File: 1695177340012.jpg (52.26 KB, 361x750, 361:750, e1e0df94bcae8d6f909b786eb6….jpg) ImgOps Exif Google
If you had a magic button that would repeal all gun-control laws and prevent enactment of any gun-control laws for 20 years, would you press it? For purposes of this question, a "gun-control" law is a law that criminalizes the keeping or bearing of ordinary small arms by free adults or restricts free adults from acquiring such arms (including ammunition). It does not apply to laws that restrict children, prisoners, inmates of mental asylums, etc., nor does it apply to laws restricting bombs, nuclear weapons, etc. Also, it doesn't apply to policies of denying entry to sensitive places for persons bearing arms.
There are certain restrictions and limitations placed upon purchases.
These vary in ammo capacity, length of the barrel, weight times, etc.
File: 1695304819114.jpg (82.27 KB, 912x960, 19:20, Japan tentacle hentai gun ….jpg) ImgOps Exif Google
Many criminals have no trouble acquiring guns on the black market. I think the solution is to keep violent criminals imprisoned until either they die or they can be trusted to behave in general society.
The problem with your logic, which is indeed the argument that I see constantly from the NRA generally honestly, is that it applies to basically all situations of law-breaking harm.>"Criminals will sexually assault victims no matter what the law says. Therefore, don't have laws that make rape illegal. Or child molestation illegal. We must accept the futility that we cannot practically enforce those moral rules.">"Criminals will steal computers and other electronic equipment no matter what the law says. Therefore, don't have laws that make theft illegal. We must accept the futility that we cannot practically enforce those moral rules."
Et cetera. If we understand that dangerously violent people genuinely and sincerely don't have the empathy and ethics for caring about their fellow human beings that most of us have, then we can't just give up on civilization, letting those types run free without recourse. That's not going to work out at all.
The major distinction is that denying law-abiding citizens the ability to steal doesn't limit or otherwise restrict their ability to defend themselves.
Regardless, the whole reasons those things're illegal is that they are harmful to others.
It's not to make it so those things do not happen.
It's to punish those who do.
An eye for an eye is the foundation of justice, after all.
A better example would've been drugs.
File: 1695351442781.jpg (24.27 KB, 341x341, 1:1, pIWD4h2A_400x400.jpg) ImgOps Exif Google
>>12571>we can't just give up on civilization, letting those types run free without recourse. That's not going to work out at all.
That is why I suggested "keep violent criminals imprisoned until either they die or they can be trusted to behave in general society".
File: 1695455042398.png (225.38 KB, 549x565, 549:565, yv1eq46g6soa1.png) ImgOps Google
All only necessary on public roads.
Meanwhile we allow free purchase of mufflers, no forced limitation on how fast it can go, no fuel tank size restrictions, no tax stamp to add a spoiler, no fuss about overall length, no restrictions on trucks with too many modern features, and so on and so forth.
If we're going to use the car argument, we're going to need to be on an equal playing field.
There are literally import taxes and regulations on maximum length width and height, braking capacity, and so on and so forth.
Sure the laws and regulations aren't identical but that's because nobody has been on enough cocaine to regulate the magazine size of a Misubiti or the caliber of a Dodge, or the rear view mirror angle and passenger side air bags deployment zones of a Browning.
Again only for on public roadways.
But that aside, the only limiting factor as I understand it are necessary components for safe operation on the road. >>12577
Do those taxes carry with them the penalties of years in prison with a felony if you have merely the components to make it shorter, and thus the "intent to construct"?
You're right that there are import restrictions, but I think it obvious to say, they're no where near as heafty as the requirements and restrictions on importing firearms.
And of course, once again, these restrictions you mention only apply to their use on public roadways. >Sure the laws and regulations aren't identical but that's because nobody has been on enough cocaine to regulate the magazine size of a Misubiti or the caliber of a Dodge, or the rear view mirror angle and passenger side air bags deployment zones of a Browning.
Right. Because that would be absurd and would accomplish nothing.
Just as it has done for guns.
Nobody worries about a "shoulder thing that goes up" on a car, because it's obviously meaningless and changes next to nothing.
File: 1695526745987.jpeg (151.62 KB, 941x1244, 941:1244, F6quQT1XEAAympK.jpeg) ImgOps Google
Reminder: most early gun-control laws were explicitly racist and "applied only to particular groups, such as slaves, Blacks, or Mulattos".