How to ban guns without firing a single shot!

[RF667799]

Except people who buy boats, RV's etc do so without the intention to kill others.

You were talking about recreational use of items. The duplicity is really something to behold.

 

[CLAX1911]

Except people who buy boats, RV's etc do so without the intention to kill others.

So lives is only a matter if they're ended intentionally?

 

[JMB1911A1]

Except people who buy boats, RV's etc do so without the intention to kill others.

None of the guns in my safe were bought with the intention to kill others, just like my boat.

 

[RF667799]

None of the guns in my safe were bought with the intention to kill others, just like my boat.

Did it turn out the guy in New Orleans rented the Ford truck with the intention of killing others?

 

[Spock]

To be clear, I don't think banning all guns is possible in this country in any of our lifetimes. So relax. But we might be able to reduce the number of mass shootings by banning some. I also don't mean "banning" in the sense that cops are going to walk into homes and grab guns.

Be sure to read at the end of this post some silly and irrelevant arguments that some have made in the past, so you don't repeat them. But if you do, I'll just refer you to the proper "Irrelevant argument" number.

Remember: there is likely NO way to stop ALL mass shootings. But the idea here is to make them more difficult. So that there are less shootings. And when shootings are unavoidable, that less people get killed.

The whole process will take years... maybe decades. But we need to start now!

All we want to do is make mass shooting more difficult.

The following might help:

1. Ban the sale to the public of "assault weapons". As well as parts and ammunition. Reinstate the Assault Weapon sales ban.
2. No confiscation (except what is already in the law). But adopt a voluntary buy-back program with strong compensation, for guns and ammunition.
3. Ban so-called "cop-killing" bullets.
4. Ban the sale of high-capacity magazines.
5. Ban ghost guns.
6. Require a license to buy any firearm and ammunition.
7. Require a "graduation process" to obtain and maintain a gun license.
8. Mandatory buy back program for weapons acquired with a license for anybody who fails to renew their license.
9. Implement a federal mandatory background check for all gun sales. No loopholes. And hold private sellers accountable if the gun sold without a check or to an unlicensed buyer is used in a crime.
10. Give courts the authority to confiscate guns from people who they consider a threat to themselves and others. (Red Flag Law)
11. Raise the age limit for buying any kind of guns to 21 (at least)
12. Implement strong nationwide cash-for-guns programs focusing primarily on assault weapons.
13. Repeal the PLCAA and investigate gun manufacturers and gun lobbyists' role in passing it.
14. Require manufacturers to alter design of guns sold to public to make them as difficult to be modified as possible.
15. Declare gun violence a preventable public health problem. Give the CDC funding an resources to study the relation between certain mental illnesses and gun violence.
16. Repeal DoC v Heller given that the decision is based on factual historical and linguistic inaccuracies.

Feel free to skip the following absurd or irrelevant arguments

• Irrelevant argument 1: People can print their guns: Sure... but that would be more difficult than just running down to the store. It's easy to print a gun with a kit. So selling kits must be outlawed. But many crazy people might not know HOW to print a gun without one. Some might not bother and just go jump of a bridge... or something. And then there are the bullets....
• Irrelevant argument 2: They can kill people with .... (cars, bombs, knives, forks...): Read the sentence in "bold" at the top. It's HARDER to kill a lot of people with any of those items, than it is with a gun. Learning how to pull a trigger is easier than learning how to make a bomb without blowing yourself up in the process.
• Irrelevant argument 3: You can't stop ALL shootings: Then we don't! That doesn't mean we can't stop ANY shootings.
• Irrelevant argument 4: Guns don't kill people... people kill people: Bullshit!!
• Irrelevant argument 5: But but but... the 2nd Amendment: Start here and continue through all the threads mentioned which debunk this inaccurate claime
• Irrelevant argument 6: This xxxx [bump stock, cop killer bullets, assault rifles, ...] don't exist: MORE Bullshit! They do!
• Irrelevant argument 7: What we need is more guns, not less (and variations like "arm teachers" and similar): There are more guns than there are people. So we have tried this. It hasn't worked! Countries have done the contrary (Australia, UK, Japan, ...etc) and it HAS worked.
• Irrelevant argument 8: This is just a mental issue: There are as many nuts in other countries as there are in this one. And NO country has anywhere near as many shootings as we do. Over 600 every year since 2020, and almost 400 so far this year. Second place this year among developed countries: France with 6!)

Nice post.
Highly unlikely that the irrelevant arguments will be avoided.

 

[CLAX1911]

Nice post.
Highly unlikely that the irrelevant arguments will be avoided.

Relevant meaning only arguments you agree with. If you want an echo chamber join Bluesky

 

[Feynman Lives!]

Relevant meaning only arguments you agree with. If you want an echo chamber join Bluesky

I'd be thrilled if you had arguments that DISAGREE with me. I challenged you to give us your BEST argument against any of my proposals. And you chose two. First you made the claim I hadn't addressed mental health, which I obviously DID (point 10, for example). And then that "Red Flag" laws already existed, which is false They only exist in 21 states and DC.

You challenged, not arguments, but FACTS. Which means you don't even HAVE arguments that disagree with us.

 

[RF667799]

Irrelevant argument 4: Guns don't kill people... people kill people: Bullshit!!

Obligatory baby talk.

 

[Spock]

Irrelevant argument 4: Guns don't kill people... people kill people: Bullshit!!

Obligatory baby talk.

Means matter.

 

[RF667799]

Means matter.

Please address my posts rather than vomit incoherent deflection.

Guns don't have agency. Some of you are just going to have to deal with that grown-up fact.

 

[Spock]

Please address my posts rather than vomit incoherent deflection.

Guns don't have agency. Some of you are just going to have to deal with that grown-up fact.

Firearm casualtiies require three factors: opportunity, intent, and ....... means.

 

[RF667799]

Firearm casualtiies require three factors: opportunity, intent, and ....... means.

Guns don't have agency. Neither do skateboards, knives, motor vehicles...

BTW, accidents don't require intent. Try to get your arguments into some sort of coherence.

 

[Spock]

Guns don't have agency. Neither do skateboards, knives, motor vehicles...

BTW, accidents don't require intent. Try to get your arguments into some sort of coherence.

What are the three factors necessary for a firearm casualty to occur?
You understanding of "agency" appears to be wrong, as well.
Firearms are instrumental in firearm violence and, hence. have agency

Definition of AGENCY

the office or function of an agent; the relationship between a principal and that person's agent; the capacity, condition, or state of acting or of exerting power : operation… See the full definition

www.merriam-webster.com

 

[RF667799]

What are the three factors necessary for a firearm casualty to occur?
You understanding of "agency" appears to be wrong, as well.
Firearms are instrumental in firearm violence and, hence. have agency

Definition of AGENCY

the office or function of an agent; the relationship between a principal and that person's agent; the capacity, condition, or state of acting or of exerting power : operation… See the full definition

www.merriam-webster.com

I'll decide what definition I'm using.

From your source: the capacity, condition, or state of acting or of exerting power

The context is assigning responsibility. Absolutely nobody has argued that people don't sometimes use guns to harm themselves or others. Though that's a favorite assumption of gun banners, when they solemnly express dumbass shit like: "Guns are necessary for gun violence."

Now, if YOU want to use (3) as YOUR definition, your special pleading is out the window again.

 

[rahl]

Except people who buy boats, RV's etc do so without the intention to kill others.

You cannot support this categorical claim.

 

[jaeger19]

Nope! Just about firearms. If you want to argue against saving lives, open your own thread! This thread ASSUMES that saving lives is considered by all posters a good thing.

Your argument though is that saving lives should always be the priority.
However pointing out that you are not willing to agree to restricting car use in order to save lives demonstrates your hypocrisy and the weakness of your argument.

 

[RF667799]

Your argument though is that saving lives should always be the priority.
However pointing out that you are not willing to agree to restricting car use in order to save lives demonstrates your hypocrisy and the weakness of your argument.

And he refuses to discuss the weakness of his argument.

 

[Spock]

I'll decide what definition I'm using.

From your source: the capacity, condition, or state of acting or of exerting power

The context is assigning responsibility. Absolutely nobody has argued that people don't sometimes use guns to harm themselves or others. Though that's a favorite assumption of gun banners, when they solemnly express dumbass shit like: "Guns are necessary for gun violence."

Now, if YOU want to use (3) as YOUR definition, your special pleading is out the window again.

Firearms have agency as in instrumentality and through exerting power. Don't try to wiggle away.

 

[rahl]

Firearms have agency as in instrumentality and through exerting power. Don't try to wiggle away.

Firearms are inanimate object and by definition, do not have agency.

 

[Feynman Lives!]

Your argument though is that saving lives should always be the priority.

That's not my argument. That is my most basic assumption. Assuming that people want to live is not an argument.

If anybody wants to argue otherwise, I urge them to open their own thread. Not what this thread is about and, frankly.... I'm not interested in a discussion about how many angels can dance on the head of a pin.

However pointing out that you are not willing to agree to restricting car use in order to save lives

I completely agree that people who could pose a threat to others by driving should not be allowed to drive. Just like people who could pose a threat to others should not be allowed to be anywhere near guns. But those are two different topics! MY arguments for the latter and ideas on how to implement it are on the OP.

If you have anything to rebut MY arguments.... go for it! Looks like nobody in this thread has been able to. But if you want to discuss the "driving" part, OPEN A THREAD. I am not interested in you using that as a strawman.

 

[Spock]

Firearms are inanimate object and by definition, do not have agency.

You seem to be equating agency with autonomous function.
Definition of agency includes instrumentality

Dictionary.com | Meanings & Definitions of English Words

The world's leading online dictionary: English definitions, synonyms, word origins, example sentences, word games, and more. A trusted authority for 25+ years!

www.dictionary.com

A firearm has agency as it is a required component of firearm violence. In addition, a firearm is an agent of injury in the public health epidemiology literature. Google those highlighted terms for a better understanding

 

[RF667799]

Firearms have agency as in instrumentality and through exerting power. Don't try to wiggle away.

Firearms can't act or exert power. They are inanimate objects that require a human to use.

I know that the magic gun baby talk is very important to your ideology, but it's foolish.

 

[Spock]

Firearms can't act or exert power. They are inanimate objects that require a human to use.

I know that the magic gun baby talk is very important to your ideology, but it's foolish.

Your long held misconception is now revealed.
Firearms are the sine quo non for firearm violence and are the agent of injury.

 

[RF667799]

Your long held misconception is now revealed.
Firearms are the sine quo non for firearm violence and are the agent of injury.

Skateboards are the sine quo non for skateboard violence then. Knives are the sine quo non for knife violence. Ropes are the sine quo non for rope violence. Motorcycles are the sine quo non for motorcycle violence.

I told you that you would destroy your own special pleading fallacy...with my adept help, of course.

Your claim is a rhetorical construction. Nothing more. It works for virtually everything.

 

[Spock]

Skateboards are the sine quo non for skateboard violence then. Knives are the sine quo non for knife violence. Ropes are the sine quo non for rope violence. Motorcycles are the sine quo non for motorcycle violence.

I told you that you would destroy your own special pleading fallacy...with my adept help, of course.

Your claim is a rhetorical construction. Nothing more. It works for virtually everything.

That is your response to "agency"? More foolish posts from you that are off the immediate topic.