4 ms·

To be Fair, based on the History of " restrict guns " it is clear no amount of restrictions is enough to satisfy those that want to restrict guns, confiscatio

To be Fair, based on the History of " restrict guns " it is clear no amount of restrictions is enough to satisfy those that want to restrict guns, confiscation and total ban is the clear end goal it is NOT "bad faith" to say that, when there is clear evidence that no matter how many times compromise is reached they return the very next day asking for more and more restrictions

shkkmo 4y ago
Factually false, if you believe this you are in an echo chamber. Yes, there are a few who want to ban guns, but I know many people, some of whom are gun owners, who support reasonable restrictions. Trying to paint the entire movement with the views of it's most extreme members is absolutely bad faith communication.
- phpisthebest 4y ago
  So "gun owners" fall into 2 camps 1. Sport Shooters 2. Self Defenders There are some that over lap, but I am not a sport shooter, i own guns exclusively for self defense, most gun owners that "support reasonable restrictions" do so because they only care about maintaining shooting sports, and are fine with restrictions because normally they are targeted to self defense uses of fire arms. There is also a small subset of gun owners that are ignorant of the current state of law and believe rhetoric like "closing the gun show loop hole" or other such non-sense. None of this however changes the fact that the MAJOR organizations that support gun control, and big name politicians pushing for gun control have their implicit stated goal of total ban of the most common weapons in use today, (Semi-Auto rifles and pistols with capacities greater than 8) So sure maybe they will allow people to have a black power musket, or some other such non-sense and you believe that classifies as "not a total ban" but to me that is a total ban
  - shkkmo 4y ago
    > So "gun owners" fall into 2 camps Again, not true. You need to get out of your filter bubble and meet more kinds of people. People own guns for many reasons and those different reasons do drive different gun usage. A ban on semi-automatic rifles and high capacity pistols is not even remotely the same thing as banning all guns or even banning all non muskets. I don't think such a ban has popular support even among those who do support greater restrictions.
MaysonL 4y ago
To be fair, banning guns seems to also ban mass shootings.
- pitaj 4y ago
  At face value, it may seem to, but whether it practically would, in the US especially, is a totally different question.
  - hsbauauvhabzb 4y ago
    At the very least the reduced access would reduce occurrences and fatality rates. UK and Australia are probably good comparable cultures/case studies.
  - MaysonL 4y ago
    Are there countries where guns have been banned, and mass shootings increase? Are there countries where banned guns have been allowed, and mass shootings increased?
    - Alupis 4y ago
      Other countries have their own version of mass shootings. They often involve knives, explosives, or vehicles instead. You trade one for the other. Mentally unstable/unhealthy people commit mass violent acts regardless of the tools available. In practically zero cases of mass shootings was the assailant completely mentally healthy. Taking away one particular violent tool is not going to solve the mental health problem in this country.
      - bb88 4y ago
        > They often involve knives, explosives, or vehicles instead. Which, btw, are all regulated in the US.
  - pksebben 4y ago
    https://www.ojp.gov/ncjrs/virtual-library/abstracts/australian-firearms-buyback-and-its-effect-gun-deaths https://www.ojp.gov/ncjrs/virtual-library/abstracts/australi...

shkkmo 4y ago

Factually false, if you believe this you are in an echo chamber. Yes, there are a few who want to ban guns, but I know many people, some of whom are gun owners, who support reasonable restrictions. Trying to paint the entire movement with the views of it's most extreme members is absolutely bad faith communication.

phpisthebest 4y ago
So "gun owners" fall into 2 camps 1. Sport Shooters 2. Self Defenders There are some that over lap, but I am not a sport shooter, i own guns exclusively for self defense, most gun owners that "support reasonable restrictions" do so because they only care about maintaining shooting sports, and are fine with restrictions because normally they are targeted to self defense uses of fire arms. There is also a small subset of gun owners that are ignorant of the current state of law and believe rhetoric like "closing the gun show loop hole" or other such non-sense. None of this however changes the fact that the MAJOR organizations that support gun control, and big name politicians pushing for gun control have their implicit stated goal of total ban of the most common weapons in use today, (Semi-Auto rifles and pistols with capacities greater than 8) So sure maybe they will allow people to have a black power musket, or some other such non-sense and you believe that classifies as "not a total ban" but to me that is a total ban
- shkkmo 4y ago
  > So "gun owners" fall into 2 camps Again, not true. You need to get out of your filter bubble and meet more kinds of people. People own guns for many reasons and those different reasons do drive different gun usage. A ban on semi-automatic rifles and high capacity pistols is not even remotely the same thing as banning all guns or even banning all non muskets. I don't think such a ban has popular support even among those who do support greater restrictions.

MaysonL 4y ago

To be fair, banning guns seems to also ban mass shootings.

pitaj 4y ago
At face value, it may seem to, but whether it practically would, in the US especially, is a totally different question.
- hsbauauvhabzb 4y ago
  At the very least the reduced access would reduce occurrences and fatality rates. UK and Australia are probably good comparable cultures/case studies.
- MaysonL 4y ago
  Are there countries where guns have been banned, and mass shootings increase? Are there countries where banned guns have been allowed, and mass shootings increased?
  - Alupis 4y ago
    Other countries have their own version of mass shootings. They often involve knives, explosives, or vehicles instead. You trade one for the other. Mentally unstable/unhealthy people commit mass violent acts regardless of the tools available. In practically zero cases of mass shootings was the assailant completely mentally healthy. Taking away one particular violent tool is not going to solve the mental health problem in this country.
    - bb88 4y ago
      > They often involve knives, explosives, or vehicles instead. Which, btw, are all regulated in the US.
- pksebben 4y ago
  https://www.ojp.gov/ncjrs/virtual-library/abstracts/australian-firearms-buyback-and-its-effect-gun-deaths https://www.ojp.gov/ncjrs/virtual-library/abstracts/australi...