Opinion Should they ban assault weapons?

Should they ban assault weapons?

  • Total voters
    374
We're nowhere close to an "assault weapons" ban like this. To the majority of Americans, the brains of children splattered on textbooks is a preferable outcome to taking guns away from an obvious psychopath.
 
The Penetrator said:
tenor.gif

l4bN_f-maxage-0.gif

tenor.gif
Click to expand...
Don't you guys have Hate Speech laws?
 
Higus said:
I'm voting no, but I feel like this is a loaded question. Assault weapons is a meaningless term. There should be some reasonable legislation that helps reduce the likelihood of a mentally ill person getting their hands on a weapon, but I acknowledge that there is concern from law abiding gun owners about a slippery slope effect. I don't see a path forward.
Click to expand...
Please define reasonable legislation. I totally get where you are coming from, but when I ask people to define what they would like to see done, I either don't get a straight answer (the default is, "Well, some smart person will think of something..." which is effectively a dodge) or I get a plan that is so totally ludicrous that it tramples gun owners' basic rights (typically, privacy rights as codified in HIPAA). I'm not accusing you of anything at all, but I would like to see if you can offer me something new within the context of the debate. Thanks.
 
Cubo de Sangre said:
I'll give it a crack. Granted I'm whittling out the retarded criteria like flash-hiders and pistol grips.

  • Barrel over 16"
  • Semi-auto
Click to expand...
A longer barrel is safer. Harder to conceal and requires more movement to change the arc of fire. Also less effective in close quarters.
 
I think a better solution would be to act as follows:

A. Have a requirement that all schools of a certain size have at least two armed security guards. (The hero-assistant football coach was a part time security guard and died acting as a human shield.)

B. Find a way to stop giving the killers publicity. That has been the main catalyst for hateful lunatics.

C. Much, much more in the way of mental health funds.

That applies to problems with the homeless, broken family structures, and a lot of troubled young people we could be helping out.

Why is the money not there?

D. Some restrictions on AR/AK platform rifles might help.

- Waiting limits of two weeks

- A more extensive background check

- A standard mental competency test with several different versions so psychos have trouble cheating on the system

I am a big 2nd Amendment proponent, but you can definitely have legal oversight of "military style" rifles legally speaking and probably should in a moral sense.

A good compromise would be to allow suppressors, ease the restrictions on SBS weapons, and
 
Fawlty said:
We're nowhere close to an "assault weapons" ban like this. To the majority of Americans, the brains of children splattered on textbooks is a preferable outcome to taking guns away from an obvious psychopath.
Click to expand...

Anyone capable with a shotgun could get the same kind of casualty count, or near to it.

"Not doing anything" though is getting more ridiculous every time this happens.

Why can't America put out a little money to...

- Make it a little more difficult to get high capacity rifles and have the process be a little longer.

To other gun enthusiasts - A slight inconvenience for gun afficanidos is really not that big of a deal, and logically speaking would save a few lives while preserving the freedom.

- Mental health is a sham in America

- There should be a federally mandated overall of school security. Mass shootings and terror are not psychologically good for a society to put it mildly. They are incredibly rare, but anyone who is in that situation will be traumatized.

A fraction of XYZ federal and state budgets could provide armed security to harden a lot of these targets, especially schools.
 
Stoic1 said:
I'm picturing the TS making the angry face because this thread didn' go the way he had hoped. He doesn't realize how ill informed he is or how often this topic is argued.


tldr: hahaha TS is an idiot.
Click to expand...

Has there been a poll on this before?
 
sub_thug said:
Please define reasonable legislation. I totally get where you are coming from, but when I ask people to define what they would like to see done, I either don't get a straight answer (the default is, "Well, some smart person will think of something..." which is effectively a dodge) or I get a plan that is so totally ludicrous that it tramples gun owners' basic rights (typically, privacy rights as codified in HIPAA). I'm not accusing you of anything at all, but I would like to see if you can offer me something new within the context of the debate. Thanks.
Click to expand...
Not to cop out, but everyone is going to have a different definition of what is "reasonable". For instance, I think high capacity magazine bans are reasonable, but a lot of people are going to disagree with me. I'd personally like to see higher standards for issuing CC licenses, I'm ok with extending waiting periods, and I'd support a universal database of owners (on face value). I can understand the opposing point of views, but I'm going to get called an idiot for my opinion anyway.
Ultimately, imo, the best long term way to reduce gun violence is to reduce the guns in circulation. There are a lot of ways to do that, but if the goal is to have an immediate, demonstrable change, the methods are probably going to be unreasonable. I'd like small legislation that make gun ownership a minor hassle. Critics will say that this is just punitive to law abiding owners, but that would be kind of the point; You reduce the amount of legal guns in circulation, you have the effect of eventually lowering the amount of illegal guns in circulation or gun related crime all together.
There are other ways to effect gun crime without going into gun control, like tackling income inequality or other broad economic changes, etc. And I'm supportive of that as well. It's probably easier politically to attack gun violence without actually mentioning guns.
 
InternetHero said:
I think a better solution would be to act as follows:

A. Have a requirement that all schools of a certain size have at least two armed security guards. (The hero-assistant football coach was a part time security guard and died acting as a human shield.)

B. Find a way to stop giving the killers publicity. That has been the main catalyst for hateful lunatics.

C. Much, much more in the way of mental health funds.

That applies to problems with the homeless, broken family structures, and a lot of troubled young people we could be helping out.

Why is the money not there?

D. Some restrictions on AR/AK platform rifles might help.

- Waiting limits of two weeks

- A more extensive background check

- A standard mental competency test with several different versions so psychos have trouble cheating on the system

I am a big 2nd Amendment proponent, but you can definitely have legal oversight of "military style" rifles legally speaking and probably should in a moral sense.

A good compromise would be to allow suppressors, ease the restrictions on SBS weapons, and
Click to expand...

Z - Go become a likeable person
 
They should ban guns just to prove that Liberals are living in a fool's paradise.
 
Maybe the anti-gunners would agree to banning blacks from owning guns. They commit 55% of the murders in the US, so it only make sense right?
 
I'm shocked at how relatively close this is

@PolishHeadlock given that you're both a centrist and an intelligent person, so your vote is particularly surprising
 
Um, assault weapons are already ridiculously hard to get as they're essentially M4s, HK 416s, or M16s. Assault weapon implies select fire with a fully automatic capability which my AR15 is not.

Learn the words IMO.
 
cedented said:
So there has been another mass shooting in America. I wonder if it's time to ban these weapons. What's your thoughts?
Click to expand...


I could get behind a ban, but to be honest they are such a pain to get now that I don't think that it would make much of a difference.
 
Rational Poster said:
I voted yes, but only because of the current state of gun ownership.

If we got better at regulating access and policing illegal transfers of firearms, I think anyone should be allowed to own any gun.

Some states do it better than others and Florida definitely isn't one of them.
Click to expand...
I think if the WA law was better written so people knew what "transfer" actually meant in the law more states would pick it up... and I would like it better if they fucking made the cost of transfer a standardized thing.

Some stores... $15 flat rate for any gun (hand gun, rifle, shotgun you name it).

Other stores.... $35 for a long gun, $20 for a shotgun, $50 for a pistol.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest posts

Forum statistics

Threads
1,236,923
Messages
55,455,196
Members
174,786
Latest member
Gladiator47

Share this page

Back
Top