NationStates Jolt Archive

What is your opinion on it?

Gun control is a good thing...
If you don't have control of your gun, how are you going to be able to hit your target?







My Thread
*stashes it out of reach of UCS*

What is your opinion on it and do you think it'll be an issue in the presidential election? I'm pro gun personally and I think it'll definately come up since the Supreme Court decided to rule on the D.C handgun ban(D.C vs. Heller) in March.

I'm pro-gun but I don't think it's a very important thing right now in terms of deciding candidates. Actually, I'm on the liberal side of everything but gun control (and I'm also against affirmative action, besides that I'm generally liberal).

That was fast.

I think most people think guns should be regulated and kept out away from people with criminal records. If someone says they don't support gun control does that mean they think guns should be sold at the gas station?

Would Jesus have wanted us to have guns???

No, it won't come up much. The Democrats were mostly quiet about it after 2000, thankfully.

I'm pro-gun. If the shit hits the fan--not likely, but nevertheless possible--I'd rather have an armed populace than a society where a monopoly in weaponry is held by the state and whichever group happens to control it.

Would Jesus have wanted us to have guns???

Yes
http://more4news.typepad.com/photos/uncategorized/gunsandgod.jpg

I think most people think guns should be regulated and kept out away from people with criminal records. If someone says they don't support gun control does that mean they think guns should be sold at the gas station?

How far does that go, though? Should it only be for violent felons, or should traffic tickets be included too? You never know when someone might get a ticket for a broken headlight and go postal with an evil black Assault Weapon™.

No, it won't come up much. The Democrats were mostly quiet about it after 2000, thankfully.

I'm pro-gun. If the shit hits the fan--not likely, but nevertheless possible--I'd rather have an armed populace than a society where a monopoly in weaponry is held by the state and whichever group happens to control it.

The Democrats finally realized that nationwide gun control is a losing proposition. I am of the opinion that new Gun Control laws helped lose Bush I the presidency in 1992, and was a major factor in the 1994 Congressional elections, which saw the Democrats lose 54 seats in the HoR, including the sitting Speaker of the House.

No, it won't come up much. The Democrats were mostly quiet about it after 2000, thankfully.

I'm pro-gun. If the shit hits the fan--not likely, but nevertheless possible--I'd rather have an armed populace than a society where a monopoly in weaponry is held by the state and whichever group happens to control it.

Kerry made some noise about the Assault Weapons Ban back in 04. But that didn't go anywhere. It was nothing but a ridiculous piece of feel good legislation anyway.

How far does that go, though? Should it only be for violent felons, or should traffic tickets be included too? You never know when someone might get a ticket for a broken headlight and go postal with an evil black Assault Weapon™.I don't think it should go far enough to keep guns out of the hands of regular people. In some countries not even the police have guns. But I'm just wondering what exactly it would mean to not support gun control at all. Every state would be like Texas.

Kerry made some noise about the Assault Weapons Ban back in 04. But that didn't go anywhere. It was nothing but a ridiculous piece of feel good legislation anyway.

The AWB was one of the worst thought pieces of legislation to come from Congress during the Clinton presidency. It seriously pissed off gun owners, didn't go far enough for the Bradyites, and was a huge Meh to everyone else.

I don't think it should go far enough to keep guns out of the hands of regular people. In some countries not even the police have guns. But I'm just wondering what exactly it would mean to not support gun control at all. Every state would be like Texas.

Acually, the state with the least amount of Gun control is Vermont. Yes, liberal, Gay Marriage, Howard Dean, Vermont.

Acually, the state with the least amount of Gun control is Vermont. Yes, liberal, Gay Marriage, Howard Dean, Vermont.They're also the only state that can legally try 11 year olds as adults.

That was fast.

Gun Control is a Pandora's Box for NSG. People can get very opinionated.

They're also the only state that can legally try 11 year olds as adults.

Vermont is also the leading manufacturer of Maple Syrup in the US.

See, I can fling around facts useless to the discussion too.

I don't think it should go far enough to keep guns out of the hands of regular people. In some countries not even the police have guns. But I'm just wondering what exactly it would mean to not support gun control at all. Every state would be like Texas.

:eek:
* supports limited gun control *

Vermont is also the leading manufacturer of Maple Syrup in the US.

See, I can fling around facts useless to the discussion too.That's awesome, but what I said isn't exactly useless because Vermont can't act so liberal now that I know they let everyone have guns and try 11 year olds as adults.

Gun control is fine by me, so long as I'm given other superior and controllable means by which I can personally defend the liberty of myself and others.

In Soviet Russia, guns control YOU! :eek:

That's awesome, but what I said isn't exactly useless because Vermont can't act so liberal now that I know they let everyone have guns and try 11 year olds as adults.

It always boggles me as to why people see gun restrictions as Liberal.

The AWB was one of the worst thought pieces of legislation to come from Congress during the Clinton presidency. It seriously pissed off gun owners, didn't go far enough for the Bradyites, and was a huge Meh to everyone else.

It remains to this day a good example of how to make bad laws.

1) it was unconstitutional

2) it had too many loopholes to be effective on any level

3) it banned guns based on cosmetic(scary) features instead of function

4) the guns it targeted were rarely used in crime anyways

The AWB was one of the worst thought pieces of legislation to come from Congress during the Clinton presidency....

You can say that again. Unfortunately, there are still AWBs in 7 states (California, Connecticut, Hawaii, New Jersey, New York, Maryland, and Massachusetts).

Vermont is also the leading manufacturer of Maple Syrup in the US.

See, I can fling around facts useless to the discussion too.


So can I.

My cat's breath smells like cat food.

Truthfully, I don't own a cat.

....cause honestly, whats the point of an automatic rifle in the hands of a civilian?

They are really fun to shoot :D

You can say that again. Unfortunately, there are still AWBs in 7 states (California, Connecticut, Hawaii, New Jersey, New York, Maryland, and Massachusetts).

Hawaii wants to serialize and microstamp ammunition too. As much as Hawaii is l33t, their gun laws are draconian.

Oh, and only 4 months untill I can get my CPL! w00t

One of the biggest reasons that gun control is seen as a liberal leaning idea is that it is government regulation of the populace.

As far as for or against...I don't want dangerous criminals and people with serious mental health issues to have guns. The only problem with a lot of gun control measures is that they really only make it difficult for the members of society that wouldn't do anything wrong with them. Bad people are going to get guns either way if they want them, so why police anything more than a few high-risk types of people and extremely deadly weapons....cause honestly, whats the point of an automatic rifle in the hands of a civilian?

Gonna put 20 rounds through that deer?:mp5:

One of the biggest reasons that gun control is seen as a liberal leaning idea is that it is government regulation of the populace.

As far as for or against...I don't want dangerous criminals and people with serious mental health issues to have guns. The only problem with a lot of gun control measures is that they really only make it difficult for the members of society that wouldn't do anything wrong with them. Bad people are going to get guns either way if they want them, so why police anything more than a few high-risk types of people and extremely deadly weapons....cause honestly, whats the point of an automatic rifle in the hands of a civilian?

Gonna put 20 rounds through that deer?:mp5:

Most people who own guns don't hunt.

Gun control is good.


Banning guns I disagree with. Thats because its an issue brought up that is a symptom of a larger problem, but politicians bring it up because its easier to attack the symptom than the problem.


(Problem is social inequility and bad education systems in the areas withhigh gun violence).

Depends on the culture really. I personally support gun rights here in New Jersey/United States.

What about the fact that some people are just bad.

Perhaps some people are. But nobody says we can eliminate violent crime. The possibility remains that we can greatly reduce it.

I will agree with that, but would you hold it against someone to have a gun for protection in their house or things like that? My point was that an automatic rifle is just a killing machine for maiming and destroying life. I have no problem with someone having a handgun in their home especially if you live in a rougher part of town.

If your going to pitch the crime angle for banning machine guns, I ask you when the last time a legally owned machine gun was used in a crime.

Most people who own guns don't hunt.

I will agree with that, but would you hold it against someone to have a gun for protection in their house or things like that? My point was that an automatic rifle is just a killing machine for maiming and destroying life. I have no problem with someone having a handgun in their home especially if you live in a rougher part of town.

I will agree with that, but would you hold it against someone to have a gun for protection in their house or things like that? My point was that an automatic rifle is just a killing machine for maiming and destroying life. I have no problem with someone having a handgun in their home especially if you live in a rougher part of town.

Actually, automatic weapons are a blast to shoot at the range. You can google some videos of machine gun shoots, or you can search through old gun control threads here for some links to videos myself and others have posted.

Handguns are great for self defense. So is my AR-15, but I wouldn't use that because it wouldn't look good in a court room.

Pics?

Here's mine: http://img96.imageshack.us/img96/1135/1000045ur3.jpg

(Problem is social inequility and bad education systems in the areas withhigh gun violence).

What about the fact that some people are just bad. You cant blame it all on society and the way people had to live and things people have gone through. There are plenty of people that have had rough lives and do nothing to harm others, but there are also many who have had great lives and it still wasn't enough and they kill someone.

Handguns are great for self defense. So is my AR-15, but I wouldn't use that because it wouldn't look good in a court room.

Castle Doctrine, my friend. Hopefully, you wouldn't have to go to a court. Of course, the great overall hope is that you will never have to exercise the Castle Doctrine.

I will agree with that, but would you hold it against someone to have a gun for protection in their house or things like that? My point was that an automatic rifle is just a killing machine for maiming and destroying life. I have no problem with someone having a handgun in their home especially if you live in a rougher part of town.

Handguns are great for self defense. So is my AR-15, but I wouldn't use that because it wouldn't look good in a court room.

Probably hasn't been any time lately, I know. But if there is no other use for a weapon than to kill people we may as well keep it out of the hands of the public as much as possible. The cops can have them, but that is very regulated and kept (generally speaking) in tight control of someone trusted to use it.

A question to you would be, what could an AR-15 be used for (other than to kill someone) and when is the last time that was used to stop a crime other than by police?

Please educate yourself on present gun laws before equating an AR-15 to a machine gun.

Probably hasn't been any time lately, I know. But if there is no other use for a weapon than to kill people we may as well keep it out of the hands of the public as much as possible. The cops can have them, but that is very regulated and kept (generally speaking) in tight control of someone trusted to use it.

A question to you would be, what could an AR-15 be used for (other than to kill someone) and when is the last time that was used to stop a crime other than by police?

AR-15s can be used to put rounds downrange quickly, to show those uppity paper targets that WE'RE the bosses :D. They're also good as a varmint rifle (woodchucks, prairie dogs, rabbits, coyotes, etc...).

So is my AR-15, but I wouldn't use that because it wouldn't look good in a court room.

Because your AR-15 is so much more sinister. I mean, just picking one up makes you want to go on a killing spree!

In fact, we need to ban all guns that look like it. Then we'll complain that the ban on cosmetic differences didn't do anything and try to patch this fundamentally flawed law. Of course nobody will care by this point, and the worthless ban will expire, and there was much rejoicing. (yay)

My baby.

http://i137.photobucket.com/albums/q234/Bojangles18_2006/DSC01653.jpg

Very nice. Too bad that's illegal in CT (due to CT's AWB), otherwise I might have something similar.

Pics?

Here's mine: http://img96.imageshack.us/img96/1135/1000045ur3.jpg

That is one sexy gun. :cool:

If your going to pitch the crime angle for banning machine guns, I ask you when the last time a legally owned machine gun was used in a crime.

Probably hasn't been any time lately, I know. But if there is no other use for a weapon than to kill people we may as well keep it out of the hands of the public as much as possible. The cops can have them, but that is very regulated and kept (generally speaking) in tight control of someone trusted to use it.

A question to you would be, what could an AR-15 be used for (other than to kill someone) and when is the last time that was used to stop a crime other than by police?

Pics?

Here's mine: http://img96.imageshack.us/img96/1135/1000045ur3.jpg

My baby.

http://i137.photobucket.com/albums/q234/Bojangles18_2006/DSC01653.jpg

Of course there are blips on the radar, but if you look at stats, most gun violence is committed in areas that are very poor and slumy, such as inner cities.

Bingo. What many gun grabbers do not (or refuse to) realise is that gun crime is a symptom of a greater problem. Banning guns would be like putting a band-aid on a severed jugular.

Let me also add this:

I would love to just go out and shoot an automatic weapon at the range and just have a good time. But that is also something I am more than willing to sacrifice to limit the amount of killing that a majority of civilian weapons can do. I hope that made sense.

I am a gun enthusiast myself. I like shooting clay pigeons and unloading my .30-06 at things. I am just not sure that the benefits outweigh the potential costs of allowing a large amount of automatic weapons in the country.

I would expect a "gun enthusiast" to be smarter then to can an AR-15 a machine gun.

EDIT: Seriously, this time warp is getting real annoying.

What about the fact that some people are just bad. You cant blame it all on society and the way people had to live and things people have gone through. There are plenty of people that have had rough lives and do nothing to harm others, but there are also many who have had great lives and it still wasn't enough and they kill someone.

Of course there are blips on the radar, but if you look at stats, most gun violence is committed in areas that are very poor and slumy, such as inner cities.

Actually, automatic weapons are a blast to shoot at the range. You can google some videos of machine gun shoots, or you can search through old gun control threads here for some links to videos myself and others have posted.

Let me also add this:

I would love to just go out and shoot an automatic weapon at the range and just have a good time. But that is also something I am more than willing to sacrifice to limit the amount of killing that a majority of civilian weapons can do. I hope that made sense.

I am a gun enthusiast myself. I like shooting clay pigeons and unloading my .30-06 at things. I am just not sure that the benefits outweigh the potential costs of allowing a large amount of automatic weapons in the country.

Let me also add this:

I would love to just go out and shoot an automatic weapon at the range and just have a good time. But that is also something I am more than willing to sacrifice to limit the amount of killing that a majority of civilian weapons can do. I hope that made sense.

I am a gun enthusiast myself. I like shooting clay pigeons and unloading my .30-06 at things. I am just not sure that the benefits outweigh the potential costs of allowing a large amount of automatic weapons in the country.

Legal automatic weapons aren't used in crimes. They're too expensive for that to happen (an M-16 runs anywhere from $12k to $18k, and MP-5 is over $20k, and even a Mac-10 is over $3k). For example, in the North Hollywood Shootout, the rifles were illegally modified to fire full auto.

Yeah, I don't know a whole lot about it and I do realize that an AR-15 is semi-automatic. I was using that as an example because that what you or somoeone was talking about.

I don't want any of you guys to take me wrong. As far as current gun control laws are concerned I am ignorant for the most part. My ideas on gun control is just that they shouldn't be in the hands of convicted criminals (what level, I am not sure), not in the hands of people with real mental issues, and probably no automatic weapons for the civilian populace.

So, you admit you are ignorent about gun laws, but you want to create new laws to solve a problem that doesn't exist.

Nice logic.

Probably hasn't been any time lately, I know. But if there is no other use for a weapon than to kill people we may as well keep it out of the hands of the public as much as possible. The cops can have them, but that is very regulated and kept (generally speaking) in tight control of someone trusted to use it.

A question to you would be, what could an AR-15 be used for (other than to kill someone) and when is the last time that was used to stop a crime other than by police?

Hunting, plinking, match shooting. The AR-15 is the gun of choice for medium to long distance competition shooting. And is fast becoming the most popular semi-auto centerfire rifle in the country among civilians. It's not overly expensive, ammo is cheap, it's versatile, and has low recoil so even beginners and the elderly can shoot them well.

Legal automatic weapons aren't used in crimes. They're too expensive for that to happen (an M-16 runs anywhere from $12k to $18k, and MP-5 is over $20k, and even a Mac-10 is over $3k). For example, in the North Hollywood Shootout, the rifles were illegally modified to fire full auto.

Not to mention the cost of the Class II, and the hoops you have to jump through.

These days, it's just easier for criminals to buy a smuggled AK from the back of the truck.

Exactly, which is why I dont support the banning of fire arms. When someone has AIDs you dont give them advil.

What, not even if they have a headache...
You bastard!!
:p

Please educate yourself on present gun laws before equating an AR-15 to a machine gun.

Yeah, I don't know a whole lot about it and I do realize that an AR-15 is semi-automatic. I was using that as an example because that what you or somoeone was talking about.

I don't want any of you guys to take me wrong. As far as current gun control laws are concerned I am ignorant for the most part. My ideas on gun control is just that they shouldn't be in the hands of convicted criminals (what level, I am not sure), not in the hands of people with real mental issues, and probably no automatic weapons for the civilian populace.

Bingo. What many gun grabbers do not (or refuse to) realise is that gun crime is a symptom of a greater problem. Banning guns would be like putting a band-aid on a severed jugular.


Exactly, which is why I dont support the banning of fire arms. When someone has AIDs you dont give them advil.

What, not even if they have a headache...
You bastard!!
:p

rofl

What is your opinion on it and do you think it'll be an issue in the presidential election? I'm pro gun personally and I think it'll definately come up since the Supreme Court decided to rule on the D.C handgun ban(D.C vs. Heller) in March.

I'm not pro-gun. I'm pro-second amendment. *nod*

Not to mention the cost of the Class II, and the hoops you have to jump through.

These days, it's just easier for criminals to buy a smuggled AK from the back of the truck.

There's nothing i'd love more right now than to see the 86 MG ban get repealed.

Pft, I don't care anymore.

Only one of my like, 12 guns was purchased from a licensed gun dealer. (1930 Mosin-nagant) We bought the AK from a friend, my Grandpa sort of stole the .30 carbine from the navy... (But that was 1945) The majority of our other guns also came from my Grandpa.

Gun control doesn't really do a whole lot unless you live in New York and what not. Even then, unless you end up shooting someone there really isn't any reason why the government would ever figure out what guns you own.

There's nothing i'd love more right now than to see the 86 MG ban get repealed.

I imagine that automatic weapons collectors would hate to see that, as their collections would lose thousands of dollars of value due to more automatic weapons being available. Since I'm not one of those people though, I'd be happier than a pig in slop. :D

So, you admit you are ignorent about gun laws, but you want to create new laws to solve a problem that doesn't exist.

Nice logic.

No I am just trying to say what I think gun control should mean. I am ignorant about guns and gun control laws because up until the last couple years I haven't been around them, except for a couple times. Now I own a hunting rifle and would like to own a shotgun and possibly a handgun in the next few years, but I am only learning and acquiring right now. In fact, I have 9mm training tomorrow morning.

So there is no reason to become defensive about what I say, its just what my take on things are.

No I am just trying to say what I think gun control should mean. I am ignorant about guns and gun control laws because up until the last couple years I haven't been around them, except for a couple times. Now I own a hunting rifle and would like to own a shotgun and possibly a handgun in the next few years, but I am only learning and acquiring right now. In fact, I have 9mm training tomorrow morning.

So there is no reason to become defensive about what I say, its just what my take on things are.

Congradulations. You'll become more educated, and more informed in your opinions.

My point was that there is no widespread ownership of automatics. The registry itself is limited to guns put on it over 20 years ago. The expense and the pains of getting registered machine guns and the Class II license needed to posess one makes it out of reach for the average gun owner. Only serious collectors or dealers own Machine guns, typically. There is no machine gun problem.

Would Jesus have wanted us to have guns???

Uhh, yeah. the more guns we have, the sooner people can go help with the religious war against Santa.... oops, i mean Satan. No, seriously though, does that really matter? God saw it was inevitable that humans would develop guns, so it doesn't matter what Jesus would have wanted. Personally, gun control makes some sense, but in the long hall I'm totally against it.

Gun control doesn't really do a whole lot unless you live in New York and what not. Even then, unless you end up shooting someone there really isn't any reason why the government would ever figure out what guns you own.

I've heard some creepy stories coming from HK owners. They've been finding RFID chips embedded into the grips. Disconcerting, to say the least.

One of the biggest reasons that gun control is seen as a liberal leaning idea is that it is government regulation of the populace.

It's funny how that doesn't make any sense at a semantic level.

government out of populace's business = conservative

Abortion? Sodomy laws?

Congradulations. You'll become more educated, and more informed in your opinions.

My point was that there is no widespread ownership of automatics. The registry itself is limited to guns put on it over 20 years ago. The expense and the pains of getting registered machine guns and the Class II license needed to posess one makes it out of reach for the average gun owner. Only serious collectors or dealers own Machine guns, typically. There is no machine gun problem.

Thank you for enlightening me. I would say that there are people plenty enough trustworthy to own automatic weapons and keep them secure and use them for entertainment and such. As long as owning an automatic isn't easy enough for the average Joe to get one, I don't have a problem with it.

It's funny how that doesn't make any sense at a semantic level.

government regulation of populace = liberal

government out of populace's business = conservative

Generally speaking in the United States anyway.

government regulation of populace = liberal

government out of populace's business = conservative

Generally speaking in the United States anyway.

Liberalism: a political or social philosophy advocating the freedom of the individual, parliamentary systems of government, nonviolent modification of political, social, or economic institutions to assure unrestricted development in all spheres of human endeavor, and governmental guarantees of individual rights and civil liberties.

I'm going to interpret "government out of populace's business" as referring to economic business, so no complaints there.
That's only because politics in U.S. are broken

Abortion? Sodomy laws?

Good point, but the one thing that we all know falls under a conservative viewpoint is morality issues.

But that is why I said generally speaking.

I imagine that automatic weapons collectors would hate to see that, as their collections would lose thousands of dollars of value due to more automatic weapons being available. Since I'm not one of those people though, I'd be happier than a pig in slop. :D

I think they could manage, seeing as how some of those guys drops hundreds of thousands of dollars on their collections.

Thank you for enlightening me. I would say that there are people plenty enough trustworthy to own automatic weapons and keep them secure and use them for entertainment and such. As long as owning an automatic isn't easy enough for the average Joe to get one, I don't have a problem with it.

The only person to ever use a registered MG in a homicide was a cop AFTER the ban.

Bad people will always have guns just like bad people will always have illegal drugs even though they are outlawed. However if we outlaw guns the only people who will give them up are the good people. The best thing to do is simply make it a stricter process to purchase guns with training and a detailed background check. If we outlaw guns, good people will not have any protection from intruders. If my gun is taken away and someone breaks into my house, i am defenseless and will surely die.

The best thing to do is simply make it a stricter process to purchase guns with training and a detailed background check.

The only people who will even be aware of these background checks and stricter buying processes will be the good people.

You do know how easy it is to make an automatic weapon, don't you? Blowbacks will be the most common homemade machine gun because of the simplicity. The trick will be extraction but there are several helpful instructional documents available online and in print that tel you how to solve that issue. Aside from that it's really just a matter of the Main Spring and the Mag Spring. As soon as the trigger stop is pulled out of the way the weapon will discharge until empty. Not the most efficient or accurate, especially since you won't be able to rifle the barrel without the proper equipment but the point of a machine gun is to get several rounds to the target quickly so aim is not a big factor if you've ot lots of ammo to burn.

*takes notes*

The only people who will even be aware of these background checks and stricter buying processes will be the good people.
Perhaps, but using such laws and coupling them with even tougher restrictions on anyone caught selling a gun without a license would seem to help.

I'm pro-gun but I don't think it's a very important thing right now in terms of deciding candidates. Actually, I'm on the liberal side of everything but gun control (and I'm also against affirmative action, besides that I'm generally liberal).
Liberal? What kind? Classic, Neo, Paleo, Conservative, National, Cultural, Ordo, Social, or Anarchist? Or are you a leftist? There is a difference.

Anyway, it looks like the shit aklready hit the hyperdrive so I guess it's up to Titty Shepard to save the day. Anyone know his number?

I imagine that automatic weapons collectors would hate to see that, as their collections would lose thousands of dollars of value due to more automatic weapons being available. Since I'm not one of those people though, I'd be happier than a pig in slop. :D
You do know how easy it is to make an automatic weapon, don't you? Blowbacks will be the most common homemade machine gun because of the simplicity. The trick will be extraction but there are several helpful instructional documents available online and in print that tel you how to solve that issue. Aside from that it's really just a matter of the Main Spring and the Mag Spring. As soon as the trigger stop is pulled out of the way the weapon will discharge until empty. Not the most efficient or accurate, especially since you won't be able to rifle the barrel without the proper equipment but the point of a machine gun is to get several rounds to the target quickly so aim is not a big factor if you've ot lots of ammo to burn.

Just tossing this out there, but Japan has had a 24% increase in gun shootings in 2007. They had a whole 66 of them. The number of gun deaths also rose sharply in 2007 with 22 from 2 in 2006.
42 of those instances were yakuza related with 12 of the 22 deaths being yakuza members.
http://search.japantimes.co.jp/cgi-bin/nn20080208a7.html

Japan has one of the most draconian gun registry laws in the world.

Again, just tossing that out.

Perhaps, but using such laws and coupling them with even tougher restrictions on anyone caught selling a gun without a license would seem to help.

The tougher restrictions on illegal sellings would be a good idea, but something tells me that guns involved in crime were not used by their legal purchaser.
That said, I'm all for regulating weapons. Personally, I think that (one of) the best routes to take is to make certain types of firearms illegal or heavily regulated. Ammo capacity and action are things to consider.

Liberal? What kind? Classic, Neo, Paleo, Conservative, National, Cultural, Ordo, Social, or Anarchist? Or are you a leftist? There is a difference.

Anyway, it looks like the shit aklready hit the hyperdrive so I guess it's up to Titty Shepard to save the day. Anyone know his number?


You do know how easy it is to make an automatic weapon, don't you? Blowbacks will be the most common homemade machine gun because of the simplicity. The trick will be extraction but there are several helpful instructional documents available online and in print that tel you how to solve that issue. Aside from that it's really just a matter of the Main Spring and the Mag Spring. As soon as the trigger stop is pulled out of the way the weapon will discharge until empty. Not the most efficient or accurate, especially since you won't be able to rifle the barrel without the proper equipment but the point of a machine gun is to get several rounds to the target quickly so aim is not a big factor if you've ot lots of ammo to burn.

Of course I know how easy it is to make an automatic weapon. I've been mentioning Philip Luty's name on this board every time someone infers that banning firearms will make firearms magically disappear. What I'm talking about in that post you quoted was LEGAL automatic weapons. Making your own automatic weapon without the proper license(s) is illegal and potentially dangerous.

Just tossing this out there, but Japan has had a 24% increase in gun shootings in 2007. They had a whole 66 of them. The number of gun deaths also rose sharply in 2007 with 22 from 2 in 2006.
42 of those instances were yakuza related with 12 of the 22 deaths being yakuza members.
http://search.japantimes.co.jp/cgi-bin/nn20080208a7.html

Japan has one of the most draconian gun registry laws in the world.

Again, just tossing that out.

So, what you're saying is that with more gun laws, gun crime has the potential to increase instead of decrease, therefore more/less guns and/or gun laws may not have any effect on crime? Gotcha. :p

So, what you're saying is that with more gun laws, gun crime has the potential to increase instead of decrease, therefore more/less guns and/or gun laws may not have any effect on crime? Gotcha. :p

What he's saying is that Japan clearly does not follow The Great Correlation of Firearm Abundancy and Crime, and should be shunned by those loyal to It.

Not only is the right to keep and bear arms a constitutional one, it is a fundamental and basic human right of all people.

The right to self-defense is the most basic right and the cornerstone of the social contract.

Not only is the right to keep and bear arms a constitutional one, it is a fundamental and basic human right of all people.

The right to self-defense is the most basic right and the cornerstone of the social contract.

Right to bear arms /= right to self-defence.

The tougher restrictions on illegal sellings would be a good idea, but something tells me that guns involved in crime were not used by their legal purchaser.
True, but having everyone licensed to drive and cars registered means that it's easier for police to tell who shouldn't be driving.

That said, I'm all for regulating weapons. Personally, I think that (one of) the best routes to take is to make certain types of firearms illegal or heavily regulated. Ammo capacity and action are things to consider.
There's that too. I've yet to hear of a good reason to own military grade equipment beyond "I want one".

Of course, in my perfect world (Which doesn't exist of course and never will), gun owners would be licensed, with the license granted after background check and after gun safety/operations classes (I'm thinking along the lines of the same police and military get). After that, no worries. Concealed weapons? Built into the license. Background check on weapon's purchase? Nope, already done for you, don't need it. Buying ammo? No problem, just flash your license and enjoy. In my own perfect world.

True, but having everyone licensed to drive and cars registered means that it's easier for police to tell who shouldn't be driving.

Well, posting from Canada, I'd say that the current level of gun registration is sufficient to identify legally owned guns.


There's that too. I've yet to hear of a good reason to own military grade equipment beyond "I want one".

Of course, in my perfect world (Which doesn't exist of course and never will), gun owners would be licensed, with the license granted after background check and after gun safety/operations classes (I'm thinking along the lines of the same police and military get). After that, no worries. Concealed weapons? Built into the license. Background check on weapon's purchase? Nope, already done for you, don't need it. Buying ammo? No problem, just flash your license and enjoy. In my own perfect world.

In my crazy perfect world, the only weapons anybody could own would be bolt-action rifles. Slow to reload, very difficult to conceal, and highly accurate. *resists urge to use sniper smiley*

It is the law abiding citizen who is armed for defense that is hurt by gun control, not the lawbreaker who is armed and looking for easy targets.

Right to bear arms /= right to self-defence.

Obviously, I disagree.

Right to bear arms /= right to self-defence.

Of course it does.

I'll defend myself and my family by any method I see fit.

First let me say that I am a gun owner and a man who, given the chance, would gladly join an organized militia meant to protect America.

I support the rights of people to own weapons fir both plinking, self defense, and hunting purposes.

Gun control is good to an extent. I think it's best to keep Automatic weapons out of the hands of individuals. However, I do not support any laws meant to ban semi-automatic rifles.

I also feel it is stupid to ban assault weapons which are limited to semi-automatic. The pistol grip, fore grip, folding stock, bayonet lug and other things that characterize an assault weapon do not actually make the gun more dangerous.

Banning only leads to people using illegal means to get the guns that are banned. It is only valuable with fully-automatic weapons because it is much more difficult to get those illegally than pistols and semi-automatic firearms.