Australian comedian perfectly sums up why other countries think US gun laws are crazy

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Port_Arthur_massacre_(Australia)

"I like them" is generally enough reason to allow somebody to own something. I'm not bothered by that rationale for ownership. Indeed, if I ever owned a gun, that would be the reason. I am hugely bothered by people owning them but refusing to consider the required responsibility inherent in that choice.

His comedy special "Bare" is on Netflix. I need to watch it. Regardless of someone's position on guns, that bit was fucking funny.

I fully support the state prosecuting those who don't exercise responsibility with their guns.

I do not support the state burdening or constraining my right in order to prevent me from having the responsibility in the first place.

I'm willing to discuss all sorts of solutions to violent crime PROVIDED you acknowledge at the outset that I have a legitimate right to own guns appropriate for defense of myself, my family, and my property, free from state interference with or burden on that right.

If you won't acknowledge that, we have nothing to discuss.

That fellow was very good at "cherry picking" obvious media sensation opportunities and exploiting them.
So he gets an "A" for that. I don't agree with what he says, but if you do that is your choice.

Anyone like cars that do more than get you from point A to point B without breaking down? So why do you purchase any car
for it's gadgets and extra fun/easy capabilities? I mean I'm all for your choice to do that, but a fraction of fancy car owners
kill people. Why don't you own up to the responsibility of owning a car? My god you need to control your fellow
fast and fancy car owners. You are killing thousands of your fellow Americans.

The founders of our country acknowledged that. Just sayin'

Paladin prefers polarization. That's an approach that leads to groups like Mom's Demand Action getting larger and more powerful. The kind of statement he makes in this thread is why people talk about gun nuts. And I'm somebody who wants gun owners to have their guns. Yet he loses me with the extreme rhetoric and refusal to talk.

Moms Demand Action? How about trying to get laws changed to keep violent and habitual felons behind bars.
There's a nice place to start!

So cars are needed? Fair enough, but what about people who abuse the right to drive them? I don't see too many groups of upset people
campaigning to regulate them more. Regardless, your neighbor just killed a kid drunk driving. And you don't give a shit?
Let's put him away for murder, and by the way let's make it more difficult for you to drive because all drivers kill kids.

Here's the way I see it. Starting in 1936 and ending in 2004, the pro-gun side has lost every single fight. Compromise is not seven decades of one side giving everything and the other giving nothing. So, I have to agree with Paladin. Until the people opposed to my stance on gun control can agree to actually, you know, compromise and admit a few things, we're all wasting our time.

You can go out and buy a ridiculously powerful gun at any gun retailer, and even some retailers like Walmart, which is everywhere. You're free to carry your gun, in most states, and free to defend yourself with a gun, and not be arrested for possessing it. What have you lost?

You're not one of the Jim Jefferies 10percenters are you paladin??

And that has not always been the case and is still not the case in many areas. The pendulum is starting to swing back, and frankly, I'm glad.

I really liked the bit about all the bad people coming to murder you in your homes. Made me chuckle

You've never heard of MADD and SADD? Car drivers should be significantly more regulated than they are.

Then you haven't lost, you've gained. I'm not seeing the problem. I support the second amendment, but I also agree with Jim on this one.

Thanks! Well put. Here's what I think is funny: anti-gun folks mock pro-gun (or neutral gun) owners as clinging to and reading too much into the 2nd Amendment. Like it's old fashioned,
not applicable to modern times.
Yet when their particular constitutional rights ( which were violated in whatever form or fashion) are violated they will wrap themselves in that document like it was a quilt made by mama.

And yet, I've moved significantly in your direction, and you guys keep moving further away. So no, I don't buy the way you see it.

Then we're wasting our time. The pendulum is starting to swing in my favor. I'm interested to see how far it goes.

That can be a part of it. Then again unless you spent most of your life here you'll never really "get it" and that's fine.
As for not being able to protect yourself with a gun? They are a pretty efficient tool for that provided you train
and practice with it. Hell, we won a revolution with them matter-of-fact!

How much further could it swing beyond where it already is? You already can own just about any firearm with minimal inconvenience. You already can take that firearm just about anywhere, even in some cases on somebody else's private property. What exactly are you looking for at this point?

As this man so cheerfully points out, the joke's on us gun-grabbers because you can own a fully functional tank:
http://bearingarms.com/legal-to-buy-a-tank/

And he says it with much pride, so yeah, I'm not sure what has been lost, or how much farther is needed to go.

By the way, this is that 10% Jim referred to.

As for the pendulum swinging, here's how I see it: the pendulum seems to be swinging toward the average armed citizen defending themselves
in whatever way plays out. Cops shooting/killing people tends to still piss off a lot of people. They are under the microscope now.
But hey, we have been discussing this in obtuse ways for a while - The US hates authority, it's in our nature, hard wired. But deep down
most of us understand the reasoning behind being able to defend yourself against those who might harm you. Most average US citizens work hard,
and follow the laws and try to better themselves. When people interfere with that (the government or the thug on the corner) we tend to handle it
at the most basic level. And they can crunch numbers all day (anybody can use stats to prove anything) but being able to defend yourself against those
who try to harm us is what separates the US from......pretty much all of western Europe.

So let me bring this up: guns can be purchased anywhere on this fucking planet, period, end of story.
So if the criminals in western Europe started going bat-shit crazy gun-slinging like they do in the US in some cities do you really think that
the average citizen would kick back and say "no problem, the police can handle these hooligans" and sleep well at night?
If almost every single store and restaurant and bank underwent an armed robbery at least once? If innocent bystanders got hit from stray bullets
on a daily basis that the citizens wouldn't say "hey! Can I have the right to defend myself since the criminals are getting deadly?"

As with a fully automatic firearm, owning a tank with functional main armament requires special permitting and background checks far above buying even the scariest of "assault weapons".

And that guy's a moron.