In a comment from my last diary, Robobagpiper wrote;
This. It's a matter of trust. When gun controllers incessantly go on with "ban this! ban that!" out of one side of their mouths, and sneer "you crazies! We don't want to come take away your guns" out of the other, there is zero basis for trust.
It really does come down to trust and I don’t trust you. How can I when firearms are called killing machines? Why should I when gun owners are routinely considered mentally unstable? Trust cannot be built when when gun owners are told they are compensating for having a small penis.
Based on such comments and opinions that are published daily regarding gun owners, I am fully persuaded that regardless of your proclamations of wanting “reasonable” or “sensible” (whatever those words mean) firearm regulations, I believe that you will keep pushing until you have banned the private ownership of guns all together. The total failure of your own policies regarding firearms drives you to do so.
Columbine occurred during the last assault weapons ban. Connecticut has some of the strictest gun laws in the country, and even has a partial AWB. Despite these laws the shootings still happened. If you are a proponent of gun control these incidents prove that the gun laws you desire to put in place don't work and aren't strict enough.
In the days immediately following the Sandy Hook shooting emotions where running hot and even I called for limiting magazine capacity. Not much has changed since then with emotions still pegged on 11. There have been calls by more than a few on this site to:
• Ban handguns
• Ban semi-automatic rifles
• Ban certain magazines
• Ban concealed carry
• Require mental health testing prior to gun ownership
• Repeal the 2nd Amendment
• Ban the RKBA group
Even if a new AWB is passed there will be more mass shootings and those will be cited as proof that we need more new laws and more new bans that are even stricter. I don’t believe that there is a single instance or scenario where you will decide that you have gone far enough. You cannot be appeased.
Nationally our violent crime rates are significantly lower than what they were 20 years ago.
Violent crime Murder/homicide Rape Robbery Aggravated assault
1992 757.7 9.3 42.8 263.7 441.9
2011 386.3 4.7 26.8 113.7 241.1
This has been an ongoing trend, even with the introduction of self-defence laws like the ill named “Stand your Ground Laws” and the easing of restrictions on concealed carry. But the fact that violent crime is dropping in spite of this doesn't seem to matter, hence my lack of trust. I trust you even less when I see comments like this from someone whose diaries get posted on the front page.
I see. You protect the constitution by shooting. Thanks for that. If you didn't go shooting, why we probably wouldn't even be able to masturbate.Then there was a diary, now deleted, that compared owning 30 round magazines with owning child pornography. Comparing me to a pedophile doesn't do much for building trust.
At some point, I believe a violent statist will need to take charge of the issue and suppress the gun freaks with drone strikes and be done with it. Probably after one of your bretheren breaks into a maternity ward and shoots up a bunch of infants. That'll be the last straw methinks.
Somehow, I think the Constitution will be alright with a disarmed public.
I expect comments like these from a right wing site, but not here. When I see seriously fucked up shit like that you have not only lost me on this issue, but I will actively fight against you.
Oh sure there might be six or seven people out there that favor more restrictions like mahakali overdrive and Meteor Blades who are calm and consider deeply what we could do, but those calmer voices appear to be a minority here. Subsequently I am convinced that your ultimate goal is to have only the police and military armed.
Color me jaded and uninterested in such a concept.