Gun Control thread (merged many)

[Rockstar]

I picked up a Barrett M-95 .50 BMG not too long ago just because I can that and they're a helluva a lot of fun to shoot. Only one range in this area with a 500 yard lane though. Anything less really doesnt make it worth while to expend $80.00 or so dollars in ammo and that's the cheap stuff.



Now that's a shootin' iron!

[Onkel Neal]

Wrong thread, lol

[Rockstar]

well, it does take a great deal gun control on my part when I pull the trigger on that beast.

[August]

Originally Posted by Onkel Neal

I'm not sure that is worth it, especially when there are millions of AR-15 owners like me and August who have never and will never use their weapon in a crime. Probably 99% of all assault weapon owners fit in this category, so is it fair, does it make sense to pounish them, for the insane actions of a tiny few?

Where is Platapus with his Latin warning signature about how "Abuse does not take away from the use"?

The truth is that any right can and is abused. But if we are going to use that fact as an excuse to take away the rights of those who aren't abusing them then that same concept can also be applied to every other so called "right" as well.

For example some people use their right to privacy to hide criminal activity, therefore by this theory that right needs to be, if not outright repealed, then like they are trying to do with the 2A at least legislated into insignificance.

The same concept is already slowly being applied to the right of free speech, the right to assemble, the right to avoid self incrimination and the rest so when a politician says "Rights have Limits" what he really means is the government that was created to safeguard your rights sees itself as more powerful than those rights and therefore can ignore them as it sees fit.

[Onkel Neal]

Reporter admittedly desperate to make Wal-Mart look bad actually shows herself to be irresponsible.

But I had only just finished printing my name when she stopped me and asked whether the address on my license matched my home address. I had moved since I obtained my license, and the addresses didn't match.

Hey lady, don't you know the law requires you to keep your driver's license current? Busted!

[Platapus]

abusus non tollit usum -



Translation: "abuse does not preclude proper use"



A legal maxim in the context of -- A right should NOT be withheld from people on the basis that some tend to abuse that right.

[August]

These Red Flag laws make me wonder.

What is the sense of declaring somebody to be a danger but then only confiscating their guns and just leaving them to their own devices?

In case anyone doesn't know the way these laws work, somebody, a family member, social worker, ex wife, etc makes a claim to a judge that the subject is a danger to themselves or others. The judge issues a confiscation order for the subjects firearms. The cops show up at the subjects home, present the order and demand that the subject surrender all their firearms.

Now here is the strange part.

If the subject complies without resisting then the cops just take the guns and leave him there still depressed or angry or crazy enough to be a danger to themselves or others. Somebody that was supposedly bent on committing suicide or murder is supposedly completely deterred by the lack of a gun. We leave a depressed person with plenty of rope, razor blades and alone standing next to an open window in a room on the top floor of a tall building and we leave a manic free to plot his revenge on those who dropped a dime on him.

Does anyone else see a problem with this?

[Dowly]

Re:suicide


There have been studies that show a gun is an easy way out, because it is sudden and final. Methods that take time carry out or are slower to take effect (drugs for example) and more painful have shown to deter suicidal persons in some cases. I believe the fences at the Golden Gate Bridge were used as an example; the time it takes to climb them gives the person time to rethink about what they are doing.


Of course, if someone REALLY wants to off themself then they'll find a way without a gun.

[Onkel Neal]

Beto O'Rourke: Fines will 'compel' AR-15 owners to turn their guns in

This idiot will start the civil war. Just imagine gun sales if he was to win the Democratic nomination.

O'Rourke claimed a "longtime Republican" spoke to him in the bathroom while they were urinating, telling the Democrat he's all in for the gun confiscation.

"New O'Rourke anecdote: He says a longtime Republican chatted him up today in [Buc-ee's Beaver] bathroom on guns," posted Svitek. "He said, 'This is gonna be strange — not strange that I'm talking to you while we're both at a urinal ... but strange because I'm telling you you're absolutely right on guns.'"

That's the most made up bunch of BS, he's giving Biden a run for his money.

[Commander Wallace]

Originally Posted by August

These Red Flag laws make me wonder.

What is the sense of declaring somebody to be a danger but then only confiscating their guns and just leaving them to their own devices?

In case anyone doesn't know the way these laws work, somebody, a family member, social worker, ex wife, etc makes a claim to a judge that the subject is a danger to themselves or others. The judge issues a confiscation order for the subjects firearms. The cops show up at the subjects home, present the order and demand that the subject surrender all their firearms.

Now here is the strange part.

If the subject complies without resisting then the cops just take the guns and leave him there still depressed or angry or crazy enough to be a danger to themselves or others. Somebody that was supposedly bent on committing suicide or murder is supposedly completely deterred by the lack of a gun. We leave a depressed person with plenty of rope, razor blades and alone standing next to an open window in a room on the top floor of a tall building and we leave a manic free to plot his revenge on those who dropped a dime on him.

Does anyone else see a problem with this?

One problem i see with this August is that the weapon confiscation is without due process. What if someone is angry with someone or has an ax to grind and without cause or exercising malice or extreme prejudice decides to call the police to say someone is a danger to themselves and their community.


The authorities may end up taking weapons that never should have been taken in the first place. If on the other hand, someone is a legitimate dangers, by all means : secure : their weapons and as you said, diffuse the situation and get them the help they need.

[Skybird]

https://translate.google.de/translat...ndsatzfrage%2F

The right to life can not be relativized or questioned by considerations of "social utility". The denial of possession of weapons means favoring violent attacks and thus an attack on the right to life. Therefore, utilitarian considerations on this issue are problematic, because in this way human lives are degraded to the calculation mass. However, according to Hsiao, this conflicts with the fundamental right to life.
(...)
Nevertheless, a life-threatening attack is most effectively countered by the use of force of arms.

[Aktungbby]

Originally Posted by Dowly

Re:suicide
I believe the fences at the Golden Gate Bridge were used as an example; the time it takes to climb them gives the person time to rethink about what they are doing.

WORSE YET: SOME TIME AGO (90'S) I HAD APPLIED FOR A SECURITY POSITION ON THE GOLDEN GATE BRIDGE AND WAS INTERVIEWED BY A PANEL WHO ASKED WHAT I WOULD DO DIFFERENTLY. I ANSWERED DEADPAN "I WOULD OPEN A BUNGEE-CORD CONCESSION AND LET EM 'TRY IT ONCE' MY BARRACK'S HUMOR BEING CORRECT: I WAS OFFERED THE POSITION BUT DECLINED: I DIDN'T WANT 2 B GRAVE-SHIFTS AT 0200 ON HORRIBLE STORMY WINTER NIGHTS!

 

[em2nought]

Originally Posted by Onkel Neal

Beto O'Rourke: Fines will 'compel' AR-15 owners to turn their guns in

This idiot will start the civil war. Just imagine gun sales if he was to win the Democratic nomination.



That's the most made up bunch of BS, he's giving Biden a run for his money.

Beto probably just misunderstood, the dude probably told Beto to go ahead and show up at his door to collect his firearms.

[August]

Originally Posted by Commander Wallace

One problem i see with this August is that the weapon confiscation is without due process. What if someone is angry with someone or has an ax to grind and without cause or exercising malice or extreme prejudice decides to call the police to say someone is a danger to themselves and their community.


The authorities may end up taking weapons that never should have been taken in the first place. If on the other hand, someone is a legitimate dangers, by all means : secure : their weapons and as you said, diffuse the situation and get them the help they need.

I don't like them because of the lack of due process either for the very reasons you mention but I also think that the very idea of red flag laws themselves are faulty. A person is considered to be dangerous enough to disarm but not dangerous enough to even monitor afterward? It doesn't make sense.

[Commander Wallace]

Originally Posted by August

I don't like them because of the lack of due process either for the very reasons you mention but I also think that the very idea of red flag laws themselves are faulty. A person is considered to be dangerous enough to disarm but not dangerous enough to even monitor afterward? It doesn't make sense.

I agree with you on that as well. I think there should be an honest and open dialog regarding weapons and the mentally Ill. Where to even start with something like this. Colt has said they will no longer manufacture the AR-15 for sale to the general public.



The people i know have an odd assortment of weapons they use for hunting and to protect their homes. They are not the danger. It's the crazies out there. It's anyone's guess how anyone would address that.