What is your opinion on gun laws in the US?

[WhoWhatWhen]

Recently I went to a friends house. Her dad was super drugged up with prescription pills and weed (as far as I know) for his "back pain." Me and the friend were talking and we hear a bang in the kitchen. I thought nothing of it but she is super alert. Her dad yells to her "get your gun" and he walks to the kitchen with his pistol. She gets her gun (some type of hunting gun) and goes to the kitchen. Nothing is there, of course.

I'm really do not like guns and this situation kind of proves my point. This guy, who was clearly on drugs (prescription or not) was not in his right mind. But he still had a gun. Just makes me think what kind of mistakes he could've made in these situations with a gun. This just makes me want to ban guns in the US because crazy/drugged up people like this overreact at the smallest things and go straight to willing to be violent.

~Sorry for rambling but this is bothering me and I don't think I even got it all out right~

[Dalcourt]

Totally get what you talking about. My Dad is also having bis guns around when he's all stoned and stuff. He and his buddies do all kinds of bullshit like shooting cans and bottles while completely high. He also threatened to shoot me when he had some really bad trips.

I feel gun laws should be way stricter so many dumb things and freak accidents happen due to people having such an easy access to guns.

I use guns myself for hunting purpose but never just run around with a gun. I would feel weird. Why would I need a gun when I go shopping or such?

Sadly people in the US are so fond of their guns and their right to have them that I have given up on believing the laws will cgange in my lifetime.

[sqishy]

I'll keep it short because this has come up before. My opinion is that it is very dangerous, shown by the statistics of mass shootings as example.

[DriveAlive]

I am not sure how gun regulations would prevent such a situation from occuring. I am very much in favor for the one and done type of law when it comes to gun crimes. If you commit a crime with a gun, from robbery to drunk driving with a gun in the car, you lose your guns.

[Flapjack]

What gun laws?xD They can't even ban armour piercing rounds and fully auto guns. I think they're decades away from having a decent licensing process.

[DriveAlive]

What gun laws?xD They can't even ban armour piercing rounds and fully auto guns. I think they're decades away from having a decent licensing process.

Armor piercing rounds are illegal. Full auto guns requries extensive licensing, fees, ATF and local police approval, and must be manufactured before 1986.

[Flapjack]

Armor piercing rounds are illegal..
That's good! Sorry just a youtuber I watch uses them so I assumed they were legal:) Maybe the USA is only a decade away from decentish gun control laws!
Full auto guns requries extensive licensing, fees, ATF and local police approval, and must be manufactured before 1986.
'extensive licensing' You have to do more in the UK to get a shotgun for hunting.

The fact that anyone can own a gun I find deeply disturbing and sickening.

[DriveAlive]

That's good! Sorry just a youtuber I watch uses them so I assumed they were legal:) Maybe the USA is only a decade away from decentish gun control laws!

'extensive licensing' You have to do more in the UK to get a shotgun for hunting.

The fact that anyone can own a gun I find deeply disturbing and sickening.

Once again, getting a gun is a lot harder than you might think. I find that there are areas within the laws that are particularly weak and need to be fixed, but the common talking points are mostly covered by the law. The biggest issue is enforcement. Still, it is far more difficult than just anyone getting a gun.

[mattsmith48]

Incredably stupid and dangerous, when the 2nd amendment was writing it seemed smart because they didnt want a cruel dictator taking over like what they lived while part of England. Now its just useless to still have it because something like that will never happen in the US.

[Flapjack]

Once again, getting a gun is a lot harder than you might think. I find that there are areas within the laws that are particularly weak and need to be fixed, but the common talking points are mostly covered by the law. The biggest issue is enforcement. Still, it is far more difficult than just anyone getting a gun.
They sell guns in walmart... I think you have grown up in a bubble buddy and don't realise what it is like in other countries.

http://www.walmart.com/browse/sports-outdoors/firearms/4125_546956_1107532_1225336

[DriveAlive]

They sell guns in walmart... I think you have grown up in a bubble buddy and don't realise what it is like in other countries.

http://www.walmart.com/browse/sports-outdoors/firearms/4125_546956_1107532_1225336

Buying a gun in Walmart is the same process as buying a gun in a gun store. I certainly understand how hard it is to buy guns in other countries, but many people think that it is completely lawless in the U.S. and there is absolutely no restrictions on buying a gun, which is completely untrue.

[dxcxdzv]

They sell guns in walmart... I think you have grown up in a bubble buddy and don't realise what it is like in other countries.

http://www.walmart.com/browse/sports-outdoors/firearms/4125_546956_1107532_1225336
I think the ones in your link (that you can buy online) are fake.
$50 an M4, lol, even I will get interested.

[Flapjack]

I think the ones in your link (that you can buy online) are fake.
$50 an M4, lol, even I will get interested.
There are airsoft guns but if you go to the side and select shotguns you will see:)

[Jinglebottom]

You can purchase guns illegally from the deep web - at least that's what I heard.

[Flapjack]

You can purchase guns illegally from the deep web - at least that's what I heard.
sounds suspicious :D:D:D:D

[Dalcourt]

True there are restrictions on buying a gun in the US, too...but still it's way too easy to buy one legally (as the thread is about gun laws it's not about getting a gun illegally which I'm sure is possible everywhere in the world). Sometimes staff in gun stores is too lazy to go through all the check up stuff they have to do etc.
And I will never understand why people have to carry guns around with them during daily activities.
Just saw a mama with her little girl while grocery shopping the other day and this lady had a handgun in her purse...like wtf?
she wanna take part in a shoot-out the lil girl on her arm or what??

[Leprous]

*pew pew mass shooting*

-Sane people "Why are guns still everywhere here?"

-Trump supporters "Cuz self defendingz"

-Sane people "If nobody is there to shoot you why do you need them?"

-Trump supporters "Cuz 'Murica free"

^^This is not to be taken seriously people^^

To be honest guns shouldn't be this easy to get. It honestly makes no sense. Like, why do people need these guns? Okay hunting yes. If you want a gun to hunt you shouldn't just be able to buy it whenever you want though.

[Stronk Serb]

Here it's really time consuming and expensive, heck, my moms annual salary could bareky cover a possesion license, a firearm, training and a carry permit. Still, people have AKs and machine guns under their beds and in rural areas shoot them in the air when the Serbian team wins first in some sport, on Christmas and other special occassions. Still, I am not really afraid for my life because our police, even though it sucks at all aspects, is extremely professional and efficient when it comes to violent crime, gun crime in particular when regular people are involved. If mobsters decide to have a shootout, they let them do it unless there are civilian casualties. Also murder rates here are quite low, like between 0 and 1 per 100,000 people.

[Flapjack]

If mobsters decide to have a shootout, they let them do it unless there are civilian casualties. Also murder rates here are quite low, like between 0 and 1 per 100,000 people.
Mobsters have a right to live and be protected too.

[Microcosm]

Taking up guns of any kind would be impractical in the U.S.. It would be possible, but impractical and dangerous. I come from the *deep* South(spooky place, lemme tell ya) and these people don't fuck around about their guns. Hitler II and the Second American Civil War will come out of that.

But in reality, I think it's too easy to get guns. This is obvious to any sane person considering many of the "regulations" here. You can walk into a so-called gun show and buy a rifle without even giving an I.D.. You could be 14 and some people would let you purchase a hunting rifle.

Background checks are a necessity that we don't seem to have a consensus on in this country. People think of the implementation of tons of background checks before used gun purchases as a gateway to strict gun control, and, as you're probably aware, saying the phrase "strict gun control" around a southern republican makes them get quite mad.

[Bull]

I do not support banning guns in USA. I do however support common sense gun control laws that define who can purchase a gun. I do support the closing of loopholes in background checks: I am 19, I can walk into a gun show in certain states and walk out with the gun of my choice with no background check, no waiting period, put down your cash and pick up the gun and go. Not smart. I do support restrictions on weapons of war. In no way do such common sense laws infringe on the 2nd amendment.

The other part of this concern must be directed to the mind set of people. We must be more aware and concerned with mental health, radicalization, motivation to hate. Civility has declined drastically over many years, however, the rapid decline in the last few months is alarming and down right scary! We must develop a higher level of respect for people who are different than us. We must accept that not every one was created in the same mold. We must embrace humanity and stop the hate.

[bandofbros20]

I firmly believe in the right to own guns, however I do agree it is too easy to purchase them. there are background checks when u buy a gun (I've been with my dad when he's bought a gun a few times) but they are not rigorous enough or do a good enough job because people with terrorist ties and mental disorders still get guns. I would support gun regulations if they were smart but the ideas put forth currently are stupid. like 15 Round mags only. and first before we take away the guns from the innocent gun owners, let's stop people from getting gun access from the black market or the deep Web. because I'm not going to hand over my guns until I know for a fact the bad guy doesn't have more firepower than me. but the thing is politicians will probably never Institute smart gun laws, but only stupid ass ones.

[Cadanance00]

I believe my right not to get shot is more important than someone else's right to buy a military assault rifle with a 30 round magazine who's purpose is nothing more than killing the largest number of people in the shortest amount of time.

[mattsmith48]

You can purchase guns illegally from the deep web - at least that's what I heard.

You can also buy cocaine on the deep web, so cocaine should be legal right? its alot less dangerous for you then getting shot

[mattsmith48]

Taking up guns of any kind would be impractical in the U.S.. It would be possible, but impractical and dangerous. I come from the *deep* South(spooky place, lemme tell ya) and these people don't fuck around about their guns. Hitler II and the Second American Civil War will come out of that.

If your so scare of a 2nd Hitler why are you guys voting for him rightnow?

A Second Civil War is just a fantasy people bring up to give them a reason to keep guns legal

[dxcxdzv]

A Second Civil War is just a fantasy people bring up to give them a reason to keep guns legal
I can easily imagine that a second Civil War, which would greatly divide the population, a greatly armed population, would lead to the worst bloodbath in US history.

[mattsmith48]

I can easily imagine that a second Civil War, which would greatly divide the population, a greatly armed population, would lead to the worst bloodbath in US history.

The 1st one was about keeping slavery, what would this one be about? if states ever want to leave the US they would do peacefully throught a vote like other countries did

[dxcxdzv]

The 1st one was about keeping slavery, what would this one be about? if states ever want to leave the US they would do peacefully throught a vote like other countries did
Please note that I am not speculating on the possibilities of such a war. Neither on the reasons that could lead to it.

[mattsmith48]

Please note that I am not speculating on the possibilities of such a war. Neither on the reasons that could lead to it.

Theres the problem with this civil war fantasy, no one just wake up one morning and say lets start a civil war. You need reason to start one and I dont see anything that could do this.

[PlasmaHam]

The 1st one was about keeping slavery, what would this one be about? if states ever want to leave the US they would do peacefully throught a vote like other countries did

The first Civil War was not about slavery, but of state rights. That lie about slavery is their to make the blacks look good and the rebels to look awful. The winners do write the history books after all. State rights could become an issue in this increasingly totalitarian government. I don't know if it could lead to open revolt though.

I seriously doubt Congress will just let some states walk away. The same thing happened in the Civil War and look at how well that went. And what countries have successfully split after a vote?

[mattsmith48]

The first Civil War was not about slavery, but of state rights. That lie about slavery is their to make the blacks look good and the rebels to look awful. The winners do write the history books after all. State rights could become an issue in this increasingly totalitarian government. I don't know if it could lead to open revolt though.

the civil war was about the south wanting to keep slavery even though the federal goverment voted to ban it.

I seriously doubt Congress will just let some states walk away. The same thing happened in the Civil War and look at how well that went. And what countries have successfully split after a vote?


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Independence_referendum#Past_referendums

[PlasmaHam]

the civil war was about the south wanting to keep slavery even though the federal goverment voted to ban it.


You have no idea what you are talking about, do you. Your total explanation there made absolutely no sense when you look at actual history. I am not going to tell you what is wrong, I'll see if you can figure it out yourself.

This is getting off-topic, if you want to continue this discussion feel please to PM me or start a different debate thread.

[Porpoise101]

The first Civil War was not about slavery, but of state rights.
No it was about the supposed right to own slaves. Slaves formed the backbone of the southern economic system and in a last ditch attempt to preserve their lifestyle, southern elites were forced to lose their property or secede. Even though the US didn't officially ban slavery until emancipation, the government was allowing slaves to escape and be free up north.

Also, history isn't always written by the victors. When the losers write, they are exceptionally bitter.

As for gun laws, increased regulation should be put in place. Also, we must stop the smuggling of illegal weapons. It would be a good help to the world, as many of the illegal weapons in the world are from the US. In Japan, American weapons account for 1/3 of the total seizures. This needs to stop, not just for our sake, but everyone else's.

[lliam]

Out of courtesy I will not post here my opinion on the question in the title.

[Professional Russian]

What gun laws?xD They can't even ban armour piercing rounds and fully auto guns. I think they're decades away from having a decent licensing process.

fully automatic weapons and armor piercing ammunition were banned under NFA

The 1st one was about keeping slavery, what would this one be about? if states ever want to leave the US they would do peacefully throught a vote like other countries did

the American people aren't fans of our constitutional rights being fucked with. especially the one that allows to defend ourselves from enemies foreign and domestic. the first step to controlling a population is stripping them of their ability to defend themselves which as we can see there's alot of politicians trying to do that and i dont trust them one bit. so yeah banning guns would lead to another civil war because we don't like our shut being fucked with especially by a crooked corrupt government who can't do a fucking thing but lie to the American people and refuse help to trained military operators.

[Flapjack]

fully automatic weapons and armor piercing ammunition were banned under NFA
I am struggling to get accurate info on the armour piercing rounds however I know fully auto weapons were not banned. Only fully auto weapons made after 1980 something were banned. You're misleading people.

[Professional Russian]

I am struggling to get accurate info on the armour piercing rounds however I know fully auto weapons were not banned. Only fully auto weapons made after 1980 something were banned. You're misleading people.

https://www.atf.gov/rules-and-regulations/national-firearms-act

straight from the ATF. 1934. amended along the way. am I still misleading? I'm sorry they weren't banned just heavily taxed which it hard to get your hands and production of automatic firearms for civilization consumption was banned after 1980 that's why they're hard to get and when you do they're super expensive like $25000

[Flapjack]

https://www.atf.gov/rules-and-regulations/national-firearms-act

straight from the ATF. 1934. amended along the way. am I still misleading? I'm sorry they weren't banned just heavily taxed which it hard to get your hands and production of automatic firearms for civilization consumption was banned after 1980 that's why they're hard to get and when you do they're super expensive like $25000
Yeahhh a tax and ban are not the same thing.

[Professional Russian]

Yeahhh a tax and ban are not the same thing.

the tax was put in place as a substitute for a ban so that it first infringe on the 2nd amendment. and its still acting like a ban. how often you automatics out anywhere? you don't unless you know people who have them.

[Flapjack]

the tax was put in place as a substitute for a ban so that it first infringe on the 2nd amendment. and its still acting like a ban. how often you automatics out anywhere? you don't unless you know people who have them.
$200 dollars does not serve as a ban. Whilst a ban would obviously be better, the low number of automatic weapons out there does make them less commonly used in mass shootings which is good. So why can we not go further and ban assault style weapons so they're used less in mass shootings? So more people don't die?

[Professional Russian]

$200 dollars does not serve as a ban. Whilst a ban would obviously be better, the low number of automatic weapons out there does make them less commonly used in mass shootings which is good. So why can we not go further and ban assault style weapons so they're used less in mass shootings? So more people don't die?

that $200 tax stamp aint shit. if that was the most expensive i would have bought the browning 1919 machine gun ive always wanted along time ago. true machine guns go for $25000+ which your average criminal doesn't have laying around HOWEVER through illegal resources you can get them much cheaper and without registration on them which a ban would do no good on because without registration the government doesn't know it exists and can't really do anything with it unless said person is caught with it. so that tax along with the 1980 civilian ban has Made it virtually impossible to get true automatic weapons hence why it's commonly referred to as the NFA ban. as for assault rifles i dont know what you're talking about. my AR15 hasn't assaulted anybody recently neither has anyone elses. to add alittle more whats fixation on scary black rifles? why not go after glocks which are commonly used? what about shotguns such in the fort hood(i think) shooting? bolt action hunting rifles like in the Texas a&m shooting and Kennedy assassination?

[Flapjack]

as for assault rifles i dont know what you're talking about. my AR15 hasn't assaulted anybody recently neither has anyone elses
Oh the old guns don't kill people, people do. True. But there are accidental deaths because a lot of idiots own guns. It also makes it easier to kill a large number of people. Or are you content with American schools being shot up? With kids being taught how to hide from a school shooter?

[Professional Russian]

Oh the old guns don't kill people, people do. True. But there are accidental deaths because a lot of idiots own guns. It also makes it easier to kill a large number of people. Or are you content with American schools being shot up? With kids being taught how to hide from a school shooter?

i every child got a psych evaluation along with having gun safety taught in schools so you learn how dangerous and learn respect for the gun it'd be better. if mental health records showed up on back ground checks it'd be better. if the government enforced their own laws it'd be better. theres alot of solutions to this problem and banning isn't one of them. banning makes it worse. you ban it from law abiding citizens that leaves it only to the criminals.

[Flapjack]

i every child got a psych evaluation along with having gun safety taught in schools so you learn how dangerous and learn respect for the gun it'd be better.
http://www.wltx.com/news/deputies-3-year-old-accidenlty-shoots-herself/276399222
That 3 year old obviously didn't have a gun safety course.
gun safety taught in schools

Children should not be taught gun safety! They are weapons designed to kill people! How about before anyone gets a gun they have to have psych evaluations and gun safety qualification and training and has to see a police officer and has to keep it securely? That still wouldn't go far enough but it would be better. Most of the gun nuts I have seen are genuine idiots. they preach gun safety and then purposefully shoot their children or accidently shoot people.
FbuxzZl4yyc
UZF8Y9RAB0k
gXvx9IrakpQ
WMnjsZEfFLk


banning makes it worse.
You wanna know something? I live in the UK. I have never been taught how to hide from a school shooter and in the UK there has not been a mass shooting in 5 years. Compared to the USA that has, on average, one mass shooting per day. Yeah some criminals do get guns but school shooters aren't 'criminals' before, most of them have a breakdown and go on a killing spree.

[Professional Russian]

http://www.wltx.com/news/deputies-3-year-old-accidenlty-shoots-herself/276399222
That 3 year old obviously didn't have a gun safety course.


Children should not be taught gun safety! They are weapons designed to kill people! How about before anyone gets a gun they have to have psych evaluations and gun safety qualification and training and has to see a police officer and has to keep it securely? That still wouldn't go far enough but it would be better. Most of the gun nuts I have seen are genuine idiots. they preach gun safety and then purposefully shoot their children or accidently shoot people.
FbuxzZl4yyc
UZF8Y9RAB0k
gXvx9IrakpQ
WMnjsZEfFLk



You wanna know something? I live in the UK. I have never been taught how to hide from a school shooter and in the UK there has not been a mass shooting in 5 years. Compared to the USA that has, on average, one mass shooting per day. Yeah some criminals do get guns but school shooters aren't 'criminals' before, most of them have a breakdown and go on a killing spree.

the UK reference is irrelevant because they've always had a ban on guns. in school I was never taught to hide
quite the contrary actually. we were told to fight back. we were permitted to have on hunting rifles in our vehicles on school property for that reason . and my school never had anything worse than a bomb threat written in crayon on a bathroom wall. every man woman and child should be taught gun safety and learn to respect it. all those videos? accidents happen the i saw one where it said drunk. thats an irresponsible person. not the gun. if you ask me everyone should have a psych evaluation while they're in middle school. I had to have one and so did most of the there kids i went to school with and it was actually a very good thing. also I don't trust anybody but myself with my guns. thats why they're locked up and only me and my dad have the keys to get in. I don't trust cops. they're all assholes who out to get their bonus at the end of the month for making busts and shit. fuck them. actually the college im going to encourages you to bring your knives and gun because huntings a real big thing here in Pennsylvania and I feel safer having my guns with me as well as being surrounded by other people like me with guns

[Flapjack]

the UK reference is irrelevant because they've always had a ban on guns. i
Yeahhh so the crap that the USA has isn't in the UK? How is that irrelevant? Oh wait I know! It disagrees with your talking point.
in school I was never taught to hide
quite the contrary actually. we were told to fight back. we were permitted to have on hunting rifles in our vehicles on school property for that reason .
http://www.gifbin.com/bin/062010/1275389857_naked-gun-facepalm.gif
I am sorry but this is stupid on so many levels.
Firstly, this is the story I was talking about with the children be taught how to hide.
70QVEp7d3O0
Is that little girl supposed to fight back?
Also, having students keep guns in their trucks is stupid. Hold on school shooter!! Let me leave the building, grab my gun and come back so I can engage you in combat despite the fact I have no idea how to fight and you came heavily armed. You're supposed to do all that before someone dies?

What a gun in a students car can be however is a murder weapon when the student is picked on and bullied and wants to either threaten someone or actually shot them.

all those videos? accidents happen the i saw one where it said drunk. thats an irresponsible person. not the gun.

I agree accidents happen. I agree that man was an idiot. But when you weaponise every person in the country, there are going to be accidents and drunk people being stupid. If I got drunk, the worse I could do is embarrass myself. People getting drunk in the USA around guns, could kill people.

[Professional Russian]

Yeahhh so the crap that the USA has isn't in the UK? How is that irrelevant? Oh wait I know! It disagrees with your talking point.

image (http://www.gifbin.com/bin/062010/1275389857_naked-gun-facepalm.gif)
I am sorry but this is stupid on so many levels.
Firstly, this is the story I was talking about with the children be taught how to hide.
70QVEp7d3O0
Is that little girl supposed to fight back?
Also, having students keep guns in their trucks is stupid. Hold on school shooter!! Let me leave the building, grab my gun and come back so I can engage you in combat despite the fact I have no idea how to fight and you came heavily armed. You're supposed to do all that before someone dies?

What a gun in a students car can be however is a murder weapon when the student is picked on and bullied and wants to either threaten someone or actually shot them.



I agree accidents happen. I agree that man was an idiot. But when you weaponise every person in the country, there are going to be accidents and drunk people being stupid. If I got drunk, the worse I could do is embarrass myself. People getting drunk in the USA around guns, could kill people.

I don't think you get it at all. and if you're not from the US or a gun owners yout usually don't. you think banning guns will make it flowers and rainbows when it really wont. if it would id be right along with it and just hunt with my bow. yes Imy very aware of how dangerous guns are. also very aware of how dangerous knives and bows are too. but all my life ive been taught gun safety and to respect it. much like with the machines and tractors i run and the truck I drive. I know they can easily kill me and many others and I respect they have to do that and it goes the same way with guns. I mean fuck mass shootings? look at that guy that killed 83 people with a truck then proceeded to start shooting. it's all in whos using it and their intentions. like ywah i use my guns to kill...deer bear rabbits groundhogs birds foxes coyotes and snakes sometimes. and I actually feel much safer hunting with a gun because in the event I get lost 3 shots straight up is the signal for help and youre not gonna hear a boweek over a mile away. yes guns CAN kill people but in reality the vast majority are used for recreational purposes and all youre really doing ia punishing the law abiding citizens who safely use their guns to hunt or just to shoot with or who use them self defense. and also at this point there's so many legal guns floating around that banning them really can't change much because people buy and sell to each other all the time. thats how i got most of my guns. I bought them from other people and not a dealer.

[Flapjack]

I don't think you get it at all. and if you're not from the US or a gun owners yout usually don't.
Yeah dude I admit I don't get it. I think it's crazy. I think it's stupid. I blame the corrupt politicians. You have got to understand you're in a guns bubble .
you think banning guns will make it flowers and rainbows when it really wont.
Did I say that? Or did I say that I am not happy with the ridiculous number of mass shootings and accidental shootings and something needs to done to bring this number down and save lives.
also very aware of how dangerous knives and bows are too.

Knives and bows are dangerous. But you can't shot up a school with them or shot down at cops from a car park.

I mean fuck mass shootings? look at that guy that killed 83 people with a truck then proceeded to start shooting. it's all in whos using it and their intentions.
Yeah I agree buddy although you are overlooking accidental shootings. Guns make it easier to kill people. So do trucks. But the difference between guns and trucks is that there is currently not a problem with truck killings whereas there is a giant problem with guns. Also, trucks have legitimate used. Why does one need an assault style weapon?
and I actually feel much safer hunting with a gun because in the event I get lost 3 shots straight up is the signal for help and youre not gonna hear a boweek over a mile away.
Flares? What is more of an issue? Mass shootings or people getting lost with a gun?
thats how i got most of my guns. I bought them from other people and not a dealer.
Make it illegal to possess them.

[Professional Russian]

Yeah dude I admit I don't get it. I think it's crazy. I think it's stupid. I blame the corrupt politicians. You have got to understand you're in a guns bubble .

Did I say that? Or did I say that I am not happy with the ridiculous number of mass shootings and accidental shootings and something needs to done to bring this number down and save lives.


Knives and bows are dangerous. But you can't shot up a school with them or shot down at cops from a car park.


Yeah I agree buddy although you are overlooking accidental shootings. Guns make it easier to kill people. So do trucks. But the difference between guns and trucks is that there is currently not a problem with truck killings whereas there is a giant problem with guns. Also, trucks have legitimate used. Why does one need an assault style weapon?

Flares? What is more of an issue? Mass shootings or people getting lost with a gun?

Make it illegal to possess them.

im only addressing the last 2 because the rest is a hopeless argument. flares are illegal in certain areas and good like getting Americans gun. you'll have to take from our cold dead hands.

[Flapjack]

im only addressing the last 2 because the rest is a hopeless argument. flares are illegal in certain areas and good like getting Americans gun. you'll have to take from our cold dead hands.
Yeahhh pointless because it disproves your talking points.

Please enlighten me to why flares are illegal? Are they dangerous? But flares don't kill people, people kill people! How about kinder eggs? They too dangerous too?


you'll have to take from our cold dead hands.
N0Wn3Eey6dY

[Professional Russian]

Yeahhh pointless because it disproves your talking points.

Please enlighten me to why flares are illegal? Are they dangerous? But flares don't kill people, people kill people! How about kinder eggs? They too dangerous too?



N0Wn3Eey6dY

They don't disprove anyrhing. I just know im not gonna change your mind and its hopeless to try. also flares are illegal around airports and military bases for safety reasons. never said flares are dangerous, although my dumbass has burnt the shit out of myself with them before...also almost got arrested cause I hadon't the genius idea to shoot up red white and blue flares on the 4th of July but yeah not really dangerous....i mean theoretically you can kill people with them and they also accept 12 gauge shotgun shells

[Stronk Serb]

Mobsters have a right to live and be protected too.

I am of a different opinion. I think they personally forfeited their righ of protection when they decided to have fucking shootouts, throw people in concrete shoes in the Danube, smuggle drugs etc. If someone close to them dies that isn't so far related to crime, then start an investigation.

[Leprous]

$200 dollars does not serve as a ban. Whilst a ban would obviously be better, the low number of automatic weapons out there does make them less commonly used in mass shootings which is good. So why can we not go further and ban assault style weapons so they're used less in mass shootings? So more people don't die?

Because we have the right to bear arms in this free country so we don't get shot. Obviously.

[Flapjack]

I am of a different opinion. I think they personally forfeited their righ of protection when they decided to have fucking shootouts, throw people in concrete shoes in the Danube, smuggle drugs etc. If someone close to them dies that isn't so far related to crime, then start an investigation.
Well firstly I obviously believe that every human has human rights and so they should be protected. If a human commits a crime, they should receive a fair trail and a fair sentence with rehabilitation. That stuff aside, do you not think if the police when after mobsters involved in shootouts, there would be less shootsouts? If there are less shootouts then surely the odds of an innocent being injured by one is less?
Because we have the right to bear arms in this free country so we don't get shot. Obviously.
ObviouslyXD

[DriveAlive]

Well firstly I obviously believe that every human has human rights and so they should be protected. If a human commits a crime, they should receive a fair trail and a fair sentence with rehabilitation. That stuff aside, do you not think if the police when after mobsters involved in shootouts, there would be less shootsouts? If there are less shootouts then surely the odds of an innocent being injured by one is less?

ObviouslyXD

I think the best way to deter this sort of gang related gun crime is to have massive police crackdowns of gang areas. People choose to ignore the really bad gang ares because they are poor and black. Also, make extremely harsh punishments for possession of illegal firearms. That way, it would take gang members off of the streets and would deter them from having guns on them.

[Flapjack]

I think the best way to deter this sort of gang related gun crime is to have massive police crackdowns of gang areas. People choose to ignore the really bad gang ares because they are poor and black. Also, make extremely harsh punishments for possession of illegal firearms. That way, it would take gang members off of the streets and would deter them from having guns on them.
What would this massive police crackdown involve? I don't disagree I just want to talk about some substance instead of talking points. I assume it would involve sending many poor black men to jail for decades for smoking and selling weed?

What would be these extremely harsh penalties for possession of a illegal firearm?

Would gun control not bring down shootings?

I think a lot of children are forced into a life of crime because they grew up in poor neighbourhoods.

[DriveAlive]

What would this massive police crackdown involve? I don't disagree I just want to talk about some substance instead of talking points. I assume it would involve sending many poor black men to jail for decades for smoking and selling weed?

What would be these extremely harsh penalties for possession of a illegal firearm?

Would gun control not bring down shootings?

I think a lot of children are forced into a life of crime because they grew up in poor neighbourhoods.

Of course this would not be the only solution, and any success would be contingent on a litany of social programs.

It would involve sending criminals do jail for possessing firearms or selling drugs. I am for the legalization of marijuana so that is out. Using drugs would get you sent to rehab. I honestly believe that the biggest problem facing poor black communities is drugs. IF we can curb the flow of drugs, it will vastly improve the impoverished communities.

Illegal firearm possession would definitely get a harsh prison sentence. I am thinking 5+ years minimum. Also, the prison system needs to be revamped, as well. I am in favor of a military boot camp style. The military is known for whipping people in shape and helping them to get their lives on track. This would be a great way to do this for criminals and wold also prevent gangs from forming in prison.

I have yet to find a gun control measure proposed that would work anywhere near as well as what I have just proposed.

[ethan-s]

The thing about gun laws is they don't keep criminals from having guns. Yes, I do think there are some folks who dont deserve to have them like crack heads and felons, but I also think law abiding citizens should be able to have them. I mean, they obey the laws, so why punish them?

[PlasmaHam]

The thing about gun laws is they don't keep criminals from having guns. Yes, I do think there are some folks who dont deserve to have them like crack heads and felons, but I also think law abiding citizens should be able to have them. I mean, they obey the laws, so why punish them?

I have been trying to say this for months now. People who want to murder other people really don't care about doing it legally. The shootings in Baton Rogue were planned well in advance, they could have easily gotten an illegal gun.

[Porpoise101]

I think the best way to deter this sort of gang related gun crime is to have massive police crackdowns of gang areas.
I disagree.. kind of. I do think that we need to restore safety to these areas. That will make businesses and people slowly want to move in again and allow these neighborhoods to recover. But to me, a crackdown isn't going to help that much. Crackdowns in the past have mostly resulted in increased attempts by gang leadership to recruit youth. This is because they mostly result in young and unimportant members being arrested. It isn't a good idea to have a bunch of youths who strayed from the high path being locked up for the activities and pressure of higher-ups. Many of these kids will just end up being criminals again.

This is why I support strategic raids. They result in less collateral damage and take out the higher-ups. We also need to increase the presence of law enforcement, even in schools to keep the peace. Slowly, we can remove the police presence and instead rebuild the neighborhoods again. With increased policing, illegal weapons can be collected as well.

Of course, this does run the risk of aggravating tensions between the police and citizens. But if this is implemented slowly and the citizens get more transparency and say then I think this could work.

[TheLivingLie]

Guns should be band in every country, all they do is kill people, and if people say u need to be able to defend yourself, learn hand to hand combat or use a knife! I am pretty sure it is easier to kill someone with a gun than a knife so less people should die!

[PlasmaHam]

Guns should be band in every country, all they do is kill people, and if people say u need to be able to defend yourself, learn hand to hand combat or use a knife! I am pretty sure it is easier to kill someone with a gun than a knife so less people should die!

Sorry, but that's not the way the world works. Murder is banned in every country too, that doesn't mean people still won't murder.

[jamie_n5]

I support the 2nd Amendment. I would be just fine with stricter background checks and not allow people on don't fly or possible terrorists lists and mentally ill people not to be able to buy firearms period.

[sqishy]

[The USA] has, on average, one mass shooting per day.

There are actually around four mass shootings per day in the US.

(I also liked your 'facepalm-ish' gif.)

- - - - - - - -

Mass shootings also are not the only way that non-suicide gun-related deaths happen, last year over 13,000 people were killed by firearms and not all of those were from mass shootings. I expect the non-fatal casualty number to be greater than 13,000 too.

Over 19,000 suicides with firearms happened in the US in 2010, so that'll add another number.


We tend to talk about events where a group of people die in close proximity in time and space, by a shared cause. These are incredibly important, but so are the events where even one person dies.

[Vlerchan]

on don't fly or possible terrorists lists
Banning people on the basis of the current no-fly and terrorist watchlists, without a doubt, undermines their constitutional right to due process.

The reason that mental health records might be valid, is because those are the result of expert diagnosis.

There are actually around four mass shootings per day in the US.
Which institutions definition are you using here? Because they're all different, and this statistic is only ever really rolled out on a partisan basis.

[sqishy]

Which institutions definition are you using here? Because they're all different, and this statistic is only ever really rolled out on a partisan basis.

You've made me check the past website I looked deeply into, and quickly backtrack and realise I've screwed up.

I was going by what I remember from a website late last year, which did give a number of 1512, the statistic defining a mass shooting as four or more people being shot by a perpetrator. I now cannot find this statistic (a sudden mystery) and another website [ http://www.gunviolencearchive.org/ ] has given the number of mass shootings in 2015 as 332, with the same definition on a mass shooting. Currently this year it is 200, so .9756 shootings happen on average per day so far.

You're absolutely right, I was absolutely wrong. If I was of a fickle theistic mind, I would say that someone deceived me.

Mimikyu is correct.

[Vlerchan]

[Updated source]
Worth noting that this site defines a mass shooting as a situation where four or more people are shot (or killed). The definition the United States government uses refers to four or more people being shot (and killed). That's what I was referring to when I was discussing partisan bias: there is no single definition here.

The likelihood is that there are also shooting situations, in public places, where people are shot at but no-one is shot. This would confuse things further.

[ethan-s]

I have been trying to say this for months now. People who want to murder other people really don't care about doing it legally. The shootings in Baton Rogue were planned well in advance, they could have easily gotten an illegal gun.

That's what I'm saying.


One more thought is this; if idiots get guns and shoot themselves, it is natural selection at work. At least the stupid idiot is dead before he can kill others.:D

[sqishy]

Worth noting that this site defines a mass shooting as a situation where four or more people are shot (or killed). The definition the United States government uses refers to four or more people being shot (and killed). That's what I was referring to when I was discussing partisan bias: there is no single definition here.

There sure isn't a single definition, I recognise that.
That said, I'm not in favour of the US govt's definition, as it ends up showing a smaller number of mass shootings.



The likelihood is that there are also shooting situations, in public places, where people are shot at but no-one is shot. This would confuse things further.

This is an important point, the number of bullets shot with intention to kill is insanely higher.

[TheLivingLie]

Sorry, but that's not the way the world works. Murder is banned in every country too, that doesn't mean people still won't murder.

yes but theres probably less murder, like theres less drugs in the uk cause theyre all banned, if they were legal there would be a lot more

[DriveAlive]

yes but theres probably less murder, like theres less drugs in the uk cause theyre all banned, if they were legal there would be a lot more

Really? I thought countries that decriminalized drugs experienced a decrease in drug use.

[Stronk Serb]

yes but theres probably less murder, like theres less drugs in the uk cause theyre all banned, if they were legal there would be a lot more

Guns aren't banned in the UK, get your facts straight. Ownership is still legal but it's a painful process to obtain the necessary licences and permits for firearms.

[Flapjack]

Guns aren't banned in the UK, get your facts straight. Ownership is still legal but it's a painful process to obtain the necessary licences and permits for firearms.
Yeah there are gun control laws like there should be in the USA. That has reduced gun violence by a lot. I personally think all guns should be banned however.
Really? I thought countries that decriminalized drugs experienced a decrease in drug use.
I have also read that:)

[PlasmaHam]

In 1911, Turkey established gun control. From 1915 to 1917, 1.5 million Armenians, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated.

In 1929, the Soviet Union established gun control. From 1929 to 1953, about 20 million dissidents, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated.

Germany established gun control in 1938 and from 1939 to 1945, a total of 13 million Jews and others who were unable to defend themselves were rounded up and exterminated.

China established gun control in 1935. From 1948 to 1952, 20 million political dissidents, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated.

Guatemala established gun control in 1964. From 1964 to 1981, 100,000 Mayan Indians, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated.

Uganda established gun control in 1970. From 1971 to 1979, 300,000 Christians, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated.

Cambodia established gun control in 1956. From 1975 to 1977, one million educated' people, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated.

Defenseless people rounded up and exterminated in the 20th Century: 56 million. Now you understand why, in the words of Justice Joseph Story (appointed to the Supreme Court by James Madison), "The right of the citizens to keep and bear arms has justly been considered as the palladium of the liberties of a republic; since it offers a strong moral check against the usurpation and arbitrary power of rulers; and will generally, even if these are successful in the first instance, enable the people to resist and triumph over them."

(Source: The Patriot Post, https://patriotpost.us/pages/77)

[Vlerchan]

That isn't evidence that gun control leads to mass killings - or even facilitates them.

In 1922 Ireland made it a capital offence for citizens to possess guns. No mass-killings followed - in fact Ireland was one of the few European states that remained democratic in the decade to come: and it also happened to be on of the few post-colonial states to remain democratic.

It seems clear that there is an independent driver that is being missed in these simplistic calculations - which I'd argue do more harm than good within the debate.

---

In a bid to be a bit more constructive: the likelihood is that gun control influences the risk of state persecution. The techniques to model this have been around in political science since the government survival debates of the mid-80s (Browne, Frendreis and Gleiber 1984; 86; 88) and wouldn't be too difficult to replicate. I do imagine those methods will have been applied to gun control at this stage - and just need to be found.

[Flapjack]

That isn't evidence that gun control leads to mass killings - or even facilitates them.

In 1922 Ireland made it a capital offence for citizens to possess guns. No mass-killings followed - in fact Ireland was one of the few European states that remained democratic in the decade to come: and it also happened to be on of the few post-colonial states to remain democratic.

It seems clear that there is an independent driver that is being missed in these simplistic calculations - which I'd argue do more harm than good within the debate.

---

In a bid to be a bit more constructive: the likelihood is that gun control influences the risk of state persecution. The techniques to model this have been around in political science since the government survival debates of the mid-80s (Browne, Frendreis and Gleiber 1984; 86; 88) and wouldn't be too difficult to replicate. I do imagine those methods will have been applied to gun control at this stage - and just need to be found.
But Vlerchan reality has a well known liberal bias xD

[Stronk Serb]

In 1911, Turkey established gun control. From 1915 to 1917, 1.5 million Armenians, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated.

In 1929, the Soviet Union established gun control. From 1929 to 1953, about 20 million dissidents, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated.

Germany established gun control in 1938 and from 1939 to 1945, a total of 13 million Jews and others who were unable to defend themselves were rounded up and exterminated.

China established gun control in 1935. From 1948 to 1952, 20 million political dissidents, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated.

Guatemala established gun control in 1964. From 1964 to 1981, 100,000 Mayan Indians, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated.

Uganda established gun control in 1970. From 1971 to 1979, 300,000 Christians, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated.

Cambodia established gun control in 1956. From 1975 to 1977, one million educated' people, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated.

Defenseless people rounded up and exterminated in the 20th Century: 56 million. Now you understand why, in the words of Justice Joseph Story (appointed to the Supreme Court by James Madison), "The right of the citizens to keep and bear arms has justly been considered as the palladium of the liberties of a republic; since it offers a strong moral check against the usurpation and arbitrary power of rulers; and will generally, even if these are successful in the first instance, enable the people to resist and triumph over them."

(Source: The Patriot Post, https://patriotpost.us/pages/77)

You miss a trend here, all of them were militarized dictatorships were poverty is/was rampant. Also it was government vs. the people, not an individual or a small group vs. people. If all gun owners of the US rebelled against the government, would they be able to overthrow it? Besides, I'm for meaningful gun regulations. Thorough background checks and psychological evaluation. Look at Switzerland, you need a military background to be able to posess firearms and there are no mass shootings there as far as I'm aware.

[Bluebyrd]

Are we going to ban knives? Knives can kill. How about bricks? Anything can kill so it's the people that we need to sort out, not guns.

[dxcxdzv]

Are we going to ban knives? Knives can kill. How about bricks? Anything can kill so it's the people that we need to sort out, not guns.
I don't know for the rest of Europe, but in France blades are highly subjects to regulations as well.

[Bluebyrd]

I don't know for the rest of Europe, but in France blades are highly subjects to regulations as well.
Yes but you don't hear all of the uproar about knife control, do you?

[Flapjack]

Are we going to ban knives? Knives can kill. How about bricks? Anything can kill so it's the people that we need to sort out, not guns.
How much do you know about the current situation in the USA?
I don't know for the rest of Europe, but in France blades are highly subjects to regulations as well.
Same in the UK. If caught carrying a knife without a valid reason such as the knife is needed for fishing you will get 7 years in prison.

[Vlerchan]

But Vlerchan reality has a well known liberal bias xD
When I speak, it becomes truth.

Are we going to ban knives? Knives can kill. How about bricks? Anything can kill so it's the people that we need to sort out, not guns.
You sure have gotten to the core of their wholly primitive argument.

I could hear the zing! from my desk.

[dxcxdzv]

Yes but you don't hear all of the uproar about knife control, do you?
This is gonna shock you but there are actually very few people who enjoy gambol with a blade in France.
And I think that, conversely, there is a way more significant amount of people who enjoy not having to wonder if the guy next to them has a bunch of steel able to reach their lungs in less than a second.

[PlasmaHam]

Same in the UK. If caught carrying a knife without a valid reason such as the knife is needed for fishing you will get 7 years in prison.

Wow, remind me to keep my 50 some odd knives at home if I ever plan to go to Europe. Where I live, I keep a knife on me almost all the time, very handy. The only real regulations are knives past a certain length and switchblades, basically everyone I know wears a knife.

[Flapjack]

Wow, remind me to keep my 50 some odd knives at home if I ever plan to go to Europe. Where I live, I keep a knife on me almost all the time, very handy. The only real regulations are knives past a certain length and switchblades, basically everyone I know wears a knife.
And you're comfortable living like that? I have never seen someone with a weapon ever!

[PlasmaHam]

And you're comfortable living like that? I have never seen someone with a weapon ever!

Yea, I am honestly surprised the UK doesn't allow that. That is very surprising.

[Flapjack]

Yea, I am honestly surprised the UK doesn't allow that. That is very surprising.
We're not allowed anything for self defence! You can buy a baseball bat but you can't carry it around with the intention of using it as a weapon for self defence or otherwise.

[Porpoise101]

We're not allowed anything for self defence! You can buy a baseball bat but you can't carry it around with the intention of using it as a weapon for self defence or otherwise.
Very bizarre, even I have a knife on me unless at school.

I wonder, are martial arts popular in the UK?

[Vlerchan]

Very bizarre, even I have a knife on me unless at school.
In contrast, I find the idea of carrying a knife with me nuts (here, it's the scummiest sort of people that do it).

In Ireland, alongside restrictions on knives and pepper-spray, our police are also unarmed.

[Flapjack]

Very bizarre, even I have a knife on me unless at school.

I wonder, are martial arts popular in the UK?
Not really tbh? Like you get the few boys in high school that do boxing but there's no rush to become ninjas because we can't carry a gun if that's what you're thinking?

[Porpoise101]

Not really tbh? Like you get the few boys in high school that do boxing but there's no rush to become ninjas because we can't carry a gun if that's what you're thinking?
Neat. In the US, boxing isn't that popular as its seen to be brutish. I always thought it was kind of cool though. Karate and taekwondo are very popular, even among kids.

[Flapjack]

Neat. In the US, boxing isn't that popular as its seen to be brutish. I always thought it was kind of cool though. Karate and taekwondo are very popular, even among kids.
I also think boxing is brutish! The only people I know that do it are my dad and racists at my school sooo yeah XD I done Karate for a whole month when I was little :')

[mutantboy]

Recently I went to a friends house. Her dad was super drugged up with prescription pills and weed (as far as I know) for his "back pain." Me and the friend were talking and we hear a bang in the kitchen. I thought nothing of it but she is super alert. Her dad yells to her "get your gun" and he walks to the kitchen with his pistol. She gets her gun (some type of hunting gun) and goes to the kitchen. Nothing is there, of course.

I'm really do not like guns and this situation kind of proves my point. This guy, who was clearly on drugs (prescription or not) was not in his right mind. But he still had a gun. Just makes me think what kind of mistakes he could've made in these situations with a gun. This just makes me want to ban guns in the US because crazy/drugged up people like this overreact at the smallest things and go straight to willing to be violent.

~Sorry for rambling but this is bothering me and I don't think I even got it all out right~

My opinion is that all weapons should be prohibited. Nobody can be allowed to shot. And the ideal situation would be that all armies would be dismantled....

[Flapjack]

My opinion is that all weapons should be prohibited. Nobody can be allowed to shot. And the ideal situation would be that all armies would be dismantled....
Yeah I agree! Tbh I don't get how people disagree with that!

[DriveAlive]

Yeah I agree! Tbh I don't get how people disagree with that!

Which brings us back to the people who want firearms to hunt or target shoot. If you think these practices should also be illegal, please explain why.

[Flapjack]

Which brings us back to the people who want firearms to hunt or target shoot. If you think these practices should also be illegal, please explain why.
I don't think you should be able to buy a weapon that could easily kill a person because you say you want to shoot targets or animals. Even if you wouldn't go as far as me, I am sure you agree that fully auto and semi auto guns being sold is ridiculous? If your hunting deer with assault weapons, you're doing it wrong.

[sqishy]

Are we going to ban knives? Knives can kill. How about bricks? Anything can kill so it's the people that we need to sort out, not guns.

Most things can be used in killing, but most things are not designed to be used only in killing.


I'm quoting a comparison I made between guns and trucks, from that Nice attack thread on the news sub-forum. I hope that trucks are a good example for this.


Guns:

Guns are tools that are designed specifically to critically injure or kill living animals, humans included.

Their intended effect will be the most efficient thing they are at.

Guns are much more efficient at killing because that is where the peak of their efficiency is, it's where the intent was put.

One gun has so much more capacity than one truck in killing people. Removing guns removes one good way to kill humans.

Banning guns means banning a direct and great capacity to kill humans.

- - - -


Trucks:

Trucks are tools that are designed specifically to transport large volumes/masses of stuff on the ground from one location to another.

Their intended effect will be the most efficient thing they are at.

Trucks can evidently be used to kill, but it is due to the side effects of the processes required to transport lots of stuff around - a big mass with a lot of energy is needed to do that.

Removing trucks removes one good way to transport lots of stuff. We've lost a method of transportation that is mostly used in moving foods, for a great statistical example. Food increases and sustains human life. Guns are comparatively very inefficient in transporting food across population regions, if one were to attempt it (by all means try to conceal a peanut in a large bullet if you want to).

Banning trucks means banning an indirect but great capacity to eventually sustain human life.

- - - -

Therefore I am not seeing your reasoning.

[DriveAlive]

I don't think you should be able to buy a weapon that could easily kill a person because you say you want to shoot targets or animals. Even if you wouldn't go as far as me, I am sure you agree that fully auto and semi auto guns being sold is ridiculous? If your hunting deer with assault weapons, you're doing it wrong.

I do not agree becuase if the person is legally able to purchase the weapon, then why not? There are many practical uses for semiatumatic weapons. Not to mention, one of the joys of living in a free country is being able to buy what you want, not just what you need.

[Vlerchan]

Not to mention, one of the joys of living in a free country is being able to buy what you want, not just what you need.
Heroin.

I don't need it - I'll quit tomorrow. This time I promise. Just give me that hit.

/FREE Autonomous Individual

[Flapjack]

I do not agree becuase if the person is legally able to purchase the weapon, then why not? There are many practical uses for semiatumatic weapons. Not to mention, one of the joys of living in a free country is being able to buy what you want, not just what you need.
What legit reasons for there for owning a semi auto gun?xD

I don't need chemical weapons, can I buy them? When high schools are getting shot up and children are being taught how to hide from a shooter I think it is time for common sense gun regulation in the US.

[DriveAlive]

What legit reasons for there for owning a semi auto gun?xD

I don't need chemical weapons, can I buy them? When high schools are getting shot up and children are being taught how to hide from a shooter I think it is time for common sense gun regulation in the US.

Semiatumatic weapons are rather useful for hog and bird hunting. Semiatumatic handguns are preferable for self defense.

[Flapjack]

Semiatumatic weapons are rather useful for hog and bird hunting. Semiatumatic handguns are preferable for self defense.
They're also useful for shooting up high schools! I think the American people have to chose what they prefer.

[DriveAlive]

They're also useful for shooting up high schools! I think the American people have to chose what they prefer.

No. We need to separate the symptom from the cause. How about a greater investment into mental health care in this country?

[Flapjack]

No. We need to separate the symptom from the cause. How about a greater investment into mental health care in this country?
I'd support that too buddy. Ya know there was a knife attack in London the other day? 1 dead and 6 injured. Horrific but could you imagine how many he could have killed with a semi auto gun and as many rounds as he wanted?

[DriveAlive]

I'd support that too buddy. Ya know there was a knife attack in London the other day? 1 dead and 6 injured. Horrific but could you imagine how many he could have killed with a semi auto gun and as many rounds as he wanted?

And can you imagine how many he could have killed with a bomb? These types of attacks will continue, regardless of the weapon used, as long as there is a lack of help for people with mental illness.

[Flapjack]

And can you imagine how many he could have killed with a bomb? These types of attacks will continue, regardless of the weapon used, as long as there is a lack of help for people with mental illness.
Do you want any gun control? Or are you happy with how things are now?

[DriveAlive]

Do you want any gun control? Or are you happy with how things are now?

I do want effective gun control. Unfortunately, many of the laws already on the books are not enforced and politicians talk about adding more ineffective laws instead.

[Flapjack]

I do want effective gun control. Unfortunately, many of the laws already on the books are not enforced and politicians talk about adding more ineffective laws instead.
It is the republican party that is fuelling that because they are bought out by the NRA.

What gun control do you want?

[Porpoise101]

These types of attacks will continue, regardless of the weapon used, as long as there is a lack of help for people with mental illness.
I am going to point out that it is the Republicans who are cutting out mental health from the state budgets. In many states, mental health hospitals are getting shuttered. They are cutting education too, which means that people will have reduced access to special ed.

So you have two choices:
Support the Dems, get mental health facilities
Support the Republicans, keep the gov off of your guns

Unfortunately, the American political system has little tolerance for conservative Democrats or liberal Republicans :(

[Flapjack]

And can you imagine how many he could have killed with a bomb?
Yeah he could have killed loads with a bomb and no gun control does not stop every mass shooting but it's about combating the issue. The whole 'we can't stop everyone so what's the point?' talking point is really stupid.

When people have a breakdown with a semi auto in their house they can kill a lot more kids in school than a guy with a knife.

[DriveAlive]

It is the republican party that is fuelling that because they are bought out by the NRA.

What gun control do you want?

I support a simple background check system that denies felons or those mentally ill from purchasing a gun. This background check is run when a person first purchases a firearm and receives a gun license. That way the person would be able to buy future firearms without having to continually undergo background checks. Only 40% of people who lie on firearms background checks are prosecuted, which is why background checks are seen to be ineffective. My system would work well if partnered with a far more aggressive prosecution of those who break the law.

There should also be much harsher punishments for those who break the law with regards to firearms. Possession of an illegal weapon or an attempt to illegally buy or sell a gun should receive an extremely harsh sentence (possibly >5 years). This would properly motivate people to not break the law. Also, being in possession of a firearm while involved in another crime like drinking and driving or a public altercation would get an exponentially higher sentence.

[Flapjack]

I support a simple background check system that denies felons or those mentally ill from purchasing a gun. This background check is run when a person first purchases a firearm and receives a gun license. That way the person would be able to buy future firearms without having to continually undergo background checks. Only 40% of people who lie on firearms background checks are prosecuted, which is why background checks are seen to be ineffective. My system would work well if partnered with a far more aggressive prosecution of those who break the law.

There should also be much harsher punishments for those who break the law with regards to firearms. Possession of an illegal weapon or an attempt to illegally buy or sell a gun should receive an extremely harsh sentence (possibly >5 years). This would properly motivate people to not break the law. Also, being in possession of a firearm while involved in another crime like drinking and driving or a public altercation would get an exponentially higher sentence.
Do you not think a person should get a licence before they get a gun? How about a UK style licensing system? Why not go further and regulate the types of guns that can be bought?

[PlasmaHam]

Do you not think a person should get a licence before they get a gun? How about a UK style licensing system? Why not go further and regulate the types of guns that can be bought?

There are gun licenses, though here they are called permits. No one can go carry a gun around unless they have one, which usually requires both written and practical tests. Basically like getting a license to drive a car, you need to take written and practical exams.

There are regulations on what guns should be bought. Automatic weapons are banned, certain military grade guns and ammo are banned.

[Flapjack]

There are gun licenses, though here they are called permits. No one can go carry a gun around unless they have one, which usually requires both written and practical tests. Basically like getting a license to drive a car, you need to take written and practical exams.

There are regulations on what guns should be bought. Automatic weapons are banned, certain military grade guns and ammo are banned.
1. Automatic weapons are not banned
2. AR-15 not a military grade weapon?
ZLaD9mSC6iI
3. But you don't need this permit to own a gun?

[DriveAlive]

Do you not think a person should get a licence before they get a gun? How about a UK style licensing system? Why not go further and regulate the types of guns that can be bought?

A person should be required to get this license either before or at point of purchase of their first firearm. The reason why not to go further and regulate the types of guns that can be bought is because it would have no effect other than to burden gun owners. If a person can legally purchase one type of gun, then why should they not be allowed to purchase another? The person is either safe to own a gun or they are not. If that person should not be allowed to own an AR15 for whatever reason, then I do not want them owning any other type of gun.

[PlasmaHam]

1. Automatic weapons are not banned


They are. Liberal propaganda may not say so but they have been banned since the 1980s. You could technically buy an automatic weapon made before the 1980s, but the average price of one of those is $200,000+.

2. AR-15 not a military grade weapon?
Pistols are also used by the military. I said "some" military grade weapons, mainly fully automatics or ones without any practical purpose (Bazookas, tanks, Flamethrowers, etc.) As we have said, the AR-15 is both practical and isn't fully automatic.

3. But you don't need this permit to own a gun?
You don't need a permit to buy a car, does that mean that anyone can then go drive it around?

[Flapjack]

They are. Liberal propaganda may not say so but they have been banned since the 1980s. You could technically buy an automatic weapon made before the 1980s, but the average price of one of those is $200,000+.

Soooo they're not banned?:D:D:D:D:D:D
Also as usual you're exaggerating, lying or don't have a clue xD
For a full-auto M16, this will be anywhere from $12,000 and up. Typical prices for an M16 hover around $14,000 to $16,000.
You don't need a permit to buy a car, does that mean that anyone can then go drive it around?
This is relevant to the gun control debate how?

Why do people need semi auto weapons?
A person should be required to get this license either before or at point of purchase of their first firearm. The reason why not to go further and regulate the types of guns that can be bought is because it would have no effect other than to burden gun owners. If a person can legally purchase one type of gun, then why should they not be allowed to purchase another? The person is either safe to own a gun or they are not. If that person should not be allowed to own an AR15 for whatever reason, then I do not want them owning any other type of gun.
Pretty sure banning semi auto weapons would have a pretty large effect!!

[PlasmaHam]

Soooo they're not banned?:D:D:D:D:D:D
Also as usual you're exaggerating, lying or don't have a clue xD


Prehaps banned wasn't the best wording of it, but I suggest you check out the Firearms Owners' Protection Act of 1986. Prohibits the sale or ownership of fully automatic weapons made past 1986. The few fully automatic weapons made before 1986 are $20,000+ and the supplies are quickly diminishing due to collectors and aging. Even if you buy one of those, you have to register with the government which takes about 6 months of intense scrutiny and a 300 licensing payment. For a terrorist or your average murderer, there is basically no way to get a machine gun unless you have money to burn and a perfect record or get one illegally. It is practically a ban. However, if you want to get nitpicky about it, go ahead. Everyone understands what I am saying.

Certain states completely ban machine guns too. Which is the level I want gun control to be regulated at.

[Flapjack]

Prehaps banned wasn't the best wording of it, but I suggest you check out the Firearms Owners' Protection Act of 1986. Prohibits the sale or ownership of fully automatic weapons made past 1986. The few fully automatic weapons made before 1986 are $20,000+ and the supplies are quickly diminishing due to collectors and aging. Even if you buy one of those, you have to register with the government which takes about 6 months of intense scrutiny and a 300 licensing payment. For a terrorist or your average murderer, there is basically no way to get a machine gun unless you have money to burn and a perfect record or get one illegally. It is practically a ban. However, if you want to get nitpicky about it, go ahead. Everyone understands what I am saying.

Certain states completely ban machine guns too. Which is the level I want gun control to be regulated at.
A few facts in here are exaggerated as always with you but it doesn't actually matter so I won't bother correcting them.

Automatic firearms are not in common circulation so they're not as commonly used in mass shootings. Wouldn't you like to get rid of weapons like the AR-15 so terrorists can't shot up your high schools?

[PlasmaHam]

A few facts in here are exaggerated as always with you but it doesn't actually matter so I won't bother correcting them.

I'll more than happily accept blame for false or exaggerated facts, but I need proof they are wrong first.
Automatic firearms are not in common circulation so they're not as commonly used in mass shootings. Wouldn't you like to get rid of weapons like the AR-15 so terrorists can't shot up your high schools?
No. I'll rather risk my life than risk my liberty. Called pride and courage, I'm not sure if you've heard of that. The Second Amendment allows us to possess such weapons. It is not the gun at blame, it is the person behind it. Gun laws were basically non-existent in mid-20th century America, yet their weren't the mass murders of today. We are facing an ideological group that hates the West, and mentally disabled people who we are encouraging instead of treating.

[Flapjack]

No. I'll rather risk my life than risk my liberty.
But you're not only risking your life having these powerful weapons everywhere, you're risking kids lives and families lives. Children are being taught how to hide from shooters in the USA. In how many other developed countries does that happen?

The Second Amendment allows us to possess such weapons.
No the second amendment allows a well regulated militia to own firearms. Did I miss the AR-15 part? Even if you ignore the militia bit, it allows you to own firearms. How does that allow 'such weapons'?

It is not the gun at blame, it is the person behind it.
Yep! I am not suggesting we charge the AR-15 with the murders. It is just the tool that makes killing a lot easier. In London there was a knife attack recently, 1 dead and 6 injured. Could the attacker have killed more or less with a Ar-15?

We are facing an ideological group that hates the West
How is this relevant to the gun control debate? Also, you allow those on the terrorists watch list to buy guns!

I will appeal to your nationalistic side, are you not embarrassed that the USA is the only western country to be having a mass shooting everyday and their high schools shot up? People in Europe make jokes about it. No one outside of the American gun bubble can understand US gun laws because they're stupid. Does that not motivate you to change?

[PlasmaHam]

I will appeal to your nationalistic side, are you not embarrassed that the USA is the only western country to be having a mass shooting everyday and their high schools shot up? People in Europe make jokes about it. No one outside of the American gun bubble can understand US gun laws because they're stupid. Does that not motivate you to change?

Nope

I have Chuck Norris in front of an American Flag with dual uzi as my sig. My patriotism level doesn't include the phrase "embarrassed with the USA."

No one outside of the American gun bubble can understand US gun laws because they're stupid.

Exactly.

[Flapjack]

Nope

I have Chuck Norris in front of an American Flag with dual uzi as my sig. My patriotism level doesn't include the phrase "embarrassed with the USA."



Exactly.
Thanks for responding to all my points xD I assume you either can't counter them or you accept them?

[Dalcourt]

Thanks for responding to all my points xD I assume you either can't counter them or you accept them?

Lolz ... Mimikyu don't ever try to understand US mentality especial not the mentality of people in certain states.

Gun laws and esp the way they are enforced are too lax in the USA but on the other hand if you wanna kill you always find a way like bying ya gun on darknet amazon like the Munich shooter.
I own two hunting rifles and a handgun but never harmed anyone but I also wouldn't have a problem with giving them up.


And PlasmaHam I so love the fact you have the Southern / Rebel flag as an avatar now...sadly most avid debaters are too European to fully grasp the offensiveness of it, lol.

[Flapjack]

Lolz ... @Mimikyu (http://www.virtualteen.org/forums/member.php?u=122060) don't ever try to understand US mentality especial not the mentality of people in certain states.

Gun laws and esp the way they are enforced are too lax in the USA but on the other hand if you wanna kill you always find a way like bying ya gun on darknet amazon like the Munich shooter.
I own two hunting rifles and a handgun but never harmed anyone but I also wouldn't have a problem with giving them up.


And @PlasmaHam (http://www.virtualteen.org/forums/member.php?u=122733) I so love the fact you have the Southern / Rebel flag as an avatar now...sadly most avid debaters are too European to fully grasp the offensiveness of it, lol.
Yeah unfortunately the most determined will always get a gun but with common sense gun regulations and restrictions the situation will get a lot better I am sure:)

I am European and I fully grasp how offensive it is!!:(

[Merk]

If you were to look at other countries that the government had disarmed their people and taken complete control, than look at the US history, and even more so recent US history, it's easy to see through the devils thin skin. The US gov. Is slowly working to disarm Americans, to make us defenceless. The currant gun laws are plenty. It's hard ennuf to get a weapon to defend yourself without any new laws.

Did you know that Obama has been controlling what we see in the news? This isn't new, but Obama has to is illegally abusing this power, to influence the weak minded sheep among us?. How about the Dallas police shooting, at the memorial for the killed police, he completely twisted that into an anti gun, racist, burning bag of shit. If the people near that shooter were properly trained to use a gun, the bastard who was shooting cops would has been neutralized I'm a matter of minutes. If he wanted the US to be safer, than he wouldn't be pushing anti gun laws, he would be pushing gun training.

Weapons are not for mass destruction, they are used for defence. The bastard who shot police later admitted that white police, were his targets. Btw, this guy was black. So stop complaining about white racism against blacks. I'm not saying that there isn't racism, I'm saying that it's not unwarranted. If you here about a shooting or something ells, don't just Bernice the news, find things out for your self.

Notice ask the illegal immigrants who don't have to pay taxes but can get on welfare? Btw we are paying for their luxurys through taxes. How would you like to have a hover board? How about that new x box one? Hmm? You're paying for those luxurys, not for you, but for the violent illegal aliens who you need to defend yourself against with that gun everyone's trying to outlaw? I say BUILD THE WALL!

No. seriously, we need guns. There are plenty of laws already. We don't need more. If you thing the laws aren't ennuf, than don't make new ones, and start enforcing the existing ones.

[Dalcourt]

Yeah unfortunately the most determined will always get a gun but with common sense gun regulations and restrictions the situation will get a lot better I am sure:)

I am European and I fully grasp how offensive it is!!:(

I'm afraid common sense and American citizens doesn't go together very well.

You know we need the guns to defend ourselves, shoot back when there's a freak shooting at a crowd so that we would have even more casualities than if we would just run and hide...US logic you see.

As I said I use my guns for hunting purpose and I could give them up without hesitation. I would never carry a gun with me somewhere else in public anyway...way too dangerous with my skin color.
Ya know if a white guy carries his gun openly it's called open carriage and is fully legal...if a colored does it it's called fuck dat niggah's got a gun he must be out to rob someone. So gun laws aren't the same for all anyway.

I feel safe without a weapon and don't need it at all. Why would I need to protect myself anyway don't we have our heroes in blue to protect me?

But seriously now I don't really see a change in US gun laws in the near future put I'm positive that one day even here people will get enough common sense to grasp that they don't need all those weapons.

[PlasmaHam]

And PlasmaHam I so love the fact you have the Southern / Rebel flag as an avatar now...sadly most avid debaters are too European to fully grasp the offensiveness of it, lol.

Thanks, I make it my personal agenda to annoy leftist liberals at every chance I get. The Confederate Flag isn't offensive, but they think that it is, so it works.

It is amazing how all these Europeans here claim to know everything about America yet in reality they know very little.

[dxcxdzv]

Thanks, I make it my personal agenda to annoy leftist liberals at every chance I get. The Confederate Flag isn't offensive, but they think that it is, so it works.

It is amazing how all these Europeans here claim to know everything about America yet in reality they know very little.
http://66.media.tumblr.com/2ec49c8513fe201381709b6cf72e75ab/tumblr_nqtxffGv5S1ua05o9o1_1280.png


I had this one hidden in a corner of a forgotten folder on my computer. :D
Guess from what it's from, c'mon, guess.

[Leprous]

Thanks, I make it my personal agenda to annoy leftist liberals at every chance I get. The Confederate Flag isn't offensive, but they think that it is, so it works.


Well glad I ain't one. Tbh that's kinda sad. But oh well whatever floats your boat.

Btw do you think I'm a leftist?

[Flapjack]

Btw do you think I'm a leftist?
Stfu you commie!! Also dude he is trolling for attention, don't give it to him unless he actually wants to debate issues.

[Professional Russian]

Thanks, I make it my personal agenda to annoy leftist liberals at every chance I get. The Confederate Flag isn't offensive, but they think that it is, so it works.

It is amazing how all these Europeans here claim to know everything about America yet in reality they know very little.
this isn't directed towards plasma ham and im not trying to change the debate but I would like take a moment to defend the confederate flag. courtesy of the SCV(sons of confederate veterans) everyone loves to think the confederate flag is racist and that it's offensive when it really isnt. The civil war was actually started over the north taxing the south and then Lincoln got the slaves involved. realistic the south freed the slaves to fight for the confederacy during the Civil then they were allowed to go free after. theres actual multiple confederate flags the one plasma ham has as his avatar isn't even the real confederate flag. it's actually a battle flag. Robert E. Lee's if i remember correctly. that flag was made now into a REBEL FLAG. you can use it for your cause to REBEL against something. it's doesn't have to be racist. it doesn't have to be offensive. just rebeling against something. you can thank the klan, neo nazis, and skin heads everywhere for making it into a racial symbol. any questions kids?

[PlasmaHam]

Well glad I ain't one. Tbh that's kinda sad. But oh well whatever floats your boat.

Btw do you think I'm a leftist?

Nothing I've heard from you had shown me otherwise.

Stfu you commie!! Also dude he is trolling for attention, don't give it to him unless he actually wants to debate issues.

AMERICA!!!

[Flapjack]

If you were to look at other countries that the government had disarmed their people and taken complete control, than look at the US history, and even more so recent US history, it's easy to see through the devils thin skin. The US gov. Is slowly working to disarm Americans, to make us defenceless.


If you're looking at other countries, you should look at countries like the UK. Where ya know there isn't a mass shooting everyday, their high schools aren't shot up and British children aren't taught how to hide from a mass shooter.

Also LOL xD Another gun nut that thinks him and his 9mm can stop one of the world's strongest militarises xD
The currant gun laws are plenty. It's hard ennuf to get a weapon to defend yourself without any new laws.

How are they plenty? It is not hard to get a gun in the USA and the guns you can get are ridiculous. AR-15 for home defence? Who is robbing you? ISIS?

Did you know that Obama has been controlling what we see in the news? This isn't new, but Obama has to is illegally abusing this power, to influence the weak minded sheep among us?.

Yeah!! He also is controlling our minds buddy and... CHEMTRAILS! :eek: Don't you worry though buddy, with a tinfoil hat you'll be safe;) You really believe this?
If the people near that shooter were properly trained to use a gun, the bastard who was shooting cops would has been neutralized I'm a matter of minutes.
Like the armed police at the Orlando nightclub shooting? Ya know a better way to avoid being shot and killed? Take the gun away from the shooter.

Weapons are not for mass destruction, they are used for defence.

No weapons are for killing. Whether that killing is in self defence or for shooting up a high school is up to the person with the gun.

Btw, this guy was black. So stop complaining about white racism against blacks. I'm not saying that there isn't racism, I'm saying that it's not unwarranted.
One black guy shots people so racism against every black guy is okay? What about the white guys that shot up schools and abortion clinics? What you are doing is looking for an excuse to be racist. Similar to how Hitler used the Jew that started the Reichstag fire.

Notice ask the illegal immigrants who don't have to pay taxes but can get on welfare? Btw we are paying for their luxurys through taxes. How would you like to have a hover board? How about that new x box one? Hmm? You're paying for those luxurys, not for you, but for the violent illegal aliens who you need to defend yourself against with that gun everyone's trying to outlaw? I say BUILD THE WALL!
All illegals with hover boards got dam it! They don't even share them:( Have you ever met an illegal immigrant? How many have hover boards?

The wall is a stupid ignorant racist policy that will never work.


No. seriously, we need guns. There are plenty of laws already. We don't need more. If you thing the laws aren't ennuf, than don't make new ones, and start enforcing the existing ones.
Tell the plenty of laws already talking point to the dead cops, to the dead children and the dead unborn babies.

[Vlerchan]

Our new government is founded upon exactly the opposite idea; its foundations are laid, its corner- stone rests, upon the great truth that the negro is not equal to the white man; that slavery subordination to the superior race is his natural and normal condition. This, our new government, is the first, in the history of the world, based upon this great physical, philosophical, and moral truth. This truth has been slow in the process of its development, like all other truths in the various departments of science [...]

[...] With us, all of the white race, however high or low, rich or poor, are equal in the eye of the law. Not so with the negro. Subordination is his place. He, by nature, or by the curse against Canaan, is fitted for that condition which he occupies in our system [...]

http://teachingamericanhistory.org/library/document/cornerstone-speech/

Etc.

I'm on mobile so I am not going to bother to go through the source in detail but the politics of Black enslavement was central to succession. Of course there was a separate economic angle relating to Lincoln's subsidised for Northern industries but this was subordinate to the racial question.

---

Am I a liberal too?

I will also respond in detail tomorrow.

[dxcxdzv]

this isn't directed towards plasma ham and im not trying to change the debate but I would like take a moment to defend the confederate flag. courtesy of the SCV(sons of confederate veterans) everyone loves to think the confederate flag is racist and that it's offensive when it really isnt. The civil war was actually started over the north taxing the south and then Lincoln got the slaves involved. realistic the south freed the slaves to fight for the confederacy during the Civil then they were allowed to go free after. theres actual multiple confederate flags the one plasma ham has as his avatar isn't even the real confederate flag. it's actually a battle flag. Robert E. Lee's if i remember correctly. that flag was made now into a REBEL FLAG. you can use it for your cause to REBEL against something. it's doesn't have to be racist. it doesn't have to be offensive. just rebeling against something. you can thank the klan, neo nazis, and skin heads everywhere for making it into a racial symbol. any questions kids?
May I have a source for the freeing of slaves please?

Btw, the American Civil War has surely more complex roots that we may think, but slavery has been a determinant factor.

As always TED-Ed has something to say about this:
oWww0YIf-JE

[Leprous]

Nothing I've heard from you had shown me otherwise.



Fun fact, I'm a nationalist.

[Professional Russian]

May I have a source for the freeing of slaves please?

Btw, the American Civil War has surely more complex roots that we may think, but slavery has been a determinant factor.

As always TED-Ed has something to say about this:
oWww0YIf-JE

i dont have an online source. I sat in with the SCV(sons of confederate veterans) to learn all that. youd have to know one or be able to get in with them to see the source

[Flapjack]

i dont have an online source. I sat in with the SCV(sons of confederate veterans) to learn all that. youd have to know one or be able to get in with them to see the source
Sounds legit xD

[dxcxdzv]

i dont have an online source. I sat in with the SCV(sons of confederate veterans) to learn all that. youd have to know one or be able to get in with them to see the source
So your source is basically unverifiable?

[Professional Russian]

Sounds legit xD
if you'd like to take time out of your day to look them up and what they do you'd see they are legit.
So your source is basically unverifiable?

it's verifiable in the fact you need documentation that one of your relatives fought for the confederacy and after you do that I think they have classes. one of my very close friends is one and he let me sit in with him at a meeting one time I'm not personally one of them

[Flapjack]

if you'd like to take time out of your day to look them up and what they do you'd see they are legit.

I highly doubt a group called the sons of confederate veterans is legit but even if they were, you saying that they said it isn't proof. I could say I met Obama and asked his opinion on potatoes, Obama may tell the truth about potatoes but my word doesn't prove anything.

[Professional Russian]

I highly doubt a group called the sons of confederate veterans is legit but even if they were, you saying that they said it isn't proof. I could say I met Obama and asked his opinion on potatoes, Obama may tell the truth about potatoes but my word doesn't prove anything.

i think it's legit considering you need actually documentation to be able to be a part of it

[Flapjack]

i think it's legit considering you need actually documentation to be able to be a part of it
What kind of documentation? I just saw a video of a guy complaining the reputation of their confederate ancestors has come under attack... NO SHIT! They were rebels and fought for slavery. The group is clearly racist and stuck in the past so no you saying you heard them say it is proof. Again even if I trusted them, I wouldn't trust you.

How did they know it anyway?

[dxcxdzv]

it's verifiable in the fact you need documentation that one of your relatives fought for the confederacy and after you do that I think they have classes. one of my very close friends is one and he let me sit in with him at a meeting one time I'm not personally one of them
I'd call something verifiable if you can provide me a source, whether it is online or simply the name of a book or similar, that can confirm your says.
And when I look at this story of the SCV, without questioning the ability of this organization to carry and communicate valid information, I can say that this does not constitute a verifiable source and thus its validity is reasonably questionable.
I guess then that you won't mind if I say that this argument is not valid.

However I searched myself concerning this story of slaves fighting for the Confederacy.
It actually seems like there has been black people fighting on their side, most under commandment of their "masters" and without official approval.
General Lee asked the fighting slaves to be freed afterwards but apparently it has not been accepted.
http://www.history.com/this-day-in-history/confederacy-approves-black-soldiers

The idea also faced very strong opposition, from Jefferson Davis inter alia, according to The Negro's Civil War: How American Blacks Felt and Acted During the War for the Union (McPherson, 1991, Chapter 17).

[Professional Russian]

What kind of documentation? I just saw a video of a guy complaining the reputation of their confederate ancestors has come under attack... NO SHIT! They were rebels and fought for slavery. The group is clearly racist and stuck in the past so no you saying you heard them say it is proof. Again even if I trusted them, I wouldn't trust you.

How did they know it anyway?

Why wouldn't you trust me?

[PlasmaHam]

What kind of documentation? I just saw a video of a guy complaining the reputation of their confederate ancestors has come under attack... NO SHIT! They were rebels and fought for slavery. The group is clearly racist and stuck in the past so no you saying you heard them say it is proof. Again even if I trusted them, I wouldn't trust you.

There are legit groups of Confederate ancestors. The United Daughters of the Confederacy and the Sons of the Confederacy. They have websites even, look them up.

An ancestor of mine fought for the Confederacy, but I've never joined any of these groups just because.

(This sounds like we maybe need a spinoff thread for this)

[Flapjack]

Why wouldn't you trust me?
It is nothing personal buddy:) Just I don't know you and I am sure if I said I saw something from a questionable liberal group you would want evidence too?:)
There are legit groups of Confederate ancestors. The United Daughters of the Confederacy and the Sons of the Confederacy. They have websites even, look them up.

An ancestor of mine fought for the Confederacy, but I've never joined any of these groups just because.

(This sounds like we maybe need a spinoff thread for this)
I don't see how that is related to my post so why quote me? Sure buddy you can make whatever thread you want:)

[PlasmaHam]

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/1/16/Firearmsources.svg/516px-Firearmsources.svg.png

This is an older statistic, but it was done by a reliable source. Might be interesting for this conversation.

[Flapjack]

image (https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/1/16/Firearmsources.svg/516px-Firearmsources.svg.png)

This is an older statistic, but it was done by a reliable source. Might be interesting for this conversation.
Yeah I checked that out and it is legit, I don't get what you're trying to prove by it though?

[PlasmaHam]

Yeah I checked that out and it is legit, I don't get what you're trying to prove by it though?

Y'all across the pond keep saying that we are experiencing gun violence due to the ability of your average person to walk into a Wal-Mart and buy a gun without any care. Yet this statistic shows that only 20% of guns used for crimes are gained by the person through legal purchasing.

[Flapjack]

Y'all across the pond keep saying that we are experiencing gun violence due to the ability of your average person to walk into a Wal-Mart and buy a gun without any care. Yet this statistic shows that only 20% of guns used for crimes are gained by the person through legal purchasing.
Is it not legal to get a gun from a family or friend?

[DriveAlive]

Pretty sure banning semi auto weapons would have a pretty large effect!!
As I said, this would be a huge infringement on individual rights and would have a minimal at best effect on overall gun crime. With all things, personal freedom must be weighed against public safety. If all cars were limited to not exceed 45mph, I am sure this would reduce road deaths, but it would be unduly burdensome on drivers. My point is not to compare cars to guns, but rather to say that sometimes a minute benefit is not worth the huge cost payed for it. I seriously doubt that the decrease in crime from banning ALL firearms regardless of type or use just because they are semiatumatic would in any way outweigh the cost payed by legal gun owners.

[Flapjack]

As I said, this would be a huge infringement on individual rights and would have a minimal at best effect on overall gun crime. With all things, personal freedom must be weighed against public safety. If all cars were limited to not exceed 45mph, I am sure this would reduce road deaths, but it would be unduly burdensome on drivers. My point is not to compare cars to guns, but rather to say that sometimes a minute benefit is not worth the huge cost payed for it. I seriously doubt that the decrease in crime from banning ALL firearms regardless of type or use just because they are semiatumatic would in any way outweigh the cost payed by legal gun owners.
This is down to personal opinion. I do not believe banning semi auto guns is a 'huge infringement on individual rights' especially as most of the developed world has also banned them. You can either chose the freedom to own the guns or having your high schools shot up and reducing the number of mass shootings.

[dxcxdzv]

Y'all across the pond keep saying that we are experiencing gun violence due to the ability of your average person to walk into a Wal-Mart and buy a gun without any care. Yet this statistic shows that only 20% of guns used for crimes are gained by the person through legal purchasing.
And how did this "family and friend" obtained guns?

[DriveAlive]

This is down to personal opinion. I do not believe banning semi auto guns is a 'huge infringement on individual rights' especially as most of the developed world has also banned them. You can either chose the freedom to own the guns or having your high schools shot up and reducing the number of mass shootings.

It is in no way that simple. First, there are literally 100s of millions of semiautomatic guns already in circulation in America so it would be very difficult to reduce access to them. Second, what is there to stop someone from using a lever action gun or building a bomb? My point is that these mass killings are perpetrated by the mentally ill who will find one way or another to kill as many people as possible. If the focus was not on gun rights but on mental health, these people would not be out there in the first place. It is better to attack the cause instead of blaming the symptom.

[Flapjack]

It is in no way that simple. First, there are literally 100s of millions of semiautomatic guns already in circulation in America so it would be very difficult to reduce access to them. Second, what is there to stop someone from using a lever action gun or building a bomb? My point is that these mass killings are perpetrated by the mentally ill who will find one way or another to kill as many people as possible. If the focus was not on gun rights but on mental health, these people would not be out there in the first place. It is better to attack the cause instead of blaming the symptom.
I am all for increasing spending on mental health however unfortunately the Republican party doesn't agree. Also not every mass shooting is done by the mentally ill and you cannot catch every mentally ill person. While I am happy you want to tackle that issue I think more needs to be done. A lever rifle does not have the same killing power as a semi auto, I'm sure you can agree? Bombs are bad and unfortunately easy to make but not all the shooters that have a breakdown and decide to shoot up a high school know how to make one. The terrorists are choosing weapons like the AR-15 time and time again and not lever rifles or bombs. This suggests that that weapon is better for killing.

[DriveAlive]

I am all for increasing spending on mental health however unfortunately the Republican party doesn't agree. Also not every mass shooting is done by the mentally ill and you cannot catch every mentally ill person. While I am happy you want to tackle that issue I think more needs to be done. A lever rifle does not have the same killing power as a semi auto, I'm sure you can agree? Bombs are bad and unfortunately easy to make but not all the shooters that have a breakdown and decide to shoot up a high school know how to make one. The terrorists are choosing weapons like the AR-15 time and time again and not lever rifles or bombs. This suggests that that weapon is better for killing.

Personally, an AR15 would not be my first choice and I think the ease with which one can make a bomb is a sad reality. However, the two types of people who perpetrate these crimes are the mentally ill, or as you pointed out, terrorists. Both of these types are completely delusional and nothing will stop them from carrying out their plans. It my sound callous, but I would rather have terrorists shooting up schools than trying another 9/11. The guns are the least of the problem here.

[Flapjack]

Personally, an AR15 would not be my first choice and I think the ease with which one can make a bomb is a sad reality. However, the two types of people who perpetrate these crimes are the mentally ill, or as you pointed out, terrorists. Both of these types are completely delusional and nothing will stop them from carrying out their plans. It my sound callous, but I would rather have terrorists shooting up schools than trying another 9/11. The guns are the least of the problem here.
I can accept that buddy:) I think that is the most rational pro government argument I have ever heard xD We both see there's a problem, we just disagree on how to tackle it and I respect that:)

[DriveAlive]

I can accept that buddy:) I think that is the most rational pro government argument I have ever heard xD We both see there's a problem, we just disagree on how to tackle it and I respect that:)

We are not so different you and I :)
If only politicians could find this type of middle ground, then we could reach compromises.

[Bob billy]

I think if you have a certain offense on your record, you should have to take extra steps to buy a gun. Maybe misdemenors that result in 6 months of prison. People who have mental issues shouldn't be allowed because of their unpredictable natures.

[Phosphene]

I think if you have a certain offense on your record, you should have to take extra steps to buy a gun. Maybe misdemenors that result in 6 months of prison. People who have mental issues shouldn't be allowed because of their unpredictable natures.

Please don't bump threads :locked: