Topic: Gun control (The official gun thread!)

[Retro Rocket]

Comparing guns to cars is like comparing your wife to a hooker..... I mean seriously

I'm not sure I see your logic in the comparison. The point is that simply because a car can be driven in excess of posted limits, a law abiding citizen doesn't. Whereas, a criminal with no regard for the law does drive the car as fast he/she chooses.

To avoid this opportunity to break the law, why not impose restrictions that limit a cars capacity to the posted speed limits? You object I take it? So do I, but it is a rational argument based upon the same premise that guns by themselves don't harm people. In the hands of ne'er do wells they can inflict damage. As can cars. In fact, cars are probably often used in the commission of a crime but we don't address that issue much. But all of this requires the overt act of a person to choose to ignore the law.

A for my wife being compared to a hooker, oddly, there is much similarity. She sleeps with me for "payment" in terms of housing, food, clothing, luxury items. I guess you're more right than not. Hopefully, she limits her escapades to only this "John" though.

Yes, the irony of that statement hit me as I posted....

[HondaMan]

The principal reason for the peoples right to bear arms and form militias is to defend our own people from an out of control democracy,

Its already out of control mate and nothing is being done and really, nothing can be done with arms, that statement is just plain funny , it really is an American thing, "if it doesn't go our way then we'll just shoot it"....  Thats how the rest of the world sees it....

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4-mYP25kC2Y

[Retro Rocket]

Retro - For all the times we find ourselves on opposite sides of conversations, I think that is the first time we've both laughed a the same thing! Cheers, and good day!

Best-

   I think everyone got that one....

[Hon3ybadger]

So I have a "non political" opinion to share. A gun to me is a tool. Like a parachute or a fire extinguisher. It's something you won't need 99.9% of your life but in that .1% there is no better replacement. For some background I was born and rasied in California. Spent over twenty years down there. In those years I've have to defend myself many times (I honestly lost count) from wrongful gun use. Everything from old farmer John firing rock salt to protect his property to armed robbery and drive-bys by gang members. I choose not to go into details. I agree with many of the guys on here and their views though I have some ideas that might help promote proper gun handling and lower wrongful use.

The last time I bought a gun in Cali it was 2008. When you purchace a gun you have to wait two weeks, What Cali Gov calls (Cool down period) so if you but a gun when your angry with your wife or what not you (hopefully) calm down two weeks later when you pick it up. Also you have to buy a gun lock at the time of pick up. The reasons behind these laws are understandable but I honestly think one step further might help. I say might because the vast number of pro's and con's with it.

My idea is you should only be sold a gun if you can show proof of ownership of an approved GUN safe. Now this would require lots of paperwork and certification of safes, money and time and a bit annoying knowing the state knows you own a safe. But it MIGHT cut down the number of kids getting ahold of guns accidentally and gun theft.

On actual gun control my answer is simple. If you feel you need a concealed weapons permit go get one. Find the weapon that fits you best and become skilled with it. I can proudly say out of all my friends (mostly marines) I'm one of the best shots in the bunch. When it comes to government and the "GUN FREE ZONES" how many bad guys follow the rules? None. When the law abiding citizen leaves his\her gun in the car or at home to enter the GUN FREE" school campus its like taking the sheperd and making him\her just another sheep in the pen. Then comes along a bad guy who knows its a GUN FREE ZONE". To the baddie it means no one will shoot back. Like a wolf in the sheeps pen when the sheperd is away.

Look at it this way, If you were to go hunting and the deer shot back at you, Would you think twice about shooting at them?

[Hon3ybadger]

Calj-- I praise you sir! for you are the few who understand the responsibility and respect guns require. Especially with children. My theory about safes and locking them up is focused at the people (we all know at least one) who want a gun for safety. They buy one, don't ever train with it and put it in their nightstand fully loaded with untrained kids in the house. That drives me nuts! Like you, I started shooting at 4. Learned to respect the power of guns and how to properly handle them.

I moved to Oregon years ago and yes the 15 min background check and purchace of weapon and ammo is amazing. No stinking two week wait.
It is foolish to have that law up here but in Cali it makes sense. 

A odd thought just crossed my mind. When you get your license you have to prove you can safely operate a car. When you buy a gun you don't have to prove anything. It won't affect "gun control" by any means but might reduce stray bullets.

[TwoTired]

It is foolish to have that law up here but in Cali it makes sense. 

No it doesn't.  It is only there to add stigma toward gun owners.

When you get your license you have to prove you can safely operate a car. When you buy a gun you don't have to prove anything. It won't affect "gun control" by any means but might reduce stray bullets.

It is a privilege (not a right) to operate a car on public roads granted by the state.  You can purchase and drive your car without a license or proof of operability, as long as you don't use public thoroughfares.  I don't believe you have to license the car either, if you keep it off public roads.
To buy a gun you have to prove you are a citizen (plus some other hoops to jump though), which under the second amendment to the US Constitution, protects your right to own a gun.    That's the fundamental difference between a "privilege" and a "right".

Requiring a gun safe at time of purchase, only raises the cost of purchase, and oppresses the poor from exercising their right. Or, do you favor only the rich, elite, having access to self defense weapons?
 It may also delay access for a tool which may protect their life.  Ex-spouse threatens to kill their ex-spouse, if the kids are taken away, or they report the recent beating to the cops.  Must wait 10 days (+ the delivery of an approved safe, inspection of premises, etc.) and hope the aggressor "cools off" before having the ability to protect yourself.


I was down at the gun shop/gun range recently and saw a colt 1911 Vietnam war commemorative pistol.  It looks and functions exactly the same as any other 1911, apart from having some engraving on it regarding the commemoration.
I am a Vietnam vet, yet I am not allowed by the state to purchase that pistol, because it is not listed on the state's approved weapon list.  I could buy the standard 1911s they had for sale.  There were many similar guns that could not be sold, as well, due simply because of the fact that the manufacturer didn't submit and pay state approval fees in order to add those particular guns to the list.
The existing laws are there to make guns in California more expensive and add to state coffers.  "Safety" is just the subterfuge needed to assuage the generally uninformed public.

[sniper1]

May I recommend a very well penned book entitled "Unintended Consequences" by John Ross. It I a very good book no matter what side of the fence you may fall on. You may just get a little education about the subjects contained in this forum.

[Hon3ybadger]

Well Two tired you have very valid points. I was below poverty most of my life. I do not favor the rich. And the idea about owning a safe was some crazy thing that passed through my head one day. To revise the comparison between operating a car and operating a gun. Maybe a person applying to get a concealed license should have to qualify to carry in public like if you were to get a driving license to drive in public.

[TwoTired]

I'd still like to know why those who are so willing to deprive law abiding citizens access to their choice of weapons are not willing to have the government limit the speed mechanically on their cars so as not to breach state or national speed limits.

I suspect it has something to do with laws that have an effect on someone else, rather than ones that strike too close to home.   Make "them" pay, "not me" mentality.

Limiting personal freedoms, such as car capability, would effect personal choice as to whether to adhere to laws or not.  Each generation seems to be more willing to give up more freedoms in exchange for less responsibility.

[ttr400]

This is how it works where i live.

http://www.saps.gov.za/services/flash/firearms/faq_applying.php

[BobbyR]

This just hit the wire:

At least 19 stabbed at Pa. school; suspect arrested

USA TODAY  - ‎10 minutes ago‎     
A male student armed with two knives went on a slashing and stabbing rampage at a high school in Murrysville, Pa., Wednesday, injuring at least 19 students before he was subdued and handcuffed, police said.

[TwoTired]

Aren't knives already banned from schools?

[70CB750]

Aren't knives already banned from schools?

Yes, they are.

[BobbyR]

Saw that too. How tragic for those families affected. There is no end to the means by which evil-doers will resort to carry out their evil deeds.

That is the pont. It is the Evil or sickness in people, not the mechanism that does the harm.

[Hon3ybadger]

I carry a knife everywhere. I did everyday in highschool too. Imagine what the news would say if that kid went to my school and tried stabbing me and instead got stuck himself. Same logic goes for guns. I had a english teacher back in the day who always carried a glock in his briefcase. He knew he would go to jail but he was a firm believer in self defence and protection for his students.

[Retro Rocket]

Every "gun-free" zone is an open hunting ground for lunatics. Makes me nuts!

You should probably add, "only in America" I'll say it again, Its a "mentality" not possessed by many other Western countries, its totally different here, massacres or attempted ones seem common place in the US and the stats are there to support it...

[70CB750]

And Germany and Austria and Canada and Norway and ...

[Retro Rocket]

And Germany and Austria and Canada and Norway and ...

I said "common place" I wouldn't call single examples common....

[70CB750]

And Germany and Austria and Canada and Norway and ...

Meanwhile in Australia:

[Retro Rocket]

Your quite welcome to come here and see for yourself mate, I've never heard a gun go off or even seen one in a public place, know anyone who's been shot or even convicted of a gun offense and i grew up on the wrong side of the street with lots of shady associates, if there were any around my neck of the woods I would have seen them, i'm not at all saying that guns weren't around, just absolutely no comparison to the US at all, we don't have the high incarceration rates or crime rates you have in the US and I know no one that feels they need a gun to be safe, no one at all, and if it were the case,  I would live somewhere else....

[Retro Rocket]

The reported crime statistics between our two countries certainly agree with you, Retro. It is an unusual situation here in the States. My sister emigrated to Melbourne many years ago and had nothing but praise for how safe she felt, compared to the decades having lived in Washington, DC where she was victim of violent crime on 3 separate occasions.

Lots of really great things about Australia-

And lots of great things about the US as well, i don't want to sound like i'm US bashing, the point i'm trying to make is that we just don't get the gun mentality thats so prevalent in the US, it just doesn't exist in most other western countries, yeah sure, there's plenty of people that like hunting and going to the range, myself included but we are certainly not gun mad. I saw a political video yesterday from a Republican candidate that only made the news here due to its absurd gun related theme, its so far removed from reality here it just would never happen, this guy comes across as a raving lunatic.....

http://video.au.msn.com/watch/video/9raw-candidate-grins-talking-about-sisters-murder/xlyd4id?cpkey=397f7a20-ff27-4d6e-9af4-3a4c72a610fb%257c%257c%257c%257c

[TwoTired]

One can always find or cherry pick statistics to support ones preconceived notions.

I do recall some who compared gun related crimes between Britain and the US, touting the low rates of Britain, an thereby surmising that Britain had a safer populace due to gun control measures.
  Upon investigation of how the stats were tallied, it was found that US gun related crimes were reported on an any-incident basis.  In the US, if it showed up in a police log, it was tallied.  Gun related deaths, for example, were tallied whether by police action, personal defense, accidental, or criminal perpetration.  Making no differentiation between beneficial gun involvement, negligent action, or detrimental.  Whereas, only gun related crimes that were proved after conviction were tallied in Britain. 

It is easy to argue for one statistic basis over another.  However, it was clear that each set of statistics had different purposes.

In the US, funding dollars were connected to need for correction.  Therefore, it was highly desirable to show alarming rates to bolster departmental funding dollars.
In Britain, in order to show that the police were doing such an excellent job, the numbers were stacked (conviction only) to show how well they were doing and keeping rates low.
I recall reading about a published scandal about how the police in some Brit locales were cooking the books to show how effective they were at preventing crime, in order to justify lavish funding. 

One of the first things a statistician learns when comparing stats., is to first know they actually have relevance, rather than simply having a comparable label on the end results.  Politicians, lobbyists, and propagandists seldom care about how they were collected, only that it appears to support their argument du jour, and has good "soundbite" potential for uninformed, ignorant listeners who are unable or unwilling to delve into statistic fundamentals.

[Retro Rocket]

One can always find or cherry pick statistics to support ones preconceived notions.

Thats your argument every time Lloyd, you choose to ignore statistics that are extreme to say the least to push your conspiracy theories. Stats are NOT preconceived, neither is the notion that your crime and incarceration stats are Western worlds worst. You can change their color, turn them around, shuffle them , do what you like but they are extreme statistics  driven by a population obsessed with guns. You should travel a little and look at this from an outside  perspective Lloyd, actually spend some time in Australia or New Zealand for example, there's still plenty of guns here, we just don't have the "guns solve crime" dribble that's constantly shoved down your throats or feel the need to "carry" to feel safe..

[BobbyR]

I will say this with all due respct to the fellow member of the Community here.  I must point out that the United States is a Sovereign Nation. We have no need to defend, or explain our laws, customs, dialect of English to any other Country.

We have 4.4% of the World's population at roughly 317M people. The UK has 63M, Australia 23M, and Canada 35M.
 
California has a population of 38M, Texas 26M for comparison. 

The NY City Subway system carries 6M passengers a day.

Considering the access to Firearms compared to other Nations, we do not have shooting victims piled up like cordwood on our streets.

We do have a heritage of Firearms ownership, and self defense. It is not only our Heritage, it is written into our Constitution, which is unique in the World.

What happens in the U.S. as it relates to firearms is a local matter, and it is our matter to deal with. When the US takes an action outside it's own Borders, the World Community has the right to comment.

Our internal belief system and it's consequences is ours to deal with as we see fit. It is an interesting debate, but will not resolve anything.

 

[Retro Rocket]

What happens in the U.S. as it relates to firearms is a local matter, and it is our matter to deal with. When the US takes an action outside it's own Borders, the World Community has the right to comment.
Our internal belief system and it's consequences is ours to deal with as we see fit. It is an interesting debate, but will not resolve anything.

When that mentality is used over seas {not yours but the discussion} It has back fired in the US's face, there's more than one occasion where guns have been thrown at a country to help it fight a battle that suited the USA's agenda,  then those very arms have been used against US forces, i don't care where it is, throwing guns at any situation is just bad policy.. Bobby, just remember we are a multi national forum and a difference of opinion is just whats expected, its just like the bikes here, some like em stock, some like cafe's ...