General Politics Discussion [ARCHIVED] • Page 130

Yea sorry I'm fucking around, haha.

 

You're forgetting the ignorance of people, they see a semi-auto rifle and they say it's an AR.

 

Then only allow those farmers who have proven their crops are threatened by wild hogs apply for those guns. The population of eligible applicants would be ridiculously small and easy enough to regulate.

 

Well it actually might have (one component of gun violence is ease of use and impulse control) but nobody's saying that anyway. We're saying that stopping a lot of gun violence by regulating guns is a basic causational solution that has been seen successful in multiple other countries.

 

Whether or not you were serious, it's an argument I see used a lot and I just don't get it

 

I think as a policy proposal, it doesn't pass the smell test. But, sure, a regulation of that scope would reduce the number of AR-15s that are out in the wild.

 

"instrument of death" is a phrase used when talking about guns, but seriously, the same thing should be said about a sword. Didn't someone recently in China kill a bunch of kids with a long knife? I thought something like that happened, could be wrong.

Fact of the matter is a long sword, katana, etc, are ONLY used for killing. Yet I don't even think you have to be 18 to buy one.

 

It's not just that they're designed to kill, it's also that they do it quickly, effectively, and at long distances. Additionally, re general gun violence, suicide by gun is much more popular than knife due to pain tolerances, immediacy, etc

 

I saw a number thrown out earlier but I'd like a credible source for this? Also "starve to death" is just laughable hyperbole.

 

If we put the number of AR-15s in the wild up against the number of homicides in which AR-15s were the weapon used, I don't think there would any kind of math to suggest that a whole cloth ban would move the needle much.

 

Why are you traveling with your gun used to protect your farm? The gun needed to protect your farm shouldn't be not on your farm.

We wouldn't be monitoring the person, we're monitoring the gun.

How does that solve anything? People could still buy guns and use them to murder people...

 

Yea I know I get it, better laws need to be put in place, no point in arguing in circles.

 

If the person has documented proof of the reasoning for the use of the AR, there should be no reason to monitor them, but only to monitor the gun in case it's stolen/lost.

 

Sorry, but what comment are you replying for. What number do you want a source for?

Yeah, I was exaggerating a bit for comedic purposes. Bottom line is farmers grow food, animals eat that food, farmers kill animals eating food, we get food.

 

Tracking guns seems like such a common sense thing to do it shocks me that it's not being done. For fucks sake people put tracers on their dogs in case they get lost.

 

"bad people will still try to kill people, so we might as well give them the tools necessary to make their goal of killing people as easy and effective as possible"

 

Well people will always be able to get guns and kill people. I personally don't think a lot of gun control proposals prevent this from happening.

 

Tell that to all the school kids murdered by guns in England

 

Getting the manufacturer to do this would be almost impossible to do. I'd imagine it being as difficult as dealing with the tobacco execs when mentioning changing ingredients in their cigs.

 

how bout this

would you rather get shot or stabbed? which seems more likely to kill you? hint: its the one that probably wouldnt happen to you accidentally while slicing carrots.

 

Yeah I don't think we disagree on the core, which is that we need better regulations on guns to cut down on gun violence. We just disagree on the extent as well as efficacy of such laws.

 

I don't think anyone would be opposed to an owner putting a tracker on their weapon in order to track it. I think the opposition is to the idea that a government agency would be tracking people, a clear 4th amendment violation.

 

Admittedly I have historically been caught up in a drive by shooting when preparing a light salad

 

Why does the entire US population have to be punished for a small percentage of assholes going nuts and killing people?

By that logic, alcohol should have been made illegal due to all these drunk drivers killing innocent families.

Me and you will not agree on anything relating to this topic, so we should just stop.

 

But then why not have it privatized...really it should be the government mandating manufacturers to track their weapons or face penalty. Require the manufacturer to place the trackers and monitor it.

I understand that this is the exact fear of many gun owners but it would help reduce unnecessary death, it just makes sense.