Originally Posted by Croatoan
So what can be done?
1: Please for the love of everything stop calling for bans. It makes actual discussion impossible.
2: We need to make it more expensive to purchase semi automatic weapons including handguns. Requiring waiting periods, extra taxes, or even forcing people to pay for their own mental evaluations would be great. Passing an evaluation by a psychologist should be required for purchase (shrinks would love this as it would increase their clientele).
3: We need to admit that there is a epidemic of mental illness in the United States. Mental hospitals need to be reopened and we need to get the dangerous people off the streets.
I will be honest, I don't own a gun and don't really see a need one for myself and my family. We can argue semantics over whether something is an assault rifle or not all day, but in the end people are getting needlessly killed, and one party is not wanting to budge at all or make any compromises to make that happen. Hell, there are some people wanting less regulation.
Anyways, I agree with a lot of your points. I don't think anyone is realistically calling for outright gun bans. Hell, even Obama, the person that everyone said that he wanted to take away people's guns, literally said "sensible gun laws" time and time again. Banning guns in the US is never going to happen.
The problem is, in your point #2, all of that is considered violations of the second amendment to the most right wing gun fans/NRA.
Mandatory gun training classes, week-long wait on gun sales, mental evaluation, etc. would work wonders for helping regulate gun sales for people who should be responsible enough to use them. None of this would 100% prevent gun violence, but it would help immensely.
Also, initiating a government gun buy-back program to help get unwanted guns off the street would help as well.
Originally Posted by Croatoan
If you don't know what you are talking about it makes it hard for anyone to take your point seriously. For example, if I went into an argument with string theorists spouting garbage they wouldn't take my point seriously either. If you want to debate anything you need to educate yourself so you can debate accurately, or you will always lose. THAT is why terminology is important, particularly when you want to attack a persons constitutional right.
People can have some terminology wrong, but that doesn't mean their point is moot. I don't need specific terminology on why drinking 3 gallons of milk in one sitting is a bad idea. I can get the terminology wrong, but in the end the point remains that drinking that much milk isn't good for you.
Saying that their entire post isn't even up for debate and worthless because someone mislabeled a gun as an assault rifle isn't a good debate tactic either.
Mil6es point was a semiautomatic rifle or handguns won't stand a chance to a squad of miltants in full gear with full auto weapons, or drones, or whatever else the military has at its disposal. This situation is just a fairy tale to me, along with what I have personally heard of gun owners dreams of taking down an attacker at a mall or bank with their own gun. "Yeah man, if i saw someone walk in with a gun and start shooting, I would take out my own gun, get into flanked position and take them out before they can do any damage".