The Thread Where We Discuss Guns and Gun Control

[Timsup2nothin]

If it makes no difference, then why do so many mass shooters choose guns? Do we see Mass murderers with a closet full of guns that they left at home? Obviously they feel that using a firearm is a superior choice to using a sap in order to get their Mayhem done

Because mass shooters aren't murderers a priori. They are becoming murderers in the act, so they are basically the same as the hothead at the fenderbender in the parking lot. Yes, it would make a huge difference if we could keep guns away from them.

This is the fault in the barrel strokers argument that "these bad things would happen anyway without guns" and "if you ban guns only criminals will have them." Guns empower people who aren't criminals and make them think their fantasies can be made real...whether that fantasy is "showing that disrespectful guy that blamed me for the accident" or "heroically defending my home against the dangerous invader lurking in my bushes" or becoming the notorious mass murderer. So, yes, if we got guns out of peoples' hands less of these bad things would be happening because knives and cars and such just don't provide the fantasy fuel. Meanwhile, it doesn't really matter whether actual criminals have guns, because they have criminal intent to begin with, and that's all it actually takes to be a criminal, be that jaywalker or killer for hire.

 

[Commodore]

Poor Hitler was so misundrstood!

And here I thought we were having an actual discussion. Silly me.

Anyway, just saw a video today that I think sums up quite nicely the stance of 2nd Amendment supporters:

I think this man asks some very good questions that I doubt anyone has a good answer for. When is the government going to start standing up for the majority? Why is it the actions of a criminal get laid at my feet when I've been a law abiding citizen my entire life?

He also brings up a very good point about gun confiscation: How exactly do you plan on doing it? Sure, the law abiding citizen will turn in their guns, but how do you plan on getting them from the criminals that refuse to turn them in? As he states, the police can barely maintain public order as it is, so what are they going to do when street gangs and other organized criminal elements start actively resisting them? What's the plan gun control crowd? What are you gonna do when criminals start killing police by the hundreds and remaining officers walk off the job because they care more about their own lives than your warm and fuzzy about feeling safe? You gonna put the Army on the streets? Sorry, but that's illegal. The military cannot be used for law enforcement purposes.

So again, I ask: What is your plan for getting guns off the streets when you get your laws passed? I have yet to hear a cohesive plan for getting guns out of the hands of criminals. I have yet to hear a cohesive and practical plan to stop the manufacture and distribution of ghost guns either. All I've heard is plans to get guns out of the hands of already law abiding citizens. Sorry, but that doesn't impress me because that's the easy part. When you have a practical plan for getting guns out of the hands of criminals, then we can talk about gun control.

 

[inthesomeday]

He also brings up a very good point about gun confiscation: How exactly do you plan on doing it? Sure, the law abiding citizen will turn in their guns, but how do you plan on getting them from the criminals that refuse to turn them in? As he states, the police can barely maintain public order as it is, so what are they going to do when street gangs and other organized criminal elements start actively resisting them? What's the plan gun control crowd? What are you gonna do when criminals start killing police by the hundreds and remaining officers walk off the job because they care more about their own lives than your warm and fuzzy about feeling safe?

Hm... you make a compelling argument

 

[Timsup2nothin]

So again, I ask: What is your plan for getting guns off the streets when you get your laws passed? I have yet to hear a cohesive plan for getting guns out of the hands of criminals. I have yet to hear a cohesive and practical plan to stop the manufacture and distribution of ghost guns either. All I've heard is plans to get guns out of the hands of already law abiding citizens. Sorry, but that doesn't impress me because that's the easy part. When you have a practical plan for getting guns out of the hands of criminals, then we can talk about gun control.

Here's the flaw in your argument...where do the guns in the hands of criminals come from in the first place? Here's a clue: there is no record of any large scale illegal gun manufacturing operation being shut down in decades. There is no indication that any such operations exist.

So.

Ready for the answer?

EVERY gun in the hands of a criminal was manufactured legally, and sold legally.

Every.

Single.

One.

So, much to the dismay of gun manufacturers, the surest way to cut off the supply of guns to criminals is to stop legally selling them to people who then hand them over to criminals.

 

[stinkubus]

Australia executed a successful buy back program.

 

[Commodore]

Here's the flaw in your argument...where do the guns in the hands of criminals come from in the first place? Here's a clue: there is no record of any large scale illegal gun manufacturing operation being shut down in decades. There is no indication that any such operations exist.

It doesn't have to be a large scale operation. People are getting increasingly easy access to the manufacturing tools necessary to make their own guns. This was made clear by the bust that took place in Canada last year in which a couple were manufacturing their own submachine guns. And according to the police, these weren't cheaply made guns either. They were described as "military quality". Remember, at it's heart, a gun is just pieces of shaped metal and polymers that perform a certain function when assembled. And with increasing automation of manufacturing processes, one doesn't even have to have any experience or training in machining to be able to use the machines necessary to manufacture their own guns. Either program the machine yourself or download gun making code (which are already floating around the internet for download) for the machine you are using, and you got yourself your own personal gun factory. As for ammunition, that's even easier for the average Joe to manufacture on their own than a firearm is.

So what's the plan to stop that? Are you going to make it illegal for someone to purchase CNC machines and 3D printers for personal use? Are you going to say that only licensed machinists can use or own anything related to machining or manufacturing? Are you going to ban the sale of metals and other materials that could possibly be used to manufacture firearms? Face it, ghost guns are becoming a thing. Even law enforcement recognizes the threat, and right now even admit there's not really anything they can do about it. And the technology is only going to get better, cheaper and more accessible as time goes on.

Here's one article about the rise of ghost guns: https://gizmodo.com/its-becoming-frightfully-easy-to-make-untraceable-guns-1819076070

A quick Google search will yield you a bunch of other articles on the matter as well.

Australia executed a successful buy back program.

Again though, that only works for law abiding citizens. That doesn't do anything for getting guns out of the hands of criminals. In fact, given the cultural differences between Australia and the US, implementing a gun buyback would probably temporarily increase crime as criminals will try to steal guns and turn them over in an attempt to make some quick cash with the buyback program. Now that's not to say the authorities would fall for it, but that's not going to stop people from trying.

 

[Timsup2nothin]

So what's the plan to stop that?

You don't need a plan to stop that. Your entire post was nonsensical deflection. The point that matters is that criminals get their guns by converting the grossly overabundant guns held by non-criminals. The "well, if they weren't able to buy them by the millions they could knock them out in their basements one by one like that Canadian couple so no point worrying about them being able to just buy them by the millions" bit is wild, even for you. If a criminal wanted to be in the manufacturing business then they wouldn't be a criminal.

You want to pretend that the issue is "how to deal with the guns criminals have." The issue is that criminals can get guns whenever they want. Unlike the typical barrel stroker criminals don't want to have a piece to fondle, it's just a means to an end. Guns are disposables, to a criminal. That's why criminals chuck guns out car windows, throw them in rivers, bury them in deep holes. No point risking getting caught with one, since I could pick up five more just like it tomorrow.

If you change the fact that criminals can get guns easier than catching fleas you'd be making a huge difference, but to do that you need to cut into the supply, not fantasize about basement gun factories.

 

[Yeekim]

Because mass shooters aren't murderers a priori. They are becoming murderers in the act, so they are basically the same as the hothead at the fenderbender in the parking lot. Yes, it would make a huge difference if we could keep guns away from them.

I've never heard of any mass murderer "just losing it" in the heat of the moment. All cases I've heard of were premeditated, long planned for. A guy wants to kill people he thinks "don't deserve to live". As many as possible. And he wants to feel righteous and powerful as he is doing it. And guns are apparently quite irreplaceable for these purposes.

 

[Arwon]

Yeah tbh mostly when guns are hard to get, many criminals can't or don't bother. There's a cost/benefit calculus there that changes totally when there's no accessible commercial firearm industry operating, and a lot of are quite stupid and desperate. Most opportunists don't want a hefty extra offence, and less easy availability of firearms means more expense and difficulty obtaining them. Anecdotally, even more organised criminals here are often not particularly experienced with firearms and are often lousy with their guns since the only places to practice are gun clubs and require like, licenses (Some of the largescale incidents in Melbourne's spate of gangland shootings mostly had what we might consider to be weirdly low body counts).

 

[Cutlass]

And here I thought we were having an actual discussion. Silly me.

Way to miss the point. Apologizing for the traitors who started the Civil War is no different from apologizing for Hitler, because their share of the blame is in no sense less. It wasn't the Poles or the Jews who started the war, and it wasn't the North that started the war. If you aren't going to put all the blame where it belongs, you deserve a snarky answer, at the least.

 

[El_Machinae]

With regards to the gun supply, I think the trick is to be willing to take time. Ban the sales, except to someone licensed to make the purchase. And then make it illegal for someone who falls below a certain threshold to own the firearm.

Banning the sales stops the flow inward. People who maintain the threshold get to keep their current stock, people who fall below the threshold will lose their access.. Over time, the supply diminishes. Lots of places have successfully transitioned to a safer-gun economy. This will damage some retailers, but that's business. They bet that increasing inventory of an item that the public feared was a good business decision, and were hoping to get a premium. With sales restrictions, their inventory will have to be reduced.

 

[Commodore]

Australia executed a successful buy back program.

Again though, that only works for law abiding citizens. That doesn't do anything for getting guns out of the hands of criminals. In fact, given the cultural differences between Australia and the US, implementing a gun buyback would probably temporarily increase crime as criminals will try to steal guns and turn them over in an attempt to make some quick cash with the buyback program. Now that's not to say the authorities would fall for it, but that's not going to stop people from trying.

but to do that you need to cut into the supply,

And I'm telling you banning guns isn't going to cut the supply. All it's going to to is shut down large factories and put those people out of work. And what do you think those people are going to do with all that gunsmithing knowledge and the easily available technology described above? Not to mention all the other opportunists who will also start manufacturing ghost guns to make a quick buck. I know I would. Right now I'm a law abiding citizen, but ban guns and I'll become a criminal real quick. Not for the money though, I'd do it because I would want to do my part to sabotage gun control efforts and increase gun violence to make the gun control crowd look foolish.

For real world examples of what I'm talking about, just look at Prohibition and the current Drug War. The same logic and arguments you are making are the exact same arguments those who supported Prohibition and who support criminalization of drugs are making. Now look at how widely available alcohol was during Prohibition and look at how widely available illegal drugs are today. That alone should tell you just how flawed your "banning them will cut the supply" argument is.

Way to miss the point. Apologizing for the traitors who started the Civil War is no different from apologizing for Hitler, because their share of the blame is in no sense less. It wasn't the Poles or the Jews who started the war, and it wasn't the North that started the war. If you aren't going to put all the blame where it belongs, you deserve a snarky answer, at the least.

I did that to prove my point. Thanks for helping me.

 

[Arwon]

I've gotta say I don't think I've ever heard the "people will make bootleg guns because they become unemployed" argument against even trying to diminish the proliferation of personal firearms before. That's genuinely hilarious.

As well as being impressively bonkers, it is also not really an argument against gun licencing, registration, curbing the kinds of weapons permitted to personal possession, any of that stuff. Rather it's really an argument against anything that reduces the number of employees and volume of activity in the US firearms manufacture industry, up to and including, say, stopping arms deals with despotic foreign governments. Or like, changes in people's hobby tastes or a bit of a recession. It's probably an argument for Swiss-style compulsory firearms possession just to be safe. After all, we're all apparently hostages to lawless bands of gun factory workers who hold us all hostage in the name of continuing to manufacture firearms!

 

[El_Machinae]

Right now I'm a law abiding citizen, but ban guns and I'll become a criminal real quick. Not for the money though, I'd do it because I would want to do my part to sabotage gun control efforts and increase gun violence to make the gun control crowd look foolish.

If your goal was to behave in ways that increased gun violence, isn't that actually evil?

You have a larger point that the people employed will need help pivoting to new careers. Leftists have known this for years, despite not engaging in the best of solutions. There's also this issue when it comes to the military industrial complex in the States. So many people would become unemployed if the government stopped giving them so much money. And there's not really a system in place to re-task this huge level of knowledge into more productivity elsewhere.

Now, I think that there's a larger issue, because I think that Automation-Induced Unemployment will become a huge thing in our lifetime. Ostensibly, the solution for one is a potential solution for another.

 

[Arwon]

"I will shoot people if I don't get my way" is of course the perfect argument against gun regulation.

 

[stinkubus]

Again though, that only works for law abiding citizens. That doesn't do anything for getting guns out of the hands of criminals. In fact, given the cultural differences between Australia and the US, implementing a gun buyback would probably temporarily increase crime as criminals will try to steal guns and turn them over in an attempt to make some quick cash with the buyback program. Now that's not to say the authorities would fall for it, but that's not going to stop people from trying.

Could you be more specific as to what the cultural differences between the US and Australia are?

 

[rah]

The thought that the majority of people who lose their jobs first choice will be to become a criminal is the most hilarious argument I've ever heard. And followed up with doing so out of petty vindictiveness shows the desperation of the person making the argument.

Up to this point I perceived an actual realistic discussion. But now it's jumped the shark tank.

If I don't get my way, I'll turn into a super villain just to show you.

 

[Commodore]

If your goal was to behave in ways that increased gun violence, isn't that actually evil?

Why should I care? Anti-gun people already think all gun owners are evil just for merely owning a gun so why not embrace it? Stanford Prison Experiment: people will start to act in accordance with how they are treated. Treat me like I'm evil, then I'm going to start being evil.

"I will shoot people if I don't get my way" is of course the perfect argument against gun regulation.

Nah, I won't be shooting anyone. I'm just going to help facilitate those who do want to shoot people though. If I don't get to have my rights, you don't get to have your peaceful society.

The thought that the majority of people who lose their jobs first choice will be to become a criminal is the most hilarious argument I've ever heard.

So I take it you have never heard of moonshiners or drug cartels then? Make guns illegal and the legit gun makers today become the gun cartels of tomorrow.

And followed up with doing so out of petty vindictiveness

So being mad at having one of my rights stripped away is "petty" now?

Up to this point I perceived an actual realistic discussion

Well it's kinda hard to have an actual discussion when I've tried and get no reciprocation from anyone else. Just look at the ghost gun point I made. I linked to an article that describes what I'm talking about and even said that a simple Google search will yield many more results from many more sources that corroborate my argument, and Tim just ignored all that and said "that doesn't exist, that's just a fantasy" because he doesn't want to admit that he was wholly unaware of the ghost gun issue and what that would mean for gun control efforts.

Look through the last few pages or so and you'll see I've made every effort to engage with people respectfully on this issue and despite that, I was still met with insults and mockery.

Could you be more specific as to what the cultural differences between the US and Australia are?

Yes.

 

[hobbsyoyo]

Could you be more specific as to what the cultural differences between the US and Australia are?

I just had a coworker get back from his honeymoon in Australia and he told me on several occasions he had to remind himself he was no longer in the states. He said culturally it was so similar he often forgot.

 

[Arwon]

I can think of a few things: y'all are really relaxed about speeding and drink-driving and everyone is a protestant, even the atheists and non-christians. Also you're super acculturated to capitalism murdering people through lack of healthcare. And everyone seems insecure and stressed, in large part because of the previous thing.