Gun Culture and Responses to Mass Shootings

[Alexander18]

The problem is guns should never have been made in the first place. Guns are made to kill and nothing else.

 

[Ascended Dialga]

The problem is guns should never have been made in the first place. Guns are made to kill and nothing else.

But the fact is, they already have been made and there's nowhere to go but forward. We just need to figure out which direction is best.

 

[Auraninja]

The problem is guns should never have been made in the first place. Guns are made to kill and nothing else.

Well, you have deer hunting and warfare. This can't be done on a practical sense, and honestly, your opinion is a tad short-sighted.

 

[Bolt the Cat]

We most certainly do need tougher gun legislation, we shouldn't be giving people the right to own a lethal weapon unless they demonstrate the responsibility to not use it on innocent people. This is something that should be common sense. I also agree that assault weapons should be outright banned for civilians, there's nothing that an average joe needs one for.

But yeah, it's pretty clear at this point that nothing's going to get done until we as a society come up with some way to counter the NRA and other special interests. And I don't think "just vote out the people who rejected gun control" is going to be enough, this seems to be more of a systemic issue.

 

[Alexander18]

Well, you have deer hunting and warfare. This can't be done on a practical sense, and honestly, your opinion is a tad short-sighted.

How? If people are going to create weapons then of course they are going to kill with it. Just get rid of all guns and all the other weapons. Problem solved.

 

[chalkus]

How? If people are going to create weapons then of course they are going to kill with it. Just get rid of all guns and all the other weapons. Problem solved.

And how do you propose that happens? Who is going to take away all the guns? And do mean every single gun, even from cops and military?

 

[lemoncatpower]

How? If people are going to create weapons then of course they are going to kill with it. Just get rid of all guns and all the other weapons. Problem solved.

unfortunately that isn't a feasible option that is practical or something that we can all agree on.
While we're not all going to agree on the same thing, that would separate people even more between the two sides.

If they fix the amendment or whatever the constitution of the states has, that would be a start. Isn't it a little outdated?
It doesnt make sense to me that when something, due to laws, ends up with mass murder, though they still have to use exact protocol to challenge the law when obviously it needs fixing.
But somehow it takes all this work and time and money, when really they just need to quickly adapt another countries gun laws. Obviously easier said than done...

Not sure how they haven't been able to challenge the laws though, does the senate or whatever it's called just knock it out every time or something?

 

[Alexander18]

And how do you propose that happens? Who is going to take away all the guns? And do mean every single gun, even from cops and military?

Have each town and city of people hand over guns to the authorities of those cities and towns. The authorities deliver the weapons by vehicle to a place where they are all destroyed.

 

[Mr. Reloaded]

Have each town and city of people hand over guns to the authorities of those cities and towns.

Because this is totally not a ton of work, and won't leave the innocent defenseless.

Hunters are damn sure not about to hand over their shotgun's.

The authorities deliver the weapons by vehicle to a place where they are all destroyed.

And business in the black market starts to boom once again.

Make America great again folks!

 

[Alexander18]

Because this is totally not a ton of work, and won't leave the innocent defenseless.



And business in the black market starts to boom once again.

Make America great again folks!

There can be baseball bats and non-lethal weapons to defend yourself and others with.

 

[Remix2]

Look like now the democratic senate are doing a sit in now.

http://www.rawstory.com/2016/06/hou...-so-you-cant-see-an-anti-gun-violence-sit-in/

It like the democrat just finely grew a spine.

 

[Navarch]

I'm not too political since I'm under 18, can't vote, and don't pay a whole lot of attention to politics, but:

Why don't they just make it so that if you want to get a gun, you have to be tested and get taught a lesson? People would have to test/teach, which would create jobs. It's like driving; if you aren't safe, you don't get your license. We'd hit two birds with one stone: creating jobs, and putting guns in the hands of only trained people.

I do agree about automatic weapons that can kill lots of people very fast. They should only be used if they really have to (for example, I read an article about people in Texas having to use AR-15s to control the wild boar population). Civilians shouldn't be able to buy these willy-nilly.

I'm probably missing something or have no idea what I'm talking about tbh lel.

 

[Sadib]

Those congresspeople against gun control are on the sides of the terrorists. They need to be exected.

 

[Auraninja]

How? If people are going to create weapons then of course they are going to kill with it. Just get rid of all guns and all the other weapons. Problem solved.

There is a difference between saying something will happen, and having something that could actually happen. Most of this debate has been about gun control. It would be unfair to create a cease and desist for anybody that uses a gun for its practical purposes (deer hunters, sporting events, law enforcers, and ones used for emergency purposes). Besides all of that, you can't constitutional propose a law totally abolishing gun control (2nd Amendment, 4th Amendment maybe). On another side, it would be extremely hard to conduct complete nuclear deterrence, which are weapons that should not be allowed to exist.

Have each town and city of people hand over guns to the authorities of those cities and towns. The authorities deliver the weapons by vehicle to a place where they are all destroyed.

That's not something that could actually happen. You could play the scenario in your head without any supernatural explanation, but that doesn't make it possible.

Also, if we threw the guns out, would Kang and Kodos come after us?

 

[Navin]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MCI4bUk4vuM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RolEI5n4Jxs

The fact that this isn't common sense just shows how embedded the NRA and pro-gun culture has become in the U.S.

 

[chalkus]

A couple of things to keep in mind.

The right to bare arms is guaranteed in the constitution. The government is making secret lists without due process and are placing the names of American citizens on it, citizens who then lose that particular right. You also are not notified when your name is added to those lists. In order to have your name removed from those lists, you will have to take the federal government to court, out of your own pocket. Also keep in mind the incredibly high success rate of the government, and the struggle a low income citizen would face in even mounting a challenge, and we have a recipe for the curtailing of people's rights by an overbearing government.

Now, you may trust the current admin to only put bad actors on those lists, but what about a future one. What if we do have a president Trump and he decides to add political opponents and detractors to one of those secret lists? What if he or someone like him were to use those lists to curtail other rights, like the first amendment, which Trump has alluded to in the past with his threats against the media. These are things we need to talk about, and things I would have expected the Dems to tackle, instead of sitting on the floor of the House patting themselves on the back.

The day you surrender one constitutional right arbitrarily without due process, then you put them all at risk.

 

[lemoncatpower]

A couple of things to keep in mind.

The right to bare arms is guaranteed in the constitution. The government is making secret lists without due process and are placing the names of American citizens on it, citizens who then lose that particular right. You also are not notified when your name is added to those lists. In order to have your name removed from those lists, you will have to take the federal government to court, out of your own pocket. Also keep in mind the incredibly high success rate of the government, and the struggle a low income citizen would face in even mounting a challenge, and we have a recipe for the curtailing of people's rights by an overbearing government.

Now, you may trust the current admin to only put bad actors on those lists, but what about a future one. What if we do have a president Trump and he decides to add political opponents and detractors to one of those secret lists? What if he or someone like him were to use those lists to curtail other rights, like the first amendment, which Trump has alluded to in the past with his threats against the media. These are things we need to talk about, and things I would have expected the Dems to tackle, instead of sitting on the floor of the House patting themselves on the back.

The day you surrender one constitutional right arbitrarily without due process, then you put them all at risk.

that's why they need to have a big sit down and rewrite the constitution now that the laws and rights of people are completely different. I think it's just old people and stubborness and the rednecks. The constitution is broken and out-dated and it's probably one of the stupidest things any non-american has heard of.

 

[bobjr]

Plus it's not like we've already changed it before. Remember the prohibition era?

 

[lemoncatpower]

http://www.metronews.ca/news/world/2016/06/26/police-5-stabbed-outside-california-capitol-building.html

this isn't about a shooting as much as it is stabbing, but at least the right people are being stabbed here

jk I don't advocate for violence of any kind and it is sad that leftist radicals ended up doing that, but seriously the TWP shouldn't exist at all. Does that not count as a group that spouts hate? Isn't that against the law!?

 

[Baba Yaga]

A couple of things to keep in mind.

The right to bare arms is guaranteed in the constitution. The government is making secret lists without due process and are placing the names of American citizens on it, citizens who then lose that particular right. You also are not notified when your name is added to those lists. In order to have your name removed from those lists, you will have to take the federal government to court, out of your own pocket. Also keep in mind the incredibly high success rate of the government, and the struggle a low income citizen would face in even mounting a challenge, and we have a recipe for the curtailing of people's rights by an overbearing government.

Now, you may trust the current admin to only put bad actors on those lists, but what about a future one. What if we do have a president Trump and he decides to add political opponents and detractors to one of those secret lists? What if he or someone like him were to use those lists to curtail other rights, like the first amendment, which Trump has alluded to in the past with his threats against the media. These are things we need to talk about, and things I would have expected the Dems to tackle, instead of sitting on the floor of the House patting themselves on the back.

The day you surrender one constitutional right arbitrarily without due process, then you put them all at risk.

Why is your concern so selective? No one had any problems with people on the terrorist watchlist being denied access to planes, but if you propose that they not have access to firepower either, everyone is suddenly concerned about their constitutional rights.

Shit's rich.