Comment

Liberator Lives Again

8
goddamnedfrank5/06/2013 5:56:03 pm PDT

re: #6 kirkspencer

I know you’re strongly against anything that restricts firearms in any way, shape, or form, but the majority of the public isn’t.

I’ve repeatedly said here that handguns, being involved in more than 80% of all firearms crime, need to be much more heavily regulated. I’ve even directed such comments directly to you.

In as much as you care about actually influencing the intentional homicide rate, yes. Handguns will always be more conducive to criminality, used far more often, more concealable and thus easier to sneak past society’s defenses. If you ban so called assault weapons you’ll just drive the smaller number of mass killers who use them back to the more efficient handguns, which they’re usually carrying anyway and using more often already. You’ll have done basically nothing to influence the intentional homicide rate and have handed the anti gun control crowd a powerful argument when the rate goes up again - that disarming law abiding citizens was demonstrably counter productive. Crack down on handguns and you stand a chance at actually effecting a positive change.

I’ve, again repeatedly, expanded this line of reasoning, offering specific ways to crack down on handguns:

Here’s some comparative stats. It’s hard to argue against the US policy resulting in a lot more dead people. More than 80% of that though is handguns, which have always been the vast, vast majority of the problem at every level of gun crime. The best medium term answer for the US would be to try and move handguns into the NFA category that governs machineguns, SBRs and SBSs - require a $200 tax stamp and several months of ATF background check for every single transfer.

I don’t know if you’re just a fucking idiot with long term memory issues or a sniveling lying little piece of shit, and at this point I kind of don’t care, I’m tired of having my position misrepresented by your bitch ass.