If we pivot back to the threads topic, isn’t this a prime example of why gun control is ineffective?
Weed’s illegal, but you want it. So you get it.
Gun’s illegal, but you want it. So you get it.
Right? Now I can’t buy a gun or “roll a j” because I don’t like to break the law. But, not everyone’s like me.
I did NOT smoke when the punishment for possession was jailtime. When it was downgraded to a jaywalking level misdimeanour, the risk reward shifted a lot.
It’s actually an example of something akin to gun control working lol.
Edit: currently in my county they don’t even arrest you for possession. My brother in law got pulled over with 2 ounces on him and they confiscated it and gave him an 80 dollar ticket
Edit2: having 2 ounces at a time is a fuckin lot for 1 guy
But plenty did, right? Their risk/reward was just different than yours. Plenty of criminals will still get guns because the crime they’re going to commit will carry more punishment than possession (assumingly anyway).
Well, not really. It’s a poor parallel I didn’t want to make for this reason.
Not sure what you mean here. Point is, there never has been this Eden of no restrictions. Going back a good long ways, we’ve had restrictions in the name of public safety. The NFA was another extension of that. So when the libertarians act like a more arduous purchasing process for firearms is tantamount to turning our backs on what America is about - as opposed to simply saying, hey, that’s bad policy, it’s not going to work as intended - history says otherwise.
Did it? Did the GG take the position that the machine guns used in WW2 should be freely available under the 2A? If you’ve got a source, let me know.
I’m sure it did, to a certain degree.
So, the existence of duly passed legislation - particularly legislation that sticks around and isn’t repealed for decades - isn’t indicative of public opinion on a topic? Well, that’s convenient. And it’s news to me.
Yeah, when Canada invades, we’re not going to be calling up the guys who own tons of tactical gear and secondary market AR-15s but can’t get up a flight of stairs without passing out. We have a professional military with more lethal weapons. That’s a fantasy being used as a pretext for what really is cosplay.
Those don’t represent public dangers.
I’m not talking about them specifically - I’ve seen that sentiment lots of places.
I’m not - I’ve seen too many “black rifle” guys waxing anxiously about the opportunity to waste some robber with his gleaming new gun. They can hardly contain their excitement at the prospect.
We just went through this, you can’t seem to make up your mind - over time, there have been some level of restrictions as public safety issues arise. No, there hasn’t been unfettered access.
Ok? The fact that you personally do not demonstrates what re: my point? Lots - and lots and lots - of others do.
dude it’s February… we’re like 51 days into this thing.
I was honestly very surprised to see this. Anyway, We’re pretty far off-track at this point, I’ll spare this thread and stop posting for a bit.
For me it was more about the purchase. There’s essentially no risk of smoking at home. It’s the sale that gets you (and people not driving high like schmucks).
I meant more conceptually in controlling the risk reward ratio, but u agree. Not very apples to apples.
Well if I hadn’t switched jobs recently I could dated back to mid 2016. It woulda sounded cooler if I hadn’t needed to pee in a cup
ok ,this actually has relevance:
DEVELOPING: Trump signs memo to Jeff (POS) sessions to ban any device that turns weapons into machine guns.
I think this is just a small move to seem like we’re doing something, kinda like when we bombed the syrian air strip, or dropped the MOAB. It’s not bad, it just lacks substance.
Before 1936 you could buy a BAR or Thompson sub machine gun out of a catalogue delivered right to your door. You could buy fully auto handgun kits as well. There were no mass shootings of civilians by crazies and terrorists back then, because the lone wolf mass shooting wasn’t invented yet.
Now the mobsters certainly got ahold of some crazy stuff. But they bought it directly from crooked cops and military arsenals. Ironically they had money to bribe with because of prohibition.
You could buy a Tommy Gun unfettered for quite some time. 15 or 16 years if I remember correctly. That’s a a decade and a half of American history were access to said firearm was unfettered.
You stated our history is not that of unfettered access, but public safety. There are plenty of examples, this being one of them, of times when access to arms was unfettered for substantial periods of time.
Do you have a source that says they took the opposite stance? Many of them owned Tommy Guns and 1911s, weapons of war. I would say that’s evidence many took the position I stated.
We both know plenty of legislation passes without the public even being aware of it let alone it being indicative of public opinion. Half the voting populace doesn’t even vote.
Sure, it’s not like there isn’t a precedent of civilians fighting to free this country…
Really, fast cars and fast food aren’t public dangers? Might want to re-check the body count.
I was referring to arms as they relate to the American way of life and, ya, it’s pretty connected. When you think of the expansion west what image comes to mind:
How about the revolution:
All privately owned my friend.
Over time, there have also been ruling that solidify the place of firearms in our laws and culture. Like Heller. Or the expiration of the Federal Assault Weapons ban.
Maybe on the interwebz.
Not sure if I’ve ever seen anyone ask you this. If I may interject for a moment to ask a question.
Very clearly, nearly everyone agrees a line should be drawn somewhere regarding the public’s access to arms. If you were king of the world, where would you personally draw the line?
I don’t even know why the greatest generation is being used as the gold standard anyway. Or why we’re even trying to compare their way of life in their prime to now.
It’s nonsensical at best.
I would confiscate and destroy any and all firearms. I certainly wouldn’t allow others a/the power to oppose my divine authority.
In all seriousness and I’ve said this during these debates before, we need to re-write the 2A. It’s that simple. Too bad it will never happen.
I would not allow private ownership of nuclear and biological weapons. That seems pretty obvious.
Honestly, that might be it. I don’t see a need to ban artillery or aircraft or tanks. There aren’t a whole lot of people with the money or knowledge to build a F/A-18… so it seems like a moot point to me.
As far as individual arms are concerned, I donno. I would probably allow everything but require you join a state militia and require monthly or annual militia training.
Probably mandate 4 years of service in a branch of the military or maybe the peace corps.
In other words, require you actually do things for the country as one of her citizens. If you don’t, that’s your choice, but no gunz (maybe just not auto & semi-auto “weapons of war”) for you.
Probably add a waiver system for those with bone spurs etc…
*That’s just off the top of my head…
Ok, so now that lone wolf mass shooting has now been invented, it makes sense to craft policy to deal this newly invented problem, right?
Yes, but who’s getting killed now? Native Americans?
Yes, because when you rebelled because the Brits were all for fiscal responsibility “pay taxes to make up for at least a fraction of the costs we incurred defending you from the French” and “do not encroach on lands of Native allies we have treaties with” there was a clear physical threat of violence just over the Appalachians.
The “well armed militia” is constantly vigilant against whom? The French-Canadians?
Wowsers. That’s a terrifying sounding world.
Thanks for sharing either way though
I didn’t say it was a good thing. I’m simply pointing out firearms are very connected to the US of A from 1776 - now. Even prior to that.
How about a billion Chinese or the Russian? They seem to love us.
I don’t think it sounds that bad. You don’t have to do any of it under your royal grace.
A world where the rich kids of Instagram are flying f35s to school and school shooters are using the grenades they bought at Costco sounds purty scary.
Yes, because you were a frontier society at the time - this subsequently acquired mythological proportions in popular culture.
So with MAD, nuclear weapons, drones and all that, the Red Army which has under 800k servicemen total will invade the mainland USA Red Dawn style?
Do you seriously believe that there is a plausible (or even implausible) scenario where the US mainland is under threat from a hostile foreign power, requiring citizens to grab their guns when the church bells start ringing and assemble in town squares to repel the invaders?
