Hope this doesn't get locked. IF STRICT GUN LAWS WORKED.

[skip68]

Yeah I know.  Even when they shoot each other, some times innocent kids or adults fall victim.   

[Bobs69]

That's the only problem Skip68, otherwise they can go for it as far as I'm concerned.

[John_Kunkel]

Hide your guns, save your ammo, and kick back a have a beer.

Yep. Americans are notorious for simply ignoring laws that are convenient...dating back to Prohibition and before.

[skip68]

Can you imagine prohibition today?   That would be a nightmare and a half.    

[ws23rt]

Can you imagine prohibition today?   That would be a nightmare and a half.    

Not for -want to be moonshiners.  A business opportunity.

It could be a way to get some off the couch (or from in front of a screen ) and make a living from a government induced job opportunity.

If I couldn't buy beer with my pension I would go back to work and make my own beer.

[Mike DC]

  


I think it sounds more like a great new way to imprison undesirables.  They quit the War on Drugs and start a new War on Guns instead.  


(I don't mean targeting all gun owners, I mean a pretext to target people they already don't like.  Rich white people don't go to prison for 3 years over an ounce of weed.)

 

[Mytur Binsdirti]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2AFw74gPbvE

[el dub]

Your future leaders.

[HeavyFuel]

No not at all.   Kinda along the lines of ws23rt.   
I'm hypothetically speaking, basically saying that if we had a miracle cure that kept most guns out of the wrong hands we'd have more bad guys filling the streets and judicial system.   Being that most killings are thugs killing thugs, if the thugs couldn't get as many guns, less thugs will be killed that normally would be killed off.  Thus creating more thugs annually and more crime.    The way it is right now is thug life has its own population control.  Unfortunately for every one that dies or gets locked up, baby mama's spit out 10 more with NO roots.   
This doesn't matter anyways because the thugs will ALWAYS get and have the guns.   
Make sense?   Sorry Bob, guess I'm thinking a bit over the top.   

We catch your drift, Skip.   

Similar to the necessity for something like AIDS to come along every once in a while to keep the homosexual and drug addict population in check.  Just think of how many Jews we'd have today if Hitler hadn't taken the steps to reduce their numbers by a few million.

Of course, those are extreme statements and I mention them just to make a point.......there's an endless number of complicated social dynamics effecting our species, the Homo Sapiens.

Personally, I'm all for adding some depth to our collective gene pool by eliminating a few individuals at the shallow end.......but not by genocide.  Just a little 'natural selection'.     

[ws23rt]

The down side I see for looking to "natural selection" as a positive is,---it is neither positive or negative.  It's a term (saying ) that is used from an outsiders view to try to make sense of what they see.

If we made it mandatory for everyone (over the age of 5 or so ) to carry a loaded gun I suspect that mandate would have a human toll of it's own. As to how many sick killers are part of that is a good question??

Something I feel is true is that when humans get frantic.---Let's say terrorized ---they/we will tend to react to what is in our face with little regard for the value of rational thinking.

Let's say one of us found a crab on our scrotum (or whatever ---political correctness is here).  How sould the the surgery begin?

Radical Islam is our crab.  We can run around screaming. We can live with the itch. We can remove the offending area. We can use our smart phones to zap the crab. We can remove the crabs home entirely.  --- When tomorrow comes there will be crabs.

Also If we damage the habitat of the crab too much they may just gain status.     They will become endangered.  

BTW as I recall some big lizards were naturally selected away some years back.   It seems to have worked rather well. Them were BIG crabs.

[el dub]

 

[XH29N0G]

I heard on the radio that we will continue to sell terrorists guns because we don't want to take away their second amendment rights. 

[el dub]

Will see how well they work on the guy that gave the guns to those California terrorists. I don't think they will work. He may say he just loaned those guns to them or some such. It will be interesting to see it play out.

[el dub]

Headline:  States expanded gun rights after Sandy Hook school massacre. Did you notice any change? Smith  &Wesson did, after the California shooting. Big change. A ton of people bought guns from them and others. And the pols don't get it.

[alfaitalia]

You have no idea how funny (or scary in some cases) this sounds from over here in the UK. We banned hand guns...must be thirty years ago, like most of the civilised world. It's not impossible to own one but so difficult to get a license and with such strict controls they are all but banned. Us ex gun owners were not happy as you can imagine.....but we got over it and life went on. Oh and guess what gun crime and shootings went down.....not surprising really with no legally held guns around to be stolen by the villains....ok we are an island so it is more difficult to get them here than just driving over the border. And in reply to the person who said about knife crime in the UK because we have no guns....well firstly or knife crime is also proportionally lower than yours so that argument hold little water...and secondly a knife can't hurt you over arms length away so I know what I would rather take my chances with. Of course we still have gun toting criminals but it is so rare that a single shooting makes the news for days. Our police don't even feel the need to carry guns as the chances are they will never see an armed villain in their career....They vote on it once in a while and always say no.....if they don't carry then the criminals feel less need to. It seems like a mass shooting over there barely makes the headlines over there any more. You just seem to accept it as the price you pay for your right to bare arms.....A right you have under your precious constitution.....but a right that was actually an amendment to the original constitution in the first...so you could change it back again if you wanted....but you won't. And it's your country so if it's the democratic decision of the majority to have guns then so be it. Just don't complain when it's your son or daughter next time. Just the view point from over the pond...and one I don't expect to find much support..so go easy on me!

[skip68]

This country was formed by guns.   It's something that will always be.  The time to ban guns that might have actually made a difference today was 100 years ago.  It's way to late to try now.    
Also keep in mind the U.S. has 5 times the population of the U.K. and people coming in from all over.  Lots of them are criminals.
Thanks for your point of view alfaitalia.  

[ws23rt]

The discussion about guns is really about a specific type of weapon.--Is it not?--

I see this as an important point for discussion.--The media and our leaders talk about guns as a knee jerk response to the mass killings of people at random when guns are used.

When airplanes are the weapon of choice for the same end it is of course absurd to ban airplanes. So the topic goes to where it should go.---The killers---
Also when a pressure cooker or an exploding vest is the means for a kill all attention is on the reason for and identity of the killer.

Clearly the focus on guns is ducking the problem.  ---It is trigger fingers at the root.----Let's ban the fingers.   Better yet just identify and terminate the brain that triggers those nasty killing fingers.

[skip68]

That's the real truth.  There is killing methods used by terrorists and NONE are ever the topic unless it's guns.     

[XH29N0G]

I also think it is the topic because guns are legal to acquire and effective for killing.  They are more effective than knives.  Hijacking planes and blowing up bombs are also effective, but they are illegal.

[ws23rt]

I also think it is the topic because guns are legal to acquire and effective for killing.  They are more effective than knives.  Hijacking planes and blowing up bombs are also effective, but they are illegal.

It is hard to find a way through this "legality" issue.---Laws are tools for lawyers and prosecutors.  They don't do much to intimidate or otherwise dissuade the enemy we are talking about here.
When someone expects to die with their mission of killing a law is not an affective weapon against them. It only affects everyone else.

I'm wondering how long it will take for being at war to sink in as what we are dying from.---Is it a percentage of the living being killed??

[XH29N0G]

good point

[ws23rt]

As mentioned many times, we have guns. Lots of them.  Making laws against them feels more like an after thought out of misplaced/ applied frustration.

Not unlike the issue of immigration.  

How can we round up and expel the guns we have?---Or do we need to??

[el dub]

If you guys check out Cnn there is some kind of debate going on right now where eventually they will be discussing gun control. It's also online. The BS is really flying around.

[bull]

The rhetoric keeps getting hotter and hotter and with that the anger level increases. At first the anti-gunners were asking nicely and pro-gunners politely gave in to a few concessions. Since then the rhetoric has gotten more and more aggressive. Today, they are demanding (some even call for a total ban and elimination) and the pro-gunners are in full-on F-you mode.

The problem here is someone has to blink. Most people I know (myself included) are strong proponents of the 2A and are to the point we will not give up anymore rights without a huge fight. We feel we've given enough, too much in many cases, and have seen no positive results. So now what? If the anti-gunners go all in and say "That's it, turn them in or else!" it's going to be war. As I understand it most sheriffs will refuse to enforce more federal gun laws so they will side with pro-gunners and I imagine the lion's share of the military would refuse to start kicking down American doors to usurp the US Constitution.

Here's two ironies I can see happening if the anti-gunners don't drop it: 1. The fight over the 2A may end up being the very reason the 2A was created. 2. Those who want to ban guns will have to kill more Americans than have ever been killed to realize their goal of banning them.

[skip68]

Well said bull.     
Think taking away the rebel flag was controversial?  Try taking away our guns.      That's a civil war in the making.