Another school shooting in Murrica (Oregon edition)

[Leshma]

A thread with Jeade is always a pleasure.

Liberal scum thinks alike huehuehue

No seriously, it is very refreshing to see active forumite from USA who isn't member of glorious Robertson family.

[Grytviken]

too off topic my bad 

[Xant]

[Grytviken]

Liberal scum thinks alike huehuehue

No seriously, it is very refreshing to see active forumite from USA who isn't member of glorious Robertson family.

xaxaxaxaxaxaxa    it's very refreshing to see a serbling who idolizes Putin and hates 99.9% of Americans !

[LordBerenger]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7YyBtMxZgQs

Depends.

Melee 2handers confirmed to be the people who want to nerf/remove guns.

[cup457]

ma boy jeade with the n-pap we bros

[Thryn]

[Rando]

just lol @ all these shiteating yuro-peons saying "hurpa derpa just stop letting everyone have guns xD" as if you can just delete all guns by passing some law. fuckin rofl

[GRANDMOM]

What does all these schoolshootings have in common?

-Schools

The logic thing to do here is to close all schools, not to get guncontroll like everyone else in the free western world that has never seen or heard of schoolshootings!!

[Overdriven]

How are you going to form a well regulated militia without the right of the people to keep and bear arms? The original founders also thought the military should not be a permanently funded operation, and the government should be dependent on the states not the other way around.

The well regulated part explains that. That would suggest proper training, adequate storage of arms ect. Perhaps blame the founding fathers for not thinking it through properly but the term militia seems to have been grossly stretched beyond intent, and only at a stretch could it ever be interpreted as 'everyone have a gun in your draw'.

[Vibe]

just lol @ all these shiteating yuro-peons saying "hurpa derpa just stop letting everyone have guns xD" as if you can just delete all guns by passing some law. fuckin rofl

No, but it sure fucking helps you dumbass

[Mr_Oujamaflip]

No, but it sure fucking helps you dumbass

Would it though?

If I break into a house there is a chance the homeowner will shoot me if he has a gun, there is also a chance that I will shoot him as I have a gun. That gives criminals a higher risk when it comes to stealing stuff. If you remove the gun from the homeowner then the criminal has less risk, and therefore more likely to break into the house as it's safer. This means more break ins would occur as the criminal can defend himself with a gun that's illegally obtained but the homeowner can't. People will probably get shot a lot less in this case, but stuff like break ins, carjacking etc would become more common since guns are still pretty easily obtained illegally purely due to the number of them in the country. Therefore I think if guns were made illegal fatal shootings would drop significantly but overall crime would increase.

Even if I'm wrong, simply making them illegal wouldn't necessarily work or necessarily help since the number of weapons available both legally and illegally is much too high for an on/off switch to work. It wasn't so bad in England as there just wasn't as many guns.

[Grytviken]

The well regulated part explains that. That would suggest proper training, adequate storage of arms ect. Perhaps blame the founding fathers for not thinking it through properly but the term militia seems to have been grossly stretched beyond intent, and only at a stretch could it ever be interpreted as 'everyone have a gun in your draw'.

And if you chose to interpret it like that it still falls under the 10th Amendment and firearms would still be legal. And no it's not a gross stretch beyond intent, it was put there to protect the citizenry and their liberties. Liberal policies of gun control have already failed in many areas of the US with high minority populations, the most notorious being Washington D.C and Chicago. Outright banning firearms would not only be illegal but it would not be tolerated by an even larger majority who would simply refuse to comply.


Also controversial militias do exist that are not affiliated with the government, they showed up in areas where the police were told to stand down and filled their role to protect citizens and their property when the government wouldn't. Whether they are properly trained or have adequate arms is a matter of opinion, but alot of them are ex-military and law enforcement and seemed chummy with the local authorities.

[Overdriven]

And if you chose to interpret it like that it still falls under the 10th Amendment and firearms would still be legal. And no it's not a gross stretch beyond intent, it was put there to protect the citizenry and their liberties. Liberal policies of gun control have already failed in many areas of the US with high minority populations, the most notorious being Washington D.C and Chicago. Outright banning firearms would not only be illegal but it would not be tolerated by an even larger majority who would simply refuse to comply.

That entirely depends on how much pressure the NRA ect would have on state legislature. Some states may enforce it, some wouldn't.

Sure it was. But as I stated, in no way is what the US has now, a well regulated militia. Arguing otherwise is just daft. So that part has blatantly been ignored.

If they refuse to comply they break the law. And if they break the law they are charged with whatever offences and dealt the punishment. But in no way would banning them, other than in controlled and regulated militias, be illegal.

[Grytviken]

That entirely depends on how much pressure the NRA ect would have on state legislature. Some states may enforce it, some wouldn't.

Sure it was. But as I stated, in no way is what the US has now, a well regulated militia. Arguing otherwise is just daft. So that part has blatantly been ignored.

If they refuse to comply they break the law. And if they break the law they are charged with whatever offences and dealt the punishment. But in no way would banning them, other than in controlled and regulated militias, be illegal.

The official controlled well-regulated Militia already exists. Every state has a National Guard at their disposal which is armed and funded by the home state and under the command of the state's government. It can also be mobilized and used by the Federal government when needed.

If they refused to comply who would enforce it? The majority of Law enforcement and Military personnel are pro 2nd Amendment, as well as a large majority of citizens.