For those who are afraid of guns

[ReverendHellh0und]

I will Reverend...
But first I must go surfing. Seriously... the waves are freaking perfect and it is glassy and there just ain't nobody out there right now!

:2wave:

Didya get washed out to sea or what? :lol:

 

[Bodi]

Didya get washed out to sea or what? :lol:

No...
I just ended up going back a couple of times.
The shorebreak was too good to resist.
...then we had Fire Training. Motor Vehicle Accidents Simulation. Cutting the roofs off of cars and smashing in car windows, etc. Was great stuff.

I'll try to get to it tonight.

 

[ReverendHellh0und]

No...
I just ended up going back a couple of times.
The shorebreak was too good to resist.
...then we had Fire Training. Motor Vehicle Accidents Simulation. Cutting the roofs off of cars and smashing in car windows, etc. Was great stuff.

I'll try to get to it tonight.

Hmm you had plenty of time to post elsewhere, I am really curious as to your stance.

 

[Bodi]

Hmm you had plenty of time to post elsewhere, I am really curious as to your stance.

I think that the 2nd Amendment was intended to be worded for civilians to own guns if they are part of a civil defense group. ie a militia.

I don't think that responsible gun ownership is a bad thing at all...
In many ways, it stops violence.

I also feel that there are too many guns...
The issue is much like Alcohol and Prohibition.
What to do.

Guns are not good for benevolent societies.
Guns are not good for people.

But people being people and societies being corrupt and untrustworthy...
Guns are not bad.

We should be evolving towards a no gun society... but that is idealized, I know.

That is all for now I think.

 

[ReverendHellh0und]

I think that the 2nd Amendment was intended to be worded for civilians to own guns if they are part of a civil defense group. ie a militia.

Who are the militia?

I ask, who are the militia? They consist of now of the whole people, except a few public officers. - George Mason

Militia act:

a) The militia of the United States consists of all able-bodied males at least 17 years of age and . . . under 45 years of age who are, or who have made a declaration of intention to become, citizens of the United States and of female citizens of the United States who are members of the National Guard.

(b) The classes of the militia are --


(1) the organized militia, which consists of the National Guard and the Naval Militia; and


(2) the unorganized militia, which consists of the members of the militia who are not members of the National Guard or the Naval Militia.



Do these definitions by our founding fathers and US Code define militia as being you or I?

I don't think that responsible gun ownership is a bad thing at all...
In many ways, it stops violence.

I agree.

I also feel that there are too many guns...
The issue is much like Alcohol and Prohibition.
What to do.

I would say not punish those who follow the law as scofflaws will simply ignore.

Guns are not good for benevolent societies.
Guns are not good for people.

No such thing,
They were quite good for us in the late 1700s, They are good in the 2.5 million times a year they are used in defense.

But people being people and societies being corrupt and untrustworthy...
Guns are not bad.

I see your point.

We should be evolving towards a no gun society... but that is idealized, I know.

Highly idealized, perhaps we should try to achieve a more enlightened society where they are not needed anymore as opposed to regulation and prohibition of the people on the path to said society.



That is all for now I think. [/QUOTE]

 

[LaMidRighter]

Well. I just exercised my 2nd amendment rights yesterday. Bought a Baby Eagle .40, can't wait to take it to the range. Pairing it with full brass 180 grains. Life is good.

p.s. I will not be shooting up a school, robbing a business, or killing any innocent people. Just thought I'd share that with the anti-gun crowd.

 

[American]

Gun control should be implemented at the individual level. You teach people to control their guns at the individual level. That means the government passes simple common sense laws requiring certain types of training, which serves two purposes 1) improved public safety, and 2) the "militia". Gun safety training of the public would change fear of guns (rather the unknown), to respect for guns. This is something that the state can promote in schools because of the 2nd Amendment to have a well regulated militia. Citizens can chose to be trained or not, and those trained can chose to own a gun or not. Gun safety courses should be free, because this is tax dollars well spent. A certification qualifies one for gun ownership. This one requirement I think the Founders would even endorse. One course would teach you about long rifles and handguns. Most all other laws would be unnecessary, because in the hands of a trained citizen a weapon would be safed. Certification renewal would be required every some many years either by state training or by proof of certified training at a designated business (gun club, gun shop, private school) certified to provide training.

 

[scourge99]

Gun control should be implemented at the individual level. You teach people to control their guns at the individual level. That means the government passes simple common sense laws requiring certain types of training, which serves two purposes 1) improved public safety, and 2) the "militia". Gun safety training of the public would change fear of guns (rather the unknown), to respect for guns. This is something that the state can promote in schools because of the 2nd Amendment to have a well regulated militia. Citizens can chose to be trained or not, and those trained can chose to own a gun or not. Gun safety courses should be free, because this is tax dollars well spent. A certification qualifies one for gun ownership. This one requirement I think the Founders would even endorse. One course would teach you about long rifles and handguns. Most all other laws would be unnecessary, because in the hands of a trained citizen a weapon would be safed. Certification renewal would be required every some many years either by state training or by proof of certified training at a designated business (gun club, gun shop, private school) certified to provide training.

The problem wtih placing restrictions on fundamental rights is they are often abused or quickly run out of control to support someones agenda. EG, voters used to have to pay to vote. This tactic was used to keep certain types of people for voting even though it makes sense to charge voters due to the overhead involved.

Someone has to determine what is "common sense" and such a subjective duty is begging to be abused one way or another.

 

[TurtleDude]

The problem wtih placing restrictions on fundamental rights is they are often abused or quickly run out of control to support someones agenda. EG, voters used to have to pay to vote. This tactic was used to keep certain types of people for voting even though it makes sense to charge voters due to the overhead involved.

Someone has to determine what is "common sense" and such a subjective duty is begging to be abused one way or another.

True, many of us could see the value in a simple test before people vote. FOr example, I saw studies that demonstrated that more people could name the last two finalists of "American Idol" than the two federal senators in their home state. However, abuse is possible =reading tests in the south managed to fail Black PhD's while "crackers" who dropped out of HS managed to pass

 

[SmilesAndFrowns]

I am Very Pro Gun, To the point that backround checks are required for all guns purchased be it shotgun, pistol or pre-ban Machine Gun, (i will get to the machine gun thing later) and classes and in depth interviews and backround checks are required for CCW's.

First, someone said early to teach in schools gun safety. What do you mean? Dont play with it. Or do you mean how to use?

Second, I personally own several firearms that include so called "assualt weapons," I own an AK-47 mainly on the reasoning, that weopons are a techniloigal marvel. Besides that fact that going target shooting with your friends and family is just a damn good way to spend a day. Away from the TV outside have good health fun.

Third, Machine guns are still legal. Machine guns made before 1986 are legal to own. They cost some money because usually once you get one you dont want to get ride of it. And to say some of these are military surplus. You can buy grenades too. And tanks, and arterllery guns. You just got to know where to look and have some money.

Forth, "2 deaths from legally own machine guns since 1930" do you know you could buy an Thompson aka the tommy gun for 100 dollars then, legally, a matter a fact "Baby Face Nelson" was actually given his Thompson as a gift from his wife, she bought it from the hardware store.

Fifth, I know without a doubt that the average joe, even the nut joe, isnt going to efficently opperate a 249 SAW (Squad Automatic Weapon) Better yet the average nut isnt going to have the sufficent ability to fire a bolt action "sniper rifle" and put kill shoots on target, even yet hit anything at all. If you think "sniping" from a 100 yards away with concealment is far, your mistaken. And a .22 isnt designed to kill people and then he listed and AR-15 as a example of a modern weopon, its chambered in 5.56mm, also know as the .223, yeah thats a .22. A double barrel shotgun. Kill more then two people, maybe. But, not on the first shot. Shotguns have a spread of about 2 1/2 inchs at 25yards.

Sixth, Most masscres take place where guns are not permited to be carried. What would happen if, that Former US Marine using his GI bill to go to college is allowed to carry is licensed weapon to school with him after he get his ccw. He safes lifes if some nut tries to shoot up the places.

Seventh, Criminal look for easy prey, I.E. those that are less likely to put up a fight. Basicly does grandma and grandpa have a .357 magnum in there glove boxs?

In closing i really want some feed back on this. Thanks for starting this thread.

 

[LaMidRighter]

I am Very Pro Gun, To the point that backround checks are required for all guns purchased be it shotgun, pistol or pre-ban Machine Gun, (i will get to the machine gun thing later) and classes and in depth interviews and backround checks are required for CCW's.

Welcome to the forum. And I have no problem with background checks, so long as gun control stays there. No extra taxes, gun-buy limits, ammunition purchase limits, size.......etc.

First, someone said early to teach in schools gun safety. What do you mean? Dont play with it. Or do you mean how to use?

I think both. They are both points in an overall largely common sense safety practice when handling firearms.

Second, I personally own several firearms that include so called "assualt weapons," I own an AK-47 mainly on the reasoning, that weopons are a techniloigal marvel. Besides that fact that going target shooting with your friends and family is just a damn good way to spend a day. Away from the TV outside have good health fun.

I agree, and am jealous of your collection(but just a little)

Third, Machine guns are still legal. Machine guns made before 1986 are legal to own. They cost some money because usually once you get one you dont want to get ride of it. And to say some of these are military surplus. You can buy grenades too. And tanks, and arterllery guns. You just got to know where to look and have some money.

This one came up on another thread, I have to read up on the assault-rifle, full-auto laws in this country.

Forth, "2 deaths from legally own machine guns since 1930" do you know you could buy an Thompson aka the tommy gun for 100 dollars then, legally, a matter a fact "Baby Face Nelson" was actually given his Thompson as a gift from his wife, she bought it from the hardware store.

Spot on.

Seventh, Criminal look for easy prey, I.E. those that are less likely to put up a fight. Basicly does grandma and grandpa have a .357 magnum in there glove boxs?

I agree, most criminals say they are more scared of armed "victims" than the police. Also, I think that just the sight of a gun during a holdup would encourage a peaceful ending(i.e. the criminal running for his life).

In closing i really want some feed back on this. Thanks for starting this thread.

Ask and you shall recieve. I think we all look forward to your input on this.

 

[SmilesAndFrowns]

And I have no problem with background checks, so long as gun control stays there. No extra taxes, gun-buy limits, ammunition purchase limits, size.......etc.

I agree with no extra taxes, but as far as gun-buy limit; I could understand that especially if your buying multiply long-guns and pistols. Only simple because if your buying 4 or 5 handguns or rifles i kinda would raise an eyebrow. Whats it really going to hurt to wait another month or two?

I think both. They are both points in an overall largely common sense safety practice when handling firearms.

I really cant see how correct use of a firearm is good for a student to learn. I'm just 21 but I'm in the business of killing, thats just the Marine Corps. But I didnt really start learning gun safety officially until i was 17-18, from my father. But as far as an impersonal class room setting, its really not necassery to teach people how to handle a weapon. Teaching that guns should be respected and that they are TOOLS for killing, that also can be used in constructive manners, such as, target shooting and hunting. I dont want mentally distrubured kid to know what hes doing. I rather him shoot with out skill then shoot with skill.

 

[LaMidRighter]

I agree with no extra taxes, but as far as gun-buy limit; I could understand that especially if your buying multiply long-guns and pistols. Only simple because if your buying 4 or 5 handguns or rifles i kinda would raise an eyebrow. Whats it really going to hurt to wait another month or two?

The big problem is that a gun-buy limit is prior restraint. If you can pass a check to make sure you are socially and psychologically stable, then you are no danger regardless of any eyebrows raised. The same logic that says it doesn't hurt to wait also dictates that you will accumulate the weapons eventually anyway.

I really cant see how correct use of a firearm is good for a student to learn. I'm just 21 but I'm in the business of killing, thats just the Marine Corps. But I didnt really start learning gun safety officially until i was 17-18, from my father. But as far as an impersonal class room setting, its really not necassery to teach people how to handle a weapon. Teaching that guns should be respected and that they are TOOLS for killing, that also can be used in constructive manners, such as, target shooting and hunting. I dont want mentally distrubured kid to know what hes doing. I rather him shoot with out skill then shoot with skill.

The point is that you would teach the proper times to use weaponry, where the legal protection of self-defense becomes invalid in your state, how to handle, and respect a weapon. Technique and other issues can and should be excluded, however, because of what you have adressed, that can be learned later anyway.

 

[TurtleDude]

The big problem is that a gun-buy limit is prior restraint. If you can pass a check to make sure you are socially and psychologically stable, then you are no danger regardless of any eyebrows raised. The same logic that says it doesn't hurt to wait also dictates that you will accumulate the weapons eventually anyway.


The point is that you would teach the proper times to use weaponry, where the legal protection of self-defense becomes invalid in your state, how to handle, and respect a weapon. Technique and other issues can and should be excluded, however, because of what you have adressed, that can be learned later anyway.

Under current federal law-If you buy more than one handgun from the SAME dealer within FIVE business days, the DEALER is required by LAW to fill out a MULTIPLE PURCHASE FORM and send that to the ATF office.

So when BillyBob Strawman goes into Joe's Gun Shop and buys Four Jennings POS 25 caliber pistols (the ones that come with a coupon for a ski mask or half a pair of nylons) the ATF is notified of that and can inquire as to why BBS is stocking up on junk like that

 

[LaMidRighter]

Under current federal law-If you buy more than one handgun from the SAME dealer within FIVE business days, the DEALER is required by LAW to fill out a MULTIPLE PURCHASE FORM and send that to the ATF office.

So when BillyBob Strawman goes into Joe's Gun Shop and buys Four Jennings POS 25 caliber pistols (the ones that come with a coupon for a ski mask or half a pair of nylons) the ATF is notified of that and can inquire as to why BBS is stocking up on junk like that

I can see a point on junk guns raising red flags. Still, law enforcement could do a better job on the local level than the ATF I would think, considering they would know the criminals or gun dealer better in most locations.

 

[TurtleDude]

I can see a point on junk guns raising red flags. Still, law enforcement could do a better job on the local level than the ATF I would think, considering they would know the criminals or gun dealer better in most locations.

True-I have no problem with the ATF notifying local law enforcement. If someone buys a dozen junk guns it certainly raises questions. If a guy who is a well known competition shooter or collector buys 3 Rock River Limited Match 45's that certainly doesn't raise the same suspicions as some guy buying 4-5 ravens or brycos at 68 bucks a pop.

 

[SmilesAndFrowns]

I think the limit is a good idea. Maybe it should be more specific and more local. For instance like you said local law enforcement should handle it. Because more then likely they know the dealer and the know the gun collector be it they are in the area and can find out whats up. I cant see your mass murder buy 3 ar-15s. Its not realitic, but buying some cheap Hi-point pistols i can see that.

 

[LaMidRighter]

I think the limit is a good idea. Maybe it should be more specific and more local. For instance like you said local law enforcement should handle it. Because more then likely they know the dealer and the know the gun collector be it they are in the area and can find out whats up. I cant see your mass murder buy 3 ar-15s. Its not realitic, but buying some cheap Hi-point pistols i can see that.

I don't mind a limit being imposed if there is a reasonable suspicion of the purchase, I have two requirements that need to be satisfied for me to be satisfied:
1) Due process and information gathering must be followed explicitly
2) If the multi-gun sale is denied, the reasons must be stated clearly in writing and fully explained to the purchaser.

 

[scourge99]

I don't see a difference in buying one gun or 500. It only takes one gun to kill the same amount of people as 500 guns.

If joe bob buys 5 junk guns it doesn't make him more likely to kill more people. One gun can do the same as 5.

 

[alphieb]

danarhea;1057534342

I have a few friends who believe in gun control, but when push comes to shove the reason is because they are afraid of guns, will never own one, and don't want others to own one either. This is also unfortunate. For them, I would recommend one of the various gun safety courses that are around. If you learn responsibility, those guns become a friend instead of an enemy.

Sometimes, they have people in their homes with access to them that are not responsible. That is how they end up in the wrong hands. Gangs are killing each other daily.

 

[Dr_Patrick]

Sometimes, they have people in their homes with access to them that are not responsible. That is how they end up in the wrong hands. Gangs are killing each other daily.

And do you think that gun control laws will somehow prevent these gangs from getting guns and killing each other? Plus, even if it were possible to do it there are a fair number of other deadly weapons out there that are completely legal. Should we ban those as well?

 

[alphieb]

And do you think that gun control laws will somehow prevent these gangs from getting guns and killing each other? Plus, even if it were possible to do it there are a fair number of other deadly weapons out there that are completely legal. Should we ban those as well?

Well, it would be kind of hard to do a drive by shooting with a knife:roll: And yes, the fewer the guns the harder they will be to obtain.

 

[Dr_Patrick]

Well, it would be kind of hard to do a drive by shooting with a knife:roll: And yes, the fewer the guns the harder they will be to obtain.

Yes, because drive by shootings are the only method of gang killings. It sounds to me like you've been watching too many movies. Personally, I think it's foolish to blame the problems of the world on inanimate objects. Besides, what makes you think that criminals won't find illegal methods to get guns? All this would do is restrict gun use for law abiding citizens.

 

[scourge99]

Yes, because drive by shootings are the only method of gang killings. It sounds to me like you've been watching too many movies. Personally, I think it's foolish to blame the problems of the world on inanimate objects. Besides, what makes you think that criminals won't find illegal methods to get guns? All this would do is restrict gun use for law abiding citizens.

Mexico is a good example. Guns are banned there yet there is lots of gun crime.

Gun bans aren't effective. They are even less effective when bordering countries do not have bans. If we banned guns in a state all you have to do is drive a bit to get a gun. If we banned it in the US now you just have to import one from Canada; not a difficult task.

Bannings guns to stop violence is an ideal solution for an ideal world. Too bad we don't live in an ideal world.

 

[alphieb]

Yes, because drive by shootings are the only method of gang killings. It sounds to me like you've been watching too many movies. Personally, I think it's foolish to blame the problems of the world on inanimate objects. Besides, what makes you think that criminals won't find illegal methods to get guns? All this would do is restrict gun use for law abiding citizens.

Nope, I watch the news and hear about all too many kids going to school with guns and shooting people. The problem is crazy people shouldn't have ANY access to "objects".