All I can say about this is people are the most dangerous animals on planet earth with or without a gun that's why I cant wait to get in my Cutlass Black and fly away... come on 3.0!
Guns. Good or Bad?
- Thread starter NaffNaffBobFace
- Start date
- Status
Huegpaynis
Space Marshal
Yes, because to do otherwise would be disingenuous and go against my own convictions.
It also wouldn't be wrong. What would be wrong would be to say that their own opinions, as formed by their life experiences, including the loss of their child or loved one, are wrong because they run counter to mine. Yes, my rights to bear arms are secured by the constitution, but your right to disagree with me about the firearms I own is also secured by the constitution. So yes. I would say "guns are good." I would also get screamed at. Because I cannot expect that my own opinions take precedence over someone else's.
Yes we can. It's extremely expensive, but completely legal. What we cannot do is manufacture them or buy them at retail.
Sorry, I was more of making the point that anyone that goes through everything involved to legally own an automatic weapon is hardly 'normal'.
You are right on the improvement on cars to try and reduce the impact they make to pedestrians and hopefully soon they will be most if not fully computer controlled. Of course this does open up the theoretical debate on who should the car protect the people inside the car or those outside. For who is going to buy a car that may kill you if it deems doing so could save others.
Yes guns are the latest technological improvement on humans desire to kill each other. The history of humanity is littered with stories of murders of attempted genocide, wars and subjugation. And through out this history there has been an arms race to build better ways to go about accomplishing these goals. To give tools to kings men to soldiers to give them an advantage on the battlefield as well as at home to implement control. Guns in their current form are the pinnacle of this technology and I do have to wonder how much better or worse off we would be with out them all together. Much like Pandora's box the question of if we should have gone here is already decided and no longer can that door be closed. We now live in a world were guns exist and much like any other weapon the biggest deterrent for any individual is the knowledge that utilizing this expression of power can be meet with an equal show of might and power by many others. Its what for the most part keeps countries from conquering each other and keeps the use of nuclear weapons to a minimal. There is always the exception and the rouge element were an individual no longer fears death or no longer cares about the possibility of death and goes out with a bang or gun fire as their final expression.
While the existence of guns problematic situation that does lead from time to time to horrific random events. The attempt to remove guns would only lead to an upset of power allowing those whose own ambitions have already allowed them to corrupt and negate the laws to seize even more power due to their retaining their weapons. With out the ability to completely remove every gun from existence the only other option is to make sure everyone is able to have one. Yes this will guarantee that there will be misuse of the weapon from time to time and the sadness of lives taken far to soon. But the truth is anytime we attempt to only give power to a few we find ourselves at their mercy and people are jerks. We always think our way is the best but the truth is our way caters to our own self interests at the expense of someone else, and in the balance of power it allows for a system that caters to the needs of the majority with the lease oppression of the minority.
In the last 20 years we have had many situations and case studies that show how a few with guns and armies can make the lives of many miserable. We can look through Mexico and Central America, we can go over to Africa and Boko Haram, into the middle east with the Taliban and their interaction with the villagers into Syria and Egypt. We can even step back in history and see how the balance of power allowed a few to inflect their will upon the masses.
It really is not easy to get automatic rifles in the USA. Very few people have them and those that do have to follow special rules and intense scrutiny to make sure said weapons are heavily secure and not used by anyone else. It also requires tax stamps and approval by the local chief of police with in your area. It also gives the police the ability to inspect where the weapons are being held and the weapons themselves at any time they feel like it.
Airlines have for years attempted to limited success from keeping people from hijacking planes as its in their best interest to give the appearance of safe travel. It has not stopped planes from being hijacked and in fact the best deterrent for keeping planes from being hijacked is not the security before the plane but the people on the plane itself. The best deterrent from bombings is not to increase security and police presents but to have neighbors and friends being engaged and involved in each others lives. It goes back to the use of guns to kill each other. Guns themselves are not the problem they are but a symptom of the problem. While attempting to remove guns may cause the individual to reconsider their course of action most often they will simply find an alternative method and this does nothing to address the root cause. Why did this individual feel the need to take another life and what can we as a society do to address this? So the question of why remove guns when it does not address the persons needs to act out violently and only allows for the possibility of an imbalance of power.
This would be epic!
Huegpaynis
Space Marshal
It's not that complicated, actually. Since it's a private sale and all requisite NFA paperwork has already been completed on a pre-hughes amendment weapon, you just do the transfer paperwork and your NICS check at an FFL and pay the man for your money-to-noise converter.
EDIT: The primary deterrent to more people owning automatic weapons in America is price, not complexity. It's like $15,000 on the cheap end.
...and the 6 to 12 month wait for approval...
...and the whole less need for a warrant to search your home 'for cause' due to being a registered owner of an automatic weapon in many States...
GUNS ARE GOOD! The government needs our guns just as Hitler needed the guns before he could implement The Reichstag Fire Decree or Martial Law as we know it in America. He got the guns with the same tactics used in America now. Trying to get WE THE PEOPLE to give up our 2nd Amendment which is what keeps the government in their place. If you vote for guns being banned leave America, you don't belong here. Guns aren't the problem. Psychopaths with guns are the problem. And they are in the highest of ranks in the US trying to bring down America from within.
Many lives are lost but the media uses Crisis Actors to deceive the public.
WAKE UP!
https://www.facebook.com/TheRealRedElephants/videos/478693535835783/
View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PR9AsdWg73E
Many lives are lost but the media uses Crisis Actors to deceive the public.
WAKE UP!
https://www.facebook.com/TheRealRedElephants/videos/478693535835783/
Huegpaynis
Space Marshal
The waiting period is for new NFA applications, such as a form 1 to create an SBR or a form 4 for purchasing a suppressor. Any existing automatic weapons would already be registered, meaning the only waiting periods would be imposed by your local legislation, and to my knowledge, there isn't any on private sales. If you have to fill out a new form 4, then I'm mistaken, but I don't believe you have to do that during a private sale as it's already registered.
I know someone will correct me if I'm wrong, which I realize is a high likelyhood, so I appreciate the more accurate info. If you look at all the mass shootings, have any one of them had a fully automatic weapon involved? I am leaning towards no. So what's the upside of debating fully automatic weapons? If there were some involved, then carry on... :)
In my country you first need to prove to your gouverment that you're qualified to be trusted with gunownership.
So you need to provide the following things:
no criminal record
no current proceedings
psychological record
not addicted to drugs /alcohol
not a member of forbidden partys or organisations
record about a secure gun storage
But this isn't a prove once and forever solution, for example if you keep driving to fast, the gouverment may question your mental health, and revoke your right to own guns...
This process trys to keep lunatics away from guns, (and I think we can all agree, that there are enough people out there who can't be trusted with gunownership.) While it still allows qualified people to own guns for their hobby.
And okay, if you life in the middle of nowhere and bears and other bigger dangerous animals live next door to you, i can understand your wish to own a gun. But who the hell needs a gun in the middle of a city? I can't think of a situation that is better with a gun in your hand.
(Getting robbed? If you're unarmed, you may loose your money, if you're armed you may loose you're life as well)
I would like to hear why a solution like the german solution can't be a solution for you.(US Citicens)
Or why do you feel the need to be able to buy guns without a backgroundcheck on you?
(I'm talking about anything bigger than a softair gun here)
PS: Yes there will always be illegal ways to get a weapon if you want one, The point in banning them is making it as hard as possible.
So you need to provide the following things:
no criminal record
no current proceedings
psychological record
not addicted to drugs /alcohol
not a member of forbidden partys or organisations
record about a secure gun storage
But this isn't a prove once and forever solution, for example if you keep driving to fast, the gouverment may question your mental health, and revoke your right to own guns...
This process trys to keep lunatics away from guns, (and I think we can all agree, that there are enough people out there who can't be trusted with gunownership.) While it still allows qualified people to own guns for their hobby.
And okay, if you life in the middle of nowhere and bears and other bigger dangerous animals live next door to you, i can understand your wish to own a gun. But who the hell needs a gun in the middle of a city? I can't think of a situation that is better with a gun in your hand.
(Getting robbed? If you're unarmed, you may loose your money, if you're armed you may loose you're life as well)
I would like to hear why a solution like the german solution can't be a solution for you.(US Citicens)
Or why do you feel the need to be able to buy guns without a backgroundcheck on you?
(I'm talking about anything bigger than a softair gun here)
PS: Yes there will always be illegal ways to get a weapon if you want one, The point in banning them is making it as hard as possible.
Last edited:
In the USA you do have to get a background check with each purchase, the claims in that media about that not being the case is a lie.
The biggest issue in the USA with the background checks is the extremely 'liberal' States, counties, and cities have laws that block the reporting of mentally unstable people desiring to commit these acts from being reported.
Two easy examples of this are the Colorado movie theatre shooter and Virginia Tech shooter. Both had told their therapists detailed plans for exactly what they later carried out, but that information was blocked from going to the national database backgrounds checks reference (laws in California blocked this for the Colorado shooter, and county laws blocked it for the VT shooter.)
All the locations with the highest gun crime in the USA have had a gun ban or laws so restrictive as to effectively be a ban.
Every time these policies are overturned the crime, and particularly violent crime, rates dropped drastically until their jacked up economies caused it to increase again.
I love how people watch Borne movies then think criminals are going to have near magical levels of skills to disarm a victim then use their own firearm against them. This is such an exceptional rarity in the real world it is laughable. Most criminals have so little firearms experience they cannot even hold it correctly much less hit a target 10 ft in front of them, whereas with the level of grubbing training many States require before they'll issue a conceal carry permit puts the potential victim in a very good position to win the engagement (which they frequently do without ever having to fire a shot.)
The biggest issue in the USA with the background checks is the extremely 'liberal' States, counties, and cities have laws that block the reporting of mentally unstable people desiring to commit these acts from being reported.
Two easy examples of this are the Colorado movie theatre shooter and Virginia Tech shooter. Both had told their therapists detailed plans for exactly what they later carried out, but that information was blocked from going to the national database backgrounds checks reference (laws in California blocked this for the Colorado shooter, and county laws blocked it for the VT shooter.)
All the locations with the highest gun crime in the USA have had a gun ban or laws so restrictive as to effectively be a ban.
Every time these policies are overturned the crime, and particularly violent crime, rates dropped drastically until their jacked up economies caused it to increase again.
I love how people watch Borne movies then think criminals are going to have near magical levels of skills to disarm a victim then use their own firearm against them. This is such an exceptional rarity in the real world it is laughable. Most criminals have so little firearms experience they cannot even hold it correctly much less hit a target 10 ft in front of them, whereas with the level of grubbing training many States require before they'll issue a conceal carry permit puts the potential victim in a very good position to win the engagement (which they frequently do without ever having to fire a shot.)
While I typically do not use Vox as a source of any unbiased reporting they do raise some valid points that guns do allow for quick choices to be easily lethal. The key word being easily, as this does not discount the reality of the individual with our with out a gun attempting to perform the same action in that instance just the chance of it being lethal is greatly reduced with other methods. IE if I was in a heated argument and I banish a gun or a sword to kill you my intent is the same. The ease at which I am able to accomplish this intent is different from the gun to the sword to a hammer and my chances of successfully carrying out my intent significantly decreases with each step down. Which is why the favored gun of choice to accomplish this is not a long rifle or shotgun but a hand gun as its far easier to carry around and have available.
Which brings up the second fallacy of the gun ban moment, the weapon they repeatedly go after is not the one that causes the most deaths. The debate and the movement repeatedly goes after the one that has the lease impact on the number of gun related death.
Great questions.
Honestly i'd rather be unarmed out in the wild with Bears and Mountain Lions then in an urban setting, for nothing is as deadly as another human.
While you are right that if you are armed and are getting robbed you have a higher chance of loosing your life, but overall your chances of being robbed while armed are greatly reduced due to you no longer being an easy target. This is where the balance of power comes into play and forces the individual to put their own life on the table, concede or negotiate. When both parties are equally armed the outcome is typically a far more beneficial negotiation then at any other time. It doesn't even have to apply to situations with guns it can be countries with equally sized armies. It can be in the boardroom with equally skilled lawyers. Guns simply lower the bar on utilizing that power.
And to finish with once any government has the ability to question you as an individual over your ability to have access to a level playing field it is only a mater of time when it can be used against you for you no longer have the ability to negotiate. Which is not an issue during times of plenty, but add an economic stressor and things can turn sour quickly. With out the population being all equally in powered the outcome has been the same through out history the strong pray upon the weak subjecting them to a life of servitude and/or genocide. But when all parties are equality in powered then typically third options are found which may be more painful for the strong but generally are far more successful in the long run.
I understand what your saying but all i'm seeing here is an arms race, We cant keep getting robbed by those people with guns maybe we should get guns? those guys we rob are getting armed maybe we should get a machine gun as well?
We as a species are trying to move forward but all this says to me is that instead of that some would rather have a bigger stick than the other because that will show them! This is a mentality I cannot wrap my head around you having guns doesn't make the other side any less dangerous be it terrorists, lunatics or even your own politicians hell this makes your own police forces more dangerous because everyday on their job that could be their last because everyone is armed this is a literal arms race.
Nobody here I think "not read all the comments" wants america to just give up their weapons honestly i'm glad you have something you enjoy and i would love to start shooting myself what we are saying is that this is occurring far too often with no change at all and instead of a resolution you have more violence.
Those case studies alone I feel just reinforce my point that having easy access to weapons in an environment that breeds violence makes an arms race and equipping more folk with weapons just causes more problems
On top of that the whole religion and drugs thrown into the mix that we shouldn't also get into haha
"But our great security lies, I think, in our growing strength, both in numbers and wealth; … unless, by a neglect of military discipline, we should lose all martial spirit …; for there is much truth in the Italian saying, Make yourselves sheep, and the wolves will eat you."
"They who can give up essential Liberty to obtain a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety"
- Benjamin Franklin
"They who can give up essential Liberty to obtain a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety"
- Benjamin Franklin
Jeah, I agree, giving up the fight is not an option, but we don't need to be wolves either.
Writing a letter to your local politican may change your world more than carying a gun with you.
A single Voice dosen't mean much, but that's just because there are millions of voices to be heared.
Just because somone refuses to use his body to fight, he isn't becoming a sheep.
He becomes a sheep when he stops trying to improve the world around him.
At least that's how I like to understand that phrase.
Last edited:
As an impartial observer of this thread I have noticed it is hard to argue such strong and decisive quotes, so for balance and balance alone, here are some other gun related quotes: Last Words.
"There is no place I so much desire to see as Jerusalem." President Lincoln moments before being shot by John Booth.
"Useless, useless." John Booths last words after being shot while resisting arrest for the murder of Lincoln.
"That is very obvious." JFK's last words before being assassinated.
"I don't have a gun, stop shooting." Teenager Michael Brown, before he was shot dead by a police officer in Ferguson, Missouri.
"And now, in keeping with Channel 40's policy of always bringing you the latest in blood and guts, in living color, you're about to see another first--an attempted suicide." Christine Chubbock moments before shooting into her own skull just behind the ear live on air.
"Let us pass over the river and rest under the shade of the trees." Thomas 'Stonewall' Jackson who had been accidentally shot by his own men.
"There's good in all of us and I think I simply love people too much, so much that it makes me feel too fucking sad." From Kurt Cobains suicide note written before he blew his brains out.
"Officers, why do you have your guns out?" Kenneth Chamberlain, who had accidentally triggered his Life Alert necklace and refused assistance.
"Dear God, Dear God, why is this happening? I just want to go home" Cassie Bernall, victim of the Columbine High School massacre.
There are a lot more, and they outnumber the words of any famous or founding father a thousand times over - however I hope they will not be required - Just for balance.
Last edited:
Not the place for these arguments, but if someone wants a gun with malicious intent, a law won't stop them and even if it does, they'll find a new way of maneing
- Status