If you're seeing this topic then another mass shooting hap…

On May 19 2018 10:33 superstartran wrote:




Are you saying that 176 of the 193 current Democrat seats doesn't show that there is a strong push from the liberal left to ban assault weapons? Because the crux of the issue here is that the NRA is able to swing lots of moderate voters in their favor because of the fact that they are able to EASILY prove that the liberal left does have an agenda. That bill alone proves it.

On May 19 2018 10:58 Plansix wrote:

This I agree with. But this started with me refuting the claim that there is national push for an assault rifle ban. There is not.

On May 19 2018 11:01 Kyadytim wrote:

To quote you, Bull. Fucking. Shit. The NRA swings no moderate voters. The NRA has a huge amount of sway with the small fraction of the US electorate that regularly vote in Republican primaries, and they leverage that force Republican congresspeople to suck up to the NRA.

On May 19 2018 10:23 Blazinghand wrote:


I am pro-gun-control and I find that in practice these "assault weapon" bans are pretty darn useless. By banning ergonomic features instead of writing good gun control laws, we've spent a ton of political capital and will here in California without actually getting at the issue. Most gun crime is done with handguns, not long guns; most gun deaths are suicides, and most gun homicides are done with illegal guns that left the system somehow. Better registration, mental health evaluation requirements for gun ownership, gun buybacks to get illegal guns off the street, etc would all be way more effective at reducing gun deaths than banning front-grips on long guns. Sadly, few people are educated on the pro-gun-control side about which measures would be most effective and the actual statistics of gun violence, and few gun owners and pro-gun-ownership-people are inclined to help out in drafting legislation like this. As a result, when we do get political victories, they're spent on useless laws that don't get at the core of illegal guns, handguns that fell out of the system, suicidal people who own guns, etc. Very frustrating. I don't have high hopes of this changing; if in 2020 we get a Democrat in the presidency again and pass a new gun control bill, it'll probably do something dumb like ban bayonet lugs and ergonomic stocks like all the "assault weapon" bans do without appreciably reducing gun deaths, because this is what people demand even though it's useless.

This is what happened in California, where we control everything, and it's pretty darned annoying because we SHOULD be able to pass an actual gun law that's useful, instead we ban things that LOOK scary and people are still dying!

Sigh.

On May 19 2018 11:02 superstartran wrote:




I'm really too lazy currently to actually delve into all the sources and look at all the polls, but a basic google search pretty much pulls up this.


http://www.businessinsider.com/assault-weapons-ban-poll-gun-reform-2018-2



Along with the assault weapons ban bill with a sponsored 176 Democrats, I'm pretty sure you really can't say there is no 'national push for an assault rifle ban' because that's pretty much categorically false.

On May 19 2018 00:56 nothingmuch wrote:


No dude, you just get a (heavily armed) fireman in each school/public building that constantly checks everyone for fire alarm pulling capabilities/flammable material and shoots them if necessary. For freedom.+ Show Spoiler +

User was temp banned for this post.

On May 19 2018 09:33 KwarK wrote:
Given how ineffective the airport security theatre is I don't see why we need to roll the same thing out across the nation's schools. It'd make more sense to treat the school shootings as a kind of "freedom tithe", a price we pay for the right to have guns in a society. Just accept that the price of guns is school shootings and move on imo.

On May 19 2018 12:26 RaiZ wrote:

This post made me laugh. I learned about mass shooting just a few minutes ago, a few days after watching dear white people on netflix, and now this. What does it mean to you ? That I'm being too old / cynical / whatever you can think of OR that your country is a BIG F@#$ING JOKE ?

Man. USA will never cease to amaze me.

And now we're arguing again about law and sh.t and democrats and liberals. It's a never-ending cycle.

You know what I think about this now ? It went to a point where a couldn't careless anymore. My sympathies go for the victims. But really, you know what would've been better ? That I'd not have said it. GL with that, you're in deep shit.

On May 19 2018 08:41 Archeon wrote:

What do you expect? It's a complicated problem and all the possible partial solutions are too expensive for how rarely this really happens. More teachers for more time/student, psychologists at schools, better gun controls, no-reporting-policies, all of that costs money.

Alternatively the politicians hold some speeches, proclaim absurd "hardliner"-ideas to gather some conservative voters, the media races for the fastest coverage while shitting on everyone's emotions and the schools continue their high pressure low care model because that's inexpensive and produces efficient cogwheels for the economy, so the economy is happy and so are the parents once the child found a job. So everyone with influence gets what they wish for, which means that this will just continue for the next 100 years.

On May 19 2018 13:03 Aveng3r wrote:

I sense that I might not be understanding your position clearly, so allow to me ask a clarifying question here: Do you propose anything at all? Like what is your solution here?

On May 19 2018 13:50 KwarK wrote:

I think you understand, I propose doing nothing. You either have guns + school shootings or you have no school shootings, but also no guns. I don't think throwing money at the problem is going to make it possible for a society to have guns but no school shootings. The price of allowing people to have cars is vehicular terrorism but we pay it happily enough because what are we going to do, ban cars? Why should this be different? The gun supporters should come out and say that school shootings are a price they're willing to pay, rather than pretending that there is a third way.

On May 19 2018 11:29 Plansix wrote:

Again, this bill is as serious as repealing the income tax. Claiming the existence of a sponsored bill that has zero chance of a floor vote means anything shows a basic misunderstanding of how laws are passed in congress. This bill is just piece of paper with some names on it.

On May 19 2018 23:28 mierin wrote:
Maybe if these politicians' children start getting shot up at their private academies, outside money might stop mattering as much. As it stands it's almost not even worth debating because nothing meaningful is going to get done.

On May 19 2018 23:28 mierin wrote:
As it stands it's almost not even worth debating because nothing meaningful is going to get done.

On May 19 2018 23:47 evilfatsh1t wrote:
i used to think this thread had a purpose but now its fairly obvious that this thread goes through a routine that is pretty much identical every single time. and those who dont want to take part in the neverending cycle of gun control debate no longer post anymore because mass shootings have occurred too many times at this point for us to even be surprised. how sad...
well actually there was another school shooting that i think happened the day after? santa fe so... thats new i guess. consecutive school shootings happening now.