Gun control

Convo

Convo

Ahn'Qiraj Raider
8,761
613
Flank_sl said:
In terms of killings, I do not think removing guns will do much harm. I know many Americans use the argument that guns allow them to defend themselves, but I do not believe that. Coming from a society where very few people have guns, and those are all just single shot rifles, I do not need a gun to be safe. If civilians do not have guns, then most criminals will not have guns either. This is because criminals do not want to risk 10 years in prison for armed robbery to commit a crime that would only get them 2 months if they are caught unarmed. Since they know that their civilian targets will be unarmed, they do not carry guns.

Removing guns would have a positive impact in reducing killings. It wont stop them all, as some crazy people will still find ways to kill people, but removal of guns will almost certainly help. I do not see how anyone can argue against this.

I am happy to believe that the right to bear arms trumps the reduction of murder, but when someone says that gun control will no prevent murder I just think they are using bullshit justifications because they do not want to admit that they would rather keep their guns than prevent people being murdered.
Click to expand...
I'm certainly not arguing banning guns would not cut down on murders. I think they would for sure. I just think in this case people were going to die no matter what. It takes a fucked up person to take an innocent persons life and in the US it's becoming more common. I don't think that's gun.. I think it's much deeper. Fuck if I know what it is.
 
Famm

Famm

Ahn'Qiraj Raider
11,041
794
It would take probably a couple generations or more but if there was a concerted effort we could get most of the handguns and automatic rifles off the streets. Would need some really draconian mandatory sentencing for gun crime and some really aggressive urban gun turn in programs. Basically increasing the versions that we already have and add laws restricting sale and ownership. Maybe grandfather in certain people who own them already but they are to be handed over when they die or want to get rid of them, and require regular inspections and re certification and psych testing to continue ownership.

But its a totally moot point. We are going to have to see A FUCKTON more random gun violence like this before the tide of public opinion in the U.S. would ever turn to such an extreme. Right now gun control is a totally hopeless proposition. I don't get why the NRA types are so rabidly paranoid and defensive. I understand being politically active, but you guys have won and continue to rule the conversation. Your guns are in zero danger. We have a president who is openly supportive of gay rights, pushed for universal health care and is seen as a far left liberal socialist by half the nation. He's already won re-election yet evenhewon't touch this issue with a ten foot pole.

Its a dead issue. You'd have better luck outlawing abortion than guns at this point.
 
hodj

hodj

Vox Populi Jihadi
<Silver Donator>
31,672
18,377
The technology already exists to literally fabricate guns through 3-d printing techniques. Once 3-d printers are widespread and blueprints are up on the internet, gun control measures will cease to function worldwide.

That's why the company which patented the technology is trying to keep it under wraps, canceling one firms' license because they were trying to print manufacture guns, but the fact is that the technology exists already, so the cat is basically out of the bag.

I'm not saying if its a good or bad thing, I don't know. I'm very torn on the gun issue, especially in light of tragedies like yesterday's, but I know if the government can't keep tons of heroin and cocaine out of the country on a daily basis, they're probably going to have a hard time cracking down on the 300 million guns already here.

Shit sucks.

Here's some articles on the 3-d printing technology, dunno how many people are even aware this exists yet

http://www.nbcnews.com/technology/fu...l-woes-6213570

http://bits.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/1...a-gun-at-home/

http://www.extremetech.com/extreme/1...3d-printed-gun
 
N

Numbers_sl

shitlord
4,054
3
Maybe the first step is to get the retards to admit that guns make it much easier for lots of people to be potentially killed. The prevailing idea that violence will happen with or without guns is a misdirection.
 
Janx

Janx

<Silver Donator>
6,344
17,125
Flank_sl said:
I'm British, so I obviously think gun control works. I also think it would be possible to remove the majority of guns from American citizens, but it would take a long time and cost a lot of money. The problem is that the average American has different cultural values to the average Brit. To me, America is a place where people can live with minimal government interference. America is the land of the free. I can see why an American would not want gun control, because you are defined by your rights (to bear arms).

Personally, I would be interested to see what percentage of gun related murders (particularly in schools, malls, cinemas etc) are committed by people over the age of 25. It is a bit of a stretch, because as far as I am aware Americans are able to buy other adult things by the age of 21, but raising the age limit for guns to 25 may help.
Click to expand...
Problem with the CT shooting is, the kid was 20 but it was his parents guns that he used. So raising the age in most cases would not help. Also the Britain vs US debate on gun controls working is skewed due to the fact that there are over 300mil people in the US vs...66.6mil in the UK. Way more chances for teh crazy happening here. Also, I think parenting in the US has gone so far downhill at this point its no wonder young people are doing this crazy shit.
 
K

Kaosu

Bronze Knight of the Realm
232
2
hodj_sl said:
The technology already exists to literally fabricate guns through 3-d printing techniques. Once 3-d printers are widespread and blueprints are up on the internet, gun control measures will cease to function worldwide.

That's why the company which patented the technology is trying to keep it under wraps, canceling one firms' license because they were trying to print manufacture guns, but the fact is that the technology exists already, so the cat is basically out of the bag.

I'm not saying if its a good or bad thing, I don't know. I'm very torn on the gun issue, especially in light of tragedies like yesterday's, but I know if the government can't keep tons of heroin and cocaine out of the country on a daily basis, they're probably going to have a hard time cracking down on the 300 million guns already here.

Shit sucks.

Here's some articles on the 3-d printing technology, dunno how many people are even aware this exists yet

http://www.nbcnews.com/technology/fu...l-woes-6213570

http://bits.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/1...a-gun-at-home/

http://www.extremetech.com/extreme/1...3d-printed-gun
Click to expand...
(Un)fortunately, the material commonly used in 3d printers cannot withstand the repeatedly use of most powder ammo. Not only that, but 3d printing only allows for 'certain' components to be made, not all can be. Until 3d printers can mold components under different tensile strengths and ultimately, materials, its a novelty technology that acts as a stepping stone into something more.

And there is real world evidence to show just that.
rrr_img_3065.jpg


rrr_img_3065.jpg


rrr_img_3065.jpg
 
hodj

hodj

Vox Populi Jihadi
<Silver Donator>
31,672
18,377
Ah I wasn't aware of that, though it makes sense, since the 3-d printing technology currently employs a resin to fabricate objects.

Still pretty crazy possibilities going forward from that technology, not all of them bad. Its like the predecessor to the Star Trek replicators in a way.
 
Gavinmad

Gavinmad

Mr. Poopybutthole
42,662
51,085
kaosu_sl said:
(Un)fortunately, the material commonly used in 3d printers cannot withstand the repeated use of most powder ammo.
Click to expand...
Does it work long enough to fire off a couple magazines? Cause I don't think the concern is people using the technology to craft guns for long term usage.

Anyway, I think if your weapons are used in the commission of a crime, you should be charged as an accessory unless you can prove the person who committed the crime had to take extraordinary measures to gain access to your guns. So yeah, charge this dudes parents as accessories to however the fuck many counts of murder it is and send them to jail for the rest of their lives, and I bet you'll see people starting to keep their shit locked up when they realize that they'll be the ones going to prison for the rest of their lives when their friend/son commits a murder suicide.
 
hodj

hodj

Vox Populi Jihadi
<Silver Donator>
31,672
18,377
He killed his mother and the guns were his mother's, unfortunately, bro.

His father and mother were divorced and his father lived across town. The mother bought the weapons legally.

The shooter, Adam Lanza, apparently woke up yesterday morning, took his mothers .223 rifle, and shot her in the face.

Then he drove over to the school where she worked, busted his way in or was let in by the school officials because they knew him, at which point he went on his rampage.
 
Gavinmad

Gavinmad

Mr. Poopybutthole
42,662
51,085
hodj_sl said:
He killed his mother and the guns were his mother's, unfortunately, bro.

His father and mother were divorced and his father lived across town. The mother bought the weapons legally.

The shooter, Adam Lanza, apparently woke up yesterday morning, took his mothers .223 rifle, and shot her in the face.

Then he drove over to the school where she worked, busted his way in or was let in by the school officials because they knew him, at which point he went on his rampage.
Click to expand...
Did the dude live with his mother?

Doesn't change the fact that the Portland mall shooter didn't own the gun he was using. In fact, the only shooting I've heard of in the last few years where the dude owned the guns was that loser at the theater in CO. I'm not saying irresponsible gun ownership is the only problem here, but it's pretty clearly part of the issue in some or most of these incidents.
 
K

Kaosu

Bronze Knight of the Realm
232
2
Gavinrad_sl said:
Does it work long enough to fire off a couple magazines? Cause I don't think the concern is people using the technology to craft guns for long term usage.
Click to expand...
Edit: I looked at the upper and its a AR-5.7, which has much less felt recoil than a .223; about six shots before it cracked and destroyed itself. Also, there are simply some components that would not work in this case. Even if you were able to replicate all the parts, which would require a elasticity (like a trigger spring for example) that is not attributed to the material, the barrel portion of the rifle/handgun would be destroyed after the first or second shot.

Things like the barrel and trigger just (probably) wouldn't work very well.

Its conceivable using small caliber rounds, even if it was possible to make all the components of the material used in 3d printers, would last longer. But I bet not much longer.

tl;dr - After a few shots, the gun would become nonfunctional or too broken to use properly.
 
Janx

Janx

<Silver Donator>
6,344
17,125
hodj_sl said:
He killed his mother and the guns were his mother's, unfortunately, bro.

His father and mother were divorced and his father lived across town. The mother bought the weapons legally.

The shooter, Adam Lanza, apparently woke up yesterday morning, took his mothers .223 rifle, and shot her in the face.

Then he drove over to the school where she worked, busted his way in or was let in by the school officials because they knew him, at which point he went on his rampage.
Click to expand...
I think this reinforces the fact that his mother was an idiot and didn't properly secure her firearms.
 
hodj

hodj

Vox Populi Jihadi
<Silver Donator>
31,672
18,377
Gavinrad_sl said:
Did the dude live with his mother?

Doesn't change the fact that the Portland mall shooter didn't own the gun he was using. In fact, the only shooting I've heard of in the last few years where the dude owned the guns was that loser at the theater in CO. I'm not saying irresponsible gun ownership is the only problem here, but it's pretty clearly part of the issue in some or most of these incidents.
Click to expand...
Apparently he did live with his mother.

But I agree, in other situations such a law meant to punish irresponsible gun ownership could have merit.

It becomes a bit complicated when you start considering how to handle it in the case of someone stealing gun from a home during a B&E type event, though, for various reasons. For instance, if I own my home, and don't happen to have all my guns in a giant steel gun chest that's locked up and someone breaks in when I'm not home and steals my handgun, then I report it to the police, and someone uses the gun in a crime sometime down the road, would I be legally responsible for that? Seems a bit unfair, as I should have the reasonable expectation that my home would not be broken into and my things should be secure from being taken in the first place.

We can't turn innocent victims of theft into complicit murderers to find justice for a tragedy like one of these shootings, in my personal opinion.

But I certainly see merit in the greater point you were making. I just thought it should be pointed out in this one particular case it wouldn't have changed much.

Janx_sl said:
I think this reinforces the fact that his mother was an idiot and didn't properly secure her firearms.
Click to expand...
Good point. She was a single woman, with a 20 year old that apparently had some personality issues (I think he may have been edging into schizophrenia personally, its the perfect age for such an event to occur, 18-26 and tends to occur in that age range for males, and there are stories from the brother and others that he always had a personality disorder, murdering 20 5 year olds screams schizophrenic to me) so maybe she had them because they gave her the perception of protection/security. I dunno, hard to speculate now, and she's dead so I guess we'll never really know. If she had locked them up in a cabinet, the son may have been able to get the keys to the locker, I dunno. Or maybe he knew the combination/could figure it out from knowing his mother. Word is he was quite intelligent.

The town itself though was said to be very secure, with no major crime reported since 2010, so that seems weird, why she felt she needed to own a bushmaster .223 rifle of the type Lee Boyd Malvo and John Muhammed were employing during their shooting spree in the early part of last decade. Those things shoot monster rounds for a civilian weapon.
 
Haus

Haus

<Silver Donator>
11,379
43,083
Famm_sl said:
"Outlaws" aren't going around shooting up schools. They are shooting each other and its generally over drug dealing and addiction. Cling tightly to your catch phrase though, I'm sure it keeps you cozy.
Click to expand...
You know someone who consciously chooses to shoot innocent people, since that it outside the bounds of the law, I think would by definition be an "outlaw".

Of course I live in Texas. Here Gun Control means having good enough grouping that when the cops and coroner show up they don't make fun of you.
 
K

Kaosu

Bronze Knight of the Realm
232
2
hodj_sl said:
The town itself though was said to be very secure, with no major crime reported since 2010, so that seems weird, why she felt she needed to own a bushmaster .223 rifle of the type Lee Boyd Malvo and John Muhammed were employing during their shooting spree in the early part of last decade. Those things shoot monster rounds for a civilian weapon.
Click to expand...
.223 isn't some sort of monster round. If you want, I'll get into it, but lets put that aside for now. In the end, the kid didn't even use the rifle in or around the elementary school. He used handguns, as he left the bushmaster in the vehicle.
 
hodj

hodj

Vox Populi Jihadi
<Silver Donator>
31,672
18,377
kaosu_sl said:
.223 isn't some sort of monster round. If you want, I'll get into it, but lets put that aside for now. In the end, the kid didn't even use the rifle in or around the elementary school. He used handguns, as he left the bushmaster in the vehicle.
Click to expand...
Sorry I just mean in relation to like a 9 millimeter, the rounds are pretty large. Like the intent of that weapon is more along hunting game lines than self defense.

I had read that they recovered the rifle at the school, so assumed he was using it in the shooting there. My mistake.
 
Gavinmad

Gavinmad

Mr. Poopybutthole
42,662
51,085
hodj_sl said:
Sorry I just mean in relation to like a 9 millimeter, the rounds are pretty large. Like the intent of that weapon is more along hunting game lines than self defense.

I had read that they recovered the rifle at the school, so assumed he was using it in the shooting there. My mistake.
Click to expand...
.223 rounds are 5.56mm. The 9mm round is shorter and wider than a 5.56, although obviously the rifle round has a much larger powder charge. I have absolutely no idea why you feel the need to mention that the DC sniper team also used a bushmaster, because it has absolutely no fucking bearing on anything. The 5.56mm rifle round is not some sort of monster round, it's just about the smallest rifle round in common usage.
 
F

Flank_sl

shitlord
499
0
To me, the size of the round is almost irrelevant. The important thing is how many rounds can be fired before you need to reload? How long does reloading take? These are the things that actually affect how many people a nutjob can kill on his spree.
 
Gavinmad

Gavinmad

Mr. Poopybutthole
42,662
51,085
Flank_sl said:
To me, the size of the round is almost irrelevant. The important thing is how many rounds can be fired before you need to reload? How long does reloading take? These are the things that actually affect how many people a nutjob can kill on his spree.
Click to expand...
The size of the round is irrelevant to you because you don't know anything about firearms and bullet wounds. Semi-automatic pistols can be reloaded about as fast as you see in action movies. Lets double or triple that to compensate for the fact that not everybody is a combat hardened movie protagonist, and you still have at most a ~10 second reload time. The dude was carrying at least two pistols, if they were both ~15 round magazines, he may never have had to reload.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.