The Biden Gun Plan

Nice if we could get some opinions on guns which don't come from the extremes..those who want no restrictions on guns and those who want to ban all private ownership of guns.
 
dudalb said:
Nice if we could get some opinions on guns which don't come from the extremes..those who want no restrictions on guns and those who want to ban all private ownership of guns.
Click to expand...

I don't think you'll find too many Americans who want to ban all private ownership of guns. In almost every prime time TV show the heroes are packing heat. But there are legitimate questions to be asked about what firearms fulfill civilian purposes, and what someone should need to do to buy and own them. In particular, there's good reason to ask why a civilian should have AR15-style rifles, based on military weapons, that fire high-velocity rounds from high-capacity magazines. There's also good reason to ask whether concealed carry permits, rare only a few years ago, should be so easily or widely available.

The fact is that a majority of Americans don't own any guns, and they seem to get along just fine without them.
 
dudalb said:
Nice if we could get some opinions on guns which don't come from the extremes..those who want no restrictions on guns and those who want to ban all private ownership of guns.
Click to expand...
I've been very vocal in this sphere and I advocate for neither of those.
 
The intractable problem with gun control in this country is that it simply isn't politically popular with enough people.

Sure, you might be able to find a broad consensus of the public that agrees on banning "bad" gun (with definitions of what that is often being quite arbitrary), but these "bad" guns aren't really what are responsible for the overwhelming majority of gun violence.

You may be able to find a political consensus to regulate the features of scary rifles, or limit magazine capacity, or eliminate gimmicky attachments like pistol braces or bump stocks, but the second you start suggesting taking away the ability to acquire pistols that consensus evaporates. And pistols are exactly the types of weapons that are used when it comes to gun violence, both in the streets and in people's homes.

These gun control suggestions are just nibbling the crust around the turd sandwhich. The big turd in the middle is that people in the US want firearms that are useful for self-defense, especially pistols. So long as these types of guns are available, gun violence will never stop.
 
Last edited:
SuburbanTurkey said:
The intractable problem with gun control in this country is that it simply isn't politically popular with enough people.

Sure, you might be able to find a broad consensus of the public that agrees on banning "bad" gun (with definitions of what that is often being quite arbitrary), but these "bad" guns aren't really what are responsible for the overwhelming majority of gun violence.

You may be able to find a political consensus to regulate the features of scary rifles, or limit magazine capacity, or eliminate gimmicky attachments like pistol braces or bump stocks, but the second you start suggesting taking away the ability to acquire pistols that consensus evaporates. And pistols are exactly the types of weapons that are used when it comes to gun violence, both in the streets and in people's homes.

These gun control suggestions are just nibbling the crust around the turd sandwhich. The big turd in the middle is that people in the US want firearms that are useful for self-defense, especially pistols. So long as these types of guns are available, gun violence will never stop.
Click to expand...

Maybe we should ban "bad" people or scary people instead.
 
arthwollipot said:
I've been very vocal in this sphere and I advocate for neither of those.
Click to expand...

Last time I checked, your position seemed to be that gun ownership is not a right, and that all guns should be banned by default. You acknowledge some exceptions, for a very few types of guns as tools for a very few types of jobs. It's the citizen's burden to establish that an exception should be made in a specific case.

This is about as close as you can get to the 'ban all guns' extreme without literally banning all guns. And I do wonder why you even need the fig leaf. Why not simply say that you support a default gun ban, with a few necessary and reasonable exceptions?

Why waste time hiding behind technically correct, which is the worst kind of correct?

Your position is diametrically opposed to the position that gun ownership is a right, all guns should be allowed, and it's the government that has the burden of establishing the need for exceptions. And it's pretty far towards the extreme end.
 
Last edited:
theprestige said:
Last time I checked, your position seemed to be that gun ownership is not a right...
Click to expand...
Good so far.

theprestige said:
...and that all guns should be banned by default.
Click to expand...
Thunk!

theprestige said:
You acknowledge some exceptions, for a very few types of guns as tools for a very few types of jobs. It's the citizen's burden to establish that an exception should be made in a specific case.
Click to expand...
I see that even after all these years you do not have a grasp on my opinion on gun control that is not poisoned by your opinion of my opinion on gun control.

theprestige said:
This is about as close as you can get to the 'ban all guns' extreme without literally banning all guns.
Click to expand...
A bizarre mischaracterisation of my position, which I remind you has evolved since I first started posting about guns on this forum several years ago.

theprestige said:
And I do wonder why you even need the fig leaf. Why not simply say that you support a default gun ban, with a few necessary and reasonable exceptions?
Click to expand...
Because I don't!

theprestige said:
Why waste time hiding behind technically correct, which is the worst kind of correct?

Your position is diametrically opposed to the position that gun ownership is a right, all guns should be allowed, and it's the government that has the burden of establishing the need for exceptions. And it's pretty far towards the extreme end.
Click to expand...
Only to Americans. Only to Americans!

From my point of view it's America that has the extreme position - that gun ownership is a right, that no-one should be made to provide a reason for owning one, that the government should stay out of regulating peoples' lives, that any kind of gun control is some kind of punishment for legal gun owners. I mean WTF? How is that not the extreme position?
 
arthwollipot said:
Good so far.

Thunk!

I see that even after all these years you do not have a grasp on my opinion on gun control that is not poisoned by your opinion of my opinion on gun control.

A bizarre mischaracterisation of my position, which I remind you has evolved since I first started posting about guns on this forum several years ago.

Because I don't!

Only to Americans. Only to Americans!

From my point of view it's America that has the extreme position - that gun ownership is a right, that no-one should be made to provide a reason for owning one, that the government should stay out of regulating peoples' lives, that any kind of gun control is some kind of punishment for legal gun owners. I mean WTF? How is that not the extreme position?
Click to expand...
It is an extreme position.

But okay, update me on your shift in gun control. You said I was wrong a few times, but didn't take the opportunity to correct my mistakes.
 
theprestige said:
It is an extreme position.

But okay, update me on your shift in gun control. You said I was wrong a few times, but didn't take the opportunity to correct my mistakes.
Click to expand...
One example - I am no longer opposed to the availability of silencers (aka suppressors). I was convinced on that by a discussion on this very forum in which I argued for their illegality. Perhaps you remember it.
 
arthwollipot said:
From my point of view it's America that has the extreme position - that gun ownership is a right, that no-one should be made to provide a reason for owning one, that the government should stay out of regulating peoples' lives, that any kind of gun control is some kind of punishment for legal gun owners. I mean WTF? How is that not the extreme position?
Click to expand...

How do you feel about Switzerland?

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

I can see how you Aussies might not see value in firearms as a right, seeing as you folks were the penal colony, not the brave rebels that we Amerkins are!!!! I'm pretty opposed to handing out guns to criminals too...
:cool:
 
dudalb said:
Nice if we could get some opinions on guns which don't come from the extremes..those who want no restrictions on guns and those who want to ban all private ownership of guns.
Click to expand...

I've tried to be a voice of reason, but I get attacked more than one might be expected to on a skeptics forum.

I can carefully explain how I follow the rules, but still get attacked by those don't really care to read or understand the law.

I even made a video one time to explain a gun control law. Of course it didn't work. One of the forum hoplophobes didn't bother with the video and went right to that's ILLEGAL and resorted to a personal attack when I objected. The forum admin made it entirely clear that these personal attacks were not against the rules when I reported the posts.

I was able to convince the mods that sexually harassing a member over posts about guns was bad; after months of complaining.

The irony is that trying to accomplish the same thing on some gun forums leads to worse behavior; "guns'er bad except for the kind I own".
 
Emily's Cat said:
How do you feel about Switzerland?

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

I can see how you Aussies might not see value in firearms as a right, seeing as you folks were the penal colony, not the brave rebels that we Amerkins are!!!! I'm pretty opposed to handing out guns to criminals too...
:cool:
Click to expand...
As I never tire of pointing out, convict transportation ended in 1868, when it was already no more than a trickle, an entire generation before Australia even existed. The vast majority of European settlers were free immigrants. "Convict origins" is largely a myth.

But let's talk about the Biden gun plan again.
 
Emily's Cat said:
How do you feel about Switzerland?

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

I can see how you Aussies might not see value in firearms as a right, seeing as you folks were the penal colony, not the brave rebels that we Amerkins are!!!! I'm pretty opposed to handing out guns to criminals too...
:cool:
Click to expand...


Why Switzerland? They have a well regulated Army. A rifle is given to you to take home as well as a sealed box of ammunition. Serious jail time will result if the box's seal is broken.
 
Elagabalus said:
Why Switzerland? They have a well regulated Army. A rifle is given to you to take home as well as a sealed box of ammunition. Serious jail time will result if the box's seal is broken.
Click to expand...
They give you a gun but you're not allowed to use it? I thought that after mandatory service, you continued to be considered a part of the reserve, and you had the gun so that you could be called up in times of necessity.
 
arthwollipot said:
As I never tire of pointing out, convict transportation ended in 1868, when it was already no more than a trickle, an entire generation before Australia even existed. The vast majority of European settlers were free immigrants. "Convict origins" is largely a myth.
Click to expand...

The American Rebel is also a myth. But I still thought it was humorous... :(
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom