Thank you for this fucking pointless thread! Enjoy your 300+ replies.
Adam Gutierrez
can you refute me or what
Jason Butler
What evidence do you have that this would save any lives?
Caleb Wright
Shall not be infringed
Thomas Cook
It's not really infringing, you still get to have guns and as many as you want, it's ensuring you meet the demands of a Well - Regulated militia. If anything, you infringe on people's inalienable rights More by not doing anything about it
Other countries do this and it happens less, and it's not like doing nothing is helping the situation anyhow
Daniel Hughes
That would depend on whether or not shooters are using registered firearms or not.
For example if someone shoots up a school with an illegally obtained firearm, your suggestion doesn't achieve anything.
That doesn't mean it's a bad suggestion I just don't think the discussion has even gotten that far yet.
Cooper Thomas
In Australia crime was going down before massive gun control was passed and had no effect on the rate crime was going down. Gun control also had effect on the number of people killed in mass killing since the bans. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_massacres_in_Australia
Asher Lee
I'd accept it only if the standard for voting was the same
Jonathan King
Also any laws that restrict my right to own and use firearms are infringing. At the time the bill of rights was written "well regulated" meant well functioning, it had nothing to do with government regulation. Also the 2nd amendment says "the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed", it doesn't say anything about the right of the militia to bear arms.
Noah Ross
This just sounds like winging about trying to follow more rules, imho. And more of what I was referring to with the militia but was trying to uphold that well-functioning standard on an individual basis. I feel that a government has the reach and capabilities of upholding such a task easier than any other kind of organization.
Do you have other citations for this? Wikipedia doesn't detail the lack of affect the laws had.
That's a fair cop, and I agree we don't seem to be at that point yet, but I still feel like putting as many hurdles between someone and a thing would help mitigate potential crimes being committed
Josiah Nguyen
So when someone doesn't give a fuck at all and commits a mass shooting with his magical government issued license in his pocket is it cool?
Gabriel Ramirez
>I feel the government... I don't care about your feelings. You have to prove such laws would work using empirical evidence. >Wiki doesn't detail the lack of affect the laws had The page I linked earlier show how the number of mass murders and deaths didn't change after the gun bans were put in place.
The chart on this page shows Australian murder rates by year and how the rate was falling before the ban was put in place. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gun_violence
Liam Allen
Yeah. Here's your answer.
Shall not be infringed. Now go fuck yourself.
Joshua Morgan
A gun is a right car is a privilege. Cars kill 30000 a year ban all cars.
Liam Morgan
The federal and state government already operates it's own militias, plus many other departments like the DMV, they'd be capable of providing guidelines for citizens wanting to own a gun that they'd have to uphold. And doing so would also mean they've built up individuals capable of defending themselves against tyranny, so that's a plus
Your thesis is interesting but I'm still not wholly convinced, I'd want to see more details on what was happening during that time period to see that decrease, I could suspect some level of intervention somewhere. I also found data suggesting that the effects of the laws have created substantive positive change, particularly in regards to suicide, which is another factor of this worth considering as well. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gun_laws_in_Australia
See
Landon King
When's the last time you heard of someone using a car to kill someone maliciously
>west Virginia
Ok the second time
If it were regulated properly there would be a significantly greater likelihood someone like that would be noticed before receiving a firearm. I seriously don't understand how the fact sometimes a system could potentially fail maybe means that there should be no system in place at all
Ian Cook
I don't think you understand how gun or car laws work.
Adam Hill
This feels a little convenient because the language in some cases particularly re: auto and manual? But it's still pretty funny. I'll argue that "on par" doesn't necessarily mean "equal" and doesn't preclude improvement.
Also the image seems to ignore a difference between the part of the argument implied where most of that freedom given you drivers comes about because it's already assumed that a level of competency has been acquired and proven vis a vi your license. Idk I'll think on it
Joshua Reyes
>the language re: The language is more context dependant in despite being the same terms
brb will kysb for error
Ian Mitchell
cars are fucking death machines of hell. I don't know how people get the courage to stroll around on sidewalks 10 ft from these things passing
Jason Gutierrez
kek
Imagine how bad it would be if everyone didn't know how to drive
Angel Cox
Why does everyone turn this into a gun issue when it's obviously an accountability issue?
This wouldn't be a problem if it were a responsible private school. It notices that its liability insurance premiums are skyrocketing, so it locks down its grounds and preemptively looks for problem students. All thanks to the free market.
Do public schools even buy liability insurance or are liabilities simply externalized to the taxpayer?
Carter Howard
Shouldn't liability be placed on gun owners to use their equipment properly? A license would be proof of such a thing that one would be held accountable for
