Gun politics, firearms ownership, and US 2nd amendment discussion

2012-07-15 06:32:18

#126

rdx-fx: ...; +955|6809

Ty wrote:
But don't you agree that it is appropriate for people to be taught that there are rules and they should follow them? That they should show that they at least have the minimum knowledge and understanding to be trusted with a car or a gun? The understanding of these rules doesn't prevent all gun harm here either, that doesn't mean they're worthless. Just like my criticism of your three steps. What they do may not be enough but there is a significant benefit in having them.

You need clear, established laws for a civilized society. So everyone is working under the same rules, in theory.

But you can't legislate common sense, compassion, or responsibility.

On the contrary, the more laws you make, the more you absolve the populous of relying on their own ethics, common sense, compassion, and responsibility. Once you reach that bureaucratic leviathan of a society, where there is a law for every detail, people begin to take the attitude of 'if it isn't illegal, it's okay'.

2012-07-15 06:40:56

#127

Ty: Mass Media Casualty; +2,398|6992|Noizyland

Jay wrote:
Ty wrote:
Jay wrote:
Ok, and? Those are very good instructions to follow, but it's not like you can force people to adhere to them. Everyone has to take a written and road test in order to gain a driver's license here. It doesn't preclude a lot of people from being terrible, irresponsible drivers. And those terrible drivers kill way more people than gun owners do.
But don't you agree that it is appropriate for people to be taught that there are rules and they should follow them? That they should show that they at least have the minimum knowledge and understanding to be trusted with a car or a gun? The understanding of these rules doesn't prevent all gun harm here either, that doesn't mean they're worthless. Just like my criticism of your three steps. What they do may not be enough but there is a significant benefit in having them.
Rules are less than worthless if they are unenforceable. They become scofflaws and undermine actually legitimate rules.

That's a bit cynical don't you think? Most people don't need the threat of a speeding ticket to understand the danger of driving too fast. You're not suggesting that the only reason people stick to a speed limit is because they fear getting a fine? Likewise the reason people should keep their firearm pointed in a safe direction isn't because some cop is waiting around a tree to write a ticket but because it's dumb to start waving a gun around. The reason you identify your target is because you don't want to end up like the aforementioned gentleman who has to spend the rest of his life knowing he killed a young school teacher. By the way I should mention that this guy didn't get manslaughter, he got charged with murder. Retrospective maybe since the damage had been done but it's one way of enforcing a rule.

What's so difficult in making sure, as much as possible, that someone understands this stuff? Common sense isn't so common you know. Sure it's not going to solve everything, a complete dullard can pick himself up enough to show a basic understanding or pass a test sure. But having nothing instead doesn't seem the best option.

Anyway it's 1:40am on a Monday morning and I have to get up for work. Boo. Good conversation though. G'night.

[Blinking eyes thing]
Steam: http://steamcommunity.com/id/tzyon

2012-07-15 06:45:49

#128

Jay: Bork! Bork! Bork!; +2,006|5575|London, England

Ty wrote:
Jay wrote:
Ty wrote:

But don't you agree that it is appropriate for people to be taught that there are rules and they should follow them? That they should show that they at least have the minimum knowledge and understanding to be trusted with a car or a gun? The understanding of these rules doesn't prevent all gun harm here either, that doesn't mean they're worthless. Just like my criticism of your three steps. What they do may not be enough but there is a significant benefit in having them.
Rules are less than worthless if they are unenforceable. They become scofflaws and undermine actually legitimate rules.
That's a bit cynical don't you think? Most people don't need the threat of a speeding ticket to understand the danger of driving too fast. You're not suggesting that the only reason people stick to a speed limit is because they fear getting a fine?

For most people, yes, that is the only reason. Speed limits are arbitrary. Some people feel comfortable driving much faster than the law allows. The only reason they stay within 10 miles of the limit is because speeding tickets have become very expensive.

"Ah, you miserable creatures! You who think that you are so great! You who judge humanity to be so small! You who wish to reform everything! Why don't you reform yourselves? That task would be sufficient enough."
-Frederick Bastiat

2012-07-15 08:38:08

#129

eleven bravo: Member; +1,399|5476|foggy bottom

krazed wrote:
Dilbert_X wrote:
Jay wrote:
So how would you guys format the responsibility test?
No criminal record, no history of mental health problems, secure storage in place, part of a club and be able to find two or so responsible/professional people prepared to provide character references.
so... exactly like canada

yeah, thats a pretty dumb idea

Tu Stultus Es

2012-07-15 08:40:22

#130

eleven bravo: Member; +1,399|5476|foggy bottom

Jay wrote:
Ok, and? Those are very good instructions to follow, but it's not like you can force people to adhere to them. Everyone has to take a written and road test in order to gain a driver's license here. It doesn't preclude a lot of people from being terrible, irresponsible drivers. And those terrible drivers kill way more people than gun owners do.

i didnt take a written or road test for my texas license

Tu Stultus Es

2012-07-15 12:06:00

#131

Jay: Bork! Bork! Bork!; +2,006|5575|London, England

eleven bravo wrote:
Jay wrote:
Ok, and? Those are very good instructions to follow, but it's not like you can force people to adhere to them. Everyone has to take a written and road test in order to gain a driver's license here. It doesn't preclude a lot of people from being terrible, irresponsible drivers. And those terrible drivers kill way more people than gun owners do.
i didnt take a written or road test for my texas license

You had a military license, right?

"Ah, you miserable creatures! You who think that you are so great! You who judge humanity to be so small! You who wish to reform everything! Why don't you reform yourselves? That task would be sufficient enough."
-Frederick Bastiat

2012-07-17 01:48:54

#132

Dilbert_X: The X stands for; +1,813|6323|eXtreme to the maX

Jay wrote:
All you're doing is raising the barrier to entry by making it more expensive to own a weapon (legally). The first two are already in place here, and they don't really mean anything. The club certainly means absolutely nothing. And even if the storage space was in place, are you going to put gps monitors on all weapons to prove they are locked away?

If someone can't/won't spend say $200 to join a club - or be trained in safe handling by some other means - then I'd suggest they aren't too serious about responsible firearms ownership.
A CCW requires money to be handed over, training, background checks, gun registration etc, I don't really see the difference.

There's no need for GPS trackers on guns, or cars, as you've pointed out the existing laws and enforcement work just fine to inhibit the majority from breaking the laws.
Those that do will usually be re-educated or taken out of the system eventually.

Should murder be legal because the state can't put a Police officer on everyone's shoulder? Nope.

Rules are less than worthless if they are unenforceable. They become scofflaws and undermine actually legitimate rules.

Who says the rules are unenforceable? You could apply that argument to any law.
(A scofflaw is someone who habitually breaks the law.)

It seems to me that licensing, gun registration and secure storage requiremnents would eventually reduce access to firearms by people who should have them. I don't see the big deal.

Last edited by Dilbert_X (2012-07-17 01:52:49)

Fuck Israel

2012-07-17 04:40:03

#133

13rin: Member; +977|6696

People (save Jay) over the last two pages want some magic bullet or super duper test that would screen out the morons. As data taken from those that actually gone through the license permitting process here in the state of Florida, one can easily see that the vast segment of the population who want to have a gun & CARRY IT, do so responsibly.

http://licgweb.doacs.state.fl.us/stats/cw_monthly.pdf

Over 2,260,949 million permits issued, with on 168 fucktards..... That isn't even .01 percent.... Actually, its more like 0.007431 percent.

Also from the data one can see that permits are denied, so there is all ready a 'magic test' in place. But the bottom line is that criminals aren't going to respect any gun control law. Forcing law abiding citizens to jump through more hoops via regulations and asinine tests (cause bad guys don't take the time to do so) does nothing more than make firearms harder for them to obtain. That translates to "the bad guys still have guns and you made it harder for law abiding citizens to defend themselves."

I stood in line for four hours. They better give me a Wal-Mart gift card, or something. - Rodney Booker, Job Fair attendee.

2012-07-17 05:17:42

#134

Dilbert_X: The X stands for; +1,813|6323|eXtreme to the maX

Right, so the CCW licensing system works very well, despite it consisting of 'hoops via regulations and asinine tests'.
And it removes peoples CCWs if they commit crimes not involving firearms - which seems reasonable.

Wouldn't it be logical to apply the CCW licensing system to all gun purchases?
It wouldn't make it 'harder' for the law abiding, just a little longer winded - I bet it could done within the typical mandatory 'cooling off' period for example so really there'd be no real effect.

And I bet it would make it harder for 'bad guys' to get hold of guns in the long run.

So whats the big deal?

Last edited by Dilbert_X (2012-07-17 05:35:05)

Fuck Israel

2012-07-17 06:07:59

#135

unnamednewbie13: Moderator; +2,053|6989|PNW

Since they don't want to leave their name all over a crime scene, bad guys don't generally buy firearms through legit dealers.

2012-07-17 06:11:10

#136

Jay: Bork! Bork! Bork!; +2,006|5575|London, England

Dilbert_X wrote:
Jay wrote:
All you're doing is raising the barrier to entry by making it more expensive to own a weapon (legally). The first two are already in place here, and they don't really mean anything. The club certainly means absolutely nothing. And even if the storage space was in place, are you going to put gps monitors on all weapons to prove they are locked away?
If someone can't/won't spend say $200 to join a club - or be trained in safe handling by some other means - then I'd suggest they aren't too serious about responsible firearms ownership.
A CCW requires money to be handed over, training, background checks, gun registration etc, I don't really see the difference.

There's no need for GPS trackers on guns, or cars, as you've pointed out the existing laws and enforcement work just fine to inhibit the majority from breaking the laws.
Those that do will usually be re-educated or taken out of the system eventually.

Should murder be legal because the state can't put a Police officer on everyone's shoulder? Nope.
Rules are less than worthless if they are unenforceable. They become scofflaws and undermine actually legitimate rules.
Who says the rules are unenforceable? You could apply that argument to any law.
(A scofflaw is someone who habitually breaks the law.)

It seems to me that licensing, gun registration and secure storage requiremnents would eventually reduce access to firearms by people who should have them. I don't see the big deal.

Im on my phone so im not going to bother breaking this up...

If they cant pay $200 they dont really want a gun? Are you a fucking mong? Do you want to reinstate poll taxes too? You would deny the people most in need of a weapon (because protection is a billion times more important than the faggoty target shooting you do) because they cant pay entrance fee? Gone! Every last shred of credibility on the topic.

"Ah, you miserable creatures! You who think that you are so great! You who judge humanity to be so small! You who wish to reform everything! Why don't you reform yourselves? That task would be sufficient enough."
-Frederick Bastiat

2012-07-17 06:47:18

#137

13rin: Member; +977|6696

Dilbert_X wrote:
Right, so the CCW licensing system works very well, despite it consisting of 'hoops via regulations and asinine tests'.
And it removes peoples CCWs if they commit crimes not involving firearms - which seems reasonable.

Wouldn't it be logical to apply the CCW licensing system to all gun purchases?

There all ready is a screening process to begin with.

It wouldn't make it 'harder' for the law abiding, just a little longer winded - I bet it could done within the typical mandatory 'cooling off' period for example so really there'd be no real effect.

And I bet it would make it harder for 'bad guys' to get hold of guns in the long run.
So whats the big deal?

CWP's in FL actually eliminate the 'cooling off' period and there is none for buying long guns.

I stood in line for four hours. They better give me a Wal-Mart gift card, or something. - Rodney Booker, Job Fair attendee.

2012-07-17 10:20:18

#138

west-phoenix-az: Guns don't kill people. . . joe bidens advice does; +632|6606

http://www.theblaze.com/stories/surveil … e-robbers/

July 13, 2012
Samuel Williams
Duwayne Henderson
Davis Dawkins
Palms Internet Cafe
Marion County, Florida
Shooting
.380-caliber semi-automatic handgun

https://weknowmemes.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/11/yea-fuck-yea.gif

Last edited by west-phoenix-az (2012-07-17 10:33:38)

https://i127.photobucket.com/albums/p123/west-phoenix-az/BF2S/bf2s_sig_9mmbrass.jpg

2012-07-17 12:19:22

#139

War Man: Australians are hermaphrodites.; +563|6931|Purplicious Wisconsin

^
Spoiler (highlight to read):
Well look at that, 2 bad guys with shotguns and pistols running away from an old man with a pistol in close quarters. 1 old man beats 2 people despite the fact he has less firepower and is most likely weaker than them(considering his age that is compared to the bad guys)?
Lol

Last edited by War Man (2012-07-17 12:22:04)

The irony of guns, is that they can save lives.

2012-07-17 12:24:01

#140

coke: Aye up duck!; +440|6926|England. Stoke

War Man wrote:
^
Spoiler (highlight to read):
Well look at that, 2 bad guys with shotguns and pistols running away from an old man with a pistol in close quarters. 1 old man beats 2 people despite the fact he has less firepower and is most likely weaker than them(considering his age that is compared to the bad guys)?
Lol

2012-07-17 12:27:06

#141

RTHKI: mmmf mmmf mmmf; +1,741|6954|Oxferd Ohire

real life spoilers?

2012-07-17 12:29:22

#142

west-phoenix-az: Guns don't kill people. . . joe bidens advice does; +632|6606

War Man wrote:
^
Well look at that, 2 bad guys with shotguns and pistols running away from an old man with a pistol in close quarters. 1 old man beats 2 people despite the fact he has less firepower and is most likely weaker than them(considering his age that is compared to the bad guys)?
Lol

The Article wrote:
One of the men was brandishing a gun while the other had a bat.

2012-07-17 12:35:37

#143

RTHKI: mmmf mmmf mmmf; +1,741|6954|Oxferd Ohire

i thought it was obviously a bat

2012-07-17 12:40:44

#144

west-phoenix-az: Guns don't kill people. . . joe bidens advice does; +632|6606

he thought it was a comBAT shotgun

2012-07-17 12:42:03

#145

Jay: Bork! Bork! Bork!; +2,006|5575|London, England

https://a248.e.akamai.net/origin-cdn.volusion.com/xmqo7.amhs2/v/vspfiles/photos/COM-VIMSP1-2T.jpg

"Ah, you miserable creatures! You who think that you are so great! You who judge humanity to be so small! You who wish to reform everything! Why don't you reform yourselves? That task would be sufficient enough."
-Frederick Bastiat

2012-07-17 12:46:30

#146

RAIMIUS: You with the face!; +244|6932|US

Wow, that lady standing in the middle of everything! Utter facepalm.
The only thing she can think of doing when gunfire erupts around her is plug her ears and turn into the guy shooting.

Jeesh people, when bullets are flying, DUCK!

2012-07-17 13:04:29

#147

west-phoenix-az: Guns don't kill people. . . joe bidens advice does; +632|6606

RAIMIUS wrote:
Jeesh people, when bullets are flying, DUCK! stay low, and keep firing, keep extra clips mags for extra shit

2012-07-17 13:07:31

#148

War Man: Australians are hermaphrodites.; +563|6931|Purplicious Wisconsin

west-phoenix-az wrote:
War Man wrote:
^
Well look at that, 2 bad guys with shotguns and pistols running away from an old man with a pistol in close quarters. 1 old man beats 2 people despite the fact he has less firepower and is most likely weaker than them(considering his age that is compared to the bad guys)?
Lol
The Article wrote:
One of the men was brandishing a gun while the other had a bat.

Wasn't paying keen attention to the object. Still, 2 young guys that are stronger and outnumber the old man.

The irony of guns, is that they can save lives.

2012-07-17 13:08:39

#149

RTHKI: mmmf mmmf mmmf; +1,741|6954|Oxferd Ohire

old man got the jump on em

2012-07-17 13:16:32

#150

west-phoenix-az: Guns don't kill people. . . joe bidens advice does; +632|6606

[youtubehq]\http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NZrdbSJVSVM[/youtubehq]

BF2S Forums Gun politics, firearms ownership, and US 2nd amendment discussion

Ty wrote:

Jay wrote:

Ty wrote:

Jay wrote:

Ty wrote:

Jay wrote:

Ty wrote:

krazed wrote:

Dilbert_X wrote:

Jay wrote:

Jay wrote:

eleven bravo wrote:

Jay wrote:

Jay wrote:

Dilbert_X wrote:

Jay wrote:

Dilbert_X wrote:

War Man wrote:

War Man wrote:

The Article wrote:

RAIMIUS wrote:

west-phoenix-az wrote:

War Man wrote:

The Article wrote:

Board footer