What do you think are necessary gun control measures?
Minimum gun control (background checks, permits, fully automatics still legal)
26.9%
29
High gun control (can only use guns at a shooting range or for hunting)
23.1%
25
Total gun ban
13.9%
15
No gun control (can buy any firearm with no background check and no permits)
11.1%
12
Medium gun control (basically what the US has right now, you need a permit to buy guns and you cant buy fully auto guns)
25.0%
27
108 votes
SargonTheGreat said: Fatephile said: Cant Kevin just take it from home into his school? I mean Kevin is mentally ill I dont think he cares that he cant take his gun off his property.I don't know man, I guess best option is to ban carrying guns in public and just make people keep them in their house for defense or in case they wanted to go hunting or something.We all know how eager Kevin is to slaughter his school How about Dave and his wannabe gangster friends? |
| خ |
I support minimal to no gun control. The citizens should have the means to defend against invasions and their own government should it become tyrannical. An armed populace reminds the government that the government is the peoples bitch. So the idea of the government making all sorts of hoops for you to jump through in order to get a gun and telling you what kind of gun you can and can't get is akin to burglars telling you what kind of locks, safes,dogs and other shit you can and can't get to protect your home in order to make it easier for burglars to rob your home. |
| ive been interested in guns most of my life and really wish they were a more normalized thing and less of a political hot button issue. i know people across the political spectrum who are gun people. yes you should securely store your guns and felons and people who've been hospitalized for mental illness shouldn't be allowed to own guns, right left and center most Americans would generally agree with that. their are some weird quirks in American firearms laws that make little to no sense, to give and example machine guns are legal to own provided your not a not prohibited from owning guns for the reasons previously stated, the catch is the machine gun has to have been registered with the ATF ( Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives) before 1986 at which time the registry for machine-guns was closed... their are manufacturers and corporations and security organizations this doesn't apply to but most Americans arent able to purchase new manufactured machine guns unless they were manufactured and registered before 1986. i can buy a registered Thompson sub machine gun provided it was registered before 1986.... but i cant buy a MP5 that was made last year. registered machine guns are rather expensive as a result and tend to cost alot of money, 10's of thousands of dollars in many cases. its also a lengthy process to purchase one so most gun owners dont own them... criminals in all things tend to not follow laws so machine-guns are more prevalent underground in cartel and gang violence, almost always modified semi auto or unregistered machine-guns. ya i think civilians should be allowed to own machine guns the old laws with regards to machine-guns weren't that bad and legally owned MG's were used in few crimes ever. we sort of already can but i want to be able to register new ones, it would also lower the price of some due to supply and demand. |
ChadAznable0079Sep 23, 2020 9:48 PM
| After watching Kino's journey, I am convinced that we do not need gun control. |
 |
| @SargonTheGreat point of clarification in most states in the U.S we dont have a permit to buy a gun, we have a background check requirement which is a painless affair, run through the FBI and basically make sure you've never been hospitalized for mental illness, been arrested for domestic violence, or committed a felony. it similar in execution but not really a permit. we do have concealed carry permit... which may have been a point of confusion. american gun laws are really complex. Canada does have a permit to purchase if im not mistaken as does a number of other country's. |
SargonTheGreat said: Nazcaa said: I mean im not saying that the state is for sure going to harm its citizens but a state is inherently anti-citizen since they will always make choices that alienate or harm certain groups, taken to an extreme a state could decide to exterminate an entire race of people because they are impeding the states goal. Also the blm riots are a good example of why we need guns, 30+ people have been lynched and murdered and thousands injured, how is someone supposed to defend themselves against a mob of people if they dont have a gun?Stomping on and threatening people is very different to throwing people into gas chambers. Likewise, it’s a pandemic so the scenario is rather unique and difficult to broadly apply. Lastly, they haven’t mowed anyone down yet (to my knowledge), and if their citizens all had guns then for all we know the citizens could have started shooting, resulting in the officers shooting them all (oftentimes lethal force is met with lethal force, also it unfortunately would probably only take one or two of the citizens to start shooting for the officers to begin, making this even worse.) Oh, and I’m sure that has been met with backlash, given that even I’ve heard about it before. As for muslims, I don’t know much about it and I can’t be bothered researching it (sorry) so I can’t comment on it really, but when I said most countries I was mainly excluding the more chaotic places like muslims, Islam, China, North Korea, and stuff (no offence to people who live their, I’m just saying your governments are bad as far as I’m aware). Mainly because they have very different cultures, governments and public attention/relations. Wow mate, your really suspicious of the government. It’s not some evil organisation set out on conquering the world and massacring its citizens (That’s an exaggeration btw, no need to tell me that). Most governments are made by the citizens, comprised of citizens, and directed by citizens, and therefore probably aren’t anti-citizen. That’s excluding some of the less normal, less democratic centred ones as I’ve mentioned previously, who’s circumstances are too complex to delve into, particularly on pure conjecture (although I would still argue the same thing). Anyway, the point is that governments essentially never go to the extremes that you’ve mentioned, as I previously stated the citizens don’t just sit their passively when you exterminate a whole race. Especially if that race lives in your country, and in the age of internet and self awareness. That is what would go against the state goals, which are simply put to better the state (and therefore the people who live in it) and maintain order amongst its citizens. Having your citizens sent into a frenzy, destroying your reputation, etc never benefits a states goals, and for what? Killing some people for little to no reason (wars another matter and in not important to the discussion). As for the blm, as I already said, what would giving them all guns do? Make the situation far more deadly and result in far more deaths. Having a gun to vs 10 people with guns is a lot worse than having no gun and versing 10 people without guns, especially since they probably won’t try to kill you unless you start pointing a gun in their face (it’s less likely at least). Also, that’s now citizens versing citizens, not citizens versing the government (the almighty, scary government set on destroying the thing that makes it a government. Sorry, forgive my bad humour, I know your opinion isn’t quite that) |
NazcaaSep 23, 2020 10:28 PM
 |
Sargon, let Americans be Americans: |
| "You misunderstood from the very beginning. You just believed what you wanted to believe." Rei Ayanami |
| I think banning guns completely is the best option. But the problem is that the people that want guns will buy them on the dark net without a license, which is even worse than doing test and stuff to buy a gun |
| I think u need to have proper licenses to own a gun. but other than that I think everyone deserves the right to be able to protect themselves. |
 |
| The very simple solution to gun control that doesn't compromise freedom, yet also reduces gun violence by lowering the amount of guns on the street is for government to have a gun buyback program, where gun owners are incentived, though not forced, to sell their guns to the government at likely a fixed price per gun, depending on its type. I'm certain most Americans would find such a policy acceptable, left, right or otherwise, as arguing against it would mean you're essentially arguing that people have no right to sell their guns, etc. |
| "I saw the Emperor - this soul of the world - go out from the city to survey his reign; it is a truly wonderful sensation to see such an individual, who, concentrating on one point while seated on a horse, stretches over the world and dominates it." |
SargonTheGreat said: How would this reduce crime exactly? Anyone who doesnt wanna sell their gun just wont sell their gun and selling the gun on the black market would probably be more lucrative if someone is willing to take the risk. It would reduce crime by virtue of there being less guns on the street. You're right in that the program would not compel people to sell their guns, though this is the point in that the program is merely designed to incentivize gun owners to sell their guns through a legal channel, which is free of legal risk as opposed to a black market. Government could also reduce the lucrativeness of selling to other buyers by offering market prices to buy back the guns. |
| "I saw the Emperor - this soul of the world - go out from the city to survey his reign; it is a truly wonderful sensation to see such an individual, who, concentrating on one point while seated on a horse, stretches over the world and dominates it." |
SargonTheGreat said: Blackmarket firearms prices are gonna be much higher than government prices though since it includes the premium fee of actually sourcing the firearm and taking the risk in the first place, even if the government somehow manages to findout what the exact price for a glock on the dark web is and match it the buying price will just increase above the government price and we end up back at square one where the blackmarket is more lucrative than selling to the gov. Also what would the government do with all these guns they buy? Military grade weapons aren't allowed (no the ar-15 isnt military grade since its only semiautomatic and not select fire like an actual assault rifle) so they would just end up with a bunch of civilian level guns that they cant use to arm their military and they need pretty specific guns for the police so alot of the guns they collect would be useless. Wouldn't the exact opposite happen if government were to instate a guns buyback program? What you're saying would make sense if the number of gun sellers stayed constant, but with an openly legal incentives program to sell their guns at whatever price government chooses, wouldn't the number of sellers and thus supply of guns in the market increase, thereby lowering the prices? Unless you're going to argue that the implementation of a guns buyback program would somehow lead to a surge in demand for guns that outpaces the now greater supply of guns entering the market. Also charging a ludicrous price per gun would be net unprofitable if another seller out-prices you and can sell a greater volume, thereby controlling prices to a degree. |
| "I saw the Emperor - this soul of the world - go out from the city to survey his reign; it is a truly wonderful sensation to see such an individual, who, concentrating on one point while seated on a horse, stretches over the world and dominates it." |
| Gun Control is a term that encompasses one of the different issues related to Guns ( relating to other issues like ownership, safety, violence etc) and how society could function around them, primarily in the US. I believe in a second amendment but not the current. Thankfully it is an Amendment in the US constitution and can be modified or removed (and even put back again). I do support people owning some types of guns but in full disagreement on how these processes are worked and regulated |
| "In the end the World really doesn't need a Superman. Just a Brave one" |
rafacanto01 said: guns r made to kill or hurt others, either ppl or animals, and im against both options. I think the world would be a better, safer and happier place without guns, so im 100% against them. I would be terrified if normal ppl could have guns here in Brazil (im already scared to know cops and the militarily have it). Guns just wasnt made for good things. Ppl tried to convince me otherwise, but i just cant accept something used to hurt others to be okay. Im disgusted of ppl who use it, even to hunt. If normal people were armed in Brazil, you wouldn't be powerless against criminals. Imagine how much street crime would go down if the criminals no longer thought themselves and the police/military were the only ones with the guns? @Meusnier To be honest, even if Japan was to loosen their gun control laws I don't think crime would go up very much. People in Japan are raised very well, I really think there are hardly any criminal inclinations among Japanese people to begin with. Gun control or lack of control could have some impact on crime levels but I really think its a small impact. I voted for "minimum" btw OP. |
| Signature removed. Please follow the signature rules, as defined in the Site & Forum Guidelines. |
SargonTheGreat said: Ryuk9428 said: If normal people were armed in Brazil, you wouldn't be powerless against criminals. Imagine how much street crime would go down if the criminals no longer thought themselves and the police/military were the only ones with the guns? @Meusnier To be honest, even if Japan was to loosen their gun control laws I don't think crime would go up very much. People in Japan are raised very well, I really think there are hardly any criminal inclinations among Japanese people to begin with. Gun control or lack of control could have some impact on crime levels but I really think its a small impact. I voted for "minimum" btw OP. Ryuk9428 said: Idk about everyone being strapped ( in this society) because theres too many dipshits but I still think there should be little to no regulation on what you can buy or how many hoops you need to jump through to buy it.If normal people were armed in Brazil, you wouldn't be powerless against criminals. Imagine how much street crime would go down if the criminals no longer thought themselves and the police/military were the only ones with the guns? @Meusnier To be honest, even if Japan was to loosen their gun control laws I don't think crime would go up very much. People in Japan are raised very well, I really think there are hardly any criminal inclinations among Japanese people to begin with. Gun control or lack of control could have some impact on crime levels but I really think its a small impact. I voted for "minimum" btw OP. I don't think you'd ever create a country where everyone is strapped, but I think its a good thing for criminals to worry about the possibility that the person they are trying to rob or house they are trying to burglarize could be armed. It might be deterring more people than we think in the US. |
| Signature removed. Please follow the signature rules, as defined in the Site & Forum Guidelines. |
Ryuk9428 said: @Meusnier To be honest, even if Japan was to loosen their gun control laws I don't think crime would go up very much. People in Japan are raised very well, I really think there are hardly any criminal inclinations among Japanese people to begin with. Gun control or lack of control could have some impact on crime levels but I really think its a small impact. I voted for "minimum" btw OP. Indeed, you are right to mention people's education in Japan, as it certainly plays a huge role. The crime rate is very low, but this is also due to laws such as the anti-gang ones Just imagine if the yakuza (bouryokudan) had been walking around with guns when they were many... Japan was not especially a safe country in the beginning of the 20th century, Tanizaki told about it in his autobiography notably but I would have to look for precise historical references to be sure about that. There is an increasing number of knife attacks, better not make them more deadly by allowing people to wield guns. In the end, when the criminality is that low, nothing justifies that citizens be allowed to carry guns. |
Meusnier said: Ryuk9428 said: @Meusnier To be honest, even if Japan was to loosen their gun control laws I don't think crime would go up very much. People in Japan are raised very well, I really think there are hardly any criminal inclinations among Japanese people to begin with. Gun control or lack of control could have some impact on crime levels but I really think its a small impact. I voted for "minimum" btw OP. Indeed, you are right to mention people's education in Japan, as it certainly plays a huge role. The crime rate is very low, but this is also due to laws such as the anti-gang ones Just imagine if the yakuza (bouryokudan) had been walking around with guns when they were many... Japan was not especially a safe country in the beginning of the 20th century, Tanizaki told about it in his autobiography notably but I would have to look for precise historical references to be sure about that. There is an increasing number of knife attacks, better not make them more deadly by allowing people to wield guns. In the end, when the criminality is that low, nothing justifies that citizens be allowed to carry guns. Yeah but Japanese culture has changed a lot since the early 20th century so I don't think that's much to go on. In general, family and community ties in Japan seem to be strong. The police are effective, and crime isn't tolerated. In the 1950s, Japan actually had a pretty average homicide rate of like 3-3.5 per 100,000 which is shocking to think but in recent years they've driven the homicide rate down to 2.5-3 per million which is truly incredible. Gun control doesn't do that. A healthy society that teaches good values does. |
| Signature removed. Please follow the signature rules, as defined in the Site & Forum Guidelines. |
Ryuk9428 said: Meusnier said: Indeed, you are right to mention people's education in Japan, as it certainly plays a huge role. The crime rate is very low, but this is also due to laws such as the anti-gang ones Just imagine if the yakuza (bouryokudan) had been walking around with guns when they were many... Japan was not especially a safe country in the beginning of the 20th century, Tanizaki told about it in his autobiography notably but I would have to look for precise historical references to be sure about that. There is an increasing number of knife attacks, better not make them more deadly by allowing people to wield guns. In the end, when the criminality is that low, nothing justifies that citizens be allowed to carry guns. Yeah but Japanese culture has changed a lot since the early 20th century so I don't think that's much to go on. In general, family and community ties in Japan seem to be strong. The police are effective, and crime isn't tolerated. In the 1950s, Japan actually had a pretty average homicide rate of like 3-3.5 per 100,000 which is shocking to think but in recent years they've driven the homicide rate down to 2.5-3 per million which is truly incredible. Gun control doesn't do that. A healthy society that teaches good values does. I agree with what you said, but doesn't it also mean that the "right" to hold a gun should be even more controlled in societies such as the Western ones where family and social ties are not as strong? One small point though: family and community ties were only stronger in the past, with several generations living under the same roof. There are still a number of growing social problems in Japan that are not addressed at all (bullying (ijime), hikikomori, herbivore men (soushokukei danshi), etc), issues of child abuse and domestic violence so things are not so bright there. Their justice system is also heavily flawed, with many scandals of false testimonies obtained by force (look at the conviction rate). |
Meusnier said: Ryuk9428 said: Yeah but Japanese culture has changed a lot since the early 20th century so I don't think that's much to go on. In general, family and community ties in Japan seem to be strong. The police are effective, and crime isn't tolerated. In the 1950s, Japan actually had a pretty average homicide rate of like 3-3.5 per 100,000 which is shocking to think but in recent years they've driven the homicide rate down to 2.5-3 per million which is truly incredible. Gun control doesn't do that. A healthy society that teaches good values does. I agree with what you said, but doesn't it also mean that the "right" to hold a gun should be even more controlled in societies such as the Western ones where family and social ties are not as strong? One small point though: family and community ties were only stronger in the past, with several generations living under the same roof. There are still a number of growing social problems in Japan that are not addressed at all (bullying (ijime), hikikomori, herbivore men (soushokukei danshi), etc), issues of child abuse and domestic violence so things are not so bright there. Their justice system is also heavily flawed, with many scandals of false testimonies obtained by force (look at the conviction rate). I think its difficult to determine whether gun control will help or not. Its easy to say these things are unaddressed problems but I'd be suspicious of any claims that do not compare what's happening in Japan to other countries. Japan is hyper-aware of social trends in its population and they come up with names and categories for everything. My neighborhood for example has a hikikomori guy. He never leaves his house, its always dark. My dad says he has only seen him once in the whole time we've been living here. He's a really nerdy guy who apparently works at home all day and makes crazy amounts of money doing so but he is extremely awkward and introverted. I live in the US but this guy is as hikikomori as they come. |
| Signature removed. Please follow the signature rules, as defined in the Site & Forum Guidelines. |
Ryuk9428 said: Meusnier said: I agree with what you said, but doesn't it also mean that the "right" to hold a gun should be even more controlled in societies such as the Western ones where family and social ties are not as strong? One small point though: family and community ties were only stronger in the past, with several generations living under the same roof. There are still a number of growing social problems in Japan that are not addressed at all (bullying (ijime), hikikomori, herbivore men (soushokukei danshi), etc), issues of child abuse and domestic violence so things are not so bright there. Their justice system is also heavily flawed, with many scandals of false testimonies obtained by force (look at the conviction rate). I think its difficult to determine whether gun control will help or not. Its easy to say these things are unaddressed problems but I'd be suspicious of any claims that do not compare what's happening in Japan to other countries. Japan is hyper-aware of social trends in its population and they come up with names and categories for everything. My neighborhood for example has a hikikomori guy. He never leaves his house, its always dark. My dad says he has only seen him once in the whole time we've been living here. He's a really nerdy guy who apparently works at home all day and makes crazy amounts of money doing so but he is extremely awkward and introverted. I live in the US but this guy is as hikikomori as they come. I agree that there may be examples of hikikomori elsewhere, but the problem does not seem to be widespread to me. On the other hand, it is hard to meet with hikikomori to make statistics. |
| ahaha why is this even on this site since when did anime forums turn into this lol? mods are you even here? still an interesting topic though |
 |
| I would say higher gun control, but knowing that would barely stop anything and there'd still be many shootings, just get rid of them. America needs to learn that having guns in your home doesn't make you hard or give you an excuse to shoot someone. |
 |
| I believe having a firearm is a huge responsibility. I’m all for defending oneself, but if that means handing out guns to any rando who signs up for one, that’s not a society I want to live in. At the very least, we should have the minimum for gun control- though I don’t necessarily mind some more necessary, tighter restrictions, either. |
| Thread Locked for not adhering to Casual Discussion Rule 7. Controversial/sensitive topics liable to incite rule violations (trolling, flaming, abuse) are no longer allowed. a. aim to profile/stereotype, or question the legitimacy of, people based on their gender, sexual orientation, race, xenophobia, religion, etc. b. discuss highly-debated social issues; e.g. abortion, sexual assault, immigration, etc. c. focus on political ideologies and events; e.g. Nazism, fascism, world leaders, controversial laws/lobbies, etc. In accordance with the board specific rules please remember to follow the Site Guidelines as well to further prevent violations. |
 Anime List │ OST │ Artist |
More topics from this board
» What are some of your favorite animals?DoisacChopper - Feb 10 |
49 |
by CalmTeaTime
»»
10 minutes ago |
|
» Do you think there should be an age limit on friendship?Thy-Veseveia - Feb 28 |
42 |
by Kamikaze_404
»»
16 minutes ago |
|
» What sort of education did you get?removed-user - Dec 23, 2019 |
48 |
by Rhaelynne
»»
21 minutes ago |
|
» 2023-2024 NBA Season Discussion ( 1 2 3 4 5 ... Last Page )deg - Jun 18, 2023 |
679 |
by Hitagi__Furude
»»
2 hours ago |
|
Poll: » Do you care about your native culture?Kamikaze_404 - Apr 9 |
45 |
by Bruh69XD
»»
3 hours ago |