• Welcome to OGBoards 10.0, keep in mind that we will be making LOTS of changes to smooth out the experience here and make it as close as possible functionally to the old software, but feel free to drop suggestions or requests in the Tech Support subforum!

Gun Control Laws

Deacon923 said:
There is no political support for a handgun ban in this country. The supreme court would never allow it anyway. Its a strawman argument.

I propose a national gun registration database and a requirement that all gun owners carry insurance. Further, the registered owner of a gun should be financially responsible for all crimes committed with their guns unless gun is reported stolen. To own a gun owners must submit to regular licensing and skills tests. Finally if any resident of a home with a registered gun is diagnosed with any mental illness, the gun owner must notify local law enforcement.

I thought about proposing a requirement that guns in a residence with a mentally ill person must be secured but discarded that idea as it is probably unworkable and unconstitutional. The rest of my proposal is constitutional in my opinion.

Discuss that proposal instead of your straw men.

Sent from my DROID RAZR using Tapatalk 2
Click to expand...

i'm on board with all of these things.
 
We can easily end gun show sales.

We can make every sale be registered.

We can ban add on magazines.

We can redo the assault weapon ban with no exceptions.

We can limit the number of usable weapons (other than antiques over 100 years old) that can be purchased by individuals or non-security firms.
 
DreamOnDemOn said:
Man, bullets. I don't think there is any corelation between the number of guns in a country and the rate of gun homicides in that country. Canada has more than 1/3 as many guns per 100,000 people but gun death rate only about 1/6 as high. If guns were killing people, you would think there would be about twice as many gun deaths in Canada.

Maybe it is not how many guns you have but what you do with the guns once you get them.
Click to expand...

Based on the data I have, the US gun homicide rate is 2.98/100k people v. 0.76/100k people in Canada. The US has 88,800 guns/100k people v. Canada's 30,800/100k people. This gives us a gun homicide rate that is 36% higher per gun in America.
 
tintinisahottie said:
I didn't mean it as a strawman. I don't like guns. But I just don't see what we can do to stop them. They're too widespread. Even if we went with the most restrictive law possible we couldn't stop them at all
Click to expand...

When you have restrictive import laws, the cost goes way up. When the cost goes up, fewer people can afford them.
 
tintinisahottie said:
If you're only buying/obtaining legally
Click to expand...

The vast majority of guns used in mass shootings were purchased legally. If you increase restrictions on legal guns, then the cost of illegal guns would go up as well (due to difficulties in transporting and higher risk incurred by the middlemen transporting guns).

I'm just restating what Arlington says in this post. Read his points and see if you take issue with them:

http://www.ogboards.com/forums/show...Control-Laws&p=1036542&viewfull=1#post1036542
 
BeachBumDeac said:
The vast majority of guns used in mass shootings were purchased legally. If you increase restrictions on legal guns, then the cost of illegal guns would go up as well (due to difficulties in transporting and higher risk incurred by the middlemen transporting guns).

I'm just restating what Arlington says in this post. Read his points and see if you take issue with them:

http://www.ogboards.com/forums/show...Control-Laws&p=1036542&viewfull=1#post1036542
Click to expand...

It's not that I take issue with them per se, I just think it's unrealistic. It's still going to be easy to get your hands on a gun if you're a sick twisted demented person. The whole problem is a lot like the drug problem, I just don't see a real solution any way you slice it. I mean I know where I could get high powered, illegal weapons right now and I have frankly lived a very sheltered life because of my family's financial situation
 
tintinisahottie said:
It's not that I take issue with them per se, I just think it's unrealistic. It's still going to be easy to get your hands on a gun if you're a sick twisted demented person. The whole problem is a lot like the drug problem, I just don't see a real solution any way you slice it. I mean I know where I could get high powered, illegal weapons right now and I have frankly lived a very sheltered life because of my family's financial situation
Click to expand...

Yeah, but they'd have to be a sick, twisted, demented person with a LOT of money. And the vast majority of gun death isn't from these mass shootings by sick people. They're the accidental and the impulsive shootings that happen every day by people who aren't sick or twisted, just making a bad decision. Don't you think those would go way down with more restrictive laws?
 
No, because people already have them. They're already in such circulation, as shown by the stats about the number of guns per people that keeps getting thrown out, that how is restricting them now even going to make a dent?
 
tintinisahottie said:
No, because people already have them. They're already in such circulation, as shown by the stats about the number of guns per people that keeps getting thrown out, that how is restricting them now even going to make a dent?
Click to expand...

923 laid it out pretty well. If you implemented his proposals AND did a buy back program at the same time, you could reduce the number of guns in circulation.

Deacon923 said:
There is no political support for a handgun ban in this country. The supreme court would never allow it anyway. Its a strawman argument.

I propose a national gun registration database and a requirement that all gun owners carry insurance. Further, the registered owner of a gun should be financially responsible for all crimes committed with their guns unless gun is reported stolen. To own a gun owners must submit to regular licensing and skills tests. Finally if any resident of a home with a registered gun is diagnosed with any mental illness, the gun owner must notify local law enforcement.

I thought about proposing a requirement that guns in a residence with a mentally ill person must be secured but discarded that idea as it is probably unworkable and unconstitutional. The rest of my proposal is constitutional in my opinion.

Discuss that proposal instead of your straw men.

Sent from my DROID RAZR using Tapatalk 2
Click to expand...
 
tintinisahottie said:
No, because people already have them. They're already in such circulation, as shown by the stats about the number of guns per people that keeps getting thrown out, that how is restricting them now even going to make a dent?
Click to expand...

Why attempt to reform any of our massively uphill battles. Millions of American children read below their grade level. Why implement any new policies that won't even make a dent in the issue?

Ridiculous argument.
 
Are there any indicators that these shooters actually would go through the black market for these guns? I hear that, but I'm not compelled by it. Would gangs get guns illegally? Sure, but they do now. These shootings are largely crimes of convenience (easily obtained guns, low security, nearby venues, vulnerable populations). These are not, sickeningly, elaborately planned attacks. The fact that a mass shooting can be considered a crime of convenience is sad.

If I lock my car door, someone can still break the window if they want to. Locking doors still deters crime.

Gun control works. It's not a panacea, but it will help.
 
Last edited:
BeachBumDeac said:
923 laid it out pretty well. If you implemented his proposals AND did a buy back program at the same time, you could reduce the number of guns in circulation.
Click to expand...

Again, completely ignores how we're getting the guns out that are already owned, that's what I don't understand
 
tintinisahottie said:
If you're only buying/obtaining legally
Click to expand...

I would guess that if the laws are more restrictive, making illegal gun sales more risky, than the cost of buying on the black market would go up a ton as well.
 
Deacfreak07 said:
Is there any indicators that these shooters actually would go through the black market for these guns? I hear that, but I'm not compelled by it. Would gangs get guns illegally? Sure, but they do now. These shootings are largely crimes of convenience (easily obtained guns, low security, nearby venues, vulnerable populations). These are not, sickeningly, elaborately planned attacks. The fact that a mass shooting can be considered a crime of convenience is sad.

If I lock my car door, someone can still break the window if they want to. Locking doors still deters crime.

Gun control works. It's not a panacea, but it will help.
Click to expand...

Exactly.
 
DreamOnDemOn said:
Is it possible that some of those poor helpless children might have been saved if some people inside the school had weapons with which to protect the kids from lunatics? There are some reports that the principal and maybe others tried to stop the derranged kid but were shot dead. If these brave people had been armed, pehaps they could have ended whatever torment the shooter was experiencing before he took so many innocent lives.

Even lunatics who commit this kind of atrocity realize that the jig is up when deadly force arrives, whether that be in the form of the police after everyone is already dead, or in the form of one or more sane, law abiding citizens trained by the NRA in self defense. Whether or not it would have made a difference in this particular case, removing the freedom of a peaceful, mentally competent person to defend themselves as a knee jerk reaction to tragedy would, as removing freedom almost always does, make the situation worse.

Now everybody send me as many negreps as you can.
Click to expand...

Its also possible that your mom doesn't have to take donkey punches to make a living, but highly unlikely.
 
tintinisahottie said:
Again, completely ignores how we're getting the guns out that are already owned, that's what I don't understand
Click to expand...

The cat is already out of the bag. You either do nothing about them, or institute some type of buy back program.
 
TownieDeac said:
Why attempt to reform any of our massively uphill battles. Millions of American children read below their grade level. Why implement any new policies that won't even make a dent in the issue?

Ridiculous argument.
Click to expand...

Strawman. I'm not advocating against any policies, I'm just trying to hear one explained that I think will actually help. Which none of the proposed, in my opinion, would
 
This reminds me of the arguments against gay marriage. None of them are good and the vast majority of them are idiotic.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top