The Big Gun Control Thread

Every Fox and Friends seemed to just get into this territory,

There is just a grab bag to poo poo things, in this case anything that might come from the White House. The heart attack one intrigues me, so much of the ACA and Mrs. Obama's efforts are targeted at preventative care, preventing children from maintaining unhealthy habits. But I think that got compared to Dachau. These are the same people who started demonizing the eradication of cervical cancer as a war on religion.

Even when you run out of the thing that kills more people, you ultimately get to say "freedom." I fully understand how some times unsavory practices must be defended for the good of our rights. Say defending the KKK to protect free speech.

I do concur with Paleo, the focus should be on pocket pistols, that are the cause of almost 3/4 of the deaths. That does not mean shooting sprees with military grade hardware needs to be put in the ice box until then, however.

I think it is quite likely we will get a true universal background check and I think it is safe to say that most of the country (including gun owners) would be okay with it.

Another meaningless "assault weapon " ban however is probably DOA

Paleocon wrote:
I think it is quite likely we will get a true universal background check and I think it is safe to say that most of the country (including gun owners) would be okay with it.

Another meaningless "assault weapon " ban however is probably DOA

Simple Background Checks, and point of sale registration goes a long way across the board. The assault weapon matter is with the ATF. They stopped granting permits for awhile.

Something to tackle the straw man needs to be on the agenda as well. Frankly if a driver of a car is guilty of the same crime as the man in the passenger seat-murder, robbery, kidnapping. The buyer of the guns should be too.

Farscry wrote:
The Conformist wrote:
Very interesting video on how the government can sway the people. This man had an amazing life.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y3qkf...

Hoo boy, John Birch Society interview? Wow.

I never said I agree with the whole John Birch approach. I think the interview and the interviewee is fascinating.

jonstock wrote:
Stengah wrote:
The only way they get those numbers is to include suicides, which don't exactly fall under the category of "death due to gun violence."

Why not? Suicide is a type of violence--violence against oneself, but still violence.


Because it is a person who wants to die killing themselves, which I have far less of a problem with than someone killing someone else that doesn't want to die. Ultimately I think that people ought to be able to kill themselves if they want to.

The Conformist wrote:
Farscry wrote:
The Conformist wrote:
Very interesting video on how the government can sway the people. This man had an amazing life.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y3qkf...

Hoo boy, John Birch Society interview? Wow.

I never said I agree with the whole John Birch approach. I think the interview and the interviewee is fascinating.

I do think the interviewee is fascinating, but the leading questions from the interviewer get on my nerves. Sorry, was tired and headachey last night and shouldn't have posted; it was a dick response on my part.

Kroger Gun Stunt Sparks 2nd Amendment Debate

Charlottesville police say the man who showed up at a Kroger grocery store with a loaded gun wanted to make a point. On Sunday, an unidentified 22-year-old man carried a loaded AR-15 into the Kroger store on Emmet Street and Hydraulic Road, sparking not only a scare for customers and employees but also a 2nd Amendment debate.

If I yell that there is an armed shooter in the building, and he gets arrested or, better yet, shot on the spot, I will be just exercising my 1st Amendment rights, correct?

Ugh, when is this fad going to end? Did he film himself doing it do so he could put it up on youtube? These guys love the youtube.

Paleocon wrote:
I think it is quite likely we will get a true universal background check and I think it is safe to say that most of the country (including gun owners) would be okay with it.

Another meaningless "assault weapon " ban however is probably DOA

A large federal database for background checks is not the answer in my opinion; this will end up creating A federal gun registry which I would be against. The NRA and myself urges our Senators to support mental health reform to address problems in the mental health system before any gun control scheme.

Gorilla.800.lbs wrote:
If I yell that there is an armed shooter in the building, and he gets arrested or, better yet, shot on the spot, I will be just exercising my 1st Amendment rights, correct?

Don't be silly. You'd be inciting a panic, and would get arrested yourself. Don't you see? The second amendment trumps the first!

Gorilla.800.lbs wrote:
If I yell that there is an armed shooter in the building, and he gets arrested or, better yet, shot on the spot, I will be just exercising my 1st Amendment rights, correct?

Unless he had actually shot the gun, you could possibly be guilty of incitement or false statement of fact if the cops shot him based on you identifying him as a shooter (he had a note in his pocket explaining his intentions, so I think that was exactly what he was planning for). "Armed man" "guy with a gun" "crazy guy with a gun" would be fine though.

Nekroman wrote:
A large federal database for background checks is not the answer in my opinion; this will end up creating A federal gun registry which I would be against. The NRA and myself urges our Senators to support mental health reform to address problems in the mental health system before any gun control scheme. :)

The background check information is expunged periodically, from what I understand. Even if it was kept and guns were registered to a customer at the point of sale, why would you be against a federal gun registry?

Tanglebones wrote:
Kroger Gun Stunt Sparks 2nd Amendment Debate

Charlottesville police say the man who showed up at a Kroger grocery store with a loaded gun wanted to make a point. On Sunday, an unidentified 22-year-old man carried a loaded AR-15 into the Kroger store on Emmet Street and Hydraulic Road, sparking not only a scare for customers and employees but also a 2nd Amendment debate.

I think we really, really, really need to relate things like this to the limits of the First Amendment, specifically shouting "Fire" in a crowded theater.

Funkenpants wrote:
Nekroman wrote:
A large federal database for background checks is not the answer in my opinion; this will end up creating A federal gun registry which I would be against. The NRA and myself urges our Senators to support mental health reform to address problems in the mental health system before any gun control scheme. :)

The background check information is expunged periodically, from what I understand. Even if it was kept and guns were registered to a customer at the point of sale, why would you be against a federal gun registry?

Not speaking for Nekroman, but the complaint I've heard is that once the government knows where the guns are, it makes it easier for them to swoop in and take them when Obama inevitably decides to tek er guns, despite him never even proposing anything of the sort.

Of course, neither mental health reform, nor background checks will do anything to solve the problem of assholes who think it's a good idea to (legally) parade around public shopping areas with loaded AR-15s, looking for trouble.

It's all good until we have another Trayvon Martin shooting from someone who fits *this* particular (not insane, not yet felonious) profile.

ranalin wrote:
That's a bit emotional isnt it?

Heart desease causes 2,200 deaths a day...

I think that's a fair criticism. I also think that gun violence versus heart disease is an invalid comparison to make. Heart disease kills only the victim, gun violence rarely kills the owner of the weapon. If gun owners were only shooting themselves then I think the majority of the population would care a whole lot less.

That number has to include suicides as well and I believe those numbers belong there. You can easily make and argument that guns dramatically inflate the effectiveness of a suicide attempt. There's been countless botched suicide attempts whether it be by wrist cutting or self-inflicted poisonings where the person has lived. It's pretty hard to live through a bullet to the temple or shotgun round in the mouth.

Paleocon wrote:
And again. More people are beaten to death than killed with long arms of any type.

Except we're not just talking about long arms are we? We're talking about a staggering number of deaths due to guns of all types and a scenario where we can't admit we're unwilling to control the situation.
In a situation where you get to choose between a beating and being shot, I think it's an easy decision.

Tanglebones wrote:
It's all good until we have another Trayvon Martin shooting from someone who fits *this* particular (not insane, not yet felonious) profile.

I bet nobody will get shot doing this sort of thing, but it's just rude and wastes the time of the police.

Having to arrive on scene and worry about whether you're going to have to shoot this odd guy with the semi-automatic rifle with the high capacity interchangeable magazine sounds like a drag for the cops.

Nekroman wrote:
Paleocon wrote:
I think it is quite likely we will get a true universal background check and I think it is safe to say that most of the country (including gun owners) would be okay with it.

Another meaningless "assault weapon " ban however is probably DOA

A large federal database for background checks is not the answer in my opinion; this will end up creating A federal gun registry which I would be against. The NRA and myself urges our Senators to support mental health reform to address problems in the mental health system before any gun control scheme. :)

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

Stengah wrote:
jonstock wrote:
Stengah wrote:
The only way they get those numbers is to include suicides, which don't exactly fall under the category of "death due to gun violence."

Why not? Suicide is a type of violence--violence against oneself, but still violence.

Because it is a person who wants to die killing themselves, which I have far less of a problem with than someone killing someone else that doesn't want to die. Ultimately I think that people ought to be able to kill themselves if they want to.

I'm not against people making a rational decision to commit suicide, but most suicide proceeds from a temporary, irrational mental state. The presence of guns makes that state much more deadly.

But none of the gun control measures being proposed would affect the suicide rate, and handgun bans are apparently unconstitutional, so this doesn't have much bearing on the debate. I guess I'm just saying that the statistics about violent deaths were actually correct.

Tanglebones wrote:
Of course, neither mental health reform, nor background checks will do anything to solve the problem of assholes who think it's a good idea to (legally) parade around public shopping areas with loaded AR-15s, looking for trouble.

It's all good until we have another Trayvon Martin shooting from someone who fits *this* particular (not insane, not yet felonious) profile.

Most gun owners would never do something like that, I do not carry my AR around with me.

Farscry wrote:
The Conformist wrote:
Farscry wrote:
The Conformist wrote:
Very interesting video on how the government can sway the people. This man had an amazing life.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y3qkf...

Hoo boy, John Birch Society interview? Wow.

I never said I agree with the whole John Birch approach. I think the interview and the interviewee is fascinating.

I do think the interviewee is fascinating, but the leading questions from the interviewer get on my nerves. Sorry, was tired and headachey last night and shouldn't have posted; it was a dick response on my part.

No apology needed. I know you're a good guy and we all have those days

Nekroman wrote:
Tanglebones wrote:
Of course, neither mental health reform, nor background checks will do anything to solve the problem of assholes who think it's a good idea to (legally) parade around public shopping areas with loaded AR-15s, looking for trouble.

It's all good until we have another Trayvon Martin shooting from someone who fits *this* particular (not insane, not yet felonious) profile.

Most gun owners would never do something like that, I do not carry my AR around with me.

Not sure why you thought I was saying *most* gun owners would do this. So far there have been two well-publicized cases of this since Newtown. I do think it ties into the same vigilante, wannabe hero personality type shared by George Martin.

H.P. Lovesauce wrote:
Nekroman wrote:
Paleocon wrote:
I think it is quite likely we will get a true universal background check and I think it is safe to say that most of the country (including gun owners) would be okay with it.

Another meaningless "assault weapon " ban however is probably DOA

A large federal database for background checks is not the answer in my opinion; this will end up creating A federal gun registry which I would be against. The NRA and myself urges our Senators to support mental health reform to address problems in the mental health system before any gun control scheme. :)

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

What's the deal with the shell game link?

Nekroman wrote:
Paleocon wrote:
I think it is quite likely we will get a true universal background check and I think it is safe to say that most of the country (including gun owners) would be okay with it.

Another meaningless "assault weapon " ban however is probably DOA

A large federal database for background checks is not the answer in my opinion; this will end up creating A federal gun registry which I would be against. The NRA and myself urges our Senators to support mental health reform to address problems in the mental health system before any gun control scheme. :)


Why the opposition to a gun registry? Creating a national gun registry is not infringing on anything, so it doesn't run afoul of the 2nd amendment.
Look at it this way, there's not much stopping them from combing the internet for people who've posted that they own a gun or the subpoena the IP addresses of visitors to gun forums and create the same list. How hard will it be for them to type "People who like guns" into Facebook once their graph search goes public? It won't have every gun owner, but it will have a very large number of them.

Edit -

Bear wrote:
I also think that gun violence versus heart disease is an invalid comparison to make. Heart disease kills only the victim, gun violence rarely kills the owner of the weapon. If gun owners were only shooting themselves then I think the majority of the population would care a whole lot less.

That number has to include suicides as well and I believe those numbers belong there.

Those paragraphs contradict either other pretty hard.

Tanglebones wrote:
Nekroman wrote:
Tanglebones wrote:
Of course, neither mental health reform, nor background checks will do anything to solve the problem of assholes who think it's a good idea to (legally) parade around public shopping areas with loaded AR-15s, looking for trouble.

It's all good until we have another Trayvon Martin shooting from someone who fits *this* particular (not insane, not yet felonious) profile.

Most gun owners would never do something like that, I do not carry my AR around with me.

Not sure why you thought I was saying *most* gun owners would do this. So far there have been two well-publicized cases of this since Newtown. I do think it ties into the same vigilante, wannabe hero personality type shared by George Martin.

I believe it to just be a few people who just are afraid their right to own such a gun could be in jeopardy; expressing this by legally carrying it around with them. I still do not think it is the right thing to carry around. I live in Indiana and we have pretty relaxed carrying laws. I have a lifetime carry permit and I choose to carry a concealed firearm, even though my permit gives me the option to carry it without even having to conceal.

I'll admit that people open carrying scares me. But then, after watching the astonishing abuses carried about by local, state, and federal law enforcement over the last few years trying to scare OWS away, I'm pretty scared of municipal law enforcement as well.

Rock. Hard place. Conclusion: I understand why this is such a difficult topic. Still a little annoyed that it completely railroaded the fact that my state became Right to Work last month.

jonstock wrote:
Stengah wrote:
jonstock wrote:
Stengah wrote:
The only way they get those numbers is to include suicides, which don't exactly fall under the category of "death due to gun violence."

Why not? Suicide is a type of violence--violence against oneself, but still violence.

Because it is a person who wants to die killing themselves, which I have far less of a problem with than someone killing someone else that doesn't want to die. Ultimately I think that people ought to be able to kill themselves if they want to.

I'm not against people making a rational decision to commit suicide, but most suicide proceeds from a temporary, irrational mental state. The presence of guns makes that state much more deadly.

But none of the gun control measures being proposed would affect the suicide rate, and handgun bans are apparently unconstitutional, so this doesn't have much bearing on the debate. I guess I'm just saying that the statistics about violent deaths were actually correct.


I just don't think suicide is a problem to be solved by gun bans. I also don't think self-violence should be so causally included with interpersonal violence. While it's by no means good when someone in a temporary, irrational mental state decides to kill themselves, it's far less serious of a problem as someone deciding to kill others. Particularly in this case where the debate is focusing on mass shootings and people killing others, it's dishonest to bolster the firearm death count by including suicides.

jonstock wrote:
Stengah wrote:
jonstock wrote:
Stengah wrote:
The only way they get those numbers is to include suicides, which don't exactly fall under the category of "death due to gun violence."

Why not? Suicide is a type of violence--violence against oneself, but still violence.

Because it is a person who wants to die killing themselves, which I have far less of a problem with than someone killing someone else that doesn't want to die. Ultimately I think that people ought to be able to kill themselves if they want to.

I'm not against people making a rational decision to commit suicide, but most suicide proceeds from a temporary, irrational mental state. The presence of guns makes that state much more deadly.

This isn't really in the scope of this discussion, but my understanding is that most suicides stem from addiction, depression and/or long-term, relentless emotional pain.

I oppose having a federal gun registry for a couple reasons. First, I dont believe that if my grandfather passed a gun down to my father who eventually passed it on to me should have to be registered with the federal government. You will end up paying more fees, filling out extra paperwork just to inherit something. It worries me because it may make it harder for regular people to buy guns but yet it will still be easy for criminals to buy them.

Second, I dont belive the federal government should be able to know and track where every firearm is and who has them. Most things done like this involving the federal government seem to become messed up and corrupt over time.

I do not honestly believe the people of the United States would ever have to rise up against their own government, but wouldn't the government have a unfair advantage if they knew where all the guns were located ahead of time?