🇳🇱
@stormy178@mastodon.stormy178.com @MelodyCooper
And when someone staps someone or beats them with a bat do we cry about how bats are legal... Yes there is a problem, but absurd solutions like making guns illegal is obviously not the answer.
@freemo @stormy178@mastodon.stormy178.com @MelodyCooper
Hmm, there is a disconnect: it was stated that guns should be regulated, with strict background checks. Your reply talks of "making guns illegal".
Did you reply to the wrong toot here or do you think background checks are a bad thing? If so, do you wish for people with known agression problems (psychological disorders or former history of violent crimes) to be able to have guns?
I dont think you can see the toot i replied to, the person blocked me.
I am not against background checks in their current form, which is thurough and complete.
The one issue with the current setup is loopholes at gun shows. But that doesnt appear to be a huge source of actual problems so yra im for background checks as they exist today.
@stormy178@mastodon.stormy178.com @MelodyCooper
@freemo @stormy178@mastodon.stormy178.com @MelodyCooper
You might want to state that, the toot history i read showed you ignoring the distinction between banning and background checks... it changes the meaning completely.
No i was quite clear i was talking about a specific type of commonly proposed restriction, banning.
@stormy178@mastodon.stormy178.com @MelodyCooper
@freemo And who you responded to was quite clear that background checks matter.
@thatguyoverthere @admitsWrongIfProven
I mean i dont mind private sales. But yea they should be taxed and follow regulation ideally.
@freemo @thatguyoverthere
Well for the topic at hand, it would not exactly matter if a sale is public or private - just that background checks are performed.
Are private sellers liable for what is done with their gun until background checks are performed?
Sell to a loonie, get imprisoned for their murder, right?
@thatguyoverthere @admitsWrongIfProven
Public gu sales require a paper trail be kept. This is a bigger issue for me than just the background check
@thatguyoverthere @admitsWrongIfProven
Yea but in private sales you dont have to transfer ownership at the point of sale. Sometimes you dont have to record it at all
@freemo @thatguyoverthere Sounds perfect, if the goal is to have a gun as a someone with rage control issues.
@admitsWrongIfProven @thatguyoverthere
As ive stated, it is a valid loophole. Im fine with addressing.
That said as long as attacks on gun rights are underway id be hesitant to fix this issue when the first amendment is already so grossly abused. If thr left werent calling for further constitutional violations id probably be louder about fixing this loophole. As it stands it might be one of very few ways people will have quick access to guns if in need.
I also know people who are antigun consistently think progun arguments are shit. I dont think ive ever once heard a strongly antigun person go "You make an excellent progun argument but i still disagreee due to..." like never, not unless thry were on the fence on the issue... so at best your assessment is predictable, meanwhile the progun people will generally share and praise my argument with a similar level of bias. But hey they may be biased but at least they are the correct one of the two.
@admitsWrongIfProven Hard to judge. Most of the time whatever peoples ideas on guns happen to be will not be changed by my opinion. I also have noninterest in convincing people of anything, i enjoy talking about it, but its more about seeing how people can be led to beleive lies as long as thry are popular enough rather than a desire to convince people.
I do know over the years at least 20 or 30 people have changed their mind specifically because of the data ive shared and never once was i made aware of anyone who was on the fence and changed to an antigun stance because of something I shared. So im pretty happy with the outlook if that is to be the measure anyway.