Is there such a thing as reasonable gun control? No. Gun control is an appeal to ignorance or emotions. Not reason.
~ Aristotle Sabouni
Created: 2022-04-27 |
| Is there such a thing as reasonable gun control? - No. At least not with any of the suggestions the left has ever offered. We have 20,000+ examples of gun laws, are any of them "reasonable"? Certainly not the vast majority of the ones passed or being pushed so far. This is of course assuming your goal is to limit crime, suicide, or mass murder. If your goal is people control and empowering a totalitarian state, and abusing otherwise legal gun owners, they've been highly effective. |
What about magazine limits? - Magazine Capacity Limits aren't reasonable because:
|
What about military style assault weapons bans? - If it's never worked before, what have we learned?
So if you ask the obvious question, "how does this help?" The gun controllers will dodge, attack, or give an emotion based answer (not a logic based one). So the ban must not be logical/reasonable. |
What about Microstamping? - This is engravings of serial numbers on the tip of every firing pin, so that ever expended shell tells you who the shooter is/was. The problems are:
So this can't do anything for crime or mass murder, but is a heavy cost/annoyance to gun owners for something that can't get positive results. California judges ruled that while it's not technically possible to comply, requiring it is not a hindrance to legally exercising your gun rights. |
What about No Fly Lists? -
Never before[edit | edit source]Why doesn't this bother the more informed? Because there’s never, ever, been a mass shooter that was on the no fly list before. But there could be... in theory. Yet, in America we don't take away people's Constitutional rights based on what could be, or "just in case". Doing what Democrats or the left's wants would violate the 4th, 5th, 6th, 7th and 9th Amendments to the Constitution -- all to encroach on their 2nd Amendment rights. But other than that, it's a good idea. Who is on the list?[edit | edit source]Of course that begs the question who else is on the no-fly list that shouldn't have their rights seized without due-process? Folks like Ted Kennedy, the singer Cat Stevens for the contravercial songs as Cat’s in the Cradle and Peace Train, David Nelson the actor best known for his role on The Adventures of Ozzie and Harriet, and 48,000 other people. But since you only need to have a name similar to someone else on the list, it's much, much broader than that. The problem is that is just the list of INTENDED folks on the list. When Ted Kennedy was snagged it was because he and 7,000 other Americans had names with some variant of T Kennedy. The most popular names in America such as: Gary Smith, John Williams or Robert Johnson, are on the list, along with everyone that shares those names (guilty or not). There are 72 people that work for the department of homeland security that are on the watchlist. That’s not counting many corpses, who are long dead, and will stay on the list for decades. Woe be to some poor sod who shares a name with a terrorists or someone that the government doesn’t like. There have been 10’s of thousands of false positives on the list, and the ACLU has been suing because of the complete lack of due process to have your rights to free travel stolen from you, as well as the bureaucratic hurdles to get your rights restored. How do you get on the list?[edit | edit source]
But not to worry, they can change those rules at any time: trust me, I’m from the government, and I'm here to help. Do all those reasons (plus whatever new ones that strike our imperious leaders' fancy) sound like good reasons to steal a constitutionally recognized and guaranteed natural right to self defense, without any due process?
There’s over 1 billion people in India that need to show ID to vote, but if you suggest that in America, they scream about voter suppression — but if they’re just randomly suppressing the rights of some random Gun Owner, they’re fine with it. After all, that law abiding citizen deserves to lose their rights because they have a name similar to someone the government suspects of writing bad folk music.
Dear IRS, I want to unsubscribe[edit | edit source]How do you get off the list? Nobody knows. There's no process for appeal. Basically, you just have to be connected, and talk to the right politician to force your way through it. The little guy would get screwed. So not only are you guilty-until proven innocent, they don't have a process to appeal that guilt. Just the start?[edit | edit source]And you know this is just the start. If they can harass the millions of innocent Americans that have names similar to folks that Lois Lerner or Democrats don’t like, then why wouldn’t they take it to the next obvious step: the Terrorist Watch List? That’s a separate list of over 1,000,000 people that the Government is just watching for suspected ties to terrorism… not counting all those with a similar name to them. If they started this program, gun owners would have to adopt the 60’s black tradition of tacking random syllables and mishmashing names to try to increase their kids odds of someday being guaranteed their constitutional liberties, by virtue of having a name completely dissimilar to everyone else. No need to thank me little Koolaidria, thank Obamaniqua. |
| What about Smart guns? -
"Smart guns" (sometimes called safe guns) were an idea invented by gun controllers to have a wedge issue to divide the nation. But there's nothing smart about them. Anyone with a basic clue of them, would laugh openly, if they weren't so fucking dangerous. The whole issue is evidence of why we should tests to qualify people on topics, before allowing them to vote. They sound good to the unaware, "we want to make guns safer" by duping them that gun safety is a real problem, and this would be the best solution to fix it, thus anyone that opposes this money wasting bad idea sounds unreasonable and extreme. But the basics are:
So they're good politics, for dividing us, but the best thing you could say about them is "they're just a lot of really bad ideas, by the sincere but uninformed folks trying to cure problems they know nothing about". The less kind, and more likely explanation, is that they're a trojan horse meant to divide us for political gain, and undermine gun rights by fraudulent gun-hating extremists. Below is everything you need to know about the "smart gun" debate. |
| Can Red Flag Laws help? (Why are people agaisnt them?) -
Fortunately for the left, their base isn't about deep thought before reacting, it's always, "DO SOMETHING"! No matter how dumb that something is. But as soon as you think it through, it can't actually work. Either it's tuned too low -- and it isn't flagging anyone. Or it's too sensitive and you're flagging 99% innocents for the 1% that are potentially guilty. Even that 1% is ineffectual as it is so easy to defeat as to be useless: they just wait a few weeks, steal someone else's gun, use a quieter knife/club, all while having MORE time to plan. Most mass shooters have been in psychotherapy before, so they're not going to suddenly get cured in the few weeks it takes to get through the system. The idiot-left thinks that it's just a heat of the moment thing, but if you study the topic, most plan for weeks or months -- a few more weeks isn't going to change their mind. Worse, they might go to other more effective methods like Trucks or Bombs, which both have a higher kill rate. (Even knives are nearly as effective, but hopolophobes don't understand that). So it can't do any real good, but it can be easily abused... and will be. How do we know? Because the places it has been tried, already lead to abuse, and no known preventions. Of course I don't think reason will change many of the gun-grabbers minds. If you hate your neighbors having the tools of defense, then mere facts aren't going to get in their feelings. But hopefully, there's a few with enough intellectual curiosity and objectivity to read something like this, smack their head with their palm, and go, "Duh! That's fucking useless:", and grow as a human being. But if all of them did, then Democrats would go extinct. |
🔗 More
| |
Tags: Gun FAQ/tab
