Originally posted by: sandorski
Originally posted by: Hayabusa Rider
Originally posted by: sandorski
Originally posted by: Hayabusa Rider
Originally posted by: sandorski
Originally posted by: Hayabusa Rider
Originally posted by: sandorski
Originally posted by: palehorse
Originally posted by: JS80
Originally posted by: Farang
I find it amusing when dumbfucks try to apply their strict gun rights philosophies across the board and criticize major cities for enacting gun control laws to help curb soaring murder rates. I'm a hunter, I own a lot of guns, but don't try to say because someone is for stricter gun control in Chicago it means they are for it in rural Arkansas. I understand this particular politician is but as someone else said this bill is going to die, it is as much worth discussing as Rangel's military draft bill.
lol so you think more guns = high murder rates, low guns = low murder rates? HAHAHAHAHAHAHA
He also thinks that more gun laws = fewer murders! I guess he's never seen or been to DC or Chicago...
A City Ban is useless. A National Ban is the only way a Gun Ban would be effective.
Well that would certainly take care of law abiding gun owners.
It would take care of many, if not most, Criminals as well.
Since criminals don't surrender their weapons I'd say not. Oh, maybe in 20 years when they all wear out, but then people will just start making primitive firearms. Less accurate, but if you shoot the wrong person, it doesn't really matter to them. I can without much trouble make an efficient deadly weapon which would be quite effective at the range most criminals kill. What I know isn't rocket science. Of course they would be banned as well.
Besides, an outright ban would almost certainly be viewed as unconstitutional. There are other ways to effectively disarm law abiding citizens, as I have described.
My main point was that City Bans were useless. Which they are. There's nothing to control the flow from neighbouring Cities/Towns.
That said, a National Ban would certainly not be like a switch that immediately changes things. As you say though, in time through wear and confiscated weapons from Criminals the problem will ease. Some may resort to their own design, some will get Guns smuggled into the country, most will commit their Crimes using various alternatives. Gun Crime will decrease though and along with it, so will Murder Rates.
I do wonder about the decrease in murder rates.
Case in point, when I lived in VT there were no concealed weapons laws. None. I once had a half dozen hand guns under my coat and went to a diner. Perfectly legal. The reason I had them is because I went to a frozen lake where me and a couple guys did some ice fishing and plinking.
Now consider that with zero restrictions the per capita handgun crime rate is very low compared to cities and states which have what I consider draconian ownership laws, never mind carrying a concealed weapon.
Why is this? Because in the culture of VT it's consider wrong to shoot someone. That's the entire difference. You don't go around shooting people, or stabbing them or whatever.
Conversely, watching the news of inner city Rochester, NY I find that this person shot that person etc. What you often find is that if they didn't have a gun they would have killed another way. It's considered an acceptable.
Now you may argue that removing handguns would eventually make the first choice less accessible, but you haven't changed the mentality and that needs to be "You shouldn't do bad things to people and if you do bad things will happen to you". So for the next decade or two, those who don't get it are armed, and those who do aren't. Even then, the latter will be at a severe disadvantage.
I'm not saying that some regulation ought not to be in place, but I do see that it's more important to some to remove the means of protection for many, yet provide no answer to eliminating the criminal.
A ban is hardly a good solution IMO.
Willingness to take a Life is fueled by the ease a Gun makes it possible. Certainly cultural norms play into the mix, but Guns make the mix more toxic.
On another website someone linked to an article written by some US Gun Rights advocate who chose to use Canada as an example as to why Gun Control was bad. His argument was that thousands of Canadians Work in the wilderness and are forbidden to carry Guns, yadda yadda ya...wild animals. Myself and others reading the Thread it was posted in had a good laugh at that. It is exceedingly rare that such a situation ever exists that a Gun is needed, even if an animal Attacks.
I bring this up for a simple reason: There's is a hysteria in the US about this issue that does not stand up to the Facts. Criminals will not begin to go on a rampage, because Joe Blow does not have a Gun. In fact, Criminals will no longer even need a Gun in many circumstances. Add in that most Shootings are hits on other Criminals often with innocent bystanders being at the wrong place at the wrong time and it becomes quite laughable that people hold onto this issue so tightly.
So it seems to me that Americans should make a decision to move in a different direction regarding Guns. Here are some suggestions:
1) Registration of all Fire Arms. Ya, it's inconvenient, but being able to trace a Gun used in a Crime back from the scene, to its' Legal Owner, and all the way back to the Manufacturer will help a lot. a) If the Weapon was reported Stolen, then the Thief may be the same person who committed the Crime under Investigation. b) If the Weapon is not reported Stolen, the Legal Owner may be responsible for the Crime or possibly Supplying Weapons to Criminals.
If the Registered Owner fails to report a move or other failure regarding Regulation, don't make it a Crime punishable by Charges/Jail, but make it a Fine of some amount. Mistakes will happen.
2) Increase the Obligations regarding Gun Ownership through Mandatory Training and through Membership in local FireArms organizations that require regular attendence of functions(kind of Swiss Mandatory Service Light). This is to change the Culture surrounding Gun Ownership by giving it more Purpose/Responsibility and less Right, but in a less Ego driven way.
3) Extract the 2nd Amendment and outright Ban FireArms at will. Obviously this would never work as the first choice, but in time, especially as Technology progresses beyond Projectile Weapons, this will happen. It's not a Conspiracy, it's not because someone or the Government is out to get you, it's just that Guns will become obsolete and completely unnecessary.
It's time to move forward and quit clinging to 2 Centuries ago.
Facebook
Twitter