Assault weapon bans

[Rassah]

Maybe the answer isn't to tell people what to do, but to teach people how to think?

On the second point, obviously. On the first, do you advocate distributing guns to criminals?

I don't advocate doing the impossible, as you propose.

I didn't propose anything to you. I did ask you a question, and it appears I haven't received an answer. Let me rephrase it. Do you condone the current case in the U.S. where criminals are regularly supplied with guns by gun buyers and gun sellers either through their ineptitude or deliberate intent?

Only as much as I condone that jumping off a building causes one's face to be lethally smashed in. Do I like it? No. But I don't pretend that there is something that can be done about it. As much as I'd love to be able to float in the air, or keep criminals from getting tools to help them commit crime easier, I understand that my wishes are just that, wishes.

I could ask you a similar question btw: Do you condone the current state where criminals can download files (or transact financially) illegally using peer-to-peer technology? And thus, by extension, do you condone the soon-to-be state where criminals can download blueprints for guns, and quickly and easily print a many of them as they want right at home?
Whether you condone it or not, your opinion on the matter, and mine, is meaningless.

[NewLiberty]

I didn't propose anything to you. I did ask you a question, and it appears I haven't received an answer. Let me rephrase it. Do you condone the current case in the U.S. where criminals are regularly supplied with guns by gun buyers, gun owners, and gun sellers either through their ineptitude or deliberate intent?

We have enough laws that all adult citizens are criminals.  Maybe you want to rephrase again?

[FirstAscent]

I didn't propose anything to you. I did ask you a question, and it appears I haven't received an answer. Let me rephrase it. Do you condone the current case in the U.S. where criminals are regularly supplied with guns by gun buyers, gun owners, and gun sellers either through their ineptitude or deliberate intent?

We have enough laws that all adult citizens are criminals.  Maybe you want to rephrase again?

I don't need to rephrase again. Your statement here has no merit, since you're implying the concept of matter of degree has no relevance.

[FirstAscent]

Maybe the answer isn't to tell people what to do, but to teach people how to think?

On the second point, obviously. On the first, do you advocate distributing guns to criminals?

I don't advocate doing the impossible, as you propose.

I didn't propose anything to you. I did ask you a question, and it appears I haven't received an answer. Let me rephrase it. Do you condone the current case in the U.S. where criminals are regularly supplied with guns by gun buyers and gun sellers either through their ineptitude or deliberate intent?

Only as much as I condone that jumping off a building causes one's face to be lethally smashed in. Do I like it? No. But I don't pretend that there is something that can be done about it. As much as I'd love to be able to float in the air, or keep criminals from getting tools to help them commit crime easier, I understand that my wishes are just that, wishes.

Finally a post where you admit some sensible things. You admit:

1. You don't like the idea that criminals can get guns.
2. You admit that ultimately, criminals source their guns from gun buyers, gun owners and gun sellers.
3. You admit guns allow criminals to commit their crimes easier.

[Rassah]

Finally a post where you admit some sensible things. You admit:

1. You don't like the idea that criminals can get guns.
2. You admit that ultimately, criminals source their guns from gun buyers, gun owners and gun sellers.
3. You admit guns allow criminals to commit their crimes easier.

Uh, congratulations? Though, I am sorry to disappoint you, but I'm pretty sure everyone here would admit to #1, #2, and #3 (you need to add from 3D printers to #2 BTW). It's just that this isn't the issue. No more so than I am sure you will admit that

1. You don't like the idea of falling
2. You admit that, ultimately, all falling comes from the existence of gravity
3. You admit that gravity makes falling and resultant deaths and injuries easier.

Banning gravity is not the answer here. Oh, also, I have traded more than $1,000 BTC for USD without registering with FinCEN or getting a Money Transmitter License, I have illegally downloaded music, movies, and software, I have viewed porn and drank alcohol when I was underage, I have crossed the street while the light was red, and I have lied on domain registration applications about my real name and address, meaning I am a criminal. Does that mean I shouldn't be allowed to own a gun?

[FirstAscent]

Finally a post where you admit some sensible things. You admit:

1. You don't like the idea that criminals can get guns.
2. You admit that ultimately, criminals source their guns from gun buyers, gun owners and gun sellers.
3. You admit guns allow criminals to commit their crimes easier.

Uh, congratulations? Though, I am sorry to disappoint you, but I'm pretty sure everyone here would admit to #1, #2, and #3 (you need to add from 3D printers to #2 BTW). It's just that this isn't the issue. No more so than I am sure you will admit that

You are incorrect.

Some here don't admit to #2.

Many here don't admit to #3, citing cars, knives, and spears as being, apparently just as effective. Funny how such who make such arguments never ask themselves why they argue so vehemently in favor of guns if other such tools were so effective.

1. You don't like the idea of falling
2. You admit that, ultimately, all falling comes from the existence of gravity
3. You admit that gravity makes falling and resultant deaths and injuries easier.

Banning gravity is not the answer here. Oh, also, I have traded more than $1,000 BTC for USD without registering with FinCEN or getting a Money Transmitter License, I have illegally downloaded music, movies, and software, I have viewed porn and drank alcohol when I was underage, I have crossed the street while the light was red, and I have lied on domain registration applications about my real name and address, meaning I am a criminal. Does that mean I shouldn't be allowed to own a gun?

I don't see Japan attempting a ban on gravity, do you? And yet they manage quite effectively with their ban on guns.

As for your BTC transactions, I really don't care. Nor do I care about those other things as well. It's all a matter of degree.

[NewLiberty]

I didn't propose anything to you. I did ask you a question, and it appears I haven't received an answer. Let me rephrase it. Do you condone the current case in the U.S. where criminals are regularly supplied with guns by gun buyers, gun owners, and gun sellers either through their ineptitude or deliberate intent?

We have enough laws that all adult citizens are criminals.  Maybe you want to rephrase again?

I don't need to rephrase again. Your statement here has no merit, since you're implying the concept of matter of degree has no relevance.

The matter of degree does have relevance, both in the current law and in the current facts.

Criminals who are in prison are not sold guns by any of the folks you complain about.  I am OK with that.
Criminals who committed trespassing for cutting across someone's lawn without permission or non-violently protested a war and was arrested might be sold one.  Both are criminals.  So if you do not want to rephrase, then yes if Walmart "regularly" sells a gun to the lawn cutter through their ineptitude, I am OK with that ineptitude too.

[FirstAscent]

I didn't propose anything to you. I did ask you a question, and it appears I haven't received an answer. Let me rephrase it. Do you condone the current case in the U.S. where criminals are regularly supplied with guns by gun buyers, gun owners, and gun sellers either through their ineptitude or deliberate intent?

We have enough laws that all adult citizens are criminals.  Maybe you want to rephrase again?

I don't need to rephrase again. Your statement here has no merit, since you're implying the concept of matter of degree has no relevance.

The matter of degree does have relevance, both in the current law and in the current facts.

Criminals who are in prison are not sold guns by any of the folks you complain about.  I am OK with that.
Criminals who committed trespassing for cutting across someone's lawn without permission or non-violently protested a war and was arrested might be sold one.  Both are criminals.  So if you do not want to rephrase, then yes if Walmart "regularly" sells a gun to the lawn cutter through their ineptitude, I am OK with that ineptitude too.

Do you know where people who have committed armed robbery, murder, and other such actions get their guns? Do you know the path by which these guns get in their hands? Do you know why so many have them?

Let's focus on the last question: do you know why so many have them?

[NewLiberty]

Guns are pretty easy to make.  The technology has been around for a long long time.  You can make deadly weapons from stuff around your house.
They have them because they want them.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0fSrRjNstCg

[Rassah]

Finally a post where you admit some sensible things. You admit:

1. You don't like the idea that criminals can get guns.
2. You admit that ultimately, criminals source their guns from gun buyers, gun owners and gun sellers.
3. You admit guns allow criminals to commit their crimes easier.

Uh, congratulations? Though, I am sorry to disappoint you, but I'm pretty sure everyone here would admit to #1, #2, and #3 (you need to add from 3D printers to #2 BTW). It's just that this isn't the issue. No more so than I am sure you will admit that

You are incorrect.

Some here don't admit to #2.

Huh... Where do they claim criminals get guns from then? Aside from gun buyers, gun owners, and gun sellers (and making them themselves) the only other options I can think of are that they are found on the street, are spontaneously created, or come from windows into other universes.

Many here don't admit to #3, citing cars, knives, and spears as being, apparently just as effective. Funny how such who make such arguments never ask themselves why they argue so vehemently in favor of guns if other such tools were so effective.

Citing cars, knives, and spears doesn't mean they don't admit that "guns allow criminals to commit their crimes easier." They admit that, and simply point out that there are a whole lot of other things that also allow criminals to commit their crimes easier. You are so focused on trying to convince everyone of this point, when no one disagrees with you, and is just asking "Why not ban those other things, too, and where do we stop?"

I don't see Japan attempting a ban on gravity, do you? And yet they manage quite effectively with their ban on guns.

Of course. Which is why Japan has no homicides, manslaughter (accidental killing), or other crimes. Right?

[Rassah]

Do you know where people who have committed armed robbery, murder, and other such actions get their guns? Do you know the path by which these guns get in their hands? Do you know why so many have them?

The question isn't "where to they get the guns." We all know the answer to that, and have moved on a long time ago (while you are apparently still assuming we have no idea). You trying to prove a point by making others admit that "criminals can buy guns from almost anywhere" doesn't really solve or prove anything. The real question is what can we do about it, and if there IS anything we can do about it. That question, naturally, veers off into "If we ban this tool, won't people use others for similar purposes?"

[NewLiberty]

Most of the questions don't make much sense.
Nor does the assault weapon ban if any of these statistics are proclaimed as the reason.
Assault weapons and rifles are about 1% of the "gun crimes"
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L_-N9_tnWBo

It doesn't solve the problem they pretend that it solves.
What it does is make them feel good about attempting to use government to "do something" against their fellow citizens with whom they disagree.

[FirstAscent]

Finally a post where you admit some sensible things. You admit:

1. You don't like the idea that criminals can get guns.
2. You admit that ultimately, criminals source their guns from gun buyers, gun owners and gun sellers.
3. You admit guns allow criminals to commit their crimes easier.

Uh, congratulations? Though, I am sorry to disappoint you, but I'm pretty sure everyone here would admit to #1, #2, and #3 (you need to add from 3D printers to #2 BTW). It's just that this isn't the issue. No more so than I am sure you will admit that

You are incorrect.

Some here don't admit to #2.

Huh... Where do they claim criminals get guns from then? Aside from gun buyers, gun owners, and gun sellers (and making them themselves) the only other options I can think of are that they are found on the street, are spontaneously created, or come from windows into other universes.

Others in this thread seem to think they only get them from other criminals. The reality is they get them because people such as yourself (gun advocates) insist on allowing a free flowing path of guns into their hands.

Many here don't admit to #3, citing cars, knives, and spears as being, apparently just as effective. Funny how such who make such arguments never ask themselves why they argue so vehemently in favor of guns if other such tools were so effective.

Citing cars, knives, and spears doesn't mean they don't admit that "guns allow criminals to commit their crimes easier." They admit that, and simply point out that there are a whole lot of other things that also allow criminals to commit their crimes easier. You are so focused on trying to convince everyone of this point, when no one disagrees with you, and is just asking "Why not ban those other things, too, and where do we stop?"

You should ask yourself why we don't ban guns and knives. The answer is so obvious.

I don't see Japan attempting a ban on gravity, do you? And yet they manage quite effectively with their ban on guns.

Of course. Which is why Japan has no homicides, manslaughter (accidental killing), or other crimes. Right?

Review the statistics. We've already been over this.

[NewLiberty]

Others in this thread seem to think they only get them from other criminals.

Yes, but only to the extent that pretty much all adult citizens are criminals.

The reality is they get them because people such as yourself (gun advocates) insist on allowing a free flowing path of guns into their hands.

In what jurisdiction are you, that has guns "free flowing" into anyone's hands, much less criminals?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gun_laws_in_the_United_States_by_state
Looks like there are some laws about who and what guns can be sold pretty much everywhere, as well as at Federal and local government levels.

For what its worth, I don't think of myself as a gun advocate at all.  I do like liberty though, and I think we have more than enough laws.

[FirstAscent]

Others in this thread seem to think they only get them from other criminals.

Yes, but only to the extent that pretty much all adult citizens are criminals.

The reality is they get them because people such as yourself (gun advocates) insist on allowing a free flowing path of guns into their hands.

In what jurisdiction are you, that has guns "free flowing" into anyone's hands, much less criminals?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gun_laws_in_the_United_States_by_state
Looks like there are some laws about who and what guns can be sold pretty much everywhere, as well as at Federal and local government levels.

300 million guns is the result of the free flowing supply, as advocated by the NRA, and gun advocates such as yourself. The U.S., by virtue of its guns per capita, and its ineffective laws enforced ineffectively, has created that gun inventory.

I'm not to blame for the existence of 300 million guns in the U.S. Gun advocates, and gun buyers are to blame for it.

Also, are you aware that there is direct correlation between guns per capita and gun deaths, worldwide, when viewed on a 2d chart, depicting the position of each country on the intersection of guns per capita and gun deaths?

[Rassah]

Huh... Where do they claim criminals get guns from then?

Others in this thread seem to think they only get them from other criminals. The reality is they get them because people such as yourself (gun advocates) insist on allowing a free flowing path of guns into their hands.

Really? I probably missed that. Personally, I know that criminals buy their guns from other gun owners, either on the street, over the internet, or at gun shows. I know this because the media has been harping about "background checks" for almost a year now. I can't imagine that everyone else is actually as dumb as you claim them to be. Maybe?

You should ask yourself why we don't ban guns and knives. The answer is so obvious.

Is it because the actual ban will be ineffective at stopping criminals from buying them from other gun owners, on the street, or over the internet, and because it will do absolutely nothing but distract us from the underlying issue of crime itself? I mean, to paraphrase, guns don't cause crimes, people cause crimes. Personally, I'd rather see the millions of tax dollars going to stop the underlying problem of crime, than ineffectually attempting to patch one of many of its enablers.

I don't see Japan attempting a ban on gravity, do you? And yet they manage quite effectively with their ban on guns.

Of course. Which is why Japan has no homicides, manslaughter (accidental killing), or other crimes. Right?

Review the statistics. We've already been over this.

Yes, we have. I noticed Japan still has crime. And in the end, I've dismissed them as inadequate, because they con't control for the radically different cultures and respect for others between Japan and other countries. Are there any better statistics that can account for the radically different cultures?

By the way, I don't own a gun, nor do II consider myself a gun nut in any sense (though I have had experience with sniper rifles)

[FirstAscent]

Huh... Where do they claim criminals get guns from then?

Others in this thread seem to think they only get them from other criminals. The reality is they get them because people such as yourself (gun advocates) insist on allowing a free flowing path of guns into their hands.

Really? I probably missed that. Personally, I know that criminals buy their guns from other gun owners, either on the street, over the internet, or at gun shows. I know this because the media has been harping about "background checks" for almost a year now. I can't imagine that everyone else is actually as dumb as you claim them to be. Maybe?

Yeah, there are people that dumb in this thread. Scroll back and find the post, or take my word for it. I believe it was Spendulus.

You should ask yourself why we don't ban guns and knives. The answer is so obvious.

Is it because the actual ban will be ineffective at stopping criminals from buying them from other gun owners, on the street, or over the internet, and because it will do absolutely nothing but distract us from the underlying issue of crime itself? I mean, to paraphrase, guns don't cause crimes, people cause crimes. Personally, I'd rather see the millions of tax dollars going to stop the underlying problem of crime, than ineffectually attempting to patch one of many of its enablers.

Funny how you also seem to say that tax is theft, and as a result, you advocate no tax dollars going towards elimination of crime or the social nets that would prevent people from falling into the world of crime. It seems that in almost every post you make, I have to call you out for your two faced positions, conveniently made by you to win a point.

I don't see Japan attempting a ban on gravity, do you? And yet they manage quite effectively with their ban on guns.

Of course. Which is why Japan has no homicides, manslaughter (accidental killing), or other crimes. Right?

Review the statistics. We've already been over this.

Yes, we have. I noticed Japan still has crime. And in the end, I've dismissed them as inadequate, because they con't control for the radically different cultures and respect for others between Japan and other countries. Are there any better statistics that can account for the radically different cultures?

Obviously a nation of 120 million plus people still has crime. Again, it's a matter of degree. How many times must I point that out?

As for a difference in culture, you mean like, the NRA? Maybe Japan's culture is just plain better if they have so much less crime? I can't say for certain, but they must be doing something right.

By the way, I don't own a gun, nor do II consider myself a gun nut in any sense (though I have had experience with sniper rifles)

Do you see what you just admitted? I assume that you don't own a gun because you've determined that you don't in fact need one.

[NewLiberty]

300 million guns is the result of the free flowing supply, as advocated by the NRA, and gun advocates such as yourself. The U.S., by virtue of its guns per capita, and its ineffective laws enforced ineffectively, has created that gun inventory.

I'm not to blame for the existence of 300 million guns in the U.S. Gun advocates, and gun buyers are to blame for it.

Also, are you aware that there is direct correlation between guns per capita and gun deaths, worldwide, when viewed on a 2d chart, depicting the position of each country on the intersection of guns per capita and gun deaths?

Sure, and I am fine with that.  I am sorry you are so afraid.  You should probably look for a good therapist.
For what it is worth, I am also not interested in government mandating that folks be covered in bubblewrap, even if it saves lives.

The supply is not "free flowing".  There are a great amount of laws governing how, where, who can sell to whom, and more laws most every year.
If 300 million guns is the wrong number for you...
What is the right number for you?
What percentage of those guns should be held by your governments?

I am not an advocate of guns, also not an NRA member, am not political at all really though I do appreciate their work.
I also appreciate what freedoms remain, on a wide variety of other issues.
Freedoms tend to lead to prosperity, this one included.  
It seems a bizarre thing to get worked up over.  Assault weapons?  Really?  The sky is just not falling in this neck of the woods, and certainly not a problem worthy of further extracting taxes of my fellows in order to hire a bunch of government gunslingers to run around trying to disarm citizens.

[Rassah]

You should ask yourself why we don't ban guns and knives. The answer is so obvious.

Is it because the actual ban will be ineffective at stopping criminals from buying them from other gun owners, on the street, or over the internet, and because it will do absolutely nothing but distract us from the underlying issue of crime itself? I mean, to paraphrase, guns don't cause crimes, people cause crimes. Personally, I'd rather see the millions of tax dollars going to stop the underlying problem of crime, than ineffectually attempting to patch one of many of its enablers.

Funny how you also seem to say that tax is theft, and as a result, you advocate no tax dollars going towards elimination of crime or the social nets that would prevent people from falling into the world of crime. It seems that in almost every post you make, I have to call you out for your two faced positions, conveniently made by you to win a point.

I meant, "If millions of dollars have to be stolen from people, and used for SOMETHING, I'd personally rather see it go to something productive instead of wasteful." I in no way meant that I want to see millions of dollars applied towards the underlying problem of crime, I specifically meant that I want to see millions of dollars STOP being used on things like gun control, and, if must be, used for something productive instead. Ideally, of course, I'd rather not have any money taken by nannies to take care of us, and such education come from the communities themselves, instead of the state.
TL;DR: I am willing to recognize the reality we are forced to live under, and am capable of proposing solutions without the need to tear down the entire system as a whole, regardless of how much better I believe things would be otherwise. If you were thinking that you caught me with a "gotcha," I am sorry to disappoint you.

Yes, we have. I noticed Japan still has crime. And in the end, I've dismissed them as inadequate, because they con't control for the radically different cultures and respect for others between Japan and other countries. Are there any better statistics that can account for the radically different cultures?

Obviously a nation of 120 million plus people still has crime. Again, it's a matter of degree. How many times must I point that out?

That's what we have been asking you about: what is the degree that we must go to? Should we ban some guns? All guns? All guns and some knives and bows? All guns, knives, bows, baseball bats, spears, and vehicles over 500lb? And how do we decide? You propose that it's a matter of degree. I propose you're not focusing on the right thing to begin with.

As for a difference in culture, you mean like, the NRA? Maybe Japan's culture is just plain better if they have so much less crime? I can't say for certain, but they must be doing something right.

No, I don't mean like the NRA. Frankly, I don't even know what the NRA culture is like. I don't follow, or care about them, since they have very little actual influence and rarely speak out about things. I meant that, yes, Japan's culture is "better," in a sense that they typically have much *much* higher respect for others, and elders, ingrained into them from a very early age, as compared to the cultures of European and American countries. So in that sense, even if every person in Japan owned a gun, the crime rate there would likely be lower than in Switzerland and wherever else.

By the way, I don't own a gun, nor do II consider myself a gun nut in any sense (though I have had experience with sniper rifles)

Do you see what you just admitted? I assume that you don't own a gun because you've determined that you don't in fact need one.

Actually, it has about equal parts "don't need one" , "too lazy to go through all the hoops to get one" , and "don't want to spend so much to buy one."
Regardless, what's your point? Just because I happen to not need a gun, must we force everyone else to not have one, too, even if they do need one?

[FirstAscent]

300 million guns is the result of the free flowing supply, as advocated by the NRA, and gun advocates such as yourself. The U.S., by virtue of its guns per capita, and its ineffective laws enforced ineffectively, has created that gun inventory.

I'm not to blame for the existence of 300 million guns in the U.S. Gun advocates, and gun buyers are to blame for it.

Also, are you aware that there is direct correlation between guns per capita and gun deaths, worldwide, when viewed on a 2d chart, depicting the position of each country on the intersection of guns per capita and gun deaths?

Sure, and I am fine with that.

That's the problem.

I am sorry you are so afraid.

Who says I'm afraid? Can you point to any post I made indicating I'm afraid. Indeed, if I was afraid, wouldn't I want a gun? What I am is disgusted by people getting shot.

You should probably look for a good therapist.

See above post to clarify the rebuttal of the premise of your conclusion.

For what it is worth, I am also not interested in government mandating that folks be covered in bubblewrap, even if it saves lives.

Same here. So why did you bring it up?

The supply is not "free flowing".

How did you arrive at such an erroneous conclusion given the statistics?

There are a great amount of laws governing how, where, who can sell to whom, and more laws most every year.

You mean ineffective laws ineffectively enforced?

If 300 million guns is the wrong number for you...
What is the right number for you?

Much much less, since there is a linear relationship in the number of guns per capita vs. gun deaths. Pretty simple, isn't it?

What percentage of those guns should be held by your governments?

You want less guns in the hands of the police? Then start advocating less guns per capita.

I also appreciate what freedoms remain, on a wide variety of other issues.
Freedoms tend to lead to prosperity, this one included.  
It seems a bizarre thing to get worked up over.  Assault weapons?  Really?  The sky is just not falling in this neck of the woods, and certainly not a problem worthy of further extracting taxes of my fellows in order to hire a bunch of government gunslingers to run around trying to disarm citizens.

Guns don't lead to prosperity.