LaserBuddha
Member
Whenever I hear someone say that extended magazines don't make a difference since you can just carry more magazines, I want to ask that person why people buy them then.
-
Hey Guest. Check out your NeoGAF Wrapped 2025 results here!
US gun debate: Obama unveils gun control proposals
- Thread starter Dead Man
- Start date
- Status
V
Vilix
Unconfirmed Member
All the major news networks reported that. But, you know how that goes. One outlet reports something then everyone else reports it. I'm going to wait for the Conn state police and FBI report.
Bullshit. Maybe some guy who owns a O/U shotgun for duck season would be in favor of this stupid legislation, but no actual gun owner I've ever met was in favor of the AWB. It's a terrible piece of legislation and anyone with the slightest amount of technical knowledge of the subject knows it is.
Besides, this stuff about the NRA just being hardline because they are in the pockets of the gun industry is nonsense. Every gun owner I know is constantly complaining about the NRA being too soft, and many have joined the GOA instead.
It's like you're responding to someone else.
He said must gun owners would support stricter gun control. He didn't say anything about any groups of people concerning the AWB.
And your response was "Bullshit."
Nightstick11
Banned
I feel like this is a simple issue.
(1) Ban magazines over 10 rounds
(2) Ban assault weapons
(3) Jack up the taxes on handguns and semi-automatics 300% or so
(4) Jack up the taxes on bullets 5000% or so
(5) Lying on a background check is a felony, punishable by 15+ years
(6) Allowing anyone else to use your gun is a felony, punishable by 15+
(1) Ban magazines over 10 rounds
(2) Ban assault weapons
(3) Jack up the taxes on handguns and semi-automatics 300% or so
(4) Jack up the taxes on bullets 5000% or so
(5) Lying on a background check is a felony, punishable by 15+ years
(6) Allowing anyone else to use your gun is a felony, punishable by 15+
I assumed we were talking about the proposed bans.
What is your hypothetical gun control law that gun owners support, and why aren't we talking about that instead of this?
Then you know a lot of crazy people.
http://ap-gfkpoll.com/uncategorized/our-latest-poll-findings-19
80% of gun owners favor federal standards for gun show background checks.
37% even want a ban on high-capacity magazines.
V
Vilix
Unconfirmed Member
I'm not in favor of an AWB or extend magazine ban. However, I have no problem with only being able to purchase and use the ammo at a gun range. Honestly, there's no other place you could or should use it. At least if your a law abiding citizen.
LaserBuddha
Member
What is the logic behind targeting "assault weapons"? Is it because they think the military stylings will inspire violent fantasies in people? That reasoning I can understand whether it's really bullshit or not. But "assault weapon" is just a comestic distinction so there isn't an argument for the deadliness of it.
EDIT: unless it's to keeps guns off the market which can be modified into fully-automatic weapons?
Ok so there's one potential law you can get gun owners to agree on.
I'll agree to it as well, as I mentioned above, as long as it does not criminalize all private transfers. Gifts and inheritances should not need to go through an FFL.
My law?
Look, I'm not sure where your tone is coming from...
For starters, most of these policies with overwhelming support are not yet on the books. And if your instinctual response is "i'm in the red bar on the ones where the blue bar is taller" then I think you have your answer.
Again, as I said, you want to talk to Mammoth Jones about the specific measures we could take (I named one on the last page). He's a gun owner, and it will sound much more self-effacing coming from him. I don't want you to think I'm trying to take away your rights.
edit: I just saw "why aren't we talking about that instead of this?"
Do you mean America? Cause that will take a while.
Yes, so he then simply grabbed the legally purchased guns by his law-abiding citizen of a mother. That's how most guns are acquired by people who can't have them legally. And the people who have their guns stolen all consider themselves "responsible" gun owners
Mammoth Jones
Member
It's a multifaceted issue that requires a multifaceted solution.
Deal.
No deal. No where near enough semi-auto rifle crime to justify that. And if there is, then you have to add handguns to the list in order to remain logistically consistent.
If your goal is to subvert citizens that have a legal rights to own a firearm by raising the taxes on it, I don't support that.
Once again, attempting to restrict use through taxes won't fly.
Agreed. Conduct an investigation. But if it's found they knowingly lied when they've been informed they can't legally have a firearm then yup.
Wife is home alone and uses my gun in self defense against someone and I go to jail? How about when the firearm is registered the owner lists possible legitimate family/household users as a compromise?
Because one costs less than two.
LaserBuddha
Member
That's fine, but it represents a miniscule reason to keep them around, when weighed against the potential harm caused buy them.
I have to ask you this honestly. Were you dropped as a child? Like on your head? Because son, you got a bad case of the stupids. I can see (5) being a high end misdemeanor, but 15 years for letting my buddy use my shotgun to go hunting? Seriously?
My law?
Look, I'm not sure where your tone is coming from...
For starters, most of these policies with overwhelming support are not yet on the books. And if your instinctual response is "i'm in the red bar on the ones where the blue bar is taller" then I think you have your answer.
Again, as I said, you want to talk to Mammoth Jones about the specific measures we could take (I named one on the last page). He's a gun owner, and it will sound much more self-effacing coming from him. I don't want you to think I'm trying to take away your rights.
edit: I just saw "why aren't we talking about that instead of this?"
Do you mean America? Cause that will take a while.
Now you are changing 'gun-owners' to 'the public'.
Also I don't really care about public opinion polls. I care more about creating a system of regulations that maintains the most possible freedom for law abiding citizens while more effectively accomplishing the goal of reducing gun violence. People will agree to all sorts of heinous shit if it doesn't affect them personally.
Funny thing is, I don't even own a gun.
Stupid. Ban one thing that looks scary but the other weapon thats just effective but looks like a hunting rifle will be okay.
So with 10 bullets less people will die in shootings than 30 bullets? Why not ban magazines entirely? Stupid.
Bingo. When I was visiting in Texas I could have bought a gun and im Canadian. Thats how broken it is and thankfully its getting fixed.
Doesnt this exist already? IF I buy ammo for a FN Five Seven, it already has special commercial rounds.
No shit.
NRA lobbyists are now crying.
All in all, some good thought out proposals and some dumb shit that is pointless. Its not what you can own, its the legislation required to own it.
CrunchyFrog
Member
While I agree in principle that getting arrested in this situation does seem silly, as accidents do happen, an owner of a weapon such as that should know damn well what pieces and parts are what and go where if he's going to own them. Gun owners should have some kind of accountability for choosing to procure such a potentially dangerous implement. Once again, one thing most legislation up to this point has failed to do is institute some kind of mandatory check for firearms training, and training with the specific weapons in question. You sure as hell better know what you're doing with said weapon before you own and use it.
It does. I don't understand that proposal either.
How 'bout no.
How 'bout no.
How 'bout no.
How 'bout no. (and you're talking de facto ban here, which would never fly in court)
Sure, when actual murderers serve that kind of time too, absolutely.
Too vague. Knowingly permit a prohibited person to use your gun, sure. But if that person is legal to own and I trust them (friend, relative) and have no reason to believe they would commit a crime with it, I should be able to loan them my property.
I'm sure you guys saw this but for good measure....
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2rRSUEaLKvA&feature=share
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2rRSUEaLKvA&feature=share
Mammoth Jones
Member
I'll concede that. Yea, definitely.
I mean, I've said time and time again that gun safes need to be a much more vocal issue and I'm *pissed* that the NRA went with the "Guns in schools to stop guns in schools* angle instead of an open conversation about gun storage in the home.
I was talking to my boss today. He's a really cool guy and during Obama's speech we talked about the proposed legislation and I said it doesn't matter is semi-auto's get banned if people don't lock their shit up. Own what you want. But ffs lock it up.
He then proceeded to tell me that when growing up his little sister who was 5-6 years old somehow found their dads handgun. Brought it back to the room he was sitting in and when he turned his head to her he saw a gun pointed at his head and heard *click*. She pulled the trigger. Nothing happened because the gun was empty. But if it was loaded my boss wouldn't be here today. From a 6 year old girl. Can't blame her, she didn't know better. But shit like that happens A LOT. My opinion is own what you want. But lock it up. I don't understand why safes in the home can't be a broader topic. As well as government working with safe makers to ensure they're built up to spec for gun owners. Not something a toddler can pop open with a coathanger.
I personally don't think it's possible to teach gun safety reliably to someone that young. That's just me. And even if you do properly when they're going through the typical teen angst phase you really don't want them having access to firearms. Reliable bolted safes just make sense and they really do save lives. If the mother in that sandy hook incident had a secured safe this very well may not have happened. Or if she had a secured safe. I still haven't read any news about how he got them from her. Not sure if he had open access or if he stole a key, or had a key given to him, or got the password somehow or knew the password by heart.
I posted this in the "Portland guys roam city centre with assault rifles to educate public" news thread when someone raised NZ allowing assault weapons but having lower levels of gun violence.
I'm sure the average gun owning American would cringe at the list in total, but as stated at the bottom there is stuff here I think the US could consider that would make an impact. Basically, we have legislation that allows for broad gun ownership and the procurement of assault weapons but which results in much lower levels of gun related violence.
I'm sure the average gun owning American would cringe at the list in total, but as stated at the bottom there is stuff here I think the US could consider that would make an impact. Basically, we have legislation that allows for broad gun ownership and the procurement of assault weapons but which results in much lower levels of gun related violence.
Mario said:
Mammoth Jones
Member
And I applaud him.
There was another from a woman that was really upset because she admitted there was really good policy in it and wanted it split into two bills. But couldn't support it as it was.
brochiller
Member
Ok, I don't agree with some of his points either, but how 'bout you write something more productive than "How 'bout now."
In terms of the 15+ years for letting someone else use your gun, that's just fucking absurd. So my dad should be in jail facing about 1000 years in prison right now because I've used his gun countless times to shoot targets and go hunting with? Get a grip on reality man.
Mammoth Jones
Member
Yea, I let my friends little bro (22) shoot my shotgun so he could decide if he could deal with the recoil. He wanted one for home defense.
makingmusic476
Member
I would love to know his stance on topics like government funded healthcare.
I see a lot of Rs taking the "we need better care for the mentally ill" stance, then turning around and attacking any and all forms of government funded healthcare.
The point is that that stuff doesn't need to be illegal to begin with. A flash supressor and a bayonet lug don't magically increase the power of the weapon. Least I haven't heard of too many bayonet killing sprees. No reasonable person would think that swapping out the barrel or adding a collapsible stock so a gun is more comfortable to use is wrong, so why should someone be a felon for doing it?
IMO if something is not obviously morally wrong and does no direct harm to anyone, it probably shouldn't be illegal. Just a personal rule of thumb.
I didn't write "How 'bout now."
I wrote "How 'bout no."
No.
(edit: Doesn't mean I can stop it or anything LOL. But, that's my answer to his 'simple solutions.')
Bullshit.
Owning or using a firearm regardless of how you acquired said firearm should be subject to licensing.
I think that there needs to be a federal system in place. Take it completely out of states hands. One set of rules, not this wishy washy state by state shit that enables anyone and everyone to acquire a gun if they want regardless of background.
I am a gun owner as well....if that makes a difference.
That sounds awesome but you know....MURICA!
Far right groups would never let their guns go and insist its to protect from tyrant government. This mentality is what fucks up a legit legislation of any kind. That plus racism is still a wide issue in the States, this is what fuels some of the right's crazy asshats, sadly.
Mammoth Jones
Member
That is the crux of it. Many of them don't get how interconnected the system really is and then want to solve each problem in its own silo. Every aspect of the US doesn't exist in a vacuum.
One more point on this ... the FBI reported over 71,000 instances of persons lying on the background check in 2011. The Justice Dept prosecuted 77 cases. That's how much they really care about this, outside of the politics of it.
Mammoth Jones
Member
The problem is that there is SO MUCH distrust of the Federal Government regarding this issue. I just can't see something like this happening unless the President also signs a law that somehow prevents such a system from being used to confiscate weapons. Every person I've ever met that was against registration sited an eventual confiscation as their reasoning.
Too fucking bad, lol.
Nonsense, If I personally know someone and know they aren't a dangerous felon, I should be able to trade/sell/gift my weapon to them. If two gun owners want to trade weapons, I see no reason why that transfer has to go through the federal government. That's just a nightmarish level of bureaucracy.
Knowingly transferring a weapon to a prohibited person? That should be big time illegal.
Yeah well....whatever helps the current problem. I acquired both of my guns with absolutely no issue. One was a gift, the other I bought from a friend. No background check, nothing. It's a little scary honestly. I have a sawed off, folding stock, pistol grip shotgun that is essentially untraceable as far as I know. I'd never do anything stupid with it, but it's scary to think about how easily firearms are acquired by nutjobs who want to acquire them when I just literally happened upon them with 0 effort.
brochiller
Member
You can't forget the violent American culture. And I don't mean video games or movies. I'm talking about wars. We have been at war about 210 years out of our 236 years of existence. That culture isn't something that can be easily rid of with legislation.
You're likely a person who likes to revert to the car analogy so I'll pose this question.
Why do we have to be licensed to drive a car? Why do all cars (that are used on public roads) have to be identifiable with license plates, VINs, registration, etc?
Why the fuck do I have to fill out a form when I buy Sudafed but not when I go by a box of 7.62?!?
Mammoth Jones
Member
Yea...
But then they simply mention the confiscation in Katrina and it's hard for me to really counter that. They did do that shit. And many people didn't get their guns back.
With that said, registration isn't something I'm concerned with opposing. As long as the list isn't publishable by a paper that just wants to shame gunowners.
If that shotgun has a barrel length of less than 18 inches or an overall length of less than 26 with the stock folded, you are a felon.
CrunchyFrog
Member
Oh I agree with you at least on the legal terms for restriction of weapons on such attachments. It seems rather arbitrary and easily circumvented, but I still think that the aforementioned mistake is indicative of a serious lack of knowledge of the weapon, for which there should be no excuse when dealing with something as dangerous as an assault rifle. What is your opinion on a mandatory training program for all potential private gun owners? Additionally, what is your opinion on defining and evaluating a system of quantitive assessment of lethality based on things like ease of reload, firing speed, caliber, effective range, and other such weapon characteristics, and defining a legal threshold based on said statistics? Something akin to a weighted scoring system. Arbitrary still, but at least based on an empirical approach and more easily and universally enforceable.
You know EVERYTHING about said person? Really? Even then, how can I, a third party, really know that you KNOW said person? Once again, this is the "law abiding citizen" argument by another name. Private weapon sales is just too easy to abuse.
Where did you get that number from?
I wouldn't be putting that in print very often. Ms. Napolitano's "See Something, Say Something" program might catch up with you.
If the barrel's less than 18", you got trouble there.
Depends. For a short barrel shotgun (SBS) you should consult the ATF guidelines.
http://www.atf.gov/firearms/faq/national-firearms-act-short-barreled-rifles-shotguns.html
- Status