Gun Control Advocates are Immoral

[Sir-Sister-of-Suck]

I believe that you claimed a slippery slope towards greater regulation. Australia's example proves that not necessarily to be the case.

I never said it was 'necessarily' the case, I just think that's how a hefty, nation-wide regulation of firearms would work in a place like america. Besides the fact that I believe there to be better models to draw from, I think we really can just break down the logic of the situation to show how it sets a precedence for future legislation:

It is one of the main arguments of republicans that gun control would not help to reduce gun violence in america. If they decided to suddenly vote and pass a gun-control measure affirming the very belief they've argued against for so long, that argument which has kept gun control at bay to this point, can no longer be used; This is also the reason why I think the gun debate has to shift it's fundamental focus before those who are pro-gun control can actually convince their opposers. The premise of their argument is misdirected, because it's not a given that everyone just believes gun control will reduce gun violence - it is not simply a discussion of 'freedom vs security' - but it does becomes one if republicans decide that it is. Hopefully, you can I see my point, even if you don't agree with what I think the consequences to it are.

If you are seeking to argue in a philosophically valid way then you would do better to skip slippry slope conjectures and fortune telling and focus more on actual slippery slope events happening now such as Trump's removal of US governmental checks and balances on Presidents.

It's actually not my argument for why we shouldn't have a gun ban, I was just explaining to you why many conservatives have this mentality around gun laws. It's just one result I think would happen.

The main reason I'm against gun control is because I don't want to give the black market more power by giving them more stuff to sell.

Never again will a US President need to declare their finances for tax purposes or offload their assets to prevent conflict of interest. Never again need a President worry about inquiries - all they need do is sack the investigators. I can't see that removal of accountability from the position of President leading anywhere good in the long term.

I don't know how many times I've said this over the last few days, but I am not a fan of trump. Frankly, it's getting annoying that people think they can back me into a corner or something by mentioning some of the shady shit that trump has done since entering office. Like, you, in particular, have seen me long enough to know that I'm not some big trump guy. I'll defend him, or attack him when I see fit. Out of the things you listed, I never understood why the tax record thing was such a big thing. What sort of gut-wrenching information could have been in his audit?

[henry quirk]

Austrailan-style gun legislation won't work in the U.S. (for reasons I can go into if anyone gives enough of a shit to ask for 'em).

Surely, on East and West Coasts bans and confiscations would be welcomed, but in the broad middle of America ain't no fuckin' way such a thing would fly.

And, of course, savvy anti-gunners have come to know this. Disarming Americans, then, requires a different approach, one based on incrementalism.

Hundreds of cities and townships have all manner of gun owner-hobblin' *regulation proposed by **well-intentioned (but ***poorly informed and weak-willed) local legislators. Often, such legislation fails (thank Crom), but, increasingly, these regulations are gettin' implemented (often to the ignored protests of residents). Of course major, national outlets never report on such things. You have to consult local outlets to find out what's goin' on in Poughkeepsie or Rayne or La Pointe or Newton or...

Also, major outlets never report the frequent events of folks successfully self-defending with a gun. No, national reporting is focused solely on the infrequent (yes, infrequent) atrocity.

If you wanna get the other side, you gotta go local.

Anti-gunners chip away, grind away on the local level intending to disarm Americans with hundreds, thousands, of ordinances, local regs and restrictions, and overblown penalties. And they couple this city-by-city hobbling with subtle redefintion and characterization (fundamentally, 'gun is bad').

Make no mistake: anti-gunners in America want ALL guns gone.

Make no mistake: the American anti-gunner is an ****awful creature, not (I suppose) honestly motivated like the Aussie version.









*exorbitant taxes on ammo, outlandish age restrictions, completely useless bans on accessories, and on and on

**and some not-so-well intentioned folks as well (as well a number of just evil motherfuckers who ought to be eatin' the business end of a gun, not regulatin' 'em)

***can't tell you how many folks in-office propose regulations on 'assault rifles' (which don't exist as a formal category of weapon). how can you regulate sumthin' that doesn't exist is beyond me. reality is: any gun (a 22 cal pop gun, my lil coach gun, a 38 cal snubbie, etc.) is an assault weapon in the wrong hands (which, I suspect, is the reason anti-gunners fixate on the construct...adopt a nebulous category and, one by one, dump all gun types into it)

****commie (dupes, sympathizers, card-carriers) fuckers, one and all

[henry quirk]

"Trump's removal of US governmental checks and balances on Presidents."

He's doin' no such thing.

#

"Never again will a US President need to declare their finances for tax purposes or offload their assets to prevent conflict of interest."

First: there's no regulation demanding public declaration of finances. It is a convention only (a silly convention that needs to be tossed).

Second: Trump has disconnected from his businesses in such a way that satisfies the law and pisses off his detractors (a one-two punch)

#

"Never again need a President worry about inquiries - all they need do is sack the investigators."

Which investigator has Trump shit-canned?

#

"I can't see that removal of accountability from the position of President leading anywhere good in the long term."

Seems to me: Trump's detractors (almost all of the 'press', most of the Democrats, a good chunk of the Republicans) are holdin' him accountable (even for shit that's not his). Too bad for them they can't make the shit stick.

[Greta]

Australian-style gun legislation won't work in the U.S.

Yes, the horse has bolted in the US. It's gone.

[henry quirk]

No, the horse hasn't bolted cuz the horse was never reigned in the first place.

Aussie-style gun control would never have worked here.

[Greta]

No, the horse hasn't bolted cuz the horse was never reigned in the first place.

Aussie-style gun control would never have worked here.

We will never know now.

[henry quirk]

Thank Crom for that, at least.