lol...
 
Naw. Some lame arse, barely veiled deflection trolling does not come close to the level of torment The Bapu has inflicted on this tenderfoot's poor heart and soul.
 
He's a bad man.
 
averyverybadman

Beepster
Which completely ignores the elephant in the room that when you have borderless states with varying gun regulations the states/areas with the tightest regulations can just easily import their weapons across state lines.
 
Byron, please stop posting NRA pamphlet material. This is NOT the forum for it.
 
PLEASE and thank you.

Which also ignores the elephant in the room that the states with lax gun control and lower violent crime are also just as borderless.   
 
Again, I wouldn't imply a correlation of the supply of gun owners and gun control with rate of violent crime.  Just pointing out that violence cannot be tamed by regulating their tools, just like you can't fight obesity with spoon and fork control. 
 
The best results appear to have nothing to do with gun laws, apparently.  
 
Something I've noticed with us gun rights advocates, we are consistently guilty of not being honest about the argument against semi-auto rifles (never mind they keep using the term assault rifles).  When we don't speak to the point being made by our fellow countrymen then we aren't really engaging.  Grenades don't kill people - people kill people.  Rocket launchers don't shoot themselves off - it's the operator who is the problem. 
 
Yet....we don't allow citizens to have them and I don't see the NRA lobbying to turn that around.  We are, apparently, happy to outlaw them.  So...we *do* get the argument that some weapons are too dangerous to leave the argument at irresponsible people.  That's the same argument being made against semi-auto rifles. 
 
I find that gun control advocates do get that people kill people, not guns.  They seem to be appealing to the same logic we all agree on when it comes to weapons too dangerous to simply regulate.  
 
Or I could be on acid...
 
 

eph221
I think I have a solution that everyone can agree on:  education!  Make gun owners take a week long course on the responsibilities...etc of gun ownership.  (one has to study and take a test for cars, so it shouldn't rub anyone the wrong way. )The proctor can weed out the wack a doodles kind of like when the terrorists were getting flying lessons.

Many states already require this for hunters Eph, Hunters Safety Classes.  Both states that I have been a resident of do.  

Yes this might work! 😘

Beepster
Which completely ignores the elephant in the room that when you have borderless states with varying gun regulations the states/areas with the tightest regulations can just easily import their weapons across state lines.
 
Byron, please stop posting NRA pamphlet material. This is NOT the forum for it.
 
PLEASE and thank you.

Which completely ignores the fact (there's that word again) that people don't typically travel to commit crimes. It's not like there are crime tours or something where criminals get on a bus to ride over to the next state like they were going to the casinos.

But if we were to take your argument at face value, it is a perfect illustration of the futility of prohibitory and confiscatory gun control schemes. The criminals will always be able to get them. Just like the old bumper sticker: Where guns are outlawed, only outlaws will have guns.

The link I provided is to the FBI. Do you really think the FBI is shilling for the NRA?

bdickens
Where guns are outlawed, only outlaws will have guns.

^^^^This is the crux of it all^^^^
 
Correct me if I'm wrong, but didn't this already happen in Brazil as well Australia where crime went up to some astronomical figure?  

eph221
Yes this might work! 😘

LOL!  The problem is, Eph, taking a class does not prevent someone from becoming a homicidal maniac.  It's still about the person, not the gun.  

Voda La Void
...you can't fight obesity with spoon and fork control. 
 

I like that observation! 

bdickens

Beepster
Which completely ignores the elephant in the room that when you have borderless states with varying gun regulations the states/areas with the tightest regulations can just easily import their weapons across state lines.
 
Byron, please stop posting NRA pamphlet material. This is NOT the forum for it.
 
PLEASE and thank you.

Which completely ignores the fact (there's that word again) that people don't typically travel to commit crimes. It's not like there are crime tours or something where criminals get on a bus to ride over to the next state like they were going to the casinos.

But if we were to take your argument at face value, it is a perfect illustration of the futility of prohibitory and confiscatory gun control schemes. The criminals will always be able to get them. Just like the old bumper sticker: Where guns are outlawed, only outlaws will have guns.

The link I provided is to the FBI. Do you really think the FBI is shilling for the NRA?

You completely missed my point. I wasn't saying people are travelling to commit crimes. That doesn't even make sense. I was saying that guns can and are brought in from less restrictive states/areas (very easily) for use by the criminals who reside in the restrictive areas.
 
That is why one of the most important things to do is to set gun regs at the federal level. Not a mish mash of laws all over the place that completely undermine ANY attempts at local gun control.
 
The only other option would be set to up manned border checkpoints that all incoming traffic must go through like at international borders. That of course would a logistical nightmare, cost a fortune, probably not be all that effective and really is a much less palatable idea (especially in regards to freedom of movement) than sane and uniform federal laws.
 
And this is an extremely complex issue. It cannot be summed up in cliched bumper sticker slogans and catchy sounding (on the surface) false equivalencies.
 
There is no point in me going on about this because we've already reached the point in the discussion where the thread is being loaded up with talking points to deflection and strawmen and I know how this debate goes. Around and around in circles for ever until everyone is ticked off and nothing get solved.
 
That's why I didn't want this to turn into a 2A/GR. This is a) not the right place for it, b) not the right TOPIC for it and c) it's in blatant violation of the TOS/COC making it so anyone who posts rebuttals is breaking the rules.
 
There are a bajillion and one other websites where this type of discussion is allowed and occurs every day. Go to one of them if you want to get into a gun argument.

I'm actually surprised that this topic has lasted as long as it did.