3D Printed Gun

[Captain Seafort]

Which would require storage laws, very similar to what we have for passenger safety in cars. However the NRA tried twice to put this to vote in the 80's and it was put down.

Fuck the NRA. They're an over-powerful pressure group, not the be-all and end-all of legislsation.

You're statement directly pointed to giving up on treating illnesses.

My statement compared research in to illnesses that aren't the leading cause of death to dealing with factors in your astronomical murder rate that aren't the biggest single problem. As you well know.

Vigilante justice isn't the problem

If you're relying on every random Tom, Dick and Harry to deal with criminals, rather than the police, that's vigilante justice, whether you and the FBI recognise it or not.

Still it points to an issue of unregistered USERS with and uneducated public and not the firearms themselves.

I don't have a problem with firearms - it's their possession by amateurs I have a problem with, and I consider removing weapons from those who are competent to use them to be a price well worth paying to prevent those who are incompetent or malicious getting their hands on them.

[Captain Seafort]

These so called fuckwits are probably the average Joe who just wants a gun for whatever reason and doesn't want someone in his house.

Yes. So what?

If you can create a law that allows a cop or an authority than you just given up your own rights to privacy.

If you want the privilege of owning a weapon, the state's duty to protect its citizens means that you have to jump through a few hoops

[McAvoy]

So... you want some form of police state is that it?

People coming to your house inspecting it to make sure it is the way they want it according to their definition. That is exactly what you are talking about. That is why it will never happen. As logical as it is in your head, it will never happen in America because Americans love their privacy and their rights inside their own homes.

Basically you are talking about is a stepping stone to allow cops or whoever to go inside a house without a warrant.

[McAvoy]

In the end, it's up to the individual to ensure safety of anything from cleaning chemicals to firearms.

Most individuals are idiots. If every car owner is required to produce documentary evidence that a professional has checked their vehicle to ensure it meets minimum standards to drive safely then requiring every gun owner to produce documentary evidence that a professional has checked their storage arrangements to ensure they meet minimum standards to stop any random thief waltzing in and grabbing them should be a shoe-in.

the funding for such a thing would be much better spent on urgent national priorities.

Bringing down your astronomical murder rate is an urgent national priority.

Safety is a secondary concern in most states. Its more concerned about emissions. So your point moot.

Let me know when guns produce smog.

Oh and you have much more crime than Americans in proportion to your population. You are the one with a problem not us.

[Deepcrush]

Fuck the NRA. They're an over-powerful pressure group, not the be-all and end-all of legislsation.

They are civilian group focused on a part of the Bill of Rights. No different then equal rights groups such as the LBGT or civil service groups such as the Boy Scouts. Its simply their focus is on self defense.

My statement compared research in to illnesses that aren't the leading cause of death to dealing with factors in your astronomical murder rate that aren't the biggest single problem. As you well know.

However you placed a meaningless statement into the debate to derail the issue after you got caught again with no valid response. And yet again you attempt to back peddle the issue here. Notice that lying and trolling haven't worked yet for you? Get the clue.

If you're relying on every random Tom, Dick and Harry to deal with criminals, rather than the police, that's vigilante justice, whether you and the FBI recognise it or not.

And yet again you're lying about a statement just made. No one in the thread at any point said they were going to rely on the average citizen to stop criminals. The issue has never been about stopping but preventing. Lying still not helping you here either.

I don't have a problem with firearms - it's their possession by amateurs I have a problem with, and I consider removing weapons from those who are competent to use them to be a price well worth paying to prevent those who are incompetent or malicious getting their hands on them.

And while this would be cute and maybe work in a cartoon. Its meaningless in real life. Criminals will, by their nature of being criminals, break laws. So saying its against the law for a criminal to have a firearm is useless. To go as far as disarming the police for no reason other then to say you took guns off the street is simply open intent of murder. Stating that you would prefer people accept themselves as victims is meaningless because moral cowardice of your country hasn't taken over here (not every where at least, I know up north its common enough). Stating your support for criminals over the populace is also meaningless because sooner or later you'll reach the line of people who aren't willing to become the victims you want them to be.

Your entire point is that you don't like self defense, which is fine. No one will force you to defend yourself against a criminal here in the US. If you want to just let it happen then it is your right to do so. In fact the Police can't even force you to press charges so places like New York, Detroit, Seattle or Chicago would be perfect for you as that's their way of living. On the reverse side, there remain those of us who are not willing to be the victims you want us to be. We will fight back if someone attacks us, some like myself are trained and others are not. But in the end it doesn't matter because the simple fact that we are willing to fight back is what keeps the crime away from where we live. Because there are easier targets then us. Its not that we don't have police or that they aren't effective, its just that they can't be everywhere. So civilian support is welcome. We like living in low to no crime areas and we aren't going to give that up. Period.

[Captain Seafort]

So... you want some form of police state is that it?

I want a state that protects the lives of its citizens, and if you think inspections to ensure that weapons are safely stored constitutes a police state then you've got a seriously fucked-up perspective.

it will never happen in America because Americans love their privacy and their rights inside their own homes.

The civilised world loves its freedom more - freedom from fear of murder.

Basically you are talking about is a stepping stone to allow cops or whoever to go inside a house without a warrant.

Ever heard of the slippery slope fallacy? This is it.

Safety is a secondary concern in most states.

Then they're fucking stupid.

Oh and you have much more crime than Americans in proportion to your population. You are the one with a problem not us.

You've got a murder rate four times ours, and you think we've got a problem.

[Captain Seafort]

Its simply their focus is on self defense.

Their focus is on possession of firearms, and their pursuit of that goes far beyond simply opposing the repeal of the second amendment to opposing any form of firearms regulation.

However you placed a meaningless statement into the debate to derail the issue after you got caught again with no valid response. And yet again you attempt to back peddle the issue here. Notice that lying and trolling haven't worked yet for you? Get the clue.

Oi, Deep, get your attention away from that mirror and speak to me instead.

No one in the thread at any point said they were going to rely on the average citizen to stop criminals. The issue has never been about stopping but preventing.

"Not stopping but preventing".

[McAvoy]

I have seen stats that the crime rate in the UK is between two to five times that of the US. But let's go with yours. The UK has a population of about 63 million. The US is 315 million. Five times the population.

It looks like it is safer to live in the US than the UK.

So ultimately in the end you admit you want a police state in exchange for freedom of privacy

And no that is not a slippery slope fallacy. That is called a loophole.

Even if such a law was passed it would never work at all. That is a pipe dream. Might as start building an Atlantic Bridge then. There isn't enough manpower to do that. Cops are not on every street corner. Many government funded organizations are broke. Bridges and highways are crumbling. And you think the US can get enough people to survey people's handling arrangements?

You are delusional then. I can easily buy a safe and put the guns in there and the 364 days out of the year or longer have the guns outside the safe.

Yeah ok. Pie in the sky. Police State and all.

[Captain Seafort]

I have seen stats that the crime rate in the UK is between two to five times that of the US.

It is. Despite that, the murder rate is far lower here - the US' is several time that of any other OEDC country,

But let's go with yours. The UK has a population of about 63 million. The US is 315 million. Five times the population.

It looks like it is safer to live in the US than the UK.

I'm talking about the rate, not absolute numbers.

So ultimately in the end you admit you want a police state in exchange for freedom of privacy

Not at all, and at no point have I described anything remotely approaching a police state

And no that is not a slippery slope fallacy. That is called a loophole.

Going from inspecting weapons storage arrangements to barging into peoples houses whenever they feel like it to look for whatever they want is a slippery slope fallacy.

[McAvoy]

It is the beginning of a police state. Having authority figures come into someone's home and inspect something inside it. Like I said before only former criminals who are on probation or a warrant or by invitation is allowed.

Cars are 100% completely different. There is no comparison.

You can keep your police state.

[Captain Seafort]

It is the beginning of a police state.

By that standard, so does the existence of a police force in any way, shape or form.

Cars are 100% completely different. There is no comparison.

I agree that cars provide an economic benefit while firearms do not, but there's still a comparison in that training and certification must be obtained, and any sensible government requires proof that all reasonable steps have been taken to ensure that the danger they pose in minimised.

[Teaos]

Jumping in late, I take the assumption that if you gun is in your house, it is considered secure, as no one should be their with out your knowing.

If you compare a Car to a gun you must want people garages to be bunkers and for no one to leave a car parked in public?

[Captain Seafort]

Jumping in late, I take the assumption that if you gun is in your house, it is considered secure, as no one should be their with out your knowing.

Because of course burglaries never happen, and no burglar would ever grab an unsecured firearm they happened to find.

If you compare a Car to a gun you must want people garages to be bunkers and for no one to leave a car parked in public?

Both should be inspected to minimise the risk they pose. Cars become risky when they're poorly maintained, guns become risky when they fall into the hands of criminals, therefore those are some of the risks that must be inspected for in addition, of course, to training and any medical conditions that would make an individual operator dangerous.

[McAvoy]

You know what else has no economic value but is a weapon? Swords, crossbows, BB/pellet guns, etc. All of these have other purpose but to be a weapon. Should they be in some sort of locker or safe inside the house? What about collectible guns? Tough shit for collectors right?

You never answered the many many household items that can be used as a bomb.

But then again.... maybe like everything else in life, jlmaybe just maybe we shouldn't place blame on an inanimate object but the person. If their gun is stolen which doesn't really happen that often enough then their should be hefty fines. Someone who didn't properly secure their weapon with someone unstable in the house or family, should do time.

Face the facts, it just will not work. Americans are not the Most Awesome of All Countries The Uber Super United Kingdom, we just lowly Scum of the Earth Americans who would like to keep our guns because it is our right and we like our privacy. Sorry for not being as awesome and all knowing as you.

[Captain Seafort]

You know what else has no economic value but is a weapon? Swords, crossbows, BB/pellet guns, etc. All of these have other purpose but to be a weapon. Should they be in some sort of locker or safe inside the house?

Ranged weapons should be, bladed weapons aren't as much of an issue.

What about collectible guns? Tough shit for collectors right?

Not an issue, so long as they're deactivated.

You never answered the many many household items that can be used as a bomb.

Yes I did - dual use is a different issue, and therefore require different controls.

maybe we shouldn't place blame on an inanimate object but the person.

We're going round in circles here. I've already repeatedly pointed out that it's not a matter of blame but of minimising the risk of a problem person getting their hands on a tool that makes them more dangerous.

Someone who didn't properly secure their weapon with someone unstable in the house or family, should do time.

As the saying goes, an ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure.