Mega-Thread: Gun Control Thread

[Guy4123]

Oh no the gun used by the Dallas shooter was a regular SKS

Now California is going to classify my SKS as an assault machine weapon ghost gun and ban it

[Stormdash]

Oh no the gun used by the Dallas shooter was a regular SKS

Now California is going to classify my SKS as an assault machine weapon ghost gun and ban it

Suppose we should just be glad it wasn't a milsurp Mauser or Mosin or Enfield.

[Ghostpanther]

http://www.businessinsider.com/supre...e-2014-11?IR=T
"The Supreme Court has ruled otherwise. That court has issued a number of rulings upholding civil forfeiture, including one in 1996 that said seizure of an innocent person's property didn't violate due process."

There may be one thing you are missing here. Those who have personal property seized have had in some way ( directly or indirectly ) a connection to a crime being commited with said property involved. Just taking your 2nd Amendment rights taken away by seizing your firearm for example on the assumption you may be capable of a crime would not be the same thing.

[PhaelixWW]

Oh no the gun used by the Dallas shooter was a regular SKS[/URL]

Now California is going to classify my SKS as an assault machine weapon ghost gun and ban it

It was actually an AKM, not an SKS.

Edit:
Oh, and detachable mag SKS's are already banned in California.

[Mayhem]

There may be one thing you are missing here. Those who have personal property seized have had in some way ( directly or indirectly ) a connection to a crime being commited with said property involved. Just taking your 2nd Amendment rights taken away by seizing your firearm for example on the assumption you may be capable of a crime would not be the same thing.

So it´s not due process, it´s just being connected someway or another to a crime?

[Espe]

So it´s not due process, it´s just being connected someway or another to a crime?

Don't do the crime if you can't do the time.

That's what I always say.

[Mayhem]

Don't do the crime if you can't do the time.

That's what I always say.

They didn´t do the crime, that´s the point.

[TITAN308]

Anyone have experience with the Lyman Crusher 2 series presses? I just ordered one for a 300 blackout station.

- supposedly built like a tank, very heavy
- not gonna lie, only press I could find with a black/silver powder coat finish to match my office

At $150, definatly the most I've spent on a single stage press.

[Roxinius]

Just put a sig mpx on layaway at my go to gun store bye bye money

[Stormdash]

Yeah, I'm having some "bye bye money" impulses, but they are right now torn between a Steyr Scout rifle or an M1A socom. I'm one of the Cooper/scout fanboys, yes. I am also kinda fascinated by finding a decent milsurp Lee-Enfield.

[Ghostpanther]

So it´s not due process, it´s just being connected someway or another to a crime?

Something they own is connected to a proven crime. Yeah. Due process has been done to a degree. They do not seize your property in those cases just because of the hell of it. A process is involved. No fly, no buy is not the same thing. There is a assumption you might be capable of committing a crime based on evidence which has not stood up to the inspection of a defending lawyer in a court. Not going to work. However, if someone uses your firearm to commit a crime, they could seize it as evidence. But not prevent you from buying another one if you where not also convicted of a crime.

[Mayhem]

Something they own is connected to a proven crime. Yeah. Due process has been done to a degree. They do not seize your property in those cases just because of the hell of it. A process is involved. No fly, no buy is not the same thing. There is a assumption you might be capable of committing a crime based on evidence which has not stood up to the inspection of a defending lawyer in a court. Not going to work. However, if someone uses your firearm to commit a crime, they could seize it as evidence. But not prevent you from buying another one if you where not also convicted of a crime.

So their stuff get´s taken from them without them doing anything wrong? Awesome, due process has been done to a degree, and a person not you, so it´s fine that you lose your belongings, right? Right!

[Will]

poll would've been more interesting if it had 4 options instead of 2:

Yes, and I'm from the US.
No, and I'm from the US.
Yes and I'm from outside the US.
No and I'm from outside the US.

[TITAN308]

I would love to see the poll reset to see if the numbers change. Started in 2012.

[Ghostpanther]

So their stuff get´s taken from them without them doing anything wrong? Awesome, due process has been done to a degree, and a person not you, so it´s fine that you lose your belongings, right? Right!

If their property was used in the commitment of a crime, they actually did something wrong by being irresponsible. And in some cases the punishment for that may be the lost of your property. You share some responsibility for anything done in your home which is against the law. Have you forgotten the argument on here already how a person who does not secure their firearms and someone uses it to commit a crime or even a accident , should be held libel? The law is not perfect by any means. But I am still happy I live here.

- - - Updated - - -

poll would've been more interesting if it had 4 options instead of 2:

Yes, and I'm from the US.
No, and I'm from the US.
Yes and I'm from outside the US.
No and I'm from outside the US.

Hehe. Good point. The numbers then I think would still be in favor of banning them even here in the US. But not by as much as it shows now.

[Jeezy911]

Funny thing is even if this poll was representative of the american public/or congress which it is not (MMO champ and gamer's in general tend to swing slightly liberal) it still would not be a bill that would be passed into law with a 60/40 majority assuming at least one chamber holds the minority.

[Mayhem]

If their property was used in the commitment of a crime, they actually did something wrong by being irresponsible. And in some cases the punishment for that may be the lost of your property. You share some responsibility for anything done in your home which is against the law. Have you forgotten the argument on here already how a person who does not secure their firearms and someone uses it to commit a crime or even a accident , should be held libel? The law is not perfect by any means. But I am still happy I live here.

The problem however is, they have never been held accountable for being irresponsible. They have no say or anything, someone else committed a crime on their property without their knowledge and they get punished because of being irresponsible? How were they irresponsible? Should parents hold their children under surveillance 24/7.

Also, the women that lost her car because her husband had intercurse with a prostitute in it? You share responsibility for the actions of someone else despite not being able to prevent them? That, makes no sense. I agree that you share responsibility if you were required by law to do something and didn´t, but if there´s no law, you shouldn´t be punished.

Funny enough you seem to agree with that when talking about guns, but not when talking about your car, house, property...

[Ghostpanther]

The problem however is, they have never been held accountable for being irresponsible. They have no say or anything, someone else committed a crime on their property without their knowledge and they get punished because of being irresponsible? How were they irresponsible? Should parents hold their children under surveillance 24/7.

Also, the women that lost her car because her husband had intercurse with a prostitute in it? You share responsibility for the actions of someone else despite not being able to prevent them? That, makes no sense. I agree that you share responsibility if you were required by law to do something and didn´t, but if there´s no law, you shouldn´t be punished.

Funny enough you seem to agree with that when talking about guns, but not when talking about your car, house, property...

I do not have a Constitutional right to have a house, car or property. It might be challenged in court I do and even make it to the Supreme Court. But it is clear I have the right ( Constitutional ) to bear and keep arms. But let me be clear, I do not agree with seizing someone's property because another person committed a crime unknown to you using it. But I do see why they would.

This debate was started with the idea we can deny someone a firearm based on the assumption they may commit a crime because they are placed on a no fly status without due process.

[Crackleslap]

criminals dont follow laws.
banning wont fix anything.

Nah you're right. Lets just give guns away for free then!

[zenkai]

I do not have a Constitutional right to have a house, car or property. It might be challenged in court I do and even make it to the Supreme Court. But it is clear I have the right ( Constitutional ) to bear and keep arms. But let me be clear, I do not agree with seizing someone's property because another person committed a crime unknown to you using it. But I do see why they would.

This debate was started with the idea we can deny someone a firearm based on the assumption they may commit a crime because they are placed on a no fly status without due process.

You're going to be hard pressed to argue logic with someone who doesn't think logically