• 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!

ban the fucking guns

Because gun retailers don't want to lose repeat business.

Where are police unions on this? You'd think they'd want to make it harder for randos to pull off mass shootings. And if they're legally justified to shoot people for simply having a gun (which seems very anti-2nd amendment), you think they'd be for more gun restrictions.
 
2&2 Slider To Leyritz said:
What I don't get about the background check and no fly amendments is that those should actually protect most pro-gun Republican voters, so I don't understand why the congressmen would vote against it. If you're a pro-gun Republican voter, chances are you already have one or more guns. It's not like you haven't had ample opportunity to already buy some if you want some. So who is this delaying ... 17 year olds and those people who may fall under no-fly restrictions who don't already have guns? Seems like a pretty small number of "good guys" would actually be affected by this. Just general Congressional stupidity all the way around.
Click to expand...

I think most Congressmen backed by the NRA vote down anything that limits guns, regardless of the "real world consequences" of it.
 
I am all for doing something but as a friend of mine said the other day, "it's against the law to posses heroin and use it, has that law stopped any of either heroin getting into the country or people using it?"
 
bcobbdeacs said:
I am all for doing something but as a friend of mine said the other day, "it's against the law to posses heroin and use it, has that law stopped any of either heroin getting into the country or people using it?"
Click to expand...

do you even logic, bro?
 
Laws don't prevent all crimes. They make it harder to do said action, and carry harsher consequences for those who choose to break the law.

If you use the argument above then you are basically making the case that there should never be any laws for anything. Criminals break laws, so why have them in the first place?
 
The point is that just banning something is not going to do much of anything, perhaps the first thing that we should do is repeal the ban on using government funds to study how we can best stop gun violence. Develop a sensible plan and try to implement that, in the mean time increasing wait periods, banning guns to no fly list people are all good things to do.
 
MysteryMen said:
It's equally absurd that the Democrats are not concerned about the due process issue. Which is why it was nice to see the ACLU stay consistent and oppose the bill. I'm for sure anti-gun, but the due process issues worry me too
Click to expand...

I've thought from when it was first proposed that it was just a political game. They know nothing will pass so they are just trying to make Republicans look as bad as possible in the process.
 
bcobbdeacs said:
The point is that just banning something is not going to do much of anything, perhaps the first thing that we should do is repeal the ban on using government funds to study how we can best stop gun violence. Develop a sensible plan and try to implement that, in the mean time increasing wait periods, banning guns to no fly list people are all good things to do.
Click to expand...

Guns are a lot more prevalent than heroin.
 
bcobbdeacs said:
I am all for doing something but as a friend of mine said the other day, "it's against the law to posses heroin and use it, has that law stopped any of either heroin getting into the country or people using it?"
Click to expand...

Did you tell him yes?
 
bcobbdeacs said:
The point is that just banning something is not going to do much of anything, perhaps the first thing that we should do is repeal the ban on using government funds to study how we can best stop gun violence. Develop a sensible plan and try to implement that, in the mean time increasing wait periods, banning guns to no fly list people are all good things to do.
Click to expand...

I agree with all of this.
 
avalon said:
I've thought from when it was first proposed that it was just a political game. They know nothing will pass so they are just trying to make Republicans look as bad as possible in the process.
Click to expand...

Right, which maybe plays well with some people. Not with me though. This isn't a fucking game, people are dying
 
MysteryMen said:
You agree that banning guns wouldn't do much of anything?? Come on Doofus, it would have a huge impact if it ever came to pass
Click to expand...

Well I don't think it's very realistic to ban all guns. It will never happen, so it's a bit of a false hypothetical to discuss it.

I think banning all assault, automatic, semiautomatic would have a pretty big impact in the positive.

A better way to phrase what I said would be "I agree with everything after your first thought."

I think I've made it pretty clear on here that I see no positives for guns in society at all. I don't think we need them, and I sure as hell don't trust the average joe to go out and bear the responsibility that comes with being a gun owner.
 
The ban on money to be used to research guns and consequences of different actions with guns is one of the dumbest things. I mean I get it, you are afraid of the results. It's easier to ignore something when you can say there is no evidence. If you are so certain more guns is what's needed then let the studies be done and be proven right, but even they know they are selling a pile of made up shit. They are the people that won't go to a doctor because if they don't know what's wrong then nothing is wrong.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top