Gun Political Issues Megathread. (Control for or Against?)

Sobek

Disgusting Scalie
Absolutely disgusting. No representation whatsoever by people.I guarantee that of those 135 a good 90 have done it as a "compromise" under the retarded assumption they are in any way negotiating. Always the same song and dance. \

Gun Control: "Ban guns!"

2nd Defense: "Don't ban guns."

RINOs: "Let's compromise and only ban half of the guns!"

And repeat ad infinitum
 

Terthna

Professional Lurker
Absolutely disgusting. No representation whatsoever by people.I guarantee that of those 135 a good 90 have done it as a "compromise" under the retarded assumption they are in any way negotiating. Always the same song and dance. \

Gun Control: "Ban guns!"

2nd Defense: "Don't ban guns."

RINOs: "Let's compromise and only ban half of the guns!"

And repeat ad infinitum
As I keep saying; the Republican party is controlled opposition that does not represent or uphold the values they purport to. They're just there to keep you from organizing any real resistance to the establishment.
 

Sobek

Disgusting Scalie
Don't some southern states still have extra taxes on buying guns if you are non-white that have been forgotten and just not adjusted for inflation in like 100 years on the books and being charged? Doesn't sound like much paying a extra 10 bucks to buy a revolver but back then when one would cost 35 bucks that was a shit ton of extra money.

I can't find via google or other search engines, but I distinctivelly remember hearing about them. I might be mistaken about them still being active, as it is likely they would have been dropped since Civil Rights were implemented and I refuse to accept not one non-white american hasn't demanded the tax be remove if it was still active going into the 2000's, but I do know for certain that these laws were state level, not federal.
 

LindyAF

Well-known member
Don't some southern states still have extra taxes on buying guns if you are non-white that have been forgotten and just not adjusted for inflation in like 100 years on the books and being charged? Doesn't sound like much paying a extra 10 bucks to buy a revolver but back then when one would cost 35 bucks that was a shit ton of extra money.

I doubt it, as they certainly wouldn’t be enforceable and it would be basically free political clout to take them off the books.

I can't find via google or other search engines, but I distinctivelly remember hearing about them.

The 'federal' hedging you have to do here gives up the game from the start.

What I could find was pretty scant as well. There was the Black Codes early on - and I have no doubt that the South attempted to and did restrict black ownership of firearms, but I’m fairly skeptical that the political influence of the KKK was particularly necessary in effecting this, or that it was a particularly strong policy focus of the organization (at least because such focus would have been unnecessary for the vast majority of the organization’s effective lifespan).

And not really? The NFA was passed in 1934, under a democratic president, well before the southern strategy flipped the South. So I have no doubt that some KKK members and Dixiecrats did vote for gun control on the federal level. If they were unusually ardent supporters relative to northern democrats or the KKK engaged in pro-NFA lobbying on a racial basis or otherwise that would be something to point to.
 

Doomsought

Well-known member
“Everything is actually class warfare” is pretty much textbook Marxist theory. And not really accurate or useful.
International conflicts are not class warfare, nor are purity spirals or loyalty purges, but most other forms of internal conflict are class warfare. The problem marx had with class struggles is that he only beleived that there were two classes (if he ever said otherwize he was lieing through his teeth). There are five social classes and the econmomic classes are separated by how their wealth impacts their motivations rather than directly off their economic status.
 

DarthOne

☦️
JWoJiwwc.jpeg



Seriously, I'd LOVE to see someone explain away this one to me.
 

Bear Ribs

Well-known member
JWoJiwwc.jpeg



Seriously, I'd LOVE to see someone explain away this one to me.
I've had it explained to me that the only reason Chicago has any crime at all is because the surrounding areas have guns and criminals can go buy them there, otherwise the gun restrictions would work just fine. Maine has lower crime rates because it's next to Canada and this reduces crime rates because... um...
 

LindyAF

Well-known member
Agree with the point but demographic differences are a confounding factor here. Maine is 94% White, 1% asian, 2% hispanic and <2% black. Chicago is like 32% White, ~5% asian, 29% hispanic, and 32.4% black.

Maine has lower crime rates because it's next to Canada and this reduces crime rates because... um...

Of course, a progressive can't say this, but they'd talk about "urban environments" and "poverty" etc.

I've had it explained to me that the only reason Chicago has any crime at all is because the surrounding areas have guns and criminals can go buy them there, otherwise the gun restrictions would work just fine.

A good counterargument to this is that America as a whole is unlike Britain or Australia, which are both islands whose imports can be easily strictly controlled, but has an extremely porous and unsecure border with what is effectively a narco state where gun laws exist but are more or less guidelines.
 
Last edited:

Users who are viewing this thread

Top