[Uncle Skeleton]

Are you saying property was never considered a right? Or that licenses make eminent domain possible in the first place?

[Shaddim]

I'd say with direct land taxation and the concept of imminent domain, property "ownership" is a myth. If you want to actually own property, you need to buy a small island from a cash-strapped 3rd world country, otherwise you're only renting/leasing like everyone else.

[Spheric Harlot]

And the rights to life and health obviously depend upon the individual's ability to afford insurance.

[Shaddim]

Originally Posted by Spheric Harlot 

And the rights to life and health obviously depend upon the individual's ability to afford insurance.

Because more Americans are taking budgeting cues from the government and are clueless about their own finances. "The population is too stupid to know how to handle a gun, let's take them away. They aren't intelligent enough to set aside enough for health insurance either, so let's give it to them. Who's going to pay for it? The small percentage of people capable of balancing their own checkbooks."

Apparently the right to life and liberty only works if it's tied to the "right" to anyone else's money, because God forbid anyone learn how to handle their own. Babysitting the lowest common denominator is priority one, it seems.

[Uncle Skeleton]

We're just trying to stay afloat until the robots can take over and do all our work for us. Come on roomba, pick up the pace!

Just kidding I got rid of my roomba. I certainly don't want to be seen as one of the robot slavers when the robot revolution swings through.

[OldManMac]

Originally Posted by subego 

Do you have an opinion on the magazine capacity proposal made by OAW?

I do, and I'm against it. Regulating magazine capacity is just another one of those feel-good measures, that isn't going to change anything. I could just as easily have 4 ten round magazines, and do the same thing, which in my case is target shooting. A lot of people don't need a lot of things, but they may have the financial wherewithal to buy them, and who am I (or anyone else) to tell them they shouldn't.

[OldManMac]

Originally Posted by OAW 

No what I'm saying is if there is any legislation passed it should ban high capacity magazines PERIOD. Handgun, rifle, shotgun, etc. Doesn't matter. 10 round max. That's something that already has a 62+% majority in the polls.
OAW

Seing as how 80 million Americans own around 300 million guns, I'm not sure I'd trust a poll that shows that number. I think there is going to be a lot of bluster in the coming weeks about more gun control, and I think it's going to go nowhere, precisely because there are way more gun owners than just members of the NRA. I think the NRA gets more credit for what it's achieved than it should, and it's mostly from people who don't have a clue about how many gun owners, and guns, are in this country. Congress is mostly pro gun, and they're not going to want to piss off 80 million people! One thing that gets forgotten about is that not only so-called conservatives who own guns, but liberals do also. I'm on the liberal side, yet I own 6 pistols, a pellet rifle, and a .22 Ruger rifle, as well as a couple of BB guns (one of which will shoot in rapid fire 6-shot mode). Thirty years ago, there were only a handful of states that allowed their citizens to carry, and one had to show a reason they needed a gun (may issue, as it's called). Today, only one state (Illinois, but that may change this year after a court ruled that they have to draft a concealed carry law by May), doesn't allow it's citizens to carry, in some fashion. My state, Michigan, was a may issue state until 2001, and there were the usual predictions about the carnage and "Wild West" shootouts that would occur if the state became a "shall issue" state! It did become one, and approximately 350,000 Michiganders have CPLs, of which I am one, and we're still waiting for the carnage and Wild West scenarios that the dramatists like to use to fallaciously buttress their points.

What I do agree with is better background checks, and a waiting period during those checks, at gun shows. Our governor recently signed a bill into law which eliminates what's called a Permit To Purchase. When I wanted to buy my first pistol a little over 3 years ago, I had to go to the county Sheriff"s office and take a ten question test. I passed, and was then given the Permit To Purchase, which I had ten days to use. I went to Cabelas the next day and bought my first pistol. I then had 10 days to bring two copies of the Permit To Purchase to the Sheriff's office, who sent one to the State Police. I kept a copy, and Cabelas kept a copy. I then applied for a CPL, after taking a one day class, at a local gun range. The CPL took six weeks to get to me, after the Sheriff's office did the requisite background check. I passed, and they had no choice but to issue me a permit. After possession of my CPL, I no longer need to get a PTP from the Sheriff. I go buy a gun, and the dealer fills out the PTP, and gives me three copies (one for myself, and one each for the sheriff and state police). I haven't purchased a gun yet in the new year, which is when the PTP was eliminated, so I can't comment on what the procedure is now, but my daughter just got her CPL, and wants to buy a gun from me, so I'll have to investigate that procedure. Not being a licensed dealer, I believe I'll simply be able to sell it to her, but I'm not 100% clear on that. I'm pretty sure I can just sell her the gun, as her boyfriend has purchased a few guns from friends, without a PTP, as he also has a CPL. The elimination of getting a Permit To Purchase won't change anything if I buy another gun at a licensed dealer, but from what I understand, it will make private sales almost completely unregulated, which basically means that one could sell a gun to almost anyone, without background checks. That, honestly I'm not so sure is the right course of action (although it's done in a handful of states, and the massacres that have occurred were mostly done by legally acquired weapons, IIRC).

The real crux of the issue, IMO, is that we, as a nation, need better detection, and control, of mental illness, regarding handguns. The vast majority of gun owners are law abiding people (they'd have to be, with the number of guns out there; otherwise we'd really be murdering each other in far greater numbers). I've done nothing illegal with my guns, and neither have the vast majority of my fellow gun owning citizens, and we're not the problem!

[Waragainstsleep]

I have to ask:

Why do you need/want 6 pistols?

Does it bother you at all that your daughters boyfriend carries a gun? Is that a factor in why she needs one too?



It continues to baffle me that people keep talking about "law abiding gun owners" in the same breath as mental illness. Mentally ill people aren't thinking about what the law is and whether they should break it or not, they're mentally ill!
Also, this whole 'don't punish the law abiding majority' line is a bit silly. If you handed out any kind of weapons to the populace, be it a grenade each, a pack of C4 each or a small nuke each, most of them wouldn't blow up their fellow citizens, yet these items remain more restricted than guns.

[Shaddim]

Since you don't have the right to carry a gun, you don't see the benefit of it. That's the main problem with citizens from other countries trying to hand out firearm advice.

[Spheric Harlot]

What a completely alien culture.

It is completely baffling how mental illness could even be considered the ONE path of approach.

You sit surrounded by more guns than you can carry and talk about how the single most complex and unpredictable aspect in the whole equation - the human psyche - is somehow "fixable" and needs to be dealt with to solve the problem.
While outside, the NRA chants "more of the same!"

That's just bizarre and absurd, seen from here.

[Shaddim]

It's just as alien for us to look at you and try to sort out exactly where you ****ed up so badly, as to allow yourselves to become completely disarmed.

[ghporter]

As a Life Member, I strongly feel that the official NRA stance in the Newtown issue is absurd and stupidly enunciated. I personally feel that Mr. LaPierre needs to find a new job.

On the other hand, while intoxicated driving is a real problem throughout the developed world, there is no major push to ban cars (drunks can't run down other people if they don't have access to cars!).

We cannot portray all firearms owners as Neanderthals who have violence on their minds all the time. While we should take every step to prevent "the wrong people" from getting access to any sort of weapon, how are we going to keep the disturbed person from getting his hands on a 36" long machete? On gasoline and glass bottles? It is not the item used in the crime that is important, but rather the crime itself, and the machinations behind the crime. Until we separate the mechanism used by criminals from the criminals' actions, then we'll just continue to debate what should and should not be done until something else grabs our collective attention.

[BadKosh]

Originally Posted by Waragainstsleep 

I have to ask:
Why do you need/want 6 pistols?
Does it bother you at all that your daughters boyfriend carries a gun? Is that a factor in why she needs one too?
It continues to baffle me that people keep talking about "law abiding gun owners" in the same breath as mental illness. Mentally ill people aren't thinking about what the law is and whether they should break it or not, they're mentally ill!
Also, this whole 'don't punish the law abiding majority' line is a bit silly. If you handed out any kind of weapons to the populace, be it a grenade each, a pack of C4 each or a small nuke each, most of them wouldn't blow up their fellow citizens, yet these items remain more restricted than guns.

From the liberal indoctrination you've received in the UK over the years you will never understand our culture. You are spewing strawman arguments. Just like our 'right' to speak freely and criticize our government, we also have a 'right' to carry guns. Does that mean we MUST carry them? No. We have a choice, which is our right. We can use our guns for target practice and for protecting our homes, property and ourselves. We don't "hand out" weapons.

"this whole 'don't punish the law abiding majority' line is a bit silly." but that is exactly what happens when our idiot knee-jerk political hacks and shallow minded populace make laws that do nothing, or worse take or protection from the bad guys. The police (Protect & Serve) can't actually protect or serve. They get to show up AFTER the bad guys have done the damage. If you really want to make sure, you will protect yourself. The mental health professionals and the liberal lawyers have been letting wack-jobs out of institutions for decades, and allowed them to keep the fact they are wack-jobs a secret. It didn't help. The liberal solution is wrong. We need to re-examine many liberal concepts and how realistic those ideas really are.

[Spheric Harlot]

How about you examine what you've been doing so far because IT ISN'T WORKING.

[subego]

Originally Posted by Uncle Skeleton 

Is a birth certificate like your "license" to be alive?

Do I get to kill you if you don't have one?

[BadKosh]

Originally Posted by Spheric Harlot 

How about you examine what you've been doing so far because IT ISN'T WORKING.

My guns are safe, loaded and ready. I have NOT tried to kill anyone. So for me, it works.

Perhaps if more wack-jobs were kept in mental institutions and the medical professionals were more proactive others might be as lucky. Blame them. They don't seem to have a good handle on dealing with wack jobs.

[subego]

You support paying for these medical services with your tax dollars?

Or do you expect wack jobs to pay out of pocket?

[The Final Dakar]

Originally Posted by OldManMac 

I do, and I'm against it. Regulating magazine capacity is just another one of those feel-good measures, that isn't going to change anything. I could just as easily have 4 ten round magazines, and do the same thing, which in my case is target shooting.

Well, as much as I'll be surprised if my Call of Duty experience fails me here, aren't you vulnerable while reloading a gun's magazine? Plus, time spent reloading is time not spent killing. So making the shooter vulnerable 2-3x more and taking away precious seconds where they could be killing isn't likely to save lives?

[The Final Dakar]

Originally Posted by subego 

Do I get to kill you if you don't have one?

Somebody's looking for an Obama loophole.

[subego]

Kenyan licenses transfer.

[subego]

Originally Posted by The Final Dakar 

Well, as much as I'll be surprised if my Call of Duty experience fails me here, aren't you vulnerable while reloading a gun's magazine? Plus, time spent reloading is time not spent killing. So making the shooter vulnerable 2-3x more and taking away precious seconds where they could be killing isn't likely to save lives?

I think the "vulnerability" factor counts for more when people are shooting back.

[The Final Dakar]

Originally Posted by subego 

I think the "vulnerability" factor counts for more when people are shooting back.

I agree. Given that appears to be the solution bandied about, wouldn't this work well in conjunction with that?

[Uncle Skeleton]

Originally Posted by subego 

Originally Posted by Uncle Skeleton 

Is a birth certificate like your "license" to be alive?

Do I get to kill you if you don't have one?

Dunno, I never tried not having one

Do they take your guns away if your gun license expires? If the .gov wanted to keep records of all gun purchases by by using some kind of certification, like they try to keep track of all births through birth certs, would that alone mean it's not a "right?"

[subego]

I imagine they do if they find you.

As someone who lives in a state where you need to register with the state police (and pay them money) to own a firearm, I consider myself not to have the right to bear arms.

I paid up and passed my BG check, so the police have deigned to give me the privilege.

I want to repeat however, I do not own a gun. I got the license so I could go to the range with my ex, who's had a gun pulled on her, and wanted to have a relationship with guns on her own terms.

Yes. I needed to get the license to frigging rent a gun which was never going to leave the range. I'm sure that policy helps keep down gun violence.

[Uncle Skeleton]

It seems you're right.

[besson3c]

Originally Posted by Shaddim 

Because more Americans are taking budgeting cues from the government and are clueless about their own finances. "The population is too stupid to know how to handle a gun, let's take them away. They aren't intelligent enough to set aside enough for health insurance either, so let's give it to them. Who's going to pay for it? The small percentage of people capable of balancing their own checkbooks."
Apparently the right to life and liberty only works if it's tied to the "right" to anyone else's money, because God forbid anyone learn how to handle their own. Babysitting the lowest common denominator is priority one, it seems.

You are living it the land of make believe if you think that it is reasonable for Joe Sixpack to set aside an extra $800/month for semi-comprehensive health insurance on top of all of his additional expenses with his salary/wages.

[BadKosh]

Originally Posted by subego 

You support paying for these medical services with your tax dollars?
Or do you expect wack jobs to pay out of pocket?

I would hope the quality and intelligence of the mental health workers improve, since HC costs have been rising forever lets check to see if it's in the OweBamaKAIR legislation.

[subego]

Originally Posted by BadKosh 

I would hope the quality and intelligence of the mental health workers improve

Got that everybody? The real problem is mental health workers are dumb.

[The Final Dakar]

So BadKosh's proposed solution to future instances like this is "hoping". Sounds about right.

[lpkmckenna]

Originally Posted by Shaddim 

Why do I need them? In case civilization collapses.

This article describes you to a tee: http://www.slate.com/blogs/crime/2013/01/02/gun_control_ar_15_rifle_the_nra_claims_the_ar_15_r ifle_is_for_hunting_and.html

[Waragainstsleep]

Originally Posted by Shaddim 

Since you don't have the right to carry a gun, you don't see the benefit of it. That's the main problem with citizens from other countries trying to hand out firearm advice.

Funny how you seem to think you see everything though.

Guns are made to fight wars and whether you realise it, or admit it or not, that is what you are advocating. You need to be armed in case the redneck-in-chief or whoever it is that makes that call decides the government has finally gone too far and its high-time for one of those good 'ole rip-roaring civil wars again. But the last one was a long time ago. Way outside of living memory.

I'm only just over 30, but I grew up surrounded by people who lived through world wars. The worst wars ever fought. And they told us all about them. People my age grew up with stories from those wars, from grandparents and great uncles and aunts and their friends. We grew up still surrounded by buildings in most of our cities that had been bombed. They are very faded now but our cities still bear one or two scars from those wars. Almost every village and town has a war monument listing the men who left and never came back.

You had stories too, but your stories are tales from faraway places as well as faraway times. Tales of adventures in distant lands told by the people who made it back so there was always going to be a happy ending. These are very different stories to the ones where you and your family have to get out of bed several times a night and hide in a tin bunker in the garden for an hour or two hoping there is a house to go back to at the end of it. The details aren't important in the long run, what you take away is that it should never happen again.

Your country still glorifies war because it has no real experience of it. No going without the luxuries, no living in fear of losing your life or your home every night. Of your teenage sons being drafted to fight and die thousands of miles away. Your country has only ever fought at a distance in your lifetime or your parents or your grandparents and most of those wars you chose to fight. They weren't forced upon you any more than they were fought in your own back yard.
If you don't believe me, ask the people you know who've come back from more recent conflicts if their opinion of war has changed much since they signed up. I bet it has.

Whats strange is not your inability to learn from others experiences, its the pride you take in not doing so.

[Uncle Skeleton]

Originally Posted by Waragainstsleep 

Originally Posted by Shaddim 

Since you don't have the right to carry a gun, you don't see the benefit of it. That's the main problem with citizens from other countries trying to hand out firearm advice.

Funny how you seem to think you see everything though.

Funny how Shaddim isn't trying to tell other countries they should change their gun laws to be more like the US. Even the most obnoxious Americans here (and we have some doozies) aren't suggesting that. It seems to me that the person who thinks they know "everything" is the one who tries to actually change other countries to be more like their own, not the one who merely wants to maintain control on how their own country works and will eagerly let the rest do likewise.

[subego]

I wouldn't want them to be armed. They couldn't handle it.

[Spheric Harlot]

Originally Posted by Uncle Skeleton 

Funny how Shaddim isn't trying to tell other countries they should change their gun laws to be more like the US. Even the most obnoxious Americans here (and we have some doozies) aren't suggesting that.

Well, even the most obnoxious Americans apparently realize that to tell citizens of a country THAT DOESN'T HAVE YOUR PROBLEMS to change things to be more the way they are in the US is rather beyond stupid.

It is so far beyond stupid that I'm a little flummoxed that you'd use it as an argument.

[Uncle Skeleton]

Do Americans pressure other "civilized" nations to copy us on non-gun issues?

[Spheric Harlot]

Originally Posted by Uncle Skeleton 

Do Americans pressure other "civilized" nations to copy us on non-gun issues?

You can't be serious.

Are you old enough to remember the Cold War?

Financial assistance and military support have been used by the United States to persuade foreign governments for decades and decades.

Also, one of the reasons my country has been so successful is because the Marshall Plan created tremendous incentive to follow a more "American" model. In addition, our "Grundgesetz" is modeled upon the US Constitution. Post-war reconstruction is, of course, a very special situation.

But aren't they all?

[Uncle Skeleton]

No I mean individuals, like the people who Waragainstsleep was talking about.

[The Final Dakar]

Originally Posted by Uncle Skeleton 

No I mean individuals, like the people who Waragainstsleep was talking about.

Not exactly sure indifference is worth bragging about.

[Spheric Harlot]

[Uncle Skeleton]

Originally Posted by The Final Dakar 

Originally Posted by Uncle Skeleton 

No I mean individuals, like the people who Waragainstsleep was talking about.

Not exactly sure indifference is worth bragging about.

Who's bragging? I'm indifferent to pride

But it's certainly a great defense against the accusation of "thinking I see everything."

[Waragainstsleep]

Originally Posted by Uncle Skeleton 

Funny how Shaddim isn't trying to tell other countries they should change their gun laws to be more like the US. Even the most obnoxious Americans here (and we have some doozies) aren't suggesting that. It seems to me that the person who thinks they know "everything" is the one who tries to actually change other countries to be more like their own, not the one who merely wants to maintain control on how their own country works and will eagerly let the rest do likewise.

I can see how it might be a bit annoying to have other people from different countries and cultures tell you what you should do could be aggravating, I really can. But its not like its entirely unsolicited advice.
When these shootings happen, we hear Americans asking questions like "Why do these things keep happening?" and "How can we stop it happening again?" Is it really so wrong of us to answer them?

[Shaddim]

Originally Posted by besson3c 

You are living it the land of make believe if you think that it is reasonable for Joe Sixpack to set aside an extra $800/month for semi-comprehensive health insurance on top of all of his additional expenses with his salary/wages.

Wow, inflation's hit everything hard, including your imagination.

[Shaddim]

Originally Posted by lpkmckenna 

This article describes you to a tee: http://www.slate.com/blogs/crime/2013/01/02/gun_control_ar_15_rifle_the_nra_claims_the_ar_15_r ifle_is_for_hunting_and.html

What's your point? Do you have one? Of course the AR-15 is primarily for killing people. That's why I bought mine.

[Shaddim]

Originally Posted by Waragainstsleep 

Funny how you seem to think you see everything though. ..snip...

That just makes your disarmament all the more tragic.

[Athens]

Originally Posted by Shaddim 

It's just as alien for us to look at you and try to sort out exactly where you ****ed up so badly, as to allow yourselves to become completely disarmed.

I take great offence to that because most of us around the world are not totally disarmed. Thats just more propaganda BS. I have more gun freedom here in Canada then you yanks do in the city of New York City.

I agree Europeans and Asians fail to understand the cultural significance to guns and American culture and what the protected rights mean. But man Americans can be so arrogant about guns to.



But that isn't even the point. When it comes to school shootings and Mall shootings it really is about health care not the weapon. Something was wrong with the person who killed innocent people. End of line. Period. Nothing to debate about that at all. A normal healthy sound person does not do it period.

This thread is about why do people need assault rifles.

A GUN IS A GUN IS A GUN IS A GUN, say this 3 times over Europeans. A Gun is a gun is a gun is a gun. There is no functional, theoretical, practical and hypothetical difference between guns. Excuse my french, but you point the "****ing" thing and you pull a trigger, it goes bang and a projectile flies out into something. Period. All guns work this way. Just because something is labeled a hunting gun or a assault rife, its the same damn thing. So lets end this confusion and just talk about 'GUNS" as one thing. This assault name applied to some is marketing or media bias to sell a story.

So whats left to talk about....

[Uncle Skeleton]

Originally Posted by Waragainstsleep 

But its not like its entirely unsolicited advice.
When these shootings happen, we hear Americans asking questions like "Why do these things keep happening?" and "How can we stop it happening again?"

Even further from "thinking we see everything"

[Athens]

Originally Posted by Uncle Skeleton 

Do Americans pressure other "civilized" nations to copy us on non-gun issues?

Yes.... war on drugs.....

Direct political interference at the highest levels to copy your pathetic war on drugs.

[Shaddim]

Originally Posted by Athens 

I take great offence to that because most of us around the world are not totally disarmed. Thats just more propaganda BS. I have more gun freedom here in Canada then you yanks do in the city of New York City.

Then you should feel happy, I was addressing the member from the EU.

[Athens]

Originally Posted by Shaddim 

Then you should feel happy, I was addressing the member from the EU.

I think it does go both ways, I don't think you can appreciate the outside view either and probably don't care about the outside view. I am in a happy place that I can see, and understand both views. A gun lover and shooter living in a society that is a bit more restrictive of gun ownership then most of the US, but that's not even the right word, a society that offers more respect to what guns can do would be more accurate but not a Nancy pansy society like the EU that is terrified of guns.

There is a absolute cultural difference. Guns where and are a important tool in the Americas. We are nations spread out greatly over vast empty distances. Police protection is NOT a viable option in many places in the US and Canada so being armed is a significant importance. It is also a important tool for farmers when protecting animals from predators. Its a important tool in the bush to protect from wild life. Bears and Cougars in Alaska, BC, Washington, Alligators in Florida. What wild life does Germany have that can eat you. What vast wilderness is there in Germany where you are totally alone to fend for yourself. Does gun ownership in the urban cities make sense for the above reasons no except for those that venture out into the bush. But that's not the point. Its part of our culture. Many places in Europe have been Urban for a very long time so its not about the culture there.

We all also have better health care and it appears those in Europe cant comprehend how crappy American health care is which is why this keeps occurring over and over again disproportional to the rest of the world. Since it does happen everywhere. Australia mass shooting and a Canadian mass shooting both resulted in tougher gun laws in both countries. Didn't actually change anything.

[Uncle Skeleton]

Originally Posted by Athens 

Originally Posted by Uncle Skeleton 

Do Americans pressure other "civilized" nations to copy us on non-gun issues?

Yes.... war on drugs.....

Direct political interference at the highest levels to copy your pathetic war on drugs.

Sure, the highest levels. But what about the lowest levels (seriously). Has any individual person from America ever pressured you to support the war on drugs, either iRL or online?