EPTAnother Teenage Shooting/Suicide - Page 24
| Forum Index > General Forum |
|
Mayson
312 Posts
| ||
|
ParasitJonte
Sweden1768 Posts
On December 08 2007 17:48 Mayson wrote: That's exactly why the problem isn't, never was, and never will be firearms. The problem is still the behavior of an individual, not the tool used to commit criminal behavior. Stop your trolling. The availability of weapons prompted this shooting. End of story. | ||
Jibba
United States22883 Posts
| ||
|
Mayson
312 Posts
On December 08 2007 17:54 ParasitJonte wrote: If the availability of firearms "prompted" the shooting, as you put it, then, but that logic, we'd all be mass murderers.Stop your trolling. The availability of weapons prompted this shooting. End of story. Why do you ignore the behavior of the individual responsible for said shooting, only to claim it's due to some other factor? On December 08 2007 18:05 Jibba wrote: I respect your differences, and thank you. As much as I disagree with Mayson, it's pretty hypocritical to call him a troll and respond with 1 sentence, when he's put up page after page of reasonable, supported argument.  | ||
|
DrainX
Sweden3187 Posts
No one is saying an outright ban on guns in the US would work. Like someone said, a good transition phase might be allowing one hard-to-conceal rifle made for self defense per household that was illegal to bring outside the household. When you are walking towards a long term goal then short term sacrifices should be expected. If you cant even take one step then im not supriced people get frustrated when they argue with you. I wouldnt call you a troll though, your worldview is just very different from mine and you have attitude. | ||
|
Mayson
312 Posts
Most people don't understand the flow of firearms with regards to both legal and illegal buyers and sellers. Criminals get firearms from: - Legally-licensed, but corrupt FFLs - Straw purchases - Theft - Illegal "street vendors" How does gun control directly attack any of these three sources of firearms for criminals? It doesn't. Gun control aims to pass laws against those who, by definition, do not follow laws. Instead of implementing gun control so that the flow of firearms intended for the legal market isn't diverted to the illegal markets, allow federal, state, and local law enforcement to actively investigate and enforce the reasonable gun laws already in place. For example, the ATF should actively and aggressively investigate any report of stolen or missing firearms from FFLs. Weeding out the "rotten apples" amongst FFLs would show a reduced quantity of firearms intended for legal sale from ending up in the possession of criminals. Straw purchases are a big problem. Waiting periods were introduced to affect this, but there's no evidence that they work. Straw purchases is the way minors get alcohol. A minor has someone who can legally obtain alcohol buy it for them, and then immediately turn around and sell the alcohol to the minor. I think that there should be severe consequences for being convicted as a "straw purchaser." Aiding and abetting criminal activity, anyone? Theft has always been a problem, and not just with firearms. I think increasing the severity of the punishment for the illegal possession of a firearm is appropriate. It is a big problem that FFLs are sometime selling firearms illegally directly to firearms traffickers, but the solution is not to ban the sale of firearms completely. The solution is to stop the illegal sale of firearms between FFLs and firearms traffickers. This would severely limit the portion of firearms intended for the legal market to the illegal market. Edit: To imagine this visually, make a flow chart: Flow Chart of Firearms 1. Manufacturer 2. FFLs 3a. Law-abiding citizens -Legal sale from FFLs - Legal resale from other law-abiding citizen 3b. Criminals - Illegal transaction from FFLs - Straw purchase (legal sale to purchaser from FFLs, illegal resale) - Theft (from law-abiding citizens, FFLs, or other criminals) - Illegal transaction with street vendor Gun control would stop the flow of firearms before they reach the FFLs, and as a result, law-abiding citizens would be deprived of the means with which to defend themselves, their loved ones, and their property, as allowed by applicable law. Sane, logical laws, and law enforcement would stop the flow of firearms illegally at "3b," keeping firearms out of the hands of criminals to the greatest extent of the law and law enforcement manpower, while not depriving law-abiding citizens of their right to self-preservation. | ||
|
DrainX
Sweden3187 Posts
On December 08 2007 19:04 Mayson wrote: That's funny, and hypocritical of you. I went 18 pages before finally giving in and returning an insult. For the duration of those 18 pages, I was constantly bombarded with insults. Why am I held to a different standard of posting? I might be wrong. Im not going to go back and check who started. Maybe you were just pushed into a corner, I guess it is understandable in that case. I didnt read everthing my peers wrote and I have never insulted anyone on these forums that I can remember. Maybe I took your insult personaly when it wasnt aimed at me... Oh well good bye thread. I wont bump you again | ||
|
Mayson
312 Posts
I was at least justified in returning the insults. | ||
|
MarklarMarklar
Fiji1823 Posts
The problem is in my opinion the guns combined with the united states system, which sort of doesnt give a shit if there is a large lower class population, from which a large percentage of crime stems from. If you solve the lower class problems you could most likely start to gradually add harsher and harsher gun laws without increasing amount of crime. dont vote republican | ||
|
Skew
United States1019 Posts
That's because the chances that I meet up with a criminal (and criminals are 100x more prepared to fuck you up than any of you are to fuck them up, at least 99.99% of you) are far higher than the chances that I get randomly shot by a teenager, or randomly murdered for some stupid reason, because guns aren't outlawed. In fact, my brother's house (where I'm staying right now, in Phoenix, AZ) has been broken into 3 times. He got a gun for that very reason, but not with the intention to kill anyone, just to have defense in case they tried to get in again while he was in a vulnerable position (he usually sleeps downstairs on the couch after work). Once he got caught off-guard (the second time), but luckily he was able to get out of the house before they met up inside. While I'll gladly dream with the majority of you, I have to live in the real. And unless you can somehow screen stupid people from having children, I don't think a solution exists at this point. | ||
|
iloveHieu
United States1919 Posts
btw only rich white people vote for Republic, I'm a poor Asian dude so Democrat ftw. | ||
|
MarklarMarklar
Fiji1823 Posts
On December 08 2007 19:55 iloveHieu wrote: sources? I know it's "per capita" but did it take into account USA is 7501384532482930 times bigger in area & population than any little Europe country? btw only rich white people vote for Republic, I'm a poor Asian dude so Democrat ftw. per capita takes the populations size into account, its about percentages and just search murders per capita on google, or whatever you want to know, gun murders per capita etc etc | ||
|
Skew
United States1019 Posts
| ||
|
CharlieMurphy
United States22895 Posts
On December 08 2007 19:55 iloveHieu wrote: sources? I know it's "per capita" but did it take into account USA is 7501384532482930 times bigger in area & population than any little Europe country? btw only rich white people vote for Republic, I'm a poor Asian dude so Democrat ftw. Vote Ron Paul | ||
|
MarklarMarklar
Fiji1823 Posts
Don't vote Ron Paul | ||
|
kroko
Finland2136 Posts
| ||
|
distant_voice
Germany2521 Posts
| ||
|
Capt. Moroni
United States533 Posts
Once again, another tragedy shows that gun-free zone = safety for a maniac shooter, who needs not consider if his intended victims are armed as well. | ||
|
Servolisk
United States5241 Posts
On December 08 2007 16:44 HeadBangaa wrote: Servolisk believes 9/11 is a conspiracy. I laugh whenever he points at me and says "boo". Did I ever say I believe 9/11 is a conspiracy? I think I've made clear that I do not. Stop bringing this up in unrelated topics, it's lame. | ||
|
Folca
2235 Posts
On December 08 2007 16:06 Mayson wrote: For the record, I do agree with you. It's really a shame people don't understand simple logic. Take anything. Let's take teddy bears. Flood the market with teddy bears. Everyone buys them; lots of people own them, including criminals. Now, ban them. Citizens don't want to give them up, but they don't want to become a criminal, so they give in. The criminals don't care, haven't cared, and don't give them up. Now the only people with teddy bears are the criminals. Cocaine, heroine, marijuana, etc., are all illegal. Does the status of something being illegal make any difference? No. Why? Something must be enforced for it to have an impact. Oh, and I admit I was wrong in one area. Banning guns does help: ![[image loading]](http://www.snubnose.info/images/AnotherTragicSuccesforGunFreeZones_D175/feelsafe_thumb1.jpg) Too bad it helps the fucking criminals. If you ban guns, you restrict citizens themselves to protect themselves if criminals such as US Terrorists, or even the guy that started the shooting at the mall want to start a shooting, they just need a little money, or even drugs, to get what they want ILLEGALLY its not that hard -.- Obviously for citizens, if you want to be a good person, you dont want to buy guns Illegally just for your protection, might as well get caught by the law | ||
| ||
