Author Topic: Gun Control?  (Read 20940 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Re: Gun Control?
« Reply #600 on: May 22, 2018, 11:25:41 AM »

Online Vermont Green

  • Antoine Walker
  • ****
  • Posts: 4054
  • Tommy Points: 330
I don't think anyone wants to restrict ownership of hunting rifles.

Well, you'd be wrong.


Can you expand on this?  Can you quote any candidates running on a "ban all hunting rifles" platform?  Can you reference any specific legislation that was intended to ban hunting or hunting rifles?

I don't think you can as I have never heard of any such thing from even the most radically liberal candidates.  It is just tired scare tactic that the big liberal boogie man wants to take away all of your guns, perpetuated by dishonest politicians that are happy to continue this false narrative in order to get votes.

The republican party did not used to be this way.  Now everything is "they want to take your guns away" "they want to take your money and give it to lazy welfare queens" "liberals want open borders and let in 200 million immigrants"...  Things have really changed.  As long as there are people eating this nonsense up, it will continue.

Re: Gun Control?
« Reply #601 on: May 22, 2018, 11:27:02 AM »

Offline KGs Knee

  • Danny Ainge
  • **********
  • Posts: 10611
  • Tommy Points: 1192

Quote
But, with guns, they are designed to kill; it is their only use, their only role.

This is not entirely the case. Yes guns can kill, but they can also prevent killing as well depending how they are used. To say that is their only purpose is not accurate. Their purpose depends on the user and motivations of he or she.
just to be clear, they only "prevent killing" by the threat of killing.  just having a gun doesn't stop someone from killing you.  it's the threat you'd pose by trying to kill that person if they tried to kill you that would be a deterrent. 

killing is still the only purpose of a gun.  motivation is irrelevant.

Plenty of people use their guns for sport like target shooting or skeet shooting. I'd say those are legit uses that don't involve killing.

Re: Gun Control?
« Reply #602 on: May 22, 2018, 11:31:06 AM »

Offline KGs Knee

  • Danny Ainge
  • **********
  • Posts: 10611
  • Tommy Points: 1192
I don't think anyone wants to restrict ownership of hunting rifles.

Well, you'd be wrong.


Can you expand on this?  Can you quote any candidates running on a "ban all hunting rifles" platform?  Can you reference any specific legislation that was intended to ban hunting or hunting rifles?

I don't think you can as I have never heard of any such thing from even the most radically liberal candidates.  It is just tired scare tactic that the big liberal boogie man wants to take away all of your guns, perpetuated by dishonest politicians that are happy to continue this false narrative in order to get votes.

The republican party did not used to be this way.  Now everything is "they want to take your guns away" "they want to take your money and give it to lazy welfare queens" "liberals want open borders and let in 200 million immigrants"...  Things have really changed.  As long as there are people eating this nonsense up, it will continue.

Ah yes, ignore the part where I pointed out someone that explicitly stated they did want to repeal the 2nd amendment and then move the goal posts to politicians. You never said politicians in your first post, you simply said anyone.

And that aside, I have no doubts there are politicians who would like to repeal the 2nd Amendment, whether they've campaigned on it or not. Pretending there isn't a percentage of the population that does in fact want to take away all guns is choosing to ignore the obvious. It may be a small percentage of the population, but it exists.

Re: Gun Control?
« Reply #603 on: May 22, 2018, 11:41:04 AM »

Offline slamtheking

  • Dennis Johnson
  • ******************
  • Posts: 18963
  • Tommy Points: 8880

Quote
But, with guns, they are designed to kill; it is their only use, their only role.

This is not entirely the case. Yes guns can kill, but they can also prevent killing as well depending how they are used. To say that is their only purpose is not accurate. Their purpose depends on the user and motivations of he or she.
just to be clear, they only "prevent killing" by the threat of killing.  just having a gun doesn't stop someone from killing you.  it's the threat you'd pose by trying to kill that person if they tried to kill you that would be a deterrent. 

killing is still the only purpose of a gun.  motivation is irrelevant.

Plenty of people use their guns for sport like target shooting or skeet shooting. I'd say those are legit uses that don't involve killing.
fair point -- if they also don't use them for hunting (which is killing) or protection (threat of killing). 

I don't know how many gun owners would fit into that strict usage category of just target shooting.  The few gun owners I know do use their guns for target shooting -- to improve their skills for the purpose of protection. 

I'll give you the benefit of the doubt and go along with some gun owners just using their guns for skeet/target shooting but I suspect that if they're lives were threatened by someone with a gun I'm pretty confident they'd try to use their guns for protection without hesitation and not think to themselves "hmm, I DO have a gun that might be handy for this particular situation to protect myself/family but I really do have it just for the fun of shooting targets so I'll just find something else to protect myself".
« Last Edit: May 22, 2018, 11:47:10 AM by slamtheking »

Re: Gun Control?
« Reply #604 on: May 22, 2018, 11:42:41 AM »

Offline Erik

  • Kyrie Irving
  • Posts: 758
  • Tommy Points: 135
  • The voice of reason
Yeah, repeal the 2nd amendment. I'm sure criminals and psychos will respect THAT law... because they already respected about 20 laws up to and including shooting up a school. Criminals will keep their firearms because if you're a criminal, you're already not going to follow the rules -- by definition. It will lead to a large spike in crime and after we catch all the criminals who still have guns, crime will eventually go down -- but not for a long time. As a non gun owner, I personally feel safe knowing that the other guy doesn't know that I don't have a gun. I would be absolutely terrified if he KNOWS that I don't have one.

Another point: the citizens of this country will never give up their firearms because there are a large group of people who believe that disarming the citizens is step one of tyranny. I can't really argue with it because there are a lot of historical examples of it.

Re: Gun Control?
« Reply #605 on: May 22, 2018, 11:43:46 AM »

Offline nickagneta

  • Global Moderator
  • James Naismith
  • *********************************
  • Posts: 33153
  • Tommy Points: 5416
I don't think anyone wants to restrict ownership of hunting rifles.

Well, you'd be wrong.

Sooner or later people are gonna get it and repeal the 2nd Amendment, but I don't see it happening in my lifetime.

Nick has been very outspoken in his desire to see all guns taken away. And he's certainly not the only person I've seen in this thread who shares this opinion. So let's not pretend that this doesn't exist.

I'm also not too thrilled about the language used in his post, insinuating that the rest of us "don't get it" if we don't share the same opinion. I've seen plenty of other people get reprimanded for the exact same language.
People as in society, as a whole, not specific people in this thread. And yes, I think society has it wrong when it comes to guns.

I also think America would be a better country without guns but know it won't happen in my lifetime, so I am for stricter, somewhat reasonable gun control.

- create a national gun registry
- more comprehensive background checks
- let the CDC study the effects of gun violence in society
- ban bump stocks
- ban high capacity magazines
- ban assault rifles
- limit ammunition amounts per owner per type of caliber of gun
- create some accountability law if your gun is used in a crime. Regarding this, its tough, but that father who gave his son back his guns in the Waffle House shooting when they should have been legally stored, has culpability. If this father had given the key access or safe combination so his son could use the guns, that's culpability. If someone steals your gun from safe storage and kills someone, that's not culpability.
- start to get gun laws nationalized so that each state has very similar laws which of course would tie into the national registry.

Re: Gun Control?
« Reply #606 on: May 22, 2018, 11:50:08 AM »

Offline GratefulCs

  • Ray Allen
  • ***
  • Posts: 3105
  • Tommy Points: 486
  • Salmon and Mashed Potatoes
I don't think anyone wants to restrict ownership of hunting rifles.

Well, you'd be wrong.

Sooner or later people are gonna get it and repeal the 2nd Amendment, but I don't see it happening in my lifetime.

Nick has been very outspoken in his desire to see all guns taken away. And he's certainly not the only person I've seen in this thread who shares this opinion. So let's not pretend that this doesn't exist.

I'm also not too thrilled about the language used in his post, insinuating that the rest of us "don't get it" if we don't share the same opinion. I've seen plenty of other people get reprimanded for the exact same language.
People as in society, as a whole, not specific people in this thread. And yes, I think society has it wrong when it comes to guns.

I also think America would be a better country without guns but know it won't happen in my lifetime, so I am for stricter, somewhat reasonable gun control.

- create a national gun registry
- more comprehensive background checks
- let the CDC study the effects of gun violence in society
- ban bump stocks
- ban high capacity magazines
- ban assault rifles
- limit ammunition amounts per owner per type of caliber of gun
- create some accountability law if your gun is used in a crime. Regarding this, its tough, but that father who gave his son back his guns in the Waffle House shooting when they should have been legally stored, has culpability. If this father had given the key access or safe combination so his son could use the guns, that's culpability. If someone steals your gun from safe storage and kills someone, that's not culpability.
- start to get gun laws nationalized so that each state has very similar laws which of course would tie into the national registry.
i believe in nick agneta!!

TP

also, i miss your dog pic
I trust Danny Ainge

Re: Gun Control?
« Reply #607 on: May 22, 2018, 12:10:20 PM »

Online Vermont Green

  • Antoine Walker
  • ****
  • Posts: 4054
  • Tommy Points: 330
I don't think anyone wants to restrict ownership of hunting rifles.

Well, you'd be wrong.


Can you expand on this?  Can you quote any candidates running on a "ban all hunting rifles" platform?  Can you reference any specific legislation that was intended to ban hunting or hunting rifles?

I don't think you can as I have never heard of any such thing from even the most radically liberal candidates.  It is just tired scare tactic that the big liberal boogie man wants to take away all of your guns, perpetuated by dishonest politicians that are happy to continue this false narrative in order to get votes.

The republican party did not used to be this way.  Now everything is "they want to take your guns away" "they want to take your money and give it to lazy welfare queens" "liberals want open borders and let in 200 million immigrants"...  Things have really changed.  As long as there are people eating this nonsense up, it will continue.

Ah yes, ignore the part where I pointed out someone that explicitly stated they did want to repeal the 2nd amendment and then move the goal posts to politicians. You never said politicians in your first post, you simply said anyone.

And that aside, I have no doubts there are politicians who would like to repeal the 2nd Amendment, whether they've campaigned on it or not. Pretending there isn't a percentage of the population that does in fact want to take away all guns is choosing to ignore the obvious. It may be a small percentage of the population, but it exists.

OK, we are zeroing in on a more specific area of debate.  I agree with you that there exists a small percentage of Americans who would be OK with banning hunting rifles, but that is not what anyone is trying to do (I should have been more clear with my point but this is a blog that I am sneaking on to without time for thorough editing of my takes).  There is no liberal movement to repeal the second amendment or to ban gun ownership.  I use "or" because these are two different things.  You could repeal the second amendment and still allow for gun ownership.  The second amendment is about "maintaining a well regulated militia", I personally don't believe you need the second amendment to have private ownership of fire arms.

But back to the idea of "liberals want to take guns away".  Will you concede that the narrative of the mainstream republican/conservative (whatever you want to call it) is to take the idea that "a small percentage of Americans" don't like guns which is probably mostly true but falsely selling this as liberals want to take your guns away.  That is always the narrative that is fallen back on.  I have hockey buddies that were convinced that Obama had a secret plan to take everyone's guns away based on what they heard on talk radio,  This false narrative is perpetuated and the result is people vote for idiots like Roy Moore just because they believe if they don't, their guns will be confiscated by liberals.

Are you OK with using this as a political weapon to achieve a desired political outcome?  I am not and that is a big part of why I left the republican party some time ago.

Re: Gun Control?
« Reply #608 on: May 22, 2018, 12:35:46 PM »

Offline nickagneta

  • Global Moderator
  • James Naismith
  • *********************************
  • Posts: 33153
  • Tommy Points: 5416
Also, don't know how to do it but we as a society have to do something about handguns on the street. They kill more people ◊100 than die in mass shootings every year. Would love to hear good ideas on how to do that.

Re: Gun Control?
« Reply #609 on: May 22, 2018, 01:31:07 PM »

Offline indeedproceed

  • In The Rafters
  • James Naismith
  • *********************************
  • Posts: 41717
  • Tommy Points: 2359
  • You ain't the boss of the freakin' bedclothes.
I've now become much more cynical about the talking points after these shootings. When politicians say, 'What about  the violence in Chicago?', or, 'School shootings only account for a fraction of the deaths each year we see from (insert other problem here), why don't you care about those?'

It's all just moving the field goals. Maybe at some point it was discourse but it's not anymore. It's not because after they move the field goals, nobody tries to change anything.

Basically, if you're a politician who isn't sponsoring or co-sponsoring legislation that you believe will at least limit mass and especially school shootings, I wish to God that you would say what you really mean. Say, 'I'm alright with these school shootings. I feel like there are other things I should be focusing on.' Just say that, politicians. Let's just be honest about it.

My 4 year old's UPK class was put on lockdown today because of what police believed to be a credible threat. It turned out to be nothing, but I'm glad the school and local law enforcement are so vigilant. I'm also very sad about it. School shootings are going to become the new nuclear threat. The school kids being aware of a looming prospect of a violent and grizzly death at any time. They already have school shooter active drills. Just like Duck and Cover videos. And those didn't scar a generation or anything.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?reload=9&v=120wGLgCTkg

A mother posted a lengthy but worth reading letter on facebook about her daughter's experience during the shooting. The whole thing is worth a read. Too often since these aren't our kids (I hope anyways), these things have a distance.

Anyways, here's the part of the letter that struck me the most:

Quote
She arrived at school and headed to her first period, Art. She loves this class and was excited to finish her year end project. As she focused on the project, the first shot barely registers and she isn't sure what she heard. Suddenly, the kids start screaming and running. The gunman enters their room from the classroom next door and fires a shot that grazes one girl and hits a boy in the classroom. She said everything happened so fast and everyone is panicking and running around the room. There's a door at the back of the room to which the kids are running...only to discover the door is locked and they are trapped. Seeing the kids turning back from the door, she immediately starts running towards items to hide behind.

She's moving from item to item as the gunman continues to fire into the classroom. She is now covered in dust from the bullets hitting the walls around her. Kids are scrambling trying to hide / escape and she finds an area where he can't see her, but she can see him. She finally runs for the supply closet where she and 6 other kids hide. They are able to lock one door and begin blocking the other door as another girl runs into the closet with them. As they are moving heavy items in front of the door, the gunman screams...Surprise M*****F****** and begins shooting into the closet. The gunman hits 3 of the 8 kids in the closet...killing 2 of them instantly. He leaves to chase other kids who ran out of the room and they hear more gun shots. Then he comes back.

By this time, Isabelle has called the police and is whispering into the phone. They tell her to stay quiet and that help is on the way. Then silence on the phone. They hear the gunman in the classroom next door yelling Woo Hoo! and firing more shots. She hangs up and calls the police back to be told that they are entering the premises and to stay quiet and keep hiding. Then she hears only silence again. The gunman then comes back into their room and they hear him saying....are you dead? Then more shots are fired. By this time, cell phones all over the classroom are ringing and he's taunting the kids in the closet asking them....do you think it's for you? do you want to come answer it? Then he proceeds to fire more bullets into the closet and tries to get in. She calls the police again and they tell her they are headed towards their classroom. After another 5-10 minutes, the police arrive outside the classroom. By this time, she has been laying on the floor for over 30 min next to her deceased classmates. They listen to the exchange between the gunman and the police, as they can hear him reloading his weapon. Finally, the gunman surrenders and police take him into custody.
« Last Edit: May 22, 2018, 01:44:09 PM by indeedproceed »

"You've gotta respect a 15-percent 3-point shooter. A guy
like that is always lethal." - Evan 'The God' Turner

Re: Gun Control?
« Reply #610 on: May 22, 2018, 02:36:04 PM »

Offline gift

  • Bill Walton
  • *
  • Posts: 1480
  • Tommy Points: 142
I don't think anyone wants to restrict ownership of hunting rifles.

Well, you'd be wrong.


Can you expand on this?  Can you quote any candidates running on a "ban all hunting rifles" platform?  Can you reference any specific legislation that was intended to ban hunting or hunting rifles?

I don't think you can as I have never heard of any such thing from even the most radically liberal candidates.  It is just tired scare tactic that the big liberal boogie man wants to take away all of your guns, perpetuated by dishonest politicians that are happy to continue this false narrative in order to get votes.

The republican party did not used to be this way.  Now everything is "they want to take your guns away" "they want to take your money and give it to lazy welfare queens" "liberals want open borders and let in 200 million immigrants"...  Things have really changed.  As long as there are people eating this nonsense up, it will continue.

Ah yes, ignore the part where I pointed out someone that explicitly stated they did want to repeal the 2nd amendment and then move the goal posts to politicians. You never said politicians in your first post, you simply said anyone.

And that aside, I have no doubts there are politicians who would like to repeal the 2nd Amendment, whether they've campaigned on it or not. Pretending there isn't a percentage of the population that does in fact want to take away all guns is choosing to ignore the obvious. It may be a small percentage of the population, but it exists.

OK, we are zeroing in on a more specific area of debate.  I agree with you that there exists a small percentage of Americans who would be OK with banning hunting rifles, but that is not what anyone is trying to do (I should have been more clear with my point but this is a blog that I am sneaking on to without time for thorough editing of my takes).  There is no liberal movement to repeal the second amendment or to ban gun ownership.  I use "or" because these are two different things.  You could repeal the second amendment and still allow for gun ownership.  The second amendment is about "maintaining a well regulated militia", I personally don't believe you need the second amendment to have private ownership of fire arms.

But back to the idea of "liberals want to take guns away".  Will you concede that the narrative of the mainstream republican/conservative (whatever you want to call it) is to take the idea that "a small percentage of Americans" don't like guns which is probably mostly true but falsely selling this as liberals want to take your guns away.  That is always the narrative that is fallen back on.  I have hockey buddies that were convinced that Obama had a secret plan to take everyone's guns away based on what they heard on talk radio,  This false narrative is perpetuated and the result is people vote for idiots like Roy Moore just because they believe if they don't, their guns will be confiscated by liberals.

Are you OK with using this as a political weapon to achieve a desired political outcome?  I am not and that is a big part of why I left the republican party some time ago.

I think it might be helpful to acknowledge a commonality among some who oppose gun control legislation and others who advocate for "reasonable" gun control measures. In my observance, you'll find members of both groups in this very thread (judging by statements made within).

The commonality is both an area of agreement and at the crux of the immovability of the respective stances. That commonality, in my opinion, is that both sides agree that "reasonable/limited" gun control measures are ultimately ineffective toward the stated goals. The disagreement is that one side is still willing to propose the policies either for sake of avoiding inaction, or with the intent to progressively restrict gun ownership in stages. The other side is unwilling to support ineffective restrictions, especially if those restrictions are precursors to further policies that have ramifications that affect them personally.

A good portion of people on both sides of gun restriction proposals share this common view and I think it's good for people who do to share this acknowledgment rather than deny it, since common ground is a good starting point for discussions.

Re: Gun Control?
« Reply #611 on: May 22, 2018, 02:49:23 PM »

Online Roy H.

  • Forums Manager
  • James Naismith
  • *********************************
  • Posts: 35593
  • Tommy Points: -27753
  • 33,333 posts and counting . . .
I don't think anyone wants to restrict ownership of hunting rifles.

Well, you'd be wrong.

Sooner or later people are gonna get it and repeal the 2nd Amendment, but I don't see it happening in my lifetime.

Nick has been very outspoken in his desire to see all guns taken away. And he's certainly not the only person I've seen in this thread who shares this opinion. So let's not pretend that this doesn't exist.

I'm also not too thrilled about the language used in his post, insinuating that the rest of us "don't get it" if we don't share the same opinion. I've seen plenty of other people get reprimanded for the exact same language.
People as in society, as a whole, not specific people in this thread. And yes, I think society has it wrong when it comes to guns.

I also think America would be a better country without guns but know it won't happen in my lifetime, so I am for stricter, somewhat reasonable gun control.

- create a national gun registry
- more comprehensive background checks
- let the CDC study the effects of gun violence in society
- ban bump stocks
- ban high capacity magazines
- ban assault rifles
- limit ammunition amounts per owner per type of caliber of gun
- create some accountability law if your gun is used in a crime. Regarding this, its tough, but that father who gave his son back his guns in the Waffle House shooting when they should have been legally stored, has culpability. If this father had given the key access or safe combination so his son could use the guns, that's culpability. If someone steals your gun from safe storage and kills someone, that's not culpability.
- start to get gun laws nationalized so that each state has very similar laws which of course would tie into the national registry.

I agree with most of these. I donít think we need to ban assault weapons, since thatís a largely cosmetic issue.  Iím fine with regulating rate of fire, however. Magazine size is big. Be aggressive and limit it to 8 rounds.

Iíd make trigger locks protected by a finger print or passcode mandatory.

Iíd also aggressively reform the criminal code related to possession of firearms by prohibited persons, both in terms of those possessing weapons and those who supply them. Iíd broaden RICO and similar laws, making it illegal for anybody in a gang or hate group to own a firearm.

And Iíd invest a hell of a lot more in long-term mental health treatment facilities.  All gun ownership would be tied to gun safety classes, including how to spot concerns in your children.

Itís a bit more government intervention than Iíd like, but itís necessary.  School shootings drive the media, but thereís an epidemic of handgun violence that too few proposals even recognize.


Once a CrotoNat, always a CrotoNat.  CelticsBlog Draft Champions, 2009 & 2012;
DKC Draft 2015 Champions and beyond...

Re: Gun Control?
« Reply #612 on: May 22, 2018, 03:30:46 PM »

Offline nickagneta

  • Global Moderator
  • James Naismith
  • *********************************
  • Posts: 33153
  • Tommy Points: 5416
I don't think anyone wants to restrict ownership of hunting rifles.

Well, you'd be wrong.

Sooner or later people are gonna get it and repeal the 2nd Amendment, but I don't see it happening in my lifetime.

Nick has been very outspoken in his desire to see all guns taken away. And he's certainly not the only person I've seen in this thread who shares this opinion. So let's not pretend that this doesn't exist.

I'm also not too thrilled about the language used in his post, insinuating that the rest of us "don't get it" if we don't share the same opinion. I've seen plenty of other people get reprimanded for the exact same language.
People as in society, as a whole, not specific people in this thread. And yes, I think society has it wrong when it comes to guns.

I also think America would be a better country without guns but know it won't happen in my lifetime, so I am for stricter, somewhat reasonable gun control.

- create a national gun registry
- more comprehensive background checks
- let the CDC study the effects of gun violence in society
- ban bump stocks
- ban high capacity magazines
- ban assault rifles
- limit ammunition amounts per owner per type of caliber of gun
- create some accountability law if your gun is used in a crime. Regarding this, its tough, but that father who gave his son back his guns in the Waffle House shooting when they should have been legally stored, has culpability. If this father had given the key access or safe combination so his son could use the guns, that's culpability. If someone steals your gun from safe storage and kills someone, that's not culpability.
- start to get gun laws nationalized so that each state has very similar laws which of course would tie into the national registry.

I agree with most of these. I donít think we need to ban assault weapons, since thatís a largely cosmetic issue.  Iím fine with regulating rate of fire, however. Magazine size is big. Be aggressive and limit it to 8 rounds.

Iíd make trigger locks protected by a finger print or passcode mandatory.


Iíd also aggressively reform the criminal code related to possession of firearms by prohibited persons, both in terms of those possessing weapons and those who supply them. Iíd broaden RICO and similar laws, making it illegal for anybody in a gang or hate group to own a firearm.

And Iíd invest a hell of a lot more in long-term mental health treatment facilities.  All gun ownership would be tied to gun safety classes, including how to spot concerns in your children.

Itís a bit more government intervention than Iíd like, but itís necessary.  School shootings drive the media, but thereís an epidemic of handgun violence that too few proposals even recognize.
This is awesome but with over 300 million guns already in circulation without this technology, I am not sure its going to work with anything more than newly manufactured arms.

Re: Gun Control?
« Reply #613 on: May 22, 2018, 05:09:41 PM »

Online Roy H.

  • Forums Manager
  • James Naismith
  • *********************************
  • Posts: 35593
  • Tommy Points: -27753
  • 33,333 posts and counting . . .
I don't think anyone wants to restrict ownership of hunting rifles.

Well, you'd be wrong.

Sooner or later people are gonna get it and repeal the 2nd Amendment, but I don't see it happening in my lifetime.

Nick has been very outspoken in his desire to see all guns taken away. And he's certainly not the only person I've seen in this thread who shares this opinion. So let's not pretend that this doesn't exist.

I'm also not too thrilled about the language used in his post, insinuating that the rest of us "don't get it" if we don't share the same opinion. I've seen plenty of other people get reprimanded for the exact same language.
People as in society, as a whole, not specific people in this thread. And yes, I think society has it wrong when it comes to guns.

I also think America would be a better country without guns but know it won't happen in my lifetime, so I am for stricter, somewhat reasonable gun control.

- create a national gun registry
- more comprehensive background checks
- let the CDC study the effects of gun violence in society
- ban bump stocks
- ban high capacity magazines
- ban assault rifles
- limit ammunition amounts per owner per type of caliber of gun
- create some accountability law if your gun is used in a crime. Regarding this, its tough, but that father who gave his son back his guns in the Waffle House shooting when they should have been legally stored, has culpability. If this father had given the key access or safe combination so his son could use the guns, that's culpability. If someone steals your gun from safe storage and kills someone, that's not culpability.
- start to get gun laws nationalized so that each state has very similar laws which of course would tie into the national registry.

I agree with most of these. I donít think we need to ban assault weapons, since thatís a largely cosmetic issue.  Iím fine with regulating rate of fire, however. Magazine size is big. Be aggressive and limit it to 8 rounds.

Iíd make trigger locks protected by a finger print or passcode mandatory.


Iíd also aggressively reform the criminal code related to possession of firearms by prohibited persons, both in terms of those possessing weapons and those who supply them. Iíd broaden RICO and similar laws, making it illegal for anybody in a gang or hate group to own a firearm.

And Iíd invest a hell of a lot more in long-term mental health treatment facilities.  All gun ownership would be tied to gun safety classes, including how to spot concerns in your children.

Itís a bit more government intervention than Iíd like, but itís necessary.  School shootings drive the media, but thereís an epidemic of handgun violence that too few proposals even recognize.
This is awesome but with over 300 million guns already in circulation without this technology, I am not sure its going to work with anything more than newly manufactured arms.

Eventually the old guns would need to replaced. Itís a long-term solution, no doubt.


Once a CrotoNat, always a CrotoNat.  CelticsBlog Draft Champions, 2009 & 2012;
DKC Draft 2015 Champions and beyond...

Re: Gun Control?
« Reply #614 on: May 22, 2018, 05:12:27 PM »

Offline nickagneta

  • Global Moderator
  • James Naismith
  • *********************************
  • Posts: 33153
  • Tommy Points: 5416
I don't think anyone wants to restrict ownership of hunting rifles.

Well, you'd be wrong.

Sooner or later people are gonna get it and repeal the 2nd Amendment, but I don't see it happening in my lifetime.

Nick has been very outspoken in his desire to see all guns taken away. And he's certainly not the only person I've seen in this thread who shares this opinion. So let's not pretend that this doesn't exist.

I'm also not too thrilled about the language used in his post, insinuating that the rest of us "don't get it" if we don't share the same opinion. I've seen plenty of other people get reprimanded for the exact same language.
People as in society, as a whole, not specific people in this thread. And yes, I think society has it wrong when it comes to guns.

I also think America would be a better country without guns but know it won't happen in my lifetime, so I am for stricter, somewhat reasonable gun control.

- create a national gun registry
- more comprehensive background checks
- let the CDC study the effects of gun violence in society
- ban bump stocks
- ban high capacity magazines
- ban assault rifles
- limit ammunition amounts per owner per type of caliber of gun
- create some accountability law if your gun is used in a crime. Regarding this, its tough, but that father who gave his son back his guns in the Waffle House shooting when they should have been legally stored, has culpability. If this father had given the key access or safe combination so his son could use the guns, that's culpability. If someone steals your gun from safe storage and kills someone, that's not culpability.
- start to get gun laws nationalized so that each state has very similar laws which of course would tie into the national registry.

I agree with most of these. I donít think we need to ban assault weapons, since thatís a largely cosmetic issue.  Iím fine with regulating rate of fire, however. Magazine size is big. Be aggressive and limit it to 8 rounds.

Iíd make trigger locks protected by a finger print or passcode mandatory.


Iíd also aggressively reform the criminal code related to possession of firearms by prohibited persons, both in terms of those possessing weapons and those who supply them. Iíd broaden RICO and similar laws, making it illegal for anybody in a gang or hate group to own a firearm.

And Iíd invest a hell of a lot more in long-term mental health treatment facilities.  All gun ownership would be tied to gun safety classes, including how to spot concerns in your children.

Itís a bit more government intervention than Iíd like, but itís necessary.  School shootings drive the media, but thereís an epidemic of handgun violence that too few proposals even recognize.
This is awesome but with over 300 million guns already in circulation without this technology, I am not sure its going to work with anything more than newly manufactured arms.

Eventually the old guns would need to replaced. Itís a long-term solution, no doubt.
Every little step is a good step, so long as its not the only step. Right?