The Politics Thread (PLAY NICELY!)

With access to such a registry they'd be able to know. I don't see what more you want.

We already run background checks for concealable and automatic weapons in most of the country. Register the rest in a database and you're good to go.

As a first good step into the right direction, yes. Long term there at least should be a strive to remove the need for anybody to have guns at all. Might be unrealistic in the wild west of the US for now, I know

If guns are made completely illegal I can see the rednecks creating a second civil war. That's seriously what it's like.

I honestly think internet/press "success" isn't a thing they have the least damn care in the world for.

popularity is not something one trades his life for. a bit of money or some self esteem maybe. these people have no self esteem left to give.

Revenge on the other hand... a man can trade his life for that.

Nah, there are a lot of cases with people posting to 4chan for the gratification of it all. Why bother if it's not important?

at that point they have nothing left to lose and are just waiting to get caught.

on the spin-the-wheel of a "**** you" to the world move it's a take-your pick situation. wouldn't you try to fill time to spend less time thinking about the inevitable doom.

Colin, we will always need guns to defend ourselves. At least, until a better handheld weapon comes along.

People who advocate for gun control tend to ignore the already stringent restrictions on buying and selling weapons. For example, you already have to go through a background check before buying a firearm from a legal dealer. Registration is off the table for political reasons, mostly, but also because most gun owners have no interest in more oversight by their government. We Americans are EXTREMELY touchy when it comes to oversight - we tend to see it as oppression and throw tea parties. In some cases, literally. Thanks, 2012.
Point is, 99% of the problem is someone getting their hands on a firearm through illegal means or because a legal owner mishandled their weapon and DIDN'T GET A GUN SAFE. (idiots). We should address those specific problems with specific solutions, not some generic 'regulate all the guns' or 'ban all guns' bullshit. Or even the 'ban scary guns' crap.

The other thing I hear alot from gun control advocates?
"Why do you need an assault rifle to hunt deer?"

I don't know. But I do know it's none of your business. And it sure is none of the government's business. This is like asking some kid why he used his allowance to buy a massive car-sized Twinkie. It's not relevant. Eat the damn Twinkie and be happy.

https://gfycat.com/CompleteBruisedAlaskajingle


I got the caption a little wrong but I haven't slept in a while so stfu you made the worse mistake.

I think there's a line that needs to be drawn here. It becomes the government's business if assault rifles are often used in murders and shootings.

Where the FLUCK do you live!? A Call of Duty map!?

I hope you realize how sad that is.

Meanwhile I go take a walk through the dark of the night.
Unarmed.
Feeling safe.

EDIT:

I live in a WORLD where humanity isn't perfect. If you don't protect yourself, someone will take advantage of it. That's not something you can change by wishing it away and passing legislation. There will always be someone envious of your position.

Lol. That's naive.

You are correct, but most of the school shootings involved multiple weapons, most of them handguns.

No. Imagine a place where you do that without having to be afraid. I know it is hard, but please do.
I enjoy it some more till you manage to imagine it. Have fun fighting for your life meanwhile. From what you say it sounds like you constantly have to.

Hey we do agree on something

But you don't have all of those restrictions when using the "gun show loophole", do you?
http://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-12328493
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gun_show_loophole
I.e., private sale of second-hand guns do not require any background check at all as far as I understand it. So doesn't that make those stringent restrictions kind of superfluous? I think Obama tried to close that loophole, but met a lot of resistance, so I don't think it has been closed.

We don't have to fight for it because A) our military is strong enough that invasion is off the board and B) we have guns everywhere. Not having guns doesn't magically make a place more safe.

You perceive the world so completely different from how I do. It's amazing somehow.

neither does having guns.

we live in a world where guns are obsolete war-wise. to make them valid again they were turned into a commodity and thus kept commerce and all those jobs going.

You obviously don't know it but we live in a world where your government considers their top computer-virus more lethal and more valuable than the entire country's guns private or state owned combined.

And you know what? they're damn right. it is. and that's what sets them and you apart. their brains.

it's a good thing though because as I just pointed out. with more brains you can do more damage.

I already said I don't give a damn about guns for self-defense. I just want to shoot clay pigeons on my property, or in designated areas that it's allowable in such as ranges and hunting grounds off-season.

There's no need to ban guns. Just monitor them so that misuse can be more easily tracked.

Trying to fix a non-issue by banning property is stupid.

really?

funny ^^

because you say yourself :

idea : why not allow only gun ranges to to be the only place you can use and store your guns? you buy a gun? great! it gets shipped to your gun range of choice. you go there to use it but it can never leave the gun range and is stored in their secure lockers when you're not there. As has been proven ranges don't limit the wide expanse of legal activities one could come up with when you think of a legal way to use your guns :


I'm certain they could provide you with plenty of clay pigeons.

and has the added bonus of putting the responsibility of guns not falling into the wrong hands on ... you guessed it responsible people (by professional and legal obligation). I fail to see how guns being digitally checked in and out of their range lockers +timestamps cross-referenced with the business hours of the range + exiting pat-down wouldn't be THE most draconian monitoring you can think of and yet somehow leaves you with the complete freedom to do exactly what it is you like to do. This way you guarantee all the benefits of guns and largely diminish to practically rid completely of gun's current problems. (I'd personally say it would be so efficient it would rid completely )

So what argument possibly remains against this?