What's new
By:
Filters

Gun Control

it's a who do you trust question. the general public or government. I think there are good people both places. I also know that through history when a government gains enough power it is only a matter of time before absolute power corrupts absolutely. again this is a right that our founders saw imperative after spilling their blood for our freedom. gun crimes happened back then too. I'm old fashioned and I don't think the time for this right has passed. I haven't even fired my gun for years, but its a scary thought that someone would regulate it or heaven forbid take it or quit selling cartridges. that sounds like another country.
 
SaltyDawg said:
Because once the government gets acceptance on gun control, there is no limit to where it will lead. When this "sensible gun control" doesn't stop the mass shootings (which it won't, for the reasons I've been saying) then we'll only get stricter gun control regulations.
Click to expand...

Except the fact that the exact opposite happened when the assault weapons ban signed in 1993 expired without little resistance in 2004.

The NRA has completely bought the republican party and a good chunk of democratic party. This will blow over and whatever changes we imagine will come of this will be mostly if not completely undone within the next 8-12 years.
 
I've been reading into a few mass murders. In Canada, Marc Lépine planned his rampage for months. In South Korea, Woo Bum-kon was an alcoholic police officer who took his weapons right out of the police armory. Poorer countries tend to use incendiaries. Oceania and Maritime Southeast Asia rampages have relied almost exclusively on melee weapons (13 events with 12 dead minimum).

Guns aren't the issue. Although I can see some new restrictions on AR-15's, it won't be a solution.
 
franklin said:
I've been reading into a few mass murders. In Canada, Marc Lépine planned his rampage for months. In South Korea, Woo Bum-kon was an alcoholic police officer who took his weapons right out of the police armory. Poorer countries tend to use incendiaries. Oceania and Maritime Southeast Asia rampages have relied almost exclusively on melee weapons (13 events with 12 dead minimum).

Guns aren't the issue. Although I can see some new restrictions on AR-15's, it won't be a solution.
Click to expand...

Thanks for doing some research. Who knew that people can figure out how to obtain weapons whether it is legal or not. Also mass murders do not require guns.
 
candrew said:
Except the fact that the exact opposite happened when the assault weapons ban signed in 1993 expired without little resistance in 2004.

The NRA has completely bought the republican party and a good chunk of democratic party. This will blow over and whatever changes we imagine will come of this will be mostly if not completely undone within the next 8-12 years.
Click to expand...

I don't want to have to sit through 2 terms of the most incompetent president ever, and the worst terrorist attack on American soil, just to get back to square 1.

Let's keep moving forward, rather than take a huge step backwards on the premise that we will eventually get back to where we are today.
 
SaltyDawg said:
I don't want to have to sit through 2 terms of the most incompetent president ever, and the worst terrorist attack on American soil, just to get back to square 1.

Let's keep moving forward, rather than take a huge step backwards on the premise that we will eventually get back to where we are today.
Click to expand...

Who are you and what have you done with Salty!
 
SaltyDawg said:
That's fine for you. But if I want to SELL my coffee table, or if I don't want to spend the money in a brand new coffee table, RC Willey is obviously not a good choice.
Click to expand...

Is KSL really the only way to sell stuff online?

I saw a link on KSL.com's website on facebook where someone provided in a comment an alternative online website to buy and sell guns. Seems to me like the "free market" is doing what it does best. If KSL doesn't want to advertise, that's fine. it's their loss. People are going to buy and sell their crap online.
 
The Thriller said:
Is KSL really the only way to sell stuff online?

I saw a link on KSL.com's website on facebook where someone provided in a comment an alternative online website to buy and sell guns. Seems to me like the "free market" is doing what it does best. If KSL doesn't want to advertise, that's fine. it's their loss. People are going to buy and sell their crap online.
Click to expand...

There are plenty of other places to buy and sell stuff online, but KSL is far and away the biggest in Utah. I honestly don't even know where else to look for used guns online. I'm sure I could find a place if I searched, but off the top of my head KSL is the only place I know for used guns online.

I agree that it's KSL's decision too. I'm just disappointed that they're contributing to this unfortunate hype fest.
 
moevillini said:
it's the unbalanced (who are generally not what I think of when someone refers to the "bad element) that go out and randomly shoot strangers for no apparent reasons
Click to expand...

My choice of wording was poor, but by "bad element" I am talking about someone who obtains a gun specifically for malicious purposes.

But either way, if we take guns out of the equation "unbalanced" people are no longer a threat?

and not just that, but it seems to me (despite everyone's arguments here to the contrary) that there are just TOO MANY GUN OWNERS who have TOO CAVALIER an attitude about their weapons.
Click to expand...

What do you mean by "too cavalier an attitude"? Can you site some examples? Sure, there will be fanatics in any area, but I think you (and a big chunk of the country) are projecting. The Ted Nugent types are actually few and far between. But even at that rate, the Nuge hasn't shot and killed another person, to my knowledge.

definitely needs to be mandatory jail time for anyone whose gun is used in a crime, whether it was stolen or lost - - especially if they failed to report it
Click to expand...

If a prosecutor could prove gross negligence, then some sort of punishment should be assessed. Aside from that, such a suggestion is not even vaguely reasonable or logical.

and no more internet sales or sales at gun shows or other less regulated venues in my opinion, at least not without some very stringent checks and balances in place
Click to expand...

By "internet sales", do you mean private parties using the internet to facilitate a transaction, or do you mean ALL internet sales, period?

If you think you can go on the webz, and get someone to ship you a gun, you're way off. There are a plethora of web-based retailers who are happy to sell you a gun. Upon receipt of your hard earned dollars, they will ship your gun to the FEDERALLY LICENSED dealer of your choice, where you can then pick it up, after a background check has been completed.

Edit: Any firearm shipped (by dealer or private citizen) must be sent to a dealer with a FFL.

Private transactions are merely facilitated by the ease of internet contact. As long as private firearms transactions are legal, how connections are made are of little consequence.
 
Bronco70 said:
My choice of wording was poor, but by "bad element" I am talking about someone who obtains a gun specifically for malicious purposes.

But either way, if we take guns out of the equation "unbalanced" people are no longer a threat?
Click to expand...

I took "bad element" specifically to mean criminals and/or gang-banger types, most of whom will have some sort of police record by the time they reach adulthood. I was not referring to someone who just "snaps" and uses a gun to resolve a situation that displeases them. Or even someone who plans an attack, but is otherwise a law-abiding person. And I also don't consider the mentally ill, or others who may suffer from various disorders, to be the "bad element". I'm not sure the term "mentally ill" should be applied either; there are so many categories that I'm not sure there's any one blanket term to cover everybody. And many people do a good job hiding their problems at least to some extent, and if they've never sought treatment, I'm not sure the "mental illness" label would even apply.


What do you mean by "too cavalier an attitude"? Can you site some examples? Sure, there will be fanatics in any area, but I think you (and a big chunk of the country) are projecting. The Ted Nugent types are actually few and far between. But even at that rate, the Nuge hasn't shot and killed another person, to my knowledge.
Click to expand...

Why are we always hearing about the kid who accidentally shoots his brother, or the kid who brings a gun to school, or the father whose 7 year old son kills himself while trying out a gun at a gun show, or the person (this was just on the news) who shoots himself while demonstrating his new gun's safety features. To me, these types of incidents certainly indicate that the gun owner has not been as careful as they should have been - ie, they've been too cavalier.

If a prosecutor could prove gross negligence, then some sort of punishment should be assessed. Aside from that, such a suggestion is not even vaguely reasonable or logical.
Click to expand...

I've got nothing. We disagree big time. Perhaps as was mentioned in a previous post, where the guns are secured in a safe and the entire safe is stolen, maybe that person would bear little responsibility - so long as they reported the theft immediately upon discovering it. But there are cases where someone notices they can't find their gun that they haven't seen for weeks or months, and have no clue when it disappeared.

By "internet sales", do you mean private parties using the internet to facilitate a transaction, or do you mean ALL internet sales, period?

If you think you can go on the webz, and get someone to ship you a gun, you're way off. There are a plethora of web-based retailers who are happy to sell you a gun. Upon receipt of your hard earned dollars, they will ship your gun to the FEDERALLY LICENSED dealer of your choice, where you can then pick it up, after a background check has been completed.

Edit: Any firearm shipped (by dealer or private citizen) must be sent to a dealer with a FFL.

Private transactions are merely facilitated by the ease of internet contact. As long as private firearms transactions are legal, how connections are made are of little consequence.
Click to expand...

I'll take your word for this, since I have no experience with it at all. I have no idea how easy or difficult it is to get a gun. I know it's pretty easy to get a FOI (firearm owner identification) card in Illinois which is what you need to be able to buy a gun. Beyond that, the only time I was ever present for any sort of gun transaction was a gazillion years ago when I was dating a Chicago cop and he wanted to purchase a new weapon.
 
someone suggested earlier that there would be a civil war if the govt tries to take peoples guns away. Why do people think they can fight back against the govt? I've never heard of anyone taking on the govt and winning...
 
There are 12,000 gun related deaths each year. There are 75,000 alcohol related deaths each year. Give up your beer and then I will give up my gun.
 
gregbroncs said:
You could potentially kill just as many people with a car if you so desired.
Click to expand...

Yes but that is where the comparison ends, which is why its a dumb comparison.

You could kill people with just about anything, but most things have other uses as well.

A gun can not drive me to work, but a car can.... See a car can kill people but it main purpose is not for killing.... A guns main purpose is for killing.
 
Beantown said:
There are 12,000 gun related deaths each year. There are 75,000 alcohol related deaths each year. Give up your beer and then I will give up my gun.
Click to expand...

People drown every year... give up water.

People die from food related illness every year.... give up food.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page

Top