• @Wrench
    link
    71 year ago

    Draw a line in the sand for weapon varieties. For me, that’s semi auto. Allow shotguns, bolt action rifles, etc for practical use and self defense. But any line will be hotly debated.

    Ban sales of new ones. Give X years for voluntary surrender of existing ones.

    After voluntary window expires, send authorities after registered ones, or just send fines for a while.

    Any crime after mandatory kicks in gets multiplied if an illegal gun was in proximity.

    Then, time.

    Happy? It’s pretty simple to get started. Then iterate when actual problems manifest.

    • Frog-Brawler
      link
      fedilink
      -41 year ago

      After voluntary window expires, send authorities after registered ones, or just send fines for a while.

      This part doesn’t work with your “solution.” Do you expect the police to enter people’s homes and take their guns?

      • @Wrench
        link
        61 year ago

        Iterative. Fines, court dates, warrants when it comes down to it. Sentencing enhancements for crimes.

        I wouldn’t send authorities into homes, no.

        • Frog-Brawler
          link
          fedilink
          -11 year ago

          Fines, court dates and warrants do not take firearms out of the hands of people that would rather die than give them up. You’d eventually need SWAT tasks force level initiatives to go and kill resistors eventually; I find that highly unethical.

          • @Wrench
            link
            31 year ago

            And there it is. Exactly what I said was going to happen. What was the point of this exercise?

            • Frog-Brawler
              link
              fedilink
              -4
              edit-2
              1 year ago

              And there it is…? Would you have preferred I started off with that statement in the future?

              The point is that you cannot effectively remove guns in the US, without substantially increasing loss of life, and that’s why it doesn’t happen.

              • @Wrench
                link
                51 year ago

                Let me remind you of my comment above

                Again, the point is we’re not even there yet. We can theory craft all we want, and you can poke imaginary holes in every measure taken. And in the end, you will still reach the conclusion of “if it’s not perfect, why try?” and nothing will change.

                So, why bother? No matter what solutions someone brings to the table, you will not be satisfied.

                You proved that correct. There was no point to any of this.

                • Frog-Brawler
                  link
                  fedilink
                  -2
                  edit-2
                  1 year ago

                  The conclusions I came to are as follows:

                  1. You immediately resorted to name calling when you didn’t like what I said… like some kind of petulant child.
                  2. You make claims that we just need to “try” and then once a problem with your half-baked idea is presented, it became my fault
                  3. I outright told you the point and you still missed it like a fucking moron.
                  • @foofiepie
                    link
                    31 year ago

                    Assuming the thought experiment is reaching a system such as exists in many parts of the world including the UK and Canada, what do you think the best approach to achieve that, would be?