Joe Perez

iTrader: (8)

But they weren't purchased by the 16 year old kids. They were purchased by their parents / grandparents, who are entirely able to circumnavigate whatever bureaucratic and financial obstacles might be placed in the way.

Granted, if you were to outlaw firearm ownership completely, then school shootings would probably decrease, or possibly even cease if the police were actually successful in removing all firearms from the hands of private citizens. But I don't believe that any congress would be successful in outlawing firearm ownership completely. And there's the catch- so long as it is legal to purchase and own firearms of any kind, then a small subset of the population (who are not traditional criminals in the sense of gang members, burglars / robbers, members of the drug trade, etc.) will indeed obtain and use them to commit what we class as the "crazy & random" crimes- school / workplace shootings, climbing bell towers, and so on.

I honestly don't buy the hype concerning so-called assault rifles. In all seriousness, put yourself, for a moment, into the shoes of a depressed 16 year old kid who is planning to lay waste to the classroom. Presume that you have access to your grandad's closet which contains a number of "conventional" handguns, a couple of shotguns and sporting rifles, as well as an 9mm Uzi SMG, a MAC-10, and an MP-5. Obviously, you are going to grab from the latter group simply because they have a considerable coolness factor to them.

Consider however that these weapons do not exist. You're not likely going to say "well, **** it then" and go back to being stuffed into lockers. You'll happily select from the assortment of handguns, be they semi-automatics, double action revolvers, whatever.

I'll never forgot one day, back in high school physics class, when were were talking about parabolic trajectories and the teacher (jokingly) asked "Does anybody happen to have a crossbow with them?" Dennis Sink (who today would probably be flagged for special attention, as he did in fact play D&D, wear trenchcoats, etc) calmly got up and went out to his truck in the parking lot, returning a few minutes later with a very nice compound crossbow and several bolts. Understand that he had to walk down a very long corridor on his way back in, and doubltless passed others in the hall while carrying the weapon. Nobody freaked out, and nobody got arrested however- we just went outside and upended a large, into which Mr. Tidwell proceeded to fire the crossbow several times from a distance at various angles of inclination and from various heights.

y8s

iTrader: (8)

i'm only jumping in here cuz my name came up.

for the record, i'm not anti-gun. i'd probably own some if I had a reason or more inclination. my dad offered to sell me some of his but i honestly didn't have a good enough reason to own them so I said no. my sis who lives in SF wants his 9 though...

really, any gun (or car, whatev) can be lethal. so banning some types is somewhat misguided. i prefer the background checks and waiting periods. if I'm really into guns, I am hardly imposed upon by waiting two weeks for whatever gun.

and it's true, gun control doesn't stop illegal gun sales. DC's murder rate has been astronomical even with a gun ban. I've never lived in a city and heard more gunshots than when I lived in Southeast DC!

so write your congress peeps and tell them what you really want and wouldn't mind compromising on so they know how to make legislation.



and get back on topic!

Joe Perez

iTrader: (8)

Well, I both agree and disagree.

On the matter of an armed citizenry keeping the government at bay, you're 100% correct. The second amendment was written back when there wasn't much of a practical distinction between "The People" and "The Militia", and when, in terms of land warfare anyway, the weapons likely to be owned and kept by private citizens (muzzle-loading rifles, non-repeating handguns, etc) were the exact same ones used by the army. Today, however, it's just not a fair comparison. How many private citizens do you know who own Apache helicopters, cruise missiles, Abrams tanks, etc?


On the matter of keeping criminals at bay, I have a strongly different outlook. There is sufficient historical data available on the subject to lead me to believe that there is a strong bias towards "favorable" outcomes (attacker driven off, disabled, or killed, with reduced or zero loss to victim) in situations involving an attempted assault, theft, or burglary where either the target of the crime or a proximate third-party bystander was in possession of a handgun and competent in its use, relative to those situations in which the victim was unarmed. I also believe that if a larger percentage of citizens carried firearms and were skilled in their use, that the number of both attempted and successful crimes in the above listed categories would decrease in a manner proportional to the percentage of armed citizens, approaching (but not quite reaching) zero as handgun ownership approached 100%.


The only way for bans on the private ownership of guns can reduce crime is if law enforcement is able to act with a high degree of efficiency in applying mass surveillance techniques and proactively preventing criminal activity, rather than responding to it. Without commenting one way or the other on the effectiveness of any particular law enforcement agency, it can be broadly observed that the ability of a law enforcement agency to operate in such a capacity somewhat mirrors the degree to which the society in which they operate resembles a fascist and / or police state.

Ben

iTrader: (33)

Supporting evidence

mandatory gun ownership:
Kennesaw Crime Statistics (GA) - CityRating.com
gun ban:
Washington Crime Statistics (DC) - CityRating.com

25 years murder-free in 'Gun Town USA'
Crime Rate Plummets in Kennesaw, GA

patsmx5

iTrader: (16)

Exactly.

kotomile

iTrader: (24)

elesjuan

iTrader: (11)

Picture you're a criminal walking down the street looking for a victim. Now, you see three guys walking along none know each other, or you. Two of the guys have very large and very visible pistols holstered on their hip and the third does not. Tell me.. who do you think twice about ******* with? The unassuming guy or the two with guns bigger than yourself?

In 2004 a friend and myself were held at gunpoint for over an hour by some crazy pipehead and I'd have given my right ******** to produce my pistol and remove us from the situation. Since then I've become a HUGE advocate for Conceal and Carry laws, and even straight up Unconcealed carry. Living in this major city area and often driving around in a pretty flashy red sports car I'd personally feel much better having a tool to possibly defend myself if attacked.

Back on topic of Assault weapons; Currently I don't own an assault weapon but have plans on the acquisition of one. The thought has even entered my mind of application to acquire a fully automatic rifle, I think it'd be a lot of fun.

A Couple pictures from our last outing with an FFL:




Do I *NEED* any of those weapons? Excuse me, Firearms? A Firearm is not a weapon until its used in a crime. Not really, but anyone who has ever had the ability to fire a fully automatic .223, .45ACP, 9mm pistol.. Its a LOT of fun!

The other thing about home / self defense. I wouldn't even bother pulling an assault rifle for any sort of self defense, I'd hate to end up shooting my neighbor through the perp laying dead in my front yard. A .357 magnum or buckshot in a shotgun is plenty effective in my opinion.

cueball1

iTrader: (13)

Shotgun is ideal home weapon if you have room to manuver. For the pistol I have it loaded with the "safe" rounds that dissintegrate. Not only will they not kill your neighbor as they come apart when they hit something substantial like the wall of your house, glass window, etc. they are more effective when you hit what you are aiming at. About 500 little pieces of lead coming apart inside your torso will ruin your day.

olderguy

iTrader: (19)

wcbstv.com - Police: 1 Dead After Woman Runs Down Attackers

BenR

iTrader: (2)

No, I already have enough firearms.

I'd kinda like to have a pistol, but I always balk when it comes down to it because being left handed and right eye dominant I'd have better luck throwing it at a target. Rocks are much cheaper.

olderguy

iTrader: (19)

Grenades are better.

Mach929

iTrader: (3)

it sucks i can't really spend the money right now or there's a few i'd be buying. fortunately a friend of mine has many new toys i can use at my disposal. I fear they may outlaw certain ammunitions in the future too so potentially some guns would become very expensive to shoot

Ben

iTrader: (33)

expect ammunition in general to get much more expensive. that will be much simpler for the left to accomplish while appearing to be moderate and pro 2nd.

Joe Perez

iTrader: (8)

Awaiting thread titled "Who here does their own reloads?" in 5... 4... 3... 2...

l_bader

It all depends on how the Economy continues to tank and how far I can pare down the kid's (and wife's) Christmas lists.

(I've got my eye on another AR-10...)

elesjuan

iTrader: (11)

Starting to sound like it might finally be cheaper soon...

trito

iTrader: (1)

I'm not against banning all guns, and I'm sure Obama isn't aiming for that too. What I'm for is banning assault rifles and semi automatic weapons.

If a criminal breaks into your house, you're not going to exchange 200 rounds of amo on eachother. Most likely there will be in a couple of fire shot and either one of you two are dead or he ran away. I don't see any good justification for owning these types of weapons other than purely entertainment value.

BenR

iTrader: (2)

I swear I just use them for hunting. They're perfect for quail.

elesjuan

iTrader: (11)

So either one of those things here...


1. You need to brush up on your gun lingo and learn a little more?
or
2. You're for banning all guns except pump-action shotguns and revolvers?

First off, 98% of violet gun crimes involve HAND GUNS, not "assault rifles." Bill Clinton's idea that "Assault Rifles" were for sale on hotdog stands on every corner of America is absurd and Insulting.

Semi-Automatic is a pistol, rifle, or gun that fires one shot per one trigger depression. Maybe you're talking about "Fully Automatic" where one trigger depression fires multiple rounds? If so, they've been banned since 1934 (National Firearms Act - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia) However you can still purchase one if the FBI, ATF, Sheriff, and local Police Chief sign off on your ownership, along with a 200$ "tax" stamp.

trito

iTrader: (1)

According to Wiki it's has a cartridge. If you have a gun just to protect your house, a revolver is sufficient. Semi-automatic weapons are easier to reload and can hold more rounds.

Semi-automatic pistol - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Revolver - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia