Gun control

[Fred Sherman]

Your hunting rifle has 30 round mags and can squeeze off those accurately at one a second or faster?
As you know, some 40's are also around.....

I'm honestly not familiar with hunting products but didn't think they could hold 30-40 and take the abuse of firing them at full speed.

Sure. Its a Remington R25 .308. I can throw an after market 50 round drum mag on it. Its semi automatic, so I can accurately fire it between each heart beat. They make something called a bump stock for it which comes close to near full auto, except full auto is just a waste of ammunition

 

[Ryan McAdams]

Zero speculation. Her sister in law and many others said so.
I can provide URLs.


Attack the person when you have no rebuttal.
Trying sticking to the topic.
What you said was very analogous to what Nancy Lanza described as a big fear of hers, and why she was arming herself.

Hearsay.

 

[Fred Sherman]

Its definitely interesting to see the European's thoughts on this. Very different than here in Texas. I am a gun owner and I would say 90% of my friends are too. I personally own a shotgun for hunting but many of my friends own at least 5 firearms for various purposes. Its a normal, non extreme thing here. People just have guns and it isn't a big deal at all. I've never seen anyone use a gun outside of hunting or at a shooting range or at a ranch. The cultural differences are very apparent. I think you imagine it as the wild west where everyone is carrying their pistols in holsters everywhere they go and it just isn't the case.

Although two out of every 5 people you meet in Texas are armed. Makes for polite conversation.

 

[jasetaro]

Wake up! Gun enthusiasts in the U.S. !

We're already wide awake, and far more aware of the issues involved than you realize. Every time an incident like this happens we say knee-jerk reactions from the same people... calls from more gun control. Is it's far easier to blame guns and demand more gun control than to have the serious conversations we to have about the societal and/or cultural problems that contribute to or enable these incidents.

If we're going to have a serous conversation about preventing or at least least reducing the number of these incidents we need to talk about more than gun control. We have to take hard look at our inept/ineffective mental health system, and the roll that video games, movies and TV shows that glorify violence play in these incidents. Or do you believe desensitization doesn't matter?

The sad reality is that over the last 50 years or so we've allowed the moral foundations of our society to erode to the point were we're no longer arguing about what's moral or decent, just what an acceptable level of indecency or immorality is.

 

[Rho Delta]

The real conversation needs to be about mental health. There really no more state run asylums or mental health facilities anymore here in the USA and it is taboo to talk about committing someone anymore. Nowadays you have to wait until they commit a horrible crime before you can arrest them, even if there is something clearly wrong with their mental health. It is also a reason our homeless rate is so high, because these sick people cannot get help against their will any more.

 

[Reeve of Shinra]

It took 15 pages but now we're getting to the heart of the matter. How do we as a society deal with mental and emotional health issues.

 

[Ryan McAdams]

Just look at the link between SSRi's and Mass Murder

 

[John]

The sad reality is that over the last 50 years or so we've allowed the moral foundations of our society to erode to the point were we're no longer arguing about what's moral or decent, just what an acceptable level of indecency or immorality is.

Thank you. 'Hammer, meet nail head'

 

[Cal]

Gotta love people comparing guns to knives. Can the gun lovers answer me this...

Do you feel that the safest we could be as a society is if everyone is forced to carry a gun? Like if you forgot your gun at home, you get a ticket, or are charged criminally. Would we be safer if EVERYONE was packing. Is there an age limit? Like you have to be 21 and over? What about in places where alcohol is involved like a sports game or a bar? Is it ok for everyone to have a gun on their waist?

Why because you can't understand the comparison? The point is where there is a will there is a way. Take away guns and humans will find something else to kill with. Plain and simple. Yeah it's fine because it would reduce crime. You going to mug a woman with a glock on her belt? Nope. You gonna rob a bank where the security guards have M16A2's? Nope. You going to rob a home knowing that a person may be armed? NOPE.Lets dive in further. You have a problem at your local bar? I already see people open carrying at bars and I've never seen a problem from them.

I wonder if the gun haters have any statistical evidence or if shooting off their mouths (excuse the pun) is all they have.

 

[craigiri]

Our founding fathers believed so strongly in the right to bear arms that they made detailed it in the 2nd amendment, second only to the right to freedom of speech. I consider myself to be a wise man, but I am not wise enough to toss away that which those who are my betters put such careful thought and consideration into.

You are not acting as wise as you consider yourself.

Firstly, are you aware that AMENDMENTS to the constitution are not in any order of importance? If this were so, voting rights, the right to not be enslaved, womens rights, etc would be LESS important than banning booze or not allowing troops to sleep in your house during a war.

Hopefully you can dispense with that one....

Secondly, the Supreme Court of the US - even the most conservative right-wing judges on there - who I assume you consider wiser than yourself, have clearly said over and over again that most any restrictions on commercial firearms are OK. These restrictions do not include NOT letting you own a gun, but would include most everything and anything else.

Besides OKing regs on commercial firearms, Scalia said:
"Scalia said he would consider the limitations society observed when the Constitution was written -- and then "see what those limitations are as applied to modern weapons."

OK, so you consider yourself wise? A basic one shot firearm cost about $15,000 in todays money when the founders wrote about arming militias. Therefore, a tax of $10K per weapon today would be LOW compared to that.

I'm not suggesting that, just saying that it meets Justice Scalias test.

He also remarked that at the time it was a crime to carry around a weapon to scare people - and he agrees with that.

I think you should do some reading on SCOTUS and the 2nd and also on the founders. It sounds to me as if you are talking someone elses word on these matters.

 

[jasetaro]

You are not acting as wise as you consider yourself.

Firstly, are you aware that AMENDMENTS to the constitution are not in any order of importance? If this were so, voting rights, the right to not be enslaved, womens rights, etc would be LESS important than banning booze or not allowing troops to sleep in your house during a war.

Hopefully you can dispense with that one....

Secondly, the Supreme Court of the US - even the most conservative right-wing judges on there - who I assume you consider wiser than yourself, have clearly said over and over again that most any restrictions on commercial firearms are OK. These restrictions do not include NOT letting you own a gun, but would include most everything and anything else.

Besides OKing regs on commercial firearms, Scalia said:
"Scalia said he would consider the limitations society observed when the Constitution was written -- and then "see what those limitations are as applied to modern weapons."

OK, so you consider yourself wise? A basic one shot firearm cost about $15,000 in todays money when the founders wrote about arming militias. Therefore, a tax of $10K per weapon today would be LOW compared to that.

I'm not suggesting that, just saying that it meets Justice Scalias test.

He also remarked that at the time it was a crime to carry around a weapon to scare people - and he agrees with that.

I think you should do some reading on SCOTUS and the 2nd and also on the founders. It sounds to me as if you are talking someone elses word on these matters.

Again, where has anyone in this thread said they're opposed to reasonable gun control laws? What we're opposed to is the ultimate goal of so-called gun control advocates, which is a complete ban... it's ok you can admit that's you want, we kinda we figured that out already.

 

[Aarmin]

...Do you feel that the safest we could be as a society is if everyone is forced to carry a gun? Like if you forgot your gun at home, you get a ticket, or are charged criminally. Would we be safer if EVERYONE was packing. Is there an age limit? Like you have to be 21 and over? What about in places where alcohol is involved like a sports game or a bar? Is it ok for everyone to have a gun on their waist?

No I don't want mandatory carry or gun ownership. I think most gun owners don't want this.
Age limit? Connecticut's age limit to possess or handle a gun is 21 years old. I want it to be 25 years old except for military personal/veterans.
Speaking of alcohol, what about the 12,000 kids a year killed in drunk driving incidents?

I find it funny that the guy in your avatar owns guns... and I just simply mean funny, not in any negative way.

 

[Vicki]

We're already wide awake, and far more aware of the issues involved than you realize. Every time an incident like this happens we say knee-jerk reactions from the same people... calls from more gun control. Is it's far easier to blame guns and demand more gun control than to have the serious conversations we to have about the societal and/or cultural problems that contribute to or enable these incidents.

If we're going to have a serous conversation about preventing or at least least reducing the number of these incidents we need to talk about more than gun control. We have to take hard look at our inept/ineffective mental health system, and the roll that video games, movies and TV shows that glorify violence play in these incidents. Or do you believe desensitization doesn't matter?

The sad reality is that over the last 50 years or so we've allowed the moral foundations of our society to erode to the point were we're no longer arguing about what's moral or decent, just what an acceptable level of indecency or immorality is.

I agree with you for the call of mental health care in this country. You probably didn't see my post earlier in this thread, I'll repaste part of it here:

"Here is some stats:
Prevalence for mental disorders(all cat. combined): 26.2% of U.S. adult population;
Prevalence for anxiety disorders: 18.1% of U.S. adult population;
Prevalence of personality disorders: 9.1% of U.S. adult population...
The source is from http://www.nimh.nih.gov/statistics/1ANYDIS_ADULT.shtml

By logic, if you think that these horrible incidents were caused by those (mentally ill) people, then you really should think much stricter gun laws are in desparate need for this country! America is one of the most civilized country, but if 20 kids killed at a school couldn't bring any change to this country's gun laws, I don't know what we need the president and congressmen for!
...
I don't know how many of those pro-guns people from this forum have kids. I'm a mother of an 11-year old. I can't imagine any parent wouldn't feel heartbroken by what we saw on TV in the past 2 days! Even if each of those victims' households have multiple guns, how could those parents protected their kids differently yesterday? How can owning guns at home make their kids safer yesterday? How can owning guns at home make us feel our kids are safer from now on? Only by removing guns, making guns extremely difficult to obtain for everyone(except the cops) would help prevent these kind of tragedies happen again! "

As you can see from the stats, there are about 1/4 of adult americans have some sort of mental health problems, this country really need to figure out some effective solutions for the mental health issue. In the meantime, as someone who doesn't have mental health problems(I assume that include you guys), what can we do to reduce the mass shooting in the most defenceless places like schools, movie theatres etc.?

If you have a kid and don't own guns at home, then under current gun laws, we know you can't do anything to protect your kids if bad things happen at school...

If you have a kid and own guns at home, how are you going to protect your kids from becoming victims like those 20 kids got killed last Friday at Sundy Hook? I don't see any difference in this case, unless you carry your guns(not shotguns, probably need to have at least some rifles and AK series based on the past incidents) to school everyday with your kids, but is that pragmatic? And, is that really what a free country can do for you? A responsible parent carries the most powerful weapons patrolling school everyday?

If you don't have any kids, then do you mean you don't care whether the Sundy Hook tragedy happens again anywhere in the U.S. because those dead ones are not your own kids? Your pleasure and your right for owning guns are more important than innocent kids' lives? If so, then you are someone who does not have a soul or a heart. If you do care(I assume you belong to this set), then you would realize, because of those crazies that are so different from you, how urgent it is to call for the law enhancements regarding guns NOW...

 

[TNCclubman]

What about rocket launchers? I mean if you're going to pack, why not go for the gold. Rocket launchers fall under 'arms' in the constitution right?

 

[Aarmin]

What about rocket launchers? I mean if you're going to pack, why not go for the gold. Rocket launchers fall under 'arms' in the constitution right?

You are just being a little unfair; machine guns, fully auto weapons, and rocket/missile launchers are highly illegal and restrained. There are some people that can get licensing, but its very expensive and I believe requires some type of security clearance. I could have purchased a machine gun at one time with my security clearance, but the thousands of dollars in licensing fees just isn't worth it.

 

[Digital Doctor]

Let me add a touchy subject to the mix here.
I wonder if Nancy Lanza should be charged with Improperly Securing a FireArm.
Clearly someone who was not allowed access .. had it.
I would hope that is a chargeable offence.
It might help encourage others to secure their people slaughtering tools better.
I don't know what is best here. Clearly an offence was committed.

 

[Digital Doctor]

In 1787, Our founding fathers believed so strongly in the right to bear arms that they made detailed it in the 2nd amendment

I added the important part ... In 1787.
I fully believe if the forward looking founding fathers were to see America in the 21st century, they'd say ...

Founding Fathers said: O.M.G. Why are citizens allowed to possess mass slaughtering tools ? WTF ! #BanAssualtWeapons

(And yes, the Founding Fathers would be on twitter. Because it's good to get their message out.)
The Founding Fathers were trying to help the people with the 2nd amendment, you are using it to hold progress back. Big difference.

Digital Doctor registers Founding Fathers on Twitter ....​

 

[jasetaro]

I agree with you for the call of mental health care in this country. You probably didn't see my post earlier in this thread, I'll repaste part of it here:

"Here is some stats:
Prevalence for mental disorders(all cat. combined): 26.2% of U.S. adult population;
Prevalence for anxiety disorders: 18.1% of U.S. adult population;
Prevalence of personality disorders: 9.1% of U.S. adult population...
The source is from http://www.nimh.nih.gov/statistics/1ANYDIS_ADULT.shtml

By logic, if you think that these horrible incidents were caused by those (mentally ill) people, then you really should think much stricter gun laws are in desparate need for this country! America is one of the most civilized country, but if 20 kids killed at a school couldn't bring any change to this country's gun laws, I don't know what we need the president and congressmen for!
...
I don't know how many of those pro-guns people from this forum have kids. I'm a mother of an 11-year old. I can't imagine any parent wouldn't feel heartbroken by what we saw on TV in the past 2 days! Even if each of those victims' households have multiple guns, how could those parents protected their kids differently yesterday? How can owning guns at home make their kids safer yesterday? How can owning guns at home make us feel our kids are safer from now on? Only by removing guns, making guns extremely difficult to obtain for everyone(except the cops) would help prevent these kind of tragedies happen again! "

As you can see from the stats, there are about 1/4 of adult americans have some sort of mental health problems, this country really need to figure out some effective solutions for the mental health issue. In the meantime, as someone who doesn't have mental health problems(I assume that include you guys), what can we do to reduce the mass shooting in the most defenceless places like schools, movie theatres etc.?

If you have a kid and don't own guns at home, then under current gun laws, we know you can't do anything to protect your kids if bad things happen at school...

If you have a kid and own guns at home, how are you going to protect your kids from becoming victims like those 20 kids got killed last Friday at Sundy Hook? I don't see any difference in this case, unless you carry your guns(not shotguns, probably need to have at least some rifles and AK series based on the past incidents) to school everyday with your kids, but is that pragmatic? And, is that really what a free country can do for you? A responsible parent carries the most powerful weapons patrolling school everyday?

If you don't have any kids, then do you mean you don't care whether the Sundy Hook tragedy happens again anywhere in the U.S. because those dead ones are not your own kids? Your pleasure and your right for owning guns are more important than innocent kids' lives? If so, then you are someone who does not have a soul or a heart. If you do care(I assume you belong to this set), then you would realize, because of those crazies that are so different from you, how urgent it is to call for the law enhancements regarding guns NOW...

I'm intimately with that states on mental health. Look, we live in an imperfect world. Neither Adam Lanza or his mother Nancy so far was we know was ever convicted of a crime, or adjudicated mentally insane, which means there was no legal reason they couldn't possess firearms.

The sad truth is there going to be a vulnerability gap, as much as we'd like to stop things like this from happening, we can't... it's the price we pay for living a free society.

As for having firearms in the home, it'll probably make you cringe, but go check out the story of 12-year-old Kendra St. Clair.

 

[Bobage24]

Let me add a touchy subject to the mix here.
I wonder if Nancy Lanza should be charged with Improperly Securing a FireArm.
Clearly someone who was not allowed access .. had it.
I would hope that is a chargeable offence.
It might help encourage others to secure their people slaughtering tools better.
I don't know what is best here. Clearly an offence was committed.

You do realize that Nancy Lanza is dead, right?

 

[craigiri]

Again, where has anyone in this thread said they're opposed to reasonable gun control laws? What we're opposed to is the ultimate goal of so-called gun control advocates, which is a complete ban... it's ok you can admit that's you want, we kinda we figured that out already.

That's amazing that you folks make that stuff up!

Whoever said all guns should be banned? It must be nice to set up and shadow box with fake opponents.

I would guess that it would have been tough to get all those kids with a six shooter. Someone would have tackled the dude.......he would have missed more too.

OK, cool, we are in total agreement. We need more regs. We need to get large capacity magazines and killer bullets out of the hands of those who have no reason to have them. We need better databases and background checks. We need responsible gun owners to fight FOR these things....IF they are responsible.

But since they have spent every waking moment for the last 20 years fighting against reasonable legislation, it's hard to imagine a few dozen more bodies will make a diff.