iowaman
Topic Author
Posts: 3874
Joined: Thu May 20, 2004 2:29 am

Obama, To Impose Gun Control By Decree Part 2

Tue Jan 15, 2013 2:23 am

Since the last thread was over 300 replies, please continue the discussion here. Thank you to all who have followed forum rules and kept the first thread civil.

Previous thread:
Obama, To Impose Gun Control By Decree (by AR385 Dec 26 2012 in Non Aviation)

[Edited 2013-01-14 18:28:41]
 
mt99
Posts: 6166
Joined: Wed May 26, 1999 5:41 am

Obama, To Impose Gun Control By Decree Part 2

Tue Jan 15, 2013 2:55 am

SO i haven been reading the second amendment.

"A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.[8]"

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Second_..._to_the_United_States_Constitution

And i have determined that Gun Manufactures infringe on MY right to keep a gun. How? I have to pay for it. Its my right to have a gun. Will Smith and Wesson give me one for free? Will the NRA give me a free gun?The entry point for arms should be $0. Tax who ever needs to be taxed. I want a free gun!
Step into my office, baby
 
itsjustme
Posts: 2727
Joined: Sun Apr 25, 2004 6:58 pm

Obama, To Impose Gun Control By Decree Part 2

Tue Jan 15, 2013 3:01 am

Quoting seb146 (Reply 305):
Why is everyone up in arms over Obama doing things by executive order?

Because the blunt truth is this forum is comprised of mostly "right thinking" members. At least they seem to be the most verbal on issues like this.

Quoting cmf (Reply 308):
Mental history is just one pert of the problem. The other parts must be addressed too.

It's one very small part of the problem. In the majority of gun crimes, and I'm not just talking about mass shootings, but gun crimes in general, the shooter doesn't legally own or possess his/her weapon of choice. A fact that Messrs La Pierre and Keene and their membership keep failing to address. I've said it before but it bears repeating; The current gun laws in CT actually worked, with regard to the Newtown shooter. He tried to purchase a firearm and didn't want to comply with that state's background and waiting period laws and left the store empty handed. Instead, he used the weapons legally owned by a relative. All the mental background checks the NRA and some contributors to this thread are suggesting would not have had any impact on the outcome on most of the gun crimes in this country.

[Edited 2013-01-14 19:34:43]
 
NAV20
Posts: 8453
Joined: Thu Nov 27, 2003 3:25 pm

Obama, To Impose Gun Control By Decree Part 2

Tue Jan 15, 2013 3:11 am

Quoting mt99 (Reply 1):
I want a free gun!

Sorry, mt99, the Founding Fathers were ahead of you right back in 1792. See my post 307 on the thread that the mods just closed. The Militia Act, passed in that year, required every able-bodied male not only to join the Militia, but to provide his weapon at his own expense.  


"That each and every free able-bodied white male citizen of the respective States, resident therein, who is or shall be of age of eighteen years, and under the age of forty-five years (except as is herein after excepted) shall severally and respectively be enrolled in the militia, ... every citizen, so enrolled and notified, shall, within six months thereafter, provide himself with a good musket or firelock...."


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Militia#Nineteenth_Century_2
"Once you have flown, you will walk the earth with your eyes turned skywards.." - Leonardo da Vinci
 
mt99
Posts: 6166
Joined: Wed May 26, 1999 5:41 am

Obama, To Impose Gun Control By Decree Part 2

Tue Jan 15, 2013 3:13 am

Quoting NAV20 (Reply 3):
he Militia Act, passed in that year, required every able-bodied male not only to join the Militia, but to provide his weapon at his own expense.  

Awww Dang it. Damned those loopholes! So we are forced to Join the Milita then?
Step into my office, baby
 
Ken777
Posts: 9064
Joined: Thu Mar 11, 2004 5:39 am

Obama, To Impose Gun Control By Decree Part 2

Tue Jan 15, 2013 3:24 am

Quoting mt99 (Reply 1):
A well regulated militia

Well "regulated"? That must be a word the NRA hates. Pity the Founding Fathers added it in. Guess there were not lobbyists back then.
 
NAV20
Posts: 8453
Joined: Thu Nov 27, 2003 3:25 pm

Obama, To Impose Gun Control By Decree Part 2

Tue Jan 15, 2013 3:25 am

Quoting mt99 (Reply 4):
So we are forced to Join the Milita then?

Thankfully I don't think that bit is still in force!  

Point was, though, that the first duty of the Militia in those days was to 'keep the peace' and suppress any 'insurrections.'

"To provide for calling forth the Militia to execute the Laws of the Union, suppress Insurrections and repel Invasions;"

It has to be borne in mind that quite a high proportion of the colonists in those days would have had close links to Britain and would probably have preferred to stay part of the Empire.

[Edited 2013-01-14 19:27:08]
"Once you have flown, you will walk the earth with your eyes turned skywards.." - Leonardo da Vinci
 
mt99
Posts: 6166
Joined: Wed May 26, 1999 5:41 am

Obama, To Impose Gun Control By Decree Part 2

Tue Jan 15, 2013 3:32 am

Quoting NAV20 (Reply 3):
The Militia Act, passed in that year

The same that says that Militia Members should be between 18 and 45.

So 46yo cannot have guns anymore?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Militia_Act_of_1792
Step into my office, baby
 
Mir
Posts: 19108
Joined: Mon Jan 05, 2004 3:55 am

Obama, To Impose Gun Control By Decree Part 2

Tue Jan 15, 2013 4:14 am

From the previous thread:

Quoting Fr8mech (Reply 297):
But, the data can't be discounted. Look at Washington D.C. and Chicago.

Violent crime has been going doen and we have not become the Old West, as many of the fear-mongering left claimed we would become when Florida started the shall issue concealed carry movement.

You can't discount DC or Chicago's data, but you can't discount New York's either.

Violent crime is going down (though not according to the NRA, perhaps because an increase in violent crime would compel more people to buy guns), but since there's nothing to prove that guns are the cause, it's just as likely that the effect of legal gun ownership on violent crime is negligible.

Quoting EA CO AS (Reply 309):
Can't, or don't wish to?

Can't. There's no data proving a solid causation between more legal guns and less crime, or between fewer legal guns and more crime, thus that conclusion can't logically be drawn.

-Mir
7 billion, one nation, imagination...it's a beautiful day
 
fr8mech
Posts: 6672
Joined: Mon Sep 26, 2005 9:00 am

Obama, To Impose Gun Control By Decree Part 2

Tue Jan 15, 2013 4:16 am

Quoting mt99 (Reply 1):
And i have determined that Gun Manufactures infringe on MY right to keep a gun. How? I have to pay for it. Its my right to have a gun. Will Smith and Wesson give me one for free? Will the NRA give me a free gun?The entry point for arms should be $0. Tax who ever needs to be taxed. I want a free gun!

Actually, I think the precedent has been set that you must buy your own gun, subject to the government telling you what the minimum caliber and capacity has to be. If you fail to buy your own gun, then you will be fined. If you can't afford a gun, then he government will subsidize your purchase of one.

I guess you guys have decided to take it to the ridiculous. When you can't adequately debate or defend your position, the time has come to ridicule.
When seconds count...the police are minutes away.
 
User avatar
DeltaMD90
Posts: 8245
Joined: Tue Apr 15, 2008 11:25 pm

Obama, To Impose Gun Control By Decree Part 2

Tue Jan 15, 2013 5:04 am

Quoting Mir (Reply 8):
Can't. There's no data proving a solid causation between more legal guns and less crime, or between fewer legal guns and more crime, thus that conclusion can't logically be drawn.

I agree... both sides are guilty of it. There are a lot of variables that go into it, and in general, crime has been decreasing since 1990. I often see a side pick a point in time, let's say 1994 when the AWB went into effect then pick another point, let's say 2002 and claim that the AWB decreased crime. Well, um no you can't really say that. I can't think of an example from the other side, but I've seen claims like "in 200X this gun law went into effect making it easier to own guns and a few years later crime went down." Again, crime has been going down, not sure either law had anything to do with it
Ironically I have never flown a Delta MD-90 :)
 
fr8mech
Posts: 6672
Joined: Mon Sep 26, 2005 9:00 am

Obama, To Impose Gun Control By Decree Part 2

Tue Jan 15, 2013 5:36 am

Quoting Mir (Reply 8):
(though not according to the NRA, perhaps because an increase in violent crime would compel more people to buy guns

Actually, the NRA relies on the FBI data to bolster its position that guns in the hands of the law abiding reduces violent crime. They need only point to Washington D.C. and Chicago to show the opposite. I'm glad NY's crime rate has gone down. Statistical anomaly? I'm sure there may be one or two cities that swing the other way.

So, let's get it going. What executive orders (or regulations via tha BATFE) will President Obama issue? My guess:

-background check to purchase ammunition (by the way, some states already require a permit)
-ban on the import or manufacture of 10 round or greater magazines
-some attempt to limit transfers on currently owned high capacity magazines
-some attempt to have FFL's report multiple sales or large ammunition purchases
-adding some dubious BATFE regulation that attempts to limit the private citizen's rights under 18 USC 922(a)(3), (a)(5)(d)
-some feel good proclamation that urges The Congress to act on the proposed assault weapons ban that will be submitted by Senator Feinstein.
-and a demand, yes a demand, to The Congress to bring legislation that makes his decrees law.

What do you guys think?
When seconds count...the police are minutes away.
 
seb146
Posts: 14060
Joined: Wed Dec 01, 1999 7:19 am

Obama, To Impose Gun Control By Decree Part 2

Tue Jan 15, 2013 5:36 am

Quoting Mir (Reply 8):
There's no data proving a solid causation between more legal guns and less crime, or between fewer legal guns and more crime, thus that conclusion can't logically be drawn.

Because funding for that sort of research has been cut. By.. Guess who?

On an unrelated note (Stephanie Miller touched on it): Why are militias regulated in the Constitution and free to do what they will by SCOTUS but free speech and freedom of expression regulated by SCOTUS by Citizens United and Janet Jackson's nip slip?
Patriotic and Proud Liberal
 
fr8mech
Posts: 6672
Joined: Mon Sep 26, 2005 9:00 am

Obama, To Impose Gun Control By Decree Part 2

Tue Jan 15, 2013 5:39 am

Quoting seb146 (Reply 12):
On an unrelated note (Stephanie Miller touched on it): Why are militias regulated in the Constitution and free to do what they will by SCOTUS but free speech and freedom of expression regulated by SCOTUS by Citizens United and Janet Jackson's nip slip?

Not having read the Citizens United brief, I can't comment in a detailed way, but didn't that opinion lift restrictions?
When seconds count...the police are minutes away.
 
seb146
Posts: 14060
Joined: Wed Dec 01, 1999 7:19 am

Obama, To Impose Gun Control By Decree Part 2

Tue Jan 15, 2013 5:56 am

Quoting fr8mech (Reply 13):
but didn't that opinion lift restrictions

Any person or corporation can give any amount of money to any political person or faction or cause they want. Money is the same as free speech. Unless boobies are involved. Then, we must think of the children and never ever show a bare breast ever.

Imagine: a world where a gay man sticks up for boobies.
Patriotic and Proud Liberal
 
itsjustme
Posts: 2727
Joined: Sun Apr 25, 2004 6:58 pm

Obama, To Impose Gun Control By Decree Part 2

Tue Jan 15, 2013 6:21 am

Can someone please paint me a very simple picture (to quote attorney "Joe Miller" in Philadelphia, "Like I'm a six year old") of how more guns translates to a decrease in crime? Forget the data because both sides on the gun debate can play with those numbers. I am speaking from a literal sense. I own and either carry or have somewhat immediate access to a firearm 24 hours a day, 7 days a week. And I am guessing several, if not most contributors to this thread can say the same. Great. So let's say I am approached by some sh*thead when getting out of my car at the local Shell station and he sticks a gun in my face in an attempted car jack. I get the drop on him and he finds himself chewing on the business end of my off duty piece. Even though my carrying a firearm has thwarted a successful car jack, a crime has still been committed. Here's another example- one that actually occurred: Two thugs entered an internet cafe' in, I believe it was FL. One was armed with a firearm, the other with a baseball bat. A 70 something gentlemen, who was legally licensed to carry a concealed weapon, drew his firearm and fired numerous shots at the robbers, wounding both of them in the process thus thwarting a successful robbery. However, a crime, well several crimes actually, were still committed. So, please tell me how more guns in homes or on the street literally equates to less crime.

[Edited 2013-01-14 22:31:38]
 
itsjustme
Posts: 2727
Joined: Sun Apr 25, 2004 6:58 pm

Obama, To Impose Gun Control By Decree Part 2

Tue Jan 15, 2013 6:22 am

Quoting seb146 (Reply 14):
Imagine: a world where a gay man sticks up for boobies.

If you're speaking in a literal sense seb, I'm impressed.  
 
flymia
Posts: 6810
Joined: Thu Jun 14, 2001 6:33 am

Obama, To Impose Gun Control By Decree Part 2

Tue Jan 15, 2013 6:49 am

Quoting itsjustme (Reply 15):

It doesn't equate to less crime and when someone is put into a situation where a firearm might need to be used who in the world cares. What having people who are responsible and trained with firearms do is create less victims. The dirt bag might get shot but hopefully no one innocent. And it can creat less serious crimes or less loss in life or property.

Someone comes into,your home. You hold them up with your firearm it's still a bugarly but at least you didn't lose anything.

Someone goes on a shooting spree in a mall. You have your firearm and engage him. He doesn't shoot anyone else. Less victims.

This is why responble gun ownership is a good thing in this country: http://www.wsbtv.com/news/news/colle...t-shoots-kills-home-invader/nD9XG/

A crime was still committed. But it would have been much much worse. I will also say keeping a gun in a bag is not a good idea. Should have been on the man but in this situation everyone is just happy there was a fun in the good guys hand.

I never have met a law enforcement officer who is against responsible gun ownership. But maybe that is just the mentality down here in Florida. Not saying you are against it, I'm not sure. Just the general feeling I get from officers I know down here. At the same time I can't say officers down here are the greatest bunch around sometimes.

[Edited 2013-01-14 22:58:22]
"It was just four of us on the flight deck, trying to do our job" (Captain Al Haynes)
 
Mir
Posts: 19108
Joined: Mon Jan 05, 2004 3:55 am

Obama, To Impose Gun Control By Decree Part 2

Tue Jan 15, 2013 6:53 am

Quoting fr8mech (Reply 11):
Actually, the NRA relies on the FBI data to bolster its position that guns in the hands of the law abiding reduces violent crime.

I'm only going by what LaPierre said at the post-Sandy Hook press conference:

"So now, due to a declined willingness to prosecute dangerous criminals, violent crime is increasing again for the first time in 19 years."

http://articles.washingtonpost.com/2...-minimum-risk-nra-wayne-lapierre/2

So if you believe him, because violent crime is increasing we need more guns. That statement is entirely incompatible with the idea that we have less violent crime because we have more guns.

And, as I've mentioned, the FBI data can only be used to prove correlation, not causation.

-Mir
7 billion, one nation, imagination...it's a beautiful day
 
vikkyvik
Posts: 11860
Joined: Thu Jul 31, 2003 1:58 pm

Obama, To Impose Gun Control By Decree Part 2

Tue Jan 15, 2013 7:20 am

Quoting mt99 (Reply 1):
Will Smith and Wesson give me one for free?

I wish you all the luck in the world getting a free gun from Will Smith, but I'm not sure how it's relevant.
I'm watching Jeopardy. The category is worst Madonna songs. "This one from 1987 is terrible".
 
seb146
Posts: 14060
Joined: Wed Dec 01, 1999 7:19 am

Obama, To Impose Gun Control By Decree Part 2

Tue Jan 15, 2013 7:27 am

Quoting itsjustme (Reply 16):
If you're speaking in a literal sense seb, I'm impressed.

Boobies don't kill people unless the stupid cancer gets in the way. I don't care if someone is nekked in public. If they are touching themselves inappropriately, then, yeah... I care. Otherwise, not my (or anyone else) concern.

Quoting flymia (Reply 17):
It doesn't equate to less crime and when someone is put into a situation where a firearm might need to be used who in the world cares.

So, if a person is not holding a gun, there is no crime?

I want so badly to walk up to a person who has a concealed carry permit (I have seen a number of them here) and ask them if they know for sure 100% if they know that I or anyone else in that space is mentally stable enough to know the difference between right and smashing a chair over their head and taking out the place with their gun.

Guns don't kill people. People with mental deficiancy kill people. Don't bother with what the NRA says. NRA says everyone can handle guns just fine thankyouverymuch. Including those with mental deficiancy. Depression and PTSD and what have you. That's fine. That falls under Second Amendment. They can take out 20 students in a school. Because they have a Second Amendment right to guns.
Patriotic and Proud Liberal
 
NAV20
Posts: 8453
Joined: Thu Nov 27, 2003 3:25 pm

Obama, To Impose Gun Control By Decree Part 2

Tue Jan 15, 2013 11:11 am

Might be worth (as briefly as I can) describing one of the worst shooting massacres ever - at Port Arthur, a small town in Tasmania, Australia, which started life as a penal colony in the 18th. century and has now become a picturesque tourist attraction close to the state capital, Hobart.

A young man called Martin Bryant went there with an AR15 one day in 1996. Without warning, he cut loose and blazed away at the tourists with an AR15, killing 35 people and wounding another 21.

http://www.abc.net.au/archives/80days/stories/2012/01/19/3412072.htm

As it happened, Bryant came from a wealthy family but had severe mental problems (including an IQ of only about 60). To its credit, the court decided that he was fit to stand trial, and he ended up being sentenced to serve 35 life sentences, and another 1,035 years for other related offences.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Martin_Bryant

The important thing, though, is that both Government and the Opposition got together, and agreed on introducing a ban on private ownership of all semi-automatic (self-loading) weapons, and on pump-action shotguns. What's more (brilliantly, in my opinion), they applied the ban in the form of a 'buy-back' - existing owners were given time to 'surrender their weapons' at the nearest police station and be paid fair market value for them, before the ban came into force.

It cost an awful lot of money - I've seen $350 million dollars mentioned - but it had the desired effect. There have been no further mass shootings in Australia since that time (previously we averaged at least one a year). As a bonus, the annual number of gun killings and gun suicides have just about halved since that time. This article gives a pretty good summary of the whole exercise and its effects:-

"To understand the policy success of the National Firearms Agreement, it's important to recognise precisely what happened. Alongside the gun buyback, what had been a patchwork of state and territory regulations were strengthened and harmonised. Self-loading rifles, self-loading shotguns and pump-action shotguns were banned. Firearm owners were required to obtain licences and register their weapons.

"While the changes were backed by the then Labor opposition, political credit must go to then prime minister John Howard and National Party leader Tim Fischer for standing up to the hardliners in their own parties. While they may have paid a short-term electoral price, history will judge them well.

"In the 1990s, some argued that the gun buyback would make no difference to the firearms homicide and suicide rates. Yet a series of careful studies have shown otherwise. In the decade before Port Arthur, Australia experienced an average of one mass shooting (involving five or more deaths) every year. Since then, we have not had a mass shooting. The odds of this being a coincidence are less than one in 100.

"The gun buyback also had some unexpected pay-offs. As an ANU economics professor, I collaborated with Christine Neill at Canada's Wilfrid Laurier University to look at the effect of the Australian gun buyback on firearm suicide and homicide rates. Shocking as mass shootings are, they represent a tiny fraction of all gun deaths. If there's a gun in your home, the person most likely to kill you with it is yourself, followed by your spouse.

"Neill and I found that the firearm suicide and homicide rates more than halved after the Australian gun buyback. Although the gun death rate was falling before 1997, it accelerated downwards after the buyback. Looking across states, we also found jurisdictions where more guns were bought back experienced a greater reduction in firearms homicide and suicide.

"We estimate that the Australian gun buyback continues to save about 200 lives per year. That means thousands of people are walking the streets today who would not be alive without the National Firearms Agreement. Other work, including by public health researchers Simon Chapman, Philip Alpers, Kingsley Agho and Michael Jones, reaches a similar conclusion."


Read more: http://www.smh.com.au/opinion/politi...-20130114-2cpny.html#ixzz2I2aN6TWW

The cost was high in Australia in the 1990s, and it would be absolutely astronomically expensive to do anything like it in the USA. But at least there is no doubt at all that it worked.

I hope the United States sends some people to Australia to check this issue out and see whether adopting at least some aspects of the 'ban and buyback' approach could help to reduce gun killings (and gun suicides) in the USA.

[Edited 2013-01-15 03:18:43]
"Once you have flown, you will walk the earth with your eyes turned skywards.." - Leonardo da Vinci
 
cmf
Posts: 3120
Joined: Sun Jun 12, 2011 11:22 pm

Obama, To Impose Gun Control By Decree Part 2

Tue Jan 15, 2013 11:28 am

Quoting flymia (Reply 17):
Someone comes into,your home. You hold them up with your firearm it's still a bugarly but at least you didn't lose anything.

Or, someone comes in to your home. Seeing you holding a weapon they shoot you instead of just taking the TV.

Or you think someone is breaking in to your house. When someone tries to open your bedroom door you shoot. You just killed your six year old son.

Quoting flymia (Reply 17):
Someone goes on a shooting spree in a mall. You have your firearm and engage him. He doesn't shoot anyone else. Less victims.

Or, you miss him but hit 2 people behind him while he shoots you. More victims.

Or, someone else engages the shooter. You think that person is with the shooter and you shoot him. The shooter continues shooting. More victims.

It is very easy to make up scenarios but hypothetical scenarios prove nothing.

Quoting flymia (Reply 17):
This is why responble gun ownership is a good thing in this country:

You're making a lot of unsupported assumptions. Yes it is great when a crime is stopped but this doesn't prove the net balance is positive.

- How did the two guys get their weapons. The likely alternatives are a) Straw purchase b) legal purchase c) stolen. It is very likely that without "responsible" gun owners and industry those two guys would not have had weapons. Would two guys enter a place with 10 people if they were unarmed? It is very likely that without "responsible" gun owners there would not even have been a crime.

Then add all the cases where someone at a bar is carrying, or leave it in their car, get angry and shoot the person they are angry at. Murders that only happen because weapons were at the site. Without the weapons most of them would have been no more than black eyes.

Quoting flymia (Reply 17):
I never have met a law enforcement officer who is against responsible gun ownership.

No-one have problems with responsible owners. Problem is that too many of the responsible gun owners are not responsible, at least not all the time. They do not store their weapons properly, more than 500,000 stolen guns per year. Kids getting hold of them. Stupid accidents because they make mistakes. Exposure time is very important to number of mistakes. You want enough time to avoid the rookie mistakes but after that additional time increases the "responsible owner" mistakes.

Ask the question slightly different and the answer you get from LEO is very different. Ask them if people should have loaded weapons around them at all times, for "protection." At least the two LEO bringing their kids to the scouts I take my friends kids think we have a problem with too many people having guns in the wrong situations. As do the LEO at the soccer training. And the LEO at the mountain bike races. All of this in south Florida.

So while they don't have a problem with responsible gun owners, they do have a problem with the real life owners.
Don’t repeat earlier generations mistakes. Learn history for a better future.
 
Kiwirob
Posts: 10023
Joined: Mon Jun 13, 2005 2:16 pm

Obama, To Impose Gun Control By Decree Part 2

Tue Jan 15, 2013 11:45 am

Quoting NAV20 (Reply 21):
The cost was high in Australia in the 1990s, and it would be absolutely astronomically expensive to do anything like it in the USA. But at least there is no doubt at all that it worked.

I hope the United States sends some people to Australia to check this issue out and see whether adopting at least some aspects of the 'ban and buyback' approach could help to reduce gun killings (and gun suicides) in the USA.

Do you really expect to get an answer to this post from the gun happy crowd on this forum. Remember NAV20 the rest of the world has to follow the lead of the US, they're not very good at adopting ideas from elsewhere, the metric system is a good example.
 
Redd
Posts: 354
Joined: Mon Jan 07, 2013 3:40 am

Obama, To Impose Gun Control By Decree Part 2

Tue Jan 15, 2013 12:13 pm

To add some humor to this conversation, gun owners should thank Obama !  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OUwb3Z2Klrk
 
NAV20
Posts: 8453
Joined: Thu Nov 27, 2003 3:25 pm

Obama, To Impose Gun Control By Decree Part 2

Tue Jan 15, 2013 1:00 pm

Quoting KiwiRob (Reply 23):
Do you really expect to get an answer to this post from the gun happy crowd on this forum.

I think myself that - as applauded by the mods in the first post on this thread - pretty well everyone has been very reasonable on this thread up to now, KiwiRob. I don't know whether you've ever visited the United States, but unless you have you won't know how deeply ingrained the Second Amendment is in the minds of so many people there. They really do see it as one of their fundamental freedoms - and many believe that it's a major reason why the United States has held together as a nation, instead of having revolutions and things like so many other countries.

I'm happy just offering alternative views and possibilities. Because the other thing that characterises the United States is that once a majority of people think that something is wrong and should be put right, they lose no time in recognising the fact, and sorting out the problem.

NICE one, Redd!  Smile

[Edited 2013-01-15 05:05:11]
"Once you have flown, you will walk the earth with your eyes turned skywards.." - Leonardo da Vinci
 
User avatar
Dreadnought
Posts: 9841
Joined: Tue Feb 19, 2008 6:31 pm

Obama, To Impose Gun Control By Decree Part 2

Tue Jan 15, 2013 2:17 pm

Quoting KiwiRob (Reply 23):
Do you really expect to get an answer to this post from the gun happy crowd on this forum.

Oh, so we are the only ones being unreasonable?

Let's take a step back a minute. Let's strip away all of the rhetoric and look at the fundamentals of what each side really wants:

Conservatives: The right to directly protect themselves, their family, and property from those who would do them harm.

Leftists: The right to indirectly have themselves, their family, and property protected from those who would do them harm.

I know it's a little more complicated than that , but let's keep it simple.

We have plenty of housing developments being built in this country - why not begin designating some as gun free communities? And if there is enough demand for these communities we could incorporate gun free townships. The predominately leftist Washington, DC area already has nearby two such planned towns in Columbia, MD and Reston, VA. This would be a perfect region to start another. This would place all of the anti-gun crowd in an enclave where they know that none of their neighbors will be armed with guns, save for local law enforcement.

Conversely, we can do the same for the gun-rights crowd. Communities where every adult, by default, has the right to carry a weapon (while within city limits) - concealed or not, doesn't matter.

I wonder which communities will suffer the higher crime/murder rates...
Forget dogs and cats - Spay and neuter your liberals.
 
Kiwirob
Posts: 10023
Joined: Mon Jun 13, 2005 2:16 pm

Obama, To Impose Gun Control By Decree Part 2

Tue Jan 15, 2013 2:37 pm

Quoting Dreadnought (Reply 26):
Oh, so we are the only ones being unreasonable?

Sure are, it's very easy to solve the problem, sure it will piss off a few people but it's been done in Australia, where it worked, South Africa has also limited availibility of certain types of weapons and made owning one harder, it's slowly working there as well. Other civilised countries don't have the gun issues the US has simply because there aren't that many weapons in circulation.

The second amendment is now outdated, society changes, so theres no reason why the constitution shouldn't change to reflect today's America not yesterdays America.
 
User avatar
Dreadnought
Posts: 9841
Joined: Tue Feb 19, 2008 6:31 pm

Obama, To Impose Gun Control By Decree Part 2

Tue Jan 15, 2013 3:28 pm

Quoting KiwiRob (Reply 27):
Sure are, it's very easy to solve the problem, sure it will piss off a few people but it's been done in Australia, where it worked

OK, let's assume the 2nd amendment is eliminated and we do a buyback. What was the average price that the aussie gov't paid for each gun?

Let's assume $500. That would make the buyback cost $150 billion. Not affordable.

And of course you are going to trust all the criminals to hand over their weapons, right?
Forget dogs and cats - Spay and neuter your liberals.
 
mt99
Posts: 6166
Joined: Wed May 26, 1999 5:41 am

Obama, To Impose Gun Control By Decree Part 2

Tue Jan 15, 2013 3:39 pm

Quoting fr8mech (Reply 9):
Actually, I think the precedent has been set that you must buy your own gun, subject to the government telling you what the minimum caliber and capacity has to be. If you fail to buy your own gun, then you will be fined. If you can't afford a gun, then he government will subsidize your purchase of one.

So why it doesn't happen now?

Quoting fr8mech (Reply 9):
I guess you guys have decided to take it to the ridiculous. When you can't adequately debate or defend your position, the time has come to ridicule.

I dont think its ridiculous at all..That what the law says.

Why is this ridiculous? Why isn't the word "infringed" as ridiculous?
Step into my office, baby
 
mt99
Posts: 6166
Joined: Wed May 26, 1999 5:41 am

Obama, To Impose Gun Control By Decree Part 2

Tue Jan 15, 2013 3:41 pm

Quoting Dreadnought (Reply 26):

I wonder which communities will suffer the higher crime/murder rates...

That one fallacy. Crime does not necessarily equal murder,

Is a stolen iphone the same as gun murder? In the pro-gun lobby they seem to think so..
Step into my office, baby
 
cmf
Posts: 3120
Joined: Sun Jun 12, 2011 11:22 pm

Obama, To Impose Gun Control By Decree Part 2

Tue Jan 15, 2013 3:49 pm

Quoting Dreadnought (Reply 26):
I wonder which communities will suffer the higher crime/murder rates...

Murder rates are pretty certain to be higher in the gun areas. As long as the gun side is responsible and don't provide criminals with guns, as they do today.

With less than 10% of burglars bringing guns that isn't likely to have much effect.

Without guns no longer readily available the spur of the moment murders will go down. It requires a lot more to kill with a knife than a gun.

The cases where a family member or relative murders will also go down.

Rape, probably the most common violent crime rarely involve weapons, so there will not be much change.

In the end it is a matter of maintaining the border. We know it works on the border to Canada.

Of course this wouldn't be an issue if we didn't have an industry readily supplying guns to criminals.
Don’t repeat earlier generations mistakes. Learn history for a better future.
 
User avatar
Dreadnought
Posts: 9841
Joined: Tue Feb 19, 2008 6:31 pm

Obama, To Impose Gun Control By Decree Part 2

Tue Jan 15, 2013 3:51 pm

Quoting mt99 (Reply 30):
That one fallacy. Crime does not necessarily equal murder,

Is a stolen iphone the same as gun murder?

I'm talking about crimes committed with guns involved.

There was a big stink in Britain a decade ago about gun related crimes exploding even though ownership of such weapons has been basically banned for generations. What are the latest stats on that?
Forget dogs and cats - Spay and neuter your liberals.
 
User avatar
Dreadnought
Posts: 9841
Joined: Tue Feb 19, 2008 6:31 pm

Obama, To Impose Gun Control By Decree Part 2

Tue Jan 15, 2013 3:56 pm

Quoting cmf (Reply 31):
Murder rates are pretty certain to be higher in the gun areas.

Really? In US towns where they liberalized gun restrictions (using the true usage of the term liberal), I believe the results were that crime and murder plummeted. The main reason was that all the criminals moved a short way down the road - it's hard to get true impacts where such communities are close to each other.

An armed society is a polite society. Manners are good when one may have to back up his acts with his life.
- Robert A. Heinlein
Forget dogs and cats - Spay and neuter your liberals.
 
mt99
Posts: 6166
Joined: Wed May 26, 1999 5:41 am

Obama, To Impose Gun Control By Decree Part 2

Tue Jan 15, 2013 3:59 pm

Quoting Dreadnought (Reply 33):
, I believe the results were that crime and murder plummeted.
Quoting Dreadnought (Reply 32):
I'm talking about crimes committed with guns involved.

Then separate them.. Give numbers of "crime with guns" vs "non-gun crimes".. Don't mix them up. You don't want to mislead do you?

What % of "crime" involve a guns?
Step into my office, baby
 
User avatar
DeltaMD90
Posts: 8245
Joined: Tue Apr 15, 2008 11:25 pm

Obama, To Impose Gun Control By Decree Part 2

Tue Jan 15, 2013 4:03 pm

Quoting cmf (Reply 22):
Or, someone comes in to your home. Seeing you holding a weapon they shoot you instead of just taking the TV.

Or you think someone is breaking in to your house. When someone tries to open your bedroom door you shoot. You just killed your six year old son.
Quoting cmf (Reply 22):
Or, you miss him but hit 2 people behind him while he shoots you. More victims.

Or, someone else engages the shooter. You think that person is with the shooter and you shoot him. The shooter continues shooting. More victims.

That's where proper training comes in. Part of that includes "just because you have a gun doesn't mean you have to use it."

Quoting KiwiRob (Reply 23):
Do you really expect to get an answer to this post from the gun happy crowd on this forum. Remember NAV20 the rest of the world has to follow the lead of the US, they're not very good at adopting ideas from elsewhere, the metric system is a good example.
Quoting KiwiRob (Reply 27):
it will piss off a few people

You gotta realize that it's a big deal, a big hobby, and part of our culture for more than a few in this country. We have some of the higher ownership rates in the world. I'm all for learning from others, but I don't think every country can just simply apply another country's laws verbatim. I know it's difficult for you guys to realize this because guns (especially including semi-autos) are less liked and owned, but here, we're just different
Ironically I have never flown a Delta MD-90 :)
 
User avatar
Dreadnought
Posts: 9841
Joined: Tue Feb 19, 2008 6:31 pm

Obama, To Impose Gun Control By Decree Part 2

Tue Jan 15, 2013 4:08 pm

Quoting mt99 (Reply 34):
Then separate them.. Give numbers of "crime with guns" vs "non-gun crimes".. Don't mix them up. You don't want to mislead do you?

What % of "crime" involve a guns?

You tell me. I'm not looking for more gun laws or bans. You are. It is up to you to gather evidence and convince me.
Forget dogs and cats - Spay and neuter your liberals.
 
vikkyvik
Posts: 11860
Joined: Thu Jul 31, 2003 1:58 pm

Obama, To Impose Gun Control By Decree Part 2

Tue Jan 15, 2013 4:11 pm

I really don't want to wade into this discussion, but:

Quoting Dreadnought (Reply 26):
Conservatives: The right to directly protect themselves, their family, and property from those who would do them harm.

Leftists: The right to indirectly have themselves, their family, and property protected from those who would do them harm.

Come on dude. That is the most grossly over-simplified, generic, non-universal description of this issue I've ever read.

There are plenty of conservatives who want guns simply because they like shooting them. There are plenty of liberals who are perfectly content protecting themselves, but don't feel they need a gun to do it.

Anyway....
I'm watching Jeopardy. The category is worst Madonna songs. "This one from 1987 is terrible".
 
seb146
Posts: 14060
Joined: Wed Dec 01, 1999 7:19 am

Obama, To Impose Gun Control By Decree Part 2

Tue Jan 15, 2013 4:14 pm

Quoting Dreadnought (Reply 26):
I know it's a little more complicated than that , but let's keep it simple.

Or, you could take off the FOX glasses and see what is really happening:

right-wing extremists: give everyone a gun at all costs.
right-wing moderates: we don't really need assault weapons.
left-wing moderates: we don't really need assault weapons.
left-wing extremists: ban all guns.

That is what is really going on. BTW, the vast majority of Americans are either 2 or 3. FOX and NRA wants everyone to believe we are either 1 or 4 and no one but no one is in between.
Patriotic and Proud Liberal
 
mt99
Posts: 6166
Joined: Wed May 26, 1999 5:41 am

Obama, To Impose Gun Control By Decree Part 2

Tue Jan 15, 2013 4:29 pm

Quoting Dreadnought (Reply 36):
You tell me. I'm not looking for more gun laws or bans. You are. It is up to you to gather evidence and convince me.

You should know already. Why else would you say this:


Quoting Dreadnought (Reply 33):

Really? In US towns where they liberalized gun restrictions (using the true usage of the term liberal), I believe the results were that crime and murder plummeted.

How do "you believe" - based on fact? gut instinct? NRA pamphlet?
Step into my office, baby
 
cmf
Posts: 3120
Joined: Sun Jun 12, 2011 11:22 pm

Obama, To Impose Gun Control By Decree Part 2

Tue Jan 15, 2013 4:34 pm

Quoting Dreadnought (Reply 28):
Let's assume $500. That would make the buyback cost $150 billion. Not affordable.

Why isn't it affordable? You need to look at the cost we carry now for all those guns, estimated to be as high as 100 BUSD per year. If you can reduce that by half then the payback is only three years. Seems very affordable to me.

Quoting Dreadnought (Reply 33):
An armed society is a polite society. Manners are good when one may have to back up his acts with his life.
- Robert A. Heinlein

You just need to look around USA to see that isn't true.

Quoting DeltaMD90 (Reply 35):
That's where proper training comes in. Part of that includes "just because you have a gun doesn't mean you have to use it."

Completely agree. Problem is, nothing of that is reflected in the scenarios flymia proposed. They all reflected the hero who fixes everything. It isn't reality.

Quoting DeltaMD90 (Reply 35):
I know it's difficult for you guys to realize this because guns (especially including semi-autos) are less liked and owned, but here, we're just different

I think you're missing how common guns were, and still are, in other developed countries. The difference is they have changed with the times. Many of my friends and relatives hunt in Europe hunt. Ranges are common. The big difference is the mentality that if you carry a gun you're safe. Irony is that Carrying a gun increases risk of getting shot and killed
Don’t repeat earlier generations mistakes. Learn history for a better future.
 
User avatar
Dreadnought
Posts: 9841
Joined: Tue Feb 19, 2008 6:31 pm

Obama, To Impose Gun Control By Decree Part 2

Tue Jan 15, 2013 4:37 pm

Quoting mt99 (Reply 39):

How do "you believe" - based on fact? gut instinct? NRA pamphlet?

I live in one of those areas. Every household in my city are required to own a gun, and have it loaded and "at hand" in the home. The law has been in place 30 years, and the gun-crime rate here is very small compared to other nearby cities like Marietta. 30 years ago the rates were identical.

Here is an academic, peer-reviewed, long-term study of the effect of various public policies on public, multiple shootings in all 50 states over a 20-year period performed by economists at the University of Chicago and Yale, William Landes and John Lott. It concluded that the only policy to reduce the incidence of, and casualties from, mass shootings are concealed-carry laws.

http://www.thevrwc.org/JohnLott.pdf
Forget dogs and cats - Spay and neuter your liberals.
 
mt99
Posts: 6166
Joined: Wed May 26, 1999 5:41 am

Obama, To Impose Gun Control By Decree Part 2

Tue Jan 15, 2013 4:39 pm

Quoting Dreadnought (Reply 41):
I live in one of those areas. Every household in my city are required to own a gun, and have it loaded and "at hand" in the home. The law has been in place 30 years, and the gun-crime rate here is very small compared to other nearby cities like Marietta. 30 years ago the rates were identical.

Ha again "gun crime" - what about "non-gun crime"?
Step into my office, baby
 
User avatar
Dreadnought
Posts: 9841
Joined: Tue Feb 19, 2008 6:31 pm

Obama, To Impose Gun Control By Decree Part 2

Tue Jan 15, 2013 4:47 pm

Quoting mt99 (Reply 42):
Ha again "gun crime" - what about "non-gun crime"?

You be the judge.

Kennesaw's (pop 30K) crime stats : http://www.cityrating.com/crime-stat...georgia/kennesaw.html#.UPWGseTLTY8

Marietta's (pop 56K) crime stats : http://www.cityrating.com/crime-stat...georgia/marietta.html#.UPWG6eTLTY8

Marietta is a little bit more upmarket than Kennesaw - some of Atlanta's most wealthy suburbs are there.

I think you can quickly see that Kennesaw's crime rates are better across the board.
Forget dogs and cats - Spay and neuter your liberals.
 
mt99
Posts: 6166
Joined: Wed May 26, 1999 5:41 am

Obama, To Impose Gun Control By Decree Part 2

Tue Jan 15, 2013 4:51 pm

Quoting Dreadnought (Reply 43):

I think you can quickly see that Kennesaw's crime rates are better across the board.

From your own links:

Kennesaw
Kennesaw crime statistics report an overall upward trend in crime based on data from 11 years with violent crime increasing and property crime increasing. Based on this trend, the crime rate in Kennesaw for 2013 is expected to be higher than in 2010.

Marrietta
Marietta crime statistics report an overall downward trend in crime based on data from 12 years with violent crime increasing and property crime decreasing. Based on this trend, the crime rate in Marietta for 2013 is expected to be lower than in 2010.

Kennesaw has more guns? why is the crime rate going up? Maybe the law should say that you need 2 guns in every house.
Step into my office, baby
 
flymia
Posts: 6810
Joined: Thu Jun 14, 2001 6:33 am

Obama, To Impose Gun Control By Decree Part 2

Tue Jan 15, 2013 4:58 pm

Quoting seb146 (Reply 20):
I want so badly to walk up to a person who has a concealed carry permit (I have seen a number of them here) and ask them if they know for sure 100% if they know that I or anyone else in that space is mentally stable enough to know the difference between right and smashing a chair over their head and taking out the place with their gun.

Guns don't kill people. People with mental deficiancy kill people. Don't bother with what the NRA says. NRA says everyone can handle guns just fine thankyouverymuch. Including those with mental deficiancy. Depression and PTSD and what have you. That's fine. That falls under Second Amendment. They can take out 20 students in a school. Because they have a Second Amendment right to guns.

What? We all do realize the shooting in Newtown the shooter was not eligible to get a gun. You realize he stoled the guns from his mother right? If his mom would have just locked the guns we would most likely not be here discussing this. Also concealed carry is supposed to be concealed. If you can tell that they have a gun on them they are not doing it right. At the same time please find me a news story of someomemwithna CCP or someone stealing a weapon off the person and going on a shooting spree.

Quoting cmf (Reply 22):

In my scenarios I assume responsible use. Such as not shooting if you don't know what is behind the target, or if there are people behind it. Not shooting if you don't know who the target is. Keeping you eye on the person at all times. Things that every person should know who owns or carries a gun legally. I am all for some stricter laws and training the more training the better. What I am against is limiting the use or ownership of fire arms.

As for assault weapons. I will never own one. But there is no reason to get rid of semi auto handguns.

Quoting seb146 (Reply 38):
/That is what is really going on. BTW, the vast majority of Americans are either 2 or 3. FOX and NRA wants everyone to believe we are either 1 or 4 and no one but no one is in between

CNN and MSNBC want everyone to believe that too.
"It was just four of us on the flight deck, trying to do our job" (Captain Al Haynes)
 
User avatar
Dreadnought
Posts: 9841
Joined: Tue Feb 19, 2008 6:31 pm

Obama, To Impose Gun Control By Decree Part 2

Tue Jan 15, 2013 4:58 pm

Quoting mt99 (Reply 44):
Kennesaw has more guns? why is the crime rate going up? Maybe the law should say that you need 2 guns in every house.

Man, you are really insistent, arent you?



Even if Marietta is coming down a bit and Kennesaw is going up (mainly because Kennesaw is rapidly growing compared to Marietta), Kennesaw still has only a small fraction of the crime rate.
Forget dogs and cats - Spay and neuter your liberals.
 
mt99
Posts: 6166
Joined: Wed May 26, 1999 5:41 am

Obama, To Impose Gun Control By Decree Part 2

Tue Jan 15, 2013 5:05 pm

Quoting Dreadnought (Reply 46):
Man, you are really insistent, arent you?

I try  

The graphs are from the PAST.

The future is not looking good for Kennesaw..   More guns should solve it!

Quoting Dreadnought (Reply 46):
Even if Marietta is coming down a bit and Kennesaw is going up (mainly because Kennesaw is rapidly growing compared to Marietta), Kennesaw still has only a small fraction of the crime rate.

Upward trend is upward trend. Fact from your own data: The crime rate a a place with guns is going up. You cant dispute that.
Step into my office, baby
 
cmf
Posts: 3120
Joined: Sun Jun 12, 2011 11:22 pm

Obama, To Impose Gun Control By Decree Part 2

Tue Jan 15, 2013 5:09 pm

Quoting flymia (Reply 45):
In my scenarios I assume responsible use.

A big assumption, and very selectively applied.

We know that reality isn't as rosy. There are multiple accidental shootings each day. There are plenty of spur of the moment shootings each day. How do you address them? They are not mentally ill. Some can be avoided with better training but far from all.

Quoting flymia (Reply 45):
But there is no reason to get rid of semi auto handguns.

Semi automatic handguns is the most common type used during crime. It makes much more sense to regulate them than assault weapons.
Don’t repeat earlier generations mistakes. Learn history for a better future.
 
Ken777
Posts: 9064
Joined: Thu Mar 11, 2004 5:39 am

Obama, To Impose Gun Control By Decree Part 2

Tue Jan 15, 2013 5:13 pm

Quoting seb146 (Reply 12):
Janet Jackson's nip slip?

Janet was performing over the airways where rights to broadcast include regulations related to the broadcast. That is far different than cable, or simply a public performance.

Quoting flymia (Reply 17):
You have your firearm and engage him. He doesn't shoot anyone else. Less victims.

That assumes you hit the guy with each shot. In your efforts to be the great protector you are liable for the bullet until it stops moving. Hit the wrong person and cause injury and you might have a jury give YOUR victim your house, car and retirement fund.

Quoting Mir (Reply 18):
"So now, due to a declined willingness to prosecute dangerous criminals, violent crime is increasing again for the first time in 19 years."

Courts around here a not hesitant to do their job, nor are the prosecutors, That's why we have jail overcrowding.

More guns simply mean more demand for prison space so I guess that the tax I want on guns & ammunition needs to be increased to cover increased prison costs.

Quoting cmf (Reply 22):
When someone tries to open your bedroom door you shoot. You just killed your six year old son.

Accidentally killing a family member is pretty common place in America. Actually, accidental killings are pretty commonplace in America.

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Calder, cjg225, Polot, Tugger and 17 guests