JohnMcClane
Banned
Like chicago?
-
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
Like chicago?
You have to do an interview with the Police for ANY gun ownership license. Getting a gun license for assault weapons just means you are subject to more scrutiny and inspection.
But to answer your questions, yes, you can own an assault weapon in NZ if you obtain the appropriate license, and shooting at gun ranges and collecting are valid reasons for gun ownership.
No, you can't use or intend to use a gun in NZ to defend yourself. The position of the law in NZ is that "it is illegal to take or threaten the life of somebody with a gun". On the plus side, in NZ, the chance of ever ending up in the situation where a gun was necessary to defend yourself are miniscule.
As I stated at the bottom of that initial post, I know the self defense component would be the hardest for Americans to swallow.
ChainedMaster
Banned
Why do so many people think this is reasonable? The hell is an armor-piercing bullet?
None of the weapons being banned are what the military uses. In fact, in most states in America, military grade weapons are already banned.
You are talking about Military "looking" weapon. The Ar-15's you can buy at the store, are not the, then M-16's used by the military. You can even buy an AR-15 in Canada. They are no more deadly then any wooden semi-automatic hunting rifle. They just look more scary.
TheRagnCajun
Member
Actually we're only changing one variable, and I thought it was pretty simple too.
Being able to walk across the street outside of city limits and freely and openly purchase a weapon that you can "smuggle" into the city across the street is not what I consider a gun free society.
Chicago isn't gun free.
They're more scary looking because their ergonomics are designed to more efficiently kill other humans in combat -- vs wooden hunting rifles that are designed to kill animals.
I still fail to see how in some fantasy scenario of an armed populace "fighting back" against "tyranny" is going to do the government.
A single Bomber Unit from Minot AFB or a submarine off the coast of Florida have enough fire power to flatten the Eastern Seaboard.
Your rifles aren't going to do SHIT.
Do you want to know who's REALLY tyrannical in this country? Corporations and the Oligarchy that controls them.
A single Bomber Unit from Minot AFB or a submarine off the coast of Florida have enough fire power to flatten the Eastern Seaboard.
Your rifles aren't going to do SHIT.
Do you want to know who's REALLY tyrannical in this country? Corporations and the Oligarchy that controls them.
speculawyer
Member
But when they can get them legally easily, there isn't much point to try to stop a niche illegal market.
Yes, everyone knows it is mostly handgun violence. But people are tired of seeing mass shootings by lunatics with semi-auto long-arms so it is an immediate target of legislation.
But are you suggesting that we heavily regulate the sales of hand-guns? I'm sure a lot of people would be very happy with allowing people to keep their semi-auto assault rifles if we could ban handgun sales. That makes it much harder for people to conceal carry.
plagiarize
Banned
America. Forever pretending that other countries do not exist.
Carpe Libertatem
Member
Well, thanks for a lesson on the laws that banned these weapons. But that doesn't answer the question, which is why those particular weapons are banned (you did indeed answer this about early machine guns, but that isn't relevant to later bans because Bonnie and Clyde were, you know, kinda dead).
Why were those weapons banned, but not handguns, shotguns, and semi-automatic rifles? What are the substantial differences between these groups of weapons that causes one group to be banned and the other legal?
You are talking about weapons used by the military. Which are banned. They make variations, which are semi-automatic, and significantly less deadly for public purchase.
There are not many ergonomic difference outside of a Pistol Grip. Which if you have shot a gun is for comfort more then ability to kill a "human". Which is why many modern Military grade weapons, are now coming without one.
The FS 2000 is an example.
Nightstick11
Banned
I wonder about that armed populace. On one level, the terrain of the US makes it a nightmare to control and pacify, although it'd be easier to just cut off water supply/food supply to treasonous factions.
Also, rednecks don't really have the mental fortitude to come up with sophisticated guerilla tactics and such, unless they are secretly far more intelligent than studies would indicate.
speculawyer
Member
Yeah, the whole argument of "Well why isn't Chicago completely safe because they have real strict laws?" is amazingly stupid. I'm pretty even the bone-heads that advance that argument just might be able to figure out how to 'smuggle' a weapon into Chicago.
This is why you have to look at the laws of different countries not cities. With countries they have the ability to do some actual enforcement with borders, customs, airports, etc.
No, they are designed to be more comfortable and lighter, not to be more efficient killing machines. The ergonomics, by which I assume you mean the pistol grip is largely the result of the shorter stock on carbines as compared to long rifles, which changes the natural angle your hand makes and would make a normal grip highly uncomfortable.
Wouldn't a more comfortable, lighter gun be more efficient at killing than an uncofortable, heavier gun?
You need to change your gun control laws. However banning and prohibition have never worked in the history of the world. I would wager many people in this thread are against the War on Drugs. Guns are no different. Except they are much easier to traffic. You can break guns down into tiny parts, and ship them individually. Your shipping containers and boxes are almost never checked, which is how sites like Black market reloaded and Silkroad operate. There are also no dogs running around trying to sniff out a 30 round magazine. You can stuff it in a drum of processed beef and nobody would ever know. Ever.
Banning most weapons will cause a black market for them. Especially if there is no equivilant for the public to use. If people want firearms to commit crimes. People will find a way to obtain those firearms.
Your "Assault Ban" laws, only hurt responsible gun owners who legally purchase and register their firearms. It does not hurt criminals.
You would have to ask the people who wrote some of the laws what they were thinking, they certainly don't always make much sense. I suspect that a lot of it is based purely on aesthetics, like the more modern "assault rifle" legislation.
Reality is wishy washy. Weapon lethality is not easy to rank on an objective scale despite your belief in it. But keep searching, the truth is out there and all that.
Not to be more efficient killing machines?
What the fuck do you think the entire purpose of a firearm (especially one of that type) is?
No I'm talking about assault rifles like the ar 15.
AR15 is not designed for hunting.
Maninthemirror
Banned
When the NRA says people need guns to protect themselves do they also lump those who are in the states where the 'Stand Your Ground' rule applies and also vigilante justice or just home invaders/thieves?
Not really. Part of what lets them make a lighter gun is by using less powerful ammunition.
Carpe Libertatem
Member
You can certainly hunt with the AR-15 and it can be important in rural areas for families who have cattle or other livestock as a business. A bolt-action hunting rifle is probably too slow and a handgun too inaccurate at long range to kill something that's attempting to kill your livestock (and thus, your source of income).
High-capacity magazines (I'd say maybe ~15+, maybe a bit higher instead), though, are not designed for hunting. If you need that many shots it's too late.
The AR-15 is a civilian rifle. It has never been used by the military. The Military used the M16, which is different then the current AR-15 in a number of different ways. The main one being the M16 was fully automatic.
Yes, the AR-15 was designed to be accurate and durable and meet all American laws for civilian use.
People do indeed hunt with them
With that said, you are walking down a slippery slope by saying only weapons designed to hunt with should be "legal". You should also klnow most weapons are not designed for any one task. They are designed to meet standards. Such as durability, accuracy. Ammunition, on the other hand, is a different ball game.
Some military grade weapons contracted out are indeed design to have stopping power, mainly because of the size round they can chamber. However those weapons, for the most part. Are banned in America already. The states they are legal in, are generally states with lower homicide statistics.
What, to you, is an "assault rifle?" Don't just say "like the AR-15." If you just name certain models the guns can just be renamed. What exactly makes a gun an assault rifle to you? Is it the cosmetic features touted in the "assault weapon ban?"
You realise you have no idea what my side is? And you realise posters on gaf have decried those arguments while still being against some of the more less thought out measures suggestd? And you do know the 2nd is not just a polite suggestion, if you don't like it, start a movement to get it changed. That would help gun violence more than anything suggested in this thread, or by any legislator.
Here's the dreaded "depends."
The question to ask is 'Why would it?' Lighter could imply a smaller caliber, high-quality construction, or just a low ammunition count and weight-shaving shortcuts. "Comfortable" could mean it's more compact, or the grip is more ergonomic, or the weight is balanced, or it has little muzzle climb. Or it's a heavy beast but is super accurate and low recoil when firing from a bipod. Depending on the situation it might not be very comfortable to use and still be very accurate with great 'stopping power' (however you want to define that). Sniper rifles are usually pretty heavy (long barrel, large optics, high-caliber) but comfortable to use once you set up, and are quite efficient. Support weapons are usually heavy beasts and not comfortable to use even at the best of times, but are efficient at killing in some situations. Most service weapons are light and comfortable in most situations, but do an oversized share of killing in most conflicts despite any technical deficiencies they may have.
The AR-15 is one of the most popular hunting rifles in America.
Note here for those confused when it's noted that 5.56mm is not allowed for some hunting -- you can have an AR-15 platform, and by replacing the upper receiver it can be chambered in all sorts of calibers (9mm, 7.62x39mm, and 300BLK are popular).
NathanMcMahon
Banned
Can't wait to see how crazy this gets.
ElectricBlue187
Member
Something tells me we've not even begun to see the crazy
NathanMcMahon
Banned
I know. That's why I can't wait. Just reading the ridiculous headlines on HuffPo makes me giggle. They are both ridiculous because they are HuffPo headlines and they are ridiculous because people be crazy in the articles.
Those cosmetic features aren't just for looks, though. The shorter barrels, shorter or retractable stocks, pistol grips, etc -- those are better suited for combat situations because they increase maneuverability. For hunting, you don't need that quick maneuverability -- stability and accuracy is more desirable, which is why hunting weapons look different. They are designed for different uses.
ThisWreckage
Banned
It doesn't. This is what happens when people become outraged, a president's hands are tied, and no one has a reasonable answer to a problem. Every single bit of this is mindless fluff. He actually can't do anything that will stop shootings, but at the same time he can't sit on his hands.
Define "most popular"
/thread
ElectricBlue187
Member
a national registery would do something. Who knows if it will ever prevent a mass shooting (how could you ever prove it did?) but I think it's a little more substantial than 'mindless fluff'. It is at least an attempt at something beyond a silly cosmetic ban of scary gun accessories.
The crazies can't bitch and moan all they want. Reasonable gun control will happen eventually. Will it get as draconian as Australia? Doubtful. But 30 years from now will people look back and say "What the fuck were we/they thinking?"
No doubt.
I just wonder how large the body count will have to be until we get to that point.
No doubt.
I just wonder how large the body count will have to be until we get to that point.
Bornstellar
Member
What exactly would it do to prevent mass shootings?
NathanMcMahon
Banned
Nothing inflammatory here.
ThisWreckage
Banned
If you can't prove that this legislature actually prevented a shooting from happening then it is indeed mindless fluff. Sadly, it won't.
speculawyer
Member
Except that this is all demonstrably false. No one is saying that it will completely eliminate problems! Duh. . . . it will just severely reduce the problems. Look at Japan. Look at UK. Look at Norway. Look at Germany. Look at Australia.
Objective statistics prove you completely wrong. But hey ignore that because the fetish must be served.
ElectricBlue187
Member
Keep felons and other restricted parties from buying guns at gun shows?
You can't prove something might have happened in an alternate reality where a bill didn't get passed.
Get Obama and his thugs incarcerated so they won't be able to continue these false flag attacks.
NathanMcMahon
Banned
ThisWreckage
Banned
Borrow a gun. Steal a gun. Buy one on the black market. A roadblock can be driven around.
not sure if joking so...
serious business
lol, it does fit. And yeah, j/k
EDIT: For the top of the page, since we're getting side-tracked on a really quite minor part of the overall package...
Today, the President is announcing that he and the Administration will:
1. Issue a Presidential Memorandum to require federal agencies to make relevant data available to the federal background check system.
2. Address unnecessary legal barriers, particularly relating to the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act, that may prevent states from making information available to the background check system.
3. Improve incentives for states to share information with the background check system.
4. Direct the Attorney General to review categories of individuals prohibited from having a gun to make sure dangerous people are not slipping through the cracks.
5. Propose rulemaking to give law enforcement the ability to run a full background check on an individual before returning a seized gun.
6. Publish a letter from ATF to federally licensed gun dealers providing guidance on how to run background checks for private sellers.
7. Launch a national safe and responsible gun ownership campaign.
8. Review safety standards for gun locks and gun safes (Consumer Product Safety Commission).
9. Issue a Presidential Memorandum to require federal law enforcement to trace guns recovered in criminal investigations.
10. Release a DOJ report analyzing information on lost and stolen guns and make it widely available to law enforcement.
11. Nominate an ATF director.
12. Provide law enforcement, first responders, and school officials with proper training for active shooter situations.
13. Maximize enforcement efforts to prevent gun violence and prosecute gun crime.
14. Issue a Presidential Memorandum directing the Centers for Disease Control to research the causes and prevention of gun violence.
15. Direct the Attorney General to issue a report on the availability and most effective use of new gun safety technologies and challenge the private sector to develop innovative technologies.
16. Clarify that the Affordable Care Act does not prohibit doctors asking their patients about guns in their homes.
17. Release a letter to health care providers clarifying that no federal law prohibits them from reporting threats of violence to law enforcement authorities.
18. Provide incentives for schools to hire school resource officers.
19. Develop model emergency response plans for schools, houses of worship and institutions of higher education.
20. Release a letter to state health officials clarifying the scope of mental health services that Medicaid plans must cover.
21. Finalize regulations clarifying essential health benefits and parity requirements within ACA exchanges.
22. Commit to finalizing mental health parity regulations.
23. Launch a national dialogue led by Secretaries Sebelius and Duncan on mental health.
1. Issue a Presidential Memorandum to require federal agencies to make relevant data available to the federal background check system.
2. Address unnecessary legal barriers, particularly relating to the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act, that may prevent states from making information available to the background check system.
3. Improve incentives for states to share information with the background check system.
4. Direct the Attorney General to review categories of individuals prohibited from having a gun to make sure dangerous people are not slipping through the cracks.
5. Propose rulemaking to give law enforcement the ability to run a full background check on an individual before returning a seized gun.
6. Publish a letter from ATF to federally licensed gun dealers providing guidance on how to run background checks for private sellers.
7. Launch a national safe and responsible gun ownership campaign.
8. Review safety standards for gun locks and gun safes (Consumer Product Safety Commission).
9. Issue a Presidential Memorandum to require federal law enforcement to trace guns recovered in criminal investigations.
10. Release a DOJ report analyzing information on lost and stolen guns and make it widely available to law enforcement.
11. Nominate an ATF director.
12. Provide law enforcement, first responders, and school officials with proper training for active shooter situations.
13. Maximize enforcement efforts to prevent gun violence and prosecute gun crime.
14. Issue a Presidential Memorandum directing the Centers for Disease Control to research the causes and prevention of gun violence.
15. Direct the Attorney General to issue a report on the availability and most effective use of new gun safety technologies and challenge the private sector to develop innovative technologies.
16. Clarify that the Affordable Care Act does not prohibit doctors asking their patients about guns in their homes.
17. Release a letter to health care providers clarifying that no federal law prohibits them from reporting threats of violence to law enforcement authorities.
18. Provide incentives for schools to hire school resource officers.
19. Develop model emergency response plans for schools, houses of worship and institutions of higher education.
20. Release a letter to state health officials clarifying the scope of mental health services that Medicaid plans must cover.
21. Finalize regulations clarifying essential health benefits and parity requirements within ACA exchanges.
22. Commit to finalizing mental health parity regulations.
23. Launch a national dialogue led by Secretaries Sebelius and Duncan on mental health.
- Status