Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[EuchreJack]

That video is quite interesting.

[lemon10]

Good answer, but I think the part that pisses me off is the part where each gun costs money to register.
Sure, that $50 registration fee^hypothetical on one gun doesn't sound too bad.
But what if you had 10 guns prior to the new law?

Damn, maybe I SHOULD Shoot the Gun Dealers! They're gonna make a killing on this shit.

Ah, Democrats.  Always finding new ways to tax people.

Okay, I'll bite, WHY do you need 10 different guns?
Like for self defense you need one, and if you have 2 adults in your family you could argue for 2. I suppose for hunting you would want yet another one each, so 4 total, but what are the other 6 for?
TBH if people are just hording tons of guns for no reason or to use as toys it feels reasonable to put a price on doing so.

[EuchreJack]

Good answer, but I think the part that pisses me off is the part where each gun costs money to register.
Sure, that $50 registration fee^hypothetical on one gun doesn't sound too bad.
But what if you had 10 guns prior to the new law?

Damn, maybe I SHOULD Shoot the Gun Dealers! They're gonna make a killing on this shit.

Ah, Democrats.  Always finding new ways to tax people.

Okay, I'll bite, WHY do you need 10 different guns?
Like for self defense you need one, and if you have 2 adults in your family you could argue for 2. I suppose for hunting you would want yet another one each, so 4 total, but what are the other 6 for?
TBH if people are just hording tons of guns for no reason or to use as toys it feels reasonable to put a price on doing so.

Why NOT?

Spoiler: A brief 2nd Amendment rant (click to show/hide)

Look, the 2nd Amendment doesn't say I need a reason to bear arms.  It just says not to infringe upon it. And with excessive regulations on firearms, there is a very good chance that when a person feels unsafe, they WON'T be able to get a firearm to protect themselves.  The waiting time on handguns is about 6 months.  If something happens and a person is now afraid for their life, they want their gun TODAY. Ergo, why I'm so pissy about the "why" question, as it has and will be used to restrict gun ownership, sometimes unfairly.

But some more serious answers:
1) We are talking about converting a fixed cost (pay $700 get gun) into a variable cost ($50 every 3 years, plus original fixed cost) that is forced upon the purchaser after the sale.
2) There are more than 10 kinds of guns.  Each gun feels and shoots differently.  They vary in range and penetration ability. Different guns for different animals.
3) Collection/investment value.  Without massive gun regulations, a firearm is a semi-decent investment.  But I personally wouldn't recommend it now.
4) Larger families.  A grandparent might want their grandchildren to have guns when they are adults.  And a Good Catholic family has plenty of children and grandchildren.

[hector13]

So what is the whole “well regulated militia” part of the second amendment about?

[feelotraveller]

That's about who has the nukes.  Am I right?   
(Personal nukes for everyone...  ... maybe ...)

[None]

I dunno man, if you can afford to keep ten guns as a hobby, I'm not especially sympathetic to whichever $50 registration tax you're afraid of. You don't need a gun to vote, get to work, or otherwise continue to secure food and home for one's miserable existence.

And if you feel like you will need guns to secure food and home for one's miserable existence in the near or far future (hunting notwithstanding), I'm gonna have to ask you to look real hard at yourself about how you'll face society if your contingency is to take from your neighbor by force or threat of death.

This is all a pretty dumb tangent to the otherwise pressing current event where a recently-turned 18-year-old bought a firearm with the intent to massacre a school. I'm not yet worried about the milspec larpers with basement armories or historical enthustiasts.

[nenjin]

No collection is complete without at least 4 different ways to mass execute people. Think of the children! I mean, the children you'll pass those guns on to, not the ones killed by them.

And if you feel like you will need guns to secure food and home for one's miserable existence in the near or far future (hunting notwithstanding), I'm gonna have to ask you to look real hard at yourself about how you'll face society if your contingency is to take from your neighbor by force or threat of death.

Welcome to the entire crux of the gun argument that gun zealots don't want to address because it makes them look bad. "Fuck you, as long as I get mine it's moral." The phrase I've had said to me by people I know is "When the shit hits the fan, do you want to be the one who isn't packing heat?" The entire premise is based on a doomsday future, whether that's a dictatorial government or societal collapse. A future some people even seem eager to live through.

The other one being (and yes, this has been uttered by my friends who support owning all the guns) "Bruh, guns are cool." See the above statements for a direct example of that.

[anewaname]

Or even, what is "well regulated"?

[EuchreJack]

Or even, what is "well regulated"?

Trained in use of the Nukes, obviously.
You don't want "poorly regulated" Nuclear Silos, right? 
...more seriously, it's interesting to note that Militas themselves are Quite Illegal in the United States.

[EuchreJack]

No collection is complete without at least 4 different ways to mass execute people. Think of the children! I mean, the children you'll pass those guns on to, not the ones killed by them.

And if you feel like you will need guns to secure food and home for one's miserable existence in the near or far future (hunting notwithstanding), I'm gonna have to ask you to look real hard at yourself about how you'll face society if your contingency is to take from your neighbor by force or threat of death.

Welcome to the entire crux of the gun argument that gun zealots don't want to address because it makes them look bad. "Fuck you, as long as I get mine it's moral." The phrase I've had said to me by people I know is "When the shit hits the fan, do you want to be the one who isn't packing heat?" The entire premise is based on a doomsday future, whether that's a dictatorial government or societal collapse. A future some people even seem eager to live through.

The other one being (and yes, this has been uttered by my friends who support owning all the guns) "Bruh, guns are cool." See the above statements for a direct example of that.

Oh, you're so so wrong about this!

I've heard plenty of gun nuts claim they want guns so that, should the cops try to kill them, they can kill the cops that are trying to kill them.

... It's almost like you've never heard of the Black Panthers.

[Max™]

Well regulated meant "trained and equipped to a standard sufficient for supporting and fighting alongside professional soldiers if necessary" basically.

Also: ha ha ha, militias are hardly illegal, holy shit who told you that?

Spoiler: A brief 2nd Amendment rant (click to show/hide)

Look, the 2nd Amendment doesn't say I need a reason to bear arms.  It just says not to infringe upon it. And with excessive regulations on firearms, there is a very good chance that when a person feels unsafe, they WON'T be able to get a firearm to protect themselves.  The waiting time on handguns is about 6 months.  If something happens and a person is now afraid for their life, they want their gun TODAY. Ergo, why I'm so pissy about the "why" question, as it has and will be used to restrict gun ownership, sometimes unfairly.

Well, no, following the 2008 decision in Heller it has been treated as a positive right delegated to individuals to own and carry all sorts of absurdly lethal and frankly impossible to imagine weapons when it was written, rather than a prohibition against the federal government trying to limit the ability of local and state governments to form and train militias.

That whole personal freedom to own guns bullshit only really even showed up around the civil rights era anyways, funny how that worked out huh, especially because you got life FUCKED if you think the racist ass slave owning pieces of shit in the southern states would have EVER ratified the 2nd amendment if they thought it meant free black men could own guns.

Like, seriously dude, if you think that is the case, maybe check where the foundation of this idea you have came from, see what motivation whoever was pushing it may have had to distort the way things are interpreted?

[Rolan7]

I "love" that we're quibbling over what the founding fathers meant.
They were people like us.  Imagine yourself in their shoes for a moment.  For an hour, for several hours in oppressive heat while wearing the stupid rough cloth clothes they wore.

[nenjin]

I've heard plenty of gun nuts claim they want guns so that, should the cops try to kill them, they can kill the cops that are trying to kill them.

Cops, feds, gang members, home invaders, thieves, rapists, school shooters, random psychopaths and people that "just don't belong in our neighborhood."

Everyone has their boogeyman to justify it. The color of their skin doesn't mean anything.

But since you brought it up anyways, it's like you've never heard of George Floyd, Ferguson or Ahmed Aubrey.

[EuchreJack]

Great, I was just about to post an article about the Heller decision:
https://abcnews.go.com/amp/US/supreme-court-stands-amendment/story?id=85136299

[Frumple]

I "love" that we're quibbling over what the founding fathers meant.
They were people like us.  Imagine yourself in their shoes for a moment.  For an hour, for several hours in oppressive heat while wearing the stupid rough cloth clothes they wore.

I don't particularly feel like imagining myself in the shoes of someone that raped a slave, though. Can do without it, y'know? _{(which one am I talking about, exactly? Who knows, that wouldn't narrow down the list nearly as much as it should)}

They were definitely people sharing our species, but with like maybe two or three exceptions what we know of them indicate that most of them were pretty intensely horrible people, of the sort I can't easily get my head into the same mental space of, and frankly hope to any bloody thing that will listen that I'll never be able to.

You can understand how someone would act without having to put yourself directly in their shoes, though, and thank consensual fornication for that.

e: though no aggro directed at you personally, rol, it's just a thought experiment that hit me as genuinely repugnant, the founding fathers were mostly immoral sacks of shit on the net, not a headspace you want to put yourself in