What's new
By:

Welcome to 'Murica

Stoked said:
I do think that would decrease the total flow and by result some of the guns coming up. Doing a better job at border security would also help strangle that flow even further.

But I am not sure how many drugs I am comfortable legalizing. Not sure where I stand on that tbh.
Click to expand...
I would worry about legalizing the "hard stuff" too. I think the amount of danger a product causes vs the amount of good it does should be considered in any talks of legalization.

As for decreasing the flow of guns coming up...... Im confident in saying that almost all guns in the US made and sold legally. Most of them probably made in a factory in the US
 
Is anybody seriously considering a total ban on guns? Do I need to re-read this thread from the beginning?
 
NAOS said:
Is anybody seriously considering a total ban on guns? Do I need to re-read this thread from the beginning?
Click to expand...

Isn't that what a gun ban is? Jimles even went so far as to mildly support civil war to remove them.
 
According to news outlets:

ATF Assistant Special Agent in Charge Celinez Nunez said at a news conference Friday that all of the weapons were purchased legally, seven of them by the shooter or his family members in the last three years.
Click to expand...
 
Stoked said:
Question for those supporting a gun ban.

There are by estimation over 300 millions guns in America. Let us say a gun ban is put into place and citizens are required to turn in their weapons. Let us say that many people do and let's say that 75% of weapons are confiscated and destroyed. That still leaves 75 million guns in the US. How to we get those guns? What is the plan to confiscate and destroy them?
Click to expand...

Does that 300 million include those owned by the police and military?
 
Stoked said:
That still leaves 75 million guns in the US. How to we get those guns? What is the plan to confiscate and destroy them?
Click to expand...
Over time they would surface..... Or they wouldn't because they would stay locked up (which would be a good thing imo)

Either way 75 million guns is better than 300 million.



But I actually agree with you that nothing will be done because it would be too difficult. (Though I would not say impossible)

I'm not even necessarily arguing that guns should be banned. Im more arguing that guns are a negative thing and we would be better off with less of them.... However that gets accomplished
I just think it's weird and wrong that so many Americans are so in love and obsessed with their guns. And I'm not saying these are bad people or anything (my dad and brothers have lots of guns and are amazing, awesome, good people) I just think they are misguided
 
Stoked said:
Isn't that what a gun ban is? Jimles even went so far as to mildly support civil war to remove them.
Click to expand...

"guns" aren't one thing.

There's muzzleloaders, semi-automatics, fully automatics.... rifles, pistols, .....
 
JimLes said:
According to news outlets:
ATF Assistant Special Agent in Charge Celinez Nunez said at a news conference Friday that all of the weapons were purchased legally, seven of them by the shooter or his family members in the last three years.
Click to expand...
Click to expand...

...but nothing can be done.... right Stoked?
 
fishonjazz said:
Over time they would surface..... Or they wouldn't because they would stay locked up (which would be a good thing imo)

Either way 75 million guns is better than 300 million.



But I actually agree with you that nothing will be done because it would be too difficult. (Though I would not say impossible)

I'm not even necessarily arguing that guns should be banned. Im more arguing that guns are a negative thing and we would be better off with less of them.... However that gets accomplished
I just think it's weird and wrong that so many Americans are so in love and obsessed with their guns. And I'm not saying these are bad people or anything (my dad and brothers have lots of guns and are amazing, awesome, good people) I just think they are misguided
Click to expand...

There is actually a lot in this post I agree with. I knew you were not arguing for a full on gun ban by your earlier posts about "less guns" instead of no guns.

I think the full on love affair in some quarters for guns is weird as well. I wouldn't really call guns a negative thing but I can see your point and don't really oppose it enough to argue against it.

Only real thing I have a problem with is "however that is accomplished". There are certain methods I simply will not support. But yes, less guns would be a good thing I think.
 
Stoked said:
There is actually a lot in this post I agree with. I knew you were not arguing for a full on gun ban by your earlier posts about "less guns" instead of no guns.

I think the full on love affair in some quarters for guns is weird as well. I wouldn't really call guns a negative thing but I can see your point and don't really oppose it enough to argue against it.

Only real thing I have a problem with is "however that is accomplished". There are certain methods I simply will not support. But yes, less guns would be a good thing I think.
Click to expand...
Good talk. I got no problem with anything in this post
Our beef has been squashed
 
Stoked said:
From what I remember these were citizen owned firearms. Not military, police or other federal and state agencies.
Click to expand...

OK, so, that would add another... what, 25 million? Probably more. But, OK, let's leave the professionals out of this.

As fish said, they would either remain out of sight or be eventually retrieved in one way or another.
 
Stoked said:
Only real thing I have a problem with is "however that is accomplished". There are certain methods I simply will not support. But yes, less guns would be a good thing I think.
Click to expand...

You're grossly exaggerating the possible resistance to this, beyond grumbling and threats, anyway. You're also grossly exaggerating the ability of anyone, in a modern world, to wage a war on the Government of the USA. And you just assumed that in my vision of an outright ban on guns, the police would raid people's houses looking for them. As Fish pointed out, it'd likely be enough to wait. They'd surface. Police stops, unrelated searches, stupid mistakes...people would give themselves away. Would you have some absolute wackos who'd be willing to get involved in shootouts with the FBI over guns in the forests of Idaho? Of course you would, but you can't go with the reasoning that a law should not be made because some people would not comply with it. That's true for all laws.
 
JimLes said:
You're grossly exaggerating the possible resistance to this, beyond grumbling and threats, anyway. You're also grossly exaggerating the ability of anyone, in a modern world, to wage a war on the Government of the USA. And you just assumed that in my vision of an outright ban on guns, the police would raid people's houses looking for them. As Fish pointed out, it'd likely be enough to wait. They'd surface. Police stops, unrelated searches, stupid mistakes...people would give themselves away. Would you have some absolute wackos who'd be willing to get involved in shootouts with the FBI over guns in the forests of Idaho? Of course you would, but you can't go with the reasoning that a law should not be made because some people would not comply with it. That's true for all laws.
Click to expand...

No offense, but as a foreigner to the USA you might not have the best insight on how the people here think. Obviously most will go along, but a strong portion of the NW, and the south (particularily Texas) would go down swinging.
 
JimLes said:
Why can't we do both simultaneously? Ban guns and educate people on why they're ruining the society.



Would this education start with the principle that guns are a bad thing? For all of us? Because if it doesn't, it's a waste of time. As long as people believe that guns are fun, like you do, these sort of situations will happen. If you're going to talk to kids about this kind of stuff, the way to go would be peace education. Violence IS wrong, even when it's necessary. It's still wrong. Guns are not cool, nor fun, nor is killing people or animals.

I really don't understand how anyone could live in a society where guns and violence are celebrated as cool and manly and then be shocked when someone really takes this to heart.
Click to expand...

You're a tad bit of an extremist here. I don't think anybody has said killing people is cool, or fun, or that they want to. People that think like that, they're not ok in the head. Have you had any experience with guns? Ever shot one? I'm just curious what your experience with them is, outside of what you hear on the news.
 
JimLes said:
Why can't we do both simultaneously? Ban guns and educate people on why they're ruining the society.



Would this education start with the principle that guns are a bad thing? For all of us? Because if it doesn't, it's a waste of time. As long as people believe that guns are fun, like you do, these sort of situations will happen. If you're going to talk to kids about this kind of stuff, the way to go would be peace education. Violence IS wrong, even when it's necessary. It's still wrong. Guns are not cool, nor fun, nor is killing people or animals.

I really don't understand how anyone could live in a society where guns and violence are celebrated as cool and manly and then be shocked when someone really takes this to heart.
Click to expand...

You're taking things out of context. What's cool is to be in the same circumstances to defend yourself against someone that has obtained a gun for evil purposes. Gun ownership should be looked at from a defensive perspective.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page
Back
Top