Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

Jeepdog539 t1_j8jqjwu wrote

Reply to comment by WellSeasonedUsername in Sandy Hook Survivor Survives Second Mass Shooting by midmodmad

And people don't see that as a problem. By all means lets make new laws rather than enforcing the ones that are already on the books. I can only imagine the field day that our idiot senators are going to have with this.

26

WellSeasonedUsername t1_j8jrkxn wrote

Most people don’t understand the concept that a criminal will not obey any additional laws if he isn’t already obeying the existing laws. And laws are pointless if they aren’t enforced. Both of these can be true.

14

EarthExile t1_j8nvcyr wrote

So the only real solution, as has always been obvious, is to collect and destroy guns on a massive scale

−7

WellSeasonedUsername t1_j8ogzzj wrote

Who’s gonna collect them? Destroy them? (Because I know it wont be YOU lolololol) If it’s the military or police, wouldn’t that make us a fascist state?

6

EarthExile t1_j8ohj1w wrote

Fascism is much more complex and specific than that, but yeah it would definitely require a repeal or reinterpretation of the Second Amendment to ever solve American gun violence. As long as we imagine "a well regulated militia" to really mean "any swinging dick who may desire to inflict high tech violence" we'll never be able to improve the situation.

−10

WellSeasonedUsername t1_j8ohu0b wrote

So police and military should have all the guns? Did you forget what happened in 2020? There’s 450 million guns in circulation and less than 200 shootings per year. That’s hardly the issue.

If you want to disarm people; you should do it. Don’t send police after people, be the example. Start with gangs and criminals first

9

EarthExile t1_j8ojkm3 wrote

200 shootings? Cops alone kill a thousand or so people a year in America, that number is ridiculously low

−7

WellSeasonedUsername t1_j8oye4r wrote

So you want cops to be the only ones with guns when they confiscate guns from civilians? Sorry just trying to understand your logic..

3

EarthExile t1_j8oyp6s wrote

I don't think most cops should carry guns either. Plenty of civilized countries manage that way. Just imagine a world where cops aren't prepared to instantly kill people because they don't have to assume everyone's armed to instantly kill them first.

−2

WellSeasonedUsername t1_j8ozgb4 wrote

You’re describing a utopia. Those don’t exist. Gangs will still have their guns, so will cops. So again I’ll ask, what is your logic? Disarming law abiding citizens won’t solve the police killing civilians issue OR the gang violence issue. If other countries have “solved” this issue, why do they still have murders ? Rapes? Crime ?

Edit more importantly how are YOU going to disarm cops?

5

EarthExile t1_j8ozu2j wrote

It does not take utopian ideals to attempt to solve problems. Just the will to try.

https://worldpopulationreview.com/country-rankings/gun-deaths-by-country

−1

WellSeasonedUsername t1_j8ozy6p wrote

Ok but you still haven’t answered how YOU are going to disarm civilians ? Are you going to personally disarm the police once civilians are disarmed?

Gun ownership is banned in Brazil and Venezuela. How are their gun crimes so high? Could it be gangs and cartels?

2

EarthExile t1_j8pb5xo wrote

You hone in on one of the few countries with significant gun violence like ours, as if the existence of other violent countries proves America can't achieve something. To do this, you look past most of a planet where the problem is much less severe. Did you realize you were doing that?

Do you think there are not gangs and cartels and lunatics in these places?

1

WellSeasonedUsername t1_j8pd6qf wrote

So when are you disarming the cops?

You know the Nazis took all the guns away right? Right..??

2

EarthExile t1_j8ptj1x wrote

No they didn't. The Wiemar Republic had stricter gun control laws. When the Nazis took over, they loosened the regulations for Party members. They only disarmed the specific groups they hated.

It helps to be familiar with history before you get all shitty and sarcastic about it. A cursory search reveals that you're talking out your ass, which means you put even less effort than that cursory search into justifying your belief. Or you looked up Nazi gun control, saw that what you believe isn't true, and just lied to me, hoping I wouldn't know or check.

Does it matter what's true? When I show you a map that shows a hundred countries without our gun violence problem, does it really make sense to keep acting like solutions are impossible?

Do you feel you're being honest?

0

WellSeasonedUsername t1_j8q1y6s wrote

Who does the police hate? You said police are racist and willing to kill anyone without reason. Yet you support police being the only ones with the guns.

Even Marxists believe in the human right of self defense. What are you?

When are you gonna come take my guns?

2

EarthExile t1_j8qszss wrote

You're now telling me I said things I haven't said. This is all in writing. It's all still there. You can't just lie about absolutely everything, people are going to notice.

1

WellSeasonedUsername t1_j8r9nfs wrote

When are you coming for my guns?

1

EarthExile t1_j8raiz8 wrote

Right, so we've established that your arguments are worthless, you lie constantly, and you won't engage when called on those things. What you're left with is an implicit threat of violence. Cool. And people wonder why so many Americans shoot people.

1

WellSeasonedUsername t1_j8rpp30 wrote

When are you coming for my guns? You want citizens disarmed, you should be the one to disarm them.

Instead you’ll just hide behind the police lol

You can’t bitch and whine about police violence and then say they should be the only ones with guns.

1

9millidood t1_j8opogp wrote

Criminals will still find ways to smuggle firearms in so that wouldn’t do anything except keep only CRIMINALS armed. I don’t think that’s what you want. You can’t group armed law abiding citizens who are not harming innocent people in the same group as deranged mass shooters who are clearly criminals.

1

SkitariiCowboy t1_j8pxyrt wrote

Officers, non compliant citizens, and innocent bystanders will die if this happens.

What is the maximum death toll you would be comfortable with to achieve this goal?

1

EarthExile t1_j8pyguq wrote

Five and a half billion people, but we'll have to do it with rocks and kitchen implements

1

SkitariiCowboy t1_j8q06hh wrote

Ah so you don’t actually care about reducing deaths, got it.

1

Nyrfan2017 t1_j8jsct6 wrote

Just curious I don’t know this trying to learn like when he was arrested and prohibited from having guns are all the guns he owned logged in with his lis so they should be able to go get them and know what he has?

7

WellSeasonedUsername t1_j8ju68l wrote

He would’ve been prohibited from purchasing firearms from any store, since they’d run background checks and fingerprints. Whatever guns he had prior to the 2019 incidents, he would’ve likely have had to surrendered them.

11

Nyrfan2017 t1_j8kaiio wrote

But what I’m trying to get at is do they know what he has like so he breaks law needs to surrender them but owns 5 guns turns in 2 do the record keep track of that ?

5

WonderChopstix t1_j8lh64d wrote

Every state is different . In CT you are supposed to register your guns if you live here. For other states they don't care. Purchase records are kept but no obligation to register your gun with the state.

5

snackdrag t1_j8n5nwj wrote

There's no CT gun registry or registry requirement. There are background checks for any purchase, and a permit needed to carry or purchase ammo.

1

buried_lede t1_j8lcnkw wrote

The millions of asses in this country have stockpiled even more millions of guns and they leak onto the street. The assault weapons ban helped while it was in force and it should be passed again.

Tired of so many obsessed gun owners.

−4

ShamusTheClown t1_j8mjyym wrote

'Assault weapons' do not make up a significant portion of crime. Less than 5% of firearm homicides, in fact i think its closer to 1% last time i checked.

The thing that worked, here in the state of connecticut, was creating a permit process with an educational requirement, and tying all firearm and ammunition sales to a permit/certificate. You know, a vetting process.

I personally find this whole discussion exhausting, because CT already fixed our gun problem 10 years ago. We haven't had another tragedy since then.

Its other states with loose laws having these tragedies, and they will continue until they get their shit together. We already got our shit together.

3

buried_lede t1_j8nj0x6 wrote

Fine, whatever works.

Murders and mass shootings aren’t the same, but I’m for whatever works. If Connecticut’s law is a success I hope it spreads. I am just so sick of these gun obsessed activists and their promotion of extremely libertine gun laws.

Some states still don’t even have background checks at gun shows, is that still the case? They’re assholes and they’re wrecking the country.

−1

AGK47_Returns t1_j8oo76o wrote

>Some states still don’t even have background checks at gun shows

As much as the media loves to spout out "gun show loophole", the gun show part is more or less irrelevant; It's "private seller vs FFL".

A private sale, in a majority of states, doesn't require a background check. If you want to buy from an FFL, however, you need to go through a background check, and that's federal law. The latter applies even if you are at a gun show, meaning that anyone legally in the business of selling guns has to background check you even if you're a friend or next door neighbor.

And technically private sellers aren't supposed to be selling guns for business/profit, though the interpretation of that is up for debate; rather, they can downsize their collection.

2

ShamusTheClown t1_j8oz4qi wrote

>Fine, whatever works.

Great, then drop the 'Assault Weapons ban' rhetoric, because that did not work, and would not be effective today.

Heres a video about an actually viable gun control strategy, based on actual indicators of who the 'Bad Guys' with a gun are.

You may notice that CT implemented points 1 & 2 to some extent in their Sandy Hook reforms.

1

buried_lede t1_j8lc4od wrote

The assault weapons ban helped ( and no I am not going to debate what an assault weapon is)

It helped, and then it was repealed

−4

[deleted] t1_j8ljrfk wrote

[deleted]

9

buried_lede t1_j8lm5dg wrote

Bullshit

−10

[deleted] t1_j8lo20g wrote

[deleted]

6

AGK47_Returns t1_j8oogd6 wrote

It always is.

"But but killings went down while it was in force!"

Yeah, and they had already been on a downward trend while there is also no evidence to show that it specifically correlates to the banning of any models or features.

2

WellSeasonedUsername t1_j8le69j wrote

Data? Statistics? Columbine happened during the assault weapons ban of 94.. Chicago still had a very high murder rate (still does)

2

buried_lede t1_j8lga4y wrote

Yeah, there is a lot of data and statistics. Go to the advocacy groups and see if they post it, or do a search on the DOJ site or Bureau of Justice Statistics

−2

WellSeasonedUsername t1_j8lh5b2 wrote

Sure. Head on over to r/dgu and read up on how many times an “assault weapon” is used by law abiding citizens against home intruders or robberies or in instances of self defense.

The problem with the “advocacy groups” you’re mentioning is they are heavily antigun and are quite biased. DOJ and BOJ are saying baseball bats, hammers, knives and then handguns are the leading weapons used in assaults or murders. Hardly any data on assault weapons. And according to the CDC more than 60% of gun related deaths are suicides. How does an assault weapon ban help in these cases?

2

buried_lede t1_j8lhn7f wrote

Oh F off, tutoring me on BJS and DOJ’s opinions. The stats are there and you’re full of it

1

WellSeasonedUsername t1_j8liekw wrote

firearms section 77.2% of mass shootings done with handguns, 22.8% with assault rifles

page 3

More than half of gun owners in California die by suicide

more than half of gun deaths are by suicide source: CDC

The original assault weapon ban didn’t even lower violence rates source

3

buried_lede t1_j8ljiaq wrote

Semi automatic weapons and large magazines. Studies of mass shootings found an impact, but existing weapons in the category were grandfathered in and there were other loopholes, then it sunset after only 10 years. We need to pass it again with stricter provisions and enforcement.

I’m tired of the idiots constantly insisting that gun control doesn’t get guns off the streets. Every country that has done it says otherwise and it’s obvious that it would. Will some guns still float around? yeah, big difference though.

2

WellSeasonedUsername t1_j8ljy2u wrote

Thanks for not taking a single look at any of the links I provided and instead going back in circles.

There’s over 500 million guns in circulation in the United States. Legally registered. If we counted all of the “illegal” guns, being sold to gangs and criminals, there’s probably close to double that number.

If America were to ban guns and get rid of 500 million of them. There would still be hundreds of millions of guns in the hands of gangs and criminals and psychopaths. Violence would increase especially in cities.

In 2021 there were 42,000 gun deaths and 117 of them were mass shootings and 29,000 were suicides. That means there’s almost 13,000 MURDERS. Murders. In cities, likely to gang violence.

The “every country has done it” rhetoric is getting old. Move there then? Lol

2

buried_lede t1_j8lmwk0 wrote

Fuck yourself, really. You guys don’t care about life. You literally get on your soapbox on every post about victims. Gun posts aren’t enough, you need to make your points over People’s graves and hospital beds too. All about you and your guns. Always know more than everyone else, always sure that nothing will help. Always a thousand self-serving, self-centered arguments that don’t impress anyone - they are dripping with denial. Like: there are more gun suicides than mass shootings. So what? I’m not leaving the country for you either, but thanks for the suggestion. Cute.

2

Rodimusprime8877 t1_j8lnk5z wrote

Except it didn’t. There’s no evidence to support your bullshit claim.

And you’re not going to debate what an “assault weapon” is because it is a completely made up term and debating otherwise would be like debating the existence of the tooth fairy or Easter bunny. Except both of those have more basis in fact.

0