Tippmann Pneumatics Inc. Homepage
  FAQ FAQ  Forum Search   Register Register  Login Login

Near Future & Gun Control

 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <1 678910>
Author
tallen702 View Drop Down
Platinum Member
Platinum Member
Avatar
Strike 1 - Swearing on Facebook

Joined: 10 June 2002
Location: Under Your Bed
Status: Offline
Points: 10951
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote tallen702 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 22 December 2012 at 8:05am
Originally posted by usafpilot07 usafpilot07 wrote:

It bothers me that when talking about limiting law abiding citizens' constitutional rights, it is apparently their job to justify that right, and they are treated as the dangerous ones instead of vice-versa.




Also, I want to know why all the major news organizations give lip service to the mental health component of all of this, but continue to assault law abiding gun owners but fail to even mention this outside of the local Connecticut CBS affiliate: http://connecticut.cbslocal.com/tag/connecticut-senate-bill-452/

We continue to give these kinds of killers the 15 minutes of fame and the immortality attached to their infamy because it drives ratings. Edward R. Murrow is rolling over in his grave right now.
<Removed overly wide sig. Tsk, you know better.>
Back to Top
agentwhale007 View Drop Down
Platinum Member
Platinum Member
Avatar
Forum's Vladimir Lenin

Joined: 20 June 2002
Location: GNV FLA
Status: Offline
Points: 11696
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote agentwhale007 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 22 December 2012 at 9:33am
Originally posted by Kayback Kayback wrote:


Ironically enough I agree with stricter gun control. I'm of the opinion it should be like a driver license though. There isn't anything preventing you buying what you want or need once you have proven to be safe and sound (sometimes not even that) from an auto dealership.

Now we're getting somewhere, because this is the core of what I agree with as well. 

Would you be willing to say that at least notarized paperwork and a small fee must exist for person-to-person sales of a handgun (Because I could really care less about ARs or shotguns or any kind of long gun) if I drop the associated wait time and need for a lawyer in the proposed Agentwhale Guns N' Stuff legislation. 

And on your topic of increased enforcement of law, I also concur, and I hope to include increased sentencing guidelines for those who commit violent crime with an unlicensed handgun. 


"So when Romney wins in a landslide, what will the liberal media do?"
This Ma**edited**hine Kills **edited**as**edited**ists.




Back to Top
agentwhale007 View Drop Down
Platinum Member
Platinum Member
Avatar
Forum's Vladimir Lenin

Joined: 20 June 2002
Location: GNV FLA
Status: Offline
Points: 11696
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote agentwhale007 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 22 December 2012 at 9:47am
Originally posted by Kayback Kayback wrote:

 
Actually, it is true. Case in point it is illegal to murder a class room full of children. The laws in place did nothing to stop it. How will adding MORE laws work?
 

How laws work in society is a very complex issue that really doesn't work by just saying "Well someone broke a law, therefore law has no preventive value." Simply because a high-attention case comes about, like a massacre, doesn't indicate that nobody pays attention to laws against murder. It's taking it to absolutes, philosophically, with ends that lead to either 1) The end of all law because nobody pays attention to it anyway (Which is itself untrue), or 2) The laws we have now are frozen in time because all we need is more enforcement (When law itself acts in multiple ways -- as a deterrent, as a legal mechanic for enforcement, and as a way to change societal behavior long-term). 

The concept of "law" and how it works in society is a really in-depth thing that we could probably have a whole thread discussing (Not that I'd complain), but it's silly to condense it down into this myopic statement of "Law does ____ therefore more law won't work." 
"So when Romney wins in a landslide, what will the liberal media do?"
This Ma**edited**hine Kills **edited**as**edited**ists.




Back to Top
agentwhale007 View Drop Down
Platinum Member
Platinum Member
Avatar
Forum's Vladimir Lenin

Joined: 20 June 2002
Location: GNV FLA
Status: Offline
Points: 11696
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote agentwhale007 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 22 December 2012 at 9:57am
Originally posted by usafpilot07 usafpilot07 wrote:

It bothers me that when talking about limiting law abiding citizens' constitutional rights, it is apparently their job to justify that right, and they are treated as the dangerous ones instead of vice-versa.

Constitutional challenges are incredibly important to a functioning legislative and legal intersection in a democratic society. 

I believe that my idea for better gun laws in the U.S. falls into the guidelines of defining "well-regulated" in the decision of DC v. Heller, but that's just my opinion. 
"So when Romney wins in a landslide, what will the liberal media do?"
This Ma**edited**hine Kills **edited**as**edited**ists.




Back to Top
oldsoldier View Drop Down
Platinum Member
Platinum Member

Frequent target of infantile obsessives

Joined: 10 June 2002
Status: Offline
Points: 6544
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote oldsoldier Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 22 December 2012 at 10:53am
Do we actually have an idea of the total number of gun control laws already on the books, is enforcement overencumbered with too many to enforce effectively?
I know NYS has volumns of gun contol 'laws' on the books, and a system that fails upon itself, see NYS pistol permits.
In Nebraska I got a purchase permit as required, for long arms as well as pistol. Application was a background check, fingerprint, photo for record not permit itself (should be on purchase permit so seller knows buyer IMO). To purchase a firearm you have to have this 'purchase' permit and County Sheriff notifacation of purchase card filled out by dealer, as well as the Federal Forms.

Nebraska also has a voluntary identifacation process for firearms owned in case of theft. At the local Sheriff Office you can 'register' any and all of your firearms for insurance and identifacation purposes.

Now in talking to a friend who is a Sheriff in Saunders County I asked what is the most comman semi-auto in the county. A couple of taps on his PC and the answer the Ruger 10/22, he did not give me the numbers, just that this gun is targeted from what he understands in the semi-auto ban because it will meet the criteria as an 'assault weapon'.
This is the prefered 'varmit' rifle on the farms out here.

How much more 'well regulated' can we get, enforce whats on the books already, then let's throw more laws on the books once it is proved you can enforce the ones already there.
Back to Top
agentwhale007 View Drop Down
Platinum Member
Platinum Member
Avatar
Forum's Vladimir Lenin

Joined: 20 June 2002
Location: GNV FLA
Status: Offline
Points: 11696
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote agentwhale007 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 22 December 2012 at 11:18am
Originally posted by oldsoldier oldsoldier wrote:

Do we actually have an idea of the total number of gun control laws already on the books, is enforcement overencumbered with too many to enforce effectively?
 

The necessary evil of "state's rights" is inefficiency and lack of consistency. 

Quote I know NYS has volumns of gun contol 'laws' on the books, and a system that fails upon itself, see NYS pistol permits.
 

I think New York does a lot of things right with their handgun laws, but they also have the issue of NYC being NYC. 

Quote A couple of taps on his PC and the answer the Ruger 10/22
 

From what I've found, on the national level, the most-used firearm in homicides and violent crime is the .38 revolver of varying sizes and brands. I thought that was interesting. 

Quote How much more 'well regulated' can we get,
 

This is just me speaking in favor of my own personal opinion -- It's not as much about adding more regulation onto existing regulation, it's changing existing regulation to fit the environment in which we live. Audit the system, see what works, scrap what doesn't, build up what does. I'd probably favor scrapping registration and licensing for most rifles and shotguns, because as I posted before, they don't really contribute much more to the homicide rate than knives, which we certainly don't require licensing for. 

To me, handguns are the issue. When I talk about licensing and registering, application of fees for ownership, etc., I'm really speaking of handguns. 


"So when Romney wins in a landslide, what will the liberal media do?"
This Ma**edited**hine Kills **edited**as**edited**ists.




Back to Top
impulse418 View Drop Down
Gold Member
Gold Member
Avatar

Joined: 25 November 2010
Location: Phx, AZ
Status: Offline
Points: 1651
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote impulse418 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 22 December 2012 at 12:10pm
I feel that we need special permits, to question our government. To own a blog that involves politics. The person needs to have a back round check. And psych evaluation. We don't need any more crazies spreading deadly misinformation.

These sound like ” reasonable” laws to me.
Back to Top
impulse418 View Drop Down
Gold Member
Gold Member
Avatar

Joined: 25 November 2010
Location: Phx, AZ
Status: Offline
Points: 1651
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote impulse418 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 22 December 2012 at 12:34pm
How about all those who want to practice religion, need to pass a back round check and psych eval. Need to make sure they aren't an extremist.

Why even have the 4th amendment. It only protects criminals.
Back to Top
Kayback View Drop Down
Platinum Member
Platinum Member
Avatar
Ask me about my Kokido

Joined: 25 July 2002
Location: South Africa
Status: Offline
Points: 4028
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Kayback Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 22 December 2012 at 12:45pm
Aren't you the same guys who were arguing with me about weed? I said it should be punishable because it is illegal to use, yet many here were saying it is a harmless drug and shouldn't be illegal in the first place, so they support the illegal use of it and think cops should just look the other way?

KBK
Pedicabo ego vos et irrumabo. H = 2
Back to Top
agentwhale007 View Drop Down
Platinum Member
Platinum Member
Avatar
Forum's Vladimir Lenin

Joined: 20 June 2002
Location: GNV FLA
Status: Offline
Points: 11696
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote agentwhale007 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 22 December 2012 at 12:55pm
Originally posted by Kayback Kayback wrote:

Aren't you the same guys who were arguing with me about weed?

That doesn't sound like me. 
"So when Romney wins in a landslide, what will the liberal media do?"
This Ma**edited**hine Kills **edited**as**edited**ists.




Back to Top
oldsoldier View Drop Down
Platinum Member
Platinum Member

Frequent target of infantile obsessives

Joined: 10 June 2002
Status: Offline
Points: 6544
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote oldsoldier Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 22 December 2012 at 12:55pm
Again it is the culture. From a law enforcement view more impared drivers on the road, in addition to the alcohol related imparment is the issue. But of course the same individuals that say we need more gun control are the same ones that load up on alcohol, or 'weed', to the point of being impared, get in thier auto and drive home and then go "OK we are good nothing happened", The fact that they violated exsisting law is not even relevent in thier minds because they have the 'right' to do it if , and have n o intention or desire of violent acts on thier fellow man, are far more a threat to the society according to the rhetoric of the day, than they are as they drive impared and think nothing of it, because that behavior seems to be accepted in our culture, unless you get caught, or kill someone, then it is someone else that made you do it.



Edited by oldsoldier - 22 December 2012 at 12:57pm
Back to Top
impulse418 View Drop Down
Gold Member
Gold Member
Avatar

Joined: 25 November 2010
Location: Phx, AZ
Status: Offline
Points: 1651
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote impulse418 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 22 December 2012 at 1:01pm
Cops use to look the other way, when it came to gun laws. If you were white. Guns laws are the only Jim Crow laws, still on the books.
Back to Top
agentwhale007 View Drop Down
Platinum Member
Platinum Member
Avatar
Forum's Vladimir Lenin

Joined: 20 June 2002
Location: GNV FLA
Status: Offline
Points: 11696
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote agentwhale007 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 22 December 2012 at 1:04pm
Originally posted by oldsoldier oldsoldier wrote:

But of course the same individuals

So there is a correlation between supporters of changed gun legislation and those who drive impaired? 

I've not heard of this idea before. 
"So when Romney wins in a landslide, what will the liberal media do?"
This Ma**edited**hine Kills **edited**as**edited**ists.




Back to Top
oldsoldier View Drop Down
Platinum Member
Platinum Member

Frequent target of infantile obsessives

Joined: 10 June 2002
Status: Offline
Points: 6544
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote oldsoldier Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 22 December 2012 at 1:19pm
You are a narrow minded journalist aren't you. As a culture alcohol and drug abuse which are a criminal act are accepted by many who participate in the bahavior. Many are the same individuals who are on board this gun control bandwagon. They will go the the protest, and on thier way home have cocktails and pat each other on the back on how they will change the gun laws, then hop in thier car and drive home impared by alcohol, violating a laa that they really don't intend to obey by thier diliberate action.

Do a ride along on a fri or sat night and watch your local law enforcement deal with your average impared driver, and see if you don't notice a behavior trend. Go to a high end 'Yuppie' drinking establishment and notice the current topic of conversation as they order another dring 'for the road'.

You know better than that. Our culture tends to have no problem controling the behavior of others, as long as that any controled behavior does not affect them.
Back to Top
impulse418 View Drop Down
Gold Member
Gold Member
Avatar

Joined: 25 November 2010
Location: Phx, AZ
Status: Offline
Points: 1651
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote impulse418 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 22 December 2012 at 1:27pm
Alcoholism doesn't discriminate, all walks of life drive drunk.
Back to Top
agentwhale007 View Drop Down
Platinum Member
Platinum Member
Avatar
Forum's Vladimir Lenin

Joined: 20 June 2002
Location: GNV FLA
Status: Offline
Points: 11696
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote agentwhale007 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 22 December 2012 at 1:34pm
Originally posted by oldsoldier oldsoldier wrote:

As a culture alcohol and drug abuse which are a criminal act are accepted by many who participate in the bahavior.

Pardon? 

So, do you have any statistics showing a correlation between those who support changing gun laws and those who drive impaired? Or is this all based on some kind of gut feeling I've been missing? 

I've honestly never heard of this correlation before.
"So when Romney wins in a landslide, what will the liberal media do?"
This Ma**edited**hine Kills **edited**as**edited**ists.




Back to Top
oldsoldier View Drop Down
Platinum Member
Platinum Member

Frequent target of infantile obsessives

Joined: 10 June 2002
Status: Offline
Points: 6544
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote oldsoldier Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 22 December 2012 at 2:00pm
Law 'abiding' citizens who complain about societies and our culture of guns have just as much chance to abuse alcohol, and to 'kill' on our highways. What is the alcohol related highway deaths annually? Are alcohol and 'fast' cars looked at at being banned to prevent thier misuse? Th 99.9% that use 'guns' and have 'guns' and use them legally are now to be criminalized because of the .01% that use them criminally, and will continue to use them criminally no matter what gun laws are passed.

All autos that do over 65mph should also be banned because of the slight chance that auto will be abused and one or many will die as a result, makes as much sense.

Also alcohol and any mind altering or imparing drug should not be legal, because of the havoc wrought by the small percentage that abuse the items and kill others. Drug related crimes and crimes committed under the influance are how high? We need to control the abuse of these substances too as long as we are at at. Fiorst guns, then sharp tools, then blunt tools, and we will control and change man's behavior and no one will die by a violent criminal act.
Ever see a head split open by a 9 iron in a domestic where alcohol was a factor, the victim is quite dead, the perp is remorsefull and his lawyer will prove that the abuse he suffered as a child was the reason, not the alcohol, or whatever drove him to kill in that moment of time. And a 9 iron to the head makes more of a mess than a 9mm to the head.
Back to Top
rednekk98 View Drop Down
Platinum Member
Platinum Member
Avatar
Dead man...

Joined: 02 July 2002
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 8925
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote rednekk98 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 22 December 2012 at 2:21pm
I'm fairly OK with my States licensing and registration laws and safe storage.

To get a license you need to take an approved class that covers the firearms you want to own, and most classes cover pistols etc.

You then apply at your local PD, fill out maybe 3 pages of paperwork and get fingerprinted and a photo taken. The information they check goes above and beyond anything the Feds require, if you've ever been in court for any reason (other than a minor traffic offense) you need to state it. They will still yell at you if you don't mention a traffic offense, and look at a supposedly sealed juvinial record. You must state a reason for the permit (hunting, target shooting, carrying large sums of cash, etc) and restrictions can be placed on your permit for these purposes. There are four types of permits. One for mace and stun-guns which is "shall-issue" and actually cheaper than it used to be, so <$25. Next up is non-high capacity long-guns (5 for shotguns, 10 for rifles, applies only to semi-auto actions) permits can be issued at age 15, when you can legally hunt by yourself in this state. Above that is a permit allowing your to purchase or possess non-high capacity long guns and handguns, and then the "Class A" license with allows you to have high capacity firearms, and depending on the restrictions, carry concealed. To purchase ammunition or a firearm I need to show the card, and for firearms purchases, scan my fingerprint or use a PIN.

Creating classes of firearms seems to make sense, and IMO classify handguns and high-capacity semi's the same. 21 to purchase or possess, with a closer look at your background.
Back to Top
impulse418 View Drop Down
Gold Member
Gold Member
Avatar

Joined: 25 November 2010
Location: Phx, AZ
Status: Offline
Points: 1651
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote impulse418 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 22 December 2012 at 3:05pm
That's the great thing about having states. They can decide whether they want strict gun laws or not. CT has pretty strict laws, and still didn't stop this.

There is no need for any more federal intervention. Leave it up to the states. They can look at different states, and decide what model they want. Don't like the laws, move to another state. Whole lot easier than moving to another country.
Back to Top
Linus View Drop Down
Platinum Member
Platinum Member
Avatar
Strike 1 - language 6.29.10

Joined: 10 November 2002
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 7908
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Linus Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 22 December 2012 at 3:48pm
Originally posted by impulse418 impulse418 wrote:

That's the great thing about having states. They can decide whether they want strict gun laws or not. CT has pretty strict laws, and still didn't stop this.

There is no need for any more federal intervention. Leave it up to the states. They can look at different states, and decide what model they want. Don't like the laws, move to another state. Whole lot easier than moving to another country.


And that's my issue with the Fed as of late. Too much intrusion. The Constitution was very clear at what the job was of the federal government... protection from foreign enemies, and controlling foreign affairs. Everything else was pretty much to be left up to the states (Hello, 10th amendment clearly says that).   But alas, more and more dems are trying to use the federal government to get in on the daily lives of people.




As for gun laws... why do you (whale) keep mentioning waiting periods? Waiting periods are all but useless once someone already owns a gun insofar as dems say "It prevents rash decisions by making someone wait a few days before they can get the gun". Sorry, if I already own a gun, why would waiting 7-30 more days prevent me from going on a shooting rampage?

Back to Top
 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <1 678910>
  Share Topic   

Forum Jump Forum Permissions View Drop Down

Forum Software by Web Wiz Forums® version 10.03

This page was generated in 0.203 seconds.