HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Forums & Groups » Main » General Discussion (Forum) » Gun Owners: We WILL have ...

Sun Dec 23, 2012, 04:12 PM

 

Gun Owners: We WILL have to BAN some guns

We have no other choice, or these killing sprees will take more and more lives

Gun Control Advocates: We will not be able to rid America of all guns.

-------------------------


At this point, instead of double downing on "I ain't gonna budge one inch" we need to compromise.

38 replies, 2337 views

Reply to this thread

Back to top Alert abuse

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum
Replies to this discussion thread
Arrow 38 replies Author Time Post
Reply Gun Owners: We WILL have to BAN some guns (Original post)
Taverner Dec 2012 OP
rrneck Dec 2012 #1
Taverner Dec 2012 #2
dkf Dec 2012 #3
Taverner Dec 2012 #4
Recursion Dec 2012 #29
justanidea Dec 2012 #5
Taverner Dec 2012 #6
Jim Warren Dec 2012 #14
Recursion Dec 2012 #28
derby378 Dec 2012 #7
Taverner Dec 2012 #9
Lizzie Poppet Dec 2012 #18
RomneyLies Dec 2012 #8
derby378 Dec 2012 #10
Taverner Dec 2012 #13
derby378 Dec 2012 #16
Tx4obama Dec 2012 #15
RomneyLies Dec 2012 #21
derby378 Dec 2012 #23
RomneyLies Dec 2012 #24
99Forever Dec 2012 #11
Taverner Dec 2012 #12
99Forever Dec 2012 #17
Taverner Dec 2012 #19
99Forever Dec 2012 #22
davidn3600 Dec 2012 #30
OneTenthofOnePercent Dec 2012 #20
Recursion Dec 2012 #25
Kolesar Dec 2012 #26
Recursion Dec 2012 #27
ProgressiveProfessor Dec 2012 #38
NickB79 Dec 2012 #32
DinahMoeHum Dec 2012 #31
Recursion Dec 2012 #34
Logical Dec 2012 #33
HereSince1628 Dec 2012 #35
Recursion Dec 2012 #36
ProgressiveProfessor Dec 2012 #37

Response to Taverner (Original post)

Sun Dec 23, 2012, 04:13 PM

1. Okay. Which ones do you want to ban

and how are you going to actually make that happen?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to rrneck (Reply #1)

Sun Dec 23, 2012, 04:15 PM

2. Semi-Auto would be a good start

 

Ban any gun that can shoot faster than 1 bullet per second, and ban any auto-reload gun except revolvers.


BUT - the last word should come after a study

If we were to ban guns, we should identify the ones that kill the most in these kinds of situation, and ban them

-------------------


For that matter, we aren't going to ban ALL guns, so the discussion should be which guns SHOULD we have access to.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Taverner (Reply #2)

Sun Dec 23, 2012, 04:19 PM

3. How many guns is that and what does that leave?

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to dkf (Reply #3)

Sun Dec 23, 2012, 04:20 PM

4. Don't know and don't know

 

It leaves single and double barrel shot guns, and revolver pistols would be the one exception

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to dkf (Reply #3)

Sun Dec 23, 2012, 07:00 PM

29. That would cut the number of guns in private hands in half, roughly

Semi-automatics are a majority of firearms owned, and nearly all new sales.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Taverner (Reply #2)

Sun Dec 23, 2012, 04:20 PM

5. A revolver can be fired faster than 1 round per second.

 

To eliminate guns that can do that, you would essentially have to ban everything except muzzleloaders.

In other words, you'd have to reset civilian firearms ownership back to pre 1800s technology.

Not a very practical solution.

Furthermore, the vast majority of handguns sold in the last 20 years have been semiauto. A ban on semiauto handguns would mean that 75%+ of the civilian handguns currently in existence would become illegal.

Also not very practical.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to justanidea (Reply #5)

Sun Dec 23, 2012, 04:21 PM

6. Sounds good to me

 

18th century? There were less murders back then


Take them all, give them a GENEROUS buy back plan, or for the Republicans, a huge tax break

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Taverner (Reply #6)

Sun Dec 23, 2012, 04:31 PM

14. Actually, not the case.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Taverner (Reply #6)

Sun Dec 23, 2012, 06:57 PM

28. The murder rate in the 18th century was significantly higher than today

Over twice as high.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Taverner (Original post)

Sun Dec 23, 2012, 04:22 PM

7. Ain't gonna happen

What you call "compromise," we call capitulation. We've done nothing but compromise ever since the Gun Control Act of 1968, with meager rewards to show for it.

We need new ideas instead of falling back on old ideas that we know will hurt Democrats in office. You want more emphasis on Medicare, the environment, Social Security, and jobs? Hands off my Kalashnikov. There is a better way, and together, I'm sure we can find it.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to derby378 (Reply #7)

Sun Dec 23, 2012, 04:24 PM

9. Well it's going to be the easy way or the hard way

 

America is screaming for gun control right now

I do believe that gun control will HELP the Democrats in 2014 and 2016

And the more we can smear the NRA and take them down like the GOP took down Acorn - the better the gun laws.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Taverner (Reply #9)

Sun Dec 23, 2012, 04:39 PM

18. No, not all of it.

Think anything meaningful is going to be enacted? I don't. There may be another fuckwitted cosmetic ban (that is later sunsetted), but there's not going to be a retroactive ban on entire weapon types. Politicians are stupid, but they're not that stupid.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Taverner (Original post)

Sun Dec 23, 2012, 04:23 PM

8. I don't want to ban ANY guns. I want extensive background checks for ALL guns

 

I want each and every gun to be registered and licensed. Failure to register and license any gun should be a felony.

I want ALL transfers of gun ownership to go through a FFL.

I want to repeal the registry prohibition in the FOPA so the registry is federal. I'll give on the Hughes Amendment and we can repeal that, too, so those who jump through the hoops for automatic weapons can get newer automatic weapons. Anybody who is licensed under the NFA to own automatic weapons is not a concern to me.

Yes, I know it will be a damned rough getting all existing guns registered and licensed, but that's the price gun owners have to pay for their failure to insure responsibility within their ranks. It will require time, and much of the registry and licensing of existing guns will occur during transfers, but within five years all guns MUST be licensed and registered and possession of an unregistered/unlicensed weapon should be a federal felony with a mandatory minimum sentence of five years for each count.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to RomneyLies (Reply #8)

Sun Dec 23, 2012, 04:25 PM

10. You know, I can go for most of that

Failures in the background check system allowed Seung-hui Cho to shoot up VTech because the gatekeepers had fallen asleep at the switch. We could definitely stand for a more robust check based on mental health records, too.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to derby378 (Reply #10)

Sun Dec 23, 2012, 04:29 PM

13. If all that was done and DONE WELL

 

I could buy that

But I am a bit suspicious

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Taverner (Reply #13)

Sun Dec 23, 2012, 04:35 PM

16. I would be okay with the Sheriff having the serial numbers of my firearms on file

I know what it's like to be burglarized. It violates your sense of security and privacy, and it's a whole lot of no fun. But when guns are stolen, that just adds to the problem. At least if I had a gun stolen, I could tell the authorities immediately, and they'd already have those serial numbers on file. Not all burglars go to the trouble of filing them off.

If that's what you mean be registration, I could go for this. I draw the line, however, at needing a permit just to own firearms. But the Red Dawn scenario is so improbable that I don't see much of a problem with registering the serial numbers.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to RomneyLies (Reply #8)

Sun Dec 23, 2012, 04:33 PM

15. One person in prison for five years costs the American taxpayers $250,000


Your plan would result in more profits for the private prison system, no loss of income of the gun industry, and tear apart fathers and mothers from their children.

We have enough people in prison as it is now.

The assault weapons, drums, and the magazines that have more than five or ten bullet capacity should be totally banned and confiscated.

Just my two cents



Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Tx4obama (Reply #15)

Sun Dec 23, 2012, 04:47 PM

21. I thought gun owners love to talk about how "law abiding" they are.

 

What does a law abiding gun owner have to fear from this law? All they have to do is keep being a law abiding gun owner.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to RomneyLies (Reply #21)

Sun Dec 23, 2012, 05:56 PM

23. A transparent subterfuge

We insist that our law be based on the Constitution and the ideals of what it means to be an American. When our nation goes off the tracks, shit like Bush-Cheney and Prohibition happens.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to derby378 (Reply #23)

Sun Dec 23, 2012, 06:02 PM

24. "Well regulated"

 

Let's talk again once we reach that standard, mmkay?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Taverner (Original post)

Sun Dec 23, 2012, 04:26 PM

11. No, what we "need" to do...

... is to stop the fucking insanity, not "compromise."

"Compromise" is what got us to where we are.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to 99Forever (Reply #11)

Sun Dec 23, 2012, 04:28 PM

12. Without it, however, you are left with tyranny

 

I'll take compromise over a dictator any day

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Taverner (Reply #12)

Sun Dec 23, 2012, 04:37 PM

17. I don't understand what that is supposed to mean...

...or how it's even relevant.

Is that some vague reference to holding off da gub'mint with your private arsenal?

Please clarify.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to 99Forever (Reply #17)

Sun Dec 23, 2012, 04:39 PM

19. If you do not compromise, then one party gets their way and the other doesn't

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Taverner (Reply #19)

Sun Dec 23, 2012, 05:12 PM

22. Great.

I'm on the side that doesn't want weapons of war in our public sector. You on the other side?

I still haven't heard a damn thing to convince me to want to "compromise." Better work on your packaging some more.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to 99Forever (Reply #11)

Sun Dec 23, 2012, 07:03 PM

30. With no compromise, the status quo remains

Like it or not, we have a divided government with so many checks and balances it is virtually impossible for one political ideology to rule all of the land. That was by design.

If you never compromise on anything, nothing will get done.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Taverner (Original post)

Sun Dec 23, 2012, 04:44 PM

20. Ban new manufacture/sale... or ownership?

 

Grandfather Clause, or no?
Any comment on 5th amendment protection of compensation for items seized in name of public interests?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Taverner (Original post)

Sun Dec 23, 2012, 06:42 PM

25. *shrug* In 1994 we banned assault weapons at extreme political cost

Which is to say, we banned new manufacture and import of a class of firearms that nearly nobody owns and that nearly nobody uses in crimes (and, again, if you support the AWB it's very likely you are completely misunderstanding what it did). Even with assault weapons banned, the weapon Lanza used was 100% legal to manufacture and import (though you had to have X number of parts be manufactured in the US).

Again, this was achieved at ruinous political cost, and all it did was require that his rifle not have a bayonet lug.

Seriously making mass shootings difficult (which, remember, are exceedingly rare and probably not what we should be basing gun policy on, vs. the vast majority of gun homicides that use handguns) would require banning semi-automatics with detachable magazines. That's over a hundred and fifty million guns in private hands today, as well as nearly all new sales. So what would a ban do? Prevent new sale and manufacture but leave current ownership alone? (Wouldn't do much good.) Ditto but prevent any further transfers? (Doubtful that would stand up in court.) Require a turn-in? (Fifth amendment problem if we don't compensate, incredibly expensive if we do, and subject to the problem that the people who comply will be for the most part the people we don't need to worry about.) This issue is precisely the nexus of 2nd amendment (keeping and bearing arms) and 5th amendment rights (not losing property without compensation), and those are two that even conservative judges have shown broad deference to.

Look at the political fallout of banning bayonet lugs in 1994 (not to mention the unintended consequence of making the AR-15 and SKS incredibly popular). Now imagine we were actually banning guns people used, and imagine what would happen.

I predict we'll get a renewed assault weapons ban which will be as pointless as the first: once again we will be spared the scourge of mass bayonetings or murders by rifle-mounted grenade launchers.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Recursion (Reply #25)

Sun Dec 23, 2012, 06:49 PM

26. ^ban NRA talking points,...

blind attributions, etc, ad nauseum:
the people who comply will be for the most part the people we don't need to worry about
making the AR-15 and SKS incredibly popular
mass shootings difficult (which, remember, are exceedingly rare
spared the scourge of mass bayonetings or murders by rifle-mounted grenade launchers


Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Kolesar (Reply #26)

Sun Dec 23, 2012, 06:51 PM

27. No. Those are all four accurate statements.

Make a counter-argument, don't simply whine that people we don't like also make the argument I am. I'm not saying it because I like Wayne LaPierre, I'm saying it because as much as it galls me on those particular issues he is 100% right.

I'll grant that the first one is a hypothetical, but the other three are empirical facts.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Kolesar (Reply #26)

Sun Dec 23, 2012, 09:42 PM

38. Why SKS and not AK?

SKS is a WWII design with a fixed magazine

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Recursion (Reply #25)

Sun Dec 23, 2012, 07:32 PM

32. Hit that one out of the ballpark

I like to point out to people who call for a renewal of the 1994 AWB that, while working my way through college, I worked for a year at a major sporting goods store in the gun department around 1999-2000.

I sold dozens of semi-automatic rifles, including AR-15's, during the AWB in the time I was there. All of these were factory-new, all perfectly legal, all capable of accepting pre-ban high-capacity magazines. In fact, we handed out fliers with the names of websites and upcoming gun shows where you could buy them if they asked!

Like you said, the manufacturers just took off the bayonet lugs and folding stocks and remarketed them as "target" or "varmint" rifles. Viola, perfectly legal, and they made huge profits off of it.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Taverner (Original post)

Sun Dec 23, 2012, 07:24 PM

31. If you need a semi/auto to hunt wild game. . .

. . .you're not doing it right.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DinahMoeHum (Reply #31)

Sun Dec 23, 2012, 07:49 PM

34. It's a good idea when you're hunting feral pigs

Those things are very big and very aggressive, and if you don't kill them with the first shot you're going to need another one, quickly. Plus, these animals are spreading quickly, causing significant environmental damage, and endangering pets and livestock, so they're actually things that it's pretty important that somebody hunt.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Taverner (Original post)

Sun Dec 23, 2012, 07:35 PM

33. Who is "WE"? The house and senate? Really think that will happen?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Taverner (Original post)

Sun Dec 23, 2012, 08:07 PM

35. If current sales mean anything, gun owners seem to believe you.

Some restriction of where and how they can be transported/carried is probably going to happen.







Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to HereSince1628 (Reply #35)

Sun Dec 23, 2012, 08:14 PM

36. Every single store I've seen is out. 100% out. It's astounding. (nt)

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Recursion (Reply #36)

Sun Dec 23, 2012, 09:41 PM

37. The entire supply chain has been emptied, even seeing it in reloading supplies

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Reply to this thread