Victim disarmament zones

[aowen]

The only thing the real world has taught me is how uneducated people who never went to college sound, which to be fair is an indictment of our k-12 education system. This thread has devolved even further into retardation perpetrated by loons who think that having their guns taken will be a step further to us turning into the USSR or China.

Chicago's gun ban means nothing. As someone who lived there and still has family in Chicago, I can say that to get a gun all you have to do is drive outside of Cook county, in some cases less than a 20 minute drive, to get a gun and bring it back. Illinois state law is super lax regarding guns, so if some gang bangers from the south side want to go pick up a gun, it's not hard for them.

I like how Obama is portrayed as this crazy socialist guy that wants to take everyone's guns. Let me tell you something about Obama, and all of his predecessors, that Noam Chomsky, who I am sure is the anti-christ to some people here. When he was asked what he thought about Obama at a lecture, he replied "Well, I was looking at a picture with Obama, GW Bush, and all of the other former presidents that are still alive, and I thought to myself, this is a picture of a bunch of huge criminals." So stop pretending like everyone that doesn't share your viewpoint must want to bend both knees before Obama.

[aowen]

And to add, Obama isn't a socialist, he's a fucking Plutocrat like the rest of the cunts that control most of the shit in this country.

[r00t]

You proved the premise of the thread: Banning something doesn't stop people from obtaining it and possessing it. Last time I was in Chicago I was walkin down the street with my flask of hennesy and a blunt of some grade A pakalolo

[aowen]

Originally Posted by r00t [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

You proved the premise of the thread: Banning something doesn't stop people from obtaining it and possessing it. Last time I was in Chicago I was walkin down the street with my flask of hennesy and a blunt of some grade A pakalolo

I didn't prove shit, and you most certainly didn't. I have just demonstrated how ineffective a law is without a concerted effort. Guns would be harder to get in Chicago if Illinois and neighboring states actually banned hand guns as well. Then if a person wanted a gun, they'd really have to fucking want it because they'd have a hell of a road trip on their hands to go get one. In fact, if they were banned nationally, which is what is proposed, they'd have some smuggling to do. Also, more enforcement would be necessary, rather than just confiscating guns after they have been used to commit crimes. Asserting that Chicago is a microcosm for what America would be with bans is a stupid argument.

[Daldolma]

Originally Posted by aowen [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

I didn't prove shit, and you most certainly didn't. I have just demonstrated how ineffective a law is without a concerted effort. Guns would be harder to get in Chicago if Illinois and neighboring states actually banned hand guns as well. Then if a person wanted a gun, they'd really have to fucking want it because they'd have a hell of a road trip on their hands to go get one. In fact, if they were banned nationally, which is what is proposed, they'd have some smuggling to do. Also, more enforcement would be necessary, rather than just confiscating guns after they have been used to commit crimes. Asserting that Chicago is a microcosm for what America would be with bans is a stupid argument.

Okay, so we're revoking a fundamental right for all 48 contiguous states and ramping up border security to prevent weapons smuggling. We're then substantially increasing enforcement (and presumably infringing upon privacy) to make sure people don't have guns.

Just remind me quickly: why are we doing this? What is the impetus for granting the government such a massive windfall of power while preventing law-abiding citizens from owning tools uniquely capable of providing self-defense?

I won't even get into the argument about whether banning guns would actually have the desired effect. Let's pretend it does. Let's pretend we're at 0 gun deaths a year after banning firearms. You're going to revoke a fundamental right for 300,000,000 based on 15,000 deaths a year? You're going to quite literally eliminate the possibility for entire populations of people to defend themselves because people kill other people with guns?

Seems pretty questionable to me. And why stop there? Heart disease kills 2.5 million Americans a year. Should we not ban foods with saturated fat? And soda? Do you know how many lives could be saved if the government just set a mandatory nutritional plan for the country? Literally millions per year. Alcohol and cigarettes would be long gone, too. Those are exponentially more dangerous than guns.

I assume you're not on board with all of that. I wonder why. If your argument is the human cost, then why not take every measure to preserve human life? Why get excited about a relatively minor cause of death, from a population view, when other bans could be far more effective at saving lives?

[hatelore]

Originally Posted by aowen [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

I didn't prove shit, and you most certainly didn't. I have just demonstrated how ineffective a law is without a concerted effort. Guns would be harder to get in Chicago if Illinois and neighboring states actually banned hand guns as well. Then if a person wanted a gun, they'd really have to fucking want it because they'd have a hell of a road trip on their hands to go get one. In fact, if they were banned nationally, which is what is proposed, they'd have some smuggling to do. Also, more enforcement would be necessary, rather than just confiscating guns after they have been used to commit crimes. Asserting that Chicago is a microcosm for what America would be with bans is a stupid argument.

Are you seriously that dense to think the American Government would do an outright ban on hand guns? Lol. Can you please pass that badass shit you are smoking good sir?

[r00t]

The criminals (from Chester the friendly neighborhood crackhead molestor, to Obama's gangster government) are armed, and you don't want me to be?

naw naw

[Rellapse35]

Originally Posted by r00t [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

The criminals (from Chester the friendly neighborhood crackhead molestor, to Obama's gangster government) are armed, and you don't want me to be?

naw naw

[runlvlzero]

r00t and OP wins this thread =)

[r00t]

The point is you can't ban the guns or get them off the streets. You gonna do door to door collections like the Nazis? America already saw two peaceful revolutions in the past 4 years (Tea Party and Occupy), can you imagine an act of war? You know what kicked off the original American revolution? Why were the British at Lexington and Concord? That's right: take the guns away.