(August 26, 2015 at 7:51 pm)Napoléon Wrote:(August 26, 2015 at 7:40 pm)Parkers Tan Wrote: The owner has a responsibility to society to demonstrate his or her responsibility. Surely we agree on that, right?
Yeah, and if people could do that I'd be all for allowing guns. But like I said, you have to play to the 1% who fuck things up for everyone else.
And that's where wise law comes into play. There's going to be a 1% in most anything. Mass attacks in China with knives show that. One cannot outlaw insanity; one cannot outlaw ideological extremists. So far as I know, the deadliest weapon used by a noncombatant was a jet liner.
One cannot prepare for every exigency, but as ATTf47 has already pointed out, in a rather cogent fashion you have to work inside the social and cultural framework already in place, and outlawing guns out of hand in America simply won't work. What has to be fashioned is a long-term plan that work to both reduce gun-accessibility to the dipshits while at the same time preserving 2A rights for those who demonstrate themselves to be sane and responsible.
Our state of Florida has a stipulation in its criminal code which demands that any criminal caught using a gun in a crime, whether it was fired, brandished, or even alluded-to, gets a mandatory ten-year sentence. That sort of thing is obviously no comfort to the maimed or dead, but it has wrought a significant reduction in gun crime there. That's one avenue. I've mentioned a couple of potential avenues earlier.
I don't think a board-wide gun ban is needed to solve the problem, and along with ATTF47, I think attempting to emplace one would be deeply counterproductive.
