HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Forums & Groups » Main » Politics 2014 (Forum) » Reinstate the assault wea...
Introducing Discussionist: A new forum by the creators of DU

Fri Dec 14, 2012, 04:55 PM

Reinstate the assault weapons ban & eliminate loophole in background checks for private sellers

Call and email your members of congress, and the president, repeatedly until they understand that we cannot continue allowing nut jobs to acquire guns or assault weapons to mass murder innocent people. We must also do a better job of securing the boarder so that these weapons don't come across after we have enacted legislation to prevent their sale/use in the United States.

40 replies, 3328 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 40 replies Author Time Post
Reply Reinstate the assault weapons ban & eliminate loophole in background checks for private sellers (Original post)
xxxsdesdexxx Dec 2012 OP
frazzled Dec 2012 #1
Squinch Dec 2012 #2
frazzled Dec 2012 #4
trueblue2007 Dec 2012 #20
DobbyGi Dec 2012 #3
hack89 Dec 2012 #5
Floyd_Gondolli Dec 2012 #25
hack89 Dec 2012 #29
Floyd_Gondolli Dec 2012 #31
hack89 Dec 2012 #33
hack89 Dec 2012 #6
jimmy the one Dec 2012 #7
Igel Dec 2012 #8
jimmy the one Dec 2012 #9
Kennah Dec 2012 #16
jimmy the one Dec 2012 #21
Kennah Dec 2012 #23
mainer Dec 2012 #27
jimmy the one Dec 2012 #10
former9thward Dec 2012 #11
xxxsdesdexxx Dec 2012 #14
Mojorabbit Dec 2012 #15
Kennah Dec 2012 #17
Mojorabbit Dec 2012 #18
Kennah Dec 2012 #19
jimmy the one Dec 2012 #22
Kennah Dec 2012 #24
jimmy the one Dec 2012 #28
Kennah Dec 2012 #34
SoonerPride Dec 2012 #12
xxxsdesdexxx Dec 2012 #13
Hoyt Dec 2012 #26
Sunlei Dec 2012 #30
Aristus Dec 2012 #32
jsr Dec 2012 #36
davidpdx Dec 2012 #37
Recursion Dec 2012 #39
Odin2005 Dec 2012 #35
Recursion Dec 2012 #40
Recursion Dec 2012 #38

Response to xxxsdesdexxx (Original post)

Fri Dec 14, 2012, 04:58 PM

1. I've changed my sig line to reflect that

And we should all think about doing that. Coming out of the closet, and refusing to remain cowering in the corner about our beliefs on this issue, is the first step to changing it.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to frazzled (Reply #1)

Fri Dec 14, 2012, 05:34 PM

2. I hope you don't mind that I shamelessly copied you.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Squinch (Reply #2)

Fri Dec 14, 2012, 05:45 PM

4. I want as many of us here as possible to copy it!!

Let's show our strength in numbers.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to frazzled (Reply #1)

Sat Dec 15, 2012, 03:18 AM

20. and i copied you

Renew the Assault Weapons Ban

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to xxxsdesdexxx (Original post)

Fri Dec 14, 2012, 05:37 PM

3. Spam deleted by gkhouston (MIR Team)

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to xxxsdesdexxx (Original post)

Fri Dec 14, 2012, 06:23 PM

5. Private sales is a state issue

the Federal government has no jurisdiction. It has to be done at the state level - like my state does.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to hack89 (Reply #5)

Sat Dec 15, 2012, 07:39 PM

25. That's not true

 

There was legislation in congress to close the loophole last year.

http://www.nationaljournal.com/congress-legacy/the-112th-congress-addresses-gun-control-20121214

And in 2010

http://www.bradycampaign.org/legislation/backgroundchecks/gunshowloophole/

They have all the jurisdiction they need.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Floyd_Gondolli (Reply #25)

Sun Dec 16, 2012, 10:56 AM

29. That was just for gun shows - the Commerce clause can be stretch far enough

to cover it.

It says nothing about private sales outside of gun shows - where the vast majority of private sales take place.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to hack89 (Reply #29)

Sun Dec 16, 2012, 01:01 PM

31. I'm sorry but you are mistaken

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Floyd_Gondolli (Reply #31)

Sun Dec 16, 2012, 01:53 PM

33. Care to expound on that thought

and actually show why I am wrong? You have your opinion but that doesn't mean it is correct.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to xxxsdesdexxx (Original post)

Fri Dec 14, 2012, 06:24 PM

6. The only honest postition is a ban on all privately owned guns.

handguns kill many more than rifles - 65% of all murders vice 2%

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to xxxsdesdexxx (Original post)

Fri Dec 14, 2012, 06:32 PM

7. Swiss myth on guns

desde:Call and email your members of congress, and the president, repeatedly until they understand that we cannot continue allowing nut jobs to acquire guns or assault weapons to mass murder innocent people.

That's been done dozens of times to no avail; repubs will generally disregard your call or email, blue dog dems will wince, & only to liberal dems are you preaching to the choir, but then there's little they can do against the other two factions against them.

I actually support what you say, reinstate assault rifle ban, nix the gunshow loophole, & I'd throw in enabling 'one gun per month' laws (also known as '12 guns per year laws) - anyone who needs 12 guns per year should be investigated by the fbi or cops imo.

With near half the guns in the world being in america, irate congressmen aren't going to be able to do much to prevent mass shootings. The best we can hope for, as always & ever, is a marginal reduction in gunviolence. That's all guncontrol efforts can be reasonably expected to do. Even were we to enact every single guncontrol measure available, it would not prevent mass shootings altogether, just reduce them a bit.

Support guncontrol efforts, visit (google) the brady campaign (i'm not a solicitor btw), and remember that even gun guru gary kleck contends that guncontrol efforts can have an affect on violent crime, perhaps 30% reduction, by employing simple gun control measures.

Swiss myth: Switzerland has about 3 million guns for ~8 million people.
America has about 300 million guns for 310 million people.
In other words, america has about 300 million more guns than the swiss.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to jimmy the one (Reply #7)

Fri Dec 14, 2012, 06:56 PM

8. That's pretty pointless a number.

What you need is the number of households that have a gun. My brother has a large gun safe.

He's probably going to buy another in the next couple of months because he doesn't have enough room for his guns. One houeshold (of one person), 15-20 guns. Most gun owners I've known have more than just one gun. Even the hunters I've known usually had a rifle and a pistol.

In Switzerland it's pretty much one household, one gun.

Even just the standard deviation would help a bit.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Igel (Reply #8)

Fri Dec 14, 2012, 07:45 PM

9. Swiss myth take II

Igel: In Switzerland it's pretty much one household, one gun.

Not accd'g to the swiss: In a victim study carried out on behalf of the conference of cantonal police chiefs, Martin Killias at the Institute of Criminology found that around 27% of Swiss homes have access to a firearm ... The victim study shows that 26% of the men surveyed have a gun. The number of women with a gun is much lower, running at about three percent..
Also, since the beginning of 2010 any Swiss army member who wants to keep their gun after the end of military service needs to get a gun licence. A referendum for stricter gun control was rejected in February 2011.

Swiss militia do not now keep ammo for their assault rifles at home, it is stored in swiss armory & distributed in event of actual call up of swiss home guard.
.. the 'rejection' of stricter swiss gun control was just that an effort to hold those issued assault rifles at the armory as well (as ammo), was rejected, in essence allowing for swiss males in the home guard to still keep assault rifles at home, altho without ammunition. Some 'rejection of stricter gun control', eh?

.. the swiss actually embrace gun control, they are nothing what the nra & gun lobbies claim, an armed utopia. Carrying concealed guns in switzerland is not allowed unless you have a bona fide reason (just 'self defense' is not a bona fide reason), and permits & registration are required.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to jimmy the one (Reply #9)

Sat Dec 15, 2012, 02:39 AM

16. Not correct about the ammo

Even though the 50 rounds of government issued ammo is only given to special militia members, the SIG 550 rifle is chambered in 5.56mm which is commonly available at any gun store without restriction.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Kennah (Reply #16)

Sat Dec 15, 2012, 07:16 AM

21. swiss ammo

I agree that most swiss home guard will have several rounds for their assault rifles, obtained either clandestinely or legally, hidden somewhere in their house, so as to render their assault rifle shootable if they need it. But I believe this is against swiss military regulations:

wiki: Up until 2007, a specified personal retention quantity of govt-issued personal ammunition (50 rounds 5.56 mm / 48 rounds 9mm) was issued as well, which was sealed and inspected regularly to ensure that no unauthorized use had taken place. The ammunition was intended for use while traveling to the army barracks in case of invasion.

In October 2007, the Swiss Federal Council decided that the distribution of ammunition to soldiers shall stop and that all previously issued ammo shall be returned. By March 2011, more than 99% of the ammo has been received. Only special rapid deployment units and the military police still have ammunition stored at home today.

The sale of ammunition – including Gw Pat.90 rounds for army-issue assault rifles – is subsidized by the Swiss government and made available at the many shooting ranges patronized by both private citizens and members of the militia. There is a regulatory requirement that ammunition sold at ranges must be used there.


~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
on edit, from wiki: Physically compatable 5.56mm NATO ammunition is however readily available for commercial purchase at virtually every gun store in the nation without restriction

So you probably are correct on that count, kennah, tho I suspect use of the assault rifle with store bought ammo is still subject to military regulations. And when you buy the ammo you need register your name - think the nra would buy into that policy?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to jimmy the one (Reply #21)

Sat Dec 15, 2012, 06:28 PM

23. Nothing illegal about them buying 5.56 ammo

Ammo bought in the store is registered, but ammo bought at the range isn't. Technically, it's supposed to be used at the range, if it's bought at the range, but the rule isn't regularly obeyed.

From 1968 to 1986, all "handgun ammo" sales in the U.S. required one to show a Driver's License. However, ATF was questioned about the number of crimes that were solved by this ammo registry, and they could not point to even ONE.

If you're thinking the Swiss model is a panacea, I think you'd find the NRA probably on-board. Pass out fully automatic M-16s to the America militia, along with 50 rounds in a sealed tin, make me show my Driver's License when I walk in and buy a couple of hundred rounds of 5.56 ammo, but you think that will solve the issue of school shootings? Seriously?

One of the flaws with gun legislation was when gun prohibitionists made their intentions known. Most Americans would have been fine with registration, even of semiauto rifles and handguns. But prohibition efforts and calls, which run all through DU, has made people unreasonable skittish.

Personally, I would rather not have a giant standing Army, get us off our global military empire, and go back to a mostly militia defense force. That money could be better spend on universal healthcare, public education that doesn't end at K-12 and let's one get a bachelors, masters, or even PhD, vastly expanded safety nets, redoing mental health, and THEN we would significantly reduce violence, like the shootings in Newtown.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to jimmy the one (Reply #21)

Sat Dec 15, 2012, 09:40 PM

27. I was in Switzerland recently. One man (retired from military) told me:

he can't legally get ammo. It's strictly controlled. He owns a firearm (as he's supposed to) but there's no way he could use it in a mass shooting.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to xxxsdesdexxx (Original post)

Fri Dec 14, 2012, 08:07 PM

10. This century mass shootings: US 31, restofworld 14

But since 1996, the United States has disproportionately suffered from mass gun violence on innocent populations.

Since the Columbine High School shooting in 1999, there have been 31 school shootings in the United States and only 14 in the rest of the world combined


Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to xxxsdesdexxx (Original post)

Fri Dec 14, 2012, 08:24 PM

11. Neither one of these would have stopped this shooting.

He did not get guns from a gun show or private seller. He did not use a rifle in the shooting.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to former9thward (Reply #11)

Fri Dec 14, 2012, 10:50 PM

14. Point taken

Not only what I suggested should be done, but other measures should be taken to prevent these killings that involve guns.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to xxxsdesdexxx (Reply #14)

Sat Dec 15, 2012, 02:27 AM

15. I saw on the news tonight that Conn

has very very restrictive gun laws. My guess is that this was a very troubled child. We have a dismal mental health support system in this country. In the end that is what is most needed IMO

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Mojorabbit (Reply #15)

Sat Dec 15, 2012, 02:42 AM

17. And Connecticut already has an assault weapon ban

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Kennah (Reply #17)

Sat Dec 15, 2012, 02:57 AM

18. That is what the news said and that all guns had to be registered. nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Mojorabbit (Reply #18)

Sat Dec 15, 2012, 02:58 AM

19. Skimming through it, the CT law appears to be far more restrictive than the federal 1994 AWB

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Kennah (Reply #19)

Sat Dec 15, 2012, 08:02 AM

22. Connecticut is de facto shall issue state, but not like texas

Connecticut, by law, is a May-Issue state, as state statutes contain a suitability clause and a provision for applicants to "show good cause" for the issuance of concealed carry (CCW) permits. However, Connecticut is Shall-Issue both in practice and by Article 1, Section 15 of its Constitution: “Every citizen has a right to bear arms in defense of himself and the state”, although state and local authorities have some of the broadest powers in the nation to deny, delay issuance of, or revoke a permit

Open Carry? May carry openly with permit/license.

Certificate of Eligibility for Pistol or Revolver required to purchase handguns. Applicants must complete an approved handgun safety course, and pass a NICS background check prior to issuance of certificate. Certificate of Eligibility valid for five years. There is a 14-day waiting period for the purchase of long guns a relatively long wait period.

As I've said elsewhere, there is no state with 'strict gun control' in america. So it's more apt to say connecticut has relatively stricter gun control laws than about 40 other states, as well as proper to say it has 'less lax' guncontrol laws.
Let's not forget that the worst mass school shooting occurred at virginia tech, and virginia ranks as a pro gun state.
I am interested in finding out where the assault rifle originated from, obviously not connecticut, I suspect a pro gun state. As well, the two pistols.




Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to jimmy the one (Reply #22)

Sat Dec 15, 2012, 06:35 PM

24. I was referring specifically to the CT AWB

If the mother bought it legally, and kept it legally, then it was a legal AW. The 1994 AWB didn't go nearly that far in restricting sales of AWBs. One could continue to buy both hi-cap mags and pre-ban AWs. Prices went up, but they were still selling. Once again, any belief that a reinstatement of the 1994 AWB would change anything appears very misguided.

One also needs to be 21 in CT to get a Pistol Permit, which is what allows one to carry openly or concealed.
http://www.ct.gov/despp/cwp/view.asp?a=4213&q=494614&desppNav_GID=2080

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Kennah (Reply #24)

Sun Dec 16, 2012, 07:54 AM

28. gun lobby obstructionism, taggants for one

I was referring specifically to the CT AWB

I know/knew, I agree with you actually from what I read, perhaps shoulda noted it.

From 1968 to 1986, all "handgun ammo" sales in the U.S. required one to show a Driver's License. However, ATF was questioned about the number of crimes that were solved by this ammo registry, and they could not point to even ONE.

I think cause you can't id a particular bullet from a sales rec't, that would take ballistics testing. But the ammo sales requirement surely helped isolate crime bullets to particular regions, towns, etc, to help in finding the purchaser/shooter.

If you're thinking the Swiss model is a panacea, I think you'd find the NRA probably on-board.

yes, the nra & other pro gun people, including a gun guru kopel I thinks, have even bashed the swiss as too strict on their gun laws. Switzerland may be a shooting country but they also support strong gun laws - in the 90's iirc, support for their new guncontrol policy rec'd ~88% public support.

Pass out fully automatic M-16s to the America militia, along with 50 rounds in a sealed tin, make me show my Driver's License when I walk in and buy a couple of hundred rounds of 5.56 ammo, but you think that will solve the issue of school shootings? Seriously?

Not sure if this came out the way you wanted, kennah, the question is somewhat specious or out of bounds etc.. nothing personal, I say dumb things sometimes too.

One of the flaws with gun legislation was when gun prohibitionists made their intentions known. Most Americans would have been fine with registration, even of semiauto rifles and handguns. But prohibition efforts and calls, which run all through DU, has made people unreasonable skittish.

.. prohibitions on what? assault rifles? which are about 1 or 2% of national gunstock? leaving 98% of known guns still available to satiate RKBA? prohibitions on handguns would be banning about 35% of guns true, but there's no national effort & any serious effort would be on a local (town) level or state level making any 'effective ban' in the single digit percents - even here remote chance after heller & mcd.

.. ever heard of taggants in explosives? batf wanted to mix microscopic taggants in gunpowder explosives to help anti terrorist efforts to id the plant or lot the explosives were made in, but nra objected saying that taggants in gunpowder would increase the risk of a gun/bullet misfire, which was true but something like from 3 chances in a million to 5 chances in a million. So they lobbied against taggants & prevented their addition.
Gun lobby obstructionism is more the concern than individual importunings (usually reactionary to gun shootings) to ban significant numbers of guns, which are not serious guncontrol policy.







Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to jimmy the one (Reply #28)

Sun Dec 16, 2012, 09:25 PM

34. Much of the language has been ban everything

That is going to cause an uproar.

I think ballistic testing is very misunderstood by most. It isn't every remotely close to a fingerprint, as some assert. One might think of it more like profiling, and as such it doesn't always work. One could pull several guns off a production line that were manufactured one after another, and ballistic testing on them might show them to all be the same gun.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to xxxsdesdexxx (Original post)

Fri Dec 14, 2012, 10:06 PM

12. White House.gov petition to begin dialogue on gun control

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to SoonerPride (Reply #12)

Fri Dec 14, 2012, 10:49 PM

13. signed

Thanks.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to xxxsdesdexxx (Original post)

Sat Dec 15, 2012, 07:44 PM

26. That's a very good start, but a lot more needs to done. Switzerland is a good model.

Keep one gun at home, locked up and secured. Almost no one can carry in public.

Severe, maybe. But so called responsible gun cultists have been irresponsible - promoting more and more lethal weapons in more places, stand your ground laws, etc.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to xxxsdesdexxx (Original post)

Sun Dec 16, 2012, 12:45 PM

30. That 2004 law back would help and don't elect ANY Congress in 2014- who won't vote for the ban back.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to xxxsdesdexxx (Original post)

Sun Dec 16, 2012, 01:26 PM

32. But...but...but...

how will I be able to get an AK-47? I need one for squirrel hunting!...

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Aristus (Reply #32)

Sun Dec 16, 2012, 10:38 PM

36. It really is the best way to tenderize the meat

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Aristus (Reply #32)

Mon Dec 17, 2012, 08:12 AM

37. LOL

I mean why else would you need an AK-47 except for hunting squirrels. Not that there would be much of the squirrel left after you shot it.

I agree there is just absolutely no point in those being sold.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Aristus (Reply #32)

Mon Dec 17, 2012, 04:20 PM

39. The AK-47 has been illegal to buy since 1934

The assault weapons ban didn't do anything at all about AK-47's

I get really tired of being called crazy for opposing a law by people who don't even know what the law does.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to xxxsdesdexxx (Original post)

Sun Dec 16, 2012, 09:41 PM

35. BAN THE FUCKING GUN SHOWS!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Odin2005 (Reply #35)

Mon Dec 17, 2012, 04:23 PM

40. Why?

Despite whatever you've heard, laws or no different at gun shows than they are anywhere else.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to xxxsdesdexxx (Original post)

Mon Dec 17, 2012, 04:17 PM

38. The 94 ban was stupid and we should consign it to the memory hole. The other idea is great

Background checks for all sales is a great idea.

The assault weapons ban was a stupid, stupid, stupid law and trying to reinstate it is a horrible idea.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Reply to this thread