The Supreme Court takes up a case that again tests the limits of gun rights

Page 2 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

fskimospy

Elite Member
Mar 10, 2006
85,632
50,853
136

Key findings: The authors, using a variety of national and local data sources, examined market trends— prices, production, and thefts—for the banned weapons and close substitutes before estimating potential ban effects and their consequences.
● The research shows that the
ban triggered speculative price in- creases and ramped-up production of the banned firearms prior to the law’s implementation, followed by a substantial postban drop in prices to levels of previous years.
● Criminal use of the banned guns declined, at least temporarily, after the law went into effect, which suggests that the legal stock of preban assault weapons was, at least for the short term, largely in the hands of collectors and dealers.
● Evidence suggests that the ban may have contributed to a reduc- tion in the gun murder rate and murders of police officers by crimi- nals armed with assault weapons.
● The ban has failed to reduce the average number of victims per gun murder incident or multiple gunshot wound victims.
lol - you cited a quarter century old analysis that only examined two years of data and of course did not examine any data after it expired because that was in the future. I'm pretty sure you just googled this and posted the first result that told you what you wanted to hear without reading it. Regardless, the real answer is that research is inconclusive as to the effects.

Know what the research is NOT inconclusive on though? Gun control in general. The fewer guns, the fewer deaths.

This is a very inconvenient fact: if you own a gun everyone in your household is more likely to die than if you don't. So it's not just yourself you put in danger, but your family too. Gun ownership is incredibly irresponsible.
 

fskimospy

Elite Member
Mar 10, 2006
85,632
50,853
136
If you really want to do some damage you just rent a uhaul



Or do we ban those too? Even you could snap your fingers, these mentally unstable people are just going to find another way to do harm. Same thing with criminals. And now, the criminals know, innocent law abiding people have no effective way to defend themselves.


TBH my opinion on gun control is my only real "far right" opinion. But I am completely against any form of gun control other than mandatory training and mental health checks for any at risk individuals.
You hold at least one other far right opinion, that Joe Biden retroactively classified documents at Mar a Lago, which is just a complete fabrication.

I guess maybe it's not so easily described as 'far right' as 'divorced from reality'.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Meghan54

K1052

Elite Member
Aug 21, 2003
48,077
37,268
136
I'm a collector and own many guns so let me say this as clearly as possible: Overwhelmingly countries that have restricted access to weapons reduced gun deaths. Lying to ourselves that this path would not substantially reduce gun deaths in the US is not doing us any favors. You have to own this simple immutable fact to have any credibility.
 

eelw

Diamond Member
Dec 4, 1999
9,796
4,983
136
Oh look the new troll also uses same talking points for gun discussions as RWNJs
 
  • Like
Reactions: Meghan54

fskimospy

Elite Member
Mar 10, 2006
85,632
50,853
136
I'm a collector and own many guns so let me say this as clearly as possible: Overwhelmingly countries that have restricted access to weapons reduced gun deaths. Lying to ourselves that this path would not substantially reduce gun deaths in the US is not doing us any favors. You have to own this simple immutable fact to have any credibility.
Exactly - I wish gun rights people would just say 'I know wider gun availability causes more deaths and that's a price that society should accept.'

I vehemently disagree with that position, but it's at least correct on the facts. People don't want to say that though because it's an awful thing to say, so they invent fantasies about how this isn't true.
 

MrSquished

Lifer
Jan 14, 2013
23,079
21,202
136
I heard this on NPR yesterday afternoon or this morning. I was like WTF, how is this even a question.

But not really. Cause I know this country is fucked in the head due to the GQP. You'd have to be a lunatic to oppose this 'regulation'
 

HomerJS

Lifer
Feb 6, 2002
36,730
28,907
136
I heard this on NPR yesterday afternoon or this morning. I was like WTF, how is this even a question.

But not really. Cause I know this country is fucked in the head due to the GQP. You'd have to be a lunatic to oppose this 'regulation'
Talk to the new guy
 
  • Like
Reactions: Meghan54

PumpkinCake

Member
Nov 2, 2023
158
108
71
lol - you cited a quarter century old analysis that only examined two years of data and of course did not examine any data after it expired because that was in the future. I'm pretty sure you just googled this and posted the first result that told you what you wanted to hear without reading it. Regardless, the real answer is that research is inconclusive as to the effects.

Know what the research is NOT inconclusive on though? Gun control in general. The fewer guns, the fewer deaths.

This is a very inconvenient fact: if you own a gun everyone in your household is more likely to die than if you don't. So it's not just yourself you put in danger, but your family too. Gun ownership is incredibly irresponsible.



What are your thoughts on a country-wide ban on alcohol? Another prohibition?

I mean there are nearly 3x the number of alcohol-related deaths vs firearm-related deaths. Why is the hard left so pro gun control and none of them chirp a word about alcohol.
 

purbeast0

No Lifer
Sep 13, 2001
53,024
5,905
126
LMAO at all the "counter points" this idiot is spewing.

"U-Haul trucks kill people why not ban U-Hauls?"

"Alcohol deaths are greater than gun deaths why not ban alcohol?"

Yeah, because there are no laws for rules of the road and/or alcohol.

Also, no one has said anything about banning all guns in this thread other than him.

Jesus christ. And to think like half the country is this stupid.
 
Dec 10, 2005
25,053
8,333
136
I see we have someone partaking in the old strawman of if we make murder illegal, it won't stop murders, so why outlaw murder in the first place?
 

repoman0

Diamond Member
Jun 17, 2010
4,701
3,727
136
What are your thoughts on a country-wide ban on alcohol? Another prohibition?

I mean there are nearly 3x the number of alcohol-related deaths vs firearm-related deaths. Why is the hard left so pro gun control and none of them chirp a word about alcohol.
Another @SlowSpyder talking point, except his was about smoking. Can’t do anything about guns until we fix deaths from cigarettes.

Literally just a bot trained from past posts and arguments.
 

PumpkinCake

Member
Nov 2, 2023
158
108
71
LMAO at all the "counter points" this idiot is spewing.

"U-Haul trucks kill people why not ban U-Hauls?"

"Alcohol deaths are greater than gun deaths why not ban alcohol?"

Yeah, because there are no laws for rules of the road and/or alcohol.

Jesus christ. And to think like half the country is this stupid.

Are you trying to debate the topic and facts or just sling personal attacks?
 

trenchfoot

Lifer
Aug 5, 2000
14,939
7,457
136
I heard this on NPR yesterday afternoon or this morning. I was like WTF, how is this even a question.

But not really. Cause I know this country is fucked in the head due to the GQP. You'd have to be a lunatic to oppose this 'regulation'


The GOP will oppose any sensible legislation the Democrats come up with because they've been convinced by their corporate owned leadership that it's their sworn patriotic duty to do so. Under that misguided guiding principle, what makes sense to anyone with half a brain doesn't matter in the slightest. In the matter of gun rights and the controls that keeps the nation safe from killing each other off out of derangement, hate, fear and other emotional motivators, that same idiotic and deadly GOP principle applies.

Pumpkincake's rambling off the standard GOP talking points in defense of the corrupted interpretation of the 2A is simply more proof of that stupidly stubborn principle that whatever the liberals want for the nation must be opposed, no questions asked because no questions are needed.

That stifling Three Monkey Principle of theirs is all inclusive as far as what the majority of the nation who stands in opposition to them wants out of their gov't.
 

fskimospy

Elite Member
Mar 10, 2006
85,632
50,853
136
What are your thoughts on a country-wide ban on alcohol? Another prohibition?

I mean there are nearly 3x the number of alcohol-related deaths vs firearm-related deaths. Why is the hard left so pro gun control and none of them chirp a word about alcohol.
We tried drug and alcohol prohibition and both failed miserably so we have proof they don't work. This is unlike gun prohibition (or at least much, much heavier regulation) where there is voluminous evidence worldwide that they are effective.

So the justification is easy, and frankly common sense. One works and the other doesn't.
 

PumpkinCake

Member
Nov 2, 2023
158
108
71
The GOP will oppose any sensible legislation the Democrats come up with because they've been convinced by their corporate owned leadership that it's their sworn patriotic duty to do so. Under that misguided guiding principle, what makes sense to anyone with half a brain doesn't matter in the slightest. In the matter of gun rights and the controls that keeps the nation safe from killing each other off out of derangement, hate, fear and other emotional motivators, that same idiotic and deadly GOP principle applies.

Pumpkincake's rambling off the standard GOP talking points in defense of the corrupted interpretation of the 2A is simply more proof of that stupidly stubborn principle that whatever the liberals want for the nation must be opposed, no questions asked because no questions are needed.

That stifling Three Monkey Principle of theirs is all inclusive as far as what the majority of the nation who stands in opposition to them wants out of their gov't.

Both sides do this.
 

brycejones

Lifer
Oct 18, 2005
27,649
26,746
136
I don't know where this was from or what it's quoting. I don't respond to "troll" requests for more info when an entire post is filled with hate and nastiness
You can follow the link. But I quoted the entire post so if you that is hate and nastiness I am not really sure what to tell you.

Multiple times across multiple threads you have been asked to provide evidence to support assertions your have made or been fact checked on your assertions and proven to be wrong. In every single instance you ignore evidence or just don’t provide any. It’s difficult to take anything you say seriously.
 

PumpkinCake

Member
Nov 2, 2023
158
108
71
You can follow the link. But I quoted the entire post so if you that is hate and nastiness I am not really sure what to tell you.

Multiple times across multiple threads you have been asked to provide evidence to support assertions your have made or been fact checked on your assertions and proven to be wrong. In every single instance you ignore evidence or just don’t provide any. It’s difficult to take anything you say seriously.

If someone is having a polite, honest debate I'm happy to go back and forth and dig up sources.


When almost every interaction includes name calling, accusations of racism, and "MAGA" (whatever that is) why should I spend the time? It's a waste on deaf ears.
 

fskimospy

Elite Member
Mar 10, 2006
85,632
50,853
136
If someone is having a polite, honest debate I'm happy to go back and forth and dig up sources.


When almost every interaction includes name calling, accusations of racism, and "MAGA" (whatever that is) why should I spend the time? It's a waste on deaf ears.
Ok - then what is your response to the fact that owning a gun makes everyone in your household more likely to die, all else being equal? What purpose does personal gun ownership serve in our society?
 

K1052

Elite Member
Aug 21, 2003
48,077
37,268
136
I am actually very liberal and centrist so that's why I have to vote for Trump for the 3rd time.
 
  • Haha
Reactions: mikeymikec

brycejones

Lifer
Oct 18, 2005
27,649
26,746
136
If someone is having a polite, honest debate I'm happy to go back and forth and dig up sources.


When almost every interaction includes name calling, accusations of racism, and "MAGA" (whatever that is) why should I spend the time? It's a waste on deaf ears.
You haven’t behaved that way so it would be nice to see you start doing that.