Actually depending on your state you can legally do that now, you would have to alter the cannon to be innert but if its street legal you could probally get a permit to do exactly that.
Gun Political Issues Megathread. (Control for or Against?)
- Thread starter Free-Stater 101
- Start date
Actually depending on your state you can legally do that now, you would have to alter the cannon to be innert but if its street legal you could probally get a permit to do exactly that.
No.
I also want to do that
Just tell them it is inert. I doubt they would check
I sure wished I could be as optimistic as you are, but I'm not.
I know from my own experience that there are definitely people who would not hesitate to fire on Americans who have been labeled as "terrorists" or something else, or even, for that matter, simply because they were ordered to.And this is where I stopped reading. It's obvious to me you have a fundamental misunderstanding of what the second amendment is, and aren't much better than 46 on that topic.
I legit want to own an Easy 8 with a functional main gun, incidentally.
Wargamer08
Well-known member
A good choice to be sure. Myself I just like the brick to the face aesthetics of the old Soviet block tanks, and there are still plenty of T-72s banging around. I’m maybe even short enough to drive it with the hatch open.I sure wished I could be as optimistic as you are, but I'm not.
And this is where I stopped reading. It's obvious to me you have a fundamental misunderstanding of what the second amendment is, and aren't much better than 46 on that topic.
I legit want to own an Easy 8 with a functional main gun, incidentally.
Anyone who talks about licensing for firearms hasn’t bothered to look into how some states turned the possibility of getting a concealed carry permit into granting none year after year. If people think that same sort of back handed ban wouldn’t by implemented along side any kind of training requirement, people just haven’t been paying attention.
Last edited:
Megadeath
Well-known member
America has an unusually high rate of suicide. When we consider that most suicide is more "opportunistic" rather than planned, and that guns are hands down highest scoring across quick, painless and irrevocable, it's not unreasonable to consider the people who only successfully attempt to kill themselves because of access to guns when we consider the specifics and legality of access to guns. We can't attach an exact number to that, but it's safe to assume from what we do know that guns play some part in a significant percentage of suicides.
Terthna
Professional Lurker
Suicidal people don't stop being suicidal because they lack guns to kill themselves with; maybe instead of targeting the means with which they commit suicide, perhaps we should consider their reasons for wanting to do so, and try to deal with those? Just a thought, you know; assuming you actually care that people are suffering, beyond how they might be used to push your political ideology.
If people have control over their bodies then by defintion they have the right to end their lives.
There are a lot of things out there far worse then death, like slowly withering away from cancer as it eats your body apart and leaves you in incredible unending pain. Or you could get a sever case of Altimizers and have the knowlege you will slowly lose you mind until there is nothing left of you.
Most people have a limit where checking out is preferable to continuing to live. If some one wants to kill themselves then that is their right.
I sure wished I could be as optimistic as you are, but I'm not.
And this is where I stopped reading. It's obvious to me you have a fundamental misunderstanding of what the second amendment is, and aren't much better than 46 on that topic.
I legit want to own an Easy 8 with a functional main gun, incidentally.
Money depending I would want a Sherman Jumbo. Very few left out in the wild or for sale. Expensive as hell.
That or a m8 greyhound.
Fun fact, you can buy polish T72. Look online
>unusually high suicide rate
That is a claim about facts which in turn you use to build a whole narrative, lets see if facts agree in the first place.
List of countries by suicide rate - Wikipedia
en.wikipedia.org
Suicide Rate by Country
www.macrotrends.net
That's 4 sources using different years and data.
Conclusion: No, US suicide rates are around upper end of the average when compared to the world in general. USA has nothing on South Korea for example, and that's a similarly developed country with extremely low gun ownership rate.
USA is not far off countries, from more notable and developed ones, like Slovenia, Estonia, Belgium and Sweden, none of them famous for high gun ownership.
Switzerland is famous for being one of very few US peers in at gun ownership among wealthy countries, but in suicide rates, while many spots lower, in raw number rate is about 30% lower than USA, and in turn pretty average by Europe's standards.
And nothing besides perhaps terrible stat keeping explains the suicide rates of third world countries with guns sold in open air markets to whoever can pay if we were to take your theory seriously.
To me it seems there are different factors that should be looked at to explain it at national scale:
>don't be a vodka abusing post communist mess, or a communist mess in general
>don't have a high pressure work culture
>don't have weird cultural factors
>have nice, comfy weather year round
>have highly religious population
If you even think of limiting suicide by controlling the access to means, then alongside guns you would also need to cut access to the other obvious ones, like cars, tall buildings, sharp objects and household chemicals. Or in other words, put that person in a padded cell already. And its really unfeasible to turn the whole country into that.
And if we look at USA with more resolution, you get this:
If guns are a meaningful factor, then why do the southern states famous for incredibly high gun ownership, like Texas, have average or below average suicide rates?
Who's really pushing up US suicide rates is the west, California excepted (could be its infamously high immigration from countries to the south that according to maps above have low suicide rates), and at the moment i have no idea what's so wrong with them.
Last edited:
The courts. Even courts that are not heavily pro-2nd amendment are going to take a dim view on what amounts to legislating via Executive fiat, especially if it's executive decisions that turn people from law abiding to criminals basically overnight. That's gonna end up running afoul of the Separation of Powers and could end up running up against the No Ex Post Facto clause before we even get to the 2nd Amendment.
Bear Ribs
Well-known member
Nonsense, we can in fact attach numbers to things like suicide rates that can be numerically analyzed, we can compare those numbers to each other, and all the evidence we have says the exact opposite of your "safe assumption."
Let's start with Australia, which had their major, major gun confiscation in '96 and then another in 2003.
Both homicide and suicide increased somewhat after the gun buyback, though homicide was already on a downward trend and the gun confiscation/buyback only delayed it a few years. Gun deaths decreased but the number of non-gun deaths increased significantly more and the two appear to be linked. The same was generally true of homocide.
Source: http://andrewleigh.org/pdf/GunBuyback_Panel.pdf
If one zooms out a bit and looks at a longer timeline, it's pretty clear that the confiscations, at best, do absolutely nothing and long-existing trends ignored them, and more accurately appear to actively make the suicide rates go up or at least slow existing trends where suicide was dropping. It's also rather clear that gun suicide is a rather minor percentage of all suicide.
Soruce: Did government gun buybacks reduce the number of gun deaths in Australia? - InDaily
So the cops shot the wrong guy in the confusion of the incident, it seems.
If the shooter and Hurley were in close proximity when the cops arrived, and Hurley still has his gun out, I can unfortunately see how the cops might light him up, thinking he was the actual shooter.
That is something that is often told by people. If cops are arriving and you stopped the shooter put the gun down or at least reholster ot and wait with your hands up in the air
This incident also had a cop killed in it.
Cops arriving to an 'officer down' call tend to be a bit more aggressive and trigger happy than normal, so I expect that played a part.
I expect the cops involved are being eaten up inside knowing they accidentally shot the Good Samaritan who had stopped the gunman and avenged their fellow officer. Bad day and bad luck all around.
Oh most likely
Terthna
Professional Lurker
Assuming they're actually willing to assert themselves against the executive branch; which, after their refusal to address the election fraud, isn't a sure thing.
The election fraud while evident is a hard thing for them to go against. Mainly because ot would set the precident that they can choose the winner if something reaches thier court
They already had precedent from 2000 with Bush.
Any claims about not wanting to set precedent in courts deciding elections are bullshit to cover for cowardice.
Or the fact that even with known fraud, unless states had done immediate audits, there was no heavy cases with enough evidence sadly enough