What does it take to get a little gun control

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Gun control won’t stop crime. Morons.

Oh, that’s an eloquent argument. 🙄 I guess we shouldn’t have laws at all then, because criminals gonna crime.

I didn’t say that. Guns will always be here. Criminals won’t turn in their guns and will be able to get them by different means. Law abiding citizens won’t give up their guns in fear they will become yet another victim statistic.

Guns don’t commit crimes, people commit crimes. We will become the next uk with a knife problem because criminals will find other ways to commit crimes.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Gun control won’t stop crime. Morons.

Oh, that’s an eloquent argument. 🙄 I guess we shouldn’t have laws at all then, because criminals gonna crime.

I didn’t say that. Guns will always be here. Criminals won’t turn in their guns and will be able to get them by different means. Law abiding citizens won’t give up their guns in fear they will become yet another victim statistic.

Guns don’t commit crimes, people commit crimes. We will become the next uk with a knife problem because criminals will find other ways to commit crimes.

Well, at least you restated it without the name calling. I’ll give you props for that.

I’m still skeptical of the idea that gun control won’t work because criminals will only find a different way to get their guns. The whole point of gun control is to make it harder for criminals to access guns, while still allowing law abiding people to obtain them. Why would we want to make it easy for criminals?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Gun control won’t stop crime. Morons.

Oh, that’s an eloquent argument. 🙄 I guess we shouldn’t have laws at all then, because criminals gonna crime.

I didn’t say that. Guns will always be here. Criminals won’t turn in their guns and will be able to get them by different means. Law abiding citizens won’t give up their guns in fear they will become yet another victim statistic.

Guns don’t commit crimes, people commit crimes. We will become the next uk with a knife problem because criminals will find other ways to commit crimes.

Well, at least you restated it without the name calling. I’ll give you props for that.

I’m still skeptical of the idea that gun control won’t work because criminals will only find a different way to get their guns. The whole point of gun control is to make it harder for criminals to access guns, while still allowing law abiding people to obtain them. Why would we want to make it easy for criminals?

Felons who shouldn’t have guns still have access through illegal means. There are real laws that make possession of a firearm by a felon illegal, but they still posses them. That won’t change.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Gun control won’t stop crime. Morons.

Oh, that’s an eloquent argument. 🙄 I guess we shouldn’t have laws at all then, because criminals gonna crime.

I didn’t say that. Guns will always be here. Criminals won’t turn in their guns and will be able to get them by different means. Law abiding citizens won’t give up their guns in fear they will become yet another victim statistic.

Guns don’t commit crimes, people commit crimes. We will become the next uk with a knife problem because criminals will find other ways to commit crimes.

Who cares if that hasn't happened in any country that has tried this. Look at Australia, for example. But MAGA is immune to data.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Gun control won’t stop crime. Morons.

Oh, that’s an eloquent argument. 🙄 I guess we shouldn’t have laws at all then, because criminals gonna crime.

I didn’t say that. Guns will always be here. Criminals won’t turn in their guns and will be able to get them by different means. Law abiding citizens won’t give up their guns in fear they will become yet another victim statistic.

Guns don’t commit crimes, people commit crimes. We will become the next uk with a knife problem because criminals will find other ways to commit crimes.

Well, at least you restated it without the name calling. I’ll give you props for that.

I’m still skeptical of the idea that gun control won’t work because criminals will only find a different way to get their guns. The whole point of gun control is to make it harder for criminals to access guns, while still allowing law abiding people to obtain them. Why would we want to make it easy for criminals?

Felons who shouldn’t have guns still have access through illegal means. There are real laws that make possession of a firearm by a felon illegal, but they still posses them. That won’t change.

The FDA classifies fentanyl as a Schedule II drug, meaning that it has accepted medical uses but a high potential for abuse. Yet people still illegally access it so they can abuse it. Nobody would argue that that means we should lift all restrictions on fentanyl and allow access for anyone who wants to have it.

[Anonymous]

What does it take to get a little gun control?

Range time helps a lot.

[Anonymous]

I don’t know if you know, but guns can be manufactured on 3D printers.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I don’t know if you know, but guns can be manufactured on 3D printers.

I'm guessing you hit enter before making your point.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:How do we remove 400,000,000 guns from America?

the same way we eliminate all cars and so ensure no drunk driving vehicular homicides. Which is to say, not happening. Focus on the drivers/shooters, not on the mechanical devices they use.

That is a minority position. The majority of citizens want increased regulations around guns

Majority opinions are irrelevant to rights guaranteed under the Constitution, which exist precisely to avoid tyranny by a majority.

And these are subject to interpretation by the courts. Ask women, who had a Constitutionally protected right to abortion until suddenly they didn’t. Was there a new amendment, or was there a new set of SCOTUS justices?

+1. The key is getting better representation on SCOTUS from justices that understand the constitution was not bought and paid for by the gun industry.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don’t know if you know, but guns can be manufactured on 3D printers.

I'm guessing you hit enter before making your point.

Nope. Good luck. You’ve lost.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I don’t know if you know, but guns can be manufactured on 3D printers.

Actually, at least at this point, any such “threat” is vastly more theoretical than real.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There’s widespread support for things enhanced penalties for criminal firearm use, but these are the type of ideas that have been shot down as government tyranny and unconstitutional for the last 34 pages.

Where did I miss people characterizing “enhanced penalties for criminal firearm use” as “government tyranny and unconstitutional?”

If you made a word cloud out of this thread, the word “unconstitutional” would be readable from outer space.

I just need one example where a poster contested enhanced penalties for criminal firearm use because it would be government tyranny and unconstitutional.

I’ll wait.

You missed the phrase “type of” modifying the noun “ideas”. One side is offering solutions, the other side is dismissing them.

Did you have a point, or are you being pedantic because you have nothing else to contribute to the discussion?

So no one in this topic has done what the poster claimed? If you can’t back things up you shouldn’t throw it out there. Just a thought.

Someone in fact did do that very thing as soon as it started being discussed.

Apology accepted.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote: Fact check time:

- The 1994–2004 Assault Weapons Ban did in fact work. Mass shooting deaths were 70% lower during the ban. After it expired, fatalities and frequency skyrocketed. That’s not a coincidence, it’s cause and effect.

The FBI Uniform Crime Report is an unbiased source of information. Here is what it shows for rifle homicides from 1994-2004 and then 2005-2015.

1994: 757 rifle homicides
1995: 654 rifle homicides
1996: 561 rifle homicides
1997: 638 rifle homicides
1998: 548 rifle homicides
1999: 400 rifle homicides
2000: 411 rifle homicides
2001: 386 rifle homicides
2002: 488 rifle homicides
2003: 392 rifle homicides
2004: 403 rifle homicides
(Total rifle homicides = 5,638)

2005: 445 rifle homicides
2006: 438 rifle homicides
2007: 453 rifle homicides
2008: 380 rifle homicides
2009: 351 rifle homicides
2010: 367 rifle homicides
2011: 332 rifle homicides
2012: 298 rifle homicides
2013: 285 rifle homicides
2014: 258 rifle homicides
2015: 215 rifle homicides
(Total rifle homicides = 3,822)

Delta = 1,816 rifle homicides

Did the assault weapon ban work?

Anonymous wrote:- AR-15s and similar rifles are the weapon of choice in the deadliest mass shootings. They’re used disproportionately in high-casualty events because they’re fast, accurate, and built for combat. When long guns are involved, they’re almost always military-style semiautomatics.

At least half of the U.S. gun deaths each year are suicides. That’s a handgun issue, as are accidental shootings, and domestic violence shootings, and inner city mass shootings.

Anonymous wrote:- Magazine limits matter. States that ban large-capacity magazines see 49% fewer fatal mass shootings and 70% fewer deaths per capita. Slowing a shooter down saves lives.

If you believe guns are trafficked from states with normal laws into gun control states why wouldn’t the same thing happen with magazines?

Anonymous wrote:- Columbine? Happened during the ban, yes, but the shooters used grandfathered weapons and magazines. That’s a loophole problem, not a policy failure.

You’ve identified the crux of the problem. If there is a new assault weapon ban without confiscation of both the rifles and magazines very little will change. At the time of the 94 ban it’s estimated there were between 1M-2M in the U.S. Now there are over 25M and rising rapidly.

Anonymous wrote:- "Most mass shootings involve handguns" is a dodge. True in raw numbers, but irrelevant when AR-15s are used to mow down dozens in minutes. Lethality matters.

Your words from below: “Rifles account for a small fraction of gun homicides overall”

You don’t seem to care about raw numbers, like the deaths of Black Americans. Most inner city mass shootings are committed with handguns. The new weapon of choice are Glock pistols with 3D printed “Glock switches” that make them fully automatic.

A large percentage of mass shootings are domestic violence related and aren’t committed with rifles.

Anonymous wrote:- "More rifle murders during the ban" - That's flatly false. Rifles account for a small fraction of gun homicides overall, but account for a large share of mass shooting deaths due to their efficiency.

Thanks for admitting that an assault weapon ban is an attempt to address a fraction of a fraction of gun homicides.

I already disproved your “flatly false” assertion above.

Glock, makers of the Glock Safety Pistol, and supplier to more police than any other maker, is a responsible, caring company.

Glock already, of their own accord, re-designed every single model Glock they make, to completely stop criminals from using these “Glock switches” at all.

If you all did not know: CHINA is behind these highly illegal “Glock switches.” China makes fentanyl and also 100% of the illegal Glock switches. China KNOWS these harm America, and it’s doing all this on purpose to weaken us.

Responsible, caring, Glock has spent its own $$$ to redesign its product for our safety. The new model V Glock in not convertible at all.

[Anonymous]

My kid asked me today “why do we keep talking about 9-11 when school shooting have killed more people”. I don’t have an answer for him. Do you?

[Anonymous]

We are awash in guns and we are incredibly irresponsible with guns, which has now led us to being so bad that even a total stranger landing on our shores can easily get one and shoot National Guard members on the streets of Washington DC.

That's not an immigrant problem, that's a gun problem.