The Second Amendment must go

[OverVolt]

Im not sure I agree with this. If somebody is a collector and wants to have 75 guns that should be OK, they just need to be locked up so that some random burglar doesnt have easy access to smash and grab them.

Now, a limit on ammo might not be too bad of an idea, but I dont want to touch that with a 10 foot pole.

Yea we should limit how much food people can stock too so that there is enough for everyone in an emergency, you first

Ammo prices for awhile there had doubled in price. Stockpiling when prices are good is rational. Wish I could do the same for gas.

 

[mysticjbyrd]

The second amendment isn't going anywhere. In fact, people like you only make the situation worse by advocating for something so extreme. All the gun nuts point to you, and associate you with everyone else. Most progressives don't want to confiscate all the guns. Hell, it's not just progressives. 92% of Americans are for common sense gun legislation, such as universal background checks.

 

[michal1980]

The second amendment isn't going anywhere. In fact, people like you only make the situation worse by advocating for something so extreme. All the gun nuts point to you, and associate you with everyone else. Most progressives don't want to confiscate all the guns. Hell, it's not just progressives. 92% of Americans are for common sense gun legislation, such as universal background checks.

how are those strict gun laws working in CA?

 

[ivwshane]

how are those strict gun laws working in CA?

Pretty well actually!

http://gunlawscorecard.org

 

[HumblePie]

Pretty well actually!

http://gunlawscorecard.org

HAHA

lets do it by homicide rates then. Not all gun deaths.

30K+ gun related deaths per year of which typically 2/3rds are suicides. so around 20K suicides per year.

Of the remaining, the homicides, most are gang related deaths by around 5-8K depending upon the year. Then of that the next majority is domestic disputes that turn violent and end with a gun death. Which typically means 1K or less are related to other things which run the gambit of accidents, cop killings, self defense shoots, and mass murders.

Without an outright gun ban, no gun law is ever going to stop the largest percentage of gun related deaths in this country: suicides. Even a gun ban isn't going to stop the second largest percentage of gun deaths: gang violence. Guns laws may or may not have some varying degrees of effect on the rest of the gun related deaths in this country. Mostly not though.

So that scorecard website you listed is so bad for info without knowing what it is actually trying to represent. When you take out suicides only California gun control laws don't exactly make it any better than any other state when it comes to preventing homicides.

Try reading this to get a clearer understanding.

http://www.factcheck.org/2015/10/gun-laws-deaths-and-crimes/

 

[ivwshane]

HAHA

lets do it by homicide rates then. Not all gun deaths.

30K+ gun related deaths per year of which typically 2/3rds are suicides. so around 20K suicides per year.

Of the remaining, the homicides, most are gang related deaths by around 5-8K depending upon the year. Then of that the next majority is domestic disputes that turn violent and end with a gun death. Which typically means 1K or less are related to other things which run the gambit of accidents, cop killings, self defense shoots, and mass murders.

Without an outright gun ban, no gun law is ever going to stop the largest percentage of gun related deaths in this country: suicides. Even a gun ban isn't going to stop the second largest percentage of gun deaths: gang violence. Guns laws may or may not have some varying degrees of effect on the rest of the gun related deaths in this country. Mostly not though.

So that scorecard website you listed is so bad for info without knowing what it is actually trying to represent. When you take out suicides only California gun control laws don't exactly make it any better than any other state when it comes to preventing homicides.

Try reading this to get a clearer understanding.

http://www.factcheck.org/2015/10/gun-laws-deaths-and-crimes/

So you too are also saying Michael1980's claim was full of shit as well.

As to the bolded, I'd like to see the data for that claim.
Now I realize correlation does not equal causation (which is why I've advocated for studying the issue in order to craft better policies, something the right and the NRA are opposed to) but the data certainly doesn't show that California's tougher gun laws lead to worse statistics, especially if you use the common excuses used by the right to account for the differences (like poverty, unemployment rate, number of immigrants or illegals, etc).

 

[shady28]

Pretty well actually!

http://gunlawscorecard.org

Um ok.

Here's a list of all of the states that have a lower murder rate by gun per 100,000 residents than California.

Hint : There are 37 of them. There are 50 states in the Union.

Hopefully you can do the math here... but I'll just say it.

California is in the highest 1/3 of the nation in rate of murders by gun.

In raw numbers - they have the highest number of murders by gun in the nation.


Source


New Mexico
Texas
Arkansas
Nevada
Virginia
Oklahoma
North Carolina
Alabama
New Jersey
Illinois
Kentucky
Alaska
New York
Ohio
Connecticut
Kansas
Indiana
Massachusetts
Nebraska
Wisconsin
West Virginia
Rhode Island
Washington
Colorado
Montana
Minnesota
South Dakota
Oregon
Wyoming
Utah
Maine
Idaho
Iowa
North Dakota
Hawaii
New Hampshire
Vermont

 

[Darwin333]

I prefer bow hunting as well. I also would not hesitate to use a bow in self defense either.

Better not miss your first shot. I guess I wouldn't hesitate using one either if that was the only thing available. OTOH if there is a $200 pump action shotgun next to the bow then I'll be sending buckshot towards the bad guy instead of arrows.

 

[leper84]

So a terrorist commits an act of treason and war on American soil and the first reaction is to disarm the law abiding citizens the Second Amendment would protect?

 

[michal1980]

So a terrorist commits an act of treason and war on American soil and the first reaction is to disarm the law abiding citizens the Second Amendment would protect?

d'uh.

just be sure to not call them Muslim cause then you also be racist.

PS.

we also need more screening for immigrants coming on planes.

While having zero screening from the ones walking across the boarder.

stupid

 

[ivwshane]

Thank you, I stand corrected.

Um ok.

Here's a list of all of the states that have a lower murder rate by gun per 100,000 residents than California.

Hint : There are 37 of them. There are 50 states in the Union.

Hopefully you can do the math here... but I'll just say it.

California is in the highest 1/3 of the nation in rate of murders by gun.

In raw numbers - they have the highest number of murders by gun in the nation.


Source


New Mexico
Texas
Arkansas
Nevada
Virginia
Oklahoma
North Carolina
Alabama
New Jersey
Illinois
Kentucky
Alaska
New York
Ohio
Connecticut
Kansas
Indiana
Massachusetts
Nebraska
Wisconsin
West Virginia
Rhode Island
Washington
Colorado
Montana
Minnesota
South Dakota
Oregon
Wyoming
Utah
Maine
Idaho
Iowa
North Dakota
Hawaii
New Hampshire
Vermont

 

[irishScott]

The Second Amendment must go: We ban lawn darts. It’s time to ban guns.

We are one nation, forever f*cked by the NRA and an outdated and dangerous read of the Constitution. Let's fix it.

Call me naïve or any number of other things, but my suggestion is no more naïve than most of the arguments that gun advocates trot out on a daily basis. It’s also no more naïve than thinking that we’ll solve our gun problem with half measures or, even worse, doing nothing.

http://www.salon.com/2015/12/04/the_second_amendment_must_go_we_ban_lawn_darts_its_time_to_ban_guns/

Ban guns in the US? And that will end gun crime? Yeah, put it next to your "end war!" and "give peace a chance!" bumper stickers, it'll turn out just as well.

France has gun regulations that would make US gun control advocates wet their panties with glee. Somehow the terrorists still found guns. Hell California has assault weapons bans, universal background checks, basically everything gun control advocates fought for post-Sandy Hook. The guns were even bought in California, so no passing the buck this time!

But go ahead, keep living your delusion that words on a piece of paper backed up by some mild enforcement are going to protect you from murderous religious fanatics with nothing to lose, among other threats that ignore the law and don't fear law enforcement. Hell you're welcome to give up as many civil liberties as you feel necessary for the government to babysit you from afar, but you won't be giving up mine. You don't have that right, and you will fail. I already pity how scared you are of my guns, how scared you are of me, and you don't even know me. It's pathetic, and it's why gun control advocates are failing. The only people attracted to insecurity are the insecure. Granted there's plenty of insecurity on some parts the pro-gun side, but on the whole the pro-gun message is one of strength and personal empowerment. And with skyrocketing gun sales and gun control proving politically costly for those who pursue it, Americans are making it very clear which message they prefer.

 

[bshole]

Better not miss your first shot. I guess I wouldn't hesitate using one either if that was the only thing available. OTOH if there is a $200 pump action shotgun next to the bow then I'll be sending buckshot towards the bad guy instead of arrows.

LoL. Good point. Archery kills are different anyways. The target usually tends to bleed to death. Most deer I have shot with a bow ran about 150 yards are so (I think it takes about 60 seconds for the target to lose consciousness). Gun kills tend to incapacitate instantly if you hit where you supposed to. So in short if you shoot the perp with a bow and he has a gun, you will probably die unless you happen to make a brain, spine or nerve shot.

By the way, if you feel bad for the deer, don't. In most instances, a clean bow kill is far far better way to go than the natural way.... starvation or coyotes eating them alive. Coyotes typically don't kill deer outright, they hamstring the deer and feed on the hindquarters while the deer is still alive and in severe agony and fear.

 

[SP33Demon]

So a terrorist commits an act of treason and war on American soil and the first reaction is to disarm the law abiding citizens the Second Amendment would protect?

Only 1 out of 2 are idiots in this country, i.e. liberal. But boy can that liberal half whine about shit they will never be able to change.

 

[shady28]

By the way, if you feel bad for the deer, don't. In most instances, a clean bow kill is far far better way to go than the natural way.... starvation or coyotes eating them alive. Coyotes typically don't kill deer outright, they hamstring the deer and feed on the hindquarters while the deer is still alive and in severe agony and fear.

That's a really good point.

I love animals, and while I've hunted and killed rabbit before I felt bad about it and never did it again, I got nothing from it. We did eat it but not only did it not taste good, I felt bad about eating it too.

But dying "naturally" is a lot worse, logically I know that. If not eaten alive by other animals then it's a broken leg and starvation / dehydration. Sometimes its just being eaten by flys and ants and getting an infection, sepsis, and slow death. I suppose the easiest natural death an animal can hope for is to freeze to death at night.

So logically there is nothing inhumane about hunting. Even a bad shoot results in maybe an hour or two of pain, vs many hours or even days for a common "natural" death. People who think it's inhumane are not being realistic.

 

[MongGrel]

Only 1 out of 2 are idiots in this country, i.e. liberal. But boy can that liberal half whine about shit they will never be able to change.

You sure whine a lot...

 

[techie81]

While we are at it we should ban murder. I heard that works.

 

[OutHouse]

Excellent straw man!

your favorite word when you try to deflect.

 

[Kwatt]

Source

I think your source should be checked.

It shows the District of Columbia as the highest rate per 100,000. And the lowest percentage of gun ownership...

That can't be right. Can it?

According to the gun control advocates the people in DC should be immortal.



.

 

[Genx87]

So a terrorist commits an act of treason and war on American soil and the first reaction is to disarm the law abiding citizens the Second Amendment would protect?

It is the patriotic thing to do. But honestly right now they just want to deny people on a secretive terrorist watch list that takes years to get off and lots of money if at all. Challenging it in court is impossible because state secrets. Murrica 2015.

So who do you think will be restricted the most by this terrorist watch list? I will give you a clue. Not white males. How the left can rationalize a bigoted list will be amusing to watch.

 

[mysticjbyrd]

Um ok.

Here's a list of all of the states that have a lower murder rate by gun per 100,000 residents than California.

Hint : There are 37 of them. There are 50 states in the Union.

Hopefully you can do the math here... but I'll just say it.

California is in the highest 1/3 of the nation in rate of murders by gun.

In raw numbers - they have the highest number of murders by gun in the nation.


Source


New Mexico
Texas
Arkansas
Nevada
Virginia
Oklahoma
North Carolina
Alabama
New Jersey
Illinois
Kentucky
Alaska
New York
Ohio
Connecticut
Kansas
Indiana
Massachusetts
Nebraska
Wisconsin
West Virginia
Rhode Island
Washington
Colorado
Montana
Minnesota
South Dakota
Oregon
Wyoming
Utah
Maine
Idaho
Iowa
North Dakota
Hawaii
New Hampshire
Vermont

Wow you wasted a lot of time to write something that is utterly meaningless. The issue isn't that simple. Hint: Correlation causation.

 

[shady28]

I think your source should be checked.

It shows the District of Columbia as the highest rate per 100,000. And the lowest percentage of gun ownership...

That can't be right. Can it?

According to the gun control advocates the people in DC should be immortal.



.

You would think.

DC actually has what I think are the most restrictive firearms laws in the country.

• All firearms must be registered with the Metropolitan Police Department. A background check, online training, and testing of the gun owner are required.
• Assault weapons and .50 BMG rifles prohibited.
• Illegal to possess or acquire magazines of more than 10 round capacity

They also had a concealed weapon ban that was declared unconstitutional, but is still going through higher courts on appeal.

Despite all of this, their rate of homicide by firearm is more than 4x the national average...

 

[Vic]

I didn't read the thread. I strongly disagree. The right to individual sovereignty is essential to liberal democracy. Just like the right to vote. Plus an armed populace is better than any 'defense' budget.
The reality is that crime in the US is actually down dramatically, and that it would be more likely that alcohol prohibition would succeed than a gun ban.
So get over it and stop getting the crazies all worked up.

 

[Darwin333]

I am very liberal on most topics, and I strongly support gun control that will help to prevent dangerous criminals from getting their hands on guns, but, law abiding citizens should absolutely continue to have the right to arm and defend themselves, as well as go hunting, or go plinking, or do as they please provided they do not threaten, harm, or otherwise harass the unarmed people.

The problem is what law can you pass that people who don't abide by the law will follow? How long have drugs been illegal in this country and it's still easier for a high school kid to get a bag of weed than it is a 6 pack of beer that is legal for people over 21.

To add fuel to the fire is the continuing advancing of 3D printing. Pass all the magazine bans that you want but that just opens the market for people to either illegally import and/or make their own and sell. Just like drugs.

I might have a bit more faith if we've ever had success at banning shit that people actually want. Hell even the sorta kinda itsy bitsy "wins" like putting a serious dent in prescription opiate abuse have actually been gigantic fuckups. Sure you got prescription opiate abuse down but heroin use (and even higher addiction than before, overdose, death, and all associated medical costs on the taxpayers dime) skyrockets. Woohoo, we reduced the number of people taking powerful drugs made by pharmaceutical companies that they knew exactly what was in and increased the amount of people taking the most addictive and powerful drug in the world.

The bottom line is that when we try to ban things as broad as guns or drugs the effects of the "fix" are often worse than the initial problem.

Besides, other than the huge number of guns already in the country we have already successfully 3D printed guns and high capacity mags almost 3 years ago. Can you imagine how much easier it will be in 5 or 10 years? Of course if they make it illegal then law abiding citizens won't be 3D printing guns but criminals by their very nature don't care much for laws...

 

[ivwshane]

your favorite word when you try to deflect.

Deflect? Deflect what? Something I didn't argue for or deflect from a position that a majority of Democrats/liberals don't hold?

My guess is that you are too fucking stupid to even know what a straw man is!