Should guns be banned?

[captain]

That's why I mentioned police gun training is basically a joke. It's not like they have a PHD in gun smithing or anything. It's typically 90 minutes in class and then some range time.

Not sure where you got your information.. My basic police academy was 80 hours for firearms many years ago... Then we had classes to specifically go over any new weapons that were being distributed...

Heck even the reserve academy I went to when I was 21 was a full week of firearms...

 

[skydivr]

Another though-provoking interview of Rex Grossman:

Active shooters in schools: The enemy is denial

 

[fallenarch]

fallenarch, please tell me what an "assault rifle" is, and why they are more dangerous than a hunting rifle.

Here's the problem. Gun people want to ignore the fact that lots of guns mean some irresponsible people are going to use them in an illegal manner. That's just silly. I know, we are going to get the well cars kill people, etc. But the only purpose of guns is to shoot at things, presumably to either kill them or practice killing them.

The purpose of the second amendment was to protect the people from the government. So armories would be a good way to do that and to even give people access to even more powerful weapons do to the elevated level of control. You could say that the government would just hit the armories, but they can just hit the sources of ammo too, or any number of ways they can bet an armed populace (assuming you think the army would ever turn on it's people, which I don't. Govet might, soldier will desert).

MAybe I'm all wrong but was just trying to figure out a compromise.

 

[GsxrBots]

Here's the problem. Gun people want to ignore the fact that lots of guns mean some irresponsible people are going to use them in an illegal manner. That's just silly. I know, we are going to get the well cars kill people, etc. But the only purpose of guns is to shoot at things, presumably to either kill them or practice killing them.

The purpose of the second amendment was to protect the people from the government. So armories would be a good way to do that and to even give people access to even more powerful weapons do to the elevated level of control. You could say that the government would just hit the armories, but they can just hit the sources of ammo too, or any number of ways they can bet an armed populace (assuming you think the army would ever turn on it's people, which I don't. Govet might, soldier will desert).

MAybe I'm all wrong but was just trying to figure out a compromise.

You never answered my question though.. What is an "assault rifle" and I'll add why are they more dangerous than a hunting rifle?

 

[Argilbertson]

So much discussion about the tools...so little discussion about the people wielding them.

It's silly to keep talking about gun control when we think it's ok to release someone suffering from paranoid delusions without proper treatment or monitoring.

 

[captain]

I have been a student of aspergers since my son was diagnosed at 5 years old. I have 12 years of experience "Studying" Asbergers. I suggest you study more and not make flip comments about the stability of those with Aspergers. I have heard statements like yours several times in the media this last weekend and I have also heard a few that were right on the mark. Study More!

Once again let me reiterate... I listen, I read I make decisions with what information I have... Once again, while I am very happy that you don't see any of these conditions with your son, is there even the remotest possibility that others could be? If the professionally trained medical institution believes this is an issue couldn't it be? Make no mistake this is not an attack on you or your family just looking at all data to try and put some clarity on what happened so we can take appropriate actions as a country and not just a knee jerk emotional reaction...

 

[GsxrBots]

So much discussion about the tools...so little discussion about the people wielding them.

It's silly to keep talking about gun control when we think it's ok to release someone suffering from paranoid delusions without proper treatment or monitoring.

That's what this thread is about. The tools..

 

[captain]

Here's the problem. Gun people want to ignore the fact that lots of guns mean some irresponsible people are going to use them in an illegal manner. That's just silly. I know, we are going to get the well cars kill people, etc. But the only purpose of guns is to shoot at things, presumably to either kill them or practice killing them.

The purpose of the second amendment was to protect the people from the government. So armories would be a good way to do that and to even give people access to even more powerful weapons do to the elevated level of control. You could say that the government would just hit the armories, but they can just hit the sources of ammo too, or any number of ways they can bet an armed populace (assuming you think the army would ever turn on it's people, which I don't. Govet might, soldier will desert).

MAybe I'm all wrong but was just trying to figure out a compromise.

Willie your speculating now, I shoot my guns for fun not always to kill things.. It's just fun to see who can shoot a bullet from 200 yards and get it into the smallest grouping possible.. It sounds a heck of a lot like golf huh? I don't hunt anymore because I just don't have time but if I needed to I could eat squirrel, rabbit, deer or any other things on my property.... Could you say the same?

I keep going back to this over and over and it just keeps getting ignored... Enforce what we have with a vengence and make the punishment so painful that criminals won't want to get caught with a gun... A good example is this.....

In the state of Oklahoma they passed a law that Marijuana had to have a tax stamp, yep you heard it right.. If you were found to be a dealer with a pound of marijuana then you had to have a tax stamp (label) affixed to the bag of weed. I can't tell you how many times I would go into a house that we just raided and see bags and bags of dope with a tax stamp meaning that they paid their taxes... Why would a criminal take the risk to get a tax stamp you ask? Because the penalty for not having a tax stamp was so big that no dealer wanted to get caught without it... As ridiculous as this sounds it happens every day.... So..... lets just go enforce the laws we have now, lets go into Chicago and hammer down, you get caught with a firearm and your sentence for the gun is worse than the crime itself... Then, lets put some legislation into place that will not allow the judge or prosecutor to give a lesser penalty if convicted.... Then friends, then we can make shootings go away, we will never be able to stop the wild, mentally deranged folks from killing, look at China on Friday when the man went in and killed 22 children with knives...

cap ..

 

[skydivr]

Here's the problem. Gun people want to ignore the fact that lots of guns mean some irresponsible people are going to use them in an illegal manner. That's just silly. I know, we are going to get the well cars kill people, etc. But the only purpose of guns is to shoot at things, presumably to either kill them or practice killing them.

The purpose of the second amendment was to protect the people from the government. So armories would be a good way to do that and to even give people access to even more powerful weapons do to the elevated level of control. You could say that the government would just hit the armories, but they can just hit the sources of ammo too, or any number of ways they can bet an armed populace (assuming you think the army would ever turn on it's people, which I don't. Govet might, soldier will desert).

MAybe I'm all wrong but was just trying to figure out a compromise.

The problem is, there is no compromise. Your idea places your safety and personal protection in someone else's hands - and I'm not ever going to be willing to do that, because I'm not a a sheep. There is no compromise when you are further restricting the rights of legal gun owners in response to an illegal act.

I've got a better idea: Why not fully enforce the existing gun laws? Why not ban all violent video games, tighten and enforce TV ratings? Get the gratuitious violence off TV. Why not USE the death penalty rather than allowing plea bargins for Life W/O Parole? Why, because all of a sudden these same people screaming for restricting the 2nd amendment are the same people who are constantly pushing the levels of decency using the 1st as justification...and which one do think is REALLY the reason?

 

[mysql]

Not sure where you got your information.. My basic police academy was 80 hours for firearms many years ago...

Night fire, hostage situations, etc aren't applicable to what's needed for a reasonable adult to carry and intervene as needed for situations such as these. Additionally you're talking about much of the time split between different weapons types (handgun, rifle, shotgun, etc). Again, not applicable for this situation.

This isn't their job, they do not need to intervene.

 

[GNBRETT]

You never answered my question though.. What is an "assault rifle" and I'll add why are they more dangerous than a hunting rifle?

an assault rifle is capable of selective fire and has a detachable box magazine. huge difference.

 

[mysql]

an assault rifle is capable of selective fire and has a detachable box magazine. huge difference.

... and of course selective fire isn't legal to own for citizens (I think it's defined as one trigger pull required per bullet). So it's a non-issue.

 

[Flicka]

... and of course selective fire isn't legal to own for citizens (I think it's defined as one trigger pull required per bullet). So it's a non-issue.

Incorrect.

But you're right in saying it's a non-issue.

 

[captain]

Night fire, hostage situations, etc aren't applicable to what's needed for a reasonable adult to carry and intervene as needed for situations such as these. Additionally you're talking about much of the time split between different weapons types (handgun, rifle, shotgun, etc). Again, not applicable for this situation.

This isn't their job, they do not need to intervene.

I completely agree... But in Oklahoma as an example you can take a one day class to get your carry license... This position I brought up would be something between an 80 hour class and a long Saturday... Some situational training, continued certifications.. tons of people out there willing and capable of protecting out kids...

 

[mysql]

Incorrect.

But you're right in saying it's a non-issue.

I was thinking about modifying a weapon to full auto (simple change to make).

Going through the hassle of tax stamp is a waste of time for anyone wanting to break the law.

 

[mysql]

I completely agree... But in Oklahoma as an example you can take a one day class to get your carry license...

One day? It's an hour long class followed by a single trigger pull at a range, to get your CCW in my state.

 

[Flicka]

One day? It's an hour long class followed by a single trigger pull at a range, to get your CCW in my state.

That's unfortunate. In Tennessee it's a full day of class with range qualification. I still think more would be better though.

Edit: That's for both open and concealed carry. You need a permit for either one.

 

[captain]

One day? It's an hour long class followed by a single trigger pull at a range, to get your CCW in my state.

Yep, 8 hours of class time then on the range... I think you have to shoot like 25 rounds and hit the target is what it boils down to.

 

[masterblaster]

I show my DD 214 and 6 days later I have my permit in the mail. I still think requiring ccw is unconstitutional, I rarely carry, but find myself doing it more and more lately.

That's unfortunate. In Tennessee it's a full day of class with range qualification. I still think more would be better though.

Edit: That's for both open and concealed carry. You need a permit for either one.

 

[skydivr]

I was thinking about modifying a weapon to full auto (simple change to make).

Going through the hassle of tax stamp is a waste of time for anyone wanting to break the law.

Not something to even make a joke about...