Is gun control even possible in America?

[woolfe9999]

Well it's possible to have gun control laws, but no, IMO it isn't really possible for them to be terribly effective. Not in these United States.

- wolf

 

[DucatiMonster696]

It never took with me.

Wow so are you admitting that essentially you keep touching hot grills, pans and plates even after burning yourself? You would be/are a sysadmin's worst nightmare.

Sysadmin: Don't open email attachments with executable files in them please.

ModestGamer: Click, wut?

I just deducded the best way to migrate through this wretched exsistance we call humanity.

Which is...?

Which for the most part I think the planet would be better off without.

You think, you feel, you believe.

How much of this is grounded in reality?

 

[brencat]

Gun control only punishes law abiding citizens while criminals roam free terrorizing their victims with illegally purchased/stolen/whatever guns. All one has to do is look at Chicago as exhibit #1 of the epic fail of what a total firearm ban within city limits has done to reduce crime. In fact violent gun-related crime has increased 5-fold in the 3 decades such laws have been in existence. The only people hurt are those robbed, mugged, or murdered.

Now compare that with Texas or Florida and other right-to-carry states crime rates. Pretty simple logic that if a criminal thinks the population is armed, he might think twice before trying because he might 'get dead.' But of course this logic is wasted on the anti-gun left wing nutcases who are educated beyond their intelligence.

 

[ModestGamer]

Wow so are you admitting that essentially you keep touching hot grills, pans and plates even after burning yourself? You would be/are a sysadmin's worst nightmare.

Sysadmin: Don't open email attachments with executable files in them please.

ModestGamer: Click, wut?




Which is...?



You think, you feel, you believe.

How much of this is grounded in reality?

try not to take anything I say here very seriously. I like to fuck with people.

 

[ModestGamer]

Gun control only punishes law abiding citizens while criminals roam free terrorizing their victims with illegally purchased/stolen/whatever guns. All one has to do is look at Chicago as exhibit #1 of the epic fail of what a total firearm ban within city limits has done to reduce crime. In fact violent gun-related crime has increased 5-fold in the 3 decades such laws have been in existence. The only people hurt are those robbed, mugged, or murdered.

Now compare that with Texas or Florida and other right-to-carry states crime rates. Pretty simple logic that if a criminal thinks the population is armed, he might think twice before trying because he might 'get dead.' But of course this logic is wasted on the anti-gun left wing nutcases who are educated beyond their intelligence.

do you know how many dumb fucking idiots I know with college degrees. Most of the people with college degree. You can't learn critical thinking skills. You either have them or you don't.the best you can hope for is to get out of the stampeed of lemmings.

 

[Moonbeam]

Training dogs is better. You tell the dog to sit and make the gesture, it then doesn't sit you smack it in the nose and tell it to sit again. When it does you reward it.

I suppose you can't help being a barbarian. Positive reinforcement is all you need to train a dog.

 

[Moonbeam]

America doesn't need gun control. Parts of America want gun control because of enormous gun violence and in those areas folk should have the right to control guns until background violence reaches ambient levels.

What we need is flexible intelligence not fanatical religious law.

 

[ModestGamer]

they should stop being violent. Seems like a better solution. don;t act like a bag of dicks.

but everyone is special and should feel good about themselves.

I retian the right to kill motherfuckers that need to be dead. I like this plan.

America doesn't need gun control. Parts of America want gun control because of enormous gun violence and in those areas folk should have the right to control guns until background violence reaches ambient levels.

What we need is flexible intelligence not fanatical religious law.

 

[bfdd]

I suppose you can't help being a barbarian. Positive reinforcement is all you need to train a dog.

All the dogs I've been around that were "trained" through positive reinforcement have been shittly trained dogs. Same with people. Fucking country is full of pussy ass idiots because we've gone so far overboard with positive reinforcement that there's no longer losers in little league games.

 

[ModestGamer]

All the dogs I've been around that were "trained" through positive reinforcement have been shittly trained dogs. Same with people. Fucking country is full of pussy ass idiots because we've gone so far overboard with positive reinforcement that there's no longer losers in little league games.

this I agree with. Nature does not treat losers kindly. Usually death is the remedy.

 

[Brainonska511]

Gun control only punishes law abiding citizens while criminals roam free terrorizing their victims with illegally purchased/stolen/whatever guns. All one has to do is look at Chicago as exhibit #1 of the epic fail of what a total firearm ban within city limits has done to reduce crime. In fact violent gun-related crime has increased 5-fold in the 3 decades such laws have been in existence. The only people hurt are those robbed, mugged, or murdered.

Now compare that with Texas or Florida and other right-to-carry states crime rates. Pretty simple logic that if a criminal thinks the population is armed, he might think twice before trying because he might 'get dead.' But of course this logic is wasted on the anti-gun left wing nutcases who are educated beyond their intelligence.

Because that has nothing to do with the culture in one area vs. another or anything like that. How many of the violent crimes are a product of gang wars? If gang members are murdering other gang members, it that really some guy toting an illegal gun terrorizing the law-abiding citizen?

do you know how many dumb fucking idiots I know with college degrees. Most of the people with college degree. You can't learn critical thinking skills. You either have them or you don't.the best you can hope for is to get out of the stampeed of lemmings.

try not to take anything I say here very seriously. I like to fuck with people.

Well, you sound like a douche. And you can teach people to think critically. It's just harder to do and harder to test. So I'm sure many just lazy out and just go for memorizing shit.

As for gun control, I'm sure there is a good middle ground between banning and limitless purchase.

 

[ModestGamer]

Because that has nothing to do with the culture in one area vs. another or anything like that. How many of the violent crimes are a product of gang wars? If gang members are murdering other gang members, it that really some guy toting an illegal gun terrorizing the law-abiding citizen?

Anglo Saxons and the germanics. Pretty violent bunch. I suspect it is genetic. Well usually the criminals buys a illegal gun "they are cheaper and untraceable" and they use it in the commision of a crime against a non criminal. unless they use is to kill off competition. But that depends.

CRIMINALS DON'T GIVE A FUCK ABOUT GUN CONTROL LAWS !!!!

Well, you sound like a douche. And you can teach people to think critically. It's just harder to do and harder to test. So I'm sure many just lazy out and just go for memorizing shit.

As for gun control, I'm sure there is a good middle ground between banning and limitless purchase.

You can't fix stupid. Genetics says so. even though intellegence has alot to do with diet under age 2.

Limitless purchase is the best choice. Everybody gets whatever they want. Let the shoot out begin.

 

[Bitek]

Of course we can. People still can't walk around with AK47s, gatling guns and RPGs.

Better question is if we really need more gun control than that.

 

[ModestGamer]

Of course we can. People still can't walk around with AK47s, gatling guns and RPGs.

Better question is if we really need more gun control than that.

I think society would be more polite if everyone packed a RPG.

 

[Nebor]

No. Guns are part of our culture, our national psyche. We are a nation born of gunfire, and so we carry on.

 

[shortylickens]

Nope.
When we had the ban in 94 violent crime rose slowly. And simply making a law against them doesnt do anything anyways. You'd actually have to go out and get them, which wont happen without massive budgeting to the ATF. It was feel-good legislation and no agency had the power or the resources to take guns out of the hands of criminals. They would have needed like a billion dollars and tens of thousands of new agents and new permanent offices and mobile command units and frankly that would have felt a little too much like 1984 or Brazil, and Clinton knew it. He knew he couldnt actually do anything about guns, but the people were angry and wanted to see something happen, so he passed a bill. And the people clapped. And nothing good happened. It was pointless.

 

[bruceb]

A lot of people are pro 2nd amendment and as such are against government over control of constitutional rights.

 

[MotF Bane]

I am not asking the dog to responsably own a gun. That would be like asking a women to take responsability for a situation.

good luck,.

:awe:

 

[ConstipatedVigilante]

A lot of people in the U.S. won't be willing to give up their guns at all.

 

[bullbert]

I think society would be more polite if everyone packed a RPG.

r/RPG/Holy Hand Grenade/

 

[Rainsford]

I don't think it's possible to have "gun control" as pro-2nd amendment people mean the term (taking away everyone's guns), but I DO think we can significantly improve our record in keeping guns away from people who shouldn't have them.

Background checks, waiting periods, ballistic fingerprinting, etc, are all things that can dramatically reduce gun crime without impacting the right of law abiding citizens to own guns to protect themselves, hunt, or target shoot. There is a good balance point, "gun control" doesn't have to mean taking away all the guns OR "hitting what you aim at".

 

[hal2kilo]

No, but damn if you sell a ladder without warining labels on it.

 

[Jaskalas]

I think one thing those that are pro-gun control miss is that the United States has 50 states that are completely open to each other.

We're also completely open to Mexico and the entire rest of the American landmass. Two continents worth. You could nationally ban guns across the 50 states, you'd still have the border to deal with.

 

[Anarchist420]

I don't think it's possible to have "gun control" as pro-2nd amendment people mean the term (taking away everyone's guns), but I DO think we can significantly improve our record in keeping guns away from people who shouldn't have them.

Background checks, waiting periods, ballistic fingerprinting, etc, are all things that can dramatically reduce gun crime without impacting the right of law abiding citizens to own guns to protect themselves, hunt, or target shoot. There is a good balance point, "gun control" doesn't have to mean taking away all the guns OR "hitting what you aim at".

It's been proven that gun control is counter-effective; it just punishes lawabiding citizens and rewards criminals.

 

[Rainsford]

It's been proven that gun control is counter-effective; it just punishes lawabiding citizens and rewards criminals.

No, that hasn't been proven. What's been strongly argued is that SOME KINDS of gun control are counter-productive. "Gun control" is WAY too broad a term, which was the entire point of my argument.