The Guns thread - Part 1

[LTuser]

They said they didn't want to take away our guns they said. They say that because they know they can't. This bill will not pass.

http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/survey-majority-of-democrats-want-to-ban-semi-automatics-half-want-to-ban-all-guns/article/2650543

82% of Dems want to ban all semiautomatic weapons:

And anyone on the right who said "That's what the dems want" were decried as being conspiracy nuts.. Gee who's right now!

Look, it isn't going to be an effective as a mass killer, sure.

But it does highlight a major issue with guns in the nation. The fetishization of military type guns is a problem. So even if it isn't a killer, it is still part of the problem. One of the things Walmart is doing is taking off realistic military looking non-guns, like aerosoft guns.

Exactly. Its all based on fear of what "LOOKS military".. not what is.

Back in the early-mid 80s, when i lived in the UK, i used to LOVE doing modelling, mostly 1:35 scale tanks and the like. BUT many of the local stores that sold models, also sold MODEL Pistols, that you had to GLUE together.. Still could pop off a plastic pellet though once built.
When they did their arms ban in 96, i no longer SAW those being sold.. Cause some dumbo felt that they were 'too realistic looking' so counted those models IN THE Bloody ban..

 

[Sithborg]

You are purposefully confusing a semi-auto ban with a total ban.

 

[Webfoot Hero]

Then look at their actual legislation. In the past 10 years, I haven't seen a blanket gun ban proposed yet. Typically, it's a request to ban weapons and accessories that are specifically made to kill large amounts of people. And yet you still have groups freaking out over that.

The very kind of behavior you are annoyed at above is reflected back by the people you support, where they lose their minds at the mere mention of any kind of control and assume that people are coming to take all their guns. Which is, quite frankly, silly.

They stop short of a complete weapons ban because they know going any further would not play well for their re-election hopes and would also be unconstitutional due the guarantees of the 2nd Amendment. You see them typically go for a near complete semi-automatic ban since it'd take the largest amount of weapons away as possible while still being borderline constitutional. It also doesn't help quell fears from gun rights people when they hear many politicians and gun control advocates wishing they could repeal the 2nd Amendment and/or enable an Australian-style gun confiscation program. Many don't fear control itself; they fear usual governmental overreach that often results from new legislation.

 

[DarthSkywalker]

They stop short of a complete weapons ban because they know going any further would not play well for their re-election hopes and would also be unconstitutional due the guarantees of the 2nd Amendment. You see them typically go for a near complete semi-automatic ban since it'd take the largest amount of weapons away as possible while still being borderline constitutional. It also doesn't help quell fears from gun rights people when they hear many politicians and gun control advocates wishing they could repeal the 2nd Amendment and/or enable an Australian-style gun confiscation program. Many don't fear control itself; they fear usual governmental overreach that often results from new legislation.

I can't wait until this myth is done away with.

 

[conan69]

You see them typically go for a near complete semi-automatic ban since it'd take the largest amount of weapons away as possible while still being borderline constitutional.

A "semi auto ban" would literally turn most of the gun owners in this country into criminals. They would have to register or turn in their weapons. Is the state prepared to "buy out" gun owners who have guns bought legally that would become illegal under the new ban. How much are they willing to buy my $2400 Daniel Defense for? What about my Kimber 1911? What do I get, 20 cents on the dollar? or Im a criminal. (someone whos never been arrested, has no record, not even a ticket in 30 years).

This was the complaint by many in NY and CT.. they had rifles and magazines (including pistol mags) that were purchased legally, but the Safe Act (passed in the middle of the night) literally turned people.... law abiding people... who had followed the law, into criminals overnight.

Again, this new law, posted on the last page isnt a Assault weapons ban, its basically a anything with a magazine ban.

My .380 carry and even my .22, both small carry pistols, would immediately become illegal.

 

[Tacit Ronin]

You'll be waiting a long time. The far right spins very convincing yarns.

 

[Infinity9999x]

They stop short of a complete weapons ban because they know going any further would not play well for their re-election hopes and would also be unconstitutional due the guarantees of the 2nd Amendment. You see them typically go for a near complete semi-automatic ban since it'd take the largest amount of weapons away as possible while still being borderline constitutional. It also doesn't help quell fears from gun rights people when they hear many politicians and gun control advocates wishing they could repeal the 2nd Amendment and/or enable an Australian-style gun confiscation program. Many don't fear control itself; they fear usual governmental overreach that often results from new legislation.

Many of the semi-automatic weapons they call to ban are weapons that should be banned. Typically there is a designation between a hunting weapon and weapons/accessories geared towards killing people.

And again, you see these people voting down bills to remove bump stocks, bills that would require more background checks...literally just about any kind of control or requirements that would help make people more responsible around these weapons.

The kind of hysteria around any kind of measure viewed as possible gun control needs to be controlled. It's frankly silly, and we obviously need measures that will require people to prove their worthiness and skill to handle some of the weapons they want to own.

 

[conan69]

^ You do to carry conceal. You have to go through a class and get a certificate in most states. You have to provide proof of certificate as well as personal references.
The wait for CCW in NY state is about a year and half.

Ive forever said you should have to do the same for any... ANY high powered rifle.
I have no problem with that at all.

A thorough (and proper) background check, safety class and waiting period.

 

[Infinity9999x]

^ You do to carry conceal. You have to go through a class and get a certificate in most states. You have to provide proof of certificate as well as personal references.
The wait for CCW in NY state is about a year and half.

Ive forever said you should have to do the same for any... ANY high powered rifle.
I have no problem with that at all.

A thorough (and proper) background check, safety class and waiting period.

I would agree. That would be a much needed step, and a logical one. The ease of getting these weapons needs to be controlled, especially the gun show loophole.

 

[squeekness]

I would agree. That would be a much needed step, and a logical one. The ease of getting these weapons needs to be controlled, especially the gun show loophole.

Seconded.

 

[LTuser]

You are purposefully confusing a semi-auto ban with a total ban.

When i keep seeing those on the left who DO seem to want a total ban, or others who equate "Assault weapons" to mean anything semi-automatic, how else are we to take it??

You see them typically go for a near complete semi-automatic ban since it'd take the largest amount of weapons away as possible while still being borderline constitutional.

And how would taking people's guns away, even if just "all semi-automatic weapons, which means ANYTHING but shotguns or bolt action rifles", NOT be violating the constitution??

A "semi auto ban" would literally turn most of the gun owners in this country into criminals. They would have to register or turn in their weapons. Is the state prepared to "buy out" gun owners who have guns bought legally that would become illegal under the new ban. How much are they willing to buy my $2400 Daniel Defense for? What about my Kimber 1911? What do I get, 20 cents on the dollar? or Im a criminal. (someone whos never been arrested, has no record, not even a ticket in 30 years).

This was the complaint by many in NY and CT.. they had rifles and magazines (including pistol mags) that were purchased legally, but the Safe Act (passed in the middle of the night) literally turned people.... law abiding people... who had followed the law, into criminals overnight.

Again, this new law, posted on the last page isnt a Assault weapons ban, its basically a anything with a magazine ban.

My .380 carry and even my .22, both small carry pistols, would immediately become illegal.

And can you really imagine them forcing a confiscation of "all semi-autos"?? How exactly would they do that, when w keep hearing "Its impossible to locate and round up the 11 million illegal aliens in the country", when we have what, 200+ MILLION semi-automatic weapons (from rifles to pistols) out there?

Many of the semi-automatic weapons they call to ban are weapons that should be banned. Typically there is a designation between a hunting weapon and weapons/accessories geared towards killing people.

And who gets to make that determination of 'what we should get to own'?

And again, you see these people voting down bills to remove bump stocks, bills that would require more background checks...literally just about any kind of control or requirements that would help make people more responsible around these weapons.

And pray tell, what exactly in those "Stricter backround checks" would have done a damn thing to have prevented any of the school shootings? Let alone any of the other mass shooting's we have had?

especially the gun show loophole.

What gun show loophole??

http://thefederalist.com/2015/10/07/7-gun-control-myths-that-just-wont-die/

https://www.cato.org/publications/commentary/facts-about-gun-shows

http://www.factandmyth.com/gun-laws-restrictions/yes-the-gun-show-loophole-is-real-nra-lies-exposed

There is no 'loophole'. IT is in reference to PRIVATE sellers doing a one to one sale. NOT licensed sellers. Whether that private person selling a gun, does it via craigs list, the local newspaper 'ad section', at a swap-meet, or otherwise.

JUST like if i go to an auto-dealer, i have to provide proof of drivers license AND INSURANCE before i can drive off the lot with a new car. BUT if i buy one from someone privately selling it, there's no check on my having a proper license or insurance..

 

[Aximili86]

The pro gun crowd using the word "facts" does make me laugh.

Facts: gun crime's down from what it was in the last few decades. Gun ownership's way up.

Facts. There are 5 million + AR-series rifles circulating around the U.S., as of 2016. How many mass shootings (school or otherwise), have there been in the last, say, 10 years, using ARs?

A dozen? Less?

They're seriously horrible, nightmarish events. It's just a weird argument to make upon looking at the facts, the numbers, that they're beyond-the-pale of acceptable purchases in the hands of a sane & law-abiding person. That's a 0.00-something-or-other percentage of people who own one doing the wrong thing with them.

Factually, you fix the background check innefficiencies & ineffectiveness, on paper you should be fixing this shooting problem.

Also, facts.

 

[conan69]

Yea.. those pesky facts... like texting and driving, drunk driving, hammers, knives and medical mistakes literally kill hundreds of thousands more people than ARs every year... but hey, that doesnt help our agenda.




Toughen the gun laws, re-evaluate how we deal (or dont deal) with mental health (including reasonable preemptive detainment for those whove been shown to be a threat to the public) , change the lobbying laws (since the companies that make psychotropic drugs own the congress and senate.. peoplel focus on the NRA and leave these guys out - again agenda), change the law mandating tech companies to share information w/ law enforcement when it comes to threats to public safety, demand law enforcement actually do their job, and fix the background checks system so it actually does thorough background checks....and we'd on our way to actually doing something about this.

 

[Donner]

I'm sure Conan and Ax would be just as dismissive of terrorism given how few people it actually kills in the US every year. Right?


To point out right away, there is a ban on government funded gun policy research so getting totally accurate information can be difficult. But either way:

Roughly 16,459 murders were committed in the United States during 2016. Of these, about 11,961 or 73% were committed with firearms.

Gun-related injuries are now the third-leading cause of death among children ages 1 to 17 in the United States.

Semi automatics are generally the gun of choice for mass shooters and most of them were obtained legally.

The US has 5% of the world's population, but 31% of the world's mass shooters. And also 42% of the world's privately owned guns.

Your medical mistakes "fact" is not correct: https://www.snopes.com/doctors-kill-more-people-than-guns/

And you're right, crime rates are down. So what's the point of owning an AR-15? Or letting teenagers buy one? They shouldn't be on the market at all. It's completely unnecessary.

 

[Donner]

Obviously banning the AR15 and other similar guns won't solve the problem on its own. People on terrorist watch lists pass background checks, FFS. So there are a few more things they need to be done. But no one needs an AR15 and so that's a decent starting point.

 

[Infinity9999x]

And who gets to make that determination of 'what we should get to own'?



And pray tell, what exactly in those "Stricter backround checks" would have done a damn thing to have prevented any of the school shootings? Let alone any of the other mass shooting's we have had?



What gun show loophole??

http://thefederalist.com/2015/10/07/7-gun-control-myths-that-just-wont-die/

https://www.cato.org/publications/commentary/facts-about-gun-shows

http://www.factandmyth.com/gun-laws-restrictions/yes-the-gun-show-loophole-is-real-nra-lies-exposed

There is no 'loophole'. IT is in reference to PRIVATE sellers doing a one to one sale. NOT licensed sellers. Whether that private person selling a gun, does it via craigs list, the local newspaper 'ad section', at a swap-meet, or otherwise.

JUST like if i go to an auto-dealer, i have to provide proof of drivers license AND INSURANCE before i can drive off the lot with a new car. BUT if i buy one from someone privately selling it, there's no check on my having a proper license or insurance..

Elected officials, as in people we have voted into office, should compose bills that are then voted into effect. That's how we've run our country for years, and it's how I believe this issue should be handled. Pretty simple.

And yes, there is a loophole. I am talking about private sellers. The fact that I grew up in a state where I could walk in with cash in hand and buy a weapon I haven't trained with in any way is, quite frankly, idiotic. We should not allow private sales of weapons without standard background checks. Private, or Federal.

 

[Hotwire]

There is no 'loophole'. IT is in reference to PRIVATE sellers doing a one to one sale. NOT licensed sellers. Whether that private person selling a gun, does it via craigs list, the local newspaper 'ad section', at a swap-meet, or otherwise.

JUST like if i go to an auto-dealer, i have to provide proof of drivers license AND INSURANCE before i can drive off the lot with a new car. BUT if i buy one from someone privately selling it, there's no check on my having a proper license or insurance..

And why should we not hold private sellers to the same standards as dealers?

 

[Hotwire]

Please, defend any one of these accessories. Go for it.

http://www.cracked.com/article_25456_6-psychotic-gun-accessories-you-can-totally-buy.html

 

[KevanG]

They are perfect and beautiful little snowflakes and I will fight you if you say otherwise.

 

[LTuser]

Factually, you fix the background check innefficiencies & ineffectiveness, on paper you should be fixing this shooting problem.

Also, facts.

And till you define what 'fixing the backround checks' means, imo its a non-starter.

just saw a report from Texas where a mother had cops arrest her son for his mental outbursts (and even holding a gun TO HER), but cause she declined to press charges, NOTHING WAS PUT ON HIS record, so he bought another gun.. Then shot someone...

If families/cops don't charge, and it never gets put onto records, backround checking won't do jack.

Yea.. those pesky facts... like texting and driving, drunk driving, hammers, knives and medical mistakes literally kill hundreds of thousands more people than ARs every year... but hey, that doesnt help our agenda.

And that's something i've pointed out before Conan.. Thousands more people die from those other things, than have from just AR's. BUT it seems the left anti-gun crowd doesn't want to hear it.

Toughen the gun laws, re-evaluate how we deal (or dont deal) with mental health (including reasonable preemptive detainment for those whove been shown to be a threat to the public) , change the lobbying laws (since the companies that make psychotropic drugs own the congress and senate.. peoplel focus on the NRA and leave these guys out - again agenda), change the law mandating tech companies to share information w/ law enforcement when it comes to threats to public safety, demand law enforcement actually do their job, and fix the background checks system so it actually does thorough background checks....and we'd on our way to actually doing something about this.

And that's something that needs to be addressed. Ever since we DID become a medicated society (ADD/ADHD/etc), we've imo seen a big SPIKE in gun shootings.. My father's generation had guns a plenty in schools, when they were teens, yet i don't remember hearing about mass shootings.. Cue the mid 90s, after we've had what a good 5+ years of all this over-medicating, and all of a sudden we are getting them all over?? Seems a correlation to me..

And yes, there is a loophole. I am talking about private sellers. The fact that I grew up in a state where I could walk in with cash in hand and buy a weapon I haven't trained with in any way is, quite frankly, idiotic. We should not allow private sales of weapons without standard background checks. Private, or Federal.

BUT that private seller loophole, is NOT specfic to gun shows.. However, people keep CALLING it the gunshow loophole, which is wrong.

And why should we not hold private sellers to the same standards as dealers?

I actually DO think we should. Especially in regards to ensuring someone's legally authorized to drive.. BUT how exactly would one go about that? Make it impossible for me to sell someone else my car till i walk down to the DMV, pay a fee to get a check on the buyer's license'??

Please, defend any one of these accessories. Go for it.

http://www.cracked.com/article_25456_6-psychotic-gun-accessories-you-can-totally-buy.html

A bullet that barbeques the target?? Stupid.
BUT that 2nd one (the gun stock that can hold a small holdout pistol) i think's a good idea..
Spear attachment - stupid
Bendable barrel, for MILITARY/COPS i like it. General sale for people - stupid.
Double drum mags - idiotic. ONLY Military imo.
Tripods/bipods, i am ok with.

 

[Donner]

Ah so because people die from other things, we should ignore gun deaths. That logic is so unbelievably stupid, also because there are separate groups dealing with those other issues.

 

[conan69]

No said we should ignore anything. It points out how you guys conveniently ignore "other things" which actually account for more deaths each year. Every year.
So you can ban things you dont like.

Your medical mistakes "fact" is not correct: https://www.snopes.com/doctors-kill-...ple-than-guns/

I didnt say guns, I said ARs. Combined, thosee numbers are staggering.

 

[Hotwire]

I actually DO think we should. Especially in regards to ensuring someone's legally authorized to drive.. BUT how exactly would one go about that? Make it impossible for me to sell someone else my car till i walk down to the DMV, pay a fee to get a check on the buyer's license'??



A bullet that barbeques the target?? Stupid.
BUT that 2nd one (the gun stock that can hold a small holdout pistol) i think's a good idea..
Spear attachment - stupid
Bendable barrel, for MILITARY/COPS i like it. General sale for people - stupid.
Double drum mags - idiotic. ONLY Military imo.
Tripods/bipods, i am ok with.

1. I was taking about gun sales. But, you knew that and just wanted to troll me

2. I asked anyone to defend why these would be needed. You just have critiques.

 

[Donner]

No said we should ignore anything. It points out how you guys conveniently ignore "other things" which actually account for more deaths each year. Every year.
So you can ban things you dont like.


I didnt say guns, I said ARs. Combined, thosee numbers are staggering.

In case you didn't notice, things like drunk driving and car accidents are trying to be rectified through speed traps, checkpoints, BANNING phones while driving, speed limits, etc etc. There are efforts being made. Where are the efforts with guns?

 

[conan69]

I didnt say stricter gun laws werent necessary. They are.

Made it pretty clear I agree with that point above.

But you should try to understand how people might say or perceive your side to have no interest in a solution you scream to the high heavens how about evil the NRA/Gun lobby is are while ignoring psychotropic drug peddlers who've bought your govt and are compliant in all this.



BTW, despite those preventions you listed, those accidents/deaths still happen.

All Im saying is the mass shooting thing going on is a multifaceted problem, and there is no simple solution. A AR ban isnt going to solve the problem, you can do just as much damage with semi pistols. Limit the magazines, ok... you can tape 3 mgs together and have access to 21-30 rapid fire rounds. ARs are banned, ok these bans tend to over look garande style weapons. Ban garands, then you have lever actions.
Ban everything but six shooters, someone will walk into a mall or school with a bag full of auto loaders strapped with 4 pistols.

Youre not going to find a solution banning guns. Mental health has to be addressed. People walking around in schools and on the street on mind altering drugs needs to be addressed. Politicians who are slaves to corporations needs to be addressed. Social Media/ Tech companies being obligated to inform law enforcement when users make threats against the public needs to be adddressed, updating mental health laws so LE can pre emptively detain mentally unstable people who have made threats against the public needs to be addressed... and so on.