Page 20 of 21 FirstFirst ... 1112131415161718192021 LastLast
Results 286 to 300 of 307

Thread: Gun Control

  1. #286
    Administrator
    Lei Feng Protege
    Defense Professional
    Join Date
    23 Aug 05
    Location
    Arlington, VA
    Posts
    13,975
    note I said nothing about banning AR-15s. i'm fully aware there's plenty of other options out there for people to fall back on.

    my original point was to address surfgun's assertion that Armalites are inferior weapons to a Remington Model 8. they are not.

    the second point is to address your argument that banning AR-15s would actually make mass shootings more dangerous. i find this very unlikely. such a narrow ban would likely be minimally effective, but that's different from saying that it would make the problem worse.

    frankly the current state of gun regulations in the US just dances around the fact that if you want to reduce mass shootings, then the solution is to either reduce the number of firearms available in general, or alternatively, the number of people with access to firearms. the secondary solution is to reduce the lethality of the available weapons. which, to address the fact that you have many variations on firearms, would probably mean regulations on rate of fire and round size.

    however, because this is extremely unpopular among a certain set of folks with outsized political power, the result is a kludge.
    There is a cult of ignorance in the United States, and there has always been. The strain of anti-intellectualism has been a constant thread winding its way through our political and cultural life, nurtured by the false notion that democracy means that "My ignorance is just as good as your knowledge."- Isaac Asimov

  2. #287
    Senior Contributor
    Join Date
    03 Sep 17
    Posts
    1,528
    Quote Originally Posted by astralis View Post
    my original point was to address surfgun's assertion that Armalites are inferior weapons to a Remington Model 8. they are not.
    AR-15s are not sniper rifles.

    Quote Originally Posted by astralis View Post
    the second point is to address your argument that banning AR-15s would actually make mass shootings more dangerous. i find this very unlikely. such a narrow ban would likely be minimally effective, but that's different from saying that it would make the problem worse.
    I actually stated AR15s/AK47s and by extension, the whole "assualt weapon"/tacticool firearms. But my arguement still stands. Today was done by a .45ACP.

    Quote Originally Posted by astralis View Post
    the secondary solution is to reduce the lethality of the available weapons. which, to address the fact that you have many variations on firearms, would probably mean regulations on rate of fire and round size.
    This I cannot wrap my head around. There is no way for you to restrict rate of fire and round size without impacting on hunting firearms. The 7.62AK and the .223 are fantastic coyote/javelina/wild boar/feral dog rounds. For packs of these things, you need a good semi-automatic. A lot of dangerous cainines and pigs are put down by these rounds in semi-auto. I will say, however, that the tacticool firearms ain't suited for this work but the AR15 and the AK actions have proven themselves, especially those with a sub 1 MOA.

    So, how do you distinquish between the two?

    However, addressing the weapon only addresses the symptons, not the illness. Today was a murder-suicide, just like I said.

    God Bless the children and Comfort the Families.
    Last edited by WABs_OOE; 15 Nov 19, at 07:16.

  3. #288
    Senior Contributor DOR's Avatar
    Join Date
    08 Mar 11
    Location
    London
    Posts
    3,119
    Quote Originally Posted by surfgun View Post
    The curve also increased with the closure of the sanitariums.
    In California, that started under Governor Ronald W. Reagan, and continued under later GOPers.
    Trust me?
    I'm an economist!

  4. #289
    Senior Contributor
    Join Date
    03 Sep 17
    Posts
    1,528
    Quote Originally Posted by DOR View Post
    In California, that started under Governor Ronald W. Reagan, and continued under later GOPers.
    California also has some of the toughest gun laws, tougher than Canada's.

    Yesterday's shooting was in California.

    What this means, again, that imposing a foreign gun control methodology, ie gun laws, is not a solution. Gun laws is no replacement for mental health needs.
    Last edited by WABs_OOE; 15 Nov 19, at 16:58.

  5. #290
    Administrator
    Lei Feng Protege
    Defense Professional
    Join Date
    23 Aug 05
    Location
    Arlington, VA
    Posts
    13,975
    I actually stated AR15s/AK47s and by extension, the whole "assualt weapon"/tacticool firearms. But my arguement still stands. Today was done by a .45ACP.
    i don't see how the argument stands that banning assault weapons/tacticool firearms would make things -worse-. yesterday was bad, but it wasn't Las Vegas shooting bad.

    This I cannot wrap my head around. There is no way for you to restrict rate of fire and round size without impacting on hunting firearms. The 7.62AK and the .223 are fantastic coyote/javelina/wild boar/feral dog rounds. For packs of these things, you need a good semi-automatic. A lot of dangerous cainines and pigs are put down by these rounds in semi-auto. I will say, however, that the tacticool firearms ain't suited for this work but the AR15 and the AK actions have proven themselves, especially those with a sub 1 MOA.
    from my POV, i'd say the tradeoff between ease of hunting packs of coyote and reduction in mass shooting deaths is an easy one to make. but even if you don't talk about a complete ban, there's other methods of ensuring reduction in availability of firearms.

    What this means, again, that imposing a foreign gun control methodology, ie gun laws, is not a solution. Gun laws is no replacement for mental health needs.
    it is both, but addressing mental health alone is insufficient. the US does not have an abnormally high rate of mental illness compared to the rest of the world, but the US does have an abnormally high rate of mass shootings. and the average numbers whom die in the shootings are higher than comparable mass shootings elsewhere...including Canada.
    There is a cult of ignorance in the United States, and there has always been. The strain of anti-intellectualism has been a constant thread winding its way through our political and cultural life, nurtured by the false notion that democracy means that "My ignorance is just as good as your knowledge."- Isaac Asimov

  6. #291
    Senior Contributor
    Join Date
    03 Sep 17
    Posts
    1,528
    Quote Originally Posted by astralis View Post
    i don't see how the argument stands that banning assault weapons/tacticool firearms would make things -worse-. yesterday was bad, but it wasn't Las Vegas shooting bad.
    And as bad as Las Vegas was, "assault weapons/tacticool firearms" still makes up a small percentage of mass shootings, the majority is still the pistol. As I stated, no one looks at the non-white neighbourhoods.

    Quote Originally Posted by astralis View Post
    from my POV, i'd say the tradeoff between ease of hunting packs of coyote and reduction in mass shooting deaths is an easy one to make. but even if you don't talk about a complete ban, there's other methods of ensuring reduction in availability of firearms.
    Again how do you define it? Semi auto means as fast as you can squeeze the trigger. It's the man behind the weapon, not the weapon itself that determines the rate of fire.

    Quote Originally Posted by astralis View Post
    it is both, but addressing mental health alone is insufficient. the US does not have an abnormally high rate of mental illness compared to the rest of the world, but the US does have an abnormally high rate of mass shootings. and the average numbers whom die in the shootings are higher than comparable mass shootings elsewhere...including Canada.
    No, you don't. Eastern Europe, Africa, and Central Asia puts you to shame.

    However, as others have stated, the US had already crossed that line. The US simply has too many firearms in private pocession to impose a non-American solution. Canada and Australia confisicated at that time legal firearms and the backlash was acceptable because gun rights was never a Constitutional right. Firearm confiscation is a non-starter in the US. Also, as I stated, California has tougher gun laws than Canada, including requiring AR-15 style firearms to be partially disassembled before loading a mag.

    That did not stop the predominant firearm used in mass shooting, the pistol.

    Edit: Thinking this more. Eric, to achieve what you want to achieve, you need firearms confiscation. There is simply too many firearms out there and new ones are unbelievably priced. A Chinese AK47 is $500US+? The Chinese are selling them at $75US a copy to foreign armies. That automatically put it out of reach of a lot of people. However, you can find used copies at around $2-300 each depending on quality.

    To achieve what you want to achieve, you need confiscation.
    Last edited by WABs_OOE; 15 Nov 19, at 22:04.

  7. #292
    Administrator
    Lei Feng Protege
    Defense Professional
    Join Date
    23 Aug 05
    Location
    Arlington, VA
    Posts
    13,975
    Again how do you define it? Semi auto means as fast as you can squeeze the trigger. It's the man behind the weapon, not the weapon itself that determines the rate of fire.
    to a degree. you give someone a 1863 Springfield musket...he's gonna get off 3 shots a minute. doesn't matter how good he is, that's the technical limitation of the weapon.

    problem is, technical limitations of semi-auto still allow for comparatively high rates of fire. additional hardware add-ons provide accuracy that wasn't there before. las vegas demonstrated that quite well.

    regardless, though, given the political limitations, i agree with you-- regulations on people whom can own what make more sense than strict regulations on the firearm tech.

    However, as others have stated, the US had already crossed that line. The US simply has too many firearms in private pocession to impose a non-American solution. Canada and Australia confisicated at that time legal firearms and the backlash was acceptable because gun rights was never a Constitutional right. Firearm confiscation is a non-starter in the US. Also, as I stated, California has tougher gun laws than Canada, including requiring AR-15 style firearms to be partially disassembled before loading a mag.

    That did not stop the predominant firearm used in mass shooting, the pistol.

    Edit: Thinking this more. Eric, to achieve what you want to achieve, you need firearms confiscation. There is simply too many firearms out there and new ones are unbelievably priced. A Chinese AK47 is $500US+? The Chinese are selling them at $75US a copy to foreign armies. That automatically put it out of reach of a lot of people. However, you can find used copies at around $2-300 each depending on quality.

    To achieve what you want to achieve, you need confiscation.
    i don't disagree.

    although you could probably do something like how the regulations on automatics went down; grandfather people in but after a while, they start breaking down and not replaced, etc.

    that's not going to happen anytime soon. i expect at best more inefficient kludges. fine, i'll take an inefficient, minimally effective kludge over nothing at all. let alone the NRA argument that the solution is more guns.
    There is a cult of ignorance in the United States, and there has always been. The strain of anti-intellectualism has been a constant thread winding its way through our political and cultural life, nurtured by the false notion that democracy means that "My ignorance is just as good as your knowledge."- Isaac Asimov

  8. #293
    Senior Contributor DOR's Avatar
    Join Date
    08 Mar 11
    Location
    London
    Posts
    3,119
    Quote Originally Posted by WABs_OOE View Post
    California also has some of the toughest gun laws, tougher than Canada's.

    Yesterday's shooting was in California.

    What this means, again, that imposing a foreign gun control methodology, ie gun laws, is not a solution. Gun laws is no replacement for mental health needs.
    Did someone say "replacement"?
    Nope.
    Trust me?
    I'm an economist!

  9. #294
    Senior Contributor DOR's Avatar
    Join Date
    08 Mar 11
    Location
    London
    Posts
    3,119
    Go back to the original intent.
    Look at the Constitution, at the time it was written.
    Define arms.

    Four to six foot long, muzzle-loading flintlocks.

    I have no problem with free ownership and possession of such "arms."
    Hell, I'll even throw in swords, cannon, and smooth-bore pistols.
    Trust me?
    I'm an economist!

  10. #295
    Senior Contributor
    Join Date
    03 Sep 17
    Posts
    1,528
    Quote Originally Posted by astralis View Post
    problem is, technical limitations of semi-auto still allow for comparatively high rates of fire. additional hardware add-ons provide accuracy that wasn't there before.
    Actually, Eric, not a solution. All you're doing is forcing the shooter to reacquire airm.

    Quote Originally Posted by astralis View Post
    las vegas demonstrated that quite well.
    The Las Vegas arguement is a red herring. The man had the resources and well planned out his actions. The absense of any semiauto firearms was not going to deter him. He could have easily went with a .50BMG or molative cocktails. The man took time to plan and execute a well thought out action. He was not going to be deter just because AR15s became illegal. And again, murder-suicide.

    I also remind you that the North Hollywood shootout were done with illegal firearms.

    Quote Originally Posted by DOR View Post
    Did someone say "replacement"?
    Nope.
    Still not a solution. You keep focusing on the AR15, what about the kids in those poor neighbourhoods who are being shot by illegal pistols? So you just want to concentrate on eliminating the AR15 problem in the white neighbourhoods and ignore the non-white kids in the inner cities?

    YOU HAVE NOT LOOKED AT THE PROBLEM.

    Quote Originally Posted by DOR View Post
    Go back to the original intent.
    Look at the Constitution, at the time it was written.
    Define arms.

    Four to six foot long, muzzle-loading flintlocks.

    I have no problem with free ownership and possession of such "arms."
    Hell, I'll even throw in swords, cannon, and smooth-bore pistols.
    That has been and continues to be a most stupid arguement. Not only has the USSC gave the PROPER definition, California, Texas and Florida would have remained Mexican. Canada would have militarily dominate the continent. US Westward expansion would stopped with the Lousiana Purchase.

    What? You think only US gunmakers knew how to make guns and sell them to their own people? Mauser action armed Mexicans and Canadians would have made mince meat out of your flintlock armed border settlements.
    Last edited by WABs_OOE; 16 Nov 19, at 17:31.

  11. #296
    Administrator
    Lei Feng Protege
    Defense Professional
    Join Date
    23 Aug 05
    Location
    Arlington, VA
    Posts
    13,975
    The Las Vegas arguement is a red herring. The man had the resources and well planned out his actions. The absense of any semiauto firearms was not going to deter him. He could have easily went with a .50BMG or molative cocktails. The man took time to plan and execute a well thought out action. He was not going to be deter just because AR15s became illegal. And again, murder-suicide.
    let's put it this way: when was the last time there was a Canadian mass shooting, or mass molotov cocktail, or mass bombing, that resulted in 58 dead and 469 injured?
    There is a cult of ignorance in the United States, and there has always been. The strain of anti-intellectualism has been a constant thread winding its way through our political and cultural life, nurtured by the false notion that democracy means that "My ignorance is just as good as your knowledge."- Isaac Asimov

  12. #297
    Senior Contributor
    Join Date
    03 Sep 17
    Posts
    1,528
    Quote Originally Posted by astralis View Post
    let's put it this way: when was the last time there was a Canadian mass shooting, or mass molotov cocktail, or mass bombing, that resulted in 58 dead and 469 injured?
    That is a most dishonest question. Canada does not share American violent history. Why don't you ask that question with a neighbour who has shared a violent history? Why do you not ask that question of Mexico? Because you know what that answer is.

    However, I will point out that we have exactly the same access your Las Vegas shooter has. Non-restrictive .223 chambered semi-atuo military style firearms (NORINCO Type 97) are available through a simple PAL. While a bumpstock is not legal, a rubber band is. There is absolutely zero difference in the legal prevention in this case.
    Last edited by WABs_OOE; 16 Nov 19, at 17:56.

  13. #298
    Administrator
    Lei Feng Protege
    Defense Professional
    Join Date
    23 Aug 05
    Location
    Arlington, VA
    Posts
    13,975
    how is this dishonest at all? is the US a developed first-world nation, or not? is Mexico? why are the other statistics for crime in America comparable to that of other first-world countries, -except- when it comes to firearm fatalities?

    canada and the US had very similar rates of mass shootings-- that is to say, infrequently-- until approximately 2000. this is all documented data:

    https://www.latimes.com/opinion/stor...dland-increase

    We’ve studied every public mass shooting since 1966 for a project funded by the National Institute of Justice, the research arm of the U.S. Department of Justice. Our research spans more than 50 years, yet 20% of the 164 cases in our database occurred in the last five years. More than half of the shootings have occurred since 2000 and 33% since 2010. The deadliest years yet were 2017 and 2018, and this year is shaping up to rival them, with at least 60 killed in mass shootings, 38 of them in the last five weeks.

    The death count per shooting is also rising dramatically. Sixteen of the 20 most deadly mass shootings in modern history occurred in the last 20 years, eight of them in the last five years, including the 2017 Las Vegas shooting that claimed an unprecedented 58 lives.

    For decades, the toll of mass shootings has risen steadily. During the 1970s, mass shootings claimed an average of 5.7 lives per year. In the 1980s, the average rose to 14. In the 1990s it reached 21; in the 2000s, 23.5. This decade has seen a far sharper rise. Today, the average is 51 deaths per year.
    the US doesn't have more mentally ill people. the US doesn't have a monopoly on crime. what the US DOES have a particular monopoly on is the number of guns.
    There is a cult of ignorance in the United States, and there has always been. The strain of anti-intellectualism has been a constant thread winding its way through our political and cultural life, nurtured by the false notion that democracy means that "My ignorance is just as good as your knowledge."- Isaac Asimov

  14. #299
    Global Moderator
    Comrade Commissar
    TopHatter's Avatar
    Join Date
    03 Sep 03
    Posts
    16,924
    Police Chief Tears Into Ted Cruz, McConnell For Caring More About NRA Than Gun Victims
    Houston Police Chief Art Acevedo lashed Texas Republican senators and Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) on Monday for appearing to care more about the National Rifle Association than victims of gun violence.

    “I don’t want to see their little smug faces about about how much they care about law enforcement when I’m burying a sergeant because they don’t want to piss off the NRA,” Acevedo said outside the Houston medical examiner’s office, where the body of shooting victim Police Sgt. Christopher Brewster lay.

    He pressed McConnell and Sens. Ted Cruz and John Cornyn: “Make up your minds. Whose side are you on? Gun manufacturers, the gun lobby — or the children that are getting gunned down in this country every single day?”

    Acevedo is particularly angry that the Senate hasn’t renewed the federal Violence Against Women Act. A provision of the bill passed in the House would close the so-called boyfriend loophole. Federal law currently prohibits felons and domestic abusers living with their victims from buying guns, but abusive dating partners living elsewhere can still purchase firearms.

    Brewster was killed, allegedly by the armed, abusive boyfriend of a Houston woman, as he responded to a domestic violence call.

    The bill is stalled, said Acevedo, “because the NRA doesn’t like the fact that we want to take firearms out of the hands of boyfriends that abuse their girlfriends.” He added: “You’re either here for women and children and our daughters and our sisters and our aunts, or you’re here for the NRA.”

    Cornyn in a tweet to Acevedo last week blamed Democrats wrapped up in “impeachment mania” for failing to negotiate on the stalled bill. Cruz’s office resurrected a 2013 quote about the law in an emailed statement to CNN saying that the senator has fought to “ensure that violent criminals — especially sexual predators who target women and children — face the very strictest punishment.”

    Senator John Cornyn

    @JohnCornyn
    Unfortunately, important legislation like this has fallen casualty to impeachment mania. We will keep trying to pass a bipartisan bill but it takes two (parties) to tango
    Chief Art Acevedo

    @ArtAcevedo
    It is past time for @senatemajldr, @JohnCornyn & @tedcruz to lead & get the Violence Against Women Act to @realDonaldTrump. Lives are being lost & destroyed due to inaction. Lock yourselves in a room in conference & don’t come out until you hatch it out. LE will gladly help.
    Neither senator’s office specifically addressed the armed abusive boyfriend issue.
    ____________

    I think we all know which side the GOP is on.
    “You don’t even have to be convicted of a crime to lose your job in this constitutional republic if the Senate determines that your conduct as a public official is clearly out of bounds in your role… because impeachment is not about punishment. Impeachment is about cleansing the office. Impeachment is about restoring honor and integrity to the office.”
    ~ Lindsey Graham

    "The notion that you can withhold information and documents from Congress no matter whether you are the party in power or not in power is wrong. Respect for the rule of law must mean something, irrespective of the vicissitudes of political cycles."
    ~ Trey Gowdy

  15. #300
    Senior Contributor
    Join Date
    03 Sep 17
    Posts
    1,528
    Quote Originally Posted by astralis View Post
    how is this dishonest at all? is the US a developed first-world nation, or not? is Mexico? why are the other statistics for crime in America comparable to that of other first-world countries, -except- when it comes to firearm fatalities?

    canada and the US had very similar rates of mass shootings-- that is to say, infrequently-- until approximately 2000. this is all documented data:

    https://www.latimes.com/opinion/stor...dland-increase

    the US doesn't have more mentally ill people. the US doesn't have a monopoly on crime. what the US DOES have a particular monopoly on is the number of guns.
    Sorry, Eric, didn't see this. Again. The US DOES NOT have the lead on firearm fatalities, even amongst first world nations. Eastern Europe and parts of South America puts the US to shame.

    Last I check, Mexico is a democracy and has a free trade pact with Canada and the US, ie interdependent economies, making it first world.

    Also, NO, Canada DID NOT have similar rates of mass shootings up until 2000. The ACW alone put Canada to shame. The only other North American country who shared this violent past is Mexico. The Cartel Wars across South and Central America and Mexico is evidence of their violent nature.

    However, your point is countered. There is nothing in the Canadian legal system that would have prevented the Las Vegas shooting. Assault type firearms are readily available in Canada and rubber band replacement for bump fire can be acquired at any office store.
    Last edited by WABs_OOE; 10 Dec 19, at 22:10.

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

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

Similar Threads

  1. Air traffic control
    By tankie in forum The Field Mess
    Replies: 14
    Last Post: 26 Jan 10,, 16:10
  2. Who would take control in this what if?
    By BudW in forum International Politics
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: 30 Dec 07,, 20:12
  3. US Keeps Control of Net
    By Julie in forum International Economy
    Replies: 12
    Last Post: 19 Nov 05,, 15:28
  4. This is way out of control...
    By troung in forum International Economy
    Replies: 29
    Last Post: 24 Jul 05,, 00:10
  5. Do we control the media or does it control us?
    By MaximumDefiance in forum International Economy
    Replies: 13
    Last Post: 21 Aug 04,, 23:09

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
  •