1. Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Gun Control: The Conversation

Discussion in 'General Debates' started by The Hammer, Apr 10, 2021.

  1. The Hammer

    The Hammer White Wolf - kvite ulfh
    Premium Member

    Joined:
    May 24, 2009
    Messages:
    4,803
    Ratings:
    +5,294
    Religion:
    Druidry
    Took this with permission, from an eloquent Lawyer friend of mine. Let's all get on the same page.

    " If we want to ever make progress towards adequate gun control laws in the United States, we're going to have to stop calling for "assault rifle bans." That's a near-constant refrain, and it nearly constantly causes pro-gun people to instantly stop listening to everything else that follows, because they're going to immediately pivot to one of two claims: (1) "there is no such thing as an 'assault rifle' (false) and you're just scared of the aesthetics of the weapon;" or (2) "assault rifles are already illegal, and all of the weapons you don't like are just semi-automatic rifles" (better).

    There is actually a legitimate definition of an "assault rifle," which is "a rifle with selective-fire capability that uses an intermediate cartridge and a detachable magazine" -- it has three criteria: (1) selective fire, (2) intermediate cartridge, (3) detachable magazine. Generally speaking, selective-fire weapons, and therefore actual assault rifles, are already illegal to own in the United States. The average person can't go to his local gun shop and buy one. Acquiring one requires filing a federal application and completing an extensive approval and registration process; they can't be sold or otherwise transferred to another owner without permission from the ATFE; and they can't have been manufactured any more recently than 1986.

    Advocates for adequate gun control laws in the United States would be speaking more accurately and would thereby gain credibility with those whom they seek to convince if they focused on the detachable-magazine aspect rather than incorrectly using the term "assault rifle" to refer to rifles that differ from actual assault rifles only in that they are semi-automatic instead of selective-fire. The issue is the ability that detachable magazines give to fire numerous rounds quickly and reload quickly, which isn't necessary in any context other than killing people.

    What we should be doing is making it illegal to own semi-automatic rifles with detachable magazines, because if I'm hunting, a bolt-action rifle is more than adequate (in fact, one with a 5-round detachable magazine is probably adequate for that, but I could see why ranchers or someone defending livestock against wildlife might want a bolt-action with a larger magazine capacity than 5 rounds). And if I'm looking for personal or home self-defense, a rifle isn't even close to my best option; both handguns and shotguns are better suited to that purpose than rifles.

    Of course, many pro-gun people will still disagree with the above position. However, we won't be giving them the ammo (so to speak) to just derail the entire argument and stop listening the minute we incorrectly classify something as an "assault rifle." Instead, they'll have to engage in the actual, legitimate discussion about whether semi-automatic rifles and/or detachable magazines on rifles are necessary for peaceable purposes. They'll have to explain why they can't adequately hunt with a bolt-action rifle or defend themselves with a handgun or shotgun. From there we can maybe move on to more nuanced arguments about magazine size, whether semi-automatic weapons are necessary at all, arguments about various accessories, etc. But we'll never get past the first sentence as long as we keep talking about "assault rifles."

    If we want to get anywhere, we have to speak like we know what we're talking about. "
     
    • Winner Winner x 1
  2. Mestemia

    Mestemia Advocatus Diaboli
    Premium Member

    Joined:
    Jul 23, 2005
    Messages:
    48,924
    Ratings:
    +13,273
    Religion:
    not a theist
    Couple of questions:

    When you say "rifle" what exactly are you talking about?
    I ask because I have an AR-15 style 12 gauge shotgun with a ten round detachable magazine and many people call any long gun a rifle...

    Once made illegal to own, what is the plan to obtain them from previously legal owners?
    I know people who literally have thousands of dollars tied up in their AR-15s.
    Is the plan to just confiscate them? reimburse for them? a "buyback"? "grand father" them?​
     
  3. Regiomontanus

    Regiomontanus άντρας των αστεριών

    Joined:
    May 24, 2017
    Messages:
    1,728
    Ratings:
    +1,593
    Religion:
    Christianity
    The best weapon for home defense, in my opinion, is a shotgun. Just the sound of pumping a shell in the chamber should make most burglars regret what they are doing :)

    That and, as your friend said, a rifle for hunting (but no hunting OK? - leave Bambi alone) is all one really 'needs' IMO.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  4. The Hammer

    The Hammer White Wolf - kvite ulfh
    Premium Member

    Joined:
    May 24, 2009
    Messages:
    4,803
    Ratings:
    +5,294
    Religion:
    Druidry
    This is talking about long guns in particular, with the exception of shotguns I would assume due to its lack of rifling, and generally smaller ammo capacity.

    But by having a detachable magazine you would fall under that portion of this argument.

    How necessary is it to have 10 shotgun rounds to fire in succession? What does it mean to be AR15 "style", etc.

    No clue, I would rather let the actual lawmakers hash that out. But maybe mandotory turn ins, over a period of time (not physically enforced via police)? Keep yours and get caught with it later on you get a hefty fine/jail time more then the cost of the kept weapon.

    I am all for buyback programs, if people felt that is a suitable agreement.
     
  5. KenS

    KenS Veteran Member
    Premium Member

    Joined:
    Sep 3, 2013
    Messages:
    13,584
    Ratings:
    +4,421
    Religion:
    Judeo/Christian
    Though what you said is important... I think by and large the issue is greater than just that.

    Two years ago this was posted:

    The top 10 most dangerous cities also have the strictest enforcement of gun laws…..and under Democratic city administrations for decades.

    Who are the top 10 cities with the toughest gun laws? - Quora

    If stricter laws didn't change anything and with the advent of the craziness of today, I think people are just against any additional gun control on law abiding citizens. (personal opinion)
     
    • Optimistic Optimistic x 1
  6. The Hammer

    The Hammer White Wolf - kvite ulfh
    Premium Member

    Joined:
    May 24, 2009
    Messages:
    4,803
    Ratings:
    +5,294
    Religion:
    Druidry
    And that's where discussion about background check loopholes, trafficking between state boundaries etc. gets discussed. Take here in WA, my wife (or anyone) can buy a gun and then gift it to me, with minimal oversight. It's how we obtained ours actually.

    A lot of these big cities guns, come from out of their jurisdictions (check milwaukee or Chicago for example). Which is why people want better federal oversight and gun control.

    Edit: Also the bolded portion is just political party baiting. Correlation does not equal causation in this instance. Crime rates go up as population density goes up.
     
    #6 The Hammer, Apr 10, 2021
    Last edited: Apr 10, 2021
  7. lostwanderingsoul

    lostwanderingsoul Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 17, 2015
    Messages:
    3,934
    Ratings:
    +1,275
    Religion:
    seeking
    Here is something to think about. The U S Constitution says that congress shall make NO law to stop peope from owning guns. But in fact there are laws that keep felons and mentally ill people and children from owning guns. So even though the constitution says there shall be NO laws, there are in fact laws that control gun ownership. So why can't these laws be expanded to include other people who might be a danger to society if they have guns?
     
    • Winner Winner x 1
  8. Regiomontanus

    Regiomontanus άντρας των αστεριών

    Joined:
    May 24, 2017
    Messages:
    1,728
    Ratings:
    +1,593
    Religion:
    Christianity
    Here in PA you can just go to one of the many gun shows held here every year and buy handguns 'under the table'.
     
    • Useful Useful x 1
  9. Curious George

    Curious George Veteran Member

    Joined:
    Jul 19, 2012
    Messages:
    13,382
    Ratings:
    +2,734
    Quick explanation, felons have had their rights stripped through due process. Children do not enjoy the full breadth of rights given their age and special relationships. Even with children however, there is no "ban." In theory children can still access and use guns but it is restricted.

    No right is unfettered. But when we look at making laws that infringe in fundamental rights, we do so with a higher level of scrutiny to uphold due process.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  10. Mestemia

    Mestemia Advocatus Diaboli
    Premium Member

    Joined:
    Jul 23, 2005
    Messages:
    48,924
    Ratings:
    +13,273
    Religion:
    not a theist
    Not "necessary" at all.
    It is, however, extremely convenient while rabbit and squirrel hunting.
    Of course, when hunting birds one is only allowed to be able to have a maximum of three rounds in the firearm.

    mqdefault.jpg


    i doubt the government is going to pay nearly what the weapon is worth at cost, let alone anything extra....
     
    • Friendly Friendly x 1
  11. Mestemia

    Mestemia Advocatus Diaboli
    Premium Member

    Joined:
    Jul 23, 2005
    Messages:
    48,924
    Ratings:
    +13,273
    Religion:
    not a theist
    There is no law preventing transfer of ownership between two private individuals, regardless of where said transaction takes place.
    Well, unless it is somewhere fire arms are not allowed in general. I.E. schools, bars, etc.
    So there is no "under the table" anything here...
    There is no "loophole" here.
     
    • Optimistic Optimistic x 1
  12. The Hammer

    The Hammer White Wolf - kvite ulfh
    Premium Member

    Joined:
    May 24, 2009
    Messages:
    4,803
    Ratings:
    +5,294
    Religion:
    Druidry
    That's a lot of rabbit and or squirrel. Or do you miss much?

    Kidding of course.
     
  13. Lyndon

    Lyndon "Peace is the answer" quote: GOD, 2014
    Premium Member

    Joined:
    Dec 23, 2014
    Messages:
    8,107
    Ratings:
    +4,223
    Religion:
    Theism+Jesus(pbuh) influenced by....... Taoism and Buddhism
    Why do right wing Christians want guns so much, is it because they think they are going to have to kill all the sinners?
     
    • Funny Funny x 1
  14. PureX

    PureX Veteran Member

    Joined:
    Feb 12, 2006
    Messages:
    17,356
    Ratings:
    +8,184
    Religion:
    Philosophical Taoist/Christian
    Guns are fetish objects in this country. And what that means is that they are the focus of an emotionally generated obsession. As such, reason will have very little effect on those who have succumbed to this fetish. And reasons offered against engaging in this fetish will be met with any and all unreasonable rebuttal as the fetishists cannot hear or accept reason. Their minds and ears are lost to the howl of their emotional need.

    Example: it has been a long known fact that bringing a firearm of any kind into a household increases the likelihood that someone in that household will be injured or killed by a firearm, or will unjustly injure or kill someone else, with it. This is a fact that cannot be disputed, and has been available as public knowledge for many decades. Yet if you assert this fact to a gun fetishist, it will have no effect on their obsession with firearms as self-protection, at all. Even though the reasoning and the data are obvious, and indisputable, they will invent all sorts of idiotic arguments to try and dispute it, deflect it, or dismiss it, and will succeed in doing so in their own minds. Truth, logic, and reason have no effect, because the fetish is an obsession with the fantasy of self-empowerment, with the idea of autonomy, and control over one's own fate. In reality firearms do not provide any of these conditions. But the gun has become the archetypical symbol for the illusion of these (thanks to Hollywood pandering to this cultural fantasy) at a time when many American males are feeling distinctly disempowered and enslaved to economic and cultural forces far beyond their control.

    This modern male obsession with guns and the illusion of self-empowerment attached to them has reached the point of being an all-out addiction for many. And a major component of addiction is denial. Denial so strong that no amount of reasoning, factuality, pleading, or dire results can overcome it. Reasoning with a gun fetishist is like reasoning with a drunk, or a junkie. It simply doesn't work. They cannot hear reason. They WILL NOT hear reason. They are lost in their obsession with the illusion of self-empowerment, autonomy, and control that they believe their guns give them. Even though this is logically absurd, and factually untrue.
     
    #14 PureX, Apr 11, 2021
    Last edited: Apr 11, 2021
    • Informative Informative x 1
  15. Curious George

    Curious George Veteran Member

    Joined:
    Jul 19, 2012
    Messages:
    13,382
    Ratings:
    +2,734
    I think this grandstanding is entirely unreasonable. Lol
     
  16. Lyndon

    Lyndon "Peace is the answer" quote: GOD, 2014
    Premium Member

    Joined:
    Dec 23, 2014
    Messages:
    8,107
    Ratings:
    +4,223
    Religion:
    Theism+Jesus(pbuh) influenced by....... Taoism and Buddhism
    PureX sounds good to me, gun owners can be bat crazy!
     
    #16 Lyndon, Apr 11, 2021
    Last edited: Apr 11, 2021
  17. PureX

    PureX Veteran Member

    Joined:
    Feb 12, 2006
    Messages:
    17,356
    Ratings:
    +8,184
    Religion:
    Philosophical Taoist/Christian
    I have debated with them many times on here, and they routinely present completely illogical and absurd rebuttals in defense of their fetish, while completely ignoring any and all reasonable arguments or facts being presented to them. I finally realized that reason will never have an effect because they are responding to the gun issue entirely from a very deep-seated emotional need/delusion.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  18. Regiomontanus

    Regiomontanus άντρας των αστεριών

    Joined:
    May 24, 2017
    Messages:
    1,728
    Ratings:
    +1,593
    Religion:
    Christianity
    Right. I was just pointing out that is a way to get around a background check.
     
  19. Regiomontanus

    Regiomontanus άντρας των αστεριών

    Joined:
    May 24, 2017
    Messages:
    1,728
    Ratings:
    +1,593
    Religion:
    Christianity
    My impression is that many (not talking about anyone here) are Christian nationalists and think a civil war of some sort is going to happen...

    What would Jesus do? Not own a gun, that much I am sure of.
     
  20. Revoltingest

    Revoltingest I have the kavorka
    Premium Member

    Joined:
    Mar 25, 2010
    Messages:
    185,602
    Ratings:
    +63,317
    Religion:
    Atheist
    These city leaders don't face the problem that localized
    gun control is easily defeated by looser control in the city's
    environs.
    Anyway, I notice that what most concerns the gun grabbers
    is regular news of mass shootings...not so much the overall
    statistics.
    Let's invent some yearly numbers that are accurate enuf by
    order of magnitude....
    20,000 gun deaths overall
    500 gun deaths in mass shootings.
    If we gun owners want to keep our rights, we need to address
    the biggest threat, ie, public sentiment turning against us.
    It's the 500 deaths that matter most (to the opposition).
    What can we do to mitigate those?
    1) Ensure that unsuitable people don't get guns, eg,
    violent felons, the mentally unstable.
    2) Improved mental health services for those in need.
    3) Your idea here.
    These measures would/should have other benefits too,
    eg, reducing that 20,000 figure, better mental health.
     
    #20 Revoltingest, Apr 11, 2021
    Last edited: Apr 11, 2021
    • Like Like x 1
Loading...