Gun Control

[detlef]

You compare the control and regulation of driving to the control and regulation of guns. My question for you is ... where in the constitution does it guarantee the right to own and drive a car? Furthermore, once a driver’s license has been obtained it is ridiculously easy to maintain. Are you really holding up the DMV as a shining example of how a potentially dangerous object should be controlled? The DMV is more about fee collection than it is about regulating driving.

Hardly, which is why it is rather alarming that despite this, it is still easier to get a gun. As for the constitutional element, I don't think that just because your right to own something should be protected, it should be done so to the exclusion of reasonable controls. Hell, you admit as much below. Why are you using arguments that you don't even believe yourself?

 

If you allow the government to put stipulations on an American's right to own firearms do you also support allowing the government to add stipulations to other rights guaranteed by the constitution? Would it be acceptable for the government to regulate/control specified religious sects because of the propensity of some sects to violence? How about the regulation and control of published material in an effort to control inflammatory, slanderous and false information from being disseminated.

 

Now this is where you will claim it is okay to regulate our constitutional right to own fire arms because they are dangerous but it is not okay to regulate our other constitutional rights because they are not dangerous. And I'm sure you'll have plenty of arguments you believe justify your position. But the bottom line is you believe in granting the federal government the right to curtail a right/freedom guaranteed by the constitution without a constitutional amendment.

We already do limit the rights of assembly and speech if it is deemed harmful enough. It's called "conspiracy to commit blank". If you assemble and discuss plans to do something illegal, can't you be arrested? Isn't that regulating your freedom of speech or assembly?

 

Having said all that ... obviously it does seem to make sense that some basic level of control/regulation is required. Surely convicted felons should not be allowed to own guns and it doesn’t make sense to sell guns to minors. I think it might even make sense to require that citizens pass a gun safety/training course before they are allowed to purchase a fire arm (the main problem here is the increase in the cost). The problem is that people mistakenly believe that if we actually implement gun control effectively that it would solve our crime problem. Unfortunately solving this country’s crime problem can not be solved by gun control because guns are not the underlying problem. You can’t cure a cold by treating the various symptoms (runny nose, cough, etc). Until this country identifies and addresses the underlying issues that are causing the rampant rise in the crime rate no amount of legislation (gun control and others) is going to have a meaningful impact on crime.

 

If it was as simple has passing legislation then all of America’s problems as they relate to illegal drugs, guns and crime would already be solved.

The notion of gun control not being, pardon the expression, a silver bullet to solve all crime is no reason to ignore it entirely. If you applied that logic to everything, we'd have anarchy.

[Ursa Majoris]

Gun control in any meaningful form is a dead political duck. We are way too far down the gun road to make any more than almost invisible dents in any "gun problem". IMO, a large amount of gun crime is criminal on criminal which is fine by me. Subtract those crimes and this is a pretty peaceful country by and large, with crime confined to certain areas.

 

Perhaps the periodic massacres (Columbine, V Tech, assorted post offices) are just another price we pay for the way we want to live?

[Randall]

It's amazing the NRA is against large clips, banning bullets that police departtments say penetrate their bullet proof vests and are against anything that controls guns.

 

I'm all for hunting but not for assault weapons. The NRA acts as though any control will mean guns are banned unilaterally.

 

In this country guns will negver be illegal. JNo one with any sense in suggesting that. A little common sense will prevent a lot of deaths in my opinion.

[wiegie]

It's amazing the NRA is against large clips, banning bullets that police departtments say penetrate their bullet proof vests and are against anything that controls guns.

 

I'm all for hunting but not for assault weapons. The NRA acts as though any control will mean guns are banned unilaterally.

The second amendment is not about hunting.

[Sox]

banning bullets that police departtments say penetrate their bullet proof vests

 

 

The police are not the military.My personal belief is the police shouldn't have access to any gun or round that I myself can't purchase.

[polksalet]

It's amazing the NRA is against large clips, banning bullets that police departtments say penetrate their bullet proof vests and are against anything that controls guns.

 

I'm all for hunting but not for assault weapons. The NRA acts as though any control will mean guns are banned unilaterally.

 

In this country guns will negver be illegal. JNo one with any sense in suggesting that. A little common sense will prevent a lot of deaths in my opinion.

 

You probably don't know this but neary every rifle can easily penetrate any vest. If they ever build one to stop my 7 mag the concussion alone would kill you without any penetration.

[westvirginia]

You probably don't know this but neary every rifle can easily penetrate any vest. If they ever build one to stop my 7 mag the concussion alone would kill you without any penetration.

 

I was about to bring this up. And Randull, please define "assault weapon".

 

Atomic, you might want to check out studies by John Lott, a University of Chicago economics researcher and his book, More Guns, Less Crime. Wiegie actually went over his data at one point a few years ago. It showed statistically that looser controls on law-abiding citizens attempting to obtain and carry firearms correlated with reduced violent crime rates.

 

This really should be very easy for anyone capable of any amount of logic: Someone who would kill another human being in cold blood is not worried about breaking a gun-control law which carries a penalty much less than that of said murder. All gun control laws do is regulate law-abiding citizens. Criminals are already violating other laws, do you think they really care about one more?

[polksalet]

Let's say someone was a psycho and trolling football boards. Do you think they would target me, someone who has a cold war assault rifle under their bed? My wife has a pump 12 gauge under her side packed with OOO 3.5 magnum buckshot in an open choke or would they be more likely to go after Randall?

[Ursa Majoris]

Let's say someone was a psycho and trolling football boards.

Polk, you ARE a psycho trolling football boards.

[Caveman_Nick]

Well, I'm not firmly entrenched in any opinion on gun control at this point in my life. I don't really see the logic of the constitutional argument at all, but that's different from actually wanting legal guns banned.

 

I'll listen to statistics and reason. I know that there are countries that embrace guns, and their citizens are largely more responsible gun owners... but that doesn't mean that just making guns easy to get will have that same result. How can we be a more responsible country towards guns?

 

This article has reviewed a goodly amount of evidence from a wide variety of

international sources. Each individual portion of evidence is subject to cavil, at the very least the

general objection that the persuasiveness of social scientific evidence cannot remotely approach

the persuasiveness of conclusions in the physical sciences. Nevertheless the burden of proof rests

on the proponents of the "more guns = more death/fewer guns = less death mantra, especially

since they propose public policy ought to be based on that mantra To bear that burden would at

the very least require showing that a large number of nations with more guns have more death

and that nations which imposed stringent gun controls achieved substantial reductions in criminal

violence (or suicide). But those things are precisely what is not demonstrated when a large

number of nations are compared across the world.

Over a decade ago University of Washington public health professor Brandon Centerwall

undertook an extensive, statistically sophisticated study comparing areas in the U.S. and Canada

to determine whether Canada's much more restrictive policies had better contained criminal

violence. When he published his results it was with the admonition:

If you are surprised by my findings, so are we. We did not begin this research with any

intent to "exonerate" handguns, but there it is -- a negative finding, to be sure, but a negative

finding is nevertheless a positive contribution. It directs us where NOT to aim public health resources

 

download

[polksalet]

Polk, you ARE a psycho trolling football boards.

 

Go feed your dog, he looks hungry.

[Big John]

Go feed your dog, he looks hungry.

He has cats.

[Jimmy Neutron]

The police are not the military.My personal belief is the police shouldn't have access to any gun or round that I myself can't purchase.

 

I agree.

 

"Cop killer" bullets are kind of a misnomer. There are several classes of vests and some handgun ammo can defeat lower end vests. The Winchester Black Talon ammo was touted as "cop killer" ammo even though it had no more capability to pierce a vest than standard hollow point ammo. It was simply black vs. copper and looked "evil." It was "banned" for civilian sales. That's one of example of hugh folly on the anti-gunners. If something looks scary, it must be more dangerous than other weapons.

 

Numerous weapons were outlawed in the '94 "assault weapon" ban that are much less powerful than my semi-automatic Browning BAR deer rifle. It's all about perception and not about reality. I cringe at most news stories involving guns because they don't seem to ever get the facts straight. Semi-automatics become "automatic weapons." True automatic weapons represent less than 1% of all arms in the US. They are rarely used in crimes, though drug cartels along the southern border are using them more recently. It's time for law enforcement in those areas to dump their ARs in favor of select fire M4s.

[AtomicCEO]

download

 

Ok, I read the data and conclusions of that article, and it seems to be explicitly saying that:

- More guns does not equal more murders or suicides.

- nor does more guns equal less murders or suicides.

 

It seems to be ammo neither for or against gun control, stating instead that social conditions effect murder and suicide rates.

 

I really wish that the study covered more of the other measurable effects of guns... accidental deaths, assault, attempted murder, and so on... but it did not cover that.

 

I'm afraid I came out of it with the same attitude that in a violent society, I'd rather not have everyone armed.

[DMD]

I'm afraid I came out of it with the same attitude that in a violent society, I'd rather not have everyone armed.

 

Only the ones willing to break laws, right?

[Sox]

I agree.

 

"Cop killer" bullets are kind of a misnomer. There are several classes of vests and some handgun ammo can defeat lower end vests.

 

Agreed here as well.

 

ALL BULLETS are designed to kill.Some are better at it than others.

 

Police by and large wear body armor and rarely if ever go up against someone that does.Yet they have access to Law Enforcement Only ammunition.I've had people tell me it's so they can protect themselves better.Better than we can?Why is that?They have more of a right to protect themselves than I do?Why is that?Why do the police "need" a more powerful round than I do when their job is to serve and protect?So they can do a better job of protecting themselves than I can?

[Ursa Majoris]

So they can do a better job of protecting themselves than I can?

Um.....yes, obviously. Unless you face armed criminals every day, that is.

[untateve]

If they ever build one to stop my 7 mag the concussion alone would kill you without any penetration.

 

This quote is also true of my penis. I have to be very careful when I have relations with my wife.

 

Let's say someone was a psycho and trolling football boards. Do you think they would target me, someone who has a cold war assault rifle under their bed? My wife has a pump 12 gauge under her side packed with OOO 3.5 magnum buckshot in an open choke or would they be more likely to go after Randall?

 

I like a challenge. Sleep during the day--be wary at night.

[Duchess Jack]

I can tell you this, I make it a point to walk around in my yard with my ak-47 several times a year so the neighbors can see it. Now I doubt any of my neighbors would ever rob me but I am sure they talk about the guy with the ak in his yard. Word of this is bound to get out and anyone who might consider robbing a house in my subdivision would likely hit mine last. Therefore, a 30 round banana clip = less shooting.

[wirehairman]

The second amendment is not about hunting.

 

No it is not. It is about this:

 

Democracy is two wolves and a lamb voting on what to have for lunch. Liberty is a well-armed lamb contesting the vote.

-- Benjamin Franklin

[wiegie]

Would the requirement that a potential gun owner pass an IQ test first before getting a gun be considered "gun control"?

 

No charges for man who killed wife in TV mishap

ASSOCIATED PRESS

04/09/2008

 

SEDALIA, Mo. -- Prosecutors are not expected to file charges against a Missouri man who fatally shot his wife while he was trying to install a satellite TV system in their home.

 

Henry County investigators ruled that Patsy Long's March 22 death was accidental. Her husband, Ronald Long, fired his .22 caliber pistol from inside their Deepwater home after he couldn't punch a hole through the exterior wall using other means.

 

The sheriff's office said the 34-year-old woman was hit in the chest by the second of two shots.

 

Henry County Prosecuting Attorney Richard Shields said his office does not expect to press charges.

[Ursa Majoris]

Would the requirement that a potential gun owner pass an IQ test first before getting a gun be considered "gun control"?

That would interfere with the natural progress of Darwinism.

 

There needs to be the maximum amount of opportunities for morans to eliminate themselves and their genes.

[The Holy Roller]

That would interfere with the natural progress of Darwinism.

 

There needs to be the maximum amount of opportunities for morans to eliminate themselves and their genes.

 

It is our duty to provide as many opportunities for this to happen as possible. Global warming demands it.

[H8tank]

I had a good post.

[sundaynfl]

This video sums it up:

 

Congressional Witness Testimony

 

 

I also know if anyone breaks into our house and hears me rack my 10 gauge they are going to run 9 times out of 10... Assuming, I get the one that is to stupid to run! Like Polk, I am more than happy my neighbors have all seen me unloading my shotguns, rifles and handguns...

 

 

 

 

I love the comments from the guys in prison...

Edited April 10, 2008 by sundaynfl