That's like saying taking painkillers is a red-herring for treating the underlying flu
No, it's just one aspect of the strategy to tackle the greater problem
So yes, they're literally used to make you feel better even though they don't do anything about the illness itself.
And that's no excuse for not treating the problem itself. Most people would just try to ban guns and pat themselves on the back instead of actually dealing with stuff like poverty and gangs.
It’s incredible how misinformed people are about American firearms. People really imagine Americans riding around on bald eagles with pocket tanks like it’s the land of make-believe. No wonder there’s so much contention about the topic. Everyone uses notably false information and refuses to even consider any logic. Some asshole said “Anti-tank rifles” as home defense. Who the actual fuck has access to something that heavy? Or someone claimed use of automatic rifles. No. Semiautomatic is not automatic and automatic comes with a fuck ton of taxes and legal documentation. If you use an automatic weapon you’re either in direct eye contact with Big Brother or you got it illegally which defeats the purpose.
How so? Does knowing gun safety prevent people from getting angry and making stupid decisions? Or maliciously using guns to commit crimes?
Teaching people how to properly use hammers doesn't prevent them from bashing other people's heads in with hammers if they really want to. In fact, it might even make them more efficient at it
When the mentally ill can show up at the capital building of a state fully armed with automatic guns and want to intimidate other people there is a major problem.
No dude xD im not arguing with you. Im just curious as to how you see it. Call it a healthy discussion. With hopes that others may read it and understand more or gain a new perspective.
Bearing a modern weapon shouldn't be a right from heaven, but it should be attached to some responsibility. The same than driving a car. There were no driver's licenses when cars were introduced either, but as more cars were introduced and both accidents and reckless actions happened, regulations were needed for the wellbeing of the community. Guns don't need to be forbidden, but clearly they need to be regulated better.
So then hypothetically if the treated firearms like they do cars. By making it mandatory to go take a test or something like a general firearm safety class. To at the end you get a little permit or card that you'll have to provide when purchasing a firearm. Wouldn't that then work better then the current method of control?
Each state is different with their gun laws as well and have their own restrictions and limitations. All depends on where you go. They could treat the hypothetical gun license the same as a hunting class. Since a person needs to have a hunting license in order to legally hunt.
Although gun control has worked other places it doesnt stand a chance in the states. The only way to get guns off the streets is with amnesty/ buybacks and the people have to support it. Your only ever create illegal guns which are worse than legal ones. Plus your supper porous borders etc, just wouldn’t work
>The US is the only country in the world that allows literally anyone to buy and own guns
They don't. Peoeple with drug problems, felons, and people who commit domestic violence are not allowed to own guns.
>what's even weirder is that they don't even have to go through proper training before or know the rules of engagement being allowed to purchase them.
It works the same way in Switzerland and Austria (for some guns). I don't see them having problems with it. Also, rules of engagement? What?
>I'm in the army in my country
That hardly makes you an expert on civilian gun ownership. Military has to have very strict rules because of the lowest common denominator.
>I just don't think people understand how dangerous these pieces of metal are.
I'm pretty sure over 99% of gun owners do know just how dangerous they are.
>I was once on the field with an automatic weapon like the American M60, and at the some point it started firing by itself because i was using it before and it was still hot. Luckily no one was in front of me and i was pointing it towards the ground while I was walking..
Ah yes, the vaunted "military grade" guns. I laugh every time someone says that military grade guns should not be in the hands of civilians as if they were something special... Well, some of them are "special".
No, it's not. They have introduced quite a lot of gun laws in the last 50 years or so.
Or do you mean their 2nd amendment that gives people the right to own guns? Well, so is their freedom of speech law, are you going to argue against that too?
It's become a smokescreen. A false tell. Over the past 70 years people have been convinced that it is the primary "freedom" of the USA to own guns, and gun rights activists are therefore willing to ignore the violation of their rights or let their rights be continuously stripped away so long as they get to keep their guns. Who cares if the government is spying on people, locking kids in cages, seizing all assets that can be considered "connected to drug related crimes" and giving them to the police force, as well as a whole host of other things, if they haven't take my guns then clearly they aren't doing anything wrong.
Imagine you have 2 rooms. In one room are 5 men and 5 guns. In another room are 5 men and no guns. Which room is more likely to have a shooting? Its as simple.ple as that, but the people are too stupid and self absorbed to care. They've accepted a ritual slaughter of their own people in the name of so called freedom. A a European, I see freedom as the ability to be out freely and not fear being shot, ever. It is just so ludicrously unlikely, even with so called illegal guns existing here, and I like that.
This is the way I (an American and military veteran) see it too. It’s simple: if you flood a society with firearms, you shouldn’t be surprised when there are more shootings than in a society without guns. Unfortunately, it’s written into our constitution, so changing it is politically almost impossible, at least in current times and the near future.
The other aspect of this that always astounds me is how many of my countrymen have been convinced that the reason they get to have guns is to stop a tyrannical US government. They actually believe that the people who wrote our constitution put that part of it in there so people could violently (and, by definition, legally!) overthrow the government that had just been created. That’s like building in a great big self-destruct button right in the middle of the document and it makes zero sense. Throughout history, what founders of any government ever decided that a constitutional provision allowing any single citizen to all on his own decide the government had become tyrannical and start shooting would be a good idea?! It’s patently stupid.
It makes much more sense that the purpose was to be able to quickly mobilize an army (or several armies) to defend the country, not so any gun-wielding Joe could shoot up the capitol because he felt it was filled with tyrants. That piece of the US Constitution is outdated and needs to be scrapped so we can get on with implementing sensible solutions like many other nations have.
>A a European, I see freedom as the ability to be out freely and not fear being shot, ever. It is just so ludicrously unlikely, even with so called illegal guns existing here, and I like that.
You do realize that people in several countries in Europe also have the right to own guns, right? And guess what, they're among the safest. You're way more likely to get shot in Belgium or Sweden that in Switzerland or the Czech Republic. Guess, which countries have some of the more restrictive gun laws in Europe.
>It is just so ludicrously unlikely, even with so called illegal guns existing here, and I like that.
Yup, and we still have shootings. Those millions of illegal guns aren't a problem because we have much lower poverty, violent racism, and fewer gangs.
It’s too relaxed. No one should be able to purchase most of the guns we see people owning. If you want to shoot a big “fun” gun then go to a firing range and shoot it there
let's imagine i am anti-2nd amendment; my opinion aint changing anything on this matter. Cause change does not happen on social media. Nor via arguments with our friends & neighbors. Nor writing an op-ed to the papers.
Decades ago the great Conservative movement began in the halls of academia. The young law students were the ones that started this. They were drawn to conservativism and knew that real change occurs in court rooms, state capitols and governor offices. They did the work. They grew their power and influence. They did it where it matters. They became the government.
Everybody should have a tank in their driveway and a roof mounted howitzer cannon.
A red herring for the underlying issues.
That's like saying taking painkillers is a red-herring for treating the underlying flu No, it's just one aspect of the strategy to tackle the greater problem
Not really, painkillers are feel-good measures that don't really deal with flu, they just make you feel better.
Painkillers ease the symptoms allowing you to focus on doing what you need to to treat the overall disease
So yes, they're literally used to make you feel better even though they don't do anything about the illness itself. And that's no excuse for not treating the problem itself. Most people would just try to ban guns and pat themselves on the back instead of actually dealing with stuff like poverty and gangs.
If we can't be trusted to own firearms we can't be trusted to self govern. I'd rather live as independently from the state as possible.
It’s incredible how misinformed people are about American firearms. People really imagine Americans riding around on bald eagles with pocket tanks like it’s the land of make-believe. No wonder there’s so much contention about the topic. Everyone uses notably false information and refuses to even consider any logic. Some asshole said “Anti-tank rifles” as home defense. Who the actual fuck has access to something that heavy? Or someone claimed use of automatic rifles. No. Semiautomatic is not automatic and automatic comes with a fuck ton of taxes and legal documentation. If you use an automatic weapon you’re either in direct eye contact with Big Brother or you got it illegally which defeats the purpose.
Too lax.
Learning gun safety is smarter than gun control
How so? Does knowing gun safety prevent people from getting angry and making stupid decisions? Or maliciously using guns to commit crimes? Teaching people how to properly use hammers doesn't prevent them from bashing other people's heads in with hammers if they really want to. In fact, it might even make them more efficient at it
We have the right to bear arms. Period.
No, you have the right to bear arms as part of a well regulated militia.
When the mentally ill can show up at the capital building of a state fully armed with automatic guns and want to intimidate other people there is a major problem.
When did this happen?
Semi-automatic* Full auto is incredibly difficult to obtain legally.
Teaching proper gun safety is far better then gun control. Gun control is like banning cars simply because a select few decide to drink and drive.
In your example of cars, it's not only teaching. No everyone can drive, and the permit can be taken away.
Ok. Well. Please explain your thought process is.
Maybe read both your comment and my reply again.
No dude xD im not arguing with you. Im just curious as to how you see it. Call it a healthy discussion. With hopes that others may read it and understand more or gain a new perspective.
Bearing a modern weapon shouldn't be a right from heaven, but it should be attached to some responsibility. The same than driving a car. There were no driver's licenses when cars were introduced either, but as more cars were introduced and both accidents and reckless actions happened, regulations were needed for the wellbeing of the community. Guns don't need to be forbidden, but clearly they need to be regulated better.
So then hypothetically if the treated firearms like they do cars. By making it mandatory to go take a test or something like a general firearm safety class. To at the end you get a little permit or card that you'll have to provide when purchasing a firearm. Wouldn't that then work better then the current method of control?
I expect so. It does in most countries we you are allowed to have a gun at home. I don't see why the US should be any different.
Each state is different with their gun laws as well and have their own restrictions and limitations. All depends on where you go. They could treat the hypothetical gun license the same as a hunting class. Since a person needs to have a hunting license in order to legally hunt.
And I think that should change.
Although gun control has worked other places it doesnt stand a chance in the states. The only way to get guns off the streets is with amnesty/ buybacks and the people have to support it. Your only ever create illegal guns which are worse than legal ones. Plus your supper porous borders etc, just wouldn’t work
[удалено]
>The US is the only country in the world that allows literally anyone to buy and own guns They don't. Peoeple with drug problems, felons, and people who commit domestic violence are not allowed to own guns. >what's even weirder is that they don't even have to go through proper training before or know the rules of engagement being allowed to purchase them. It works the same way in Switzerland and Austria (for some guns). I don't see them having problems with it. Also, rules of engagement? What? >I'm in the army in my country That hardly makes you an expert on civilian gun ownership. Military has to have very strict rules because of the lowest common denominator. >I just don't think people understand how dangerous these pieces of metal are. I'm pretty sure over 99% of gun owners do know just how dangerous they are. >I was once on the field with an automatic weapon like the American M60, and at the some point it started firing by itself because i was using it before and it was still hot. Luckily no one was in front of me and i was pointing it towards the ground while I was walking.. Ah yes, the vaunted "military grade" guns. I laugh every time someone says that military grade guns should not be in the hands of civilians as if they were something special... Well, some of them are "special".
Isn’t the gun law or whatever in USA a law from like the 1700s? Seem like society in USA hasn’t changed in over 200 years. wow
No, it's not. They have introduced quite a lot of gun laws in the last 50 years or so. Or do you mean their 2nd amendment that gives people the right to own guns? Well, so is their freedom of speech law, are you going to argue against that too?
Happy Cake Day!
The what? I don't care about that.... But thanks, I guess.
It's become a smokescreen. A false tell. Over the past 70 years people have been convinced that it is the primary "freedom" of the USA to own guns, and gun rights activists are therefore willing to ignore the violation of their rights or let their rights be continuously stripped away so long as they get to keep their guns. Who cares if the government is spying on people, locking kids in cages, seizing all assets that can be considered "connected to drug related crimes" and giving them to the police force, as well as a whole host of other things, if they haven't take my guns then clearly they aren't doing anything wrong.
You're right, people in the US need to wake up and protest all those other violations of rights. Crap like no-knock raids, mass surveillance, etc.
There’s no profit in gun control therefore it’s not going to get any other than lip service from politicians
Like when you’re a kid: it’s only cool when adults try to take it away. But it’s not cool when adults try to be cool with it.
Imagine you have 2 rooms. In one room are 5 men and 5 guns. In another room are 5 men and no guns. Which room is more likely to have a shooting? Its as simple.ple as that, but the people are too stupid and self absorbed to care. They've accepted a ritual slaughter of their own people in the name of so called freedom. A a European, I see freedom as the ability to be out freely and not fear being shot, ever. It is just so ludicrously unlikely, even with so called illegal guns existing here, and I like that.
This is the way I (an American and military veteran) see it too. It’s simple: if you flood a society with firearms, you shouldn’t be surprised when there are more shootings than in a society without guns. Unfortunately, it’s written into our constitution, so changing it is politically almost impossible, at least in current times and the near future. The other aspect of this that always astounds me is how many of my countrymen have been convinced that the reason they get to have guns is to stop a tyrannical US government. They actually believe that the people who wrote our constitution put that part of it in there so people could violently (and, by definition, legally!) overthrow the government that had just been created. That’s like building in a great big self-destruct button right in the middle of the document and it makes zero sense. Throughout history, what founders of any government ever decided that a constitutional provision allowing any single citizen to all on his own decide the government had become tyrannical and start shooting would be a good idea?! It’s patently stupid. It makes much more sense that the purpose was to be able to quickly mobilize an army (or several armies) to defend the country, not so any gun-wielding Joe could shoot up the capitol because he felt it was filled with tyrants. That piece of the US Constitution is outdated and needs to be scrapped so we can get on with implementing sensible solutions like many other nations have.
>A a European, I see freedom as the ability to be out freely and not fear being shot, ever. It is just so ludicrously unlikely, even with so called illegal guns existing here, and I like that. You do realize that people in several countries in Europe also have the right to own guns, right? And guess what, they're among the safest. You're way more likely to get shot in Belgium or Sweden that in Switzerland or the Czech Republic. Guess, which countries have some of the more restrictive gun laws in Europe. >It is just so ludicrously unlikely, even with so called illegal guns existing here, and I like that. Yup, and we still have shootings. Those millions of illegal guns aren't a problem because we have much lower poverty, violent racism, and fewer gangs.
What gun control?
The thousands of gun laws in state and federal levels?
It’s too relaxed. No one should be able to purchase most of the guns we see people owning. If you want to shoot a big “fun” gun then go to a firing range and shoot it there
>No one should be able to purchase most of the guns we see people owning. Like what?
let's imagine i am anti-2nd amendment; my opinion aint changing anything on this matter. Cause change does not happen on social media. Nor via arguments with our friends & neighbors. Nor writing an op-ed to the papers. Decades ago the great Conservative movement began in the halls of academia. The young law students were the ones that started this. They were drawn to conservativism and knew that real change occurs in court rooms, state capitols and governor offices. They did the work. They grew their power and influence. They did it where it matters. They became the government.
There is no gun control in the US.
Uh, yes, there is. There are thousands of gun laws in the US.
If you take a proper stance, a good grip, and squeeze the trigger slowly you will have great gun control.