Discussion: The Second Amendment III

[Optimus_Prime_]

19? Wow.

Biden ''Obama has 19 exec actions'' on gun control.

http://www.politico.com/story/2013/01/biden-guns-executive-actions-86187.html

That's not some unprecedented number or anything. Also the use of the word "action" should not be confused with the word "order". In other words they could be doing something, or nothing, probably nothing. Executive "action" simply refers to any action taken by the executive branch, that could, theoretically, come in the form of an Executive Order, or something done with out the legislature. Could be done through other actions available to the executive office.

 

[Destructus86]

Well, regardless of laws passed I have had it confirmed that my local law enforcement will do whatever they can to not enforce them. And knowing my area the locals are happy about it. These new laws arent going to do a thing for guns already owned. Heck my neighbor went out and bought an AR-15 because of the threat of new laws and shot rounds for five hours yesterday. If the goal was to curb these sells then announcing they were going to enact new gunlaws was incredibly stupid. It just increased sells on guns that will now be grandfathered in. It should have been a silent affair that was unannounced until it was enacted. As it stands any new laws will be practically pointless. In many areas, high capacity mags already owned will be traded and sold under the table and already owned and unregistered AR-15s will also be sold and traded under the table and local law enforcement wont do anything to stop it. The only law that will do much is universal registration on all new guns bought.

It's more or less an attempt to save face politically. By pushing for the law, Obama can say he made efforts to handle the situation while doing very little. But it "looks" good.

 

[Kable24]

Even if no AWB happens it will take at least a year for the prices to come down and stabilize again. Manufacturers of guns and magazines are so far behind on production that most have stopped taken orders just so they can get caught up.

 

[SuBe]

Certainly they can (at least certain types) if it poses a public health hazard.

It's as much a gun's fault for "being a public health hazard" as a fork leads to obesity or a car leads to someone being hit. Responsibility does not lay in objects, only people.

 

[Optimus_Prime_]

It's as much a gun's fault for "being a public health hazard" as a fork leads to obesity or a car leads to someone being hit. Responsibility does not lay in objects, only people.

Well the Government does have a right to restrict your access to all sorts of objects. It's not really a matter of responsibility.

 

[SuBe]

Well the Government does have a right to restrict your access to all sorts of objects. It's not really a matter of responsibility.

Really. What "right"? By whom? The Government is a just a group of men and women. What makes them so much more human than anyone else that they get to dictate what you are allowed to possess? You do do know that they would use Guns against people to take their guns away, right? You do know that they would put people in cages if they don't do what they say. And that is "right"?

 

[Optimus_Prime_]

I wasn't making a moral argument. Your Government. The one you're a citizen of does have the legal right to restrict your right to all sorts of objects and they do it all the time.

 

[Victarion]

I wasn't making a moral argument. Your Government. The one you're a citizen of does have the legal right to restrict your right to all sorts of objects and they do it all the time.

Sometimes I think they forget their role as public servants and who holds true power in this country.

 

[SuBe]

I wasn't making a moral argument. Your Government. The one you're a citizen of does have the legal right to restrict your right to all sorts of objects and they do it all the time.

So just because I live within an imaginary boundary, dictated by men and women that lives in a swamp 1000 miles away who have inflated self-worth issues, get to dictate to me what I'm allowed to possess?

 

[Optimus_Prime_]

So just because I live within an imaginary boundary, dictated by men and women that lives in a swamp 1000 miles away who have inflated self-worth issues, get to dictate to me what I'm allowed to possess?

They would be the proud owners of this imaginary boundary you live in, so yes, that would be their legal right, yeah.

 

[SuBe]

They would be the proud owners of this imaginary boundary you live in, so yes, that would be their legal right, yeah.

So everyone is a slave to these Self Important Swamp people?

 

[Optimus_Prime_]

So everyone is a slave to these Self Important Swamp people?

If you define being a slave as having to play by their rules, then yes.

 

[Destructus86]

So, just wanted to share this post made by someone I know...


This is why gun owners are afraid that the government wants to take away our guns.

Because in some states, they do.

To elaborate further, one of the points in this law is to restrict magazine capacity to 7 rounds, down from the current low-capacity limit of 10 that states like California and Massachusetts already have. Guess what? Most of the guns that would be required to be registered under this law don't have magazines that hold less than 10 rounds.
...
This puts gun owners in a no-win scenario of registering weapons they can't legally have magazines for, selling them completely, or becoming lawbreakers.

And for those who register their weapons and keep their illegal magazines because "It's only a misdemeanor charge", I doubt it'll be a misdemeanor for more than a couple of years.

 

[SuBe]

If you define being a slave as having to play by their rules, then yes.

How else would a slave be defined? "Do as I say or I will beat you, threaten you, put you in a cage."

 

[Optimus_Prime_]

How else would a slave be defined? "Do as I say or I will beat you, threaten you, put you in a cage."

Could be defined relatively. Like you are relatively better off than someone who is actually a slave according to a Government. Therefore because of your relative freedom you are not a slave. They do talk a lot about economic slavery though, especially in capitalist nations (like ours) where having more money generally means less consequence.

Most Government's I've studied boil down to a "do what I say or they'll be consequences" mentality. It's not much different from any other, outside of the form and structure that it takes.

 

[SuBe]

Could be defined relatively. Like you are relatively better off than someone who is actually a slave according to a Government. Therefore because of your relative freedom you are not a slave. They do talk a lot about economic slavery though, especially in capitalist nations (like ours) where having more money generally means less consequence.

Most Government's I've studied boil down to a "do what I say or they'll be consequences" mentality. It's not much different from any other, outside of the form and structure that it takes.

Just because a chicken is free range, doesn't mean it is free. It will still become a chicken nugget just like the rest of the chickens. Just because we are allowed some freedoms, it doesn't mean we are free.

Tax Farmers have learned that if they allow their tax cows a little room, they provide more tax milk.

 

[chaseter]

Just tax the hell outta guns. People can still buy them and it decreases the amount of 20 something psychos that go get them legally.

 

[SuBe]

Just tax the hell outta guns. People can still buy them and it decreases the amount of 20 something psychos that go get them legally.

Most guns that are used in the commission of a crime were stolen.

 

[chaseter]

Not in massacres. We will never stop the day to day murders in crimes. What can be decreased are the instances of mass murders by psychos. Tax guns, increase school security, ban all assault rifles, ban high magazine clips, close the gun show loophole, increase controls through registering, and lastly up programs like NYC has in stop and frisk.

 

[Webfoot Hero]

Not in massacres. We will never stop the day to day murders in crimes. What can be decreased are the instances of mass murders by psychos. Tax guns, increase school security, ban all assault rifles, ban high magazine clips, close the gun show loophole, increase controls through registering, and lastly up programs like NYC has in stop and frisk.

In the Newtown school shooting, the guns he used were stolen from his mother so none of your suggestions would have worked.

 

[Optimus_Prime_]

Most guns that are used in the commission of a crime were stolen.

Statistics? I hear this a lot, and the BoATF doesn't back this statement. They say only 10-15% of guns used in crimes were obtained illegally.

 

[Destructus86]

In the Newtown school shooting, the guns he used were stolen from his mother so none of your suggestions would have worked.

This is true.


Also...this isn't a gun issue. Guns are a symptom. It's like going to the doctor hoping to get a pill to take away the symptom but not cure the disease.

 

[wiegeabo]

If you want to stop the mass murdering psychos, you have to go after the mass murdering psychos, not the weapons they use.

McVeigh didn't need any guns. Just a truck and some fertilizer. And he's the most successful mass murdering psycho in this country's history.


We need an entire revamp of how we view and deal with mental health in the country. It's not anyway near an easy solution, but it is the actual solution to this issue.


While we're working on that, we do need much better personal gun control in this country in the form of enforcing training in the use and, probably more importantly, storage of guns. Properly secured guns are much more difficult to use in a crime.


But, if you really want to get serious about gun crime, then you need to get serious about the illegal guns that do around 90% of the damage. Mass shootings like this might be tragic, but they're only a tiny fraction of the crime. Similar to how airplane crashes might kill a lot of people at once, yet flying is still the safest way to travel, legal guns might kill a lot of people at once, yet they're still much safer to have around than the illegal guns.

 

[Kelly]

Good article on "Hot Guns"

http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/guns/procon/guns.html

 

[wiegeabo]

This is true.


Also...this isn't a gun issue. Guns are a symptom. It's like going to the doctor hoping to get a pill to take away the symptom but not cure the disease.

This.

But in situations like this, people just react and want a quick fix to make them feel better, even if it doesn't really do anything at all.

Then they wonder why it continues to happen again and again.