Yeah, but the same problems exist with driving too, but we don't require extensive driver training for people. If you make some kind of training requirement, then the government will abuse it and use it to limit gun availability. It also is unnecessary. The majority of gun deaths are suicides and homicides, not accidental shootings.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
NOT Gun Control
- Thread starter Onward Allusion
- Start date
Yeah, but the same problems exist with driving too, but we don't require extensive driver training for people. If you make some kind of training requirement, then the government will abuse it and use it to limit gun availability. It also is unnecessary. The majority of gun deaths are suicides and homicides, not accidental shootings.
Like most systems, they are only as good as the people who operate them. Background checks could improve just by having all parties involved just do the job correctly.
https://www.thetrace.org/2015/07/background-checks-nics-guns-dylann-roof-charleston-church-shooting/
However, no system can forecast the future, no police department can provide 100% protection, no one can stop thieves from stealing guns, and no government can wipe out evil. At some point we will have to allow, and count on, our citizens to stand up to evil. If we could ask the parents of some of the victims "in hindsight, do you wish some of the teachers and coaches had been armed" what would anyone think the response would be. For the hero coach, who used his body to stop bullets trying to protect kids, I think he deserved the God given right to defend himself and protect those kids.
https://www.thetrace.org/2015/07/background-checks-nics-guns-dylann-roof-charleston-church-shooting/
However, no system can forecast the future, no police department can provide 100% protection, no one can stop thieves from stealing guns, and no government can wipe out evil. At some point we will have to allow, and count on, our citizens to stand up to evil. If we could ask the parents of some of the victims "in hindsight, do you wish some of the teachers and coaches had been armed" what would anyone think the response would be. For the hero coach, who used his body to stop bullets trying to protect kids, I think he deserved the God given right to defend himself and protect those kids.
Coppershot
New member
Gun control advocates have a lot of targets in their sights, from high capacity magazines to semi-automatic rifles of this or that description. About all we can do is to continue to educate those less well versed in firearms than ourselves. If we fail in this endeavor, it will only be a matter of time before we are overwhelmed at the polls and in the courts.
My position on this is clear, but I completely understand angry parents and kids protesting senseless killings. The parent of a daughter killed in Florida who angrily accused Rubio of allowing weapons of war to be available to anyone who wanted them is wrong in his conclusion of who and what is to blame for his little girls death, but he has every right to scream from the rooftop. Yes, some of the kids protesting the violence are being used to advance an ideology. That was not the angry, intelligent, and articulate young man who was there when the 17 were killed who spoke on network television this past Sunday morning. He just wanted to stop seeing dead kids.
Then there was the grieving mother who blamed all of the violence on conservative Republicans, much like many of us blame liberal Democrats. There is a great divide in our nation, but this is an American problem. Can we figure out how keep firearms out of the hands of criminals and those with mental illness? No, not entirely, even if we make most guns illegal and confiscate them following the Australian model. Can we do more to this end without doing violence to the Bill of Rights? I hope so. In our current political environment I am not optimistic though.
Then there was the grieving mother who blamed all of the violence on conservative Republicans, much like many of us blame liberal Democrats. There is a great divide in our nation, but this is an American problem. Can we figure out how keep firearms out of the hands of criminals and those with mental illness? No, not entirely, even if we make most guns illegal and confiscate them following the Australian model. Can we do more to this end without doing violence to the Bill of Rights? I hope so. In our current political environment I am not optimistic though.
I think I paid around $50 for the background check, full set of palm scans and $100 for a 5 year conceal permit. My time is up and a renewal is $115 for 5 years. The officer I dealt with for the prints told me they really do check you out. Arrest records, military. If you did something stupid they will know. That's fine with me.
That’s because FAA rules require threading a cable through the trigger guard of a loaded pistol. It is amazing there haven’t been more NDs with that ridiculous policy.
Once the logical and long specified locking cockpit not kick down doors were put in, problem went away didn't it?
Having been around pilots a lot, you really don't want them to be firing a gun.
Commonly hailed as all knowing and all seeing, they can and do some incredibly stupid things.
No longer the former combat fliers from WWII.
Gun control advocates have a lot of targets in their sights, from high capacity magazines to semi-automatic rifles of this or that description. About all we can do is to continue to educate those less well versed in firearms than ourselves. If we fail in this endeavor, it will only be a matter of time before we are overwhelmed at the polls and in the courts.
It may be a shock, but non gun control people like myself think magazine limits are not a bad thing.
In my work we have layers of safety. No single aspect. If one does not stop the issue, if all work, the next one does.
If you want to review a history of how not to do it, the Maconda Oil Well blowout is brilliant (the Judge who handled the case was truly amazing and astute)
First they drilled to close to the reservoir.
Next they did not put the required number of centering devices on the pipe.
They also did not test the so called cement (liquid non seeing mix that holds down the pressure), said cement was wrong mix.
Then they used a repaired but not tested blow off preventer.
The blow off preventer had never been tested to work at the depths used.
They then took the hold down cement out of the well despite the classic indoors that pressure was building in it.
A low capacity magazine would help in many ways.
It would require a magazine change. That is both an opportunity to get the assailant and its a chance for the non trained to fumble it.
Someone trying to get high cap magazines (which would not be there if we had done this 30 years ago) might set off alarm bells and be reported.
Requiring a local background check for an AR purchase would do the same.
Raising the age limit for semi automatics would do the same.
I don't claim all the answers, but ways to lower the risk is needed.
It has to be proven which means research actively resourced instead of actively faulted.
In the end, my guess is about 5% of the gun owners are livid never do anything.
That puts the issue at 95% against.
An avalanche starts with one stone.
I would rather work towards solutions that be buried by the Avalanche.
Glenn E. Meyer
New member
Pragmatically, it was found in the last AWB that so many higher capacity magazines existed that anyone who paid the price could get them.
Currently, there are tens or hundereds of higher cap AR magazines out there. If they are grandfathered as happened in some states, they still exist. If you mandate a turn in - only the law abiding will do that (debatable as to how you define good law abiding people). The existing mags go underground.
You might argue that a ban will stop some killer from getting new gear. A determined killer won't have a problem find them. IIRC, Virginia Tech was accomplished with 10 round Glock mags (have to check on that).
Since the ban didn't accomplish anything in the past, why would it now?
Currently, there are tens or hundereds of higher cap AR magazines out there. If they are grandfathered as happened in some states, they still exist. If you mandate a turn in - only the law abiding will do that (debatable as to how you define good law abiding people). The existing mags go underground.
You might argue that a ban will stop some killer from getting new gear. A determined killer won't have a problem find them. IIRC, Virginia Tech was accomplished with 10 round Glock mags (have to check on that).
Since the ban didn't accomplish anything in the past, why would it now?
RC20 said:It may be a shock, but non gun control people like myself think magazine limits are not a bad thing.
I understand that you may not conceive of yourself as a "gun control person". That may not be true.
RC20 said:A low capacity magazine would help in many ways.
It would require a magazine change. That is both an opportunity to get the assailant and its a chance for the non trained to fumble it.
Someone trying to get high cap magazines (which would not be there if we had done this 30 years ago) might set off alarm bells and be reported.
Well, we did it 23 years ago. It didn't appear to help.
One of the issues with these tragedies is the actual number of victims really is not vital. When I heard about the Vegas issue I was surprised at the "low" number of victims.
Do you think Florida gets any less press if there are 6 victims rather than 17? Its a horrific and terrifying act and while we mourn those who died we hear from and politicize the words of the survivors.
Capacity caps only lower the number and even that is debatable. Full out bans, at best, only change the frequency of occurrence. Even effective bans will only manage to change tactics.
Do you think Florida gets any less press if there are 6 victims rather than 17? Its a horrific and terrifying act and while we mourn those who died we hear from and politicize the words of the survivors.
Capacity caps only lower the number and even that is debatable. Full out bans, at best, only change the frequency of occurrence. Even effective bans will only manage to change tactics.
A low capacity magazine would help in many ways.
It would require a magazine change. That is both an opportunity to get the assailant and its a chance for the non trained to fumble it.
Someone trying to get high cap magazines (which would not be there if we had done this 30 years ago) might set off alarm bells and be reported.
Requiring a local background check for an AR purchase would do the same.
Raising the age limit for semi automatics would do the same.
I don't claim all the answers, but ways to lower the risk is needed.
It has to be proven which means research actively resourced instead of actively faulted.
In the end, my guess is about 5% of the gun owners are livid never do anything.
That puts the issue at 95% against.
An avalanche starts with one stone.
I would rather work towards solutions that be buried by the Avalanche.
Trouble with passing something in order to get something passed, is it usually does not achieve the desired results. Even if we do pass a ban on 30 round magazines, would forcing the next shooter to use two 20 round mags give us the desired results? If our representatives are as smart as they tell us they are , they will focus on the SHOOTER and how to prevent and destroy them and not what he is using. President Trump is on the right tract by starting the conversation to arm teachers. This conversation needs to go all the way and ban gun free zones. I agree with you in that the gun owners need to be controlling this conversation and not the ones who want to ban guns, trouble there, too many in congress do not care for the constitution and would ban guns in a heartbeat if they could.
Someone trying to get high cap magazines (which would not be there if we had done this 30 years ago) might set off alarm bells and be reported.
In the case of the last shooting in Florida the alarm bell system failed. There were a lot of bells already clanging. One more would not have mattered. We can likely say the same thing about Aurora. In Sandy Hook the weapons used were not legally obtained by the shooter.
Regardless of all our thoughts and comments here, we don't have enough rhetorical arguments to stop coming bans.
The other "side" has all the persuasion it needs, they don't even need to talk. A few more school shootings will make their points for them. It's just a matter of time.
There are just too many people who have no connection to firearms these days, and the number is vast and growing. We are seen as throwbacks, exceptions, psychos...the coming generation is even less sympathetic and has even less firsthand knowledge.
In a way, it's funny, because the people who are going to enforce gun control laws (e.g. the police) are just as excluded as firearm owners. Hardly any suburbanite wants their kid to be a gunsmith or a policeman or a soldier. The pro-gun-control side would never stoop to such menial labor.
What about the economic impact of turn-ins? That's a lot of money down the drain. You can forget a grandfather clause this time.
The other "side" has all the persuasion it needs, they don't even need to talk. A few more school shootings will make their points for them. It's just a matter of time.
There are just too many people who have no connection to firearms these days, and the number is vast and growing. We are seen as throwbacks, exceptions, psychos...the coming generation is even less sympathetic and has even less firsthand knowledge.
In a way, it's funny, because the people who are going to enforce gun control laws (e.g. the police) are just as excluded as firearm owners. Hardly any suburbanite wants their kid to be a gunsmith or a policeman or a soldier. The pro-gun-control side would never stoop to such menial labor.
What about the economic impact of turn-ins? That's a lot of money down the drain. You can forget a grandfather clause this time.
Lohman446 said:One of the issues with these tragedies is the actual number of victims really is not vital. When I heard about the Vegas issue I was surprised at the "low" number of victims.
Same reaction here. Despite the public outcry about the waste of good plastic called a bumpstock, I wonder whether it decreased the number of people wounded from gunfire (and whether it might have increased trampling from panic).
I've never seen a breakdown of the total number of wounded and dead and their type of injury.
Soupah said:Regardless of all our thoughts and comments here, we don't have enough rhetorical arguments to stop coming bans.
That's why the NRA, though far from perfect, is such a phenomenal value.
Sorry all, but we are going to lose. I only hope that we can switch the banning talk to "assault rifles," not ALL semi-automatics...'cause that's where popular opinion seems to be leaning. We should be so lucky.
I'm throwing the AR guys under the bus when I talk to friends and neighbors. I don't actually believe these firearms are at fault, but I can't change the culture that created these boy monsters nor lessen the growing tide of autism-spectrum diagnosis (both related to modern mass shootings, I believe), so ARs are all I have to blame and negotiate away.
Don't worry, eventually they'll get mine too. I think we'll be at Canada-style laws in 20 years (which still beats Australia, which still beats the UK).
And for those that think I am being melodramatic. I sure hope you're right. But you're not.
I'm throwing the AR guys under the bus when I talk to friends and neighbors. I don't actually believe these firearms are at fault, but I can't change the culture that created these boy monsters nor lessen the growing tide of autism-spectrum diagnosis (both related to modern mass shootings, I believe), so ARs are all I have to blame and negotiate away.
Don't worry, eventually they'll get mine too. I think we'll be at Canada-style laws in 20 years (which still beats Australia, which still beats the UK).
And for those that think I am being melodramatic. I sure hope you're right. But you're not.
Currently, there are tens or hundereds of higher cap AR magazines out there. If they are grandfathered as happened in some states, they still exist. If you mandate a turn in - only the law abiding will do that (debatable as to how you define good law abiding people). The existing mags go underground.
I might know where to buy heroin but that doesn't mean we should make it legal.
Hardly any suburbanite wants their kid to be a gunsmith or a policeman or a soldier. The pro-gun-control side would never stoop to such menial labor.
And somewhat unrelated but are you kidding? Firstly, the police and military are two extremely well respected career choices in our society. Secondly, I don't know about how things are where you live, but around here the labor unions are decidedly Democrat. Thirdly, don't speak for their attitudes; there are plenty of pro- control people who are serving society and they are entitled to their thinking.
The "other side" does not have any answers, just an agenda. They want to ban guns. If they get their way, the killings will continue as the evil ones will always find a way to kill, we just will not be able to protect our self. Not to bring politics into this, but every day I give a quick prayer that hillaryRegardless of all our thoughts and comments here, we don't have enough rhetorical arguments to stop coming bans.
The other "side" has all the persuasion it needs, they don't even need to talk. A few more school shootings will make their points for them. It's just a matter of time.
is unemployed.
I didn't say those jobs weren't respected. They sure are.
I said no suburbanite (what I really meant was college-educated person) wants their son/daughter to work those jobs. Have you met any? Colleges attendance is at an all-time high (so they're not soldiering or getting a trade) and I don't think students' parents are clamoring for criminal justice degrees.
I said no suburbanite (what I really meant was college-educated person) wants their son/daughter to work those jobs. Have you met any? Colleges attendance is at an all-time high (so they're not soldiering or getting a trade) and I don't think students' parents are clamoring for criminal justice degrees.
turkeestalker
New member
That is the commitment to defending our freedoms that will insure our loss of them.