This is pretty sensational, but it's hilarious actually.
Such stupid arguments FOR guns. Why don't you just admit that you like your guns, and that's good enough reason. You won't be able to fight the US government bub.
This is pretty sensational, but it's hilarious actually.
Such stupid arguments FOR guns. Why don't you just admit that you like your guns, and that's good enough reason. You won't be able to fight the US government]
I guess I should be insulted by the "gun nut" comment then? Which I see you were quick to chastise Resolute for hey?
Put your big boy pants on.
Big Boy pants, grow up.
Did you ever think that I want "gun control" because I have seen first hand what the human body looks like after it has been on the business end of a "gun".
First off, I was talking about Americas allies and other wealthy nations. Mexico is not a good comparison. America should compare herself to Britain, Germany, Canada and other such nations.
So gun bans only work in rich countries, or those that are allies with the US? Gotcha.
Comparing America to other countries that had implemented gun bans is a fools game as all those countries did not have a constitutionally protected right to own firearms in the first place.
Quote:
Secondly, the 'rights' of the law abiding need to be amended simple as that. It's unfortunate, but the way democracy works is that when a few bad apples screw it up for everyone else, everyone else suffers.
The US is a constitutionally limited democratic republic. The rights of many are not taken away simply because the acts of a few. If it was true, we can start another whole long list of things to ban/rights to take away. Democracy is meant to serve the majority, so your last statement is about as backwards as it gets.
Quote:
Thirdly, yes criminals will very much so suffer. It's simply supply and demand. America currently has let's say 300 million firearms in the hands of citizens. If the 2nd amd is repealed, and a buy back program instituted, and further production of firearms is vastly restricted, the supply drops. Let's now say that there are only 50 million guns in America after the program the majority of which are hunting rifles and shotguns, and only about 50,000 AR-15s compared to the several million before the buy-back. What do you think happens to the price of AR-15s on the black market? Do you think a low-level criminal can afford a $30k AR-15? A $50k AR-15? Do you think high-level criminals are going to be conducting gun violence?
Ok, lets use your numbers for a minute. Australia's buyback program cost the taxpayer over half a billion dollars to implement and buy back 640,381 firearms.
That works out to nearly $781 per firearm. If we use that same number per your estimation of 250 million firearms bought back, without adjusting for inflation or other circumstances, that would leave the US taxpayer on the hook for 195,250,000,000. Nearly 200 billion dollars. Not gonna happen.
But if it does happen, and a black market is created, potential sellers will not price themselves out of the market. They gotta eat too. They will sell for what the market is willing to bear, not 30-50k for an AR.
Another thing, why single out AR's? Especially when you consider that in 2011, out of the 12664 murders where a firearm was the tool used, only 323 of those were committed with a rifle. ALL rifles, not just AR's.
Quote:
But CroFlames, what about people who manufacture their own guns? That ban needs to happen as well. The law-abiding become non-law abiding if they continue the practice.
Ok sure. Now what do we do about the import of illegal arms from overseas nations? "But 2stonedbirds, all guns start out as legal guns!"
The entire episode is very informative and worth a watch.
Quote:
I'm not even a citizen of America, and I get my hands on any number of high capacity weapons at a very reasonable cost. And that is the kicker. This stuff is CHEAP.
Well I hope you have a hunting licence or transport/carry permit that was issued in the US, a green card or been living in your state of choice for over 90 days otherwise you are in violation of federal law.
Again, if you want to get the type of gun control that you have been implying in this thread America will have to re-visit their constitution and amend it.
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by Yamer
Even though he says he only wanted steak and potatoes, he was aware of all the rapes.
So gun bans only work in rich countries, or those that are allies with the US? Gotcha.
Comparing America to other countries that had implemented gun bans is a fools game as all those countries did not have a constitutionally protected right to own firearms in the first place.
US is a constitutionally limited democratic republic. The rights of many are not taken away simply because the acts of a few. If it was true, we can start another whole long list of things to ban/rights to take away. Democracy is meant to serve the majority, so your last statement is about as backwards as it gets.
This is simply false. Americans since 9/11 have lost many rights because the actions of just a few people.
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to combustiblefuel For This Useful Post:
Think of what could be accomplished if instead of a $200 billion buyback program, that money was used for programs to help inner city youth, spousal support, mental health, education, ect.
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by Yamer
Even though he says he only wanted steak and potatoes, he was aware of all the rapes.
Think of what could be accomplished if instead of a $200 billion buyback program, that money was used for programs to help inner city youth, spousal support, mental health, education, ect.
Anything but the guns.
__________________
Pass the bacon.
The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to DuffMan For This Useful Post:
The US is a constitutionally limited democratic republic. The rights of many are not taken away simply because the acts of a few. If it was true, we can start another whole long list of things to ban/rights to take away. Democracy is meant to serve the majority, so your last statement is about as backwards as it gets.
It would likely never happen, but say the US did actually clamp down on gun control. Like Australia, let's assume they institute a buyback program. Some kind of program would be needed in order to A) gain support B) actually reduce the amount of guns so that a huge black market isn't instantly created. However, after thinking about it, I believe there would be way too many guns out there for them to ever realistically do this, it would be a logistical and financial nightmare.
Let's assume their are 300 million guns out there that the US would want to "buy back" and let's assume they ONLY get 200 million, so not to overestimate. For one thing... holy crap. 200 MILLION guns. I can't even fathom it, I wonder if that would fill the saddledome to the roof? maybe two saddledomes? If there if a math wiz out there, I would love to hear how many saddledomes it would take to hold all the USA's guns.
For two... the cost, wow, just wow. Assume a conservative price of $200 per gun average for all guns that they buy. Don't want to get to bogged up in this number, if it's higher so be it. I can't see how it would be lower though.
200,000,000 x $200 = $40,000,000,000
40 Billion dollars This is a conservative estimate too I think.
So we have a 40-50 billion dollar expenditure and an amount of guns so large it literally can't be comprehended without complex mathematical formulas. I think it's safe to say that the US is going to be filled to the gills with guns for a very, very, long time. Best intentions of future generations be damned, that is a ####load of guns.
That is a huge amount of tax payer money to commit. Massive. $200 per firearm would be a very, very conservative estimate. I think if that was the going rate on the buyback program that in itself would create a black market. For many range enthusiasts that $200 represents ammo costs for one day at the range.
Your average handgun in the states may retail for around $6-700 new. Rifles... hard to say, on average? Maybe $1500? Shotguns probably around the same as pistols... I think a 70% evaluation on your average firearm retail price puts the ballpark for buybacks at around $1000 a pop. Now this is talking about your most common, most available, cheapest lines of firearms. This is just a guess, it's really hard to say since firearms can run anywhere new from $1-200 up to what equates to a second mortgage.
I think using Australia's buy back price of $781 per is conservatively safe. By a fair margin.
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by Yamer
Even though he says he only wanted steak and potatoes, he was aware of all the rapes.
Last edited by 2Stonedbirds; 09-01-2015 at 11:00 PM.
You don't need to get rid of 300 million guns. Hand guns would accomplish the majority of the problem. It's too easy to whip one out and end an argument, kill yourself or have one stolen. Criminals prefer them or course, Controlling their sale would be the next step as 90% of guns used in mass killings were obtained legally.
You could also possibly attempt to regulate the crazy ass, anything but well regulated militia too. Traumatize the hell out of first graders, I say. Teach them all how to shoot and then show them what happens when they shoot stuff. Fire off a few rounds over their heads during recess too.
So we could estimate around $150 billion on a buy back program? Is that fair? I cannot comprehend how different the political climate would have to be in the US to ever see congress passing something like that, or anything even close to that. 20 dead children didn't register. Where do you go from there?
You don't need to get rid of 300 million guns. Hand guns would accomplish the majority of the problem. It's too easy to whip one out and end an argument, kill yourself or have one stolen. Criminals prefer them or course, Controlling their sale would be the next step as 90% of guns used in mass killings were obtained legally.
You could also possibly attempt to regulate the crazy ass, anything but well regulated militia too. Traumatize the hell out of first graders, I say. Teach them all how to shoot and then show them what happens when they shoot stuff. Fire off a few rounds over their heads during recess too.
Not 300 million. They can keep 100 million. Is 200 million a fair number?
So we could estimate around $150 billion on a buy back program? Is that fair? I cannot comprehend how different the political climate would have to be in the US to ever see congress passing something like that, or anything even close to that. 20 dead children didn't register. Where do you go from there?
Australia's buy back program was around 500 million for just over 600k guns so I think that's fair. Conservative maybe but it's really hard to say.
The next issue is compliance. Say this does happen, which financially I just can't see but regardless, if it does happen I imagine there will be more than a few people who will not comply. A right for Americans has been taken away, the value of your property is gone and now you and everyone else has to pay for that property. Again. Can't see it being overly popular.
And again if your in the business of crime, there's no way those guns get turned in. And those firearms, in the hands of criminals who only own them to further their criminal interests, are the ones that law enforcement/legislation needs to target.
If the financial capital could be raised to try and treat those problems as the diseases they are, and shift focus away from the symptoms, then I believe a positive change in gun crime and society in general can be made without rescinding rights and imposing ineffectual laws.
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by Yamer
Even though he says he only wanted steak and potatoes, he was aware of all the rapes.
Last edited by 2Stonedbirds; 09-02-2015 at 12:05 AM.
Traumatize the hell out of first graders, I say. Teach them all how to shoot and then show them what happens when they shoot stuff. Fire off a few rounds over their heads during recess too.
Agree with the bolded, actually kind of shocked by the rest of this.
Education for youth in regards to firearms is not a bad idea at all.
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by Yamer
Even though he says he only wanted steak and potatoes, he was aware of all the rapes.
Interesting side story. Was flipping channels with my wife and for unknown reasons we stopped temporarily at Family Feud. The subject was "Things a police officer uses for protection". The first guess was the most popular: "Gun". After that the guesses were "backup", "baton", "handcuffs", "sirens". Someone even guessed incorrectly with " brass knuckles! The one no one got: "bullet proof vest".
I'd be willing to bet the number one answer on "protection" for a police officer in Canada would be something protective like bullet proof vest. Not gun, as not many would view it as protective
interesting and tragic to note the cop that was shot today was shot with his own gun apparently, fully trained and heavily armed and yet, like all gun owners, his own firearm was the biggest threat to him.
Guns really are a ####ty method of self defence, great for killing people but bugger all good for anything else, and few people are ready and able to kill another person, therefore the advantage is always going to the nut job, never the cop or wife or random cinema patron.
Australia's buy back program was around 500 million for just over 600k guns so I think that's fair. Conservative maybe but it's really hard to say.
The next issue is compliance. Say this does happen, which financially I just can't see but regardless, if it does happen I imagine there will be more than a few people who will not comply. A right for Americans has been taken away, the value of your property is gone and now you and everyone else has to pay for that property. Again. Can't see it being overly popular.
And again if your in the business of crime, there's no way those guns get turned in. And those firearms, in the hands of criminals who only own them to further their criminal interests, are the ones that law enforcement/legislation needs to target.
If the financial capital could be raised to try and treat those problems as the diseases they are, and shift focus away from the symptoms, then I believe a positive change in gun crime and society in general can be made without rescinding rights and imposing ineffectual laws.
You fail to understand that criminals arnt the problem, it's the drunken middle aged neighbour who's been laid off from work that is the danger, it's the law abiding citizens that are actually the most dangerously unpredictable and randomly violent.
So gun bans only work in rich countries, or those that are allies with the US? Gotcha. 
This is a conservative estimate too I think.
