SaltyTiger 7,864 Posted October 2, 2017 Share Posted October 2, 2017 12 minutes ago, RunInRed said: I'd also like to know what carrying a gun on your side would have done to protect you in this situation ... Any degree of common sense tells us it would not have protected you one damn bit. Sad situation. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MDM4AU 336 Posted October 2, 2017 Share Posted October 2, 2017 18 minutes ago, RunInRed said: I'd also like to know what carrying a gun on your side would have done to protect you in this situation ... It wouldn't have but I'm not sure what the two have to do with each other. An evil person took an automatic weapon and killed more than 50 and injured over 500. He didn't have a side arm. We don't know that he legally had these weapons do we? He broke the law shooting at a bunch of people who weren't able to "carry" into the concert whether they had a license or not. I haven't seen anyone claim the concert goers should have been able to carry or if they had the outcome would have been different. Do you really want to have a conversation or just score policy points? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SaltyTiger 7,864 Posted October 2, 2017 Share Posted October 2, 2017 7 minutes ago, MDM4AU said: It wouldn't have but I'm not sure what the two have to do with each other. An evil person took an automatic weapon and killed more than 50 and injured over 500. He didn't have a side arm. We don't know that he legally had these weapons do we? He broke the law shooting at a bunch of people who weren't able to "carry" into the concert whether they had a license or not. I haven't seen anyone claim the concert goers should have been able to carry or if they had the outcome would have been different. Do you really want to have a conversation or just score policy points? Agree MDM....but you knew early this morning just a matter of time before this would be pulled up. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RunInRed 16,492 Posted October 2, 2017 Author Share Posted October 2, 2017 I'd like some common sense laws adopted, for starters. If that's 'scoring points' ... fine. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aujeff11 6,243 Posted October 2, 2017 Share Posted October 2, 2017 42 minutes ago, RunInRed said: I'd also like to know what carrying a gun on your side would have done to protect you in this situation ... Do we miss Barry yet? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RunInRed 16,492 Posted October 2, 2017 Author Share Posted October 2, 2017 Who gives a crap what Hillary Clinton says? Distraction from the issue at hand. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AU64 10,122 Posted October 2, 2017 Share Posted October 2, 2017 1 minute ago, aujeff11 said: Do we miss Barry yet? Not much ....but one more reason I'm glad HC did not win the election. Thanks for posting it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aujeff11 6,243 Posted October 2, 2017 Share Posted October 2, 2017 1 minute ago, RunInRed said: Who gives a crap what Hillary Clinton says? Distraction from the issue at hand. You seem distraught. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aujeff11 6,243 Posted October 2, 2017 Share Posted October 2, 2017 1 minute ago, AU64 said: Not much ....but one more reason I'm glad HC did not win the election. Thanks for posting it. That’s fair. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MDM4AU 336 Posted October 2, 2017 Share Posted October 2, 2017 9 minutes ago, RunInRed said: I'd like some common sense laws adopted, for starters. If that's 'scoring points' ... fine. Do you realize your response leads no-one to believe you really want to discuss this? Throw a measure out there and lets discuss. I mean that honestly. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
around4ever 4,139 Posted October 2, 2017 Share Posted October 2, 2017 Sure, let's copy Chicago's gun control laws. They are among the stiffest in the country and are really working well. NOT! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AUDub 11,184 Posted October 2, 2017 Share Posted October 2, 2017 6 minutes ago, around4ever said: Sure, let's copy Chicago's gun control laws. They are among the stiffest in the country and are really working well. NOT! There's a good reason they don't work. Chicago is pissing in the wind as long as people can go elsewhere an acquire guns easily. Majority of handguns in Chicago come from Indiana, Tennessee, and Mississippi. They go where the gun laws are the least restrictive. I saw a cool report/article somewhere that did a trace on where guns that were used in crimes were bought, and how long it took them to be involved in a crime after purchase. As you can imagine the time difference from states with less restrictive laws had significantly more guns involved in crimes and at a significantly faster rate. I'll see if I can find it... The Chicago gun ban tells you nothing, pro or con about the efficacy of gun control laws overall because their approach is wrong. Pointing out that "insert city, county or state" has strict gun laws but lots of gun crime tells you nothing. If (and that's a BIG if) you were to implement strict gun laws like England or Australia, it will only work if it's nationwide and uniform. We can argue about whether ultimately even a nationwide gun control program would work, but I'll guarantee you it will always be more successful in reducing gun crimes and gun-related deaths than some piecemeal approach where Chicago limits some gun sales but Gary, IN doesn't. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Barnacle 9,064 Posted October 2, 2017 Share Posted October 2, 2017 41 minutes ago, RunInRed said: Distraction from the issue at hand. With respect, so was your comment concerning open carry. Removing the right to open-carry and/or concealed carry wouldn't have kept those people safe any more than allowing them that right would. What's reasonable? I don't know... Further restrict magazine capacities? Further increase ammunition costs? Expand the classes of weapons that are banned? I don't support an all out ban, but I'm definitely open to discuss what policies would help prevent a man from unleashing hell-fire on a crowd of people. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RunInRed 16,492 Posted October 2, 2017 Author Share Posted October 2, 2017 43 minutes ago, MDM4AU said: Do you realize your response leads no-one to believe you really want to discuss this? Throw a measure out there and lets discuss. I mean that honestly. How about we start with an understanding that there is absolutely zero need for a civilian to possess these military-style assault rifles. You don't need them for self defense. You don't need them to take out bambi. You only need them to kill 50 and injure 500+ more. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AUDub 11,184 Posted October 2, 2017 Share Posted October 2, 2017 46 minutes ago, MDM4AU said: Do you realize your response leads no-one to believe you really want to discuss this? Throw a measure out there and lets discuss. I mean that honestly. I'll have a go. Bans are not the right way to go because we're way past the point of no return there, even if it was legally feasible. I think the process to own a gun should at least involve testing, training, and maybe even an interview with a law enforcement officer. This way, everyone who carries is educated about the proper way to carry, use, and maintain a firearm. Ammunition should also be controlled, almost more than the guns themselves. We can control ammunition way more than we can control guns. Other things like registration, background checks, closing loopholes, good book-keeping and maybe even psych evals all seem (to me) like they have a good chance of making the country safer. The NRA will grumble, but those kind of laws, if written well, should help keep guns in the hands of responsible people. On the other hand, I think we should repeal the bans on specific cosmetic and ergonomic details of weapons. I own several guns myself and have a concealed carry permit (that was very easy to get) and this drives me nuts. I don't believe for a minute that a gunman is going to kill a greater number of people if his rifle has a certain type of grip, or is black plastic instead of wood-paneled. All those bans do is inconvenience hobbyists and give the appearance of being strict on guns. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Barnacle 9,064 Posted October 2, 2017 Share Posted October 2, 2017 1 minute ago, Bigbens42 said: Bans are not the right way to go because we're way past the point of no return there, even if it was legally feasible. I think the process to own a gun should at least involve testing, training, and maybe even an interview with a law enforcement officer. This way, everyone who carries is educated about the proper way to carry, use, and maintain a firearm. Ammunition should also be controlled, almost more than the guns themselves. We can control ammunition way more than we can control guns. Other things like registration, background checks, closing loopholes, good book-keeping and maybe even psych evals all seem (to me) like they have a good chance of making the country safer. The NRA will grumble, but those kind of laws, if written well, should help keep guns in the hands of responsible people. When you say control ammunition, do you mean raise the cost? I'm not a hobbyist, but at what point is cost a deterrent, and what's the line you would draw as a hobbyist? When does it get to expensive for someone like you to go to the range? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AU64 10,122 Posted October 2, 2017 Share Posted October 2, 2017 2 minutes ago, Barnacle said: When you say control ammunition, do you mean raise the cost? I'm not a hobbyist, but at what point is cost a deterrent, and what's the line you would draw as a hobbyist? When does it get to expensive for someone like you to go to the range? Not a problem for the crooks...they will just steal what they need. Surely people don't think the killers in Chicago are running across state lines to BUY handguns in other states so they can come back and kill their neighbors and shoot children. . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AUDub 11,184 Posted October 2, 2017 Share Posted October 2, 2017 4 minutes ago, Barnacle said: When you say control ammunition, do you mean raise the cost? I'm not a hobbyist, but at what point is cost a deterrent, and what's the line you would draw as a hobbyist? When does it get to expensive for someone like you to go to the range? Hell, it's expensive for me to go to the range now, lol! Could be any number of things.Restricting ammunition sales, registering it, requiring a license, or raising prices. Treat it much like we do guns now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stoic-one 1,549 Posted October 2, 2017 Share Posted October 2, 2017 13 minutes ago, RunInRed said: How about we start with an understanding that there is absolutely zero need for a civilian to possess these military-style assault rifles. You don't need them for self defense. You don't need them to take out bambi. You only need them to kill 50 and injure 500+ more. Can I still use an AR for a 3-gun competition? Need is a relative phrase, this is kind of a free country. Military style rifle is a bit off also, a standard AR15 is a semi-auto, an M4 is select fire. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Barnacle 9,064 Posted October 2, 2017 Share Posted October 2, 2017 3 minutes ago, Bigbens42 said: Hell, it's expensive for me to go to the range now, lol! Could be any number of things.Restricting ammunition sales, registering it, requiring a license, or raising prices. Treat it much like we do guns now. That's reasonable. I'm imagining that the black market for guns is much larger than the market for ammunition. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AUDub 11,184 Posted October 2, 2017 Share Posted October 2, 2017 4 minutes ago, AU64 said: Not a problem for the crooks...they will just steal what they need. Surely people don't think the killers in Chicago are running across state lines to BUY handguns in other states so they can come back and kill their neighbors and shoot children. . Those guns had to come from somewhere, and most of the time it's from outside of the state. The rest come from parts of the state with less restrictive gun laws. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aujeff11 6,243 Posted October 2, 2017 Share Posted October 2, 2017 3 minutes ago, stoic-one said: Can I still use an AR for a 3-gun competition? Military style rifle is a bit off also, a standard AR15 is a semi-auto, an M4 is select fire. It’s the modifications that can make the AR’s military style dangerous though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Strychnine 1,804 Posted October 2, 2017 Share Posted October 2, 2017 8 minutes ago, RunInRed said: How about we start with an understanding that there is absolutely zero need for a civilian to possess these military-style assault rifles. You don't need them for self defense. You don't need them to take out bambi. You only need them to kill 50 and injure 500+ more. That is a poor understanding from which to start, as you have immediately aligned the majority of gunowners (and their lobbies) against you, and have thus resulted in accomplishing nothing. It is a knee-jerk response to incidents like this where the outcome would have been just as bad if the perpetrator used some homemade pipebombs, Molotov cocktails, and a rental U-Haul truck to mow into a crowd. I grant that firearms simplify the planning and execution, but a person that committed to such an action will not be deterred by a lack of firearms availability. They move along to Plan B. The unfortunate reality is that such atrocities cannot be legislated away. There are some reasonable gun control reforms though, that would probably be beneficial, but discussing banning firearm types or magazine types is a terrible place to start if you want to actually pass anything (especially now). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stoic-one 1,549 Posted October 2, 2017 Share Posted October 2, 2017 1 minute ago, aujeff11 said: It’s the modifications that can make the AR’s military style dangerous though. News flash, guns are dangerous. If you're referring to the hand cranks and binary triggers, we might could talk, but at that point I'm going to need someone to demonstrate they can shoot more accurately than me with a decent SA trigger to make that test fair. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aujeff11 6,243 Posted October 2, 2017 Share Posted October 2, 2017 Just now, stoic-one said: News flash, guns are dangerous. As the DS said, “guns are for fun; Weapons are for fighting.” 4 minutes ago, stoic-one said: If you're referring to the hand cranks and binary triggers, we might could talk, but at that point I'm going to need someone to demonstrate they can shoot more accurately than me with a decent SA trigger to make that test fair. It’s possible the shooter last night used a crank actually. The rate of fire wasn’t that much to be automatic. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.