• Guest, The rules for the P & N subforum have been updated to prohibit "ad hominem" or personal attacks against other posters. See the full details in the post "Politics and News Rules & Guidelines."
  • Community Question: What makes a good motherboard?

Here's a crazy gun control idea that might actually work

momeNt

Diamond Member
Jan 26, 2011
9,299
349
126
Let's tackle this prohibition style.

Everybody pro-gun rights endorse a full on gun ban, then, like prohibition in the 1920s, when everything goes to shit, say "I told you so". You'll get your guns back after probably 2 Presidential terms and probably the same number of gun deaths during that time regardless of the ban, so it will have been proven to be ineffectual and basically cement gun rights forever in the USA.

So, can the avid gun enthusiasts who shoot weekly, or the daily carriers give up that right for a few years just to prove a point? If you die because you can't defend yourself, you'll be a hero, and you'll become a statistic that cements the need for guns in our society and you'll make our country safer. Be heroes and give up your guns in the short term so that we can finally end this struggle and have some closure, like we did with alcohol in the 1920s.
 

OverVolt

Lifer
Aug 31, 2002
14,285
87
86
Except in 1920 we would actually get them back and in 2013 they'd be gone forever.
 

jpeyton

Moderator in SFF, Notebooks, Pre-Built/Barebones
Moderator
Aug 23, 2003
25,387
140
116
With 300 million guns, hundreds of millons of magazines, and billions of rounds of ammunition already in circulation...nobody is taking our guns unless we voluntarily turn them in. Who here is stupid enough to do that?
 

momeNt

Diamond Member
Jan 26, 2011
9,299
349
126
Except in 1920 we would actually get them back and in 2013 they'd be gone forever.
Oh I highly doubt that. What's more likely once a few cities are overrun by gun crime syndicates.

1. The government gives us back our right to bear arms.
2. They have national guard martial law in every city to try and wipe out gun gangs.

or 3. Gun crime syndicates won't pop up, as arrests are made and more guns confiscated, the number of guns will eventually be too minute to matter anymore and gun bans will actually work.
 

momeNt

Diamond Member
Jan 26, 2011
9,299
349
126
With 300 million guns, hundreds of millons of magazines, and billions of rounds of ammunition already in circulation...nobody is taking our guns unless we voluntarily turn them in. Who here is stupid enough to do that?
My point is to voluntarily do that, to prove the point, and settle the issue once and for all, similar to alcohol.

With alcohol every single beaten wife or kid was used as a prop in political stunts, and temperance movements drowned the radio waves in anti-alcohol rhetoric. We finally gave them what they wanted, and all hell broke loose. The same can happen with guns.
 

OverVolt

Lifer
Aug 31, 2002
14,285
87
86
Oh I highly doubt that. What's more likely once a few cities are overrun by gun crime syndicates.

1. The government gives us back our right to bear arms. not a chance in hell, if we complain too much about it they'll probably take the first one :awe:
2. They have national guard martial law in every city to try and wipe out gun gangs. yes

or 3. Gun crime syndicates won't pop up, as arrests are made and more guns confiscated, the number of guns will eventually be too minute to matter anymore and gun bans will actually work.300 million guns, no
Just sayin!
 

momeNt

Diamond Member
Jan 26, 2011
9,299
349
126
Just sayin!
So you are basically saying 100% gun bans = all out martial law and gang vs government warfare in the USA?

Is this why they are trying to leave us at least some guns that we can legally obtain? Sounds plausible. That's a really good point, if they just took away say, whiskey, people would have just moved to the other "safer" alcoholic beverages, and it might have quelled the temperance movement while leaving alcohol enthusiasts a legal means of obtaining alcohol still.

I suppose we actually are learning from history.
 

waggy

No Lifer
Dec 14, 2000
68,155
8
81
what a fucking stupid idea.

Not everyone is going to willingly give up there guns. The option on that is to go door to door and forcibly go into each house and search and seize them. I am willing to bet there will be more deaths from this then many are willing to put up with.

What makes you think the government is going to give them back after?

all around this is just a stupid idea
 

Pr0d1gy

Diamond Member
Jan 30, 2005
7,776
0
76
Stupid thread, the easiest way to enslave America is to disarm the citizens. The wheels are in motion and the OP is probably a government shill.
 

momeNt

Diamond Member
Jan 26, 2011
9,299
349
126
Stupid thread, the easiest way to enslave America is to disarm the citizens. The wheels are in motion and the OP is probably a government shill.
I'm actually an anarchist, I disagree with the entire notion of governance.

I think my idea is a pretty good idea to test the gun issue in America once and for all. If all goes to shit and there is a mass revolt, hopefully there will be some places in what was the USA that are free of government.

Will get to test the gun control in USA policy, and anarchy potentially with one simple idea.
 

waggy

No Lifer
Dec 14, 2000
68,155
8
81
I'm actually an anarchist, I disagree with the entire notion of governance.

I think my idea is a pretty good idea to test the gun issue in America once and for all. If all goes to shit and there is a mass revolt, hopefully there will be some places in what was the USA that are free of government.

Will get to test the gun control in USA policy, and anarchy potentially with one simple idea.
no its not a "pretty good idea" its a fucking stupid idea.

how about responding to thing speople would happen with this? how would you stop it?
 

Kadarin

Lifer
Nov 23, 2001
44,311
8
81
If the government takes away our right to bear arms, we're not getting it back. Not ever, unless the government itself falls.

The intent of the Dianne Feinsteins in government is to fully disarm us as citizens.
 

momeNt

Diamond Member
Jan 26, 2011
9,299
349
126
no its not a "pretty good idea" its a fucking stupid idea.

how about responding to thing speople would happen with this? how would you stop it?
If as you said there are significant deaths from people refusing to give up their previously legal weapons, then that falls into the category of massive gun crime where we either do the following.

A. Martial Law over a period of several years where we weather the high death rate until all the guns have been confiscated, then we lift martial law and we live in a gun free utopia.

B. We are shocked that there is so much crime following the ban and we repeal it - (prohibition example).

I'm basically advocating that we stop pussyfooting around it and just dive in and see what happens. Obviously gun advocates would like to see scenario B so their gun rights become firmly cemented similar to alcohol, and gun control advocates probably want to see scenario A and rid the USA of guns once and for all at any cost. Pay the deaths early and never have to pay them again sort of thing, it's like buying a house with cash vs a mortgage. Less deaths in the long run, and since we are a society and not technically individuals, the net benefit to society matters more than morality towards a single individual and respect of their freedom.

Hopefully I characterized the proponents of both sides of this issue correctly. I apologize if I am incorrect.
 

Anarchist420

Diamond Member
Feb 13, 2010
8,649
0
76
www.facebook.com
My friend's idea is actually brilliant. I've said something similar about the top marginal income tax rate. I propose letting the Democrats raise it to 100% (as long as they don't take any loopholes or exemptions away) and then watching them be like "WTF?" when revenues actually go down.

The reason that Republicans fear having the top marginal rate raised is because it will give the govt less revenue.
 

momeNt

Diamond Member
Jan 26, 2011
9,299
349
126
So your brilliant plan is to let them beat us up and hope they see the light? No thanks.
Government needs to act quickly and react even quicker. Test the ban and react quickly to the results. Instead we debate endlessly trying to compare the USA to each and every country to try and divine what our potential violent crime statistics would look like based on a given policy. Test the policy right damn here, right damn now!

The level of distrust in the government in this thread is highly encouraging. I think a lot of you would probably join the anarchist encampment if there was a revolt. Where should we go?
 

momeNt

Diamond Member
Jan 26, 2011
9,299
349
126
My friend's idea is actually brilliant. I've said something similar about the top marginal income tax rate. I propose letting the Democrats raise it to 100% (as long as they don't take any loopholes or exemptions away) and then watching them be like "WTF?" when revenues actually go down.

The reason that Republicans fear having the top marginal rate raised is because it will give the govt less revenue.
Hello friend.

The only way to find out definitively is to try it. That's all I'm saying.
 

Zargon

Lifer
Nov 3, 2009
12,245
2
76
If as you said there are significant deaths from people refusing to give up their previously legal weapons, then that falls into the category of massive gun crime where we either do the following.

A. Martial Law over a period of several years where we weather the high death rate until all the guns have been confiscated, then we lift martial law and we live in a gun free utopia.

B. We are shocked that there is so much crime following the ban and we repeal it - (prohibition example).

I'm basically advocating that we stop pussyfooting around it and just dive in and see what happens. Obviously gun advocates would like to see scenario B so their gun rights become firmly cemented similar to alcohol, and gun control advocates probably want to see scenario A and rid the USA of guns once and for all at any cost. Pay the deaths early and never have to pay them again sort of thing, it's like buying a house with cash vs a mortgage. Less deaths in the long run, and since we are a society and not technically individuals, the net benefit to society matters more than morality towards a single individual and respect of their freedom.

Hopefully I characterized the proponents of both sides of this issue correctly. I apologize if I am incorrect.
this is funny because you seem serious
 

Londo_Jowo

Lifer
Jan 31, 2010
17,304
158
106
londojowo.hypermart.net
Let's tackle this prohibition style.

Everybody pro-gun rights endorse a full on gun ban, then, like prohibition in the 1920s, when everything goes to shit, say "I told you so". You'll get your guns back after probably 2 Presidential terms and probably the same number of gun deaths during that time regardless of the ban, so it will have been proven to be ineffectual and basically cement gun rights forever in the USA.

So, can the avid gun enthusiasts who shoot weekly, or the daily carriers give up that right for a few years just to prove a point? If you die because you can't defend yourself, you'll be a hero, and you'll become a statistic that cements the need for guns in our society and you'll make our country safer. Be heroes and give up your guns in the short term so that we can finally end this struggle and have some closure, like we did with alcohol in the 1920s.
No, I will never willingly give up my constitutional rights.
 

ASK THE COMMUNITY