264 replies to this topic

[Jwheelz]

So is anyone ready to admit that maybe it's not a good idea to allow completely unrestricted purchase of assault weapons and military grade firearms? I'm all for responsible people having the ability to have weapons, but should it be so easy to build an arsenal in your home?

Although I disagree with how loosely the Second Amendment has been interpreted by courts often, ultimately if the courts say it's unconstitutional to prevent people from buying weapons altogether, then fine. And actually there are lots of legitimate reasons people should be able to have guns. But just because the right is there doesn't mean there shouldn't be reasonable restrictions on how much and how quickly you can buy the things, and what types are legal to own.

I'm aware there is no 100% foolproof way to prevent violent crimes and shootings, people who are determined enough will always be able to find the resources they need to make horrible things happen. But I can't believe there isn't some connection between the fact that we are the most heavily armed populace of any country on the planet and the fact that we also have the highest rates of gun related violence of any modern industrialized nation. I don't think it's a gun issue alone, I think we have a very violent culture in a lot of ways and that most definitely contributes to the types of situations like we saw in Colorado over the weekend.

I also think being able to carry hundred round magazines goes way beyond what anybody needs to protect themselves or their families from whatever real or imagined threats there are to be protected from. I'm sure there are people on here that completely disagree with me on the issue but people should be able to go to the movies and go to school without worrying that some crazed douchebag with big guns and a bad attitude is going to cut them down for no reason at all.

Thoughts?

[mollythecat]

I think there should be classes or some sort of certification you need to take BEFORE buying any sort of weapon especially a gun..no permit..nothing like that..and if you are a part of the military..then you should have the right to carry a gun of some sort but also carry a piece of paper stating that you have the right to bear arms or an ID of some sort...after what has happened in Colorado or other places in the past...its no wonder people are SO afraid to go anywhere...these days its WAAAY too easy to buy guns......

[Jwheelz]

there definitely needs to be something done, and WTF is up with being able to get things like teargas?

[TakeAStepBack]

http://www.gunpolicy...n/united-states

In the United States, annual firearm homicides total

2009: 9,146

http://www.cdc.gov/M..._factsheet.html

In 2009, 10,839 people were killed in alcohol-impaired driving crashes, accounting for nearly one-third (32%) of all traffic-related deaths in the United States.

1

If more people carries guns, it is less likely crazy folks like this would get away with it without being choked off by oncoming return fire. Unfortunately, there is no way to disarm everyone, therefore Im of the opinion everyone should carry.

[MeOmYo]

there definitely needs to be something done, and WTF is up with being able to get things like teargas?

I beleive he made the teargas himself

[TakeAStepBack]

I beleive he made the teargas himself

Case in point. Put all the controls in place you want. People who want to do these things will find the ways. Guns dont kill people, people kill people.

[PeaceFrog]

people with assault weapons kill lots of people.

[TakeAStepBack]

People driving public transport (like buses) while intoxicated do too.

Ban buses?

[Eco]

there definitely needs to be something done, and WTF is up with being able to get things like teargas?

I'll touch on the teargas and then bounce away from the gun subject. Tear gas as a threat or even if used saves lives....just think about the women it protects from rape, a step for police to control people before using guns or beat em up sticks. Of course we always hear about the negative uses but at least for me the positive uses outweigh them.

[Lazy Lightning]

I've shot many different types of guns, learned target practice, and enjoyed it very much, but I feel no compulsion to own a gun of my own in the name of "personal safety."

Here's some pics of me having fun with guns in California - my friend has a collection of 40 different guns, I think we took out 7 or 8 of them that day:







Wouldn't make me feel and safer having my own, but they sure are fun to fire safely!

[deadheadskier]

Let's see, the US owns more guns per capita than any other nation. The US consistently ranks as having one of the highest rates of gun crimes of any nation in the world. Most nations with higher rates tend to be developing countries, there certainly isn't a 1st world country in the same conversation as the US when it comes to gun crime.

.......and people think more people carrying will somehow reduce the problem? :rollseyes:

Personally, if I were writing the law, handguns would be outlawed for all except law enforcement. No more assault rifles for the general public either.

You want a rifle or a shot gun for hunting? Fine by me. You can use them to protect your home too. I just don't see any need what so ever for people to have handguns or assault rifles.

[TakeAStepBack]

The threat of aggression is best curtailed by the return threat of aggression. If most people are wielding what you think gives you power, you no longer have that power. It's quite simple, really.

And no, the 1800s aren't coming back by me saying that. Regardless of the fact that history is misconstrued and exaggerated. Social evolution isn't turning back. But centralized powers will always breed the same outcome regardless.

[deadheadskier]

you want to take a philosophical look at the situation go ahead. I'll stick to the statistics. We gots the most guns and we pretty much gots the most gun problems. Nations that don't have a highly armed populous don't have nearly the gun problems we do.

We'll never get rid of the problem all together, but I think the situation can improve (especially the hand gun situation, which is a no brainer) and reduced access should be employed.

[TakeAStepBack]

So only some can wield them. That's a long term recipe for disaster. More people were killing in drunk driving accidents in 2009, as I showed.

Ban cars and alcohol? Or restrict sales?

[deadheadskier]

Is that the game you wish to play?

That's like the pro-marijuana people saying smoking cigs or drinking is worse for you. This maybe so, but those are separate issues. It's pointless to point to other non-relevant factors when trying to make an argument for or against something. There's a fancy term in literary argument for that form of arguing, but it's escaping me right now.

But, in regards to drunk driving being a problem; stepped up enforcement has reduced it's prevalence big time. 26K dd deaths in 1982, less than 11K in 2009.

Same thing can happen with guns. Better controls can reduce the crime rate. And yes, I think there are many people in society who shouldn't be allowed access to fire arms. And yes, I think there are types of fire arms that should not be owned by the general public. An AR-15 assault rifle would certainly be one of them.

[MeOmYo]

never felt the need to have one for "safety". however, I shoot trap and/or skeet sometimes twice a week during nice weather. there are 4 different rod and gun clubs within 10 miles of me that have either a trap, skeet or sporting clay field, some have all. I hunt deer, turkey, duck, rabbit and grouse with both long guns and pistols all outside my door. pistols because it's challenging. I've never left the house with a gun just to have it with me just in case something happens yet I would feel comfortable carrying and/or handling a gun in front of anyone in any situation. I know their capability and know how to handle them safely. I grew up around them as did most of the people around here.

Ban them and that's a large part of who you're taking them from. Sure, they will be less available but there will a much smaller market too. People want them, they'll get them. Unfortunately, the only ones that will lose out are the ones that respect them.

IMO the problem is not the guns, the problem is a stressed out society, education and the decline of essential values.

[PeaceFrog]

if you want an assault rifle, then join the militia

other than that, I can't see how it's constitutional. There is a limit to everything.

should everyone carry around live grenades just to be safe?

carrying a gun for safety is like carrying a condom for virginity

and I've personally known a man who was killed by a gun, not another person.

[Again and Again]

IMO the problem is not the guns, the problem is a stressed out society, education and the decline of essential values.

I agree with this message!

[TakeAStepBack]

Is that the game you wish to play?

That's like the pro-marijuana people saying smoking cigs or drinking is worse for you. This maybe so, but those are separate issues. It's pointless to point to other non-relevant factors when trying to make an argument for or against something. There's a fancy term in literary argument for that form of arguing, but it's escaping me right now.

But, in regards to drunk driving being a problem; stepped up enforcement has reduced it's prevalence big time. 26K dd deaths in 1982, less than 11K in 2009.

Same thing can happen with guns. Better controls can reduce the crime rate. And yes, I think there are many people in society who shouldn't be allowed access to fire arms. And yes, I think there are types of fire arms that should not be owned by the general public. An AR-15 assault rifle would certainly be one of them.

It's not a game, it's a direct comparison of crime. We have gun control laws now. It isn't a free-for-all out there on firearms. And again, those who wish to do the type of things the OP is referring to will do them regardless of gun controls. In my view, it is better to have a population that knows how to use them safely and carries them than only having a few wield them. In the OP case, how many would the shooter have gotten off in a crowd full of armed people?

[bitrush]

people with assault weapons kill lots of people.

At what point did he have an assault weapon?

[bitrush]

You dopes...a civilian AR-15 is NOT an assault rifle.

[bitrush]

its amazing how many people want guns banned but know so little about them

[syd_25]

You dopes...a civilian AR-15 is NOT an assault rifle.

this

[TakeAStepBack]

I wasn't even going to bother arguing that point.

It's the same thing as bringing up drunk driving. When the "authorities" "cracked down" on DWI, they did not ban the sale of SUVs or large trucks because they do more damage. that is essentially what people are arguing here. That larger caliber/round firearms cause more damage in the event of criminal intent.

If they did, we'd all drive smart cars as the potential for inflicted damage is much less severe.

[Tim the Beek]

The reason Amendment II was added to the Constitution was that firearms ownership was viewed as the backstop and last bastion against tyranny.

A fair number of liberal/progressive folks I know began to change their minds about guns during the Bush Administration...

[Tim the Beek]

IMO the problem is not the guns, the problem is a stressed out society, education and the decline of essential values.

I concur.

[Joker]

Folks should be allowed to have weapons to defend themselves but they should also be trained and certified for any type of weapon they have at least every year or two.

[Roasted and Toasted]

IMO the problem is not the guns, the problem is a stressed out society, education and the decline of essential values.

Well said. Without values and human decency, we are doomed

As a firearms owner that does not participate in the shooting sports, but do enjoy my rights, I can still see validity in both sides of this debate.
Unfortunately, legislation will only affect the final cost, not availability of said firearms. Black market firearms will never go away, especially if profit margins are high.

[MeOmYo]

just to be clear, I have nothing against the use for other reasons. I don't feel the need to use them for safety because of where I live. There were 8 firearm related crimes in the COUNTY in 2009. 18 in 2011 but these numbers also include illegal possession, etc. non-aggrevated type of crimes. many people never even lock their doors to their house. it's just not an issue here.

[deadheadskier]

We have gun control laws now. It isn't a free-for-all out there on firearms.

Pretty close. In many states, all you need is a valid drivers license to purchase a gun at a gun show. No criminal background check, not hunter safety card......nada.

You dopes...a civilian AR-15 is NOT an assault rifle.

Maybe not by definition, but I'm sorry any rifle that can be easily modified to hold a 100 round magazine and unload 50-60 rounds per minute isn't something that should be available to consumers. People are damn lucky the thing jammed as the death toll could have been much higher.

[TakeAStepBack]

I can modify a 22 cal rifle to have a 50 clip and three round burst.

[JBetty]

If more people carries guns, it is less likely crazy folks like this would get away with it without being choked off by oncoming return fire.

And also more likely that a larger amount of innocent bystanders would be caught in the crossfire.

[TakeAStepBack]

Really? i would suspect if 75% of the crowd being opened up on were carrying, the incident would have been over in moments.

Like I said, unless EVERYONE, and I do mean everyone, is going to lay down their arms permanently, then I'm of the stance that everyone should carry (mentally unstable, convicted criminals, etc..no withstanding).

The best way to curtail aggression is through the understanding of returned aggression. If you take up arms with the intent to do damage on a crowd you know is also armed, it seems more than reasonable to believe that you would think twice knowing you may never get more than one round off before the intended crowd mows you down with return fire.

[JBetty]

So you're advocating a free-for-all shooting spree in a case like this?

[deadheadskier]

I don't think having an armed crowd would make any bit of difference in terms of the shooter thinking twice about such actions. James Holmes is one of very few mass killers who didn't turn the gun on himself and take his life. Most of these freaks go into these events fully expecting/wanting to die.

[TakeAStepBack]

OK. So disarm everyone except those who obtain them through black market channels and what have we solved? Nothing.

Am I advocating a "free-for-all shooting spree"?
Is this a rhetorical question?

The incident happened regardless. It isn't like Im saying everyone should run around shooting off guns at each other. It's called self defense.

[TakeAStepBack]

Or just stand there and get shot because you think guns are bad and dont want to carry one.

"Oh, please dont shoot me mr. crazy gunman."

That should work.

[MeOmYo]

I don't think having an armed crowd would make any bit of difference in terms of the shooter thinking twice about such actions. James Holmes is one of very few mass killers who didn't turn the gun on himself and take his life. Most of these freaks go into these events fully expecting/wanting to die.

no he didn't. when people showed up that had and know how to use guns, he gave up

[Jwheelz]

I guess what I'm saying is I don't really have a problem with the legal routes of obtaining guns, what I really want is to see is a crackdown on the black market. Right now the way the laws are set up on the federal level, a straw buyer (someone hired by someone else to purchase firearms) can walk up to any gun seller at a gun show and buy anything they want. The sales do not have to be recorded and no background checks have to be conducted because they are considered "private sales," those guns can then be distributed to anybody without any record of anyone making a purchase. That's how unregistered weapons get in the hands of criminals. It's correct to say that the problem will never be 100% solved, but if there's things that can be done to make it substantially more difficult for guns to go to people who would use them for violent crimes, I think it's worth it. I also like what Joker said about requiring gun owners to be routinely trained and certified on the weapons they own.

[deadheadskier]

Or just stand there and get shot because you think guns are bad and dont want to carry one.

"Oh, please dont shoot me mr. crazy gunman."

That should work.

Okay, let's allow everyone to carry then.

I guarantee you the amount of gun deaths in this country would go through the roof. Every night there a thousands of drunken bar fights all over the country. If most people were carrying, it's safe bet that many people on the losing end of a bar fight are going to turn to their gun.

I personally think Britian's gun laws should be the model for here in the US. FAR tighter control over there and guess what? A gun homicide rate 40 times lower than here in the US.

[TakeAStepBack]

Even in the wild west, gun owners checked their arms at the door of a saloon.

[deadheadskier]

Fair enough John Wayne

For me it's a pretty simple conclusion. Nations that have extremely strict gun laws, have very low rates of gun crimes. We do not have very strict gun laws and have a high rate of gun violence. More guns in more hands is not the answers. Fewer guns in fewer hands is. 2nd right supporters can't get as philosophical as they like on the subject, but the numbers speak for themselves.

[deadheadskier]

And here is an example of a fellow who had an arsenal of weapons that had no business owning such weapons, but because of our lax gun laws, law enforcement had no way of disarming him.

http://www.presshera...ays-family.html

you can be mentally ill and buy that many different kinds of guns as long as you're "non-violent"

Thankfully he was stopped on the way to commit murder.

[TakeAStepBack]

yes, they have low rates of gun crimes if you dont count the brutality displayed by despotic governments. We were given the second amendment for a reason. Thats' the whole point. We also have higher rates of DWI related deaths. Could it be all the SUVs and roads?

The problem is that blaming the tool for the bad behaviour does not take out the bad behaviour. Take away the guns and then a streak of hammer bludgeoning ensues.

Blame the hammer.

[syd_25]

Sure make them illegal.... then only the cops and the criminals wil have them. Not sure that will work better.

The penalties for illegal firearm possesion should be very strict. IMPO

[Joker]

I personally think Britian's gun laws should be the model for here in the US. FAR tighter control over there and guess what? A gun homicide rate 40 times lower than here in the US.

Beside the 2nd Amendment, this would never work here because the amount of illegal weapons already in circulation

[Spidergawd]

I'm sort of torn about this issue. I used to be staunchly anti-gun, but I do see the utility and enjoyment some find from them, plus the constitutional angle (although the NRA has taken that so far as to be farcical.) Hell, I like target shooting. It's fun. But with a teenager around, I certainly don't want weapons in the house at this point.

I think ANY gun sale, private or otherwise, should be subject to the same rules. Background checks, waiting periods, limits to quantities purchased, etc. Too much burden for private owners? Tough. Deal with it or don't sell a firearm. Caught with a firearm that didn't change hands properly? Big penalties.

As far as the self defense thing goes, can someone give me a few examples of a public shooting foiled by someone carrying in the crowd? I can't seem to find too many.

[TakeAStepBack]

The stories are out there, but they are not as "news" worthy as what happened in CO this past week.

Here is one story I found from a quick search.


Gun carrying man ends stabbing spree at Salt Lake grocery store


Reported by: Don Hudson






SALT LAKE CITY (ABC 4 News) – A citizen with a gun stopped a knife wielding man as he began stabbing people Thursday evening at the downtown Salt Lake City Smith’s store.

Police say the suspect purchased a knife inside the store and then turned it into a weapon. Smith’s employee Dorothy Espinoza says, “He pulled it out and stood outside the Smiths in the foyer. And just started stabbing people and yelling you killed my people. You killed my people.”
Espinoza says, the knife wielding man seriously injured two people. “There is blood all over. One got stabbed in the stomach and got stabbed in the head and held his hands and got stabbed all over the arms.”
Then, before the suspect could find another victim – a citizen with a gun stopped the madness. “A guy pulled gun on him and told him to drop his weapon or he would shoot him. So, he dropped his weapon and the people from Smith’s grabbed him.”
By the time officers arrived the suspect had been subdued by employees and shoppers. Police had high praise for gun carrying man who ended the hysteria. Lt. Brian Purvis said, “This was a volatile situation that could have gotten worse. We can only assume from what we saw it could have gotten worse. He was definitely in the right place at the right time.”
Dozens of other shoppers, who too could have become victims, are also thankful for the gun carrying man. And many, like Danylle Julian, are still in shock from the experience. “Scary actually. Really scary. Five minutes before I walk out to my car. It could have been me.”
Police say right now they have no idea what caused the suspect to go on the dangerous rampage. (We will update as soon as we learn new information.)
So far, police have not released the names of the suspect, the victims or the man who pulled the gun.

http://www.tacticala...e-should-carry/

[MeOmYo]

I'm sort of torn about this issue. I used to be staunchly anti-gun, but I do see the utility and enjoyment some find from them, plus the constitutional angle (although the NRA has taken that so far as to be farcical.) Hell, I like target shooting. It's fun. But with a teenager around, I certainly don't want weapons in the house at this point.

I purchased a gun safe for that reason. also to avoid having them stolen and fall into unwanted hands. having anything stolen sucks but to have someone else injured from one of my guns because I didn't secure it properly, I'm certain I wouldn't handle that very well at all.

[Spidergawd]

Thanks TASB. Interesting. Often when you hear stories like this it happens so quickly that folks don't react - especially when it's someone shooting rather than stabbing.