Sankaku Complex Forums » General

A Discussion on Gun Control

  1. danhibiki said:
    My idea for gun control is to handle it in a similar way as we do with cars. Everyone that wants to own a gun, should have to get a license, and to get this license they need to pass a series of tests, which would include safety and a psychological portion (among other things).

    I thought they already use those requirements. When I applied for my Act 235 card, I had to take a training course and take a psche test. And if you failed the psche test, you had to go make an appeal as to why the doctor's judgement should be overturned. Of course, this is for security guards who want/need a license for their job.

    Posted 1 year ago # Quote
  2. danhibiki said:
    My idea for gun control is to handle it in a similar way as we do with cars. Everyone that wants to own a gun, should have to get a license, and to get this license they need to pass a series of tests, which would include safety and a psychological portion (among other things).

    I'm reminded of one of the things I don't miss about your fair city.

    Posted 1 year ago # Quote
  3. So tell me how a "high capacity" magazine ban is supposed to reduce gun violence?

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=b2Upjn5DR0o

    Posted 1 year ago # Quote
  4. palmtop-tiger said:
    So tell me how a "high capacity" magazine ban is supposed to reduce gun violence?

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=b2Upjn5DR0o

    They are counting rounds (she shoots 14 the first time) to minimize the difference under test (completely unrealistic) conditions.

    10 vs 15 shots before anyone can realistically try to do anything (be them armed or not).

    The obvious flip side to all this is how anyone can prove you need more then the standard clip capacity as a civilian.

    It's a fairly nonsensical test.

    Posted 1 year ago # Quote
  5. Pyrolight said:

    They are counting rounds (she shoots 14 the first time) to minimize the difference under test (completely unrealistic) conditions.

    10 vs 15 shots before anyone can realistically try to do anything (be them armed or not).

    The obvious flip side to all this is how anyone can prove you need more then the standard clip capacity as a civilian.

    It's a fairly nonsensical test.

    Most handguns today have standard magazine capacities between 10 and 20 rounds, especially those in 9mm. The only way you get 10 or fewer rounds in a standard-capacity handgun magazine is if it's a larger caliber (like .45ACP) or if it's a compact/sub-compact model specifically designed for concealed carry.

    Posted 1 year ago # Quote
  6. Pyrolight said:

    They are counting rounds (she shoots 14 the first time) to minimize the difference under test (completely unrealistic) conditions.

    10 vs 15 shots before anyone can realistically try to do anything (be them armed or not).

    The obvious flip side to all this is how anyone can prove you need more then the standard clip capacity as a civilian.

    It's a fairly nonsensical test.

    Attachments

    1. angryjack.gif 1 year old
    Posted 1 year ago # Quote
  7. Pyrolight said:

    The obvious flip side to all this is how anyone can prove you need more then the standard clip capacity as a civilian.

    Did you even watch the beginning of the video?

    Checkmate, Statist.

    Attachments

    1. learntoread.jpg 1 year old
    Posted 1 year ago # Quote
  8. palmtop-tiger said:

    Did you even watch the beginning of the video?

    Checkmate, Statist.

    Read it, what was the context? Running away, shooting at each other (the most likely scenario), running at you? I might have missed it but they were being vague.

    You sure as hell don't see videos of the cops missing 15 times when someone is charging them.

    So yes it makes perfect sense for cops to have high capacity clips, hell they should all be armed to the teeth IMO.

    Unlike what they are trying to imply the average mugging/assault/home invasion (which lets face it are the most common thing a civilian will see) is not remotely similar to what a cop faces 99/100 times.

    So maybe high capacity clips could be legitimately beneficial (good vs harm) outside of law enforcement but it will take a hell of a lot more evidence then those rather suspect statistics.

    With more transparent facts you might well have a checkmate on the high capacity clips. That being said the test was still utter nonsense.

    kanika said:

    Most handguns today have standard magazine capacities between 10 and 20 rounds, especially those in 9mm. The only way you get 10 or fewer rounds in a standard-capacity handgun magazine is if it's a larger caliber (like .45ACP) or if it's a compact/sub-compact model specifically designed for concealed carry.

    Replace 10 rounds with standard capacity.

    Posted 1 year ago # Quote
  9. Pyrolight said:

    Read it, what was the context? Running away, shooting at each other (the most likely scenario), running at you? I might have missed it but they were being vague.

    You sure as hell don't see videos of the cops missing 15 times when someone is charging them.

    So yes it makes perfect sense for cops to have high capacity clips, hell they should all be armed to the teeth IMO.

    Unlike what they are trying to imply the average mugging/assault/home invasion (which lets face it are the most common thing a civilian will see) is not remotely similar to what a cop faces 99/100 times.

    So maybe high capacity clips could be legitimately beneficial (good vs harm) outside of law enforcement but it will take a hell of a lot more evidence then those rather suspect statistics.

    With more transparent facts you might well have a checkmate on the high capacity clips. That being said the test was still utter nonsense.

    Who is it who are being mugged, robbed, houses broken in to, raped? Is it the police? No, it is the citizen. They are the ones who face danger 99/100 times. The police arrive after the fact and have the benefit of backup. When danger is knocking down your door 10 rounds isn't going to cut it.

    The video showed how magazine restrictions will have no effect on gun violence. I don't need to prove why civilians need more than 10 rounds, you need to prove why civilians don't need more than 10 rounds.

    Posted 1 year ago # Quote
  10. Standard capacity I can understand but I'm sick of the government asking for more and more control over our daily lives.

    Unrelated but it's an example of the government stepping far over the line of what's acceptable.
    In this case it stepped over and then ran a marathon.
    https://www.eff.org/press/releases/mandatory-black-boxes-cars-raise-privacy-questions

    Posted 1 year ago # Quote
  11. Pyrolight said:

    Replace 10 rounds with standard capacity.

    10 rounds isn't standard capacity. Standard capacity means the capacity of a magazine that fits perfectly inside the well of a handgun. Anything longer defeats the purpose of concealability. For a 1911 pistol chambered in .45, that's 7 rounds. For a number of 9mm handguns on the market today, that's as high as 20, though 14 to 17 seems to be the majority range.

    Pyrolight said:

    So maybe high capacity clips could be legitimately beneficial (good vs harm) outside of law enforcement but it will take a hell of a lot more evidence then those rather suspect statistics.

    Suspect statistics? You sure proved yourself an expert on that.

    Pyrolight said:
    Unlike what they are trying to imply the average mugging/assault/home invasion (which lets face it are the most common thing a civilian will see) is not remotely similar to what a cop faces 99/100 times.

    Posted 1 year ago # Quote
  12. palmtop-tiger said:

    Who is it who are being mugged, robbed, houses broken in to, raped? Is it the police? No, it is the citizen. They are the ones who face danger 99/100 times. The police arrive after the fact and have the benefit of backup. When danger is knocking down your door 10 rounds isn't going to cut it.

    Actually the whole point is that the examples they used and based their numbers off of are very unlikely to be the same type as a civilian faces.

    Show me stats in comparable circumstances.

    Cops hit x% of the time in a shootout.
    Cops hit x% of the time when someones is running away (at a distance).
    Cops hit x% of the time when someone is within x feet and trying to physically attack them.

    The last one is the one is what 99/100 will actually matter to a civilian.

    So yes context matters.

    The video showed how magazine restrictions will have no effect on gun violence. I don't need to prove why civilians need more than 10 rounds, you need to prove why civilians don't need more than 10 rounds.

    No it didn't. It was a clearly skewed test with subjective statistics.

    1. Since you tried to prove civilians need them you have to put the responsibility on yourself to prove it. You have yet to do that.

    2. If a single innocent person was killed by a gunman because of an extended clip (bullets 11-15) then that is proof enough. Just to be extreme.

    A single video with an agenda proof does not make.

    Anyway since there is little point in arguing in circles I will say this since it is the main point for me.

    Ahem,

    If the stats are in their proper context and it shows that what is being said in the video is true and applicable then you have a good starting point.

    You then have to weigh the benefits vs the drawbacks (defence vs murder) with all the external factors.

    If high capacity are truly needed for personal defence then they are needed for personal defence.

    Posted 1 year ago # Quote
  13. palmtop-tiger said:
    I don't need to prove why civilians need more than 10 rounds, you need to prove why civilians don't need more than 10 rounds.

    Nonsense.

    Posted 1 year ago # Quote
  14. aneko said:

    Nonsense.

    Truth.

    Posted 1 year ago # Quote
  15. Char said:

    https://www.eff.org/press/releases/mandatory-black-boxes-cars-raise-privacy-questions

    That is a bit much.

    kanika said:

    10 rounds isn't standard capacity. Standard capacity means the capacity of a magazine that fits perfectly inside the well of a handgun. Anything longer defeats the purpose of concealability. For a 1911 pistol chambered in .45, that's 7 rounds. For a number of 9mm handguns on the market today, that's as high as 20, though 14 to 17 seems to be the majority range.

    Which when I said replace 10 with standard capacity I was acknowledging what you just said.

    They used 10 rounds as example. Whatever is the norm is fine based on the weapon.

    If any handgun should have more then 10 rounds is a totally different discussion.

    Suspect statistics? You sure proved yourself an expert on that.

    ad hominem

    Anyway time for sleep. I might check in tomorrow but I have a feeling the discussion will not have gone much of anywhere.

    Posted 1 year ago # Quote
  16. Pyrolight said:

    Which when I said replace 10 with standard capacity I was acknowledging what you just said.

    They used 10 rounds as example. Whatever is the norm is fine based on the weapon.

    If any handgun should have more then 10 rounds is a totally different discussion.

    I misinterpreted the intent of your words.

    Pyrolight said:
    ad hominem

    Pointing out an intellectually disingenuous part of your argument?

    Posted 1 year ago # Quote
  17. kanika said:

    I misinterpreted the intent of your words.

    Pointing out an intellectually disingenuous part of your argument?

    Actually limiting the number by the power of the caliber makes sense.
    You can cause a lot more mayhem with 20 rounds of 30.06 or 7.62x54r then you can with 20 rounds of 22lr or 9mm.

    Posted 1 year ago # Quote
  18. aneko said:

    Nonsense.

    Okay, I want to ban alcoholic beverages. When anyone can tell me why they need beer, I'll tell them why I need 30 round magazines.

    Posted 1 year ago # Quote
  19. Was that meant to support your position? It did not.

    Posted 1 year ago # Quote
  20. ^

    Posted 1 year ago # Quote

Reply »

You must log in to post.