Would you download a gun? 100,000 people already have...
- Thread starter wetnose
- Start date
im all for background checks...
as for limiting the fire rate?
once again how is this going to get the criminals to abide by these laws?
you do realize that in canada there is a magazine capacity limit of 5 rounds for a restricted rifle and 10 round limit for handguns, yet every time there is a shooting the firearms that were recovered had standard 16/17 round magazine or high capacity 30+ mag that were against the law...
how is it then that criminals wont abide by any laws up to date, but one limiting the fire rate all of the sudden will make them change their way of life? please explain this to me
explain to me why you need or for what practical purpose you could possibly need a high rate of fire gun ? and please don't say the criminals have it so i should. that is a cheap out. i would think the law abiding society should live to a higher standard than criminals. so unless you are planning on doing a drive by on your local tim's for getting your coffee wrong you don't have a real reason for owning a gun that can shot that fast.
as a private law abiding citizen if i had a gun i would use it for hunting, target practice and home security. someone breaks into my house i wouldn't want a high rate of fire gun. i would never consider it for hunting and target practice is for practicing with my gun so i only need 1 or 2 shots, not 30 in 30 seconds.
It's not a reason of why do we need something . It's like with anything else these days , type of cars , trucks , clothing , houses , condos , anything . It's because we can and that's what we want , not what we need . You just can't sit here and comment why do you need this or that .
If I want a AR15 that can shoot 30 in 30 secs , it's my business . Not anyone else's . Just because you don't want one doesn't mean I don't . It's as simple as that . I'm sure that you have many things that I have no need for . I can say the same thing , why do you need that .
Tired of people saying you don't need this or that . Who are you people to tell me what I can have or not . If I want something then I will buy it ( legally ) . No reason is needed . Just because I want one is good enough for me and it should be for you . I don't tell you what to buy so please don't tell me what I can have .
I am part of the Law Bidding Society . I do live with a higher standard because I don't commit crimes .
it is only my opinion, you don't need it for anything and it serves no purpose. i am not telling you that you can't own it, i am saying there is no reason to own it. fancy cars and clothes and t.v's and whatever else are one thing. how many ways do you need to kill ? now stamp your feet and tell me you want it, want it, want it.
Chicago and DC are the states in the US with the toughest gun laws. Guess what........ready......they are also the two states with the highest gun related crime.
Think about it....if you were a criminal, which one of the two houses you will rob? The one that you know there is no gun in the house, or the one that you know there is a gun in the house. Decision decision.....tough one huh?
Criminals do not go to apply for a license, adhere to background check, and register their guns. Criminals do not need authorization to transport their guns from Chief Firearms Office and they will not use suppressor just because it is illegal item. Gun laws are putting law abiding citizen at disadvantage point. Why limit the rounds on magazines for the law abiding gun owners where criminals can have 30 rounds in their handgun? Criminals don't care about laws that is why they are criminals.
If they don't allow law abiding citizens to own guns, criminals are going to have the time of their lives. Crime rates are going to spike.
Think about it....if you were a criminal, which one of the two houses you will rob? The one that you know there is no gun in the house, or the one that you know there is a gun in the house. Decision decision.....tough one huh?
Criminals do not go to apply for a license, adhere to background check, and register their guns. Criminals do not need authorization to transport their guns from Chief Firearms Office and they will not use suppressor just because it is illegal item. Gun laws are putting law abiding citizen at disadvantage point. Why limit the rounds on magazines for the law abiding gun owners where criminals can have 30 rounds in their handgun? Criminals don't care about laws that is why they are criminals.
If they don't allow law abiding citizens to own guns, criminals are going to have the time of their lives. Crime rates are going to spike.
To you it serves no purpose but to me it does . There is a reason to own it . It's because I want it .That's all the reason I need . Who says that I want to kill anything . Right now I got a stupid birds nest on my front porch with the mother bird sitting on it 24 hrs. making a big mess . Most people would have tossed out the nest long ago . Not me , I'll wait until the baby birds fly away . Your asking me me how many ways I need to kill . Answer NONE .
You never bought anything that you wanted but really didn't need it . Same principle here . I want one , I buy one , I own one . What ever makes me happy .
By getting those dirty American gun dealers shut down and eliminating private sales, gun show sales, or online sales.
Correct. All they need is someone willing to sell to them and US laws make that way too easy.
When you said "dirty American dealers" who you are referring to? Illegal and unlicensed gun dealers I hope.
And how eliminating private sales, gun show sales, or online sales are going to get the criminals to abide the laws again? I'd love to hear your thoughts.
There is no connection between legal law abiding firearms owners and criminals. As you agreed that criminals don't follow gun laws, and law abiding gun owners do.
So how does having stricter gun laws will get the criminals to follow the laws?? Please do explain.
I am referring to the small number of gun dealers who have provided a large amount of illegal weapons. ATF numbers have stats that show that most illegal guns started with a small percent of dealers.
And the ease of private sales makes it extremely easy for criminals to get their hands on guns. Take away the ease of supply and the illegal guns will slowly dry up.
Didn't everyone see this coming... and let's face it, if a reporter can put it together ANYONE can.....
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...-board-Eurostar-stopped-security-scandal.html
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...-board-Eurostar-stopped-security-scandal.html
The problem is that the gun debate is so emotional, and so polarizing, and so political, that no issue is ever looked at on its own. Every gun issue or situation is looked at by BOTH sides as an opportunity for political positioning, setting incremental precedents, or just becomes a pissing contest between the various lobby groups.
The result has paralyzed the ability of the US to take *any* action, even actions that probably everybody agrees would be reasonable.
There are a whole bunch of things that could and should be done in the US that just aren't going to get done because of the tug of war that is happening on the overall gun debate:
-- Mandatory safety training for gun ownership. Don't need any registry, just require people to be able to produce a certificate showing they completed a course. Would not impact crime in any way, but in Canada and elsewhere has been proven to significantly cut down on accidental discharges (e.g., people shooting themselves while cleaning their guns). You would think common sense would stop you from pulling the trigger on a gun that is pointed at your forehead because you believe it is unloaded and you are cleaning it -- but some people actually do need to be taught that.
-- Safe storage laws for guns that are not in use. No impact on carry or home defense, as the gun is in use while the owner is present, so next to no "freedom" issues, but would dramatically cut down on unauthorized people getting into somebody elses firearms (i.e., kids)
-- Universal background checks for gun transactions, but implemented without any of the freedom issues. Just require someone to produce evidence they have passed a police check, no need to have them tell the police why they need such a report or create any kind of registry. A nexus card, government security clearance, etc., all would do as proof, or just show a physical copy of an actual police check.
-- Better enforcement of the existing laws, such as the example you site here. But it'll become a tug of war over funding for anti-gun programs and both sides will turn it into a huge political football.
None of these things are going to happen in the US because the anti-gun lobby has taken each one and tried to manipulate it into the service of the larger cause. For example, background checks were being leveraged into the first step towards creation of a federal registry of firearms owners. Safety training, storage laws too would be leveraged into first steps towards gun regulation.
If somehow the two sides could just call a "time out" and sit down and work together on some sensible proposals, a lot could get done. But we all know that won't happen -- Bloomberg really will use his super PAC to try and turn any gun legislation into a precedent for gun control, and the NRA will oppose even the proposals that are honest and sensible out of a sneaking suspicion that it's meant as such a precedent (and that is not an unreasonable suspicion).
The same sort of shutdown has happened over the abortion debate, where every issue instantly becomes incredibly controversial to the point where no issue is really addressed on its own merits.
fuji, there is a thread started to nominate Blackcock for "Tool of the Year". We need a seconder to get the vote official. GB
