• Our software update is now concluded. You will need to reset your password to log in. In order to do this, you will have to click "Log in" in the top right corner and then "Forgot your password?".
  • Welcome to PokéCommunity! Register now and join one of the best fan communities on the 'net to talk Pokémon and more! We are not affiliated with The Pokémon Company or Nintendo.

The 2nd Amendment needs to go

286
Posts
10
Years
But like I said just because some idiots are not playing nicely with there killing weapons, does not mean no one should have them. Next someone will say "knives kill too meny people, we should lose all knives"
I feel like "some idiots not playing nicely" is a dismissive understatement given the amount of mass shootings in the US. If pattern is that they're being abused, then yes, something should definitely be done about it.

And knives a) serve a purpose that isn't killing and b) can't be used to injure 500 people from a balcony. This comparison is so tired.
 

Mr. Showdown

Pokémon professor of the Showdin region
72
Posts
6
Years
I feel like "some idiots not playing nicely" is a dismissive understatement given the amount of mass shootings in the US. If pattern is that they're being abused, then yes, something should definitely be done about it.

And knives a) serve a purpose that isn't killing and b) can't be used to injure 500 people from a balcony. This comparison is so tired.

Look the thing is that we should let anyone have a gun, but we should not take the second amendment. There needs to be a middle ground
 
25,488
Posts
11
Years
Look the thing is that we should let anyone have a gun, but we should not take the second amendment. There needs to be a middle ground

There is.
Stricter gun control and greatly limiting the number and type of firearms available.

We're not saying take all guns away, we're saying be sensible.
 
1,136
Posts
7
Years
BJS and the FBI < regarding gang related violence.

Claims of violence commited by legally obtained weapons i.e. obtaining a weapon through a surrogate is illegal are null and void. If a firearm is purchased with the knowledge to commit harm or given to a felon the sale is illegal and thus the weapon is authorized to be seized by the state. Criminality does not follow the law.

Please note, that the FBI also touches on the issue of gangs obtaining military grade weaponry within the article. Citizens cannot legally obtain military grade weaponry unless otherwise authorized to do so. see: contractor.

What is military grade weaponry? Machine guns, high-grade explosives, armor-piercing rounds and/or shells and/or other items otherwise restricted for sale to the military or police department fields.

Gang activity has increased in California, Illinois and Nevada particularly, according to the aforementioned BJS link. Texas estimates that a whopping 90% of their violent crime comes from criminals.

Arguments against gun bans reducing suicide rates: suicide.org.

Note the United States ranks 43rd, behind countries like France, Germany, Japan, Poland, South Korea, China and Romania. All of which have stricter firearm regulation than the US.

Romania has some of the toughest gun laws in the world. They maintain a higher rate in suicide than the US. Private citizens are typically not allowed to own firearms, unless otherwise authorized by the state.

Romania has a murder rate of 1.5 per 100,000 persons. Australia has 1.2 per 100,000 persons. Kazakstan has 7.8 per 100,000. The US has 4.5 murders per 100,000 persons.

Please prepare a rebuttal. For this criteria, please prepare an argument that utilizes suicide data tables and not tables regarding homicide or tables that include all firearm related deaths, as they would be inaccurate.

Which firearms? Rifles? I have sourced and linked the FBI's database, which is free and accurate, they found that rifles make up roughly 0.03:1 (.03 for every other gun murder according to 2009's data table) of homicides using fire arms here.

As you can see, rifles are negligent in terms of homicide use. Keep in mind, this table is 1:1 and not reduced to fractions nor percentages i.e actual numbers.

If raw data is too advanced, here is an article from the New York Times, regarding the September 13th 1994 Assault Weapons Ban.

For the record, I dislike using articles as sources as they are almost always 3rd party and get their information from elsewhere, in this case, the FBI.

@Greywind: If you have a data table compiled by an official governmental entity regarding mass shootings I would very much like to see it. I have yet to see one that eclipses handgun homicides.

Do note, the FBI finds that roughly 80% all firearm homicides are gang and/or drug related.

Please prepare a proper rebuttal utilizing data from a governmental agency specilized in United States law and criminality. Statistics from other countries regarding firearm homicide and gang activity do not correlate properly and are inaccurate.

Criminal activity is the question here. How to prevent criminals from obtaining firearms illegally?
 
25,488
Posts
11
Years
I'm just to stop you right there, with one point. Including all gun-related deaths, including accidents etc, is not inaccurate. If there were less guns, the number of those deaths would also decrease.
 
1,136
Posts
7
Years
I'm just to stop you right there, with one point. Including all gun-related deaths, including accidents etc, is not inaccurate. If there were less guns, the number of those deaths would also decrease.

So you're just going to ignore the data regarding the 1994 Assault Weapons Ban. You cannot remove illegal firearms from circulation, pie.

You haven't even addressed nor backed up any claim with any data from any source in that statement. Even your post itself is defeated by the previous source I had just sited, the FBI.

Guns aren't going to be magicked away, especially since, according to the FBI, 80% of all firearm homicides are commited by gangland/felons.

Please explain, how will you prevent criminals from obtaining illegal firearms.

Let me be extremely specific since you have yet to answer me at all.

How will you prevent fully automatic and/or military grade weaponry from making their way into the hands of criminals. Do keep in mind that you cannot buy grenades or AP ammunition at your local gun range.

What law would you enact to reduce gun crime, 80% of which is caused by criminals with illegal weapons (machineguns, pie. machineguns)?

I feel that you have no real solution and no real thought as to how the legislation should proceed. The only solution you gave was to penalize law abiding citizens.

Okay. Let's say that all civilian guns are destroyed. Hurrah.

Now, pie. How would you prevent criminals from obtaining illegal weaponry? Machineguns, pie. Machineguns.
 
25,488
Posts
11
Years
Honestly, I freely admit I haven't taken a good look through your sources yet.
I'll do so later and debunk you as per usual.

I just meant to point out that reducing accidental gun deaths isn't exactly a bad idea either.
 
371
Posts
6
Years
  • Age 43
  • Seen Nov 19, 2022
Accidental gun deaths have been trending downward already, This is despite the number of guns being sold going up.

I want to know what the people who wish to take guns away from the law abiding think about the people who use guns for self defense? Should they just give up and let the person attacking them have their way? Gun defense stats could be up to millions a year. Often without a shot fired.
 
322
Posts
12
Years
  • Seen Jun 21, 2018
Accidental gun deaths have been trending downward already, This is despite the number of guns being sold going up.

Do you have any sources for this because this seems wildly unbelievable and also is only part of the issue

I want to know what the people who wish to take guns away from the law abiding think about the people who use guns for self defense? Should they just give up and let the person attacking them have their way? Gun defense stats could be up to millions a year. Often without a shot fired.

Guns overwhelmingly cause more harm than they save, guns barely ever work for self defence and often do nothing more than escalate situations or cause more issues and harm to bystanders

As much as it's a great fantasy to think that you're going to be cornered in a dark alley and then whip out your gun and fill the attacker with led, despite that being kind of morally bad it's also almost certainly not how the situation is going to go. People are not sharpshooters, people are not terminators that can just blow away anything that gets in their path
 
371
Posts
6
Years
  • Age 43
  • Seen Nov 19, 2022
Do you have any sources for this because this seems wildly unbelievable and also is only part of the issue


Data isn't hard to find. Google "accidental gun deaths declining" to see any number of sites discussing it.
I'm too new to post links.
Guns overwhelmingly cause more harm than they save, guns barely ever work for self defence and often do nothing more than escalate situations or cause more issues and harm to bystanders
. Source? If these was the case, wouldn't gun deaths be in the millions per year? Why do the police in the US have guns then?

As much as it's a great fantasy to think that you're going to be cornered in a dark alley and then whip out your gun and fill the attacker with led,
lead not led. People do defend themselves against muggers fairly often.

despite that being kind of morally bad
. How so?

it's also almost certainly not how the situation is going to go. People are not sharpshooters, people are not terminators that can just blow away anything that gets in their path

They don't need to be "sharpshooters" to defend against a mugging.
 
318
Posts
6
Years
Quote: Well, those would have to be taken care of first of course. Naturally it would be a bad idea for your nation to enter a gun free future otherwise.

Seems like most anti-gun politicians don't understand that for some reason. Once we start solving the crime epidemic and reforming the disciplinary system of the police then we can start reducing firearm presence. (Well, except for in bear or rattlesnake country. Still going to need them in those territories.)
No more paid vacations or desk duty for killing unarmed citizens. What kind of punishment is that?

- A poster from Newgrounds
 
371
Posts
6
Years
  • Age 43
  • Seen Nov 19, 2022
"Unarmed citizen" is only valid if the person is (a) completely incapable of killing you with their bare hands and (b) not trying to convince you that they are an armed threat.
 
Last edited:
2
Posts
6
Years
Very few people buy guns legally with criminal intent, most are bought for decent reasons ie hunting, self defense and sometimes just for collecting. Introducing gun control will mostly affect only decent people, it won't affect criminals as much as you'd like to think.
 
318
Posts
6
Years
Very few people buy guns legally with criminal intent, most are bought for decent reasons ie hunting, self defense and sometimes just for collecting. Introducing gun control will mostly affect only decent people, it won't affect criminals as much as you'd like to think.

Sure, it could be possible to have guns for hunting and stuff. But there would indeed be lots of paperwork involved and you would absolutely have to convince the authorities that you're using them for their intended purpose and not for shooting other people. And yes, your government should definitely do all that they can to ensure criminals can't get access to illegal guns.
 
371
Posts
6
Years
  • Age 43
  • Seen Nov 19, 2022
Sure, it could be possible to have guns for hunting and stuff. But there would indeed be lots of paperwork involved and you would absolutely have to convince the authorities that you're using them for their intended purpose and not for shooting other people. And yes, your government should definitely do all that they can to ensure criminals can't get access to illegal guns.

Why more paperwork? How do you convince someone that you won't do something in the future?

Get the govt to enforce the laws already on the books.
 
371
Posts
6
Years
  • Age 43
  • Seen Nov 19, 2022
Just putting this here in case it can contribute to the discussion at hand...

Don't see how. It's just an attempt to rewrite history and blame an object for people's bad behavior while ignoring when the object was used to help people.
 

Nah

15,937
Posts
10
Years
  • Age 31
  • Seen yesterday
Data isn't hard to find. Google "accidental gun deaths declining" to see any number of sites discussing it.
I'm too new to post links.
You should have enough posts now in order to be able to post links, give it a try now.
 
25,488
Posts
11
Years
Very few people buy guns legally with criminal intent, most are bought for decent reasons ie hunting, self defense and sometimes just for collecting. Introducing gun control will mostly affect only decent people, it won't affect criminals as much as you'd like to think.

The majority of guns used in mass shootings (and I think shootings in general) were purchased legally. I've already posted a source explaining this. It's common practice in organised crime for someone to legally purchase a gun and then illegally pass it on to someone else for use (also explained in a source). A lot of the people who go nuts and shoot up a shopping centre are good people up to that point too. Even good people can snap and do terrible things and the Vegas shooting proves that the psych evaluations don't do an accurate enough job of measuring things like that.

Stricter gun control isn't just going to affect decent people who have to criminal intentions and even those decent people can snap and hurt themselves or others. Gun control is absolutely a positive thing.


As for jd, sorry I haven't gotten back to you yet. Your post was really detailed so I want to make sure I do that effort justice when I respond.
 
371
Posts
6
Years
  • Age 43
  • Seen Nov 19, 2022
You should have enough posts now in order to be able to post links, give it a try now.
Links for Accidental gun deaths declining.

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/201...deaths-drop-to-record-levels-report-says.html

There were 489 unintentional firearms-related fatalities during that time period, the lowest total since record-keeping began in 1903, accounting for less than 1 percent of accident deaths. This decrease, which was the largest percentage decline of any category cited in the NSC's report, came in a year that saw record-high firearm sales.

http://www.guns.com/2017/05/17/report-accidental-gun-deaths-hit-all-time-low-in-2015/

Report findings indicate choking deaths occur twice as often as accidental discharges while drowning is six times more likely. The chances of dying during a firearm assault are one in 370, according to the NSC, or three times less likely as dying after a fall.


The majority of guns used in mass shootings (and I think shootings in general) were purchased legally.
Source? Someone committing a straw purchase to get firearms for someone ineligible to buy guns is NOT a legal purchase. Throw them in jail as an accessory.

I've already posted a source explaining this. It's common practice in organised crime for someone to legally purchase a gun and then illegally pass it on to someone else for use (also explained in a source).
I'm not seeing the source?

A lot of the people who go nuts and shoot up a shopping centre are good people up to that point too.
Most people don't just snap and start killing people out of the blow. There are almost always warning signs that people dismiss.

Even good people can snap and do terrible things and the Vegas shooting proves that the psych evaluations don't do an accurate enough job of measuring things like that.
When did the Vegas shooter have a psych exam? Have they determined a cause at this point? He might not have been crazy.

Stricter gun control isn't just going to affect decent people who have to criminal intentions and even those decent people can snap and hurt themselves or others.
So you want to restrict people's freedom based on a "might happen"?

Gun control is absolutely a positive thing.
Up to a point. Background checks are fine. Convincing people to freely train and practice is fine. Past that is debatable.
[/QUOTE]

A lot of gun control measures have simply failed to work, which is why some people now advocate for bans and reasonable restrictions.

Which means I get to provide this link.

https://thelawdogfiles.blogspot.com/2013/01/a-repost.html

Why should I give up my rights in the vain hope that someone else doesn't commit a crime?
 
Back
Top