The Official Second Amendment / Gun Ban Thread

[APSMS 1,892]

My only argument here, is that citizens need to have access to the weapons that their government uses. Only allowing the government to use deadly weapons means that tyranny is close at hand, whether in the form of legislation (liberal or conservative), or in the form of executive orders, or simple rule of law.

I agree that regulation, and attention to gun handling need to be dealt with, but there is a deeper problem here that isn't related to how many guns the public has access to. It is equally difficult to make a fertilizer bomb that has less cost, less risk, and less effort (to deploy) and has exponentially more impact. Timothy McVae didn't need an assault rifle to make his bomb, didn't die delivering it, and killed way more people and was never noticed by regulators, yet no one goes around arguing that we ban sales of fertilizer to non-licensed farmers.

In short, I will agree that we remove Assault Rifles and other People-killing (oriented) guns from the public, when our government gives up the right to use such weapons inside the US (hint: they will never do this). Until Cops stop regularly carrying guns, and SWAT teams agree to not use automatic fire weapons against "dangerous" individuals, then I say that the Second Amendment is more the right to prevent tyranny, rather than "permission" for the government to arm a military. So, when our government agrees to remove all "mass-killing" weapons from home territory (so that using them against the populace is difficult), and agrees to remove them from the police, then I will agree that Americans probably should agree to not have new access to things like Assault weapons or high-capacity magazines.

Seriously, no government needs to have permission to give its soldiers weapons. The idea that that was a "right" that needed to be written into the constitution by the founding fathers is a ridiculous notion. Notably, the British government had tried to ban personal possession of firearms by American colonists, which was probably more likely what the Americans were trying to prevent from happening again (it would have seriously crippled their ability to fight).

Note: I don't own a gun. yet.

[Ocram's Razr 963]

Did the shooter use any illegally acquired weapons? If so, the gun ban would do nothing.

[BLANKBLANK 4,414]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-36514608

Yep, the shooter was another mental basket case who slipped through the cracks. Questions really need to be asked about the medication doctors are prescribing to people with mental illnesses and matters of over-prescription, and why people with personality problems such as that shooter are not medically screened BEFORE they get a gun.

It is the same old story with these massacres- every single one of these shooters was a person with a history of mental illness and personality disorders. I think the issue at stake here is mental illness and not the guns, it seems a man like that would have gone on a rampage anyway and you don't need a gun to get into the headlines.

Poor woman, the fact that she had to make a statement like that shows the media's obsession with sensationalizing violence and milking it for every drop its worth.

[krbe 193]

6 hours ago, OcramsRzr said:

Did the shooter use any illegally acquired weapons? If so, the gun ban would do nothing.

Legally purchased less than two weeks ago.

Seems like the shooter was naturally inclined to kill most people in America, from what the interviews are saying. G4S -- and the rest of the security business -- may have to answer for just how unhinged you're allowed to be in those jobs.

And again; checking people for mental illnesses -- as in properly examine them -- and requiring them to be part of a shooting association would probably weed out the nut cases that buy their own weapons (self-policing should not be underestimated -- it'd would've been Omar being stripped of his gun, or the entire association would've been terrorists) and quite sensibly, require weapons to be either under surveillance OR locked up might do away with four-year-olds becoming killers.