What's your opinion of gun control?

[BADecker]

^

It was stated that gang violence and homicides are excluded else the US would have like 100-150 k deaths per year through gun violence alone.

Btw. Im actually for having guns but even more for tight enough gun controls that no wrong people get it. Also i believe strongly that there is no need to have "war making" weapons legal. (Semi to full automatic weapons)
Go hunting and on shooting tournaments all you want i just dont want to see ppl with g36 or uzis running around on the street thanks.

Can't be that many. It's only about 1 a day in Chicago.   

[TECSHARE]

^

It was stated that gang violence and homicides are excluded else the US would have like 100-150 k deaths per year through gun violence alone.

Btw. Im actually for having guns but even more for tight enough gun controls that no wrong people get it. Also i believe strongly that there is no need to have "war making" weapons legal. (Semi to full automatic weapons)
Go hunting and on shooting tournaments all you want i just dont want to see ppl with g36 or uzis running around on the street thanks.

Stated by whom? I would love to see you back up that bullshit number. Either you aren't bothering to look very hard or you don't have a clue how statistics work and are just repeating what some gun control freak said. I have produced statistics to back up my arguments, now you give it a try, but I know you won't because you can't, because those numbers are a fabrication.

The right to bear arms is NOT about hunting and target shooting, it is about having the people be armed so that the government can be prevented from turning completely tyrannical, and preserving the individual's right to self defense. All the gang violence in the world can't match the death and suffering created by an unchecked tyrannical government. It would be great if we could keep the "wrong" people from getting guns, but that is just a fantasy like the tooth fairy, and indulging that fantasy will cost MORE LIVES. Just because it is a positive concept does not mean it is viable to be implemented in REALITY. There are so many holes in your logic it is not even funny, but that is a common theme with gun control freaks who are motivated wholly by emotions and just skip over the inconvenient logic part required to actually attain those goals.

1. Collect underpants
2. ? ? ?
3. Profit

You cry and cry about #3 but never have a viable plan for #2.

[Spendulus]

^

It was stated that gang violence and homicides are excluded else the US would have like 100-150 k deaths per year through gun violence alone.

Btw. Im actually for having guns but even more for tight enough gun controls that no wrong people get it. Also i believe strongly that there is no need to have "war making" weapons legal. (Semi to full automatic weapons)
Go hunting and on shooting tournaments all you want i just dont want to see ppl with g36 or uzis running around on the street thanks.

You don't like glock 36?  Why?  Mine looks okay to me!

Would you feel safer if we were walking around with guns that had their 45ACP in like roundular things or something?

[criptix]

^

It was stated that gang violence and homicides are excluded else the US would have like 100-150 k deaths per year through gun violence alone.

Btw. Im actually for having guns but even more for tight enough gun controls that no wrong people get it. Also i believe strongly that there is no need to have "war making" weapons legal. (Semi to full automatic weapons)
Go hunting and on shooting tournaments all you want i just dont want to see ppl with g36 or uzis running around on the street thanks.

Stated by whom? I would love to see you back up that bullshit number. Either you aren't bothering to look very hard or you don't have a clue how statistics work and are just repeating what some gun control freak said. I have produced statistics to back up my arguments, now you give it a try, but I know you won't because you can't, because those numbers are a fabrication.

The right to bear arms is NOT about hunting and target shooting, it is about having the people be armed so that the government can be prevented from turning completely tyrannical, and preserving the individual's right to self defense. All the gang violence in the world can't match the death and suffering created by an unchecked tyrannical government. It would be great if we could keep the "wrong" people from getting guns, but that is just a fantasy like the tooth fairy, and indulging that fantasy will cost MORE LIVES. Just because it is a positive concept does not mean it is viable to be implemented in REALITY. There are so many holes in your logic it is not even funny, but that is a common theme with gun control freaks who are motivated wholly by emotions and just skip over the inconvenient logic part required to actually attain those goals.

1. Collect underpants
2. ? ? ?
3. Profit

You cry and cry about #3 but never have a viable plan for #2.

The figure is wrong because that is actually not a yearly figure.
Its for a decade. The yearly death tolls through gun violence in the US is 10-15+ k.

So actually all your arguments boil down to a possible tyrannical government that wants to put people in gulags?

Is it 2016 yet?
If you are scared for that reason and want to be armed with heavy weapons then i can only tell you that the us political system and society is broken.

[ainzley]

I reckon if someone wants to desperately own a gun then let them. However being able to just go to a gun show and purchase a gun with next to no background checks is a problem. I honestly don't understand the obsession around guns in America. I've been hunting in NZ and used a variety of guns in carious places and while I agree they are a lot of fun, the risks associated with them far outweigh the benefits imo.

[BADecker]

^

It was stated that gang violence and homicides are excluded else the US would have like 100-150 k deaths per year through gun violence alone.

Btw. Im actually for having guns but even more for tight enough gun controls that no wrong people get it. Also i believe strongly that there is no need to have "war making" weapons legal. (Semi to full automatic weapons)
Go hunting and on shooting tournaments all you want i just dont want to see ppl with g36 or uzis running around on the street thanks.

Stated by whom? I would love to see you back up that bullshit number. Either you aren't bothering to look very hard or you don't have a clue how statistics work and are just repeating what some gun control freak said. I have produced statistics to back up my arguments, now you give it a try, but I know you won't because you can't, because those numbers are a fabrication.

The right to bear arms is NOT about hunting and target shooting, it is about having the people be armed so that the government can be prevented from turning completely tyrannical, and preserving the individual's right to self defense. All the gang violence in the world can't match the death and suffering created by an unchecked tyrannical government. It would be great if we could keep the "wrong" people from getting guns, but that is just a fantasy like the tooth fairy, and indulging that fantasy will cost MORE LIVES. Just because it is a positive concept does not mean it is viable to be implemented in REALITY. There are so many holes in your logic it is not even funny, but that is a common theme with gun control freaks who are motivated wholly by emotions and just skip over the inconvenient logic part required to actually attain those goals.

1. Collect underpants
2. ? ? ?
3. Profit

You cry and cry about #3 but never have a viable plan for #2.

The figure is wrong because that is actually not a yearly figure.
Its for a decade. The yearly death tolls through gun violence in the US is 10-15+ k.

So actually all your arguments boil down to a possible tyrannical government that wants to put people in gulags?

Is it 2016 yet?
If you are scared for that reason and want to be armed with heavy weapons then i can only tell you that the us political system and society is broken.

Not only is the U.S. political system and society broken, but that of every other government in the world is broken just the same. That's why Americans need guns.

The only reason why governments of the world don't literally make slaves of their people is because of gun freedom in America. It works like this. If any world government made slaves of its people, the people would see the freedom Americans have because Americans have guns, and they would rise up and get guns and put their government down.

Be glad Americans have gun freedom. American gun freedom is keeping the whole world free. If Americans lost their gun freedom, there would be nothing to keep government leaders of the world from rising up and making slaves of their people, including in America.

[TECSHARE]

^

It was stated that gang violence and homicides are excluded else the US would have like 100-150 k deaths per year through gun violence alone.

Btw. Im actually for having guns but even more for tight enough gun controls that no wrong people get it. Also i believe strongly that there is no need to have "war making" weapons legal. (Semi to full automatic weapons)
Go hunting and on shooting tournaments all you want i just dont want to see ppl with g36 or uzis running around on the street thanks.

Stated by whom? I would love to see you back up that bullshit number. Either you aren't bothering to look very hard or you don't have a clue how statistics work and are just repeating what some gun control freak said. I have produced statistics to back up my arguments, now you give it a try, but I know you won't because you can't, because those numbers are a fabrication.

The right to bear arms is NOT about hunting and target shooting, it is about having the people be armed so that the government can be prevented from turning completely tyrannical, and preserving the individual's right to self defense. All the gang violence in the world can't match the death and suffering created by an unchecked tyrannical government. It would be great if we could keep the "wrong" people from getting guns, but that is just a fantasy like the tooth fairy, and indulging that fantasy will cost MORE LIVES. Just because it is a positive concept does not mean it is viable to be implemented in REALITY. There are so many holes in your logic it is not even funny, but that is a common theme with gun control freaks who are motivated wholly by emotions and just skip over the inconvenient logic part required to actually attain those goals.

1. Collect underpants
2. ? ? ?
3. Profit

You cry and cry about #3 but never have a viable plan for #2.

The figure is wrong because that is actually not a yearly figure.
Its for a decade. The yearly death tolls through gun violence in the US is 10-15+ k.

So actually all your arguments boil down to a possible tyrannical government that wants to put people in gulags?

Is it 2016 yet?
If you are scared for that reason and want to be armed with heavy weapons then i can only tell you that the us political system and society is broken.

So lets break this down.
1. You admit to spreading false information about gun violence.
2. You still haven't provided any sources.
3. You still haven't explained how we get to your utopian ideal of keeping the guns away from the "wrong" people.
4. You cast tyrannical governments as a thing of the past while simultaneously calling the US political system "broken".

The fact is you are misinformed about the facts, and the only reason you are even correcting yourself is because I am calling you out on it. Either you are ignorant or purposefully disingenuous. In either case you don't have a right to open your mouth about subjects you are not informed about as if you are. This demonstrates to me your emotions dictate your logic and not the other way around. You have a bias and try to arrange your facts around it, but then skip over the part where you actually study the facts.

As far as governmental tyranny being a thing of the past, frankly that is just an idiotic concept held by future victims of genocide. The ONLY thing that prevents that past reality from becoming a future reality is the vigilance and preparedness of the worlds populations to confront it. Pretending it is not an issue is exactly how every single act of mass genocide begins, by lulling the population into a false sense of security by telling them that they are just so advanced and civilized that the violence of the past is behind them, never to return. Human beings are still just animals, only some happened to be more domesticated than others. Forget this at your own peril. This fact has no nationality, it is a HUMAN problem.

"Between 1993 and 2000, the gun homicide rate dropped by nearly half, from 7.0 homicides to 3.8 homicides per 100,000 people. Since then, the gun homicide rate has remained relatively flat. From 2009 to 2014, the most recent year data are available, the number of gun homicides has hovered around 11,000 and 12,000 per year."

http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2015/10/21/gun-homicides-steady-after-decline-in-90s-suicide-rate-edges-up/

So the actual annual rate of homicides in the USA is between 11,000 and 12,000 and has been falling for many years as gun ownership rates also climb. If the prevalence of guns is responsible for these homicide rates would it not be growing not falling? You, as many others have fallen victim to this disingenuous media circus portraying gun violence as a growing problem rather than a shrinking problem without ever even bothering to check for yourself. Once again this number still includes gang related shootings, but you feel that terrorist relating shootings should some how not be included in the European gun homicide rates. This is just classic cherry picking.

[criptix]

10-15+k per year is correct.
And btw. I did a mistake and i said i did a mistake what is the problem?

I didnt post any sources because i was going to bed and i noticed my mistake when i woke up.
The mistake was that the number was for a decade and not yearly.
Also every study shows pretty much same numbers there is no argument about the amount of deaths through gun violence.

It is funny that you are scared by a possible US genocide when reality shows that the USA has higher death tolls through gun violence then all western nations together.

If i use your argument why the heck would germany not just try to destroy all nations in the world? We had war with like every nation in the world... twice.

Your argument is flawed and you are the guy who gets really emotional about the discussion and resort to ad hominem and strawman arguments.

While i just did a mistake of reciting one number ( which i noticed and said it was wrong ).

[Wilikon]

Re: What's your opinion on remote gun control?

 

[TECSHARE]

10-15+k per year is correct.
And btw. I did a mistake and i said i did a mistake what is the problem?

I didnt post any sources because i was going to bed and i noticed my mistake when i woke up.
The mistake was that the number was for a decade and not yearly.
Also every study shows pretty much same numbers there is no argument about the amount of deaths through gun violence.

It is funny that you are scared by a possible US genocide when reality shows that the USA has higher death tolls through gun violence then all western nations together.

If i use your argument why the heck would germany not just try to destroy all nations in the world? We had war with like every nation in the world... twice.

Your argument is flawed and you are the guy who gets really emotional about the discussion and resort to ad hominem and strawman arguments.

While i just did a mistake of reciting one number ( which i noticed and said it was wrong ).

Still no sources huh? Were you going to bed again this time?

Vigilance is not the same as being scared, it is called being prepared and taking preventative measures. Also Germany isn't destroying anything any more, except maybe the European Union from within via economic and demographic means.

Just because I pointed out your repeated ignorant statements does not make it a personal attack. Please, do quote my supposed "personal attacks" and "strawman arguments". I suspect you do not understand what these phrases even mean and are simply using them as a cudgel because you have seen others use them. The only reason you noticed the number was wrong was because I corrected you, otherwise I am quite positive you would happily continue spreading misinformation without a thought because it fits your preferential bias.


"...reality shows that the USA has higher death tolls through gun violence then all western nations together."


As if to prove my point for me you have done it again making a claim that is just a popular media talking point but ignores silly things like statistical relevance and cherry picks which countries are to be included in this comparison via the fuzzy notion of calling them "western".

Every nation is Western to some one else. In general people use this phrase "western nations" to describe a level of economic development. Do you consider Russia to be economically developed? What about Mexico? Panama? Costa Rica? Argentina? It is convenient these nations are cherry picked out of these stats. When they are included a much clearer picture of where the USA falls in the comparison of gun violence compared to the rest of the world. Unfortunately this doesn't fit with the talking point that the USA is the worst, so they have to be removed from these comparisons in order to push the gun control narrative.


 
https://mises.org/blog/mistake-only-comparing-us-murder-rates-developed-countries


In conclusion you are once again demonstrating your own disingenuous and lazy attitude toward the facts in this debate. Of course this means nothing to you because your people are already almost completely disarmed anyway aren't they? There is nothing to lose putting other nations at risk by trying to tell them what their domestic gun laws should be while attempting to justify your own defenselessness right? I suspect your people will start questioning this policy very quickly as a result of the mass immigration your leadership has triggered which is clearly resulting in increased violence across Europe. Of course you will exclude any of these terrorist attacks from the stats, so you can keep living in the imaginary world where less guns in the hands of law abiding citizens makes people safer.

 

[Spendulus]

.... We had war with like every nation in the world... twice.....

So you learned the hard way that the US was better at killing people with guns in war than you were?  And now what the fuck?  You are complaining that we are better at killing people with guns than you are?

Something profound there.  I confess I don't know what...

Maybe it's if you are good with guns then people learn not to fuck with you?  Even if they are kind of slow and it takes them a couple of tries to learn?  But now you guys want to lecture us?

[icecube45]

In Pakistan they allow teachers to carry guns, in many cases it's saved lives.
Shocking huh?

[Spendulus]

I reckon if someone wants to desperately own a gun then let them. However being able to just go to a gun show and purchase a gun with next to no background checks is a problem. I honestly don't understand the obsession around guns in America. I've been hunting in NZ and used a variety of guns in carious places and while I agree they are a lot of fun, the risks associated with them far outweigh the benefits imo.

Of course the bolded part is a complete lie.  It is propaganda that has been pushed by the far left in the USA for over twenty years, over and over. 

[criptix]

@Tecshare

Are you retarded?
You yourself posted a study that validated my claim that is why i didnt post another one.

About western developed nations it is a very easy thing to compare.
Look up the gdp (ppp). I will make a nice list for you when im at home on sunday.

Btw i finished my statistic lecture with 1.3 i know how it works.


@spendulus

 

My friend went last year visiting the usa for 1 year.
He bought a glock without any problems....

I.e.: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gun_show_loophole

[criptix]

Oh and before i forget more of your rubbish tecshare:

You attacked my person by saying im a lier and illiterate.

You are using a strawman by saying you need your 2nd amendement because of .gov perpetrated genocide on the us citiziens or something around that line.

And this are just examples from your last post.

You see how absurd it is?

Oh and about cherrypicking media. You compare cuba, mexico, some other south american and east european (some of them still even communist or mega socialist) countries with the USA? Really?

[TECSHARE]

@Tecshare

Are you retarded?
You yourself posted a study that validated my claim that is why i didnt post another one.

About western developed nations it is a very easy thing to compare.
Look up the gdp (ppp). I will make a nice list for you when im at home on sunday.

Btw i finished my statistic lecture with 1.3 i know how it works.


@spendulus

 

My friend went last year visiting the usa for 1 year.
He bought a glock without any problems....

I.e.: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gun_show_loophole

You talk about personal attacks while calling me retarded. Bravo.

Speaking of your friend, how many years ago was that and in what state? Things have changed a lot recently regarding gun restrictions. The "gunshow loophole" is currently almost nonexistant. Even if it was closed completely, does this stop people from buying them illegally? Do you think buying a gun off the street corner down the block would be simpler or traveling to some other far off state to buy one and then subject yourself to having records taken? Even private sales are required to keep a bill of sale with purchaser information, which usually entails some form of photo ID because the seller would ultimately be responsible. Either way this "loophole" is largely exaggerated in the media as if you can do this almost everywhere. This is not the case. Either way "your friend" committed a crime obtaining that weapon (if it really even happened), so I am not sure you can much criticize our gun laws if some one is willing to make themselves a criminal to obtain one.

Oh and before i forget more of your rubbish tecshare:

You attacked my person by saying im a lier and illiterate.

You are using a strawman by saying you need your 2nd amendement because of .gov perpetrated genocide on the us citiziens or something around that line.

And this are just examples from your last post.

You see how absurd it is?

Oh and about cherrypicking media. You compare cuba, mexico, some other south american and east european (some of them still even communist or mega socialist) countries with the USA? Really?

That is still not a quote, that is just you saying something about what you think I said to you. You don't get to interpret my words for me then pretend I said them. Again, actually quote me unless you are afraid your claim is bullshit that is. I believe what you were referring to was me saying "Either you are ignorant or purposefully disingenuous.". This is not a personal attack, this is a direct observation of your method of argument based on your usage of false information. I didn't call you a retard, I made a claim that you were either unable to read properly or purposely spreading false information, neither of those are personal attacks. Try again.

As far as the 2nd amendment, this is not a straw man argument. The constitution of the United States is the supreme law of this land, and thus DIRECTLY RELATED to the discussion of the subject of gun control. This purpose of the second amendment was defined as being there for that explicit purpose to keep our government in check. Try again. There was nothing absurd about any of that even if you choose to interpret it that way to serve your bias.

Please, explain to me how I am cherry picking by ADDING more countries to the comparison? You want to know what logical fallacy you just committed? https://yourlogicalfallacyis.com/tu-quoque

You don't consider Russia and Mexico developed nations? Funny how you accuse me of what you are doing when all I am doing is putting the USA in perspective with the rest of the world, not just tiny culturally homogeneous European nations, (many of which are also socialist BTW). Good luck with your flailing.

[Spendulus]

@Tecshare

Are you retarded?
You yourself posted a study that validated my claim that is why i didnt post another one.

About western developed nations it is a very easy thing to compare.
Look up the gdp (ppp). I will make a nice list for you when im at home on sunday.

Btw i finished my statistic lecture with 1.3 i know how it works.


@spendulus

 

My friend went last year visiting the usa for 1 year.
He bought a glock without any problems....

I.e.: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gun_show_loophole

Huh? 

What you are calling a gun show loophole has NOTHING TO DO with gun shows.  NOTHING.

Here is the definition from your reference.

Under federal law, private-party sellers are not required, nor are they permitted to perform background checks on buyers. They also are not required to record the sale, or ask for identification.

Private parties cannot call the NCIS and do a background check.  Period. 

States vary.  States may be far more restrictive than this federal issue.   Anyone, anywhere can buy a gun from a private seller if they put the cash on the table and want to deal with such a transaction. 

[TECSHARE]

@Tecshare

Are you retarded?
You yourself posted a study that validated my claim that is why i didnt post another one.

About western developed nations it is a very easy thing to compare.
Look up the gdp (ppp). I will make a nice list for you when im at home on sunday.

Btw i finished my statistic lecture with 1.3 i know how it works.


@spendulus

 

My friend went last year visiting the usa for 1 year.
He bought a glock without any problems....

I.e.: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gun_show_loophole

Huh?  

What you are calling a gun show loophole has NOTHING TO DO with gun shows.  NOTHING.

Here is the definition from your reference.

Under federal law, private-party sellers are not required, nor are they permitted to perform background checks on buyers. They also are not required to record the sale, or ask for identification.

Private parties cannot call the NCIS and do a background check.  Period.  

States vary.  States may be far more restrictive than this federal issue.   Anyone, anywhere can buy a gun from a private seller if they put the cash on the table and want to deal with such a transaction.  

You should also specify that most states do require you to keep a record of the transaction. Additionally if he was not a US citizen he most certainly did break federal gun laws.

[Spendulus]

...

You should also specify that most states do require you to keep a record of the transaction. Additionally if he was not a US citizen he most certainly did break federal gun laws.

"...should also..."

This is trendy lying progressive bullshit, is what it is.

"Eliminating the gun show loophole" is NOTHING but cover talk for creating a registry of all firearms. 

Let me give you an example.  A family has an historic curio, a  Lugar from Germany.  The grandfather was in the war, and there is a story behind his acquiring the Lugar and staying alive.

Here are the questions.

1.  Can the gun be inherited?
2  How?  To whom?  Assume the family members live in six different states.
3.  What is required for each of the six family members to take possession of the firearm?

NOW let's "eliminate the gun show loophole."

1.  What happens?

[TECSHARE]

...

You should also specify that most states do require you to keep a record of the transaction. Additionally if he was not a US citizen he most certainly did break federal gun laws.

"...should also..."

This is trendy lying progressive bullshit, is what it is.

"Eliminating the gun show loophole" is NOTHING but cover talk for creating a registry of all firearms. 

Let me give you an example.  A family has an historic curio, a  Lugar from Germany.  The grandfather was in the war, and there is a story behind his acquiring the Lugar and staying alive.

Here are the questions.

1.  Can the gun be inherited?
2  How?  To whom?  Assume the family members live in six different states.
3.  What is required for each of the six family members to take possession of the firearm?

NOW let's "eliminate the gun show loophole."

1.  What happens?

I am in complete agreement with you. Gun registrations always lead to confiscation. Furthermore the existence of such a database puts all gun owners at risk of being attacked by foreign enemies or domestic thieves. As far as inheriting guns, most states stipulate you can transfer them to immediate family members without any paperwork.