5 ms·

So if there were a “War on Guns” in the US, do you think it would be targeted toward “rural America” or the “inner city”?

shadowgovt 4y ago
There really doesn't have to be a war on guns. Ban manufacture and sale to any party but the US government and let entropy do the work.
- Philorandroid 4y ago
  There are plenty of resources out there for reactivating spent 9x19mm casings (Project ButWhatAbout) with supplies legally available in Western Europe, it's wishful thinking that just banning ammo would pan out. The genie's kind of out of the bottle.
  - zzzeek 4y ago
    if selling your gun was illegal, sure, you could still sell it. but would you choose to sell it to a loner, mentally unstable 18 year old knowing you'd be in serious trouble if that gun were used in a crime and they named you as the source of the gun? If the kid isn't killed in the mass shooting, and he says "I got the gun from..." seems not worth the risk
    - throwuwu 4y ago
      If it’s illegal then it’ll just be done the same way as making an illegal purchase is now, probably by asking around until you find someone that “knows a guy”. Either that or you’d just steal one.
    - Philorandroid 4y ago
      You know, I could've sworn the post I was responding to said "of ammo", hence why I spoke about building ammo and not guns. But the conclusion remains the same in that making a working firearm at home isn't difficult, and there exist a plethora of designs like the FGC-9 family that can be assembled from easy-to-acquire parts, no manufacturer needed.
sharemywin 4y ago
cities because they would be the only ones to pass any real gun legislation but that's blocked by the supreme court.
- sharemywin 4y ago
  because the second amendment is the only clause of the constitution that's allowed a literal interpretation.
  - fnordpiglet 4y ago
    Except it’s not. Well regulated militias are about the states ability to muster a militia. Militias have scopes and scales associated with them, such as ages and dispositions. For instance in Washington state, “Idiots, lunatics, paupers and vagabonds, habitual drunkards and persons convicted of infamous crimes” and people younger than 18 and older than 45 years old, as well as government officials and judiciary and legislature, are not eligible for the militia, organized or unorganized. So, why are they eligible for consideration under the second amendment?
- scarface74 4y ago
  And how effective do you think it will be to ban guns in cities and doesn’t that go back to my point of giving police yet another reason to harass minorities unequally?
  - Nextgrid 4y ago
    Police already have plenty of (proven successful) ways to harass or murder and get away with it, I'm not sure they need one more?
    - scarface74 4y ago
      And we should be taking tools out of their hands not giving them more.
- stametseater 4y ago
fnordpiglet 4y ago
I don’t think there should be wars in general. I think the old adage of “if you make guns illegal only criminals would have guns” is vacuously true and entirely the point. You can then arrest them for owning a gun rather than waiting for them to commit a crime with that gun. Practically speaking I think this is unlikely to be possible in the US. Banning guns would be a dead letter law. Guns are so widely owned and pervasive it would be impossible to implement. I expect law enforcement won’t want to get involved either due to how dangerous disarming an entire populace would be.

shadowgovt 4y ago

There really doesn't have to be a war on guns. Ban manufacture and sale to any party but the US government and let entropy do the work.

Philorandroid 4y ago
There are plenty of resources out there for reactivating spent 9x19mm casings (Project ButWhatAbout) with supplies legally available in Western Europe, it's wishful thinking that just banning ammo would pan out. The genie's kind of out of the bottle.
- zzzeek 4y ago
  if selling your gun was illegal, sure, you could still sell it. but would you choose to sell it to a loner, mentally unstable 18 year old knowing you'd be in serious trouble if that gun were used in a crime and they named you as the source of the gun? If the kid isn't killed in the mass shooting, and he says "I got the gun from..." seems not worth the risk
  - throwuwu 4y ago
    If it’s illegal then it’ll just be done the same way as making an illegal purchase is now, probably by asking around until you find someone that “knows a guy”. Either that or you’d just steal one.
  - Philorandroid 4y ago
    You know, I could've sworn the post I was responding to said "of ammo", hence why I spoke about building ammo and not guns. But the conclusion remains the same in that making a working firearm at home isn't difficult, and there exist a plethora of designs like the FGC-9 family that can be assembled from easy-to-acquire parts, no manufacturer needed.

sharemywin 4y ago

cities because they would be the only ones to pass any real gun legislation but that's blocked by the supreme court.

sharemywin 4y ago
because the second amendment is the only clause of the constitution that's allowed a literal interpretation.
- fnordpiglet 4y ago
  Except it’s not. Well regulated militias are about the states ability to muster a militia. Militias have scopes and scales associated with them, such as ages and dispositions. For instance in Washington state, “Idiots, lunatics, paupers and vagabonds, habitual drunkards and persons convicted of infamous crimes” and people younger than 18 and older than 45 years old, as well as government officials and judiciary and legislature, are not eligible for the militia, organized or unorganized. So, why are they eligible for consideration under the second amendment?
scarface74 4y ago
And how effective do you think it will be to ban guns in cities and doesn’t that go back to my point of giving police yet another reason to harass minorities unequally?
- Nextgrid 4y ago
  Police already have plenty of (proven successful) ways to harass or murder and get away with it, I'm not sure they need one more?
  - scarface74 4y ago
    And we should be taking tools out of their hands not giving them more.
stametseater 4y ago

fnordpiglet 4y ago

I don’t think there should be wars in general. I think the old adage of “if you make guns illegal only criminals would have guns” is vacuously true and entirely the point. You can then arrest them for owning a gun rather than waiting for them to commit a crime with that gun. Practically speaking I think this is unlikely to be possible in the US. Banning guns would be a dead letter law. Guns are so widely owned and pervasive it would be impossible to implement. I expect law enforcement won’t want to get involved either due to how dangerous disarming an entire populace would be.