Some states have a small amount. The rest basically have none. And even the states that do have gun control pail in comparison to German gun control as Peepin pointed out.
And you’re ignoring the fact that any given gun law is only as strong as the weakest gun law nationwide. Anybody can go traveling to another state where the gun laws are lax and get a gun.
The gun control in this country is laughably weak as a result. Couple that with having the most guns per capita of any country out there, it’s a recipe for having a shooting basically every god damned day.
As I broke down, the requirements to own a gun in Germany and in America are very similar at the federal level. The weapons used in the shooting in Kansas CIty could have been purchased in Germany.
And that’s before you get into all the other restrictions that germany has on a national level. To pick out a few:
Gun license required for pretty much everything that isn’t a musket
A license requires you to be over 18, be trustworthy, capable of owning a gun, have expert knowledge, and have a necessity for a gun
Ban on convicted felons, those with addictions or metal disorders from owning guns
Any weapon defined as a weapon of war is banned
Gun control in the U.S. is nowhere near the level of gun control in Germany. A requirement for a license to own a gun in the U.S. would get shut down by the 2nd amendment so fucking hard not even the NSA would know the attempt was made.
Did you read the article I posted? Gun licensing is the equivalent of our process to purchase a firearm. And your article is wrong. Fully automatic systems are regulated in the United States at the federal level. Why you shouldn’t rely on Wikipedia for a topic you don’t understand. You see differences that really are not there.
Necessity is easy to get past, you hunt, sport shoot, etc
Still, how would any of these changed the Kansas City shooting? You keep trying to dodge the question of the article.
Then clarify as I don’t see how how any of this would have stopped the shooting.
Your chart was wrong and I called it out. Are you intentionally posting false information since you knew it was wrong ?
You realize gun control really started during Nazi germany to keep the Jews from defend themselves. After the war it was the allies who stripped away most the gun rights to keep the population from attacking the allies.
Pizzaman’s point is that American gun control is not equivalent to German gun control, though. His argument is in the details.
From the article he linked:
German gun laws restricts the acquisition, possession, and carrying of firearms to those with a creditable need for a weapon.
They also ban fully automatic guns and severely restrict the acquisition of other types of weapons.
Compulsory liability insurance is required for anyone who is licensed to carry firearms.
In other words, yeah, we have gun control laws, but as long as the Supreme Court continues to (foolishly) recognize an individual right to firearms with no relation to a militia, an interpretation that’s only a little over a decade old, then yeah, no version of American gun control laws are ever going to be effective.
They also ban fully automatic guns and severely restrict the acquisition of other types of weapons.
Fully automatic weapons are heavily restricted here. Can you think of one ever being used in a crime? I can’t.
Compulsory liability insurance is required for anyone who is licensed to carry firearms.
Do you think that would change anything? Do you think the criminals would say, Oh Crap! I can’t afford the liability insurance. Do you think that would have stopped the Kansas City shooting?
German gun laws restricts the acquisition, possession, and carrying of firearms to those with a creditable need for a weapon.
That wouldn’t have stopped the Kansas City shooting either. They didn’t legally own the firearms.
There have been a few instances, but as far as I know, they were not legal weapons. The LA Bank shooting is an example. That is the only one I can think of.
Stolen from police officers? Because German gun laws restrict acquisition, possession, and carrying of firearms to those with a creditable need for a weapon, then it’s likely such laws would not have stopped the Kansas City shooting. Police officers have a need for a weapon.
Stolen from John Smith, some random dude with no need to have a gun? Then, because German gun laws restrict acquisition, possession, and carrying of firearms to those with a creditable need for a weapon, then it’s likely such laws would have stopped the Kansas City shooting. The gun(s) wouldn’t have been available to steal in the first place.
I do not see a credible need other than for a concealed weapon. Otherwise, it appears fairly open to buying a firearm. The requirements are similar to ours, Age, criminal record, mental health, no drug abuse, background check with only the addition of proof of competency.
Yeah, I don’t see a credible need requirement either, according to that website. So, we’ll go with proof of expertise instead.
Even so, your site mentions that publicly carrying firearms is generally prohibited and concealed carry is generally reserved for specific professions.
So, if the Kansas City shooter acquired the gun by stealing them, then it’s going to matter where they were stolen from.
If they were stolen from John Smith in public, then again, German gun control laws are far more likely to have stopped the Kansas City shooting because the legally acquired gun wouldn’t have been in the public in the first place.
If they were stolen from John Smith at home, then, the website you linked has safe storage requirements that suggest it would take a lot for the shooter to find and combine everything before going on the rampage. Again, German gun control laws would have likely stopped the shooting.
And while this is a fun exercise in the logical application of law, it’s all for nothing because German gun laws are largely unconstitutional. For Americans, guns are an individual right, not a privilege. In law, rights require duties from others. If someone has a right to something, then others have the duty of respecting that right. A right to guns is the duty to endure a higher probability of being murdered in a firearm related incident than other developed nations.
I will say I have no qualms about this for concealed carry. I have training through law enforcement, military and professional training I have paid for.
It makes me uncomfortable that someone with zero experience can buy a gun, walk out of the store, load it and put in their purse or pocket.
We have gun control. That is why the question the article asks is what law could have changed stopped it.
We are not without gun laws here. We have a lot of laws in this
Some states have a small amount. The rest basically have none. And even the states that do have gun control pail in comparison to German gun control as Peepin pointed out.
And you’re ignoring the fact that any given gun law is only as strong as the weakest gun law nationwide. Anybody can go traveling to another state where the gun laws are lax and get a gun.
The gun control in this country is laughably weak as a result. Couple that with having the most guns per capita of any country out there, it’s a recipe for having a shooting basically every god damned day.
The rest basically have non
As I broke down, the requirements to own a gun in Germany and in America are very similar at the federal level. The weapons used in the shooting in Kansas CIty could have been purchased in Germany.
That is objectively false.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Overview_of_gun_laws_by_nation
And that’s before you get into all the other restrictions that germany has on a national level. To pick out a few:
Gun license required for pretty much everything that isn’t a musket
A license requires you to be over 18, be trustworthy, capable of owning a gun, have expert knowledge, and have a necessity for a gun
Ban on convicted felons, those with addictions or metal disorders from owning guns
Any weapon defined as a weapon of war is banned
Gun control in the U.S. is nowhere near the level of gun control in Germany. A requirement for a license to own a gun in the U.S. would get shut down by the 2nd amendment so fucking hard not even the NSA would know the attempt was made.
Did you read the article I posted? Gun licensing is the equivalent of our process to purchase a firearm. And your article is wrong. Fully automatic systems are regulated in the United States at the federal level. Why you shouldn’t rely on Wikipedia for a topic you don’t understand. You see differences that really are not there. Necessity is easy to get past, you hunt, sport shoot, etc
Still, how would any of these changed the Kansas City shooting? You keep trying to dodge the question of the article.
I understand how federalism works, evidently that skill escapes you.
You can legally own a fully automatic gun in the U.S., unlike Germany. Even your cherypicked point is wrong.
I’ve already answered this, and the answer went sailing over your head.
Then clarify as I don’t see how how any of this would have stopped the shooting.
Your chart was wrong and I called it out. Are you intentionally posting false information since you knew it was wrong ?
You realize gun control really started during Nazi germany to keep the Jews from defend themselves. After the war it was the allies who stripped away most the gun rights to keep the population from attacking the allies.
Nah, you’re not worth the effort. You’d just find a new way to side step the meaning of what I am saying.
I just explained why it isn’t.
And this country was founded on the blood of the natives, and built by slaves. So what?
and this is why people see you as a troll. You don’t want to have discussions. You just want to throw insults.
Removed by mod
The gun wasn’t legal.
Removed by mod
Pizzaman’s point is that American gun control is not equivalent to German gun control, though. His argument is in the details.
From the article he linked:
In other words, yeah, we have gun control laws, but as long as the Supreme Court continues to (foolishly) recognize an individual right to firearms with no relation to a militia, an interpretation that’s only a little over a decade old, then yeah, no version of American gun control laws are ever going to be effective.
Removed by mod
Fully automatic weapons are heavily restricted here. Can you think of one ever being used in a crime? I can’t.
Do you think that would change anything? Do you think the criminals would say, Oh Crap! I can’t afford the liability insurance. Do you think that would have stopped the Kansas City shooting?
That wouldn’t have stopped the Kansas City shooting either. They didn’t legally own the firearms.
If anything, you’ve pointed out that gun control works.
There have been a few instances, but as far as I know, they were not legal weapons. The LA Bank shooting is an example. That is the only one I can think of.
You almost understood.
It matters how they acquired the firearm. Do we know how that came to be?
I’ve only seen articles identify them as stolen
Stolen from who though?
Stolen from police officers? Because German gun laws restrict acquisition, possession, and carrying of firearms to those with a creditable need for a weapon, then it’s likely such laws would not have stopped the Kansas City shooting. Police officers have a need for a weapon.
Stolen from John Smith, some random dude with no need to have a gun? Then, because German gun laws restrict acquisition, possession, and carrying of firearms to those with a creditable need for a weapon, then it’s likely such laws would have stopped the Kansas City shooting. The gun(s) wouldn’t have been available to steal in the first place.
https://germanyexpat.de/gun-laws-in-germany/
I do not see a credible need other than for a concealed weapon. Otherwise, it appears fairly open to buying a firearm. The requirements are similar to ours, Age, criminal record, mental health, no drug abuse, background check with only the addition of proof of competency.
Yeah, I don’t see a credible need requirement either, according to that website. So, we’ll go with proof of expertise instead.
Even so, your site mentions that publicly carrying firearms is generally prohibited and concealed carry is generally reserved for specific professions.
So, if the Kansas City shooter acquired the gun by stealing them, then it’s going to matter where they were stolen from.
If they were stolen from John Smith in public, then again, German gun control laws are far more likely to have stopped the Kansas City shooting because the legally acquired gun wouldn’t have been in the public in the first place.
If they were stolen from John Smith at home, then, the website you linked has safe storage requirements that suggest it would take a lot for the shooter to find and combine everything before going on the rampage. Again, German gun control laws would have likely stopped the shooting.
And while this is a fun exercise in the logical application of law, it’s all for nothing because German gun laws are largely unconstitutional. For Americans, guns are an individual right, not a privilege. In law, rights require duties from others. If someone has a right to something, then others have the duty of respecting that right. A right to guns is the duty to endure a higher probability of being murdered in a firearm related incident than other developed nations.
I will say I have no qualms about this for concealed carry. I have training through law enforcement, military and professional training I have paid for.
It makes me uncomfortable that someone with zero experience can buy a gun, walk out of the store, load it and put in their purse or pocket.
Switzerland has a high rate of firearm ownership. Their firearm deaths are still low.
Removed by mod