Opinions/Discussions on Guns

[irishff1014]

I am makeing this thread so that the politcal talks don't take away from the deaths in the Another School Shooting thread. Please have you discussions here and lets remember them in the other thread please!!!

STATS:
Abc reports that Homicides are Higher then other developed countries. Homicides per 100,000in G-8 countries.

US: 3.2 Italy: 0.71 Canada: 0.5 UK: 0.1 Japan: 0 Germany: 0.2 France: 0.1

Gun crime statistics by US state: download the data. Visualised | World news | guardian.co.uk

 

[tadman95]

Unfortunately there is almost one legal gun per US Citizen. Can't imagine how many more there are illegally or un-registered. That cat is out of the bag unfortunately.

That doesn't mean you don't keep trying to limit their impact but gun control laws probably aren't the way.

 

[mgriff]

 

[Redbar]

Reps.

 

[scUM Hater]

Guns kept the Japanese out the USA, minus pearl harbor.

 

[NoJusticeNoPeace]

Pretty much says it all. The mental health care in America is much more concerning than gun laws.

 

[Bluto]

Guns kept the Japanese out the USA, minus pearl harbor.

...along with tanks, aircraft carriers, dive bombers and a couple of nukes to close it out. I'm not sure what your point is.

 

[jimmymac]

This is a good idea. Can a mod move the content in the other thread to this one?

 

[Irish YJ]

Guns kept the Japanese out the USA, minus pearl harbor.

I'm pro-gun, but bad example. Personal guns no, military guns (which is not the debate) did.

 

[Irish YJ]

Pic of the year. Reps

 

[phork]

Guns kept the Japanese out the USA, minus pearl harbor.

RAID keeps ants out of my house. Maybe I should try it on those damn japs too. Nice point, not.

 

[NYMIKE6]

JimmyMac, from other thread....
What type of gun(s) are you talking about? Handguns you just can't walk in without the background check. Rifles and shotguns you still need some type of Identification. That is for registration purposes.

 

[jimmymac]

JimmyMac, from other thread....
What type of gun(s) are you talking about? Handguns you just can't walk in without the background check. Rifles and shotguns you still need some type of Identification. That is for registration purposes.

Hey so I don't have first hand knowledge on purchasing guns. I was simply discussing the possibility f buying a gun. I have been reading a lot of things and watching a great deal lately on the subject and the impression I was left with was that it is incredibly easy to buy a gun, and the majority of times background checks are not required.

 

[NYMIKE6]

Hey so I don't have first hand knowledge on purchasing guns. I was simply discussing the possibility f buying a gun. I have been reading a lot of things and watching a great deal lately on the subject and the impression I was left with was that it is incredibly easy to buy a gun, and the majority of times background checks are not required.

I understand, don't get caught up in the media hype. If you want to know more, go to your local gun shop and talk to the manager or owner. The media makes it sound like you can get a gun in a bubble gum machine or vending machine. You also have to remember that is the legal way.

There is other ways to purchase guns, and many people do. Is it legal or ethical?

 

[DomerInHappyValley]

Jimmy I'm on my phone or I'd copy paste not only my response in the other thread but some links for you.
But google IN gun laws find the code for IN and start reading then start looking at other states codes.
It's not as easy as the Brady campaign would have us believe. Hell DC's law used to be that the gun had to be disassembled.

 

[scUM Hater]

I'm pro-gun, but bad example. Personal guns no, military guns (which is not the debate) did.

I've read in multiple historic factoids that the Japanese believed every american had multiple guns and a attempt to attack the mainland would be a horrible idea. I am just showing one reason that having guns is a good idea. Do I think people need AK's, no.

 

[DomerInHappyValley]

I've read in multiple historic factoids that the Japanese believed every american had multiple guns and a attempt to attack the mainland would be a horrible idea. I am just showing one reason that having guns is a good idea. Do I think people need AK's, no.

I believe the quote was it would be foolish to attack America as there would be a gun behind every blade of grass.

 

[Buster Bluth]

I'm against the Drug War because prohibiting something only pushes the demand into the underground black market. Gun control would only impact law-abiding citizens.

The people who commit these crimes (or most gun crimes) aren't law-abiding citizens. They will still get their guns or find another way to commit the crimes.

Also, laws are reactionary policies. Laws are punishments. How do you punish someone in a murder/suicide?

I am, however, in favor of (in Ohio, because it is a state issue) a month-long wait on guns. I think this will prevent the "oh my wife is divorcing me let me go get a gun and blow her head off" crimes. And I am in favor of a ten-round maximum clip law, as well as mechanically making it take time to change out clips. I believe California has those two laws in place. I am also in favor of a state-wide assault weapons ban.

I'm not sure that you can do more than that other than address the real problem: MENTAL ILLNESS!

 

[Buster Bluth]

...along with tanks, aircraft carriers, dive bombers and a couple of nukes to close it out. I'm not sure what your point is.

I'm not sure if scUM Hater is right or not, but I was pretty sure that some generals were on record saying that the Japanese would have gotten to Missouri before the US could do anything about it. Not sure if it's hyperbole or not, I assume it is, but the tanks and carriers wouldn't have prevented it. I know that carriers not being at Pearl Harbor that day helped (and thankfully they weren't, my grandfather was on a ship escorting them in the Pacific that day...my grandmother got to watch the whole thing from a distance).

Isn't that why they build the freeways, because we were so incredibly unprepared to move a military?

 

[woolybug25]

I've never understood why this board doesn't have it's own politics board so we didn't have to make threads in reaction to other threads getting out of hand.

Now, for the topic at hand, I've always felt that assualt rifles have only one purpose. Killing people. Sure people do range stuff with them, but I they are designed to kill people. Not as target guns, not for hunting. They are for efficiently killing people. I agree with Buster that they would still get into people's hands (just like how NY'ers just go out of state and buy them now), but something needs to be done. So I think a good compromise on assault rifles is that if a crime is committed with one that is registered to you, or if you own one unregistered, then SEVERE penalties both fines and jail/prison time. When I say severe, I mean it. Put some teeth into assualt weapons where it becomes a significant crime to unlawfully use/own one outside of the regulations.

For those that don't think there is a gun issue, look to the incident in China that happened on the same day. All of the 20 students involved where injured, not killed.

I also agree with a 30 day waiting period for handguns and assault rifles, in addition to not allowing multiple handgun/assault rifle purchases in the same month.

 

[irishff1014]

I'm against the Drug War because prohibiting something only pushes the demand into the underground black market. Gun control would only impact law-abiding citizens.

The people who commit these crimes (or most gun crimes) aren't law-abiding citizens. They will still get their guns or find another way to commit the crimes.

Also, laws are reactionary policies. Laws are punishments. How do you punish someone in a murder/suicide?

I am, however, in favor of (in Ohio, because it is a state issue) a month-long wait on guns. I think this will prevent the "oh my wife is divorcing me let me go get a gun and blow her head off" crimes. And I am in favor of a ten-round maximum clip law, as well as mechanically making it take time to change out clips. I believe California has those two laws in place. I am also in favor of a state-wide assault weapons ban.




I'm not sure that you can do more than that other than address the real problem: MENTAL ILLNESS!

Buster you made some very good points. But just like you said anything can be bought on the black market. So they will still be able to get larger clips. 1 month waiting list would be a great start.

 

[jimmymac]

I've never understood why this board doesn't have it's own politics board so we didn't have to make threads in reaction to other threads getting out of hand.

Now, for the topic at hand, I've always felt that assualt rifles have only one purpose. Killing people. Sure people do range stuff with them, but I they are designed to kill people. Not as target guns, not for hunting. They are for efficiently killing people. I agree with Buster that they would still get into people's hands (just like how NY'ers just go out of state and buy them now), but something needs to be done. So I think a good compromise on assault rifles is that if a crime is committed with one that is registered to you, or if you own one unregistered, then SEVERE penalties both fines and jail/prison time. When I say severe, I mean it. Put some teeth into assualt weapons where it becomes a significant crime to unlawfully use/own one outside of the regulations.

For those that don't think there is a gun issue, look to the incident in China that happened on the same day. All of the 20 students involved where injured, not killed.

I also agree with a 30 day waiting period for handguns and assault rifles, in addition to not allowing multiple handgun/assault rifle purchases in the same month.

Thanks for effectively putting into words the points I attempted to make but couldn't put into words. Agree completely with this.

 

[Jebediah Springfield]

I'm against the Drug War because prohibiting something only pushes the demand into the underground black market. Gun control would only impact law-abiding citizens.

The people who commit these crimes (or most gun crimes) aren't law-abiding citizens. They will still get their guns or find another way to commit the crimes.

Also, laws are reactionary policies. Laws are punishments. How do you punish someone in a murder/suicide?

I am, however, in favor of (in Ohio, because it is a state issue) a month-long wait on guns. I think this will prevent the "oh my wife is divorcing me let me go get a gun and blow her head off" crimes. And I am in favor of a ten-round maximum clip law, as well as mechanically making it take time to change out clips. I believe California has those two laws in place. I am also in favor of a state-wide assault weapons ban.

I'm not sure that you can do more than that other than address the real problem: MENTAL ILLNESS!

I would say pretty much the same.

However problems seem to come up with what we (by "we" I mean law abiding gun owners) are defending ourselves against.

Is it criminals or a tyrannical gov't? If it's the first, then IMO most people would be in favor of the max clip law and assault rifle ban. But if it's the second, that's when things get very murky.

 

[HereComeTheIrish]

Not directed at you Griff,

To the artist in this column, I personally find the picture insulting to individuals with disabilities. Is this how society sees these individuals? Crazy eyes, teeth hanging out and generally out of it?

I understand the premise that it's easy for people to get a gun, but it's like jumping through hoops to get these guys and gals funding to help them with their issues. I get it. I just have a hard time with how this particular fella is depicted. Most of you know I work with individuals like this on a daily basis....Just rubs me the wrong way that some are so flippant regarding this type of stuff.

 

[4irishnation]

Is it criminals or a tyrannical gov't? If it's the first, then IMO most people would be in favor of the max clip law and assault rifle ban. But if it's the second, that's when things get very murky.

Well said. I don't believe amongst us it is "murky"

 

[Buster Bluth]

Buster you made some very good points. But just like you said anything can be bought on the black market. So they will still be able to get larger clips. 1 month waiting list would be a great start.

Agreed but now its illegal to possess. Or at least purchase. I don't know, it's something.

My brother just bought an assault rifle that was California spec, so it had ten-round clips and is a bitch to switch clips. You can simply go to a gun store and buy a 100-round drum for it! ONE HUNDRED ROUNDS! Jesus. The Founding Fathers didn't know such things could ever exist.

 

[DSully1995]

Guns kept the Japanese out the USA, minus pearl harbor.

Ya try to prove this somehow, because i highliy doubt it, japan didnt have anywhere near the army necessary for an INVASION

 

[irishff1014]

Agreed but now its illegal to possess. Or at least purchase. I don't know, it's something.

My brother just bought an assault rifle that was California spec, so it had ten-round clips and is a bitch to switch clips. You can simply go to a gun store and buy a 100-round drum for it! ONE HUNDRED ROUNDS! Jesus. The Founding Fathers didn't know such things could ever exist.

My soon to be step-father also just bought a AR-15. He bought for a hobby to shoot targets with his buddies. when he bought this gun came with 2- 12 round clips. They also had 30 round bananna clips but he chose not to buy one. The store employees told him he could go online and but an attachment that would make it an automatic instead of semi-automatic. (stores probably shouldn't be doing this) At the same time they told him where he could get the round clip attachments that would hold up to 100 rounds. (Again they shouldn't be incouraging these type sales).

 

[IrishinSyria]

I would say pretty much the same.

However problems seem to come up with what we (by "we" I mean law abiding gun owners) are defending ourselves against.

Is it criminals or a tyrannical gov't? If it's the first, then IMO most people would be in favor of the max clip law and assault rifle ban. But if it's the second, that's when things get very murky.

The government owns billions and billions of dollars worth of planes, tanks, submarines, warships, artillery, machine guns, assault weapons, etc... believe me when I say a few assault rifles aren't going to do sh or it against a government in the "Red Dawn but versus America*" fantasy.


*What's a "Red Dawn but versus America" fantasy, you ask? It's the conservative man's alternative to the stock "Zombie Apocalypse" fantasy, where the well-prepared man uses his knowledge of the terrain, some canned food, and his personal store of ARs to take on an over-reaching liberal government. Been a favorite amongst conservatives ever since the Clinton years, at least.

 

[BobD]

It's a waste of time to debate this issue.

What's the one thing all great empires throughout history have in common? They've all eventually failed, usually because they didn't notice one or more of their perceived strengths had become their greatest weakness.