HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Forums & Groups » Main » General Discussion (Forum) » The sad part is that all ...

Tue Jan 15, 2013, 11:18 PM

The sad part is that all my friends who oppose gun control are not those we seek to regulate.

They are mostly guys with military backgrounds or LEO or otherwise sane people. Almost to a man (or person) they believe that stopping crazies is a good thing, but that the government won't do that well. I'm not sure what to tell them, but for many of them the government gets the check to them by the 3rd of the month. I think that should give them a hint.

21 replies, 1206 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 21 replies Author Time Post
Reply The sad part is that all my friends who oppose gun control are not those we seek to regulate. (Original post)
catnhatnh Jan 2013 OP
Hoyt Jan 2013 #1
Hoyt Jan 2013 #1
SQUEE Jan 2013 #20
Viking12 Jan 2013 #3
Fumesucker Jan 2013 #4
Llewlladdwr Jan 2013 #6
abelenkpe Jan 2013 #12
Llewlladdwr Jan 2013 #5
catnhatnh Jan 2013 #7
Llewlladdwr Jan 2013 #8
catnhatnh Jan 2013 #9
Llewlladdwr Jan 2013 #10
catnhatnh Jan 2013 #11
indie9197 Jan 2013 #13
Llewlladdwr Jan 2013 #14
pipoman Jan 2013 #15
catnhatnh Jan 2013 #16
pipoman Jan 2013 #17
indie9197 Jan 2013 #21
Recursion Jan 2013 #19
jmg257 Jan 2013 #18

Response to catnhatnh (Original post)


Response to catnhatnh (Original post)

Tue Jan 15, 2013, 11:27 PM

1. There also a bunch of wannabes too. Yeah, they need to be well regulated too when

walking around in public off duty, preferably unarmed.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Hoyt (Reply #1)

Wed Jan 16, 2013, 09:56 AM

20. lookin' forward to restarting the old business?

I bet the whole armed Southerner dilemna has put a crimp on your job oppurtunities.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to catnhatnh (Original post)

Tue Jan 15, 2013, 11:31 PM

3. It's similar to taxes on upper income. They think they fall into the category.

I don't want to look for the exact pol, but something 22% of Americans think they're in the Top 1%. It's likely your friends similally think they're in the category of gun owners that may fall under the umbrella of reasonable regulations (NRA disinformation is likely a contributing factor).

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to catnhatnh (Original post)

Tue Jan 15, 2013, 11:36 PM

4. Hmm.. People with experience in government think it won't do a good job

Could it be that they are thinking of their own performance and extrapolating that to all government employees?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Fumesucker (Reply #4)

Tue Jan 15, 2013, 11:49 PM

6. As a current federal employee...

...and having worked as a Government contractor also, I can tell you that it's often extremely frustrating to try and work across department or organizational boundries. Managers invariably seem more concerned with protecting their turf than in providing support to other sections. This can lead to a sense of cynicism regarding the ability of the Government to function efficiently.

Not to mention that being able to complain about each other is one of the main perks of Government service.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Llewlladdwr (Reply #6)

Wed Jan 16, 2013, 12:54 AM

12. Working for corporations is no different nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to catnhatnh (Original post)

Tue Jan 15, 2013, 11:40 PM

5. The current call is to ban semi-automatic weapons.

Semi-autos account for the majority of handguns, rifles and shotguns in the country. Odds are good that your friends who own guns have a semi-automatic. So yes, they are in fact the people you want to regulate.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Llewlladdwr (Reply #5)

Wed Jan 16, 2013, 12:16 AM

7. Bullshit...

I might like to limit their magazines but my folk would take their chances were all magazines limited.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to catnhatnh (Reply #7)

Wed Jan 16, 2013, 12:25 AM

8. So you do *not* support a ban on semi-automatic weapons?

If not then my apologies.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Llewlladdwr (Reply #8)

Wed Jan 16, 2013, 12:28 AM

9. No need for apologies...

...though I appreciate the offer. Semis are here to stay, but a magazine limit of 7 or less does not strike me as onerous...

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to catnhatnh (Reply #9)

Wed Jan 16, 2013, 12:40 AM

10. I'm not certain how one could implement such a thing though.

There are millions of 10+ round capacity magazines in the hands of American citizens. How do you, realistically, put that genie back in the bottle? Especially now that 10+ capacity magazines can be printed using 3D printers? I think these are real issues that we'll have to face. I appreciate that you seem willing to do so calmly!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Llewlladdwr (Reply #10)

Wed Jan 16, 2013, 12:53 AM

11. No real problem...

7 is the deal. 8 is illegal, 9 is illegal, 10 is illegal, etc....Any overcapacity magazine is exchangeable for a 7 round magazine and if found in possession of an overcapacity magazine after an established exchange date-FELONY. Go ahead and print as many as you like-I'm betting the government already tracks who downloaded the files and surprise-FELONY.Easy example-Ruger 10-22...mostly harmless but guess what-exchange the magazine or do a nickle. The real issue is what are 5 years of your life worth?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to catnhatnh (Reply #11)

Wed Jan 16, 2013, 01:11 AM

13. I'm guessing there will never be 7 round magazines

The new law says you can have 10 round magazines but you can only put 7 rounds in it! Next step is telling people they can only put 3 rounds in their revolvers. Stupid law and people won't obey stupid laws.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to catnhatnh (Reply #11)

Wed Jan 16, 2013, 01:14 AM

14. But here's the deal...

...if I'm planning on commiting a massacre (a felony, by the way) then I have already most likely accepted that I will not be a survivor. Do you really think fear of a felony conviction for magazine size will stop me? And consider this: possesion of marijuana is a felony under federal law, yet millions of people continue to buy, sell and use it every single day. Tons of it is smuggled into the country each year, and it's much easier to detect than magazines for firearms. As far as tracking file downloads, what would be the authority? These files aren't illegal so the Government has *zero* legitimate interest in keeping track of them.

I guess where I'm going here is that it's easy to say "lock 'em up!", but how many of your fellow citizens are you willing to incarcerate in order to impose your agenda on the public? A thousand? A million? These are hard questions and simple answers aren't going to work.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to catnhatnh (Reply #11)

Wed Jan 16, 2013, 01:23 AM

15. They will never be illegal

they may get pushed into the NFA.. maybe,,machine guns aren't illegal, howitzers aren't illegal, nor will any capacity magazine be illegal..

Oh and cheers for cheering the prison industrial complex...keep feeding them prisons..silliness..

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to pipoman (Reply #15)

Wed Jan 16, 2013, 01:34 AM

16. You guys are a fucking riot....

7 is SOOO disappointingly small? You get 3 for a duck or a deer and 7 is too few? FOR FUCKING WHAT??? Are 8 people heading for your door to kill you? Or more likely do you need drug to calm the demons in your head??

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to catnhatnh (Reply #16)

Wed Jan 16, 2013, 08:24 AM

17. I didn't comment on any of this

are you responding to the right post?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to catnhatnh (Reply #16)

Wed Jan 16, 2013, 01:05 PM

21. You don't get to decide how many rounds I need

Maybe there are two or three guys and I do need more than 7. My 9mm holds 16 because that is just the size of the grip. Why should I put in less? Why should I have to worry about changing out a magazine when I don't have to.

Not really a huge issue if you use .45 or .40 but that is not the point. It is a stupid law and makes nobody safer from crazy mass murderers. Isn't that the supposed reason for all this new executive orders?


Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Llewlladdwr (Reply #5)

Wed Jan 16, 2013, 08:36 AM

19. No. No no no. The current call is to regulate what they look like.

Feinstein has not introduced a ban on semi-automatics. She has introduced regulations about what semi-automatic weapons with detachable magazines can look like. It infuriates me that so much of the base has been completely misled about this.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to catnhatnh (Original post)

Wed Jan 16, 2013, 08:34 AM

18. You'll have to tell them that as long as they all have unfettered access to them,

so do 'the crazies'. They'll have to just deal with the inconvenience of diminishing their perceived needs & wants so we can have a better chance of 'stopping crazies'.

NY has attempted to use a multi-facted approach, and some damn clever legislation (i.e. 7 vs 10 etc.).
It isn't ALL about guns, though they are certainly the driving object.



Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Reply to this thread