View Poll Results: Do you Support Assault Weapons Ban?

Voters
4118. You may not vote on this poll
  • Yes

    2,490 60.47%
  • No

    1,628 39.53%
  1. #16621
    The Lightbringer Deadvolcanoes's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    Connecticut, USA
    Posts
    3,597
    Quote Originally Posted by Vyxn View Post
    no one is saying that the gun should be free what im saying is the left uses the excuse against voter ID because the cost will disenfranchise the poor from excising there right to vote but you have no problem with doing it to their right to own a gun. If anyone in this country deserves the right to own a gun is the law abiding poor they need that protection more so then anyone they cant afford to live in a secure neighborhood they cant afford a security system
    Do you really want only the rich to own a gun? you know if slaves where allowed to own guns they wouldn't have been slaves
    Can you stop with the strawman argument?

    No one here wants only the rich to have access to firearms. We want gun owners to be held liable for their firearms. Period.
    It is difficult to free fools from the chains they revere.

  2. #16622
    Quote Originally Posted by Deadvolcanoes View Post
    The current background check laws, which, according to you, are not being enforced, result in 117 denial of purchases a day due to the existence of a criminal record.

    Looks like we don't need to enforce laws heavily in order for them to be effective.
    You have 117 people every day that are trying to purchase a gun, and 1 in 100,000 of those denials will ever be investigated. You don't know if they then procured a gun elsewhere, it doesn't matter enough to the federal gov to investigate the crime being committed. You just have a number to throw out there as somehow having solved some problem.

    So we have:
    A) folks that are false postivies and not a problem
    B) folks that didn't know they were disqualified and would never be a problem if they had a gun or not
    c) folks that wanted to buy a gun to use in a crime

    If you want to shout out that 117 people were stopped, pretending that they're all C, then you should be calling for them to be arrested for the attempt to prevent further crimes from being committed.

    If you believe the vast majority are A or B, then the number 117 per day is utterly meaningless and it's dishonest to use it like it matters.

    ---------- Post added 2013-04-23 at 05:11 PM ----------

    Quote Originally Posted by belfpala View Post
    Going back to the other analogy...

    Ok, I installed a stronger door and a better lock on my house (enforcement), but I left my window open.
    Actually the allegory is that you installed a strong door, someone tried to kick it in but it held. Rather than call the police now, you'll ignore him and let him look for the window.

  3. #16623
    Quote Originally Posted by Deadvolcanoes View Post
    Can you stop with the strawman argument?

    No one here wants only the rich to have access to firearms. We want gun owners to be held liable for their firearms. Period.
    by making it to expensive for the poor from owning a gun like requiring insurance. who would be left owning a gun? the ones who can afford insurance. the rich

  4. #16624
    Quote Originally Posted by Deadvolcanoes View Post
    That's exactly right. Good call.

    And I understand there are other Windows open (theft, straw purchases), but those are on the 2nd floor, and more difficult for the criminal to get to, while private purchases are garden level. Close that god damn window already.
    You think a straw purchase is hard? You get a friend to buy it for you, then report it lost and that is... hard?

  5. #16625
    Quote Originally Posted by Deadvolcanoes View Post
    No one here wants only the rich to have access to firearms. We want gun owners to be held liable for their firearms. Period.
    The insurance idea is ludicrous.

  6. #16626
    The Lightbringer Deadvolcanoes's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    Connecticut, USA
    Posts
    3,597
    Quote Originally Posted by Svifnymr View Post
    Universal Background Checks, same thing. There's no penalty for not doing it, no reward for doing it, so... it's a non-starter.
    Since background check laws are currently not being enforced, what's the reward for all the FFL's that currently implement them?

    I mean they're currently not being enforced, yet millions upon millions are being implemented. I guess my question is: Are you under the impression that if we make background checks universal, no one will do them?

    I can agree that some private sales will skip the process, but I still believe millions will be added.

    ---------- Post added 2013-04-23 at 05:17 PM ----------

    Quote Originally Posted by Svifnymr View Post
    You think a straw purchase is hard? You get a friend to buy it for you, then report it lost and that is... hard?
    The illegality of it makes it "hard." It's not incredibly easy to find a friend to commit a felony for you.

    Meanwhile, selling a gun privately without a background check is not illegal, thus not "hard."

    ---------- Post added 2013-04-23 at 05:18 PM ----------

    Quote Originally Posted by Vyxn View Post
    by making it to expensive for the poor from owning a gun like requiring insurance. who would be left owning a gun? the ones who can afford insurance. the rich
    I gave you another example of how it could be done, without monthly insurance, and you failed to address that solution.
    It is difficult to free fools from the chains they revere.

  7. #16627
    right now i think internet sales requiring a background check would stop a lot. a lot harder to find a friend willing to take the risk (even if chances are slim) than it is to find exactly what you want in whatever quantity with a simple google search, with no checks.
    Quote Originally Posted by TradewindNQ View Post
    The fucking Derpship has crashed on Herp Island...
    Quote Originally Posted by Wells View Post
    Meet the new derp.

    Same as the old derp.

  8. #16628
    The Lightbringer Deadvolcanoes's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    Connecticut, USA
    Posts
    3,597
    Quote Originally Posted by Tinykong View Post
    The insurance idea is ludicrous.
    It would be very hard to implement, and have drawbacks for the poor, I agree.

    What about a fine of $5,000-$10,000 if your weapon is used in a crime? Would that not reduce straw purchases and increase proper storage?
    It is difficult to free fools from the chains they revere.

  9. #16629
    Quote Originally Posted by Deadvolcanoes View Post
    Feinstein does not represent the left. She's a clown that practically no one takes seriously.

    The left isn't trying to ban guns. Not now. Not ever. Stop the fear mongering.
    It's disingenuous to say that they are not trying to ban guns because they haven't proposed banning ALL guns, but only some of them.

    The AWB13 had 40 democratic votes, they are trying to ban some guns.



    Which part of my post that you quotes makes it sound like there is currently no gun control? You love trying to put words into my mouth...

    ...you didn't say that there is gun control, so you must mean that there isn't gun control!!!

    If your curious as to how I feel about something, just ask. Stop assuming.
    You didn't say that, certainly, but you do tend to fall into the trap of "loopholes" and "common sense gun laws". The 1994 background check system was created with specific intents and specific limitations. Folks agreed that it was common sense and all well and good and a hallmark of the time.

    Now they are pointing to things specifically exempted from that law and saying it needs to be changed, it's a loophole that it exists and common sense says we need to expand it. (In this case, expanding it means removing the exemptions that were specifically written into the 1994 law.)

    Personal transactions were specifically exempted because of the difficulty of getting the system accessible to the common man. They were specifically exempted because of the impossibility of enforcing such a requirement and because of the minimal effect it will have on guns used illegal while it will greatly inconvenience the folks operating legally.

    The "private sellers" at gunshows are already breaking laws and can already be prosecuted, but they're not. Passing a new law saying that their illegal activities are now DOUBLE ILLEGAL, won't suddenly change anything.

  10. #16630
    Quote Originally Posted by Deadvolcanoes View Post
    It would be very hard to implement, and have drawbacks for the poor, I agree.

    What about a fine of $5,000-$10,000 if your weapon is used in a crime? Would that not reduce straw purchases and increase proper storage?
    a penalty for loss of possession is quite easy to implement, once a specific gun is tied to a specific person. THAT is the part that is hard - im not really aware of a way to do that without a registry, which will simply not happen
    Quote Originally Posted by TradewindNQ View Post
    The fucking Derpship has crashed on Herp Island...
    Quote Originally Posted by Wells View Post
    Meet the new derp.

    Same as the old derp.

  11. #16631
    Quote Originally Posted by Deadvolcanoes View Post
    It would be very hard to implement, and have drawbacks for the poor, I agree.

    What about a fine of $5,000-$10,000 if your weapon is used in a crime? Would that not reduce straw purchases and increase proper storage?
    Someone could have a gun, not know it's stolen, and then get stuck with a fine for the actions of another person? No thanks.

    I prefer to place the blame where it belongs: on the perpetrator.

    I've got a few of my grand father's shotguns in a box in my basement, the last time I even looked at them was probably 5 years ago. Someone could have carefully broken into my house and stolen them, and I wouldn't know. And before people start in with the "ER MAH GERD ERTS NERT ERN A SERF" stuff, I don't live with children.

  12. #16632
    Quote Originally Posted by Deadvolcanoes View Post
    It would be very hard to implement, and have drawbacks for the poor, I agree.

    What about a fine of $5,000-$10,000 if your weapon is used in a crime? Would that not reduce straw purchases and increase proper storage?
    not if the gun is reported stolen or lost and yes guns do get lost just this last duck hunting season had a friend drop his shotgun in a lake so no it wont stop or even slow down straw purchses
    Last edited by Vyxn; 2013-04-23 at 09:32 PM.

  13. #16633
    Quote Originally Posted by Deadvolcanoes View Post
    Since background check laws are currently not being enforced, what's the reward for all the FFL's that currently implement them?

    I mean they're currently not being enforced, yet millions upon millions are being implemented.
    People go to a dealer when they think they won't get turned down, not because they know they have a felony and need a gun for a crimewave.

    So, you've created a system to police the law abiding.

    Given there is no penalty enforced when a criminal tries and fails, there's also no harm in them trying.

    I guess my question is: Are you under the impression that if we make background checks universal, no one will do them?
    Some would do them, whether the system was mandatory of voluntary. Don't you agree that instituting a voluntary background check system (via phone or internet) separate from the NICS and accessible by individuals would allow law abiding citizens that want to do the right thing to run a background check when a stranger is the buyer, while not creating some system where I need to run a background check on my long time buddy?

    Especially if the extent of that system is "go see a dealer and pay them money for it".

    I can agree that some private sales will skip the process, but I still believe millions will be added.
    As you've brought up the internet guys asking for extra because they think it's illegal before, wouldn't you agree that those are the ones most likely to NOT do the background check?


    The illegality of it makes it "hard." It's not incredibly easy to find a friend to commit a felony for you.
    The hardest part for most of them would be finding a cousin with a clean record.

    Though of course, we're ignoring the simple "fake ID" method that ATFE doesn't seem to think about.

    Meanwhile, selling a gun privately without a background check is not illegal, thus not "hard."
    If you maintain that folks jack up prices because they think the person can't buy elsewhere, then they're straw-purchasers of a sort anyway.

    I gave you another example of how it could be done, without monthly insurance, and you failed to address that solution.
    I'd like to see fines, though smaller scale than $5k and not for "used in a crime", but mainly because if you're banging a guy for $500 or $1000, you may actually get the charge through.

    Imagine a scenario of "we can convict you for a felony punishable for 5 years and $5,000, or you can take this plea bargain for $1000" for a straw purchase. Most would take the plea, reducing court costs, increasing liklihood of prosecution and lowering the burden on the system.

    Also, we get $1000 out of it.

  14. #16634
    Quote Originally Posted by Tinykong View Post
    Someone could have a gun, not know it's stolen, and then get stuck with a fine for the actions of another person? No thanks.
    If there was a gun registry, you would know it's stolen

    Quote Originally Posted by Tinykong View Post
    I prefer to place the blame where it belongs: on the perpetrator.

    I've got a few of my grand father's shotguns in a box in my basement, the last time I even looked at them was probably 5 years ago. Someone could have carefully broken into my house and stolen them, and I wouldn't know. And before people start in with the "ER MAH GERD ERTS NERT ERN A SERF" stuff, I don't live with children.
    It's your responsibility to keep those guns out hands of criminals. If you do not keep your guns in a safe and a crime is committed using them, you should face consequences of not keeping your guns safe.
    Felya's Law: Same as Godwin's, but liberal instead of Hitler.
    https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gödel,_Escher,_Bach
    Every damn thing you do in this life, you have to pay for. - Edith Piaf
    Per GennGreymane: pragmatism trigger warning

  15. #16635
    Quote Originally Posted by smelltheglove View Post
    right now i think internet sales requiring a background check would stop a lot. a lot harder to find a friend willing to take the risk (even if chances are slim) than it is to find exactly what you want in whatever quantity with a simple google search, with no checks.
    internet sales interstate require a background check. Local internet sales are probably comparatively rare, in the grand scheme of "gun sales" overall.

    Aside from that, it ignores the paranoia that anti-gunners mock pro-gunners for so much. If someone asks for "can we meet at the mall" or something, people figure it's an ATFE sting.

    (Not an absolute of course, just saying.)

  16. #16636
    Quote Originally Posted by Vyxn View Post
    not if the gun is reported stolen or lost and yes guns do get lost just this last duck hunting season had a friend drop his shotgun in a lake so no it wont stop or even slow down straw purchses
    People who are irresponsible to the point that they lose their guns, deserve to be punished.
    Felya's Law: Same as Godwin's, but liberal instead of Hitler.
    https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gödel,_Escher,_Bach
    Every damn thing you do in this life, you have to pay for. - Edith Piaf
    Per GennGreymane: pragmatism trigger warning

  17. #16637
    Quote Originally Posted by Deadvolcanoes View Post
    It would be very hard to implement, and have drawbacks for the poor, I agree.

    What about a fine of $5,000-$10,000 if your weapon is used in a crime? Would that not reduce straw purchases and increase proper storage?
    Though I'd be opposed to a "if your weapon is used in a crime" law as way too broad and subject to abuse, I'd say you need to focus on a fine that is small enough to be workable and not worth a lengthy fight, while being big enough to be a disincentive.

  18. #16638
    Quote Originally Posted by Felya420 View Post
    If there was a gun registry, you would know it's stolen
    And how in the hell would a gun registry tell if a gun is stolen unless the police have the gun in thier possession and that usually doesn't happen till after a crime is committed
    Last edited by Vyxn; 2013-04-23 at 09:47 PM.

  19. #16639
    I'll probably regret posting this but here goes anyways: I can get a gun, right now, no questions asked, cheaply and in a more timely fashion then any one of you out there could legally. The guy I get it from, he won't give 2 craps what i do with it. And are not talking a 22 bolt action, pick your poison, he has it. I really don't see where any one of you guys posting advocating gun laws are addressing this. More laws and regs wont make a goddamm bit of difference to him. Actually it'll probably improve buisiness for him.

  20. #16640
    Quote Originally Posted by Felya420 View Post
    People who are irresponsible to the point that they lose their guns, deserve to be punished.
    Accident do happen do you want to take cars away from people who get in accidents? and not all accidents are at fault of the people involved

    ---------- Post added 2013-04-23 at 05:55 PM ----------

    Quote Originally Posted by Thephayul View Post
    I'll probably regret posting this but here goes anyways: I can get a gun, right now, no questions asked, cheaply and in a more timely fashion then any one of you out there could legally. The guy I get it from, he won't give 2 craps what i do with it. And are not talking a 22 bolt action, pick your poison, he has it. I really don't see where any one of you guys posting advocating gun laws are addressing this. More laws and regs wont make a goddamm bit of difference to him. Actually it'll probably improve buisiness for him.
    Its just like the war on drugs. we have spent billion to try to stop drugs and they are just as accessible today as it was when they started the war

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •