The Politics Thread...

[blueberry]

Originally Posted by adhahn

Bearing arms is a Right, not a privilege. I'll support a safety course and licensing exam for owning a gun when we have a critical thinking test and history exam before allowing people to speak, publish, or read anything.

This is beyond comprehension! The only way to learn history or critical thinking skills is by reading, writing and discussing ideas. This has to be one of the most obtuse statement I have ever seen.

[dobermansrule]

Originally Posted by blueberry

Main gun in Newtown also used in D.C. sniper shootings

I would not consider this gun as standard fare but I'm sure some will.

I really didn't know what guns were used.. so an AR-15.... semi-auto. Our military uses the fully auto capable version.

and fyi... an AR-15, .225/5.56mm caliber - the only thing that differentiates it from a standard fare Ruger mini-14 ranch rifle is it's looks and capacity to carry more bullets. CORRECTION: quick google check - there are 30 round magazines available for the Ruger mini-14, a nondescript .223 gun. Media calls the AR-15 an assault rifle because it's an evil looking black gun. But the cute little Mini-14 is not an assault weapon, though shoots the same bullet and can carry as many.

[dobermansrule]

so America. We want our gun control. Then, be ready to give up privacy. These shootings are not simply a matter of gun control. I propose companion legislation that requires public registration of 'problem children' - much like a sex offender registry. And when chidren enroll in public schools, they will be required to undergo psychological evaluations that are repeated on a recurring basis. Too many parents, like Mrs Lanza, are holding these problem children too closely to their chests and keeping these issues private and squelched. They are harboring human pressure cookers and they aren't equipped to contain them or defuse them. Evidence Adam Lanza. If I have to give up my guns, I wants to know where little problem kids are harbored in my neighborhood and around me so I can keep a watch for my own safety. An already stressed social services system will have to be expanded, at tax payer expense.

Were this kid evaluated soon enough and not protected by mama, perhaps the killings could have been averted. Sure it didn't help that mama had unsecured guns in the house. Were the guns not there, how else would have the deranged mind of the kid acted out?

[dobermansrule]

Originally Posted by EmilyB

I think it is more than population, demographics more so.

true that.. one big melting pot of human genetics - good and bad. And you can't leave out that whole mungey thing of social values, family, morals.... so many people, anything goes culture, wide and varied gene pool, rampant stupidity.... it is a ticking time bomb.

[GRAYGHOST]

Originally Posted by blueberry

I am not for outlawing guns across the board but the laws need to change! Some guns I BELIEVE people have no RIGHT to own. It's time! Those children had right too.

Think of it this way....
One shoe bomber on a plan....now we all take our shoes off at the airport. Many, many of these shootings have happen and no changes to the laws. It's reprehensible!

So what gives you, or some government flunkie the right to tell me what type of firearm I can own??

Guns did not take the right of life away from those children in Conn.-an evil person did. He could have just as easily have used homemade pipebombs, or another homemade explosive.

The FBI's Hostage Rescue Team (wantabe SEALS/Delta Force) have lots of guns, and they have killed a lot of civilians (Ruby Ridge, and Wacco for example), but have yet to rescue any hostages alive after all these years. Maybe gun control should start with them.

Why do you think, as you seem to, that an armed government is better than armed citizens; it was jerks in the FDA who sent armed (weapons drawn) agents and police to raid a grocery store that sold raw milk?

[blueberry]

Originally Posted by GRAYGHOST

So what gives you, or some government flunkie the right to tell me what type of firearm I can own??

Guns did not take the right of life away from those children in Conn.-an evil person did. He could have just as easily have used homemade pipebombs, or another homemade explosive.

He very well could have but did not....he chose an assault rifle! I don't think our Founding Fathers had these guns in mind when they wrote the 2nd Amendment.


BTW "Arms" is such a broad term for a range of weapons....by your logic I should be able to have a biological weapon, nuclear weapon, or even brass knuckles....they are all illegal to have.

[blueberry]

Originally Posted by GRAYGHOST

So what gives you, or some government flunkie the right to tell me what type of firearm I can own??

Guns did not take the right of life away from those children in Conn.-an evil person did. He could have just as easily have used homemade pipebombs, or another homemade explosive.

The FBI's Hostage Rescue Team (wantabe SEALS/Delta Force) have lots of guns, and they have killed a lot of civilians (Ruby Ridge, and Wacco for example), but have yet to rescue any hostages alive after all these years. Maybe gun control should start with them.

Why do you think, as you seem to, that an armed government is better than armed citizens; it was jerks in the FDA who sent armed (weapons drawn) agents and police to raid a grocery store that sold raw milk?

AGAIN since you quoted me....I guess you did not read it. So again, I DON'T THINK ALL GUNS SHOULD BE BANNED! I am not for the goverment collecting all of the guns here. But I do think we need to re think how all guns are acquired; and which ones are sold.

[dobermansrule]

Originally Posted by blueberry

He very well could have but did not....he chose an assault rifle! I don't think our Founding Fathers had these guns in mind when they wrote the 2nd Amendment.


BTW "Arms" is such a broad term for a range of weapons....by your logic I should be able to have a biological weapon, nuclear weapon, or even brass knuckles....they are all illegal to have.

were the 2nd amendment frozen in time by intent... we'd all still be shooting black powder muzzle loaders. The citizens of the time had the same weapons as the military. With militias - they were often one and the same. So that frozen in time intent certainly is not in place today. Citizens are greatly limited compared to the military of today. Not that I am a proponent of Bubba owning a grenade launcher.... don't go there.

[dobermansrule]

Originally Posted by blueberry

AGAIN since you quoted me....I guess you did not read it. So again, I DON'T THINK ALL GUNS SHOULD BE BANNED! I am not for the goverment collecting all of the guns here. But I do think we need to re think how all guns are acquired; and which ones are sold.

I hate to give away the shop for fellow gun owners, but the best gun control would be to limit/ban the ammo itself. Guns with no bullets are clubs and paper weights.

but it's politically sexier to talk about banning the guns. The evil guns.

[ssgharkness020147]

Originally Posted by dobermansrule

I really didn't know what guns were used.. so an AR-15.... semi-auto. Our military uses the fully auto capable version.

and fyi... an AR-15, .225/5.56mm caliber - the only thing that differentiates it from a standard fare Ruger mini-14 ranch rifle is it's looks and capacity to carry more bullets. CORRECTION: quick google check - there are 30 round magazines available for the Ruger mini-14, a nondescript .223 gun. Media calls the AR-15 an assault rifle because it's an evil looking black gun. But the cute little Mini-14 is not an assault weapon, though shoots the same bullet and can carry as many.

The media also loves to fantisize the "power" of the AR15's cartridge, when in reality it fires a round menat to maim not kill.

[dobermansrule]

Originally Posted by ssgharkness020147

The media also loves to fantisize the "power" of the AR15's cartridge, when in reality it fires a round menat to maim not kill.

true. The kinder/gentler military. Took away the venerable 30-06 and .308 and gave our troops hopped up .22's.

[GRAYGHOST]

Originally Posted by blueberry

He very well could have but did not....he chose an assault rifle! I don't think our Founding Fathers had these guns in mind when they wrote the 2nd Amendment.


BTW "Arms" is such a broad term for a range of weapons....by your logic I should be able to have a biological weapon, nuclear weapon, or even brass knuckles....they are all illegal to have.

I do not know for certain what weapons the killer used; only that he did not use an assault rifle; that is a class III weapon capable of full auto fire. Anything that he used was 100 year+ old semi-auto technology. The Founding Fathers wrote the 2nd Amendment to protect current firearms; today we have self-loading rifles/shotguns so they are covered. As you know, the biological/nuclear weapon thing is totally ridiculous.

[monicaei]

I think people get confused about "assault rifles" and full vs semi auto. In theory my hunting rifle is a semi auto (I can get 4 rounds with 4 trigger pulls) and is actually a higher caliber (.308) than what we are discussing here.

I think there needs to be a discussion on terminology . Any of you gun nuts wanna give that a go?

[ssgharkness020147]

Originally Posted by monicaei

I think people get confused about "assault rifles" and full vs semi auto. In theory my hunting rifle is a semi auto (I can get 4 rounds with 4 trigger pulls) and is actually a higher caliber (.308) than what we are discussing here.

I think there needs to be a discussion on terminology . Any of you gun nuts wanna give that a go?

The Truth about "Assault Weapons" - YouTube

[dobermansrule]

Originally Posted by ssgharkness020147

The Truth about "Assault Weapons" - YouTube

so the distinction is the ability to fully automatic fire - one trigger pull, multiple automatic fire. That is assault rifle.

semi-automatic, one shot per trigger pull, is not assault rifle.

Those swinging the ban stick and the media who like to fan the flames don't care. They shoot bullets.

and the one "hunting rifle" shown in the video is a Saiga .308 - build on AK47 platform. I had one of those at one time.

[monicaei]

Originally Posted by ssgharkness020147

The Truth about "Assault Weapons" - YouTube

Excellent video. I particuarly like the part where it is mentioned that no one really knows WHAT an assault rifle actually is.

Here's the problem with banning semi automatic weapons, IMO... They are pretty much ALL semi automatic. I mean, short of a single barrel "crack to load" shot gun or an antique bolt action rifle, every modern fire arm is semi automatic.

If you BAN those guns, what happens to the hunters?

I do think that a middle of the road approach might be to consider restricting or regulating the sale of those "banana clips". I'm not sure there is a legitimate use of a 30 round magazine? Other than target practice or fun, which could be reasonably weighed againt the public interest.

[dobermansrule]

I wouldn't call bolt action rifles antique. Most modern, high precision, hunting rifles are bolt action. They can withstand higher pressures and more accurate for what hunting requires - the precise placement of a single shot. Can also be used as a sniper rifle. Very deadly.

[VZ-Doberman]

I know many will hop on the ban the gun bandwagon but it still goes back to the person pulling the trigger. I wonder what would be said if instead of using a gun this idiot used a car to kill the victims. Just say he waited outside the school until it was recess and a bunch of kids and a couple of adults were on the playground and he drove through the chainlink fencing and began mowing kids/teachers down. He would have been hard to stop and I think the death toll would have been as bad. No matter what weapon was used, the outcome is horrific. I'm all for background checks but reality is that if someone wants a weapon they'll find a way to get one or fall back to their 2nd choice of weapon (car/sword/fire).

China has had this happen. No gun was used but children were killed with a sword. How do we protect ourselves from the "nutcases" of the world?

[monicaei]

Originally Posted by dobermansrule

I wouldn't call bolt action rifles antique. Most modern, high precision, hunting rifles are bolt action. They can withstand higher pressures and more accurate for what hunting requires - the precise placement of a single shot. Can also be used as a sniper rifle. Very deadly.

My bad, I was refering to my grandfathers old school single shot antique and not really the "bolt action" action of the gun. See terminology is a useful discussion.

And honestly, considering the # of guns in this country, I don't even think a ban is possible. I mean, what is supposed to happen? Every hunter and skeet shooter is supposed to go drop off their guns somewhere? Not only is it unenforceable it's about as likely as every last one of them growing wings and flying to the moon

[dobermansrule]

Originally Posted by VZ-Doberman

How do we protect ourselves from the "nutcases" of the world?

1. screen them out young and institutionalize them. e.g., Michael Myers.
2. conscript them all in the military for overseas high risk duty only. i.e., nutcase invasion of overseas terror camps.
3. bring alcatraz back online and start breeding sharks in the bay.
4. scientific experimentation, new technology testing, space research - nutcases in space intrumented with various monitoring devices
5........

[dobermansrule]

Originally Posted by monicaei

My bad, I was refering to my grandfathers old school single shot antique and not really the "bolt action" action of the gun. See terminology is a useful discussion.

And honestly, considering the # of guns in this country, I don't even think a ban is possible. I mean, what is supposed to happen? Every hunter and skeet shooter is supposed to go drop off their guns somewhere? Not only is it unenforceable it's about as likely as every last one of them growing wings and flying to the moon

Portland, OR occassionally has gun drives - police sponsor drop-off events where they pay some minimal amount for your guns. In the spirit of feel-goodism, people bring in their broken guns for a few bucks to buy beer with.

But again.. it's not through guns themselves that control will be implemented - it's the ammo. No bullets, no shootee

[monicaei]

Originally Posted by dobermansrule

Portland, OR occassionally has gun drives - police sponsor drop-off events where they pay some minimal amount for your guns. In the spirit of feel-goodism, people bring in their broken guns for a few bucks to buy beer with.

But again.. it's not through guns themselves that control will be implemented - it's the ammo. No bullets, no shootee

We have those "gun drives" here too. Hasn't helped.

I agree with the previous sentiment that it should be harder to buy 20 boxes of ammo than 2 boxes of sudifed. I've never met a deer that just stood there and let you get 30 chances?

[dobermansrule]

Originally Posted by monicaei

If you BAN those guns, what happens to the hunters?

here's the gun ban view of hunters/hunting..

nobody has to hunt anymore to eat. We have grocery stores.

On occassion where there might be populations of some particular animal that needs to be controlled - as determined by the official experts in the government bureau that monitors and controls that sort of thing - the government will call upon a screened pool of 'hunters' in the area that have passed stringent background checks and government training. Those individuals will report to the local government office in area where said animals need to be population controlled, they will be issued an appropriate firearm by government agent, under custodial transfer control, and issued just enough bullets to accomplish the specific number of kills calculated by said government experts to implement the desired level of population control. The 'hunter' is required to bring back all spent brass from expended ammunition and any unused ammunition. And return said gun back to government control. To keep the pool of hunters interested, they will be allowed to take meat from said controlled kills so they can be seen as awesome hunters and really cool among their envious friends.

[dobermansrule]

Originally Posted by monicaei

We have those "gun drives" here too. Hasn't helped.

I agree with the previous sentiment that it should be harder to buy 20 boxes of ammo than 2 boxes of sudifed. I've never met a deer that just stood there and let you get 30 chances?

any deer hunter that needs more than one shot shouldn't be out there.

[monicaei]

Originally Posted by dobermansrule

any deer hunter that needs more than one shot shouldn't be out there.

Agree, and if you ban guns then the woods will be full of wounded deer from half assed bow hunters...