Opponents of stricter gun control – what would it take to change your mind?

posted 2 years ago in The Lounge
Post # 437
Member
41 posts
Newbee
  • Wedding: May 2014

View original reply
@ tiffanybruiser   

I certainly wasn’t saying that we don’t have a gun problem, but I wouldn’t call it just a gun problem. Getting rid of the guns won’t stop these people from committing the ultimate crime, they’ll find another means to do it by. That’s why I was saying that stricter gun laws, such as background checks for an example, is only part of the equation.  I cannot answer for all pro-gun people, only for myself.

 

As for your questions about “Trump signed into law the repeal of a measure that would have plausibly prevented certain classes of mentally ill people from purchasing firearms by allowing a new data source to be included the system that runs those background checks” – this is not black and white because it doesn’t tell the whole story. Note it says certain classes in the headline, the class in question are people incapable of managing their financial affairs. I’m not a physiatrist or phycologist, so I don’t know if these people were a danger to themselves or others, it’s not made clear. So no, I’m not just going to jump on a band-wagon and say these people should or shouldn’t have been on a list because I’m not an expert in mental health to be able to justify it either way. My opinion is of people that are a danger to themselves and/or others that have been classified in no way should be able to purchase firearms. Yes, while the President may not be moving into the direction of stricter gun law, my guess is that’s not the only reason people vote for a particular president.

 

Again, I can’t speak for all gun enthusiasts and my post overall was in no way solely about trying to educate people about guns. I only mentioned that at the end because of what we see in media. I agree that everyone – both pro and anti-gun people need to rally together, however the problem is always finding a middle ground where both parties compromise in this area.

Post # 438
Member
7591 posts
Bumble Beekeeper

View original reply
@ MrsAl14   Getting rid of the guns won’t stop these people from committing the ultimate crime, they’ll find another means to do it by. 

This is the worst argument of them all. Do you really buy this? Because by this logic, why do we have any gun laws at all? Or, why do we have security at airports? If a terrorist wants to fly a plane into a building, they’ll find a way.

Why do we put up barriers by pedestrian walkways in urban areas? If a terrorist wants to drive a truck into a crowd he’ll find a way, right? Might as well throw up our hands and accept our fate!

Why have drunk driving checkpoints? If someone wants to get hammered and drive, they’re not gonna be deterred by the thought of getting a DIU, right?

Why even bother having law enforcement, for that matter? If someone is determined to commit a crime, by your logic they won’t be stopped, so there’s no point in trying to make it even a little bit harder for them.

Except no, that’s not true at all. The reason we do these things is because we’re trying to make it more difficult for would-be criminals to achieve their goals. And while these measures don’t succeed 100% of the time, they succeed an awful lot, so they’re worth pursuing. It’s the same with guns. Not every would-be perpetrator of gun violence is automatically going to succeed. You really don’t think it’s worth trying to make it a little harder for these people by restricting their access to guns?

Post # 439
Member
41 posts
Newbee
  • Wedding: May 2014

View original reply
@ tiffanybruiser   Where in any of my statements did I say it’s not worth trying to make it harder for these people by restricting their access to guns? No where. I AGREED with you that stricter laws will help. All I said was a full ban on guns isn’t going to solve the problem. 

At this point you seem to be trying to argue with me when I have already agreed with a lot of your statement. And it is not the worst argument stating that completely getting rid of guns won’t stop the ultimate crime, it’s a fact – pipe bombs and such are becoming more popular and are equally as deadly. So no, I would never support a full ban on guns. I do support better restrictions, particularly when it comes to people that are known and reported dangers as is the case in MOST of these horrible acts of violence. 

I’m not here to argue with anyone, just putting my opinion out there that this is not only about guns. 

Post # 440
Member
2112 posts
Buzzing bee
  • Wedding: May 2016

banning high power guns, your right wont stop people. But what kind of logic is that, well banning guns wont stop people so we shouldnt ban them??!? It curbs the problem at the very least, which is a hell of a lot better then doing nothing. 

and you could apply that to any scenerio today… We didnt have strict airport security 20 years ago before 9/11 but now we do, and yes its a pain in the ass, but do you see anymore plans flying into buildings…. will it stop it completely, time will tell.. but its better then standing there doing nothing…

Post # 441
Member
3968 posts
Honey bee
  • Wedding: October 2015

I haven’t read a lot of the responses, but I can imagine there are several I agree with and several I don’t. Here’s my take:

Firstly, let me just put this out there: Gun control does NOT equate to “take all of my guns away.” If you think that’s what it means or that’s how you view “gun control”, you need to be educated quickly. This viewpoint is straight up idiotic. Not a single person is drafting legislature i and seriously suggesting we outlaw ALL GUNS. 

Secondly, if you are a good, law abiding, responsible gun owner, why the fuck wouldn’t you want gun ownership to be something that is more vetted? Why wouldn’t you want to make sure that all those who owned guns were of sound mind and WEREN’T going to shoot up an elementary school? From a pragmatic point, that just makes y’all as a collective look GOOD if these are the types of standards you set. So, why the hesitatation and outcry? Is it because some of you “good” people wouldn’t actually pass a background check? That maybe you shouldn’t be owning a gun? 

Also, own as many guns as you’d like. By assault rifles that are created with the sole intention of slaughtering hundreds of people? Sorry, but please justify that to me. Go ahead, I’ll wait. Because you can’t. 

Not to make broad accusations, but in my experience living in the “south” it’s like this: The same people who use the argument, “It makes no use to make guns illegal – they’ll just obtain them illegally” are the same folks who want to outlaw abortion and who foam at the mouth at the thought of illegal immigrants. Why bother trying to outlaw abortion? Women’ll just get abortions anyway, right? Why bother inacting further regulations on immigration? They’ll just find another way in, right? 

We are the only society that deals with these massacres on a semi-regular basis. The answer is out there. It’s pretty simple, but when a majority of those who hold seats in Congress and Senate have the NRA in their pockets, it’s certainly hard to pass any real legislature. 

I’ll end with this. If you are against any type of gun regulations, here you go:

Alyssa

Scott

Aaron

Martin

Nicholas

Jaime

Chris

Luke

Cara

Gina

Joaquin

Alaina

Meadow

Helena 

Alex

Carmen

Peter

These are the names of the seventeen people who were killed on Wednesday with a gun that a mentally unstable individual should not have had access to. Say these names out loud. Imagine their faces. Their lives. The crater that their absence is going to leave in their families. 

Not enough? Would you like the names of 27 Sandy Hook victims? How about the 58 names of the Las Vegas victims? How many is too many? How much is too much?

Excuse the fuck out of me if I don’t want to be shot in the tit while attending a movie by a crazed maniac wielding a gun he shouldn’t have ever had access to. 

Post # 442
Member
782 posts
Busy bee

View original reply
@ MrsMeowton   There actually are several people calling for the banning of all guns. Claiming that “not a single person” is saying that is just ridiculous. I get your point, that reasonable people are not, but by going so extreme it reduces your post to hyperbole and over the top emotion. I’ve seen them on Facebook, people that I know personally, and I’ve seen it from people in the news. However, I’m glad you recognize that the idea of doing that is idiotic.

Post # 443
Member
3968 posts
Honey bee
  • Wedding: October 2015

View original reply
@ bear123   Okay, I guess I should have made myself plainer. What representative is bringing a piece of legislature to the table with this in mind? Your Aunt Becky in CA obviously doesn’t count. 

Also, excuse the hell out of me for getting a little emotional that seventeen people are dead once again due to a completely preventable situation. Wow. I am a total monster. 

Post # 444
Member
782 posts
Busy bee

View original reply
@ MrsMeowton   We’re all emotional, it’s heartbreaking. But yelling at people on a forum isn’t changing anyone’s opinions or any laws. And I never called you a monster.

Post # 445
Member
3968 posts
Honey bee
  • Wedding: October 2015

View original reply
@ bear123   Where exactly am I yelling? Sorry if my post hurt your feelings. You are getting wildly off course here, so let’s just terminate our back and forth here before this thread gets derailed. 

Post # 446
Member
782 posts
Busy bee

View original reply
@ MrsMeowton   My feelings aren’t hurt at all. I read someone writing “excuse the hell out of me” as yelling/having some anger behind it. But if you didn’t mean it that way, cool.

Post # 447
Member
9127 posts
Buzzing Beekeeper

View original reply
@ Horseradish   You are dead on with the cherry picking statement. I haven’t read the constitution and amendendments in awhile (not American) but doesn’t the whole first paragraph that starts with “We the people” talk about the protection and wellbeing of citizens? 

Which would led me to question aren’t the citizens who died in gun crimes worth the same constitution as gun owners? Where is their wellbeing and protection or that of their family, friends and fellow students/colleagues in all of this? It says in the first freaking paragraph that that is what the point of the constitution is.

Post # 448
Member
118 posts
Blushing bee
  • Wedding: May 2017

I recently moved to Texas and as anyone knows people are overwhelmingly pro-guns here. Most my coworkers carry. It took a while, but eventally DH and I decided to purchase a handgun ourselves after taking a class and getting licensed. 

I just wanted to shed some light on what seems to be popular opinion here, based on talking to neighbors and coworkers (from both left and right leaning). They aren’t blaming guns with the same reasoning that you wouldn’t blame a car if a person drove into a crowd people, you wouldn’t blame a knife if a person decided to go on a stabbing spree, you wouldn’t blame an airplane if a terrorist decided to crash it into a building…etc. They don’t seem to understand that the whole purpose of a gun is to kill and I think that’s why it’s easy to lump it together with other inanimate things. Whenever anyone here brings up stricter gun control laws, they bring up cities like Chicago where gun control laws are very strict, yet violence involving guns is extremely high. My coworker brought up the church shooting that happened last year somewhere in Texas, the shooter was taken down by a neighbor with a gun (yikes)…Their logic seems to be that once guns are taken away from the responsible, law abiding citizens, they will basically be sitting ducks because what’s going to stop the criminals from giving up their arms? Schools are obviously a place where guns are NOT allowed on the premises…is that why they seem to be the target? I know this is such sick thinking but its the sad reality what state the US is. 

Oh, when DH and I bought our gun, they ran a background check on us. We learned that when you legally purchase a gun they WILL run a background check on you, and if you have misdemeanor you will be denied a sale. Now if you buy one illegally off a friend or on craigslist…well…can’t really control that :/ I have no idea if any of the shooters in the US obtained their guns legally or not but it’s clear there needs to be some way to control this.

Anyway, I’m just relaying things I’ve heard from others. I don’t know anything other than I’m 100% for stricter gun control laws, heck, I’d love it if the US were like other countries where purchasing a gun would be as likey as purchasing a white tiger…but…we’re not :/ 

Post # 449
Member
2112 posts
Buzzing bee
  • Wedding: May 2016

View original reply
@ staackepancakes   unfortunately some of these younger kids who are commiting these acts are getting there guns from their parents….. and there in lies an even bigger problem.. sure the parents could be outstanding law abiding citizens, but when kids have access to such guns, any form of vetting process you would have to go through, well you might as well throw that out the window..

Post # 451
Member
1516 posts
Bumble bee

A lot people seem to follow the “only good guys with guns can stop bad guys with guns” doctrine and therefore don’t support gun control. This doesn’t go with my logic. If you don’t have any control then how do you know who are they good guys? or do they rely on odds that if one bad guy has a gun there has to be more than one good guy who can shoot him? how does the good guy decide if the bad you is bad enough so they can justify killing them? If governent agrees that the mental care in the states is not good enough the  who makes sure that the good guy who is a killer now doesn’t get PTSD? Why would the president sign a bill that gives the mentally unstable to have guns and then say mental issues are a problem in the country? Aren’t the good guys with guns dangerous since they might have never handled a gun since it is not required to own one? 

I just can’t follow the good guy/bad guy logic how it is a defence to not having gun control. Wouldn’t it be the other way around. Less guns for bad guys and more than for good guys with guns control? It’s not as black and white as who is good and who is bad and still the bad guys can get guns legally even with background checks. But wouldn’t one potential life saved worth it since this won’t affect the responsible owners?

Leave a comment


Find Amazing Vendors