• Jimmyeatsausage@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    40
    ·
    1 year ago

    Maybe we should have licensing and registration requirements for guns like we do cars… nobody on the “guns aren’t the problem” side of the argument is ok with anything like that either.

    • DanglingFury@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      11
      ·
      1 year ago

      Yeah i feel like most people would be down with that. Same with taking guns away from domestic abusers. John Stewart (the problem with john stewart) had a great episode on gun control.

    • Bgugi@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      11
      ·
      1 year ago

      There is no license, class, physical or psychological examination, registration, age requirement, background check, or permit required to purchase a car.

      • Instigate@aussie.zone
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        7
        ·
        1 year ago

        There are licences, classes, examinations, registration, age requirements and permits required to actually use the car though.

        Also, cars have a viable purpose beyond being a weapon. Why are we trying to equate something whose main purpose is to transport but can be used as a weapon with something whose main purpose is to end life? If an object’s sole or main purpose is to cause physical harm, it should obviously be regulated more heavily than objects whose main purpose is not to harm, but can be used as a weapon in certain circumstances.

        • Bgugi@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          12
          ·
          1 year ago

          To use the car on publicly-owned roads.

          I’m just clarifying why “treat them like cars” is a terrible argument.

    • Frost-752@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      1 year ago

      I am on that side of the argument and im fully in favor of registration requirements, in fact I think anyone who wants to own a gun should have to undergo regular psychological, mental, and physical health evaluations as well as required to take a gun safety course. Not that I speak for everyone of course but I also dont think Im a minority in this situation.

      • DanglingFury@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        8
        ·
        1 year ago

        The counter argument to that is that it negatively impacts lower class people who are unable to take time off work to go do those things, thus disproportionately hindering lower class and minority rights.

        And the counter argument to that is that there should be enough safety nets in place to allow all people to be able to take time off work as needed.

        That would have people really confused. “We have to raise minimum wage to allow everyone the right to bear arms”

        • Bgugi@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          4
          ·
          1 year ago

          So if working conditions improve, it would be appropriate to implement stricter voter ID laws?

          • Jimmyeatsausage@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            8
            ·
            1 year ago

            Yes… but since the purpose of those laws is only to suppress turnout amongst the poor, I don’t think anyone would be trying to pass them if being poor didn’t make voting harder…the 2nd group most impacted are the elderly and they tend to vote for folks that want to suppress the poor so there’s even less reason to pass them at that point.

            • Bgugi@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              7
              ·
              1 year ago

              Suppress turnout amongst the poor [and consequently certain demographics that are disproportionately poor]. Take a look at the history of gun control and you’ll see a familiar pattern to voter suppression.