Gun Control

[notorious]

We have all heard about what happened in Aurora, Co, and I think that Gun Control is going to be a huge topic in the following months.


What measures need to be taken? Do you have any ideas that will help prevent this kind of thing from happening again as it pertains to guns?

[listopencil]

Originally Posted by Aries Walker

Think he could have hit 70 people with an ice pick? You think that guy could have gotten his car into that movie theater? Even if he went after the Farmer's Market instead, he spread more fear, his attack lasted longer, and his targets were much less able to just get out of the way with his guns. They're also easier to use, cheaper, faster, and more likely to kill a lot of people because, unlike cars, they're made to do that.

Guns, cars, and ice picks have one and only one quality in common: they can be used to kill somebody. As Bwana pointed out, so can a ball-point pen. So can a mattress, if you throw it hard enough. It's a terrible argument that's logically empty and useful only when you have no other point to raise. All it does it sink the gun control debate into more of a mire than it already is, so please, come up with another argument.

The argument is this: There are no dangerous weapons, only dangerous people. It's that simple.

[R8ers]

Originally Posted by listopencil

The argument is this: There are no dangerous weapons, only dangerous people. It's that simple.

I keep my guns locked in the safe so they don't kill people when I sleep

[Aries Walker]

Originally Posted by R8ers

Bombs are easy to make too with simple household chemicals too... Should we ban those?

You're still trying the same thing. Bombs aren't commercially available, nor are they vigorously defended by a powerful national lobby. Bombs have a much steeper learning curve, are harder to create and implement alone, and they sport a pretty horrific side effect if you screw up while making it. They take longer to light and throw, or advanced recon to plant. They're less reliable, less feared, and harder to conceal. They're also vastly different than guns, and just as much an argumentative smokescreen.

Originally Posted by listopencil

The argument is this: There are no dangerous weapons, only dangerous people. It's that simple.

Okay, let's run with that. What do you think of the Civil Defense Force?

[RNR]

Ok it is simple enough, everyone turn in your guns now. Oh and bad guys you first~

[R8ers]

You're still trying the same thing. Bombs aren't commercially available, nor are they vigorously defended by a powerful national lobby. Bombs have a much steeper learning curve, are harder to create and implement alone, and they sport a pretty horrific side effect if you screw up while making it. They take longer to light and throw, or advanced recon to plant. They're less reliable, less feared, and harder to conceal. They're also vastly different than guns, and just as much an argumentative smokescreen.

Don't Worry Chief fans, There are plenty of Moonbat Raider Fans that embarrass the shit out of me too

[RNR]

Originally Posted by R8ers

Don't Worry Chief fans, There are plenty of Moonbat Raider Fans that embarrass the shit out of me too

Did you think my post was serious?

[R8ers]

Originally Posted by RedNeckRaider

Did you think my post was serious?

Wasn't talking about you.... Your post was there after I hit send

[RNR]

Originally Posted by R8ers

Wasn't talking about you.... Your post was there after I hit send

Duck is pretty much a moonbat I guess~

[R8ers]

Originally Posted by RedNeckRaider

Duck is pretty much a moonbat I guess~

Not talking about anyone on this site either

[AustinChief]

Originally Posted by Aries Walker

Along those lines, let me ask this: Would you all be willing to support replacing carry permits with membership in this hypothetical Civil Defense Force? It would require extra training, yearly retesting, and I'd imaging some level of psychological profiling. The standards could be set federally so that each CDF member could operate nationwide, but each state (or even each county), could govern their own.

Thoughts?

Replacing? no... not with a federal program. IN ADDITION TO? Absolutely. It really depends on the details. In theory, if it results in more law abiding citizens with the right to carry in more places then I am all for it.

[RNR]

Originally Posted by R8ers

Not talking about anyone on this site either

Duck is pretty witty and fun to post with, less politics. If he shows up he will jump both feet in on the anti gun team~

[listopencil]

Originally Posted by Aries Walker

Okay, let's run with that. What do you think of the Civil Defense Force?

Your idea? Not acceptable. The National Guard already serves that purpose.

[R8ers]

Originally Posted by RedNeckRaider

Duck is pretty witty and fun to post with, less politics. If he shows up he will jump both feet in on the anti gun team~

O Well

[johnny961]

Originally Posted by notorious

It's crazy that a private sale can be made to a complete stranger. I think I suggested that any transfer of a firearm should be done through an FFL.

I am generally against more gun laws but this is something I think I could personally get behind. On all private sales either make individuals go through an ffl or create some kind of system in which a firearm owner could themselves document the sales of their own guns and contact NICS for an approval on the sale. I wouldnt 't see the requirement of background checks on private sales as a bad thing.

[Branden Albert's Huge Balls]