Comments on: Straight Shooting About Gun Control

By: Dread Pirate Brat

Dread Pirate Brat — Sat, 28 Apr 2007 08:12:46 +0000

More than war on guns (great turn of phrase), but war on freedoms perpetrated by control freaks. Monty, please sit down before you hurt yourself. xoxo, Brat

By: Norton

Norton — Fri, 27 Apr 2007 18:32:17 +0000

More gun control can only mean an eventual “War on Guns” and how fucking ironic is that.

By: Mark

Mark — Fri, 27 Apr 2007 15:29:58 +0000

What were’re discussing here is the recent calls for MORE gun control, based on VT. We don’t need it.

I already said some people shouldn’t own guns. I have no problem with that. As far as gun shows, the outright sales that are happening there are ILLEGAL.

Have you been to a gun show? You are subject to a background for ALL handguns, and MANY rifles. Point is, you can’t just walk in, buy one, and leave.

Private sales of handguns without the background checks are already illegal. Private sales of many rifles without background checks are already illegal.

The point is, the laws are already there. People are breaking them, because the laws are not being enforced.

That’s the whole of the matter.

As for the Tec-9, I have but one thing to say: Bloody Swedes.

By: Monty

Monty — Fri, 27 Apr 2007 15:21:34 +0000

The logical falacy that prevades many arguments is the movement from the specific to the general. Here we have the specific good laws like the waiting period and the outlaw of guns like the Tech 9, to some generality about how you can always get a gun and it won’t stop everything. Absolutely true. As long as gun shows still allow you to buy a gun and walk home with it… But the fact that you can’t stop all gun violence with laws does not mean you can’t stop some gun violence with laws. Nor does one law to prevent gun violence mean the government is about to break down your door and take all your guns. That’s just inflamatory rhetoric.

Let’s hear an argument for allowing mentally ill people to buy guns.
And one for allowing violent felons to buy guns.
And please tell me why we need the Tech 9.

And there is that other addage: “If you outlaw guns, only the government will have guns.”

Ronald Reagan wanted the Brady Bill passed. You think he is anti-gun? Bill Clinton signed it into law.

By: Mark

Mark — Fri, 27 Apr 2007 14:13:26 +0000

Monty, if you think you can slow it down by getting rid of the legal guns, then you might need to do a refresher course in Logic and Scientific Reasoning.

I’ll owe it to your sheltered upbringing in a foreign country that never allowed gun ownership … oh, wait … they still have a moderate amount of gun violence … hey … how did that happen, since were never never allowed to buy guns? Hmmm… so, uhhhh… only criminals own guns… and… the violence is pretty much the same… in a 100% gun control state… what the….? The mind boggles, dude.

As for my alleged “small penis,” 9-out-of-10 hot, Swedish chicks disagree. Of course, I can’t compare to a 7-foot tall Liberian named Ekim.

By: Jason

Jason — Fri, 27 Apr 2007 13:41:05 +0000

I don’t think he is arguing that we need guns Monty. It’s pretty much a given that there would be less violence in the world if guns didn’t exist. Sure they made hunting much easier in the colonial days, but that use is becoming much less a necessity obviously. I think what mark is trying to say is that, now that there is already a vast circulation of guns, gun control is going to be ineffective. Like I said above, someone who wants to acquire a gun is going to acquire one, whether through human error as Cho did, or through illegal dealing. Look at the tight restrictions on drugs, and the effect that has had.

Also, banning guns won’t guarantee a drop in violence. If you look at the genocide in Rowanda, most of the mass killings were carried out by men with machetes. That just goes to show you that even genocide can be carried out without the widespread use of guns.

By: Monty

Monty — Fri, 27 Apr 2007 12:58:27 +0000

But you can slow them down.

Americans and their little penises. They gotta carry a little penis around with them to compensate so they can be John Wayne. So they can feel powerful. So they can imagine that if they were at VT they would have shot that idiot and saved the day. The answer is more penises and bigger ones! Sure crazy people have them, so if my Mom and Grandma and sister and brother and Uncle have one too, then A) those crazy people won’t use them out of fear, and B) if they do, sis will shoot them dead…. Or C) more fights will end in bloodshed D) more depression will end in bullets to the brain E) more accidental shootings F) more easy to get guns for bad people…

Americans and their little penises need to get a grip and stop watching John Wayne movies. Live in reality. Stop watching Red Dawn too.

By: Jason

Jason — Thu, 26 Apr 2007 22:40:19 +0000

I agree that gun control laws will never prevent an act of violence. Someone who is determined to get their hands on a gun will do so, and probably fairly easily. Besides, people were killing each other before guns existed. You’ve got knives, clubs, even bow and arrow. You can’t restrict everything that someone can harm someone with.