped it you should just get kicked out immediately
that should be your number one job. doing politic-y stuff, getting reelected, pandering, all of that is not doing your job. this is a job that you can do and should do. i dunno. even if they cant physically walk down to wherever and fix the problem, it should be their number one priority to find out how to do it
the idea that this is a yes/no is dumb. immigration is a political issue (we are told) but the argument is never "should we allow immigration? yes or no", the argument is how much and how it is enforced and so on, and for guns its the same
•
Posts: 1,352
Reputation:
5
About: no pussy gettin homo that post a lot
06-18-2016, 12:59 AM
(This post was last modified: 06-18-2016, 12:59 AM by Ben.)
and there is the added element of- "you dont want another law? this means you are evil and their deaths are on your hands" when in reality the answer is "i dont want another law because we arent being responsible with the ones we have"
ive literally never met or spoken to a person who just wants complete freedom as per what guns, where, and how. its a complete misrepresentation of the issue of "legality" which i talked to grue about previously. his analogy is good:
there is a park where buildings are not allowed. still, someone bribes the mayor to give him a permit to build in the park. this is not technically illegal, no court can say it was, but the spirit of the "game" is that he shouldnt be allowed to do that. if a person gets a weapon because the system allowed it despite what the system said it would do, this is not a problem that the system can solve by being a bigger, larger system. you need to go kick the mayor out instead
•
Posts: 1,352
Reputation:
5
About: no pussy gettin homo that post a lot
06-18-2016, 01:01 AM
the stereotypical liberal solution would be to let the mayor handle his own mistakes but i dont see why that would ever be wise if he has demonstrated that he is unable or unwilling. im not trying to use "mayor" to mean president, mayor just means "current government establishment"
•
Posts: 13
Reputation:
3
About: no asshole
06-18-2016, 01:58 AM
guns are dumb get a sword like shinji ikari who is my favourite soul eater
•
Posts: 1,943
Reputation:
0
About: ima psycho gamer mercenary who will kill u at a drop of a hat nd hats drop ez in this fcked up world
06-18-2016, 01:59 AM
control these guns *flexes biceps*
06-18-2016, 08:49 AM
Simple things like taking a course on gun safety and requiring a test for a gun licence would be a good idea in the very least
06-20-2016, 04:52 AM
Yes of course it's common sense really
•
Posts: 1,202
Reputation:
4
About: to blow some phat clouds brah
06-20-2016, 09:05 AM
guns are dangerous and they kill many people and we need to revise the constitution
/diehardbait
The one and only king of cums.
•
Posts: 2,330
Reputation:
12
About: ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°)
06-20-2016, 11:21 AM
I can solve this issue in two words: laser guns
•
Posts: 1,202
Reputation:
4
About: to blow some phat clouds brah
06-20-2016, 11:41 AM
im pretty sure that didnt solve anything wait nope.
The one and only king of cums.
•
06-20-2016, 08:06 PM
What if we attached sharks to the guns
•
Posts: 2,611
Reputation:
8
About: I sleep
06-20-2016, 10:08 PM
(06-18-2016, 12:35 AM)GeorgeBubbinz Wrote: Here's a thread since Diehard's being a biggole baby.
I think it's a really complicated issue that may never be solved, especially since there's so much money from lobbyists skewing the whole thing. On one hand I think there should be more restrictions, and maybe something can be done about the 'loophole.' But as diehard said, how can you enforce a law against private sellers? They're probably gonna do it anyway. The only way to stop SOME of it would be to set up sting operations where police pretend to be buyers, and arrest the seller, but that's fucking stupid and will not have an effect in the long run. You're simply not going to keep people from getting what they want if there's money to be made. Drugs, prostitutes, guns, etc. On the other hand, there are so many guns in the country already I'm not sure how much of a difference restrictions would make as far as violent crimes go. Maybe for future generations but people seem to want an answer right now.
I was watching a clip of Colbert's tonight show and I actually think Bill O'Reilly has a somewhat reasonable solution.
"easy access to rapid fire weaponry" "had the access to the weapon" "congress debates what guns are allowed, you can't have bazookas you can't have hand grenades, so it's perfectly legitimate for congress to go, what kind of rifles should people be able to buy"
Holy hell this is a dumb video. You do not have easy access to "rapid fire weaponry", buying one is expensive and you need to go through a gun store to get one. Contrary to popular belief, there are background checks in every state without exception. Congress should NOT be allowed to determine what weapons we shall have, because it is protected by the constitution. When the fuck have you ever seen crime comitted with this shit? You don't, because you have to register to obtains those types of weapons. AS WELL for select fire guns.
The general public have some sort of stigmata on the AR-15. It scares them into shitting themselves just looking at it. Is it the all black coating? I don't even know. I always hear people stating "it's a high capacity rifle why would you need that thing!!!". Do they not know that hunting rifles use a larger round? Regardless, the 2nd amendment is a part of the Bill of Rights. Anyone who touches them is tyrannical and shows that the other 9 can be up for interpretation as well.
"every single crime done with a gun, is a federal crime" "2nd amendment does not let you break the law with a gun"
I highly agree with these though.
(06-18-2016, 12:40 AM)GeorgeBubbinz Wrote: The reason I don't want guns to be LESS restricted should be obvious. There are certain people who just should not own a deadly weapon. I understand that a life and death situation is fluid, but if someone wants to take your wallet or your purse, I'd just let them have it. I will not be pulling my gun out for some shit like that. but I know a couple anxiety-ridden people that I'm pretty certain would pull out their weapon and maybe not think prior to pulling the trigger. I don't know, fuck. it's not easy.
Of course criminals should own firearms. There are laws that exist that prevents them from obtaining one legally. What does the second part of the paragraph have to do with the former?
(06-18-2016, 12:56 AM)Ben Wrote: i think the issue is the following:
-obviously, there should be restriction
-there IS restriction in theory, but in practice it is not enforced
-making MORE laws, rallying behind people who say they will make more laws, saying without any concrete meaning that you want "gun control", spitting on people who disagree with you, and etc are all not solving this problem
how do you better enforce the laws that we have? this is a funny issue in my eyes because where i think the executive branch (as this is an executive problem and NOT a legislative or judicial) is often grasping for power they dont deserve, this is literally their problem. i think that if, within your state as a governor, something like this happens when the laws would have stopped it you should just get kicked out immediately
that should be your number one job. doing politic-y stuff, getting reelected, pandering, all of that is not doing your job. this is a job that you can do and should do. i dunno. even if they cant physically walk down to wherever and fix the problem, it should be their number one priority to find out how to do it
the idea that this is a yes/no is dumb. immigration is a political issue (we are told) but the argument is never "should we allow immigration? yes or no", the argument is how much and how it is enforced and so on, and for guns its the same
-no, there already are enough
-it is enforced
-the problem is the sensationalism that revolves around people committing mass murder with weapons.
what the hell is that last part, you're saying if the person in power doesn't uphold a law they should be thrown out?
(06-18-2016, 12:59 AM)Ben Wrote: and there is the added element of- "you dont want another law? this means you are evil and their deaths are on your hands" when in reality the answer is "i dont want another law because we arent being responsible with the ones we have"
ive literally never met or spoken to a person who just wants complete freedom as per what guns, where, and how. its a complete misrepresentation of the issue of "legality" which i talked to grue about previously. his analogy is good:
there is a park where buildings are not allowed. still, someone bribes the mayor to give him a permit to build in the park. this is not technically illegal, no court can say it was, but the spirit of the "game" is that he shouldnt be allowed to do that. if a person gets a weapon because the system allowed it despite what the system said it would do, this is not a problem that the system can solve by being a bigger, larger system. you need to go kick the mayor out instead
we are responsible with the laws we have, people who break that law are no better than someone who breaks any other law. So yes, I agree on some penalty system for breaking the fucking law
(06-18-2016, 08:49 AM)Gorilla Tits Wrote: Simple things like taking a course on gun safety and requiring a test for a gun licence would be a good idea in the very least
They have these for conceal carry permits and for obtaining a hunting permit. I agree that every single american should take a gun safety course, since everyone who does not know about guns or how to handle them are emotional, ignorant blithering idiots. They teach you how to respect the weapon and how to handle it. Gun licences (which I assume you mean "you need a licence to own a gun") are a breach in privacy on my personal freedom and should not be allowed.
(06-20-2016, 04:52 AM)Spastic Wrote: Yes of course it's common sense really
It's common sense to tell you to suck my dick
•
Posts: 2,611
Reputation:
8
About: I sleep
06-20-2016, 10:19 PM
(This post was last modified: 06-20-2016, 10:21 PM by Delirious Biznasty.)
(06-20-2016, 04:52 AM)Spastic Wrote: Yes of course it's common sense really
ok but really here is a serious reply
Yes, you're right. It should be common sense! Man, these Bill of Rights are pretty old, I think we should change some other stuff too!
Hmm, all these protesting against immigration are scary! We should ban them outright because that could end up being violent! Lets not use educated responses to this problem though, we need to think of the children! Right to assembly, more like right for a felony!
Well then, there was some sort of national disaster! Shit, we better use every resource available to kick down every door to search the premises! We don't need probable cause, think of the children!
Some people are just TOO evil and sick minded, they should be allowed an actual trial! They should be put away forever. Just think of the CHILDREN if they actually won the case they would have been given!!!!
Seeing as we went after all these other amendments, we have shown that individuals do not deserve the long list of their individual rights, I mean it's common sense! THINK OF THE CHILDREN
whew wait, we live in a country that denies these things from ever happening, thank god I didn't use this "common sense" thing and read something that supports the freedom I deserve.
SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED
(the actual irony is that one of those scenarios actually fucking happened)
([T W I C E])
•
|