And here's the next candidate for being branded a stupid evil lurral because, dunno, the ponies said so in a nice song.
Gun Control
- Thread starter Throatpunch
- Start date
Cliffy McEdgeface
bitch I will cut you
Important part bolded. This is punitive to pretty much legal gun owners/buyers and legal gun owners/buyers only. This becomes an argument of gaining MAYBE a slight amount of security at the expense of a fair degree of liberty (not to mention all the arguments that could be made about classism being a factor here!) and to me that's a terrible trade. So, so much more could be gained by making mental health a focus and it feels like the American Left basically doesn't want to go there for REASONS. (To be fair I'm pretty sure the American Right only pays the concept lipservice when they bring it up, and more's the pity - the mentally infirm have basically no friends here)
Jogre
So Old I'm Losing Radiation Signs
See, a policy that works in western European nations may not necessarily work as well in the US, given that as a country, it is far more radically different from what we know than we give it credit for.
Countries like Germany and the UK are very heavily urbanised. It's incredibly easily to phase out gun culture from urbanised nations because people living in said nations can always rely on the police being 15 minutes or so away, or on security camera footage of assailants.
The US is not like that at all. It's two very urbanised coasts separated by two thousand miles worth of rural states. For people not living on said coasts gun ownership isn't just for shits and giggles, it's a fact of life. If your nearest police station is two towns over, and you live in an area where times are tough and people are having to turn to burglaries to get by, gun ownership may be necessary for your safety. Of course, there is something uncomfortable with people using firearms as a first line of defence, and preferably escalation should be avoided at all costs, but unfortunately it's just a fact of life that in rural places there are really sometimes no other ways for people to feel safe.
You can only really phase out gun culture in nations where guns aren't that necessary to begin with. Brute forcing gun culture out of a nation so rural that gun ownership is a necessity won't work.
TheHouseAlwaysWins
Look, Ma! Two Heads!
I live in a rural area and there are police stations everywhere the majority of the US isn't like the wild west except for alaska or something.
Cliffy McEdgeface
bitch I will cut you
I lived in rural areas in SoCal for most of my life and a lot of the time the only police we had on call were ~5-10min away at BEST SPEED (in one location they had difficulty even FINDING my place due to country backroads being what they are - and it wasn't too far from a prison). A lot, and I mean a LOT can go south in 5-10 minutes. Not to mention some of the local wildlife wasn't very friendly.
Yeah, but if you're living in a small rural town how likely is it that you will encounter a criminal with the intention to kill you? Again, I am just saying, because I support your right to own a fire arm if you feel safer because of it. I understand the US has a different gun culture and I am not arguing to change everything.
Let's not get in to this Left vs. Right thingy again. For example, the US has barely any 'left'. But that's a topic for a different conversation. It's pretty clear that neither Dems nor Republicans really achieved much here.
But I don't understand why it's such a big problem to have a few more back ground checks and looking at loop holes and issues when it comes to weapons and their purchase, making sure that gun owners store them safely and that maybe people with certain conditions are not capable of owning them, or at the very least shouldn't own them till maybe someone like a psychatrist says they can. I mean it even seems that even Trump agreed to that at some point.
I still don't know to this day what got in to Trump on that day ...
Part of the problem here is, that gun related mass shootings are often treated like a tragic natural disaster like something where you simply can't do anything about, something that's tragic, but you have to get simply used to it, like a hurricane. And I simply think that's the wrong attitude. I am not saying there is a perfect solution or that I would know it. But I am certain that something can be done to improve the situation, without 'banning' all weapons, or even weapons like the AR15 while also making sure, that the wrong people don't get them so easily into their hands.
Again, the idea is not prevent all and every crime, but if you could eventually stop 5 mass shootings per year, with a good policy, it might be worth to give it a try.
To make it short, that it's to privatized and focused on profit. The big difference is that american health care is to much about the free market. There are a lot of situations where competition, enterprise and free markets are wonderfull, like the industry or if we talk about production, engineering, computing etc. Basically everything where you have some sort of product. But when it comes to something like health care though? Or things like infrastructure, police, firefighters or education? So basically all the stuff that's of interest for public health and security. Well than, not so much. That doesn't mean everything has to be controlled or overtaken by the government, but the government or public should have a lot more leverage compared to corporations and the pharmaceutical industry. Compared to the nations in the European Union for example, the US has one of the most expensive health care systems, because private business like hospitals and insurance companies are simply to powerfull so they can negotiate prizes in their favour rather than for the patients. The effects of it this neo-liberal approach can be even seen in Germany, since more than 30% of the hospitals have been privatized over the last 30 years and it had 2 very severe effects. Lower quality and increased prices which all comes down to the ethics the instituations use as general guiding principle. If profit and the interests for the share holders is the one and only goal, obviously what's best for the patients becomes a second priority, because the hospitals get the requirement to increased the interest for each year. And this is often achieved trough very questionable methods, selling patients expensive procedures like surgeries, sending them home as early as possible, cutting on staff and equipment, lowering standards and so on. Now, in theory on a free market you would look around and try to find the best option for the lowest price, just like if you would go to a grocery store and compare different goods. But you can't do that while you're in a concussion from a car accident or getting hospitalized with a severe depression, a stab wound or what ever else you have that requires a hospital. The patient is simply not in the position to negotiate succesfully for his interests, because no one is negotiating prices when you have a knive sticking out of your belly or if you need a life saving procedure and medication.
Let's not get in to this Left vs. Right thingy again. For example, the US has barely any 'left'. But that's a topic for a different conversation. It's pretty clear that neither Dems nor Republicans really achieved much here.
But I don't understand why it's such a big problem to have a few more back ground checks and looking at loop holes and issues when it comes to weapons and their purchase, making sure that gun owners store them safely and that maybe people with certain conditions are not capable of owning them, or at the very least shouldn't own them till maybe someone like a psychatrist says they can. I mean it even seems that even Trump agreed to that at some point.
I still don't know to this day what got in to Trump on that day ...
I am not saying every law and every regulation can be applied directly to the US. But, a lot would be already gained if there was at least a nation wide standard on some regulations. In some cases, there are vast differences between the states, which makes it very difficult to tackle any issue here. For example, the fact alone that private citizens are allowed to sell a weapon, should be very restricted if not outright banned. If citizens want to get weapons due to protect themselfs, so be it I have absolutely no problem with that. But in my opinion, weapons should be seen a slightly bit more like a privilage then only a right. I am also certain that exceptions can and should be made due to the differences in the US. I have no problem with farmers or even a teenager owning and operating a rifle here. I believe that some states could loosen their regulations on guns, while a few others should tighten them, to gain somewhat of a standard here, the middle ground if you so will.
Part of the problem here is, that gun related mass shootings are often treated like a tragic natural disaster like something where you simply can't do anything about, something that's tragic, but you have to get simply used to it, like a hurricane. And I simply think that's the wrong attitude. I am not saying there is a perfect solution or that I would know it. But I am certain that something can be done to improve the situation, without 'banning' all weapons, or even weapons like the AR15 while also making sure, that the wrong people don't get them so easily into their hands.
Again, the idea is not prevent all and every crime, but if you could eventually stop 5 mass shootings per year, with a good policy, it might be worth to give it a try.
Last edited:
T
TorontoReign
Guest
Nationwide standard on gun control? IN THE UNITED STATES?! WITHOUT SNEAKING IT THROUGH CONGRESS?! MWHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH *COUGH COUGH FALLS OVER DEAD*
We can't even agree on how early to kill babies in every state.
We can't even agree on how early to kill babies in every state.
Gun control works in Germany and msot countries in Europe because historically there have always been fewer guns around, they were never that ubiquitous as they were and are in the US. Europe has not been a lawless frontier for about 2000 years or so, and most countries in it have been monarchies for the longest time. And monarchies don't like armed populaces for the most part. Switzerland is a the big exception here, but they're different in a lot of ways.
European style gun control just doesn't work in the US. There are already too many guns around to prevent a big black market. The only solution would be a MASSIVE tyranny, ironically giving people all the more reason to own firearms.
European style gun control just doesn't work in the US. There are already too many guns around to prevent a big black market. The only solution would be a MASSIVE tyranny, ironically giving people all the more reason to own firearms.
No, I don't think you need a tyranny. You just have to make sure that gun culture becomes less dominant and that people see less need to own a firearm. It is anyway interesting when you consider that one huge argument by the gun lobby is, you need it to defend your self, but statistics show that crimes particularly very violent crimes are droping. Yet, the safer things become, the more do you see extreme gun fanatics argue for owning guns to feel 'protected'. And here again, cultures and societies can change over time. Not every weapon has to be given up and that shouldn't even be the target. The NRA for example is already under some preasure and we see some grassroots movements forming and
*Shrugs* Societies and laws can change. There are many historical examples for it. The last 250 years have been a steady progress for inclusion, equality and improvements for minorities gaining equal rights. Who would have thought 100 years ago that homosexuals would not only get equal rights, but also legal marriage, nationwide. Things that seem impossible now, might become normal in 50 years.
Last edited:
D
Deleted member 93956
Guest
I'm not sure how it's come across that we'd want to archieve an immediate, total, "fix". Change is made bit by bit for good or bad, after all, isn't that what some here fear of happening?
SilverStarApple/Epsilon7
Still Mildly Glowing
I hope you realize this is a literal tone argument.
It's also bullshit. Bitter dumbasses are lying and insulting me to defend a hateful ideology that wants to make my country so shitty, San Streetshitsco will look like a paradise. Am I not allowed to call these people what they are?
Am I not allowed to post videos that clear up the "Misconceptions" Liberals rely on the common man having, because their shitty lie-filled emotion-based crybully arguments cannot sway genuinely educated people?
If there was ever a point in this thread where anyone had the right to say "U mad lol", it was when this one liar was repeating the same debunked lie in this thread for what has to be at least the fourth time (I only entered this thread around the 100 mark, he's probably repeated it more before I got here) and I used a Pewdiepie impression while debunking him, to keep things feeling fresh.
But hey, at least you aren't the guy STILL trying to attack the idea of criticizing Liberals. That guy is also STILL butthurt that his "Lol u like ponies" shit backfired on him. Turns out ponies are too smart for communism, that's something he wasn't expecting.
D
Deleted member 93956
Guest
So you're under what most of the thread has come back to in that hierarchy, then.
*snap* Yep, that's going into my cringe compilation.
*snap* Yep, that's going into my cringe compilation.
SilverStarApple/Epsilon7
Still Mildly Glowing
Despite how often you've repeated this bullshit and despite how often it's been debunked, I am going to continue to assume the best in you and I am going to continue to believe I can cure you of this willful ignorance.
1. You hate "Gun Culture" because you've been brainwashed to consider every aspect of american "Cheesburger freedom guns" culture evil. You hate it and you're wrong to do so. Your reasons for choosing to believe this bullshit are dumb.
2. Making it harder for honest human beings to own guns will not hurt criminals. It will not make it harder for criminals to get guns. It will make it easier for criminals to kill and exploit the civilians you and your brothers spitefully disarmed to feel like a hero. I will say this a thousand times more if that's what it takes for you to listen for once. If Gun Control worked, we would never see shootings in Gun-Free Zones like schools.
3. There are no grassroots anti-NRA movements, just like there are no grassroots anti-American movements. How can you even use the term Grassroots to describe corrupt organizations funded by George Soros and his ilk? Oh, right, I forgot, this is just an Appeal To Popularity and it isn't meant to be honest.
4. "Oh, not every weapon needs to be given up! Just all the ones with good stocks and good bullet buttons and good silencers and good flash hiders and good barrels and good ammunition! You don't need an Assault Weapon!" you cry. God, it's hard to pretend you're arguing in good faith right now. Humans have been compromising with gun-fearing animals for decades now, and you're never satisfied. You always want to move the goalpost a little bit more, because you want the removal of the human right to defend yourself. A few people in the thread accidentally let slip that they want to live in a disarmed society because they don't want to be expected to have to step up and save the day and help fight criminals. That's pretty pathetic, and I probably should have said so at the time. What, did they not realize that in an armed society, trying to rob a McDonalds or commit a terrorist attack will go about as well for the criminal as trying to rob a gun store? Are they still stuck in the "Disarmed prey animal" mindset, terrified that some day, they might have to step up where nobody else can? Have they no trust in their fellow man and his ability to own guns and shoot criminals by his side? God, you could write a comedy skit about this irrational multi-layered fear-driven propaganda.
5. You are wrong. You are either aware of this and maliciously repeating lies, or you are a good-intentioned egotistical pawn for malicious people, and you refuse to fact-check what you hear from sources you like. You are choosing to lie and defend a cancerously toxic ideology that wants to restrict my fundamental human rights. Please understand this, you're arguing that we should give up our freedom and ability to defend ourselves, because you believed Maxine Walters when she said "When the shooter realizes he's the only armed one around, he will give up his gun and turn himself in". That's stupid and wrong. In the age of information, ignorance like yours is a choice. I will call you a baby, on the internet. Feel free to cry foul over that.
6. The rate of Violent crimes are dropping in civilized areas. The rate of anti-white racially-motivated hate crimes by liberals are rising in liberal areas. Still, you need to own a gun if you want to reliably stop any murder or rape you might come across, and you need a gun if you want to protect yourself and others from criminals. But liberals lie because they're liberals. Now that they're finally admitting the rate of violent crimes and school shootings and mass shootings in general is dropping, they're trying to claim this is an argument against owning a gun, because they will say anything and perform any level of mental gymnastics to help erode away human rights on whatever levels they can.
7. Liberal attacks on "Gun Culture" is why the Gay Club Massacre in Pulse, Orlando happened. Liberals want more Gay Club Massacres, so they can blame guns and the NRA for the consequences of their own actions. None of those gay men thought they would ever need to own a gun or defend themselves from evil. Most of those gay men likely believed Christianity was the evil anti-gay religion. And then one of the Muslims Liberals love to defend and cover for decided he had some free time, so he shot the place up. One muslim with one gun slaughtered a whole gay club, like they were animals. I hope you enjoy having their blood on their hands, because if even one gay man carried a gun, he could have shot the terrorist. And if more than one gay man in that gay nightclub carried, they would have had better chances at beating the terrorist and stopping him from killing everyone.
I don't resent you for believing in a failed ideology that's holding back humanity's ability to defend itself from evil. I don't resent you for believing in an ideology that claims there's no such thing as evil unless it's white, straight, and American. I don't resent you for believing in a failed ideology that imports Muslims and defends terrorists and shouts down any ex-muslim activist who wants to reform the religion into a less violent blood-soaked religion of evil and child rape.
I don't resent you for being the bad guy here.
Because I still believe in you, and I still believe you can shake off your chains, grow a brain, heart, and spine, and #WalkAway from the terrorism ideology.
Jogre
So Old I'm Losing Radiation Signs
Made this my new sig
SilverStarApple/Epsilon7
Still Mildly Glowing
Well that isn't an argument, but if you want context, here you go. Mind putting a full stop at the end of that? Sentences shouldn't just hang unfinished like that
Is this guy still REEEEing about how I'm an evil lurral who wants to ban guns and who makes fun of him for being a brony?
Awesome.
Awesome.
Jogre
So Old I'm Losing Radiation Signs
Sick of Commies masquerading as "Conservatives" pushing to arm the proletariat. They may pretend their attitudes about guns are about liberty, but it's really just age old propaganda repackaged:
The sooner we accept that the Republican Party has been infiltrated by Marxists the better.
The sooner we accept that the Republican Party has been infiltrated by Marxists the better.
Turns out Marx was the original "GUMMINT REEEE" guy.
Makes sense, being a jobless bum who did nothing but rant in text-form.
Makes sense, being a jobless bum who did nothing but rant in text-form.
D
Deleted member 93956
Guest
Bro, nobody's even bothering checking them out. Might as well post the lyrics, or something.
You just imagine being this fucking delusional.
Lasting baggage consequence of foreign intervention in the Middle East, demonization of a denographic? Poor following and lack of meaningful push against the unregulated weapon surplus? Low police response time? Nah, it's some fags not bringing weapons to somewhere they're supposed to just hang out, unwind and have fun without care, and not only that, but the Liberals are behind it!!