"Stricter gun laws" = NOTHING to do with "banning guns"

[Shodan 2.0]

Just saying, it seems like too many people misunderstand this idea or just misinterpret it on purpose in order to have some "problem" to whine about and a "common enemy" as a manipulation tool or simply just to have more things to whine about.

Anyway, "stricter gun laws" would just make it harder for the wrong people to get access to guns. The people who take away other people's freedom. Without such people having access to guns, everyone else would have more freedom. Freedom to live. Freedom to go anywhere without fear of getting shot.

The problem isn't guns or normal gun owners, it's just the wrong people being able to access them too easily and without even knowing how to use them responsibly.

Stricter gun laws would absolutely not affect all the normal gun owners out there who are the majority, so I don't see what's the problem. You would still have your guns for self-defense just in case because you can never fully get rid of criminals, but you would definitely be less likely to have to use them as a last resort.

See, you can have a gun in Massachusetts just fine:

https://www.mass.gov/info-details/gun-ownership-in-massachusetts

But, because Massachusetts has stricter gun laws, mass shootings (specifically school shootings) there are as nonexistent as in Europe and it's generally one of the best states in terms of safety.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Mass_shootings_in_Massachusetts

Just 4 entries here, basically isolated incidents as anywhere else in the world.

Switzerland has a really strong gun culture and plenty of guns, but mass shootings are nonexistent. Go figure. Maybe it's proper regulations, as well as proper education and training?

[Xero_Daxter]

Początkowo opublikowane przez Othobrithol:

Początkowo opublikowane przez Xero_Daxter:

What if it's not during class time and it was during lunch where the common area was at peak capacity? There was a case that this actually happened.

Those are the people that are screwed.

Dang. You said it as it is. Fair enough. Lol. *pats your head*

[Dracoco OwO]

Początkowo opublikowane przez Shodan 2.0:

There's no ♥♥♥♥♥♥♥ narrative, there was a pandemic.

The common conception would be that the pandemic was the narrative.

[Ysosrscat]

Wrong, guns are a check on government power, the government is not to be trusted with restrictions.

All you can do is a wall of text excusing authoritarianism.

After all the jabs and lockdowns, the predilections of restrictionists have been proven, and are not to be trusted.

[Xero_Daxter]

"The founding fathers probably didn't know what a machine gun was."

[Doomerang]

Become gun free because it worked so well for Venezuela.

[Pronoun Paladin ☯]

Początkowo opublikowane przez Xero_Daxter:

"The founding fathers probably didn't know what a machine gun was."

Sort of true...., but they knew what a war-ship was. Large ships with multiple cannons which included the Puckle Gun (as seen in: https://store.steampowered.com/app/242050/Assassins_Creed_IV_Black_Flag/

Think about it. what's more dangerous a machine-gun vs a war-ship capable of launching heavy artillery onto a city.

I say sort-of, because there's a large variety of multi-shot guns that existed at the time included the Puckle Gun.

[Xero_Daxter]

Początkowo opublikowane przez The Father ☯:

Początkowo opublikowane przez Xero_Daxter:

"The founding fathers probably didn't know what a machine gun was."

Sort of true...., but they knew what a war-ship was. Large ships with multiple cannons which included the Puckle Gun (as seen in: https://store.steampowered.com/app/242050/Assassins_Creed_IV_Black_Flag/

Think about it. what's more dangerous a machine-gun vs a war-ship capable of launching heavy artillery onto a city.

I say sort-of, because there's a large variety of multi-shot guns that existed at the time included the Puckle Gun.

^Good game by the way.

And my comment was a joke. The founding fathers "DID" indeed know what could happen in the future. They were well aware of semi-automatic and even automatic guns.

[BigBallinChester]

All semi-automatic weapons should be banned in the US. We should only be allowed bolt action and revolvers.

[Xero_Daxter]

Początkowo opublikowane przez Crasus:

All semi-automatic weapons should be banned in the US. We should only be allowed bolt action and revolvers.

*carries 10 revolvers on me with a total of 60 shots*

[Ysosrscat]

Początkowo opublikowane przez Shodan 2.0:

Just saying, it seems like too many people misunderstand this idea or just misinterpret it on purpose in order to have some "problem" to whine about and a "common enemy" as a manipulation tool or simply just to have more things to whine about.

Anyway, "stricter gun laws" would just make it harder for the wrong people to get access to guns. The people who take away other people's freedom. Without such people having access to guns, everyone else would have more freedom. Freedom to live. Freedom to go anywhere without fear of getting shot.

The problem isn't guns or normal gun owners, it's just the wrong people being able to access them too easily and without even knowing how to use them responsibly.

Stricter gun laws would absolutely not affect all the normal gun owners out there who are the majority, so I don't see what's the problem. You would still have your guns for self-defense just in case because you can never fully get rid of criminals, but you would definitely be less likely to have to use them as a last resort.

See, you can have a gun in Massachusetts just fine:

https://www.mass.gov/info-details/gun-ownership-in-massachusetts

But, because Massachusetts has stricter gun laws, mass shootings (specifically school shootings) there are as nonexistent as in Europe and it's generally one of the best states in terms of safety.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Mass_shootings_in_Massachusetts

Just 4 entries here, basically isolated incidents as anywhere else in the world.

Switzerland has a really strong gun culture and plenty of guns, but mass shootings are nonexistent. Go figure. Maybe it's proper regulations, as well as proper education and training?

You have blinders on.

This is purely demographics.

The reality of mass shootings is opposite of what the media shows.
https://mass-shootings.info/index.php?year=2022


Massachusetts has very low percentage of demographic in question.
Massachusetts is a predominantly white state, with over 70% of the population identifying as white (non-Hispanic)1234. The next largest racial or ethnic groups are Hispanic or Latino (11.6% to 12.6%)24, Asian (6.7% to 7.2%)134, and Black or African American (6.5% to 7.5%)



Switzerland is at least 94% white.



Demographics is destiny.

[Pronoun Paladin ☯]

Początkowo opublikowane przez Ysosrscat:

Początkowo opublikowane przez Shodan 2.0:

Just saying, it seems like too many people misunderstand this idea or just misinterpret it on purpose in order to have some "problem" to whine about and a "common enemy" as a manipulation tool or simply just to have more things to whine about.

Anyway, "stricter gun laws" would just make it harder for the wrong people to get access to guns. The people who take away other people's freedom. Without such people having access to guns, everyone else would have more freedom. Freedom to live. Freedom to go anywhere without fear of getting shot.

The problem isn't guns or normal gun owners, it's just the wrong people being able to access them too easily and without even knowing how to use them responsibly.

Stricter gun laws would absolutely not affect all the normal gun owners out there who are the majority, so I don't see what's the problem. You would still have your guns for self-defense just in case because you can never fully get rid of criminals, but you would definitely be less likely to have to use them as a last resort.

See, you can have a gun in Massachusetts just fine:

https://www.mass.gov/info-details/gun-ownership-in-massachusetts

But, because Massachusetts has stricter gun laws, mass shootings (specifically school shootings) there are as nonexistent as in Europe and it's generally one of the best states in terms of safety.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Mass_shootings_in_Massachusetts

Just 4 entries here, basically isolated incidents as anywhere else in the world.

Switzerland has a really strong gun culture and plenty of guns, but mass shootings are nonexistent. Go figure. Maybe it's proper regulations, as well as proper education and training?

You have blinders on.

This is purely demographics.

The reality of mass shootings is opposite of what the media shows.
https://mass-shootings.info/index.php?year=2022


Massachusetts has very low percentage of demographic in question.
Massachusetts is a predominantly white state, with over 70% of the population identifying as white (non-Hispanic)1234. The next largest racial or ethnic groups are Hispanic or Latino (11.6% to 12.6%)24, Asian (6.7% to 7.2%)134, and Black or African American (6.5% to 7.5%)



Switzerland is at least 94% white.



Demographics is destiny.

Mexico is more diverse and has stricter gun laws then Switzerland. Only 1 gun store in the entire country and it's on a miiltary base.

How safe would you consider Mexico to be?

[Xero_Daxter]

Początkowo opublikowane przez The Father ☯:

Początkowo opublikowane przez Ysosrscat:

You have blinders on.

This is purely demographics.

The reality of mass shootings is opposite of what the media shows.
https://mass-shootings.info/index.php?year=2022


Massachusetts has very low percentage of demographic in question.
Massachusetts is a predominantly white state, with over 70% of the population identifying as white (non-Hispanic)1234. The next largest racial or ethnic groups are Hispanic or Latino (11.6% to 12.6%)24, Asian (6.7% to 7.2%)134, and Black or African American (6.5% to 7.5%)



Switzerland is at least 94% white.



Demographics is destiny.

Mexico is more diverse and has stricter gun laws then Switzerland. Only 1 gun store in the entire country and it's on a miiltary base.

How safe would you consider Mexico to be?

You know it's bad when you go on vacation in Mexico to get captured by the Cartel.

[WhiteKnight77]

Początkowo opublikowane przez 계산 중:

Początkowo opublikowane przez Grynn:

Look at some of the states in America. The ones with the strictest gun laws have the highest acts of gun violence and crime in general, compare that to states with less gun restrictions

Are you sure about that?
https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/pressroom/sosmap/firearm_mortality/firearm.htm
https://worldpopulationreview.com/state-rankings/crime-rate-by-state

What you're claiming doesn't exactly seem to line up with statistics.

As U.S. Murder Rate Soars, N.H. Has Many Guns, Few Crimes[nhjournal.com]

[Xero_Daxter]

Początkowo opublikowane przez WhiteKnight77:

Początkowo opublikowane przez 계산 중:

Are you sure about that?
https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/pressroom/sosmap/firearm_mortality/firearm.htm
https://worldpopulationreview.com/state-rankings/crime-rate-by-state

What you're claiming doesn't exactly seem to line up with statistics.

As U.S. Murder Rate Soars, N.H. Has Many Guns, Few Crimes[nhjournal.com]

In my defense who lives in New Hampshire? Or Maine? I joke I joke. But it’s nice to see some places that has low crime rates.

[LQIM]

Making guns harder to get in the moment makes it harder for people to commit in the moment crimes, but does not make it any more difficult for dedicated criminals (the ones you really have to worry about) to get guns anyway. For example: schmool shmooters. Most schmool shmooters don't have previous criminal records, plan their attacks months to years out in advance, show massive red flags for a long time before the tragedy, and in most cases are willing to break the law (duh) to get a gun. Sure, stricter gun laws that don't outright ban certain things will stop some dude from randomly icing another dude because he was pissed, but all in all it's not that effective

Unless you're outright banning guns (glhf), you're not really going to reduce high-level gun crime through gun focused legislation