"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?

[Anosmyk]

America in a nutshell
https://www.tiktok.com/t/ZTRKpPH59/

[GloriousZote]

Oprindeligt skrevet af KennyAtom:

Oprindeligt skrevet af Shodan 2.0:

Why not make it harder for those with mental health problems to get access to guns?

oh boy, i can't wait to be disqualified just because i'm on the autism spectrum

maybe disqualify some mental disorders, but not all

You give them an inch and they'll take a mile.
Give them nothing, don't increase these restrictions.

[GloriousZote]

Oprindeligt skrevet af 【Ａｎｏｓｍｙｋ】:

America in a nutshell
https://www.tiktok.com/t/ZTRKpPH59/

I'm not clicking on a tiktok link.

[Netaris]

Oprindeligt skrevet af The Duce:

No, it's because Switzerland has a very homogeneous society.

And because they weren't as destabilized as other european countries, remind that they were relatively unharmed by WW2. So they weren't colonized by America afterward, like the other countries that suffered from the war.

[KennyAtom]

Oprindeligt skrevet af GloriousZote:

Oprindeligt skrevet af KennyAtom:

oh boy, i can't wait to be disqualified just because i'm on the autism spectrum

maybe disqualify some mental disorders, but not all

You give them an inch and they'll take a mile.
Give them nothing, don't increase these restrictions.

true

don't give them anything, they want to destroy the constitution

[Charles]

That's nice and everything but it's a fact that practically any gun regulation eventually leads to confiscation and bans. Americans are 100% justified resisting any amount of gun control.

[Pocahawtness]

I am so tired of this debate.

The pro gun people don't want to lose their guns or have anyone make it more difficult to get a gun. They don't really care about the mass shootings and murders, they just don't want their "rights" compromised. The only time you will convince them otherwise is when something truly horrific happens, and so far nothing has even come close.

There. Solved. Now can we stop talking about it until there is a mass killing of at least 500 children?

[Netaris]

The main problem I have with gun control laws is : Historically in France, the main gun control policy was just before WW2, to disarm the average citizen just before a huge crisis. Today, we have the war in Ukraine, our economy being bested by Asia, etc and a growing pressure on gun owners at the same time ... It's sus and it was already done in the past, so it raise concerns for me.

The second point is : Regulating more harshly gun ownership for the law abiding citizens will not prevent criminals from having guns. It will only make more complicated for regular citizens to have access to guns. It's like the alcohol prohibition in America back then, we all know how it ended. If peoples really think they need guns for their protection, they'll find a way to obtain what they think they need. If you don't want peoples to think they need to ensure their own safety themselves, create a environment they can trust around them (we have the exact opposite today, at least where I live).

Rather than trying to enforce gun regulations, the politicians should first try to regain the trust of their citizens. That's one of the real solutions to violence and the very wish to own guns. I see in my country, how peoples who doesn't like guns at the start, now buy one or think about buying one, because of the distrust into the ability of their society to ensure their safety. The real problem is here I think.

[GloriousZote]

Oprindeligt skrevet af Pirate☠️Pocah:

I am so tired of this debate.

The pro gun people don't want to lose their guns or have anyone make it more difficult to get a gun. They don't really care about the mass shootings and murders, they just don't want their "rights" compromised. The only time you will convince them otherwise is when something truly horrific happens, and so far nothing has even come close.

There. Solved. Now can we stop talking about it until there is a mass killing of at least 500 children?

Typical anti-gun person advocating for unprecedented mass-shooting.

[Skkooomer Lord]

Guns protect from guns

No gun, no need to protect fromguns

[Anosmyk]

Oprindeligt skrevet af Lora Grim:

Oprindeligt skrevet af KennyAtom:

true

don't give them anything, they want to destroy the constitution

Violating the constitution is only okay when it is about infringing on minority groups constitutional right to pursue happiness.

Right-wingers advocate for their right to keep their guns while preaching how gays and trans people should lose their rights.

f*ck you and your guns.

Cute rat 🐀

[GloriousZote]

Oprindeligt skrevet af Lora Grim:

Oprindeligt skrevet af KennyAtom:

true

don't give them anything, they want to destroy the constitution

Violating the constitution is only okay when it is about infringing on minority groups constitutional right to pursue happiness.

Right-wingers advocate for their right to keep their guns while preaching how gays and trans people should lose their rights.

f*ck you and your guns.

Nobody ever said gays or trans people shouldn't have rights to guns.
(Okay some might but most right-wingers don't, never even seen a single one who does, and I'm right-wing.)
So stop making ♥♥♥♥ up.

[Lora Grim]

Oprindeligt skrevet af 【Ａｎｏｓｍｙｋ】:

Cute rat 🐀

Thanks. Her name was Pizza. Was a naughty bitey ratto.
My most photogenic rat.

[GloriousZote]

Oprindeligt skrevet af 【Ａｎｏｓｍｙｋ】:

Oprindeligt skrevet af GloriousZote:

Nobody ever said gays or trans people shouldn't have rights to guns.
(Okay some might but most right-wingers don't, never even seen a single one who does, and I'm right-wing.)
So stop making ♥♥♥♥ up.

That’s not what they said though they meant there general rights.

Okay, that still doesn't change my answer though. Haven't really seen that many people who think gays and trans people shouldn't have human rights.

[Anosmyk]

Oprindeligt skrevet af GloriousZote:

Oprindeligt skrevet af 【Ａｎｏｓｍｙｋ】:

That’s not what they said though they meant there general rights.

Okay, that still doesn't change my answer though. Haven't really seen that many people who think gays and trans people shouldn't have human rights.

Yeah everyday people it’s politicians that are