Gun Laws

[Ernest Jones]

8 hours ago, Lihu said:

I kind of like the idea of out gunning the terrorists, and trying to capture them alive to show the world they can be stopped.

More police training should be made available for the general public, and people who volunteer to help should be given rewards for doing so.

Obama should really address the problem by deputizing as many people as will volunteer that have the capability (physically and mentally capable).

Holy shit, please, no...

I don't think more Cowboys is the answer. 

[Lihu]

2 minutes ago, Ernest Jones said:

Holy shit, please, no...

I don't think more Cowboys is the answer. 

Okay, okay guys, maybe I should have clarified what I meant by physically and mentally qualified. . .

[Gunther]

5 hours ago, Lihu said:

Okay, okay guys, maybe I should have clarified what I meant by physically and mentally qualified.

I'm with you brother.  If we're all strapped the country is safer, esp in these times.  

Never happen but the thought is sound.

[CoachB25]

Hey, there was not any hypocrisy in the President's speech last night.  We should collectively blame the NRA (even though these folks and the vast majority of shooters in cities are not members) and all other gun owners by asking for more restrictive gun laws, while at the same time telling us we should judge the people who committed the crimes as individuals and not judge the Muslim community as a whole.

Man, it sounds scary when they continue to call the AR15 an Assault Rifle.  Therefore continuing to knowingly lie to the American people.  An assault rifle is fully automatic.  An example of an assault rifle is a machine gun. Automatic firearms have been severely restricted from civilian ownership since 1934.

BTW, did anyone tell the President that the two shooters in San Bernadino were not on, "the no fly list?" 

Finally, I'll repeat myself:

• It is already illegal for criminals to get guns.
• Not one mass shooting has involved a firearm purchased from a gun show.
• Automatic weapons are already illegal.
• Assault Weapons are already illegal. The AR in AR15 does not stand for Assault Weapon. This gun is being attacked because of its looks. Most handguns have the same rate of fire.
• He might address banning the number of rounds in a weapon. So, you need to determine if it matters whether someone has 10, 14, 19 rounds in a gun when they can eject and reload rather quickly.

Therefore, I predict that the President will propose to change the Second Amendment and I believe he will mention using Executive Orders to do so.  I'll leave my real thoughts about that to myself for now. 

[RussUK]

On 12/5/2015, 4:42:02, iacas said:

To you and @Lihu both, as well as others, let's avoid the speculative and the made-up scenarios, please. They do not advance the conversation. Everyone can just make up whatever scenario they want. They're useless.

Guns are used to prevent or limit the severity of violent crimes every day. They're also used to escalate situations unnecessarily every day. Both are true as far as I can tell.

Very true. I'd also add the the gun itself isnt the real danger (after all its just an inanimate object), its the soft squishy thing holding onto it that may turn it into a dangerous item.

[boogielicious]

1 hour ago, CoachB25 said:

Hey, there was not any hypocrisy in the President's speech last night.  We should collectively blame the NRA (even though these folks and the vast majority of shooters in cities are not members) and all other gun owners by asking for more restrictive gun laws, while at the same time telling us we should judge the people who committed the crimes as individuals and not judge the Muslim community as a whole.

Man, it sounds scary when they continue to call the AR15 an Assault Rifle.  Therefore continuing to knowingly lie to the American people.  An assault rifle is fully automatic.  An example of an assault rifle is a machine gun. Automatic firearms have been severely restricted from civilian ownership since 1934.

BTW, did anyone tell the President that the two shooters in San Bernadino were not on, "the no fly list?" 

Finally, I'll repeat myself:

• It is already illegal for criminals to get guns.
• Not one mass shooting has involved a firearm purchased from a gun show.
• Automatic weapons are already illegal.
• Assault Weapons are already illegal. The AR in AR15 does not stand for Assault Weapon. This gun is being attacked because of its looks. Most handguns have the same rate of fire.
• He might address banning the number of rounds in a weapon. So, you need to determine if it matters whether someone has 10, 14, 19 rounds in a gun when they can eject and reload rather quickly.

Therefore, I predict that the President will propose to change the Second Amendment and I believe he will mention using Executive Orders to do so.  I'll leave my real thoughts about that to myself for now. 

I think the concern comes from this with the AR-15. The SB shooters tried to convert it but apparently were not successful.

http://www.grandviewoutdoors.com/guns/new-trigger-makes-ar-15s-nearly-full-auto/

http://www.ar15.com/forums/t_6_23/376051_Converting_an_AR15_to_Full_Auto.html

 

[iacas]

49 minutes ago, boogielicious said:

http://www.grandviewoutdoors.com/guns/new-trigger-makes-ar-15s-nearly-full-auto/

This person should be denied the opportunity to buy guns based on poor grammar…

[Lihu]

I just wanted to make a note for all those who seem to hate the NRA, that the NRA was founded on the principle of making more people "marksmen". One Union general noted that the average confederate soldier required 1000 Union bullets to kill him. Thus, he wanted to create an association to improve the accuracy of the average shooter.

This, of course, required that all NRA personnel be trained in shooting and be graded according to their knowledge of using and caring for their weapons and their surroundings.

They are taught to respect the weapon they are holding.

I do not understand why NRA members are shunned. If all gun owners were required to become NRA members before purchasing them, I think the country would be a lot safer.

People would not be selling their guns to unknown buyers and guns would be owned only by people capable of using them properly.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Rifle_Association

https://home.nra.org/

I look at some of the things that people have written, and do not understand the hatred many have for this organization while it seems like they advocate improving skills and gun safety?

[boogielicious]

31 minutes ago, Lihu said:

I just wanted to make a note for all those who seem to hate the NRA, that the NRA was founded on the principle of making more people "marksmen". One Union general noted that the average confederate soldier required 1000 Union bullets to kill him. Thus, he wanted to create an association to improve the accuracy of the average shooter.

This, of course, required that all NRA personnel be trained in shooting and be graded according to their knowledge of using and caring for their weapons and their surroundings.

They are taught to respect the weapon they are holding.

I do not understand why NRA members are shunned. If all gun owners were required to become NRA members before purchasing them, I think the country would be a lot safer.

People would not be selling their guns to unknown buyers and guns would be owned only by people capable of using them properly.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Rifle_Association

https://home.nra.org/

I look at some of the things that people have written, and do not understand the hatred many have for this organization while it seems like they advocate improving skills and gun safety?

Perhaps it is because of the way the NRA has changed over the last few decades. My Dad and brother were members for a long time. But the organization took a sharp turn at some point and became very political. Both my Dad and brother are expert marksman and enjoyed the base principles of the NRA. But the political side became very extreme for them as seems to still be.

[iacas]

7 minutes ago, boogielicious said:

Perhaps it is because of the way the NRA has changed over the last few decades. My Dad and brother were members for a long time. But the organization took a sharp turn at some point and became very political. Both my Dad and brother are expert marksman and enjoyed the base principles of the NRA. But the political side became very extreme for them as seems to still be.

Yep.

They may have been founded for one purpose, but they're almost just a lobbying group these days.

[Mr. Desmond]

26 minutes ago, Lihu said:

I do not understand why NRA members are shunned. If all gun owners were required to become NRA members before purchasing them, I think the country would be a lot safer.

I have not seen a post where NRA members are shunned. The NRA teaches gun safety (admirable) ...  however the NRA has evolved into a lobbying arm for the gun industry. They seem to oppose any and all legislation regarding any regulation of guns and ownership.

[Jaymancds]

28 minutes ago, Mr. Desmond said:

I have not seen a post where NRA members are shunned. The NRA teaches gun safety (admirable) ...  however the NRA has evolved into a lobbying arm for the gun industry. They seem to oppose any and all legislation regarding any regulation of guns and ownership.

I cant say that lobbying for the lack of regulation is bad.  The fact that we have the legal right to guns is one of the things that make America different from the rest of the world.

[CoachB25]

boogielicious (sp), what is your point?  If your point is that you can take something legal and make it illegal then yes a person can.  You should see what I can do with an aerosol can.  You should see what I can put on the tips of my arrows.  It will really make your life interesting.  Evil exist and you know what, people will always find ways to skirt the law.  That doesn't make it right for the American People to be lied to. 

[Pretzel]

1 hour ago, iacas said:

They may have been founded for one purpose, but they're almost just a lobbying group these days.

Funny anecdote about this: When I spoke to the members of Congress from Colorado this last summer about STEM education, Ken Buck was proud to show off an interesting gift from the NRA. They had given him an AR-15 painted with a tessellating pattern of american flags that he had hung up on his office wall (with action removed and a trigger guard, since it was on capital hill). He was rather keen on having one of his aids take a photograph with me and the other member of my robotics team that I had traveled with holding it next to him.

[boogielicious]

24 minutes ago, CoachB25 said:

boogielicious (sp), what is your point?  If your point is that you can take something legal and make it illegal then yes a person can.  You should see what I can do with an aerosol can.  You should see what I can put on the tips of my arrows.  It will really make your life interesting.  Evil exist and you know what, people will always find ways to skirt the law.  That doesn't make it right for the American People to be lied to. 

If you use the @mentions, it will notify me that you responded. Plus you won't have to worry about spelling. 

The point is the perception that the AR-15 can be converted to an automatic weapon is the reality of how it is seen by the public. It doesn't matter that you can't legally do it. It only matters that it can be done. So bad people could purchase a legal weapon and convert it is the concern of police, state and federal authorities. It is similar to the tracking of ammonium nitrate purchases after the OK City bombing. Most people would not know how to do this but it can be done. 

After the first World Trade Center bombing, some idiot politician stated that all chemical engineers knew how to make bombs because one of the perps was a Chem E. Now this was news to we Chemical Engineers because I don't recall having that class in college. But the perception was put forth.

BTW, I am an aerosol expert. I'm certain I know more than you with regards to everything about aerosols.

[newtogolf]

1 minute ago, boogielicious said:

If you use the @mentions, it will notify me that you responded. Plus you won't have to worry about spelling. 

The point is the perception that the AR-15 can be converted to an automatic weapon is the reality of how it is seen by the public. It doesn't matter that you can't legally do it. It only matters that it can be done. So bad people could purchase a legal weapon and convert it is the concern of police, state and federal authorities. It is similar to the tracking of ammonium nitrate purchases after the OK City bombing. Most people would not know how to do this but it can be done.

After the first World Trade Center bombing, some idiot politician stated that all chemical engineers knew how to make bombs because one of the perps was a Chem E. Now this was news to we Chemical Engineers because I don't recall having that class in college. But the perception was put forth.

BTW, I am an aerosol expert. I'm certain I know more than you with regards to everything about aerosols.

Here's where some of you lose me on wanting additional gun control laws;

Everyone acknowledges the AR-15 is only legal in semi-automatic form but some are concerned that criminals will buy a legal versoin of the AR-15 and intentionally break the law by converting it to an automatic.  So in this particular case you want the gun banned because you acknowledge criminals likely won't follow the law.

On the other hand you support more gun laws and controls to restrict the sale of guns.  Now if the laws on the books don't work to discourage the conversion of an AR-15 to an automatic weapon, why would additional gun control laws be any more successful in preventing criminals or terrorists from acquiring guns illegally?

[Pretzel]

My only question about the conversion is, if you can convert an AR-15 why would you be unable to convert other similar weapons as well? I imagine that, were AR-15's banned, a different type of weapon would become the weapon of choice to modify to fire in a fully automatic mode.

[boogielicious]

6 minutes ago, newtogolf said:

Here's where some of you lose me on wanting additional gun control laws;

Everyone acknowledges the AR-15 is only legal in semi-automatic form but some are concerned that criminals will buy a legal versoin of the AR-15 and intentionally break the law by converting it to an automatic.  So in this particular case you want the gun banned because you acknowledge criminals likely won't follow the law.

On the other hand you support more gun laws and controls to restrict the sale of guns.  Now if the laws on the books don't work to discourage the conversion of an AR-15 to an automatic weapon, why would additional gun control laws be any more successful in preventing criminals or terrorists from acquiring guns illegally?

First, I have not stated anything about more gun control laws.

Second, then what do you suggest we do? We have a problem. How do we reduce this from happening? The current state is failing right now. And it is not just with ISIS or ISIS wannabees. It is spread across the spectrum of race, religion, gender and ethnicity. You cannot find this acceptable, can you?