this post was submitted on 14 Jul 2024
690 points (93.9% liked)

Memes

44912 readers
2720 users here now

Rules:

  1. Be civil and nice.
  2. Try not to excessively repost, as a rule of thumb, wait at least 2 months to do it if you have to.

founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] -5 points 1 month ago (2 children)

you want to have guns you have to have the responsibility too.

No, you don't get to make that argument. Not after you try to make me a criminal for trying to take such responsibility. You're continuing to make the same mistakes. Argue better.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 1 month ago (1 children)

You're not a criminal for doing that under the current laws. And I straight up gave you the answer to the quiz for when it happens under UBC. You're just trying to be outraged at this point.

[–] [email protected] -4 points 1 month ago (1 children)

Outraged? Nah. Bored. After you murdered your own argument, I've got nothing left to do but play sudoku, jerk off, and fall asleep.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 1 month ago

Sure, and yet, here you are.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 month ago

Also, why can't you just take your friend, friend's guns, in your car, to the range, store them there? is there any real problem with that, or any real reason why you specifically need to have the guns rather than the range, which might be a better long term storage solution? I'm not opposed to your solution, I think it's workable, I think it has potential to, maybe not get passed federally since the gun lobby is insanely powerful, but maybe work on a state-by-state basis, right, and build up from there. But if you do have an actual counterargument for what the guy's saying, then you should give it instead of just kind of deflecting, because right now he does seem to have basically refuted all of the hypotheticals you were able to give about why requiring some kind of record every time a gun is transferred is a bad idea, and why universal background checks and the state as an active third party rather than a retroactive third party might be a good idea.

The only counterargument I can really see against it is maybe that it would result in state overreach or people being prevented from having access to guns if we start to see disproportionate enforcement of crimes and certain crimes being reclassified as felonies or something, but that's also a problem with the current system that wouldn't really get solved by your proposal at all, so yeah, I dunno.