Mega-Thread: Gun Control Thread

[Ghostpanther]

Another example of self defense using a firearm. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=McaOSjkeLvs

[Svifnymr]

Bumpstocks must be somewhat useful to some, with millions of them in existence. I have read, they are esp. good for assisting the handicap. So if that is true. Then banning them would suck. Maybe make it so you need a permit for them. *shrugs.

The handicapped thing was for arm-braces I think, not bumpstocks. An arm-brace actually does work as described for handicapped folks, but is more often used as a stock.

A bump stock is just a gimmick, the hellfire triggers have been around since the 80's at least. The main thing I worry about is the "advertising factor" from each of these tragedies. It's bad enough you parade the shooters face/ name/ agenda everywhere and give him the fame he seeks, but they also drum up the firearm used like they're trying to sell them. The bump stock let the Vegas shooter dump a lot of bullets into a crowd, but how many less would have been killed if he'd been blasting forth with a shotgun? Hell, with as many guns as he had...

The guy had the money to buy a real machinegun or a belt fed semi-auto, but it was the target, not the shooting.

The compromise to ruling that bumpstocks are machineguns is to open the registry and allow new machineguns. They're already registered and use in crime is near non-existent, but there is no return of rights once taken.

[Ghostpanther]

The handicapped thing was for arm-braces I think, not bumpstocks. An arm-brace actually does work as described for handicapped folks, but is more often used as a stock.

A bump stock is just a gimmick, the hellfire triggers have been around since the 80's at least. The main thing I worry about is the "advertising factor" from each of these tragedies. It's bad enough you parade the shooters face/ name/ agenda everywhere and give him the fame he seeks, but they also drum up the firearm used like they're trying to sell them. The bump stock let the Vegas shooter dump a lot of bullets into a crowd, but how many less would have been killed if he'd been blasting forth with a shotgun? Hell, with as many guns as he had...

The guy had the money to buy a real machinegun or a belt fed semi-auto, but it was the target, not the shooting.

The compromise to ruling that bumpstocks are machineguns is to open the registry and allow new machineguns. They're already registered and use in crime is near non-existent, but there is no return of rights once taken.

Odds are none, from the range he was shooting from. And less people than he did if he was using a handgun from that range.

True. My wife was telling me about a interview on tv news where this guy was proposing, 4 years min prison time for any person caught with a illegally obtained firearm or carrying it illegally. Basically in other words, more severe punishments for breaking the laws we already have.

[Svifnymr]

True. My wife was telling me about a interview on tv news where this guy was proposing, 4 years min prison time for any person caught with a illegally obtained firearm or carrying it illegally. Basically in other words, more severe punishments for breaking the laws we already have.

They wanted to pass a law that made it illegal to straw purchase two or more guns. It's already illegal to straw purchase 1, but this time it'd be double super illegal! Of course, prosecution of straw purchasers is all time low, but meh, lets add something new.

Florida has the 10/20/life stuff that adds to crime punishment for use of a gun in a crime.

[Maybach]

The 2nd Amendment was drafted when the average firearm in what is now the USA was a single shot musket

If people want to stick to the 2nd Amendment so religiously, restrict all firearms to single shot muskets and see how many fucking school shoot ups you get then

[Stormdash]

The 2nd Amendment was drafted when the average firearm in what is now the USA was a single shot musket

If people want to stick to the 2nd Amendment so religiously, restrict all firearms to single shot muskets and see how many fucking school shoot ups you get then

... and there went TV, radio, the internet, wireless, from the 1st Amendment's protections.

It's tiresome how many people trot out pointless bromides like this as though they are the first person to have thought it up. That is not how the Bill of Rights works.

[Ghostpanther]

The 2nd Amendment was drafted when the average firearm in what is now the USA was a single shot musket

If people want to stick to the 2nd Amendment so religiously, restrict all firearms to single shot muskets and see how many fucking school shoot ups you get then

Na. No need. We get to exercise it with modern firearms.

- - - Updated - - -

They wanted to pass a law that made it illegal to straw purchase two or more guns. It's already illegal to straw purchase 1, but this time it'd be double super illegal! Of course, prosecution of straw purchasers is all time low, but meh, lets add something new.

Florida has the 10/20/life stuff that adds to crime punishment for use of a gun in a crime.

Yeah, so does Ohio to a point. But adding greater penalties for breaking gun laws we do have, I am all for it. But in Ohio, it is not illegal to buy a firearm from a non licensed seller and the seller does not have to do a background check.

- - - Updated - - -

... and there went TV, radio, the internet, wireless, from the 1st Amendment's protections.

It's tiresome how many people trot out pointless bromides like this as though they are the first person to have thought it up. That is not how the Bill of Rights works.

Lol! Yeah. Some seem to think the Second Amendment right is less of a right than the others.

[Svifnymr]

Yeah, so does Ohio to a point. But adding greater penalties for breaking gun laws we do have, I am all for it. But in Ohio, it is not illegal to buy a firearm from a non licensed seller and the seller does not have to do a background check.

Private sales don't require background checks except for a few states, but a Straw Purchase is different. It's intentionally buying a gun for someone else, usually because they themselves are disqualified from purchasing. If you're a felon, you can't possess a gun, so you have your buddy buy you one, but now he has also committed a felony. ATF just doesn't spend the resources on small cases, so unless they catch you doing it 100 times, they don't care. It's one of the bigger sources for crime guns.

[Maybach]

... and there went TV, radio, the internet, wireless, from the 1st Amendment's protections.

It's tiresome how many people trot out pointless bromides like this as though they are the first person to have thought it up. That is not how the Bill of Rights works.

The problem is asshats hang onto a piece of legislation that was passed a couple of hundred years back like its the holy grail

Only an idiot believes that the law does not evolve over time

The fact that neanderthals still want to cling on to their unnecessary assault weapons proves exactly that

Take out the evolution in every other piece of legislation in the USA and see what you are left with then tell me that the 2nd Amendment isn't above some evolution as well

Funny how no other country in the world has this school shoot up shit going on to the extent it does in the USA

[RobertoCarlos]

Why do gun lovers love machine guns so much?

They are impractical for hunting

And lets be real, they are not gonna help you vs a "tyrannical government". They could nuke you from the sky with a drone. So no that AR-15 is not gonna help you fight Hillary

[Ghostpanther]

Private sales don't require background checks except for a few states, but a Straw Purchase is different. It's intentionally buying a gun for someone else, usually because they themselves are disqualified from purchasing. If you're a felon, you can't possess a gun, so you have your buddy buy you one, but now he has also committed a felony. ATF just doesn't spend the resources on small cases, so unless they catch you doing it 100 times, they don't care. It's one of the bigger sources for crime guns.

Thanks for the info. Yeah, that is a crime here too. But I do wish Ohio had universal background checks for all firearm sales and gifts. Some provisions could be made for say inheriting several firearms and only need to do one for the person getting all the firearms. Or if the person already has a CHL/CCW license, so no background check would be required.
In Ohio now, you do not need to go thru another background check if you have a valid carry/conceal handgun license.

[Stormdash]

The problem is asshats hang onto a piece of legislation that was passed a couple of hundred years back like its the holy grail

Only an idiot believes that the law does not evolve over time

Why don't you skip filing your 1040 this year and explained that the law simply "evolved".

You won't, because you know that's not how it works. Written law doesn't "change" meaning -- it is applied or it is ignored. If there were actually widespread support for an America without the 2nd Amendment (there isn't), it would be something you could change by amendment.

[Ghostpanther]

Why do gun lovers love machine guns so much?

They are impractical for hunting

And lets be real, they are not gonna help you vs a "tyrannical government". They could nuke you from the sky with a drone. So no that AR-15 is not gonna help you fight Hillary

AR-15's are not machine guns. Machine guns are firearms which can fire hundreds/thousands of rounds fully automatic with one trigger pull.

[Stormdash]

Why do gun lovers love machine guns so much?

They are impractical for hunting

And lets be real, they are not gonna help you vs a "tyrannical government". They could nuke you from the sky with a drone. So no that AR-15 is not gonna help you fight Hillary

Hunting is really unrelated to the 2nd Amendment. It's for defense of community and defense of self, so that when called upon citizens will be competent with the arms they own and use. Needn't be a tyrannical overthrow of the US government, could be a civil collapse of some kind or foreign threat. Federal law still to this day defines the militia as made up of citizens who are not part of any military. We are our own last defense. We are also our own best defense when it comes down to the criminal level.

[RobertoCarlos]

AR-15's are not machine guns. Machine guns are firearms which can fire hundreds/thousands of rounds fully automatic with one trigger pull.

Ok great, none of that addresses anything I just said.

[Svifnymr]

The problem is asshats hang onto a piece of legislation that was passed a couple of hundred years back like its the holy grail

Only an idiot believes that the law does not evolve over time

That's why they gave a system for changing it, duh. Women couldn't vote back then either, but they can now. But, since a lot of folks still believe that the second amemdment is important, it is.

A lot of folks think the right to free speech needs abridging too, but oh well. Can't shout fire in a theater, can't shoot into a theater, makes sense.

[RobertoCarlos]

Hunting is really unrelated to the 2nd Amendment. It's for defense of community and defense of self, so that when called upon citizens will be competent with the arms they own and use. Needn't be a tyrannical overthrow of the US government, could be a civil collapse of some kind or foreign threat. Federal law still to this day defines the militia as made up of citizens who are not part of any military. We are our own last defense. We are also our own best defense when it comes down to the criminal level.

Yeah but isnt that is what the military is for? You pay a lot in taxes and if you were ever invaded by china or russia Im sure the USA military would do a better job defending the country rather than people who are farmers and plumbers with a couple rifles locked away in their cabinet

[Stormdash]

This is a ridiculous point, because the musket was the peak of technology at that point... Just like the firearms we have now would be the peak if the 2nd amendment were drafted today.

For that matter, repeating firearms existed at the time of the drafting, although they were rare and cumbersome. I wonder, if we set down four inventions and showed the framers of the Constitution, which one they would have the hardest time imagining is real and not sorcery of some kind --

A) an incandescent light bulb
B) a streaming broadcast of an event on other side of the world on a hand held device
C) an AR pattern semi-automatic rifle
D) The F-22

It's the rifle, obviously, that they'd have the easiest time comprehending as within the reach of human engineering. They would have a helluva time with phone taps, or infrared scanners picking up UV lights used for marijuana, or the personal computer (all things that touch upon the Bill of Rights they drafted), but the AR-15 is relatively simple to believe in their position.

- - - Updated - - -

Yeah but isnt that is what the military is for? You pay a lot in taxes and if you were ever invaded by china or russia Im sure the USA military would do a better job defending the country rather than people who are farmers and plumbers with a couple rifles locked away in their cabinet

Regular military, backed up and supported by civilian militia, was the norm of the time, which is why both of them are covered in the Constitution. There's no contradiction there.

[Ghostpanther]

Ok great, none of that addresses anything I just said.

If you were not talking about the AR-15 as being a machine gun, then why mention it along with the AR-15? You do know here in the US, machine guns require a special Federal License to own and require not only months of waiting time, is expensive as hell to buy one anyway. Some costing tens of thousands of dollars. Which have to be ones made before 1986 I think it is. I am not familiar with all the laws concerning owning and purchasing a machine gun, but they are heavily restricted here.

- - - Updated - - -

Yeah but isnt that is what the military is for? You pay a lot in taxes and if you were ever invaded by china or russia Im sure the USA military would do a better job defending the country rather than people who are farmers and plumbers with a couple rifles locked away in their cabinet

You are forgetting personal self defense. The military, police can not protect us 24/7. The average response time after you call the police, is like 8 mins.

[RobertoCarlos]

You are forgetting personal self defense. The military, police can not protect us 24/7. The average response time after you call the police, is like 8 mins.

Why do you need such a high powered rifle for your home? Lets say you have a home invasion and they plan on killing anyone in the house. Are you gonna shoot them with a machine ripping up the house and potentially killing yourself or your family members? Why not just have a hand gun. Easier to use, not gonna make you deaf shooting it and easier to hide around the house/grab it quickly