Gun Control

Talk about anything under the sun or stars - but keep it civil. This is where we really get to know each other. Everyone is welcome, and invited!
buckshot
Toon Leader
Toon Leader
Posts: 1286
Joined: Thu Jan 08, 2009 12:20 pm
Title: Farmer from Hell
Location: Colbert Washington

Re: Gun Control

Postby buckshot » Fri Dec 21, 2012 11:46 am

I do remember a little something about a " well regulated militia" whippin the stuffin out of a bunch of stuffy Brit's! :monkey:

User avatar
jotabe
Toon Leader
Toon Leader
Posts: 2105
Joined: Tue Oct 31, 2006 11:59 am
Title: Leekmaster Kirbyfu

Re: Gun Control

Postby jotabe » Fri Dec 21, 2012 12:18 pm

I do remember a little something about a " well regulated militia" whippin the stuffin out of a bunch of stuffy Brit's! :monkey:
:stoned:
Those militia lasted less than six months before a the rebels could set up a proper army. Also, the English couldn't send their army in full force to fight the American army and the remaining militias because there were other two real armies holding up the English in Europe (Spain and France).
Militia works well for operations of sabotage and hit-and-runs, in support of the operations of the actual army. Not as a defensive force on itself, unless it's confronting other irregular forces.
Plus, a "well regulated militia" needs that the militiamen receive military training and have a semblance of discipline and chain of command. How many private gun owners have that?
Image

buckshot
Toon Leader
Toon Leader
Posts: 1286
Joined: Thu Jan 08, 2009 12:20 pm
Title: Farmer from Hell
Location: Colbert Washington

Re: Gun Control

Postby buckshot » Fri Dec 21, 2012 4:12 pm

Maybe you might be suprised how many responsible gun owners and collectors have been in the military or highly trained for government contract work or just enthusiasts that went out and got trained. I know some verry smart people that collect and invest in firearms ( some are even Liberals). :wave:

User avatar
Syphon the Sun
Toon Leader
Toon Leader
Posts: 2215
Joined: Thu Aug 23, 2007 8:59 pm
Title: Ozymandias

Re: Gun Control

Postby Syphon the Sun » Fri Dec 21, 2012 6:04 pm

I dispute that having weapons would have done them any good.
And yet, for more than a century, genocidal governments have disarmed their victims before carrying out the deed. I wonder why that is.
In the end, armed citizens can do very little against organized armies.
So we should make it easier for organized armies to commit senseless violence, terrorism and genocide on their would-be victims? This is not just a theoretical question. Look no further than the disarming being pushed by the governments on the genocide watch list.
Step softly; a dream lies buried here.

User avatar
jotabe
Toon Leader
Toon Leader
Posts: 2105
Joined: Tue Oct 31, 2006 11:59 am
Title: Leekmaster Kirbyfu

Re: Gun Control

Postby jotabe » Fri Dec 21, 2012 10:02 pm

Maybe you might be suprised how many responsible gun owners and collectors have been in the military or highly trained for government contract work or just enthusiasts that went out and got trained. I know some verry smart people that collect and invest in firearms ( some are even Liberals). :wave:
I would be surprised if it was the majority of the gun owners. In fact, i wouldn't mind that civilian population owned military grade firearms if it was under the condition of receiving some yearly military training. Because the reason why it's a bad idea to let civilians own weapons is that they don't have training on judgement of when to use a gun, on how to keep a gun, on how to make it safe. If it's up to the owner whether to receive that training or not, guns are just a hazard. If i have to chose beteween being with an armed criminal who has such training and an armed neighbour... i rather be with the criminal. At least i will know that when he kills me it's because he needs me dead, not because he mishandled the gun or because he got angry with me.
I dispute that having weapons would have done them any good.
And yet, for more than a century, genocidal governments have disarmed their victims before carrying out the deed. I wonder why that is.
Other governments have enacted the disarmament of the population without intending to commit genocide. And genocide has been committed both against disarmed peoples and armed ones (see Chechnya, Kosovo, Rwanda-Burundi). There is no correlation between genocides and weapon bans.
In the end, armed citizens can do very little against organized armies.
So we should make it easier for organized armies to commit senseless violence, terrorism and genocide on their would-be victims? This is not just a theoretical question. Look no further than the disarming being pushed by the governments on the genocide watch list.
Maybe we should? There is such thing as escalation. There's such thing as peaceful resistence.
The English in India answered viciously to the guerrilla and terrorist warfare of the natives, but were at a loss about what to do with Ghandi.
One of the greatest butchers of the history of mankind, Tamerlane, always offered terms, and only when meeting armed resistence, would he proceed to exterminate the whole resisting city.
How well is working the armed resistence for the Palestinians?

When you are confronted with a stronger enemy, and your defeat in armed conflict is sure, armed resistence might not be the smartest choice. If you want to help a people who could suffer genocide, the best thing you can do is fielding a stronger army than the would-be genocidal one, rather than encouraging them to skewer themselves into the enemy bayonettes.

Another point is: if the civilians own firearms and are under attack from an army, what's stopping some of the civilians to decide that they have no chance and become a fifth column? And start shooting down their neighbours.
Image

User avatar
Syphon the Sun
Toon Leader
Toon Leader
Posts: 2215
Joined: Thu Aug 23, 2007 8:59 pm
Title: Ozymandias

Re: Gun Control

Postby Syphon the Sun » Fri Dec 21, 2012 10:40 pm

i wouldn't mind that civilian population owned military grade firearms
Are you trying to imply that civilians are currently authorized to own military grade firearms?
the reason why it's a bad idea to let civilians own weapons is that they don't have training on judgement of when to use a gun, on how to keep a gun, on how to make it safe.
Do you have any evidence for this? Or is this just an assumption?
There is no correlation between genocides and weapon bans.
And yet, an unusually large share of genocide and terrorism have been preceded by disarming the victims. Those committing such atrocious acts clearly believe it is in their best interest to disarm their would-be victims. Indeed, if you study the history of gun control, even just here in the United States, it's pretty clearly based on the goal of leaving people defenseless against such acts.
There's such thing as peaceful resistence.
I'm sure would-be victims are comforted by the fact that you want to leave them defenseless because they can always emulate Ghandi as their friends and families are slaughtered.
When you are confronted with a stronger enemy, and your defeat in armed conflict is sure, armed resistence might not be the smartest choice.
What gives you the right to make these decisions for other people?
the best thing you can do is fielding a stronger army than the would-be genocidal one
How can would-be victims ever field an army if the only people with arms are the people trying to kill them? Or should they just pray someone else will come to their rescue? Because that hasn't really worked out so well in the past.
Step softly; a dream lies buried here.

User avatar
jotabe
Toon Leader
Toon Leader
Posts: 2105
Joined: Tue Oct 31, 2006 11:59 am
Title: Leekmaster Kirbyfu

Re: Gun Control

Postby jotabe » Fri Dec 21, 2012 11:28 pm

i wouldn't mind that civilian population owned military grade firearms
Are you trying to imply that civilians are currently authorized to own military grade firearms?
No. What i'm saying is that i wouldn't mind that people who has military training would own even such weapons. A policeman with a gatling gun is less dangerous than a baby with a razor.
the reason why it's a bad idea to let civilians own weapons is that they don't have training on judgement of when to use a gun, on how to keep a gun, on how to make it safe.
Do you have any evidence for this? Or is this just an assumption?
Evidence for what? Evidence that judgement is a capability you learn through training? Do i really need evidence for that? The alternative is that people are born with judgement of when and how to use a firearm.
And yet, an unusually large share of genocide and terrorism have been preceded by disarming the victims. Those committing such atrocious acts clearly believe it is in their best interest to disarm their would-be victims. Indeed, if you study the history of gun control, even just here in the United States, it's pretty clearly based on the goal of leaving people defenseless against such acts.
Even in the United States? If you are talking about the natives, their disarmament was part of the imposed treaties, after "wars". Vae Victis and all that. And their armed resistance wasn't all that successful, just look at the tribes that kept resisting. I'd go as far as to say that their genocide was due, in large part, to their continued resistance, instead of accepting that they had been defeated and robbed of their land.
I sure would-be victims are comforted by the fact that you want to leave them defenseless because they can always emulate Ghandi as their friends and families are slaughtered.
Well, in the worst case, they will end up no more dead than they would with armed resistance.
What gives you the right to make life-and-death decisions for other people?
I don't make decisions. Logics do. You know what happens, eventually, to those who fight a stronger enemy to the death?
Option A means death and defeat. Option B means finite probabilities of both survival and victory. Which one would you chose?
On the other hand, the argument can be reversed: one individual, by starting armed resistence, is endangering not only himself, but his family and his whole community.
Or should they just pray someone else will come to their rescue? Because that hasn't really worked out so well in the past.
Hasn't worked so well compared to... what? Look what happened to the Chechyans. To the Native Americans. To the Kosovars. On the other hand, the Jewish, the Koreans, the Armenians... for example, are still around, in their own countries.
Image

User avatar
Syphon the Sun
Toon Leader
Toon Leader
Posts: 2215
Joined: Thu Aug 23, 2007 8:59 pm
Title: Ozymandias

Re: Gun Control

Postby Syphon the Sun » Sat Dec 22, 2012 12:44 am

No. What i'm saying is that i wouldn't mind that people who has military training would own even such weapons.
I just wanted clarification on that point, because it wouldn't be the first time someone (in this very thread, even) had no clue what the landscape of regulating firearms in the United States actually looked like.
Evidence for what?
Evidence for your claim that civilians who own firearms lack the adequate training and judgment on how and when to "use a gun," "keep a gun," and "make it safe."
Even in the United States? If you are talking about the natives, their disarmament was part of the imposed treaties, after "wars".
I wasn't, because our earliest gun control laws weren't targeted at Native Americans, were they?
Well, in the worst case, they will end up no more dead than they would with armed resistance.
So, because you personally believe that other people's self-defense would be futile, you get to decide that they shouldn't be able to defend themselves? What moral authority, exactly, do you have to make these decisions, even if you insist those decisions are made for other people's own good?
I don't make decisions. Logics do.
"Logics" don't make laws. "Logics" don't make decisions. People do.
You know what happens, eventually, to those who fight a stronger enemy to the death?
You know what happens when you actively ensure the victims can never be "stronger" than the attackers because you intentionally disarm them and leave them defenseless? You know what happens would an attacker knows his victims are not defenseless?
Look what happened to the Chechyans.
You mean the Chechnyans who were disarmed by the Soviet government? A people disarmed by their government attackers, prior to those attacks, is your example of well-armed victims trying (and failing) to defend themselves?
On the other hand, the Jewish, the Koreans, the Armenians...
Yes, look at those people. All were disarmed by their governments. And all were slaughtered despite the fact they had no capacity to defend themselves.
Step softly; a dream lies buried here.

User avatar
jotabe
Toon Leader
Toon Leader
Posts: 2105
Joined: Tue Oct 31, 2006 11:59 am
Title: Leekmaster Kirbyfu

Re: Gun Control

Postby jotabe » Sat Dec 22, 2012 4:11 am

Evidence for your claim that civilians who own firearms lack the adequate training and judgment on how and when to "use a gun," "keep a gun," and "make it safe."
Ok, i was talking about how i would be ok if gun owners were required to receive a yearly training on gun use, and i thought the implication was obvious within context, so let me rephrase:
"Because the reason why it's a bad idea to let civilians own weapons is that they don't have training on judgement of when to use a gun, on how to keep a gun, on how to make it safe, unless they receive such training."
I wasn't, because our earliest gun control laws weren't targeted at Native Americans, were they?
So what were you talking about? i'm not aware of the US govt. ever attempting to commit genocide against the American people.
So, because you personally believe that other people's self-defense would be futile, you get to decide that they shouldn't be able to defend themselves? What moral authority, exactly, do you have to make these decisions, even if you insist those decisions are made for other people's own good?
My beliefs are irrelevant. I haven't seen any cases in the history of mankind were civilians defend effectively from an enemy army, without the help of an actual standing army. While this could be due to my ignorance of the cases where it happened, it also means that the ratio is against such cases. With those successful defenses being a low probability event, it can be attributed to chance more than to the efficacy of civilian armed resistence.
"Logics" don't make laws. "Logics" don't make decisions. People do.
Yes, i know, people can and do make laws against all logic. It's a shame, really.
You know what happens would an attacker knows his victims are not defenseless?
You know, attackers don't want to live off acorns. Which is why they don't hang up all the civilians by the oak trees.
You mean the Chechnyans who were disarmed by the Soviet government? A people disarmed by their government attackers, prior to those attacks, is your example of well-armed victims trying (and failing) to defend themselves?
Quite an unsuccessful disarmament, you know. Also, their disarmers were the Soviet Union, and their attackers were the Republic of Russia. Seems like the same thing, but the vacuum of power that happened made that disarmament moot. Also, the standards of the (post-Stalin) Soviet Union had little to do with the ones of Russia. Russia looks quite more favourably on genocide than the Soviet Union did.
Yes, look at those people. All were disarmed by their governments. And all were slaughtered despite the fact they had no capacity to defend themselves.
And they all have their own states and now are relatively safe for their people, thanks to the intervention of outside powers. Didn't work so bad for them, compared to other peoples who took their self-defense in their own hands, despite knowing they had no chance to succeed.
Image

buckshot
Toon Leader
Toon Leader
Posts: 1286
Joined: Thu Jan 08, 2009 12:20 pm
Title: Farmer from Hell
Location: Colbert Washington

Re: Gun Control

Postby buckshot » Sat Dec 22, 2012 12:31 pm

I expect this to be all shot to hell but whatever, I love the USA and the freedom and rights it protects for it's citizens. The USA is not Europe or Australia or the UK and definitely not Norway Denmark or Sweeden and I hope we never join them other than in friendship and trade. Other countrys have their way and so do we. Guns are part of the USA just like the right to pray as you like and the right to vote . Guns are history, at least a lot are, I personally have no use for high capacity handguns and most assult rifles/pistols but thats" my opinion only". Old guns and amunition speak all about America and each one tells a rich story and I can't believe any good would come by limiting their use or transfer within reason. No part of the constitution promises a warm fuzzy safe feeling, we fought all the way and we should keep up the fight to keep us all free. I don't want to ruffle any more feathers when we are all saddened and shocked by sic evil acts like last week but more legislation (in my opinion ) would be premature when laws already on the books are'nt enforced, I'm refering to background checks with an upgraded database. I am put off by the media trying to stirr up the parental age ( I don't know exactly how to classify the group I'm describing) like the age group of people that are having young kids and just getting started in life and maybe not feeling so secure about safety, economy or whatever, I feel like the media is purely trying to spin up terror and fear over law abiding folks who would never wish harm on another. I hope I'm not rambling too much but like I say I love America and I want no new laws we have enough and I won't sit quietly and see my beloved country changed .

User avatar
thoughtreader
Toon Leader
Toon Leader
Posts: 775
Joined: Wed Sep 27, 2006 5:00 pm
Title: will wrestle you to the ground
First Joined: 13 Mar 2003
Location: Portland OR
Contact:

Re: Gun Control

Postby thoughtreader » Sat Dec 22, 2012 5:55 pm

Buckshot I whole heartedly agree. We need to enforce the laws we have before we make more. And I hate how the news is always trying to scare me.

User avatar
Syphon the Sun
Toon Leader
Toon Leader
Posts: 2215
Joined: Thu Aug 23, 2007 8:59 pm
Title: Ozymandias

Re: Gun Control

Postby Syphon the Sun » Wed Jan 02, 2013 4:54 pm

i thought the implication was obvious within context, so let me rephrase
Rephrasing does not change the underlying assumption you're making that gun-owners lack adequate training and judgment. And so, again, I ask for compelling evidence to support that assumption. You can't "solve" a problem if you haven't actually defined the problem. And you can't define real problems with unsubstantiated opinions.
So what were you talking about? i'm not aware of the US govt. ever attempting to commit genocide against the American people.
I had hoped you'd have at least read through this thread and, perhaps, studied the ugly history of gun control overall. As I noted earlier, America's first gun control laws were designed solely to disarm free blacks. These laws were strengthened following the Civil War, with the intent of preventing free blacks from defending themselves against terrorism by ugly groups like the Klan. As President Grant put it, these people were using government as a means to "deprive colored citizens of their right to bear arms."

Even our modern gun control laws -- established in the 1960s -- were created to disarm "extremist" blacks, written after only after a crafty Senator received a translated copy of the regulations the Nazis used to disarm the Jews.

Around the world, the history gets even uglier.
My beliefs are irrelevant. I haven't seen any cases in the history of mankind were civilians defend effectively from an enemy army, without the help of an actual standing army.
If you insist that laws be based on your beliefs, those beliefs are very relevant. Why does it matter whether you think it is for their own good or not? Why does it matter whether you've seen cases where civilians defend themselves without a standing army? What gives you the moral authority to decide they shouldn't have the ability defend themselves? Shouldn't that be a decision they make for themselves? If not, what gives you the right to make that decision for other people?
Yes, i know, people can and do make laws against all logic. It's a shame, really.
A clever joke, but we both know that's not what I said. I said that "logic" doesn't make decisions or laws. Laws are written by human beings. Decisions are made by human beings. You believe it is illogical to defend oneself against genocide, terrorism, etc. That's fine. But what gives you the right to decide that for other people? Why is your view of the logical course of action compelling enough to deprive others of their decision-making? What if other people have different views on what is a logical course of action? What if there really are things that are worth fighting and dying for?
Quite an unsuccessful disarmament, you know.
They weren't that unsuccessful in disarming the people, especially of the weapons most valuable to defending themselves. There's a reason so many of them used homemade weapons. Either way, you're clearly missing the point: your best example of well-armed victims trying (and failing) to defend themselves is a group of people that were specifically disarmed by their government. I think you need a new example.
Also, their disarmers were the Soviet Union, and their attackers were the Republic of Russia.
So you're not talking about the genocide of Chechnyans in the 1940s? What attacks are you talking about, then?
Russia looks quite more favourably on genocide than the Soviet Union did.
A government that murdered more than 50 million of its own citizens didn't really look that favorably on genocide?
And they all have their own states and now are relatively safe for their people, thanks to the intervention of outside powers. Didn't work so bad for them
I'm sure that's a huge comfort to the victims who were left defenseless. And I'm sure it's a huge comfort for the would-be victims who are being disarmed in the present.
Step softly; a dream lies buried here.

User avatar
jotabe
Toon Leader
Toon Leader
Posts: 2105
Joined: Tue Oct 31, 2006 11:59 am
Title: Leekmaster Kirbyfu

Re: Gun Control

Postby jotabe » Wed Jan 02, 2013 11:17 pm

Rephrasing does not change the underlying assumption you're making that gun-owners lack adequate training and judgment. And so, again, I ask for compelling evidence to support that assumption. You can't "solve" a problem if you haven't actually defined the problem. And you can't define real problems with unsubstantiated opinions.
So let me ask. How many Americans have undergone military or police training? According to wiki, the US army has 1.5 million people, the reserve another 1.5 million, and the police forces 0.8 million. Who else, beside them, has a comparable and continuous training? I don't doubt the gun hobbyists will do, but i don't have the numbers. Even admitting all NRA member are gun hobbyists, that's 4.3 million. Polls say that around 25% of Americans own weapons, which takes us to 80 million of gun owners.
I had hoped you'd have at least read through this thread and, perhaps, studied the ugly history of gun control overall. As I noted earlier, America's first gun control laws were designed solely to disarm free blacks. These laws were strengthened following the Civil War, with the intent of preventing free blacks from defending themselves against terrorism by ugly groups like the Klan. As President Grant put it, these people were using government as a means to "deprive colored citizens of their right to bear arms."
The bad thing of the KKK is that they were a secret organization, with only a handful of public members. Who would have paid for the KKK crimes? The next-door neighbour. A racial uprising might not be such a good thing
Even our modern gun control laws -- established in the 1960s -- were created to disarm "extremist" blacks, written after only after a crafty Senator received a translated copy of the regulations the Nazis used to disarm the Jews.
Oh cool, Godwin! Do you think disturbs should happen unchecked?
If you insist that laws be based on your beliefs, those beliefs are very relevant. Why does it matter whether you think it is for their own good or not? Why does it matter whether you've seen cases where civilians defend themselves without a standing army? What gives you the moral authority to decide they shouldn't have the ability defend themselves? Shouldn't that be a decision they make for themselves? If not, what gives you the right to make that decision for other people?
I really don't insist on that (because i have no beliefs/strive not to have them). I have no moral authority nor any other kind of authority. It's up to you, guys, it's not me who is going to live/die in the US.
What if there really are things that are worth fighting and dying for?
Because dead people are of so much use to everyone.

A good thing about dead people is that they don't protest, they don't create a ruckus against an oppressive state. They also don't have an opinion, nor means to spread their opinion. They are not scary, because there is a lot of things they cannot do.
On the other hand, people who are alive can actually oppose oppression. They can actually resist.
So in that, i'm sure oppressive regimes agree with you: there are things worth dying for. They probably encourage their dissidents to die for their cause. And help them to.
They weren't that unsuccessful in disarming the people, especially of the weapons most valuable to defending themselves. There's a reason so many of them used homemade weapons. Either way, you're clearly missing the point: your best example of well-armed victims trying (and failing) to defend themselves is a group of people that were specifically disarmed by their government. I think you need a new example.
No, excuse me. You are missing the point. The point is "what is better? armed resistence or no armed resistence?". Even if they use makeshift weapons (they weren't), they decide to present armed resistence. Also, it doesn't matter what laws there are to disarm them or whatever. If they have weapons, they are armed. If they present armed resistence and fail, it's a failure of armed resistence.
So you're not talking about the genocide of Chechnyans in the 1940s? What attacks are you talking about, then?
The more recent ones. Putin's wars.
A government that murdered more than 50 million of its own citizens didn't really look that favorably on genocide?
Quite a lot less than the current regime, who believes in genocide and ethnic cleansing as appropriate tools, and is widely supported by the population.
I'm sure that's a huge comfort to the victims who were left defenseless. And I'm sure it's a huge comfort for the would-be victims who are being disarmed in the present.
Yes, i'm sure they would more comforted if they accompanied in their graves by their entire people.
And for the people who are being disarmed in the present, if they think they are more defenseless and more likely to be victimized without their guns, they are grossly mistaken.
Image

buckshot
Toon Leader
Toon Leader
Posts: 1286
Joined: Thu Jan 08, 2009 12:20 pm
Title: Farmer from Hell
Location: Colbert Washington

Re: Gun Control

Postby buckshot » Sat Jan 12, 2013 11:33 pm

Last weekend there was another big gunshow at the Spokane fairgrounds . The company that promotes it has the shows every other month now, (too much all the same people same stuff) we went but did'nt show. I had a feeling it was gonna be a madhouse and it was . W e got there early as we had some friends that came down from canada and were itchin to get in and I had hi hopes of getting a nice handicap park spot but we had one hell of a walk to get there. Inside the show everyone was rubbing elbows it was so tight and everyone (almost) was carying some sort of black gun(assault rifle) and a lot of hand trucks wheeling out full of full case loads of that cheap imported ammo, people were going nuts in there I saw ammo selling for 3 times what I see at the wholesale catalog pricing. The whole north annex which is usually half empty was full of tables with guys I've never seen before selling new assault guns and hi capacity handguns that mostly were just recently purchaced from Cabellas a couple weeks ago. The whole trip was crazy and a bit unnerving and Dad and I were happy to get out . I only collect "ok im a hoarder" old guns and early reloading tools and ammo and everything I deal in is at least 75 years old but I keep it all straight and legal and I probably go a bit overboard on the records part but Im that way anyhow. I said this last part to help make this clear because some of my friends and my dad are mad at me too for my views on new gun show rules. I know Im sticking my neck in the noose for saying this but I don't want to see any new anti gun legislation especially in limiting gun shows. This is only my opinion, we already have the background check laws on the books and I think they should be enforced not ignored. I would suggest that the ATF should have a few tables at every gunshow no matter how small the venue and say if you walk up to my table and wish to buy a black gun or handgun and agree on a price then we should walk over to our friendly ATF man and make our transaction, run our names through the database which I would hope would check us both out nation wide making shure we are of sound body ( criminal background whatever) I don't want to see any more single gun registration like in Canada because thats such a joke (I have a lot of collector friends up there and they all get away with a lot and we need no more un enforcable laws. If I dealt in such weapons and I don't I would want to know the person I sell to is not some damn skid lid I don't want to be worrying for the rest of my life that I may have contributed to arming some inhumane idiot. Please understand I'm only stating my opinion on this and I'm not looking for a fight.

User avatar
Boothby
Former Speaker
Former Speaker
Posts: 1017
Joined: Sat Oct 21, 2006 4:44 pm
Title: Battle School Engineer
Location: MD
Contact:

Re: Gun Control

Postby Boothby » Sun Jan 13, 2013 12:51 am

I think there's a lot (of good) to be said for simply enforcing existing gun laws, and getting rid of some abused loopholes (such as checks--or the lack thereof--at gun shows, relaxed laws for people who call themselves "collectors," but collect--and later also sell--fully functional weapons, etc.).

I had spoken to a friend who has guns, and collects guns, and has bought guns at gun shows, if imposing these laws/removing these loopholes would be a bad or horrible thing. "No, that would be perfectly fine."

But it's the nut-jobs who go into a panicked fear that Obama and the United Nations are going to take their weapons away, and come stomping in in their stormtrooper boots, and therefore buy assault weapons and high-capacity mags by the pallet-full. There's something wrong, and I think dangerous about all that. Not sure what to do, though...
--Boothby

"The biggest cause of trouble in the world today is that the stupid people are so sure about things and the intelligent folks are so full of doubts." - Bertrand Russell

buckshot
Toon Leader
Toon Leader
Posts: 1286
Joined: Thu Jan 08, 2009 12:20 pm
Title: Farmer from Hell
Location: Colbert Washington

Re: Gun Control

Postby buckshot » Sun Jan 13, 2013 1:38 pm

Here in Washington the background checks that are supposed to be done during the waiting period just get skimmed through. There are way too few denied apps and I hear from good friends and family in law enforcement about too many legally bought guns pulled from the hands of fellons. The data base has to be federal and not a patched together mess held together by the few states that do try do a good job of it.

User avatar
neo-dragon
Commander
Commander
Posts: 2513
Joined: Tue Sep 26, 2006 5:26 pm
Title: Huey Revolutionary
Location: Canada

Re: Gun Control

Postby neo-dragon » Tue Jan 15, 2013 6:17 pm

Interesting... And by "interesting" I mean ridiculous: Utah Teachers Trained to Use Guns
"Deep in the human unconscious is a pervasive need for a logical universe that makes sense. But the real universe is always one step beyond logic."
- Frank Herbert's 'Dune'

User avatar
elfprince13
Toon Leader
Toon Leader
Posts: 1977
Joined: Sun Oct 26, 2008 11:27 pm
Title: The Bombadil
Location: 127.0.0.1
Contact:

Re: Gun Control

Postby elfprince13 » Wed Jan 16, 2013 1:03 am

Interesting... And by "interesting" I mean ridiculous: Utah Teachers Trained to Use Guns
Sounds intelligent enough to me, as long as they keep up to date on their training.


In other news, Reason continues to have the best things to say: http://reason.com/archives/2013/01/15/j ... sandy-hook" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
Vermont Sustainable Heating Initiative
"But the conversation of the mind was truer than any language, and they knew each other better than they ever could have by use of mere sight and touch."
Image

User avatar
neo-dragon
Commander
Commander
Posts: 2513
Joined: Tue Sep 26, 2006 5:26 pm
Title: Huey Revolutionary
Location: Canada

Re: Gun Control

Postby neo-dragon » Wed Jan 16, 2013 6:05 am

Interesting... And by "interesting" I mean ridiculous: Utah Teachers Trained to Use Guns
Sounds intelligent enough to me, as long as they keep up to date on their training.
The problem is that teachers are not cops, and some "intro to guns" course isn't going to make them react like cops. The young lady they show practicing in the video looks frightened handling an unloaded weapon! Most teachers are no more prepared to shoot a gun in their classroom than a police officer is prepared to teach a class about Shakespearean sonnets.

Assigning police officers to schools makes sense, and I can get behind having guards and metal detectors at the doors, but teachers carrying guns in classrooms is a bad idea.
"Deep in the human unconscious is a pervasive need for a logical universe that makes sense. But the real universe is always one step beyond logic."
- Frank Herbert's 'Dune'

User avatar
elfprince13
Toon Leader
Toon Leader
Posts: 1977
Joined: Sun Oct 26, 2008 11:27 pm
Title: The Bombadil
Location: 127.0.0.1
Contact:

Re: Gun Control

Postby elfprince13 » Thu Jan 17, 2013 12:14 pm

I suspect neither of us will convince the other of anything on that score, so instead I'll just leave this: http://www.ksat.com/news/Homeowner-conf ... index.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
Vermont Sustainable Heating Initiative
"But the conversation of the mind was truer than any language, and they knew each other better than they ever could have by use of mere sight and touch."
Image

User avatar
neo-dragon
Commander
Commander
Posts: 2513
Joined: Tue Sep 26, 2006 5:26 pm
Title: Huey Revolutionary
Location: Canada

Re: Gun Control

Postby neo-dragon » Thu Jan 17, 2013 3:58 pm

I'll just say that there's a difference between someone wielding a gun in their home for defense of one's own family and property and having one present at all times in a classroom with 30 unpredictable kids. I'd sooner have a gun in my home than in my classroom.
"Deep in the human unconscious is a pervasive need for a logical universe that makes sense. But the real universe is always one step beyond logic."
- Frank Herbert's 'Dune'

LilBee91
Toon Leader
Toon Leader
Posts: 2050
Joined: Wed Sep 27, 2006 5:43 pm
Title: AK Hermione
First Joined: 10 Jan 2005

Re: Gun Control

Postby LilBee91 » Thu Jan 17, 2013 4:44 pm

I'm not as worried about the 30 unpredictable kids as the teachers. From personal experience, there are some teachers I would absolutely trust to gun someone down before letting their students come to harm. Other teachers I have had...they might snap and kill us all.

For the record, I don't think that would actually happen--I've never seen a violent outburst from a teacher, so even the crazy one are pretty controlled. But there are some teachers I would be uncomfortable with having a gun when I'm in their classroom.
I used to hate gravity because it would not let me fly. Now I realize it is gravity that lets me stand.

Happiness is when what you think, what you say, and what you do are in harmony.

User avatar
jotabe
Toon Leader
Toon Leader
Posts: 2105
Joined: Tue Oct 31, 2006 11:59 am
Title: Leekmaster Kirbyfu

Re: Gun Control

Postby jotabe » Thu Jan 17, 2013 8:54 pm

I would be more worried about the lesson that is being taught there: "Problems can be solved by throwing more guns at them".
Last edited by jotabe on Fri Jan 18, 2013 12:36 am, edited 2 times in total.
Image

User avatar
elfprince13
Toon Leader
Toon Leader
Posts: 1977
Joined: Sun Oct 26, 2008 11:27 pm
Title: The Bombadil
Location: 127.0.0.1
Contact:

Re: Gun Control

Postby elfprince13 » Thu Jan 17, 2013 8:56 pm

I'll just say that there's a difference between someone wielding a gun in their home for defense of one's own family and property and having one present at all times in a classroom with 30 unpredictable kids. I'd sooner have a gun in my home than in my classroom.
Sorry, I should have been clearer: that link was intended to be related to gun control in general rather than the classroom thing in particular.
Vermont Sustainable Heating Initiative
"But the conversation of the mind was truer than any language, and they knew each other better than they ever could have by use of mere sight and touch."
Image

User avatar
elfprince13
Toon Leader
Toon Leader
Posts: 1977
Joined: Sun Oct 26, 2008 11:27 pm
Title: The Bombadil
Location: 127.0.0.1
Contact:

Re: Gun Control

Postby elfprince13 » Wed Apr 10, 2013 1:50 pm

Can't resist dropping this here: http://reason.com/blog/2013/04/09/surve ... s-nearly-a" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
Vermont Sustainable Heating Initiative
"But the conversation of the mind was truer than any language, and they knew each other better than they ever could have by use of mere sight and touch."
Image

User avatar
elfprince13
Toon Leader
Toon Leader
Posts: 1977
Joined: Sun Oct 26, 2008 11:27 pm
Title: The Bombadil
Location: 127.0.0.1
Contact:

Re: Gun Control

Postby elfprince13 » Thu Apr 25, 2013 3:16 pm

http://www.abc4.com/content/about_4/bio ... CM9dQ.cspx" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
Vermont Sustainable Heating Initiative
"But the conversation of the mind was truer than any language, and they knew each other better than they ever could have by use of mere sight and touch."
Image

User avatar
Boothby
Former Speaker
Former Speaker
Posts: 1017
Joined: Sat Oct 21, 2006 4:44 pm
Title: Battle School Engineer
Location: MD
Contact:

Re: Gun Control

Postby Boothby » Thu Apr 25, 2013 3:28 pm

Who needs a gun, when a sword will do?

http://www.abc4.com/mostpopular/story/S ... DQzsw.cspx" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Why bring a gun to a knife fight?
--Boothby

"The biggest cause of trouble in the world today is that the stupid people are so sure about things and the intelligent folks are so full of doubts." - Bertrand Russell

User avatar
elfprince13
Toon Leader
Toon Leader
Posts: 1977
Joined: Sun Oct 26, 2008 11:27 pm
Title: The Bombadil
Location: 127.0.0.1
Contact:

Re: Gun Control

Postby elfprince13 » Thu Apr 25, 2013 3:43 pm

Who needs a gun, when a sword will do?

http://www.abc4.com/mostpopular/story/S ... DQzsw.cspx" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
:thumbs:
Why bring a gun to a knife fight?
Dunno, but Vermont, despite having the loosest gun control in the nation, has very low gun violence and unusually high knife violence.
Vermont Sustainable Heating Initiative
"But the conversation of the mind was truer than any language, and they knew each other better than they ever could have by use of mere sight and touch."
Image

User avatar
Syphon the Sun
Toon Leader
Toon Leader
Posts: 2215
Joined: Thu Aug 23, 2007 8:59 pm
Title: Ozymandias

Re: Gun Control

Postby Syphon the Sun » Thu Apr 25, 2013 4:22 pm

Chicago won't let store owners possess firearms. They have to resort to fighting off armed attackers with baseball bats. Luckily, the attacker in this case was a very, very bad shot. Most of these stories don't have a happy ending.
Step softly; a dream lies buried here.

User avatar
elfprince13
Toon Leader
Toon Leader
Posts: 1977
Joined: Sun Oct 26, 2008 11:27 pm
Title: The Bombadil
Location: 127.0.0.1
Contact:

Re: Gun Control

Postby elfprince13 » Fri Apr 26, 2013 10:46 am

Vermont Sustainable Heating Initiative
"But the conversation of the mind was truer than any language, and they knew each other better than they ever could have by use of mere sight and touch."
Image

User avatar
elfprince13
Toon Leader
Toon Leader
Posts: 1977
Joined: Sun Oct 26, 2008 11:27 pm
Title: The Bombadil
Location: 127.0.0.1
Contact:

Re: Gun Control

Postby elfprince13 » Sun Jul 07, 2013 8:36 pm

Couldn't resist sharing this. Happy (belated) 4th
Vermont Sustainable Heating Initiative
"But the conversation of the mind was truer than any language, and they knew each other better than they ever could have by use of mere sight and touch."
Image


Return to “Milagre Town Square”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Ahrefs [Bot] and 5 guests