What are the acceptable limits of the 2nd Amendment?

[August]

Originally Posted by Rilder

To be fair, most hunting these days is done by barbarians, with full fridges/freezers, who just want to go out and kill a living thing for fun and pleasure.

The demonizing begins already.

One doesn't really "need" to hunt, right?

[Cybermat47]

Originally Posted by August

The demonizing begins already.

One doesn't really "need" to hunt, right?

I'm not really fond of hunting, but it would be a good skill to have if I got lost in the wild.

[Sailor Steve]

Rilder, please read:

Originally Posted by TarJak

This is meant to be a serious discussion on the law and not an argument for or against the bearing of arms as that right is already understood.

Originally Posted by Rilder

To be fair, most hunting these days is done by barbarians, with full fridges/freezers, who just want to go out and kill a living thing for fun and pleasure.

Lets ban fishing then.
We can't have those anglers enjoying themselves can we.

[Armistead]

Our county and the next one has mass hunting land, private and public, bout are rather poor counties. They're several drop freezers where many hunters take their kills and give them to the poor for food. I seldom hunt, but when I did, all but one deer I shot was given to the poor.

[Platapus]

Meanwhile on 10 Jan 13, "The Former Presidents Protection Act of 2012) was signed in to law

http://www.govtrack.us/congress/bills/112/hr6620

Giving former presidents Secret Service protection for life.

If I had USSS protection for life, I might think that personal gun ownership is not necessary too.

[Stealhead]

Originally Posted by Armistead

Our county and the next one has mass hunting land, private and public, bout are rather poor counties. They're several drop freezers where many hunters take their kills and give them to the poor for food. I seldom hunt, but when I did, all but one deer I shot was given to the poor.

From I understand in many states the game wardens have contacts with groups that will take game so when they confiscate illegally gathered game once they gather the evidence they give the good meat away of course only with fresh kills.

Myself when I have extra I will give it friends and neighbors.In my area there is no group that actively takes game though if you gave them some that was already to go and butchered they would take it.I hunt boars myself so I suppose that a Jew or Muslim is out of luck.

[Armistead]

Originally Posted by Stealhead

From I understand in many states the game wardens have contacts with groups that will take game so when they confiscate illegally gathered game once they gather the evidence they give the good meat away of course only with fresh kills.

Myself when I have extra I will give it friends and neighbors.In my area there is no group that actively takes game though if you gave them some that was already to go and butchered they would take it.I hunt boars myself so I suppose that a Jew or Muslim is out of luck.

I was lived in the woods hunting, I like most wild game, but only a few parts of deer, mostly the loin. I bet I turned over 30 plus deer to food banks for the poor. I do love a good rabbit....

I caught Pierce Morgan on CNN again last night, still on his gun crusade, inviting pro gun people on his show, but never letting them get a complete sentence out before he goes nuts....

[Stealhead]

Seems like every one loves backstrap when it comes to venison.I agree with you hare is pretty damn good.I use the term hare because I find that a hare tastes
much better than a farm raised rabbit any day of the week.I have have eaten hare from the US,Germany and Italy. Italian hare was the best is was a Corsican hare and
fresh as well a little old Italian farmer had shot them the previous day I was invited to come eat with his family the dog got some as well for his assistance.

[Cybermat47]

Originally Posted by Armistead

I caught Pierce Morgan on CNN again last night, still on his gun crusade, inviting pro gun people on his show, but never letting them get a complete sentence out before he goes nuts....

Is that guy actually trying to get more supporters that way?

[ETR3(SS)]

From what I've hear about this Morgan the Brits didn't like him so they sent him across the pond. I think he was meant for Canada and ended up here instead.

[geetrue]

Originally Posted by TarJak

In terms of federal laws, where do you think the limits will lie for restrictions on particular weapons/classes of weapon?

There are already limitations on full automatic, certain classes of firearm including RPG's, etc. Where do you think these will land with the proposed changes?

The news today was that VP Biden has a plan to limit the kinds of guns you may purcahse that are the same kind being used in these terrible crimes from Arizona to Colorado to New England area.

He is also recomending limits on clips capicity to be limited to ten rounds.

They say these laws can be passed at the top levels of our country without public approval. I'm no really sure about that, but I do know the president is not running for office, perhaps he really does feel strongly about doing something.

Seems impossible to me ... How do you stop mental illness that constantly tries to figure out to murder someone and get the attention that particular person is really after.

Have you ever really seen somone that has Alzheimer’s disease and dementia?

They will try to untie the knots that bind them all day till they succeed.

Same with these mental ill people if they even know someone with guns they will figure out a way to obtain them and then use them for whatever it takes to gradifiy their senses.

What I want to know is what happens to people that already have these guns and the clips that may or may not become available in the near future?

Surely everyone won't have to march down to their nearest police station and turn them in.

We are talking tens of thousands of clips and semi-automatic guns in private hands.

It is almost impossible to stop what is going on and and no matter what they pass nothing would've stopped that crazy teen from killing his mother to obtain his guns and kill all of those poor innocent children ... not one law that is.

One armed teacher nearby would've saved perhaps half of the casualities, but not all.

[Stealhead]

Originally Posted by geetrue

The news today was that VP Biden has a plan to limit the kinds of guns you may purcahse that are the same kind being used in these terrible crimes from Arizona to Colorado to New England area.

He is also recomending limits on clips capicity to be limited to ten rounds.

They say these laws can be passed at the top levels of our country without public approval. I'm no really sure about that, but I do know the president is not running for office, perhaps he really does feel strongly about doing something.

Seems impossible to me ... How do you stop mental illness that constantly tries to figure out to murder someone and get the attention that particular person is really after.

Have you ever really seen somone that has Alzheimer’s disease and dementia?

They will try to untie the knots that bind them all day till they succeed.

Same with these mental ill people if they even know someone with guns they will figure out a way to obtain them and then use them for whatever it takes to gradifiy their senses.

What I want to know is what happens to people that already have these guns and the clips that may or may not become available in the near future?

Surely everyone won't have to march down to their nearest police station and turn them in.

We are talking tens of thousands of clips and semi-automatic guns in private hands.

It is almost impossible to stop what is going on and and no matter what they pass nothing would've stopped that crazy teen from killing his mother to obtain his guns and kill all of those poor innocent children ... not one law that is.

One armed teacher nearby would've saved perhaps half of the casualities, but not all.

My guess is that they would(notice i did not use will) wind up grandfathering in already produced magazines just like they did with previous bans.Even that New York ban makes it crime only if you happen to get caught with an illegal magazine so a smart New York gun owner would move to another state if they can not do this then they just keep their high cap magazines out of sight.

It will be nearly impossible to pass any such laws through congress though and even if they did there are more than enough states that would not ratify.That leaves an executive order but those can be vetoed by Congress 2/3 majority.I think in the end what they will wind up with is some sort unilateral requirement on back ground checks right now private sales and in some states sales at guns shows do not require a back ground check.In a way this is good for any gun store because they would be the broker of the back ground check which gives them the chance to sell something else to the person wishing to purchase the firearm and at least the gun store gets a fee for the background check and most likely some will try to get the person to buy some better firearm than the one they are about to buy from the private seller I can see that.

To be honest right now I wish I had about two dozen AR-15s if i did I'd sell them for two grand to all the yahoos just now deciding to buy one because it is trendy.$2,000 is the going rate for a AR15 right now.A buddy said he saw a guy selling used ones for $1500 at a gun show which is what a good one made by Colt or Rock River used to go for new two years ago depending on what you ordered.I have about 50 30 and 20 round STANAGs that I do not have need for that have never been used. I was on a job the other day this guy wanted some so I said I have brand new ones he said name your price I said $30 each for a 20 rounder $50 each for a 30 rounder half jokingly and he said yes and bought 3 30 rounders from me $150.00 dollars for magazines that I paid about $8.00 a pop for when I was in high school.

[TarJak]

Originally Posted by geetrue

What I want to know is what happens to people that already have these guns and the clips that may or may not become available in the near future?

Surely everyone won't have to march down to their nearest police station and turn them in.

We are talking tens of thousands of clips and semi-automatic guns in private hands.

You are talking millions of semi-automatic rifles: http://www.slate.com/blogs/crime/201...n_america.html

A November 2012 Congressional Research Service report found that, as of 2009, there were approximately 310 million firearms in the United States: “114 million handguns, 110 million rifles, and 86 million shotguns.” However, author William J. Krouse went on to note that “data are not available on the number of ‘assault weapons’ in private possession or available for sale, but one study estimated that 1.5 million assault weapons were privately owned in 1994.

Even if you say only 2% of the 110 million rifles are in the banned categories you are still talking about 2.2 million guns plus all the mags to go with them. I've said elsewhere that I can't see the US being able to afford to run a buy back of these weapons as at below market rate of $1500 per weapon you'd be talking a cost of $3.3bn plus mag costs. If there are more than that then the math gets worse for the Treasury. Nothing in comparison to the deficit mind, but can you see Congress passing another $3bn plus in the current economic climate? Not to mention the bleating that will come from the manufacturers about jobs etc.

Originally Posted by Stealhead

My guess is that they would(notice i did not use will) wind up grandfathering in already produced magazines just like they did with previous bans.Even that New York ban makes it crime only if you happen to get caught with an illegal magazine so a smart New York gun owner would move to another state if they can not do this then they just keep their high cap magazines out of sight.

It will be nearly impossible to pass any such laws through congress though and even if they did there are more than enough states that would not ratify.That leaves an executive order but those can be vetoed by Congress 2/3 majority.I think in the end what they will wind up with is some sort unilateral requirement on back ground checks right now private sales and in some states sales at guns shows do not require a back ground check.

And so the US will go around the same buoy again with the next shooting of children.

So how does the Congress veto look in the current make-up? If it goes along party lines then the executive order would stand would it not? If its a conscience vote then I'd say its up in the air.

[Stealhead]

The US Congress is expert in going around buoys on most every matter I don't see why that would change.Also the general public does not support total bans as I understand universal background checks are most widely supported.

Honestly banning certain firearms is not going to stop anyone from shooting children or anyone for that matter.A person like that will find a way people in China run into schools and stab kids to death.If you made magazine size limited then a person simply carries more magazines. If you ban all guns they'll use a knife or some other weapon or make some type of bomb.

No offense but from what I understand Australia seems to be very much a nanny state they even have restrictions on what can be in video games and entertainment.No thanks I say I'll take the risks of having a little more freedom myself.