HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Forums & Groups » Topics » Justice & Public Safety » Gun Control & RKBA (Group) » Hello gungeon, I've come ...

Sun Dec 16, 2012, 11:56 PM

Hello gungeon, I've come to join the discussion.

This is the DU forum where we advocate for better gun control, right? Where shall I place my bags? I plan to stay a while.

First, I'd like to discuss a ban on the manufacture and sale of semi-automatic rifles, which serve no purpose other than target shooting and mass murder.

Well, I guess some people hunt with them, but isn't that embarrassing admitting you can only hunt with a rifle that guarantees a second shot?





99 replies, 6195 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 99 replies Author Time Post
Reply Hello gungeon, I've come to join the discussion. (Original post)
Barack_America Dec 2012 OP
krispos42 Dec 2012 #1
Barack_America Dec 2012 #4
OrwellwasRight Dec 2012 #2
Loudly Dec 2012 #3
krispos42 Dec 2012 #7
ellisonz Dec 2012 #10
krispos42 Dec 2012 #11
ellisonz Dec 2012 #12
Clames Dec 2012 #22
Ed Suspicious Dec 2012 #32
ProgressiveProfessor Dec 2012 #14
fightthegoodfightnow Dec 2012 #20
ProgressiveProfessor Dec 2012 #25
fightthegoodfightnow Dec 2012 #29
ProgressiveProfessor Dec 2012 #31
fightthegoodfightnow Dec 2012 #33
svpadgham Dec 2012 #5
Starboard Tack Dec 2012 #80
DURHAM D Dec 2012 #6
Azathoth Dec 2012 #8
gejohnston Dec 2012 #9
DURHAM D Dec 2012 #16
ProgressiveProfessor Dec 2012 #13
AtheistCrusader Dec 2012 #15
ManiacJoe Dec 2012 #17
AtheistCrusader Dec 2012 #18
holdencaufield Dec 2012 #26
fightthegoodfightnow Dec 2012 #19
gejohnston Dec 2012 #21
fightthegoodfightnow Dec 2012 #23
Clames Dec 2012 #28
holdencaufield Dec 2012 #30
NewMoonTherian Dec 2012 #42
fightthegoodfightnow Dec 2012 #48
NewMoonTherian Dec 2012 #59
DrDan Dec 2012 #78
gejohnston Dec 2012 #82
DrDan Dec 2012 #97
Barack_America Dec 2012 #51
tortoise1956 Dec 2012 #24
Barack_America Dec 2012 #39
holdencaufield Dec 2012 #27
LineLineReply ?
Barack_America Dec 2012 #37
spin Dec 2012 #45
ileus Dec 2012 #34
Warren Stupidity Dec 2012 #35
NewMoonTherian Dec 2012 #43
Atypical Liberal Dec 2012 #36
Barack_America Dec 2012 #38
Atypical Liberal Dec 2012 #40
AtheistCrusader Dec 2012 #47
Barack_America Dec 2012 #49
AtheistCrusader Dec 2012 #52
Barack_America Dec 2012 #53
AtheistCrusader Dec 2012 #55
Ruttersville Dec 2012 #70
AtheistCrusader Dec 2012 #71
orleans Dec 2012 #94
graham4anything Dec 2012 #77
graham4anything Dec 2012 #79
NewMoonTherian Dec 2012 #41
spin Dec 2012 #44
discntnt_irny_srcsm Dec 2012 #46
Barack_America Dec 2012 #50
AtheistCrusader Dec 2012 #56
gejohnston Dec 2012 #57
discntnt_irny_srcsm Dec 2012 #60
fightthegoodfightnow Dec 2012 #58
discntnt_irny_srcsm Dec 2012 #61
oneshooter Dec 2012 #87
Toronto Dec 2012 #62
discntnt_irny_srcsm Dec 2012 #63
Toronto Dec 2012 #66
discntnt_irny_srcsm Dec 2012 #67
Toronto Dec 2012 #68
gejohnston Dec 2012 #72
Toronto Dec 2012 #74
gejohnston Dec 2012 #76
Toronto Dec 2012 #81
gejohnston Dec 2012 #83
Toronto Dec 2012 #86
gejohnston Dec 2012 #90
Toronto Dec 2012 #91
gejohnston Dec 2012 #92
orleans Dec 2012 #95
tortoise1956 Dec 2012 #93
discntnt_irny_srcsm Dec 2012 #85
Toronto Dec 2012 #88
discntnt_irny_srcsm Dec 2012 #89
ehrenfeucht games Dec 2012 #54
PavePusher Dec 2012 #64
PavePusher Dec 2012 #65
fightthegoodfightnow Dec 2012 #69
HALO141 Dec 2012 #73
Tuesday Afternoon Dec 2012 #75
EX500rider Dec 2012 #84
Toronto Dec 2012 #98
EX500rider Dec 2012 #99
orleans Dec 2012 #96

Response to Barack_America (Original post)

Sun Dec 16, 2012, 11:59 PM

1. Your position is certainly more honest than assault-weapon-ban proponents

And is more logical.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to krispos42 (Reply #1)

Mon Dec 17, 2012, 12:15 AM

4. Thank you. I figure if people want to play with them in the future...

...they are welcome to find a range that will rent one to them for an hour or two. There they can also play with bump fire stocks and high capacity magazines, which also need to be outlawed for future sale and manufacture.

But private ownership? No good reason for that going forward.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Barack_America (Original post)

Mon Dec 17, 2012, 12:11 AM

2. What I want to know is why no one in this group posted a thread about the President's speech.

It was very moving and very thoughtful.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to OrwellwasRight (Reply #2)

Mon Dec 17, 2012, 12:14 AM

3. Because he mentioned that the nation was going to have to change.

 

And they know what that means for them.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to OrwellwasRight (Reply #2)

Mon Dec 17, 2012, 12:19 AM

7. Probably wouldn't fit the SoP of the Group, unless there were specifics involved. n/t

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to krispos42 (Reply #7)

Mon Dec 17, 2012, 12:46 AM

10. Seriously?

Iíve been reflecting on this the last few days, and if weíre honest with ourselves, the answerís no. Weíre not doing enough. And we will have to change. Since Iíve been president, this is the fourth time we have come together to comfort a grieving community torn apart by mass shootings, fourth time weíve hugged survivors, the fourth time weíve consoled the families of victims.

And in between, there have been an endless series of deadly shootings across the country, almost daily reports of victims, many of them children, in small towns and in big cities all across America, victims whose -- much of the time their only fault was being at the wrong place at the wrong time.

We canít tolerate this anymore. These tragedies must end. And to end them, we must change.

We will be told that the causes of such violence are complex, and that is true. No single law, no set of laws can eliminate evil from the world or prevent every senseless act of violence in our society, but that canít be an excuse for inaction. Surely we can do better than this.

If thereís even one step we can take to save another child or another parent or another town from the grief thatís visited Tucson and Aurora and Oak Creek and Newtown and communities from Columbine to Blacksburg before that, then surely we have an obligation to try.

In the coming weeks, Iíll use whatever power this office holds to engage my fellow citizens, from law enforcement, to mental health professionals, to parents and educators, in an effort aimed at preventing more tragedies like this, because what choice do we have? We canít accept events like this as routine.

Are we really prepared to say that weíre powerless in the face of such carnage, that the politics are too hard?

Are we prepared to say that such violence visited on our children year after year after year is somehow the price of our freedom?

Full Transcript: http://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/president-obamas-speech-at-prayer-vigil-for-newtown-shooting-victims-full-transcript/2012/12/16/f764bf8a-47dd-11e2-ad54-580638ede391_story_1.html


Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ellisonz (Reply #10)

Mon Dec 17, 2012, 12:58 AM

11. Strangely enough, the Gungeon's SoP does not permit gun-related political discussion.

Statement of Purpose

Discuss gun control laws, the Second Amendment, the use of firearms for self-defense, and the use of firearms to commit crime and violence.




Perhaps an expansion of the SoP is needed.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to krispos42 (Reply #11)

Mon Dec 17, 2012, 01:05 AM

12. Then you should have locked hundreds of posts this year. n/t

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ellisonz (Reply #12)

Mon Dec 17, 2012, 02:17 AM

22. He's locked plenty...

 

...but your were a less frequent guest until 2 days ago so you wouldn't have noticed.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to krispos42 (Reply #11)

Mon Dec 17, 2012, 04:02 AM

32. Gun control talk control? n/t

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to OrwellwasRight (Reply #2)

Mon Dec 17, 2012, 01:11 AM

14. I for one abhor duplicates and there were plenty in LBN and GD

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ProgressiveProfessor (Reply #14)

Mon Dec 17, 2012, 02:16 AM

20. Yea - News is A Kill Joy for Gun Enthusiasts This Weekend

I would imagine the reality is the news is larger than this group.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to fightthegoodfightnow (Reply #20)

Mon Dec 17, 2012, 02:28 AM

25. I spend most of my time on DU outside of the Gungeon

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ProgressiveProfessor (Reply #25)

Mon Dec 17, 2012, 03:05 AM

29. Show Me How

LOL....please!

Not sure how I got so anchored here?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to fightthegoodfightnow (Reply #29)

Mon Dec 17, 2012, 03:28 AM

31. I always start at the Latest Threads tab and open those that interest me.

I have 15 subscriptions in addition to the main ones. I scroll through opening any one that interests me. I post on maybe one out of five or less of those that I open. Then I look at my posts and respond to things there if warranted.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ProgressiveProfessor (Reply #31)

Mon Dec 17, 2012, 04:02 AM

33. hhhmmmm

So basically I need to grow my world...I subscribe to two.....LOL.

Thanks for the insight!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Barack_America (Original post)

Mon Dec 17, 2012, 12:15 AM

5. Yeah, if you don't hunt with a bolt action rifle,

you just suck at it.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to svpadgham (Reply #5)

Mon Dec 17, 2012, 06:47 PM

80. I think bow hunting is the most honest way.

Hunting isn't supposed to be easy.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Barack_America (Original post)

Mon Dec 17, 2012, 12:17 AM

6. I would like to discuss a surtax on

all license, weapons and ammunition and the proceeds to be earmarked for mental health programs.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DURHAM D (Reply #6)

Mon Dec 17, 2012, 12:21 AM

8. lol, that's actually pretty clever

It's an undeniably progressive idea, it doesn't infringe obnoxiously on 2nd Amendment rights, and it might actually accomplish something.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DURHAM D (Reply #6)

Mon Dec 17, 2012, 12:22 AM

9. there is a sales tax since 1919

11 percent IIRC, since 1937 it has been going to environmental projects.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pittman%E2%80%93Robertson_Federal_Aid_in_Wildlife_Restoration_Act
I would hate to see those funds go away, would an extra four percent be reasonable?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to gejohnston (Reply #9)

Mon Dec 17, 2012, 01:30 AM

16. That is interesting.

I see it was lowered to 10% and is given to Interior to distribute to the states. The list of taxable items did not open so I could not see what exactly is taxed. It seems like hunters would not want that tax to go away so it looks like it will need to be an add on.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Barack_America (Original post)

Mon Dec 17, 2012, 01:09 AM

13. Welcome, the bar is in the back, fix yourself a drink and join in

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Barack_America (Original post)

Mon Dec 17, 2012, 01:15 AM

15. Well, la de frickin' dah.

How the hell is this within the SOP for this forum?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to AtheistCrusader (Reply #15)

Mon Dec 17, 2012, 01:51 AM

17. From the SOP: "Discuss gun control laws"


Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ManiacJoe (Reply #17)

Mon Dec 17, 2012, 01:53 AM

18. So discuss it then

what's up with this 'I HAVE ARRIVED' crap

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to AtheistCrusader (Reply #18)

Mon Dec 17, 2012, 02:41 AM

26. Delusions of adequacy

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Barack_America (Original post)

Mon Dec 17, 2012, 02:03 AM

19. WELCOME.

...we could use you!!!!!!

But be prepared. This place is not anchored in reality.

Here is a suggestion.

As a new subscriber with an agenda you simply MUST always start every thread by repeating word for word what the statement of purpose is for the group and how your thread relates to it.

A COMMON tactic is to say your thread is off topic no matter how clearly ON topic it is. Too many threads get locked. Again, reality is altered here.

See this is how Gungeon strategy works...first...any reference to guns on DU must be redirected to this group where a whole litany of people will try to frustrate and silence you. Did I mention the host is a gun enthusiast?

Don't give up. Fight. Be respectful and patient.

And yes, discussing a 'ban on manufacture and sale of semi-automatic rifles' is ON-TOPIC since so many here 'think' it's an assault on the 2nd Amendment. See how it works playing their game?

Be strong and return often. Remember, most DU gun control advocates simply leave in exasperation leaving these folks to think they are 'right.'

Good luck!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to fightthegoodfightnow (Reply #19)

Mon Dec 17, 2012, 02:16 AM

21. and here I thought they left because reality sank in

and joined the Liberal Gun Club and started getting range time.
http://www.theliberalgunclub.com/
http://www.shootingliberally.blogspot.com/
They even have their own AR lower

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to gejohnston (Reply #21)

Mon Dec 17, 2012, 02:19 AM

23. Nah

...unfortunately, not the reality I've been reading about this weekend.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to gejohnston (Reply #21)

Mon Dec 17, 2012, 02:43 AM

28. That's nice work. Like forged lowers rather than the machined ones.

 

Any idea on who makes it? Looking at getting a few Aero Precision lowers to build on over the next year or two.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to gejohnston (Reply #21)

Mon Dec 17, 2012, 03:24 AM

30. The ACTUAL defintion of liberal

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to fightthegoodfightnow (Reply #19)

Mon Dec 17, 2012, 09:49 AM

42. Good advice.

I want as many gun control advocates as possible. I come for an impassioned debate, and that requires two sides. This is the only forum I've found where gun control advocates have any substantial presence.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to NewMoonTherian (Reply #42)

Mon Dec 17, 2012, 12:03 PM

48. Exactly

Based on what you would read here, you'd think Democrats oppose gun control. We do not.

Stay. Please stay. Thanks!!!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to fightthegoodfightnow (Reply #48)

Mon Dec 17, 2012, 01:03 PM

59. Well, many do, and I hope more will begin to, but that's no reason to leave. n/t

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to fightthegoodfightnow (Reply #48)

Mon Dec 17, 2012, 06:45 PM

78. some certainly do . . . a poll here a while back indicated some want NO control

not based on age, criminal background, mental capacity . . . NOTHING

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DrDan (Reply #78)

Mon Dec 17, 2012, 06:57 PM

82. have a link?

I don't remember it.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink



Response to fightthegoodfightnow (Reply #19)

Mon Dec 17, 2012, 12:11 PM

51. Excellent!

I've already used a couple of these tips!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Barack_America (Original post)

Mon Dec 17, 2012, 02:22 AM

24. Pleased to meet ya!

Welcome to the deep, dark recesses of the Gungeon

From what you've posted already, you've made it clear where you stand. Thanks for being up front. I'll be more than happy to discuss gun control and RKBA with you. I'll even promise to keep it rational and reasoned. Well, pretty much rational - I won't guarantee 100% compliance, since sometimes my fingers go into business for themselves when I forget to take that crucial 15 minute walk away from the keyboard before hitting "Post my reply"...

Seriously, I am always ready to listen to ideas from either side. Feel free to bring them up, and I'll let you know what I think.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to tortoise1956 (Reply #24)

Mon Dec 17, 2012, 09:10 AM

39. Thanks a lot! Nice to meet you too!

I look forward to some (hopefully) productive discussions!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Barack_America (Original post)

Mon Dec 17, 2012, 02:42 AM

27. Did it ever occur to you ...

 

... that perhaps we aren't the people you should be lobbying?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to holdencaufield (Reply #27)

Mon Dec 17, 2012, 08:49 AM

37. ?

Just want to discuss the suitability of semi-auto rifles for private use going forward.

I wasn't aware I was lobbying anyone.

Do you have a position on the issue you could articulate?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Barack_America (Reply #37)

Mon Dec 17, 2012, 10:45 AM

45. Let's say our nation did ban the sale and manufacture of semi-auto rifles to civilians. ...

Would you then favor banning the sale and manufacture of semi-auto handguns and then all handguns?

When the gun control movement was at its peak that was the goal of the leadership.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Barack_America (Original post)

Mon Dec 17, 2012, 06:25 AM

34. You like to hunt eh?

They won't let us talk about it much here...have to post in the outdoor life forum.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Barack_America (Original post)

Mon Dec 17, 2012, 07:12 AM

35. Welcome! And good luck.

Be prepared for the Greek chorus of well rehearsed responses.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Warren Stupidity (Reply #35)

Mon Dec 17, 2012, 09:54 AM

43. I don't see anything wrong with that.

We're covering some pretty well-trod ground, so most everything of substance has already been said. A new proposal would stimulate more original discussion.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Barack_America (Original post)

Mon Dec 17, 2012, 08:39 AM

36. The second amendment is not about hunting.

 

Look, I know it's not popular to mention at the moment, but it's just a fact of law.

The second amendment is not about hunting. The weapons that the people are supposed to keep and bear are not those suitable for hunting. They are those suitable for warfare.

Now if you don't like this, I understand. We saw on Friday what happens when a motivated, demented individual gets his hands on a weapon of warfare and walks into a kindergarten room.

But that is what the second amendment protects. And now you've got two supreme court cases that say that also it is an individual right and the states must obey it, too.

These aren't opinions, these are facts.

If you want to change this, that's fine, but you are probably looking at a Constitutional amendment.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Atypical Liberal (Reply #36)

Mon Dec 17, 2012, 09:02 AM

38. That's true. But hunting also represents the most legitimate use for firearms in this country.

Arguably the only legitimate use for private citizens.

It's a way of life for a lot of people, and not one I'm looking to take away, if it can be at all avoided.

We are well beyond the 2nd amendment in a lot of aspects. "Well-regulated militia"? Not seeing many of those around, and not even sure what "well-regulated" means, specifically.

It's probably time to take a look at the 2nd, and possibly altering it to reflect modern times.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Barack_America (Reply #38)

Mon Dec 17, 2012, 09:30 AM

40. Most gun owners don't hunt.

 

The majority of gun owners in this country don't hunt.

Many gun owners are target shooters.

I suppose the voters will have to decide on the relevance of the second amendment.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Barack_America (Reply #38)

Mon Dec 17, 2012, 11:47 AM

47. Hunting represents the smallest bloc of firearms enthusiasts in the nation.

And shrinking all the time.

Which calls into question your use of the word 'legitimate' there. Possible you could rephrase it such:

"Arguably the only legitimate use I am aware of for private citizens."

?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to AtheistCrusader (Reply #47)

Mon Dec 17, 2012, 12:03 PM

49. Your rephrasing would be accurate.

With the intent being, where firearms are used as a tool rather than a toy.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Barack_America (Reply #49)

Mon Dec 17, 2012, 12:20 PM

52. Some of us take the militia thing seriously.

Being of draft age, and registered with the selective service, I keep my skills up to date. Pretty important, I think, given how much time we spend as a nation pissing off the rest of the world.

I WOULD like to see the militia called up for some purpose, by my governor. Not necessarily in a fighting capacity. You can serve the interest of a free state in other ways, like filling sand bags for flood control in an emergency, or going door to door in the various adverse weather conditions we have, to either evacuate people, or bring them supplies. If nobody shows up, then let's heave-ho the whole militia bit, from the Dick Act, on down.

I do not use my AR's or Mini-14's to hunt, because they are too small. I could use them for coyote's and smaller game, but I am mostly interested in deer only, and that means my WWII battle rifle, which happens to be bolt action. If I'm going to kill an animal, it's going to be for food, and I insist on a clean kill with minimal suffering. .223 just isn't going to do the job with a deer, custom hunting ammo aside. (Which raises the question of why we use .223 on armed deer that shoot back, possibly wearing body armor (humans and deer have similar mass) but that's a different issue).

I consider my use of my AR to be a tool. I will also die, an old man in bed, quite content if I never have to use it in any serious capacity.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to AtheistCrusader (Reply #52)

Mon Dec 17, 2012, 12:30 PM

53. I've thought of the militia thing.

1). I think, as a nation, we really need to look closely at the 2nd amendment and define what "well-regulated" mean.

2). If the spirit of the 2nd amendment, upon further review, is determined to continue to guarantee a "well-regulated" militia with firepower at least comparable to that of the military, I will live with it. What I would suggest, however, is that soldiers don't take their big weapons home with them, and neither should militia members. In my opinion, part of a "well-regulated" militia would include a secured armory for the weapons that really don't have much use in civilian life.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Barack_America (Reply #53)

Mon Dec 17, 2012, 12:49 PM

55. States used to provide those armories

for larger crew-served weapons, like cannon. But the rifles went home with everyone. Not saying it couldn't be done, but historically, that is not how America has done it.

That is a solution Canada has implemented, you can use your rifle at local shooting clubs, but you can't take it home with you. Taking it out for hunting requires the permit, and something like a 'flight plan' for departure and return.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to AtheistCrusader (Reply #55)

Mon Dec 17, 2012, 05:48 PM

70. You are incorrect

 

Taking it out for hunting requires the permit, and something like a 'flight plan' for departure and return.

That only applies to pistols.
Rifles may be kept at home and transported freely.
I frequently go there to visit relatives and to hunt.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Ruttersville (Reply #70)

Mon Dec 17, 2012, 05:54 PM

71. My mistake.

I've been told that, and when I verified it, I apparently only looked at handgun info. Apologies.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to AtheistCrusader (Reply #52)

Tue Dec 18, 2012, 03:29 AM

94. i have a suggestion

regarding what you said:
"I WOULD like to see the militia called up for some purpose, by my governor. Not necessarily in a fighting capacity. You can serve the interest of a free state in other ways, like filling sand bags for flood control in an emergency, or going door to door in the various adverse weather conditions we have, to either evacuate people, or bring them supplies."

check out AmeriCorps
http://www.americorps.gov/
"your world. your chance to make it better."

i don't know much about it--a friend's brother is going to be working/volunteering with them and we were talking about it a bit today.
he wants to help people--sounds like something you might be interested in.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Atypical Liberal (Reply #36)

Mon Dec 17, 2012, 06:42 PM

77. Scotus will soon be 7 to 2 or 8 to 1...(response to Scotus remark above)

 

the day is coming when the SCOTUS will be 7 to 2 or 8 to 1 on President Obama's side

therefore, an amendment is not necessarily so, but a new court will rule a new way

but the line 3rd paragraph from bottom-
Does James Baker work for the NRA? that line reminds me of 2000 and the recount. As there never was a recount in the first place, but perception said it was and people didn't much argue

this time, things are different and people will argue. The NRA has met its match this time

I like the thing I saw that Michael Moore said-
If only this "demented individual's" mother had a gun, she could have stopped this tragedy from happening

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to graham4anything (Reply #77)

Mon Dec 17, 2012, 06:46 PM

79. The full Michael Moore tweet today-

 

If only the first victim, Adam Lanza's mother, had been a gun owner, she could have stopped this before it started.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Barack_America (Original post)

Mon Dec 17, 2012, 09:42 AM

41. Hi, and welcome! It's nice to see new faces.

Semi-automatics serve a purpose you're overlooking: warfare. Granted, they are sometimes insufficient for this purpose, which is why I'd like to discuss repealing current unreasonable restrictions on fully-automatic weapons.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Barack_America (Original post)

Mon Dec 17, 2012, 10:29 AM

44. The lever Acton rifle is possibly the most popular deer hunting rifle made in the last 150 years.

Bolt action rifles are also very popular. Pump action rifles are not quite so popular but are used for hunting deer and other game. Semi-auto weapons are also popular and the "evil black rifles" are gaining ground quickly among hunters as they are reliable and easy to modify. (Most states limit the magazine capacity of semi-auto rifles so hunter are not running around the woods with 20, 30 or 100 round magazines.)

Some hunters do use single shot rifles.

Hunting with Single Shot Rifles

By Randy D. Smith

A single shot rifle is not as limiting a factor as many hunters might think. Most of the time, game is taken with the first shot and that is the end of it. If the shot is missed or the hit is marginal, however, it takes valuable moments to reload and attempt a backup shot. Sometimes the animal is lost. Many hunters prefer the security of repeating arms for this reason alone.

The single shot remains a popular hunting rifle around the world. The single shot stalking rifle is fashionable in Europe, where a single, precisely placed shot is considered all that is needed for most hunting situations. The stalking rifle is considered one of the most prestigious forms of hunting weapons and a symbol of the experienced and confident sportsman.

***snip***

There have been times when I regretted carrying a single shot rifle. I missed and I couldnít do anything, but watch my game escape. In spite of that, I still grab a single shot as often as not, because my memories of those lost trophies are just as vivid as the successes. Iíve become addicted to single shot hunting. I would not choose a single shot as my only rifle, but Iíll always have a single shot as one of my rifles.
http://www.chuckhawks.com/hunting_single_shot_rifles.htm


I admit that I am not a hunter but I know quite a few and none are embarrassed to admit they carry a rifle while hunting that allows a follow up shot.


Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Barack_America (Original post)

Mon Dec 17, 2012, 11:08 AM

46. re: "First, I'd like to discuss..."

"...a ban on the manufacture and sale of semi-automatic rifles, which serve no purpose other than target shooting and mass murder."

A) You've offered no proof or even argument that semi-autos "serve no purpose other than target shooting and mass murder."
B) I'm not a hunter but if I was, the most heinous consequence in my mind would be to wound an animal and scare it off while a second shot may have been able to finish it.
C) Banning semi-autos would be of questionable effectiveness without banning the manufacture and sale of full-auto rifles.

BTW, welcome to the group.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to discntnt_irny_srcsm (Reply #46)

Mon Dec 17, 2012, 12:10 PM

50. Here you go.

A). What else are semi-auto rifles used for? Note that I also mentioned hunting.

B). Re: wounding an animal. That's why you learn where to shoot an animal, and how to make the shot. If you miss, practice more and better luck next time. If you wound, but do not kill, do your best to track the animal and ensure it doesn't suffer (and the meat isn't wasted).

C). It is almost unthinkable that full auto won't be included in Feinstein's bill that she plans to introduce next month. Semi-auto rifles, on the other hand, are more of a gray area, hence the call for a discussion.

Thanks for the welcome!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Barack_America (Reply #50)

Mon Dec 17, 2012, 12:53 PM

56. Full auto hasn't been an issue since the 30's.

With the introduction of the NFA registry, full auto or select fire weapons are very very tightly controlled, and there are no new ones after 1986, so they are extremely expensive. A rifle that costs about 450$ to produce will command prices in the 16,000$ range and up.

There are only two or three instances of select fire weapons that were legally possessed being used in crimes in the last 50 years, and one of them was by a police officer.

F/A may seem scary, but it isn't an issue in the US. You'd have to delve deep into the decimal places to enumerate the per capita death rate attributed to select fire weapons.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Barack_America (Reply #50)

Mon Dec 17, 2012, 12:55 PM

57. partly because the only full auto

legally owned, that is used in a crime since NFA was registered to a police department that employed the murderer.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Barack_America (Reply #50)

Mon Dec 17, 2012, 01:15 PM

60. Thank for the reply

A) Semi-auto rifles are used for just about every application that firearms in general are used for.
Legal uses would include:
- personal protection
- competition
- tactical law enforcement and officer/agent protection
- hunting
- varmint control
- collecting and investment
- military armament

B) Animals are cagey sorts. Many can smell you from about as far as you can see them. They can often travel faster when wounded than we can when trying to track them. Spending hours tracking a wounded animal that smells of blood and is maybe attracting other predators isn't the safest course. Many hunters hunt from a distance. Great shooters are rewarded most (imho) in their ability to remain relaxed and wait for a shot if an animal moves quickly from a position that offers a clean kill to one that makes only a wound possible.

C) Full-autos are available now but more difficult than semi-autos. They were not covered by the last AWB.


More murders are accomplished with hands, feet and blunt objects than rifle and shotguns of all types.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to discntnt_irny_srcsm (Reply #46)

Mon Dec 17, 2012, 01:01 PM

58. Regarding B

That's not sportsmanship in my opinion.

That's just an excuse for taking the easy way, where there are no consequences for bad hunting in my opinion.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to fightthegoodfightnow (Reply #58)

Mon Dec 17, 2012, 01:18 PM

61. Hmmm...

An ADA lawsuit come to mind but this is America. We love the easy way.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to fightthegoodfightnow (Reply #58)

Mon Dec 17, 2012, 08:39 PM

87. I hunt...................

I generally use either a Muzzle loader (Flint w/round ball), a Sharps rifle(45-100-530or a 50-90-510), a Winchester lever action ( I have a M92 in 38WCF that my Grandpa used, built in 1911) or a pistol ( 45Colt or 44Mag)

Which one is "not ethical"?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to discntnt_irny_srcsm (Reply #46)

Mon Dec 17, 2012, 02:04 PM

62. The only purpose it serves is killing more efficiently

 

I don't know why anyone describes pursuing animals armed with a semi-automatic weapon with a scope hunting - more like slaughter. The animal doesn't stand a chance. Try hunting with a knife or bow and arrow. Then if you catch something you can call yourself a hunter. Besides, few of the people with these weapons are so called hunters. They're primarily paranoid preppers, just paranoids or criminals. Unfortunately in the last 20 years the right wing has whipped up paranoia in the US. The more right wing, the more paranoid. There's a Bogey man around every corner. The NRA helps foster this madness, no doubt to promote the sales of guns in general. Follow the money trail and see who is the net beneficiary of all this lunacy. For those people who feel safer owing a gun, check the statistics on the number of people who were saved by using a weapon vs the number who have been killed and injured by their own weapons or whose family members have been killed or injured. Don't forget to include the number of weapons stolen and used in criminal pursuits. While you're checking those stats, let's not forget to enumerate the amount of money expended on increased public security in the form of police forces, metal detectors etc etc. Perhaps if more money were spent ensuring that people's mental health needs were taken care of and there was equal access to education for all, there would be far less need to protect yourselves from each other.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Toronto (Reply #62)

Mon Dec 17, 2012, 03:02 PM

63. Welcome aboard

Thanks for the thoughts. Some of us feel differently.

re: "...check the statistics on the number of people who were saved by using a weapon..."
They vary widely from surveys and many go unreported.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to discntnt_irny_srcsm (Reply #63)

Mon Dec 17, 2012, 04:15 PM

66. I read a Harvard University paper regarding the subject of gun control

 

It is interesting that the paper concluded that the best way to impose gun control was to leave it to the insurance companies. This may seem absurd on the face of it, however if gun registration required as a matter of legislation, similar to automobile ownership, proof of insurance, and registration was yearly, then the cost of gun ownership would increase significantly, as the premiums for ownership of a semi-automatic weapon might be quite significant. The law could require that the premiums be based on say $100,000 per bullet. That would convert to $800K limits for a standard pistol with a clip or $3,000,000 or more limits for a semi-automatic rifle. Similar to automobile legislation, absolute liability would apply. There would be a reverse onus to prove that as the owner of the gun, you were not liable for killing/maiming someone. Similar to automobile legislation, you would not be liable for the improper use of your gun if it were stolen, unless you failed to secure it. Like automobile ownership you would have to pass a test to qualify. Unlike automobile ownership, there should be a psychological test in addition to a written and practical test.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Toronto (Reply #66)

Mon Dec 17, 2012, 05:09 PM

67. Why would registration...

...be required? How would/could it be enforced? What liabilities would be covered?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to discntnt_irny_srcsm (Reply #67)

Mon Dec 17, 2012, 05:38 PM

68. Once you purchase the gun and pass all the necessary testing, you would receive a renewal form in

 

the mail or email before each anniversary date of the purchase. In order to renew, you would have to provide proof of insurance. If you didn't renew, the police would be advised. They would show up at your door to find out why not. No renewal, no gun. The liability that would be covered would be accidental bodily injury as a result of the discharge of a firearm. Clearly there would be issues surrounding criminal use of a firearm, the same as with auto insurance. The point is that it would be much more expensive to own and safeguard a firearm and would present a discouragement to ownership. Those who feel strongly that they need to keep these weapons should be prepared to pay to keep them. Since this would be a cash cow for the insurance industry, they should also be made to pay a percentage of their premiums toward a gunshot victims indemnity fund.

I'm sure some would suggest this would be punitive to rural folks who hunt to feed their families. Perhaps special rates could apply to rifles that hold only one or two shots.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Toronto (Reply #68)

Mon Dec 17, 2012, 05:59 PM

72. but none of that has anything to do with the actual problem

since those are not the people doing the shooting 99.9 percent of the time. It seems the goal is to discourage legal gun ownership than actually dealing with violence. If that is the case, then it is a great plan, but don't bother us for more restrictions when it doesn't end nightly shoot outs in Chicago and NOLA.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to gejohnston (Reply #72)

Mon Dec 17, 2012, 06:24 PM

74. Not at first, but...

 

...as time goes on, there would be fewer guns around for the criminals to get their hands on. The only other solution is repealing the sacrosanct 2nd Amendment. Simple registration and background checks would not have prevented the Connecticut shooting. It may keep some guns out of the hands of people convicted of a felony or with a background of mental health issues, but unless background checks extend to everyone living with the normal applicant, others in the household with access to the guns would still be able to use them. Simple registration will do nothing to decrease the weapons in circulation. If you really want to address the cause of violence in America, you have to address the numerous socio-economic issues plaguing the country. This goes beyond the proper funding of mental health organizations. It also involves equal access to a decent education, equal access to medical care, ensuring that jobs are not exported out of the country, addressing the single mother issue or in other words the root causes of poverty. As long as people have the "I've got mine and who cares about you" mentality, nothing will change.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Toronto (Reply #74)

Mon Dec 17, 2012, 06:35 PM

76. you realize that the use of handguns in murders increased in

the UK after the ban? That Australian biker gangs make submachine guns? Or that in Europe, the illegal gun trade is the same as the illegal drug trade.

I totally agree with the rest of your points.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to gejohnston (Reply #76)

Mon Dec 17, 2012, 06:54 PM

81. Sadly Australia, the UK and Canada

 

have not gone far enough to address the social inequity issues. Europe on the other hand is not a monolith. Parts of Europe, i.e. Sweden, the Netherlands etc have extremely low crime rates. Socialism is not a dirty word. What you give up in personal wealth, you gain back in access to superior medical care, education and overall standard of living. Both the UK and much of Europe are currently facing a number of social issues, the chief of which is joblessness. The percentage of crime is a reflection of the overall health of a society. Most of the world is suffering from varying degrees of the same illness - poverty. Sure you can arm yourself to the teeth, but the more guns in the hands of private citizens, the more guns available for theft and use by criminals. I heard a statistic on ABC re gun stores in the US - there are more gun stores than food stores. There are more gun stores than McDonalds. Some 154,000+ guns were sold on Black Friday alone. Where does it all end?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Toronto (Reply #81)

Mon Dec 17, 2012, 07:06 PM

83. true

I heard a statistic on ABC re gun stores in the US - there are more gun stores than food stores. There are more gun stores than McDonalds.
I kind of doubt it. That might be true in my hometown in Wyoming where there are a couple of mom and pop gun stores, Wal Mart, and a hardware store, but one two supermarkets and no neighborhood food stores. In Chicago, that is definitely not the case, unless you are talking about black market. Everything from the MSM, or any media, deserves more than few grains of salt. I take nothing at face value.

I totally agree on everything else.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to gejohnston (Reply #83)

Mon Dec 17, 2012, 08:33 PM

86. According to the latest Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives numbers (as of Aug. 1)

 

There are more than 129,817 federally licensed firearms dealers in the United States, according to the latest Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives numbers (as of Aug. 1).

Of those, 51,438 are retail gun stores, 7,356 are pawn shops and 61,562 are collectors, with the balance of the licenses belonging mostly to manufacturers and importers of firearms and destructive devices. For comparison, here are some numbers of other ubiquitous elements of American life:

ē Gas Stations in the U.S. (2011): 143,839 (source TD LINX/Nielsen via National Associations of Convenience Stores, Association for Convenience for Convenience and Fuel Retailing)

ē Grocery Stores in the U.S. (2011) 36,569 (source: Food Marketing Institute)

ē McDonald's restaurants in the U.S. (2011): 14,098 (Source: McDonald's Corporation Annual Report 2011)

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Toronto (Reply #86)

Mon Dec 17, 2012, 09:33 PM

90. collectors can't sell like type 1 and 3s

their license is a "curio and relic" license and can only engage in interstate commerce (buy and sell directly across state lines) with other CR holders, and IIRC, only those guns on the "curio and relic" list. They are not like the gun stores or pawn shops.
Grocery stores tend to be larger supermarkets while gun stores tend to be small businesses and less floor space and inventory.
I would think there would be more McDs, Seems like there is one on every other block.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to gejohnston (Reply #90)

Mon Dec 17, 2012, 10:25 PM

91. Disturbing statistics

 

That still leaves 58,794 places to buy guns (excluding manufacturers) vs 36,569 grocery stores. That makes guns more available than potatoes. (Since grocery stores don't devote all of their square footage to vegetables, it should be comparable to gun store retail space.) I wonder what the founding fathers would make of that?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Toronto (Reply #91)

Mon Dec 17, 2012, 11:37 PM

92. not quite since

to buy vegetables you don't need:
a minimum age
background check
fill out a federal form
be limited to your state of residence (it would be a federal crime for me to buy a gun in Arizona. It would be a federal crime for me to sell a gun to Mitt. There is some speculation that the school "shooting/stabbing" in Casper, Wyoming, used a knife and a crossbow because the Gun Control Act prevented him from buying a gun in Wyoming, since he was a resident of CT.)
$300-$1200 for one item.

Any gun store also sells ammo, camping stuff, safes, holsters, etc. That actual space dedicated to guns and ammo is much less than the veggie isle. Most gun stores are actually about the same squ footage as the veggie isle in a supermarket.

The disturbing thing is that not enough of those veggie isles or neighborhood markets in cities or even in small towns.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Toronto (Reply #86)

Tue Dec 18, 2012, 03:33 AM

95. nice work. really. (next time add a link!) n/t

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Toronto (Reply #74)

Tue Dec 18, 2012, 01:55 AM

93. Holy crap!

I've been preaching about the need to address the real root causes, but I wasn't nearly as articulate as you. Thanks for a succinct description of some of what ails us as a society.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Toronto (Reply #68)

Mon Dec 17, 2012, 07:52 PM

85. Some issues

"No renewal, no gun." - This kind of violates the 5th amendment.

"...there would be issues surrounding criminal use of a firearm, the same as with auto insurance." - AFAIK (I could be wrong) auto insurance doesn't cover folks you injure on purpose with your car. You remain liable. I do not think insurance companies would agree to foot the bill for injuries due to the criminal activity. (Insurance covers "accidents" not "on purposes".)

So other than pay for injuries that someone already pays for now, how does this help?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to discntnt_irny_srcsm (Reply #85)

Mon Dec 17, 2012, 08:54 PM

88. There would be no coverage for criminal use per se

 

however, there are potentially other avenues to obtain coverage, for example if a child uses their parent's firearm at school, the parent could be sued in negligence, which would be a covered peril. As you alluded, this is also insured under homeowners insurance, however most people living in rentals do not carry personal liability coverage. There are also many homeowners who don't carry insurance if they don't have a mortgage. There is little point in suing someone without assets. At any rate, if specific insurance was a requirement for gun ownership, it would likely be excluded under residential insurance policies as are losses arising out of the use or operation of a motor vehicle. As stated previously, this is more about making gun ownership less available due to expensive premiums. How many people would want to pay auto insurance rates for gun ownership?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Toronto (Reply #88)

Mon Dec 17, 2012, 09:31 PM

89. I don't see a benefit...

...to making firearm ownership more expensive. I trust the 1%ers less than... well most people.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Barack_America (Original post)

Mon Dec 17, 2012, 12:30 PM

54. I like the idea. (nt)

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Barack_America (Original post)

Mon Dec 17, 2012, 03:18 PM

64. Almost every bolt-action hunting rifle in common use has the ability for 3-4 follow-up shots.

 

which serve no purpose other than target shooting and mass murder.

What was your point, other than flame bait?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink



Response to PavePusher (Reply #65)

Mon Dec 17, 2012, 05:43 PM

69. See- This Is How They Play

Tell you what, why don't we save everyone the time and you just tell us your point.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Barack_America (Original post)

Mon Dec 17, 2012, 06:02 PM

73. No.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Barack_America (Original post)

Mon Dec 17, 2012, 06:28 PM

75. this is GC&RKBA the gungeon is down in the cellar. Please bring back a case of beer, Thanks.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Barack_America (Original post)

Mon Dec 17, 2012, 07:07 PM

84. What's the point of banning semi-auto rifles?

Handguns murder 9,000+ American's every year.

Rifles of all kinds kill 300+ (less then knives or hands and feet)

Which sounds more dangerous to you?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to EX500rider (Reply #84)

Tue Dec 18, 2012, 07:16 PM

98. Lets extend your theory to the whole world

 

Regular bombs kill tens of thousands of people per year. Nuclear bombs zero since Hiroshima and actually that was an H bomb, so what's the point in banning nuclear weapons.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Toronto (Reply #98)

Fri Dec 21, 2012, 11:43 AM

99. Right...

......'cause hydrogen bombs and rifles are so alike......rolls eyes...

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Barack_America (Original post)

Tue Dec 18, 2012, 03:37 AM

96. lol! great introduction! n/t

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Reply to this thread