Gun control proponents, what do you ACTUALLY hope to accomplish? (regime, independence)

[NY_refugee87]

Originally Posted by rigby06

That will go over most peoples heads, since they still think that a AR-15 is an Assault Rifle, instead of the true select fire rifles that were Outlawed in 1986 via the Hughes amendment.

I keep forgetting it's 2019. We can change the definitions of words as we see fit... how silly of me...
Up is now down. Down is now up...

[NY_refugee87]

Since the recurring arguments and buzzwords are being regurgitated from msm talking points...

Assault rifles. If you're confusing AR for Assault rifle? You're regurgitating talking points and buzz words.

Also see the chart below for Rifles involved in homicide.


Rifles used in homicide accounted for
2013-285
2014-258
2015-258
2016-378
2017-403
Deaths.

Knives?
2013-1,490
2014-1,595
2015-1,589
2016-1,632
2017-1,591
Ban knives?
Universal background checks for silverware/cutlery purchases?

Hands fists feet?
2013-687
2014-682
2015-659
2016-669
2017-696
Ban fists feet and hands?
Universal background checks for hands/fists, feet?


Hammers clubs blunt force objects?
2013-428
2014-446
2015-450
2016-479
2017-467
Ban hammers and anything that can be used as a blunt force object?
Universal background checks for anything that can be used as a blunt force object?

I get it... you watch the news, read the articles... they use colorful intimidating language to captivate you, to misguide you into believing there's an issue that does not exist.

You see...
There's a problem. That problem is not the inanimate object, the firearm.
As a matter of fact, if you were genuine in being anti gun, you would focus on the sheer numbers. You'd want pistols banned. Not rifles...

The problem is a very insignificant minority of this nation who are compelled by motive incentive and intent to kill/maim others.

Democrat? Liberal? Republican? Conservative?
Not a single politician of any flavor will do anything to address motive incentive and intent.
I've brought proposals to both my congressman and sheriff. They won't go for them.
It doesn't involve expanding government giving you the misguided public, a false sense of security.
It doesn't cost tax payers a dime.
Yet... whether it's a school shooting. A shooting in a house of worship. A shooting in gang territory. A random act of violence is carried out by an individual.

If you want to be intellectually disingenuous you focus on the implement they use.

If you want to do something that will deter, prevent, and stop the BS listen closely.

We the people of the United States of America have a right to keep and bear arms. Period.
You don't want one? That's fine. However, you do not have a say in how others choose to defend themselves, their property, their family, their community.
I do however suggest you change this degenerate attitude of gunz bad! And focus on the individuals that commit the murders... see we have the same issue, with the same people.

Where we differ is how to address it and how to stop it.

You foolishly turn to the inanimate object. The weapon used. Incapable of thought, incapable of action.
What it is with modern liberals, cosmopolitan America, suburban America that I can't understand for the life of me. Why on earth would you be so ignorant to individuals carrying out the crimes they do, yet, conflate millions of others with the heinous?
I get it, I guess you think the weapons are doing it... but they're not...

Your arbitrary "gun laws" like NYs safe act, turned many NY gun owners into felons over night.
Many fled that state when they learned their rights had been extinguished. Many fled MA NJ and CT when they passed their restrictive gun laws.
There's a saying among us gun owners to others in ban/restricted states.
"Move to a free state and help solidify it" yet... like clock work... follow to free states and push to erode the constitutionally protected civil liberty to keep and bear arms...
I don't get it...

Explain the logic of surrendering the rights of millions.
Justify and define universal background checks.
Because I've yet to hear a definition just "universal background checks" regurgitated.

I can explain how to stop, how to prevent, and how to end the nonsense.
I can't understand it for you. That's for you to figure out.

Just ask me how. And any politician that picks the ball up and runs with it... will get the votes too.

[RageX]

The government has an active interest in disarming Americans.

This so that whatever population liquidation measures they intend to, and will likely eventually impose, can be done more easily.

[Patsfan20]

Originally Posted by Roboteer

So you actually think that making laws that only disarm the law-abiding, while leaving criminals' guns in their hands, will somehow make us all safer?

Can you possibly be that stupid?

Yes, yes they can be.

[Tha_Dude]

Originally Posted by RageX

The government has an active interest in disarming Americans.

This so that whatever population liquidation measures they intend to, and will likely eventually impose, can be done more easily.

It goes even deeper than that. Some of our foes also have a big interest in seeing our population disarmed should a situation come up where they can invade our country.

You think China and Russia aren't counting the days until we get disarmed as a populace? Their primary goals would be to control us for their own benefit, not to destroy us with bombs. If they destroy us with bombs it hurts them, if they conquer us while keeping our population in slavery then they thrive on our production.


It's much harder to invade a well armed populace than a disarmed populace. Anyone who would dare disagree with this must have missed their history lessons about the Vietnam war.

[Robert_J]

Originally Posted by ambient

Simple: to raise the bar on who can acquire a firearm and reduce the rate of inflow of new weapons, especially ones with extremely high / rapid capacity. Obviously this won't help immediately given we've already F'ed up and made it a free for all with assault rifles up until now, but it would be a good start. Universal background checks should be obvious, not controversial.

Conservatives like to throw up straw man arguments about how it won't be 100% effective, but that's not the point. Long term it could be materially effective, and it's already been proven in many other countries.

We should also raise the bar on who can post things on the internet. Limit one amendment on the Bill of Rights, limit them all.


What is "extremely high / rapid capacity"? I'm assuming high capacity magazines. Since ARs have shipped with 30 round mags for decades, most consider that "standard capacity". You can get 40 and 60 round magazines, 100 round drum magazines and the rare but fun, belt fed models.


I'm again going to assume by "assault rifle" you mean AR-15s and their variants. Actually, it hasn't been a free for all. Since they have been for sale to the public in the 1960s, they have been under the same regulations as any other rifle. It was the so-called ban that brought them into the spotlight and made them more popular. Ban them again and see what happens.


How will you enforce universal background checks without registration? If UBC went into effect tomorrow, I could sell any of my existing guns in a face to face transaction and no one would know. Even if investigated, I could say I transferred them earlier.

[Floorist]

Originally Posted by Robert_J

We should also raise the bar on who can post things on the internet. Limit one amendment on the Bill of Rights, limit them all.


What is "extremely high / rapid capacity"? I'm assuming high capacity magazines. Since ARs have shipped with 30 round mags for decades, most consider that "standard capacity". You can get 40 and 60 round magazines, 100 round drum magazines and the rare but fun, belt fed models.


I'm again going to assume by "assault rifle" you mean AR-15s and their variants. Actually, it hasn't been a free for all. Since they have been for sale to the public in the 1960s, they have been under the same regulations as any other rifle. It was the so-called ban that brought them into the spotlight and made them more popular. Ban them again and see what happens.


How will you enforce universal background checks without registration? If UBC went into effect tomorrow, I could sell any of my existing guns in a face to face transaction and no one would know. Even if investigated, I could say I transferred them earlier.

There are several states, like mine, where gun registration is illegal under state law.

[Quick Enough]

Originally Posted by Floorist

Most gun control nuts, are that stupid.

"Most gun control nuts, are that stupid"

Than GOD MOST gun owners are NOT "gun nuts".

Unlike most ANTI gun people.

[1AngryTaxPayer]

Originally Posted by TwoByFour

I think a culture that is based on guns and being armed is totally crazy but I am not in favor of doing away with the 2nd Amendment. But I think that states should have a lot of leeway in their gun laws so that those of us who prefer a culture that does not, for instance, allow concealed carry for anyone who can fog a mirror, can live in states that favor that.

CCW laws aren't going to stop criminals from doing it.

[what'd i miss]

NRA s dead in the water.
Gun Control rules the day.