Page 4 of 9 FirstFirst 123456789 LastLast
Results 46 to 60 of 122

Thread: 12 Killed Dozens Wounded In Colorado Theatre Shooting

  1. #46
    Official Thread Jacker Senior Contributor gunnut's Avatar
    Join Date
    27 Jan 06
    Location
    DPRK, Demokratik People's Republik of Kalifornia
    Posts
    23,818
    Gun sales spike in Colorado after shooting, just like they did in Arizona
    By Dylan Stableford, Yahoo! News | The Lookout – 7 hrs ago

    Gun sales in Colorado have spiked since last week's massacre, The Denver Post reports.

    Background checks jumped more than 41 percent since Friday's shooting that left 12 dead and 58 injured during a midnight screening of "The Dark Knight Rises" at an Aurora movie theater. Over the weekend, the Colorado Bureau of Investigation approved background checks for 2,887 people who wanted to purchase a firearm, the Post said, an increase of 43 percent over the previous weekend.

    "It's been insane," Jake Meyers, an employee at Rocky Mountain Guns and Ammo in Parker, Colo., told the paper.

    Spikes in gun sales are not uncommon in the aftermath of mass shootings like the one in Colorado. Following the January 2011 shooting that killed six and wounded more than a dozen others—including former Arizona Rep. Gabrielle Giffords—in Tucson, sales of handguns soared more than 60 percent in the state, according to FBI data. Similar spikes were seen after the massacres at Virginia Tech and Columbine.

    Some of those seeking to buy guns in Colorado over the weekend said they were seeking to arm themselves for protection in the wake of the shooting, according to the report. But many were likely fearful of a change in gun laws. Democratic state Rep. Rhonda Fields of Aurora told the paper she wants Congress to reinstate a ban on assault weapons.

    "When something like this happens people get worried that the government is going to ban stuff," Greg Wolff, an Arizona gun shop owner, told Bloomberg.com after the rampage in Tucson.
    They also get worried when a Democrat is about to take office. Before President Barack Obama's 2008 election, there was a spike in gun sales, and gun shop owners and manufacturers have reported similarly brisk buying in 2012.

    "It's definitely the election year," Jason Hanson, a former CIA officer, told Fox News in March. "People feel that Obama will serve second term and with it their gun rights with taken away, so they are stocking up."

    In December, the FBI reported a record number of background checks—1,534,414—sent by gun dealers. "Almost half a million checks were done in just the last six days before Christmas," according to CNN. In 2010, the FBI's National Instant Criminal Background Check System received more than 14 million requests, more than in any other year.

    James Holmes, the suspected shooter in Friday's massacre, was found with a military-style AR-15 assault rifle, two Glock .40-caliber pistols and a Remington 12-gauge shotgun when he was arrested outside the theater in Aurora. And like Jared Loughner, the accused killer in the Tucson massacre, Holmes purchased the guns legally.
    Gun sales spike in Colorado after shooting, just like they did in Arizona | The Lookout - Yahoo! News

    Interesting...all of a sudden a bunch of people who wouldn't otherwise buy a gun, are buying guns. Do they all plan to commit mass shootings or do they fear more gun-banning measures?

    Gun-banning legislations have put more guns in the hands of the people than anything else.

    Think about it, if I knew I can go out and buy a gun any time I want, would I bother to buy one? Probably not.

    But if I know there's a chance that I may not be able to buy another gun, I will go out and buy as many as I can, and if possible, not let the government know about it.

    Stop banning things. Things don't commit crimes. Prohibition worked out real well.
    "Only Nixon can go to China." -- Old Vulcan proverb.

  2. #47
    Turbanator Senior Contributor Double Edge's Avatar
    Join Date
    11 Sep 10
    Location
    Bangalore
    Posts
    9,691
    Quote Originally Posted by antimony View Post
    I am not sure how mental health comes into this particular case. The reason this one is shocking for me is that this seems to be a reasonably normal, even intelligent individual (a neuroscience PHD candidate, to boot). If I meet this guys at a Starbucks line or at the bus stop I would probably be casually chatting with him. He is, to all intent and purposes, completely - ordinary, till he did this.
    I'm not sure why you said the underlined bit

    The actions would indicate something wasn't right, isn't it.

    From JAD's interview link

    community mass shootings reflect someone with a substantial degree of paranoia and more general resentment toward the outside world. That paranoia may be a general suspiciousness and contempt of others or a full-blown delusional thinking.
    Mass shooters are frequently experienced by others as calm. This incongruous serenity speaks more to how dysfunctionally they express their anger than it does depict any particular condition or its severity.
    Research has demonstrated that the more random the victims, the more likely the killer has a psychotic condition.
    And here is the clincher

    Paranoid thinking does not necessarily mean someone is not aware of what he is doing, even as the community may experience him as someone running amok.
    Quote Originally Posted by antimony View Post
    How is this any different from terrorism? why do we always need to treat this as the job of nutcases where we are powerless to do anything? Regardless of reasons like mental condition or evil ideology, the current system facilitates the actions of those intent on doing harm.
    It isn't terrorism because there is no political message.
    Last edited by Double Edge; 25 Jul 12, at 00:54.

  3. #48
    Senior Contributor antimony's Avatar
    Join Date
    22 Feb 08
    Location
    Seattle, WA
    Posts
    4,162
    Quote Originally Posted by gunnut View Post
    We have that process already. There's a national data base that one has to go through in order to buy a gun. This process stops thousands of people with prior records from owning a gun every year.
    Does this system track sales between private individuals? To my knowledge it does not but please feel free to educate me.

    Quote Originally Posted by gunnut View Post
    Here's the thing: James Holmes does NOT have a PRIOR record. He came up clean.

    And what is "large quantities of guns and ammo?" Virginia (I think) and California has 1 handgun per month limit. That still gives me 12 hand guns and unlimited rifles per year. Do we limit that to 1 handgun per year? What if I want to buy a pair of matching pistols with consecutive serial numbers? Which I have done. I have a pair of unfired Sigs with consecutive serial numbers. How did I get around the 1 pistol per month limit? Private sales do not count toward the limit.
    But I am not talking about establishing a limit, I am talking about tracking and monitoring. I can buy as many cars as I want, but I need to register each one of them at sale and also on annual basis.

    Quote Originally Posted by gunnut View Post
    Now to the ammo business. What is "large quantity" of ammo? 22LR rounds come in 525 bulk pack. I routinely buy 2 boxes to 4 boxes at a time. 4 boxes of 22LR is 2100 rounds. Further more, who will keep this ammo sale? We need to have another government bureaucracy in place to track every single ammo sale to make sure one does not exceed the number of rounds one is rationed. What does that mean? Every single store that sells ammo will need to have a computer terminal connected to the DOJ in real time to track ammo purchase. California wanted to do this but luckily it has been defeated. It was nearly "unworkable" without seriously burdening businesses.

    Let's say we do have this ammo tracking thing in place. How about reloaders? Do you restrict reloading equipment too? I can sit in the garage, if I really wanted to, and crank out hundreds of rounds in a day using my single stage press. People with multi stage press can quadruple that rate. Let's not even talk about people with full auto Dillon press. Pour bullets, brass, primer, and powder in on one end, flip switch, ammo comes out the other end.
    And why should I not be able to track that? the easiest way I can think of is to establish an exchange. you buy through the exchange all your ammo and also raw material (such as shells) if you are a reloader. The point of all these tracking system mean that the LEAs can then profile and monitor buyers. Family man with children buying older generation guns and frequently part of gun shows? hmm ok. Lone guy buying lot of assault weapons (I know you hate the term ), ammo and flak jackets? Hmm, lets keep an eye on him.

    Quote Originally Posted by gunnut View Post
    Yes, this is a terrorist act. However, this is not the same type of terrorism that we normally see. Normal terrorism has an ideology behind it. Be it Timothy McVeigh (anti-government), 9-11 hijackers (anti-west/USA), or that Norway shooter (anti-immigrant), they all have a political motivation. We can profile those people. They follow a certain pattern. Most of the time they discuss these kinds of plots with those whom they share a common belief.
    Does it matter from the victim's perspective? All it matters is that this jackass was allowed by the system to get these guns and use on them and their families. Cold comfort that he was not following an idelogy.

    Quote Originally Posted by gunnut View Post
    Not James Holmes. He's a nut. He had very little contact with anyone else. He had no political ideology. He's not a stalker like the Arizona shooter. He's not anti government or even anti establishment. He's not married, no kids, came from a nice neighborhood, went to good schools, highly intelligent...etc. This guy was so ordinary that he could not be profiled.
    It does not matter but why are all of you so eager to make him a "nutcase". A guy who has gone through this level of detaild planning is not a nutcase in my book, not that I care.

    Quote Originally Posted by gunnut View Post
    We cannot stop crimes from happening. What we can do is to be vigilant and punish those who commit crimes. Make it not worthwhile for the vast majority of them. Of course these measures won't stop nuts like Holmes. He has no motive nor does he care about consequences. Some people are just evil. They just want to watch the world burn. No amount of banning...anything, can prevent these people from harming others.

    Freedom is a risky thing. I'd rather be free in a dangerous society than to be safe under house arrest.
    That sounds something a 3rd world politician would say, not something a citizen of the strongest and most advanced country in the country would. What I am proposing focusses on our LEAs being more vigilant rather than stoppping people from doing things. This mass shootings have gone on for too long, we need to bring in gun control into the conversation.
    "Is God willing to prevent evil, but not able? Then he is not omnipotent. Is he able, but not willing? Then he is malevolent. Is he both able and willing? Then whence cometh evil? Is he neither able nor willing? Then why call him God?" ~ Epicurus

  4. #49
    Senior Contributor antimony's Avatar
    Join Date
    22 Feb 08
    Location
    Seattle, WA
    Posts
    4,162
    Quote Originally Posted by gunnut View Post
    Gun sales spike in Colorado after shooting, just like they did in Arizona | The Lookout - Yahoo! News

    Interesting...all of a sudden a bunch of people who wouldn't otherwise buy a gun, are buying guns. Do they all plan to commit mass shootings or do they fear more gun-banning measures?

    Gun-banning legislations have put more guns in the hands of the people than anything else.
    Dumbasses are raising the price of guns needlessly again

    Gun control legislation is DOA, no politician would risk that in an election year
    "Is God willing to prevent evil, but not able? Then he is not omnipotent. Is he able, but not willing? Then he is malevolent. Is he both able and willing? Then whence cometh evil? Is he neither able nor willing? Then why call him God?" ~ Epicurus

  5. #50
    Senior Contributor antimony's Avatar
    Join Date
    22 Feb 08
    Location
    Seattle, WA
    Posts
    4,162
    Quote Originally Posted by Double Edge View Post
    I'm not sure why you said the underlined bit
    Have you seen the detailed level of planning this guy has done and the house bomb that he has rigged up?

    Quote Originally Posted by Double Edge View Post
    It isn't terrorism because there is no political message.
    As I wrote in my earlier piece, a very narrow view and an irrelevant one. Because of this, I can have a legitimate fear of going to the mall and facing a "nutcase" like this. Sounds like terrorism to me.

    And our collective response to this is "we cannot do anything about it" and "lets punish the perps after the crime"???
    Last edited by antimony; 25 Jul 12, at 03:28.
    "Is God willing to prevent evil, but not able? Then he is not omnipotent. Is he able, but not willing? Then he is malevolent. Is he both able and willing? Then whence cometh evil? Is he neither able nor willing? Then why call him God?" ~ Epicurus

  6. #51
    Turbanator Senior Contributor Double Edge's Avatar
    Join Date
    11 Sep 10
    Location
    Bangalore
    Posts
    9,691
    Quote Originally Posted by antimony View Post
    Have you seen the detailed level of planning this guy has done and the house bomb that he has rigged up?
    I said the same about Anders Brevik when they declared him insane. That was also a community shooting with a bit more baggage thrown in.

    But as stated in JAD's interview just because somebody is paranoid does not mean they are incapable of planning such an event. Granted its not very intuitive but thats what the expert said.

    Quote Originally Posted by antimony View Post
    As I wrote in my earlier piece, a very narrow view and an irrelevant one. Because of this, I can have a legitimate fear of going to the mall and facing a "nutcase" like this. Sounds like terrorism to me.
    When you narrow it down it becomes more precise. Terrorism is used to achieve political goals. When you inject fear and muddle definitions up then how well founded or relevant is any solution you propose going to be ?

    From what i've read here, this guy has no agenda. He just lost it and decided to take it out on the community. Compared to Brevik which was terrorism.

    You have a legitimate fear every time you get into a car and go on a trip. Car accidents kill the most amount of people worldwide but that does not stop us using cars. I bet there is higher likelihood of meeting with a car accident then getting shot in some random event like this, especially if you live in a densely populated city.

    Number of cars in your city / number of deaths resulting from accidents in a day/month/year.
    Work out the odds. This is how you reconcile that fear.

    How many people get shot in malls where you live ?

    What are the chances that you would be in the wrong place at the right time..

    You know what's funny, so many people say if the others were armed then it would act as a deterrent. But its pretty damn hard to be packing in the right place & the right time to begin with unless you're a LEO whose job is to be first responder to such incidents.

    Look at Af-Pak, lots of armed people in that region, preferred method of killing is bombs over shooting. Can kill more and faster in one *BOOM* than an AK-47.

    Total population of the city / casualties
    Population of Aurora / Deaths from this incident ? 325,000 / 12 = 1 in 27,000
    Population of Aurora / Injured from this incident ? 325,000 / 58 = 1 in 5,600 or 0.00018 %

    This is your back of the envelope layman's way of doing it. You can get more fancy with detailed models and bring it down further but its still going to be a long shot.

    I would not stop going to the movies in Aurora as it does not happen very often and even when it does there are low odds

    Quote Originally Posted by antimony View Post
    And our collective response to this is "we cannot do anything about it" and "lets punish the perps after the crime"???
    In a word, yes. That is all you can do. Its the only conclusion when bombs go off too. It may seem callous or even irresponsible to say that to those affected but they're not the ones this message is intended for.

    Don't focus on just this one incident, look at all such incidents across the country for a decade or more. What makes this one incident so unique over them.
    Last edited by Double Edge; 25 Jul 12, at 11:44.

  7. #52
    Global Moderator Defense Professional JAD_333's Avatar
    Join Date
    15 Apr 07
    Location
    Corpus Christi, Texas
    Posts
    11,214
    Quote Originally Posted by antimony View Post
    My point is that there is nothing in his background, apart from his gun and ammo purchases, that would have rang up any alarm bells for anyone.
    That's true, but the people close to someone are the best potential sources for information that that someone is exhibiting dangerous mental behavior. To put the problem in scale, there have been a miniscule number of mass murderers among the population compared to the total population. These people are not fore-ordained to commit murders such that we could identify them at all times. And considering that more than 40,000 guns are purchased daily and that 45 million Americans own a total in excess of 200 million guns in America, I don't see how we could develop an effective system to catch the rare mass murderer--a needle in a very large haystack.

    I mean both enforce it and expand it. Ensure background checks for each gun purchase, be it from a private individual or from an FFL. Keep a tab on gun purchases, so that buying a lot of guns and ammo get some attention. Enforce training in proper usage for anyone seeking to carry.
    The shooter in Colorado sought training. Proper usage of a gun only makes him more effective a killer.


    We do this for car ownership, why not for guns? None of this curtails gun ownership, but instead provides the LEAs tools to prevent things going wrong or tracking points of failure.
    The analogy suffers in several ways. People use their cars almost everyday. They join a stream of traffic. Not knowing how to operate a motor vehicle would be dangerous both to themselves and other drivers. Automobiles are not used to commit mass murder. Driving is a privilege conferred by the state, whereas gun ownership is a right conferred by the Constitution.


    I am sorry but this sounds defeatist. We are the greatest country in the world and we can do better than this. Regardless of intent we should be in a position to track and monitor sources of harm to society. We track a lot of things in the name of preventing terrorism, why not this. What if Islamic terrorists make use of these existing processes to amass an arsenal and recreate this horror? Would our response as a society be any different ? Why should this not shock us at a similar level and let us take steps to prevent this?
    I'm just being realistic. Compare more than 45,000 guns sold legally every day in the US to the number of terrorists we're tracking? Certainly a much different proposition.


    I differ with that - for legal guns there should be a tracking process. We renew car licenses every year, why not for guns?
    You show title and proof of insurance and pay your money. You could be blind and get tags. It's largely a taxing function.



    Also, once you are able to track all legal purchases (which was done here for the initial sale but not monitored at an aggregate level) then you can focus on the illegal aspects of gun trade.
    The shooter bought the guns, ammo and oversize clip soon before he went on his rampage. Annual monitoring would not have helped flag him as a threat.
    .

    An untrained armed citizen is nearly as dangerous to the general public as the perp.
    Intent puts a wide gulf between them. One accidental pull of a trigger is not the same as 100 intentional pulls.
    To be Truly ignorant, Man requires an Education - Plato

  8. #53
    Field mechanik Senior Contributor omon's Avatar
    Join Date
    01 Nov 06
    Location
    bk
    Posts
    3,628
    Quote Originally Posted by antimony View Post
    But I am not talking about establishing a limit, I am talking about tracking and monitoring.
    i have an idea. tougher gun laws don't work, neither database of bullets fired out of regestered guns. nyc tried it, it didn't help solve single crime while millions was wasted.

    to keep you safe, how about we use different approach.
    we track you, you are banned from movie theaters, airports, buses, clubs... public gathering is banned, cuz god forbid there will be a shooting, or terrorist attack. so you will be tracked, government will decide where you should go and when, so it is safe for you to be. government will track your daily routine, and if they see something unusual, your position is tracked 24\7 police is dispatched every time you veer off your normal route, to see if you are safe.
    instead of tracking criminals we'll track you, we'll try to keep you safe.
    you shouldn't have any problems with it right? you willing to give up your freedom for safety, (you really didn't expect others to loose their freedom so you feel safe, without loosing any of yours, didn't you??). that is how it will be.


    after all, bottom line is to keep you safe, you should be happy and obey.
    "Democracy is two wolves and a lamb voting on what to have for lunch. Liberty is a well-armed lamb contesting the vote!" B. Franklin

  9. #54
    Official Thread Jacker Senior Contributor gunnut's Avatar
    Join Date
    27 Jan 06
    Location
    DPRK, Demokratik People's Republik of Kalifornia
    Posts
    23,818
    Quote Originally Posted by antimony View Post
    Does this system track sales between private individuals? To my knowledge it does not but please feel free to educate me.
    That's up to the state. In CA, any non-C&R guns, and all handguns (include C&R), will need to go through an FFL01 to legally transfer. There are a few exceptions, like transfer between family members in a direct line. However, they will still need to file paperwork with the DOJ. The only cash and carry transaction in CA is bolt-action C&R rifles. Other states will have different rules.

    Quote Originally Posted by antimony View Post
    But I am not talking about establishing a limit, I am talking about tracking and monitoring. I can buy as many cars as I want, but I need to register each one of them at sale and also on annual basis.
    Cars are huge. It's relatively easy to track cars. They all carry VIN and serial numbers on the engine block, as do guns. However, driving is a "privilege" while gun ownership is a "right." We cannot infringe on rights. Besides, you only need to register cars if you want to drive them on the road. You don't need to register cars if you don't plan to drive them in public.

    Quote Originally Posted by antimony View Post
    And why should I not be able to track that? the easiest way I can think of is to establish an exchange. you buy through the exchange all your ammo and also raw material (such as shells) if you are a reloader. The point of all these tracking system mean that the LEAs can then profile and monitor buyers. Family man with children buying older generation guns and frequently part of gun shows? hmm ok. Lone guy buying lot of assault weapons (I know you hate the term ), ammo and flak jackets? Hmm, lets keep an eye on him.
    Why should you be able to track that? It's my right to own guns and ammo. That right "shall not be infringed."

    Quote Originally Posted by antimony View Post
    Does it matter from the victim's perspective? All it matters is that this jackass was allowed by the system to get these guns and use on them and their families. Cold comfort that he was not following an idelogy.
    This world is not a safe place. We cannot make it risk-free. A price to pay for our freedom is the increased risk from people taking advantage of our system.

    Let's ban alcohol and automobiles. There is no productive reason for the existance of alcohol. Private cars should be banned because we can use mass transit. That way we can strictly monitor people's movement. Apply for a permit everywhere you go so the government can assess the potential risk one may impose on others. Why are you buying propane? BBQ? File a permit. State clearly the number of people you plan to serve and the amount of meat you plan to grill. Wait...since the government is paying for healthcare, it doesn't want people to eat too much. Everyone is rationed 6 oz of meat per day, you know, to protect us from ourselves. As for your guests, they need to file a permit to go to your place. We don't want them to wander in the city too much. The bureaucrats will need to know the route they travel and the time, plus the time for the cookout. There is a curfew to reduce crimes in the city. We don't want riff-raffs out and about.

    The above scenario will produce a very safe place to live. It's also hell. And we are slowly progressing toward that utopia.

    Quote Originally Posted by antimony View Post
    It does not matter but why are all of you so eager to make him a "nutcase". A guy who has gone through this level of detaild planning is not a nutcase in my book, not that I care.
    He's crazy. I don't mean crazy as in he can't reason. I mean crazy as in he has no conscience. He has no political motive, no revenge motive, not on drugs. All he wanted to do is to see what would happen. He's not afraid of the consequences. He didn't commit suicide after the shooting. He clearly doesn't care. He doesn't have the capacity to understand others. He has no empathy. He's an extreme case of sociopath, coupled with high intelligence and a flair for the dramatics. It's the perfect storm.

    Normal sociopaths don't have his high intelligence. How many of us are PhD students in neuro science? Regular sociopaths commit petty crimes. OJ Simpson and Scott Petersen, I've read, are sociopaths. They may murder, but not on a grand scale like this. They don't have the science background to build IEDs. They aren't even close to the sociopathic degree that Holmes is at since they actually cared about getting away with their crimes.

    Quote Originally Posted by antimony View Post
    That sounds something a 3rd world politician would say, not something a citizen of the strongest and most advanced country in the country would. What I am proposing focusses on our LEAs being more vigilant rather than stoppping people from doing things. This mass shootings have gone on for too long, we need to bring in gun control into the conversation.
    There is very strong gun control already. All full auto weapons are registered, nation wide. We cannot mail order guns without going through an FFL, nation wide.

    Do a research. Murder rate is down over the last 20 years, not up. Coincidentally, concealed carry laws have expanded from 16 states to 41 states over the same period. There are way more guns now than before. Yet even with the occassional mass shootings, fewer people die from guns. Why?

    Many things in the world are counter-intuitive. Gun control is one of them. UK government grabbed all defensive arms from their subjects and now crime is going up.

    Gun control is not the answer. Norway has strong gun control. Look what happened.
    "Only Nixon can go to China." -- Old Vulcan proverb.

  10. #55
    Turbanator Senior Contributor Double Edge's Avatar
    Join Date
    11 Sep 10
    Location
    Bangalore
    Posts
    9,691
    Quote Originally Posted by gunnut View Post
    He's crazy. I don't mean crazy as in he can't reason. I mean crazy as in he has no conscience. He has no political motive, no revenge motive, not on drugs. All he wanted to do is to see what would happen. He's not afraid of the consequences. He didn't commit suicide after the shooting. He clearly doesn't care. He doesn't have the capacity to understand others. He has no empathy. He's an extreme case of sociopath, coupled with high intelligence and a flair for the dramatics. It's the perfect storm.

    Normal sociopaths don't have his high intelligence. How many of us are PhD students in neuro science? Regular sociopaths commit petty crimes. OJ Simpson and Scott Petersen, I've read, are sociopaths. They may murder, but not on a grand scale like this. They don't have the science background to build IEDs. They aren't even close to the sociopathic degree that Holmes is at since they actually cared about getting away with their crimes.
    The interview said this kind of guy wants to be famous because he has no other way.

    Evidently PhD in Neuro-science somewhere did not get him what he wants. As time goes on we will find out what his triggers were.

  11. #56
    Field mechanik Senior Contributor omon's Avatar
    Join Date
    01 Nov 06
    Location
    bk
    Posts
    3,628
    Quote Originally Posted by antimony View Post



    And why should I not be able to track that? the easiest way I can think of is to establish an exchange. you buy through the exchange all your ammo and also raw material (such as shells) if you are a reloader. The point of all these tracking system mean that the LEAs can then profile and monitor buyers. Family man with children buying older generation guns and frequently part of gun shows? hmm ok. Lone guy buying lot of assault weapons (I know you hate the term ), ammo and flak jackets? Hmm, lets keep an eye on him.
    profiling in itself illegal, every time it is proven, it is case thrown out.


    now how do you know who is a lone guy who isn't??? is there a database for that? how is it updated?
    "Democracy is two wolves and a lamb voting on what to have for lunch. Liberty is a well-armed lamb contesting the vote!" B. Franklin

  12. #57
    Senior Contributor antimony's Avatar
    Join Date
    22 Feb 08
    Location
    Seattle, WA
    Posts
    4,162
    JAD/ GN,

    I feel like I am having an extremely difficult time getting through to you two, who I consider relatively reasonable people here, becuase ytou have buil a mindset to obstrucut any discussion around gun control.

    Quote Originally Posted by gunnut View Post
    That's up to the state. In CA, any non-C&R guns, and all handguns (include C&R), will need to go through an FFL01 to legally transfer. There are a few exceptions, like transfer between family members in a direct line. However, they will still need to file paperwork with the DOJ. The only cash and carry transaction in CA is bolt-action C&R rifles. Other states will have different rules.
    So why not extend it to every state through a Federal Bill. "Guns don't kill people, people kill people", right? So take away every legal avenue for criminals and psychos to get guns. Yes, it would not have stopped the Coloradp shootings but would prevent many others while legitimate buyers can still get their guns

    Quote Originally Posted by gunnut View Post
    Cars are huge. It's relatively easy to track cars. They all carry VIN and serial numbers on the engine block, as do guns. However, driving is a "privilege" while gun ownership is a "right." We cannot infringe on rights. Besides, you only need to register cars if you want to drive them on the road. You don't need to register cars if you don't plan to drive them in public.

    Why should you be able to track that? It's my right to own guns and ammo. That right "shall not be infringed."
    Quote Originally Posted by JAD_333 View Post
    The analogy suffers in several ways. People use their cars almost everyday. They join a stream of traffic. Not knowing how to operate a motor vehicle would be dangerous both to themselves and other drivers. Automobiles are not used to commit mass murder. Driving is a privilege conferred by the state, whereas gun ownership is a right conferred by the Constitution.
    Again with the infringement thing. Once again, I am not talking about resctricting your right to purchase in any way, just adding the dimenton of monitoring and its a workable idea if you stop screaming "infringement" for one moment.

    And guys, are you having an off day or what? Lets examine your objections:

    GN said:
    1. "Cars are huge." : so???
    2. "It's relatively easy to track cars. They all carry VIN and serial numbers on the engine block, as do guns." :Bingo


    JAD said
    1. "People use their cars almost everyday." : so???
    2. "They join a stream of traffic." : Okayyy, so???
    3. "Not knowing how to operate a motor vehicle would be dangerous both to themselves and other drivers." : As opposed to guns, where using them without proper training results in orgasmic relaxation for the user and others ??? Seriously???
    4. "Automobiles are not used to commit mass murder." : Right, thats why they should be registered and guns which are indeed used to commit mass murders should not be!!! Did you read this sentence after you wrote it?


    Quote Originally Posted by gunnut View Post
    There is very strong gun control already. All full auto weapons are registered, nation wide. We cannot mail order guns without going through an FFL, nation wide.
    No one is still taking away your right to actually purchase anything. Thats not "control"


    Quote Originally Posted by JAD_333 View Post
    The shooter in Colorado sought training. Proper usage of a gun only makes him more effective a killer.
    I do not get your logic. Are you saying you are opposed to proper training for CCL holders in case any of them want to turn their hand and mass shootings?

    Quote Originally Posted by JAD_333 View Post
    I'm just being realistic. Compare more than 45,000 guns sold legally every day in the US to the number of terrorists we're tracking? Certainly a much different proposition.
    We have cracked far tougher problems; this is child's play. Terrorists do not come with ID numbers and from identifiable sources, guns do. Millions of merchandise sales are tracked on a daily basis.

    Quote Originally Posted by JAD_333 View Post
    The shooter bought the guns, ammo and oversize clip soon before he went on his rampage. Annual monitoring would not have helped flag him as a threat.
    .
    Which is why I am suggesting Real time monitoring so that purchases like this by Private individuals raises a flag which can be followed upon.

    JAD/ GN,
    I hope you realize that the technical and logistical challenges that you have thrown do not really hold water. Your real objection is about "infringement of your rights". However, I would like to stress again that what I am proposing in no way curtails your right to buy whatever is legal right now. What it does is achieves two things

    1. Stop Criminals and pshycos from getting guns throgh any legal method
    2. Monitor purchases on a real time basis so that LEAs have a chance to zero down on people building arsenals and put surveillance on them
    "Is God willing to prevent evil, but not able? Then he is not omnipotent. Is he able, but not willing? Then he is malevolent. Is he both able and willing? Then whence cometh evil? Is he neither able nor willing? Then why call him God?" ~ Epicurus

  13. #58
    Senior Contributor antimony's Avatar
    Join Date
    22 Feb 08
    Location
    Seattle, WA
    Posts
    4,162
    Quote Originally Posted by omon View Post
    profiling in itself illegal, every time it is proven, it is case thrown out.
    Profiling on the basis of who you are : illegal
    Profiling on the basis of what you do : not

    Why do we keep tabs on sex offenders? Call it what you want, it is profiling based on a persons previous actions, something I am solidly behind

    Quote Originally Posted by omon View Post
    now how do you know who is a lone guy who isn't??? is there a database for that? how is it updated?
    Why do I need to?
    "Is God willing to prevent evil, but not able? Then he is not omnipotent. Is he able, but not willing? Then he is malevolent. Is he both able and willing? Then whence cometh evil? Is he neither able nor willing? Then why call him God?" ~ Epicurus

  14. #59
    Officer of Engineers
    Guest
    Quote Originally Posted by antimony View Post
    1. Stop Criminals and pshycos from getting guns throgh any legal method
    2. Monitor purchases on a real time basis so that LEAs have a chance to zero down on people building arsenals and put surveillance on them
    Because it doesn't work. The Canadian Long Arms Registry should serve as the example.

  15. #60
    Turbanator Senior Contributor Double Edge's Avatar
    Join Date
    11 Sep 10
    Location
    Bangalore
    Posts
    9,691
    Quote Originally Posted by antimony View Post
    JAD/ GN,

    I feel like I am having an extremely difficult time getting through to you two, who I consider relatively reasonable people here, becuase ytou have buil a mindset to obstrucut any discussion around gun control.
    They are against regulation. That too more regulation for uncertain returns.

    How does one assess the strength of your idea ?

    Fewer shootings ? that is inconclusive. Better economic conditions also create less crime & vice-versa.

    Things have not changed because the trends do not create strong enough arguments as yet to make those changes is how i see it. One exception does not make the rule and this particular case is not exceptional.

    You need to find examples where you idea has worked and maybe you could argue on that basis. You will still face an uphill struggle to apply it in a guns context.

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Similar Threads

  1. 4 dead, 11 wounded in Montreal College shooting
    By Canmoore in forum International Politics
    Replies: 21
    Last Post: 17 Sep 06,, 01:30
  2. Insurgent doctor killed dozens of wounded soldiers
    By Aryan in forum The Middle East and North Africa
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 18 Apr 06,, 05:50
  3. Dozens killed in Egyptian blasts
    By Trooth in forum International Economy
    Replies: 14
    Last Post: 31 Jul 05,, 16:23

Share this thread with friends:

Share this thread with friends:

Posting Permissions

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