| Off Topic > Off Topic |
| Mass Shooting Megathread | Rancho Tehama, CA | 5 dead, shooter down |
| << < (25/54) > >> |
| Nonnel:
--- Quote from: Red Spy on November 06, 2017, 08:46:25 PM ---it's definitely not as prevalent in christians though --- End quote --- bruh |
| Dreams_Of_Cheese:
--- Quote from: Nonnel on November 07, 2017, 08:34:21 PM ---bruh --- End quote --- i guess it depends on how you interpret "less prevailent." There are a lot of self righteous christians by virtue that there's a lot of them. I dunno. |
| Tayasaurus:
--- Quote from: Headcrab Zombie on November 07, 2017, 07:01:20 PM ---Speaking of which, has anyone every looked into the specific legislation some states have passed against "assault weapons"? The only difference between a legal gun and an illegal "assault weapon" could be something like the addition of an adjustable stock. Now, can anyone who is advocating the banning of "assault weapons" explain to me how an adjustable stock makes a weapon more dangerous? It becomes even sillier when you release it works in reverse: that you can make an otherwise illegal gun suddenly become legal, simply by removing such harmless features. --- End quote --- The idea is to choke gun ownership slowly by introducing "minor" laws, from barrel length to magazine capacity, to whatever the hell you want to name. Slippery slopes are often thought of as "fast" but reality is it can be slow. A legislator who wants something removed from society wouldn't just go for a cold turkey ban. Its easier to add little nuances and grey areas everywhere to discourage peoples interests and hobbies into said thing, for fear of doing something illegal. Like a net more or less. I do beleive we will eventually turn into a society where (Look at the UK) even knife ownership is under extreme scrutiny. Most people would just wave their hand and be like "Bah, would never happen." and then next thing you know, you're going to jail for looking threatening with a butter knife in your hand. |
| Red Spy:
--- Quote from: Nonnel on November 07, 2017, 08:34:21 PM ---bruh --- End quote --- burh |
| Headcrab Zombie:
--- Quote from: RedGajin on November 07, 2017, 08:28:07 PM ---well yeah chicago has a gang problem, but wouldn't you consider guns to be a huge contributor to that problem as a whole? yeah theres other issues like stuffty schooling, horrible housing problems, etc. guns are just another factor, and this applies to cities outside of chicago as well. getting rid of guns wouldnt remove the problem tomorrow obviously, but the deathrate would no doubt go down, and itd be harder for gangs to operate overall. you dont think any sort of additional laws should be passed at all in indiana to help stop this? why? whats the downside? do those benefits outweigh helping to deter 4000+ gun-related incidents per year (using only chicago as an example)? is regulating these weapon sales too much government interference? again, i dont think something like this specific situation is a catch-all solution to everything, but it helps, and benfits the general public. --- End quote --- It's already illegal for people like felons to own firearms, and there's a federal mandate on dealers to run background checks before all sales. And I fully support that. Could more control be beneficial? Maybe. If you have any specific ideas on what kind of legislation would help, I'm open to listening to ideas, but I can't address specific downsides if there's no specific proposal But the problem is that all the recent legislation I've heard wouldn't actually make a difference, it just sounds nice to people who don't know guns. Take, for example, the call to ban bumpfire stocks after the Vegas shooting. It sounded reasonable at first, even to me. But then I did more research, and I realized a major flaw with that: you don't need a bumpfire stock in order to bumpfire. You don't need any sort of special equipment or modification. You can bumpfire with the belt loop on your pants. And thus, banning bumpfire stocks does nothing --- Quote from: RedGajin on November 07, 2017, 08:28:07 PM ---do those benefits outweigh helping to deter 4000+ gun-related incidents per year? --- End quote --- I don't like this argument because it reduces my side of the issue to "people dying is fine as long as I keep muh freedoms" when that's really not true Hell, I've never even owned a gun. I want the problems fixed, but we're blaming guns for an underlying societal issue instead of addressing the root problem. And when we do ban things, we ban things that don't make a difference, like bumpfire stocks or pistol grips |
| Navigation |
| Message Index |
| Next page |
| Previous page |