How insane is it that you could own a deadly machine like an AR-15 and not need to register it?

[ColinC]

Apparently you can own "long guns" like AR-15s in states like Missouri and Texas and not be required to register them.

48 votes, 1 pass | Time left: Unlimited
	Diabolically insane
	30 (63%)
	Just regular amount insane
	4 (8%)
	A little bit insane
	0 (0%)
	Not insane at all
	13 (27%)
	Not requiring registration for deadly machines is a good idea.
	1 (2%)
	1 DU member did not wish to select any of the options provided.
Show usernames Disclaimer: This is an Internet poll

[Aristus]

1. In places like Misery and Tex-ass, toxic is the only kind of masculinity.

In the One-Star Yelp Review State, it won’t be too long before some goober runs for Governor on a platform of mandatory gun ownership.

[ColinC]

2. At least in Texas I think a majority support registration of all weapons

And like 90% support background checks. I think. According to the last quinnipiac.

[BeyondGeography]

3. Until someone tries running on that and the propaganda machines kick in gear

(FWIW, I’d truly love to be wrong.)

[Kaleva]

4. Very few states require registration of certain types of long gun

I don't know how accurate, up to date, the below is but it will give one an idea.

https://ballotpedia.org/Firearm_registration_requirements_by_state

[ColinC]

5. More states PROHIBIT registries than requires them!!?

[DetroitLegalBeagle]

6. Yep

And Michigan is on the list of requiring registration, but its pistols only, and its technically a sales record, not registration. The form is filled out when a pistol is sold, either commercially or privately. Also, the purchaser is the one who is supposed to turn in the record to the police, not the seller. So if the purchaser doesn't, then state has no way of knowing if they actually have the gun or not. If the gun is already in the database then the record would only show the previous owner, not the the new one. The entire system is wonky as hell and pretty much useless for investigative purposes due to the seller not being required to either report the sale or retain record of the sale.

[Amishman]

10. This is why the estimates for the number of guns in the US vary by 100 million or more

Just think of what it means when the estimates for total guns is 350 to 450 million guns. We see the totals being so high and focus on that. The 'oh there's about a hundred million that we're not sure if they exist' should be even more terrifying

[hack89]

7. Adam Lanza's AR-15 was registered

It is almost like crazy people don’t care.

How exactly does registration save lives?

[ColinC]

14. Should people who use their weapons in a crime be held accountable?

And if they should be held accountable, should we make it easier instead of harder, to track those individuals? That is where registration comes in. When a vehicle is used Ina bank robbery. The first thing that is done is track the vehicle through it's registration. If we are required to register vehicles which are not deadly weapons for each purchase, why in the world should we not require registration for actual deadly weapons?

And also, if a gun cannot be tracked, is it more or less likely to be used in another crime if it is not able to be found? Registration increases likelihood of confiscation of a firearm if it is used in a crime and can prevent that weapon from being used in the future.

[MichMan]

19. Vehicles are registered for tax purposes to fund roads etc

Not in order that they can be tracked if used in a crime

[ColinC]

23. They are regularly used for that purpose, actually

Police use vehicle registration as the first thing to see if they pull somebody over. If a vehicle is used in a crime, registration can be the first lead for the crime.

[MichMan]

30. People can see a license plate on a get away car if the criminal hasn't removed it

How is someone witnessing a drive by shooting or armed robbery going to identify the suspect based on the gun being registered or not ?

The analogy makes no sense

[ColinC]

32. Not an analogy. Just common sense.

Guns are often disposed of after a crime. Without registration, it is clearly harder to pick up a lead on the weapon than with it.

[Straw Man]

150. Not common sense either.

Guns are often disposed of after a crime. Without registration, it is clearly harder to pick up a lead on the weapon than with it.

What kind of criminal commits a crime using a gun that is registered to him/her and then abandons said gun where it can be found? A very stupid one.

The best that can be said for gun registration as a crime-solving aid is that it is very good at leading investigators straight to the person the gun was stolen from.

[ColinC]

151. Do you know what a lead is?

A lead is a piece of information or an idea which may help people to discover the facts in a situation where many facts are not known, for example in the investigation of a crime or in a scientific experiment.

a name on a registration provides one of those. Also known as "clues"

[Straw Man]

157. Yes, and I told you where gun registration info "leads" in investigating crimes.

The person the gun was stolen from, aka a "dead end."

[ColinC]

158. Person who gun was stolen from

can tell the police when, where and how -to the best of their ability, the gun was taken. Many people have video cameras in their house and often times thefts are done by people who know a person. A lead such as who a gun -or any item is registered to can provide a ton of helpful information for investigators. Just tracking down when a gun was stolen can provide a lot of helpful information of where the suspect was at a particular time, and giving them an idea of others who might have seen them and talked to them.

[Straw Man]

159. Umm ...

I believe all that would have already been done when the theft was reported. If the person wasn't apprehended then, what makes you think they could now be found and connected to this gun that they have apparently abandoned?

[ColinC]

160. Your handle checks out.

How in the world would you find the person it was stolen from if you don't know who it was registered to? Even if it was reported stolen, how would you find out what gun it was and whether it was used in the crime?

[Straw Man]

163. Attacking my username? That smacks of desperation.

How in the world would you find the person it was stolen from if you don't know who it was registered to?

Tell me again what you gain by finding the person it was stolen from, who is almost certainly not connected to the crime in question?

Even if it was reported stolen, how would you find out what gun it was and whether it was used in the crime?

Come again? A gun was recovered from a crime scene. A serial number leads police to a registered former owner from whom the gun was stolen. This person knows nothing about the crime being investigated. The investigation of the original theft some time ago went nowhere, obviously, or this person would have already been in custody. So where are we? Nowhere. Dead end.

[ColinC]

166. So your assumption is...

That because the stolen gun investigation did not find the suspect, the information found in that investigation could not be helpful to investigators?

I would argue that there is a lot of information that could be used that would help track down the suspect -especially if we now know that the weapon was used in a crime. Just because they didn't catch the person the first time doesn't mean there isn't a lot of information that can be used by the first investigation to find them.

Some info on how gun registries have helped solve crimes.

https://www.gvpedia.org/gun-myths/firearm-reg/

Hawai’i is the only state that requires all firearms to be registered and consistently has the lowest or second lowest gun death rate in the country. In a March 15, 2021 letter to GVPedia, Hawai’i Police Department Chief Paul K. Ferreira wrote, “In response to your inquiry about whether the firearms registration process in Hawai’i County has been used to solve crimes or has resulted in prosecutions, firearm ownership or transfer information can lead to evidence that is vital to the prosecution of a crime.

“Firearms checks are used on a daily basis to confirm ownership of firearms recovered during the execution of search warrants, of firearms routinely found in the possession of suspects who are wanted for crimes, and firearms located within vehicles during traffic stops. Having the ability to access a person’s firearms information prior to arriving at a domestic violence type call can provide vital information for threat assessment and officer safety. Being able to verify the ownership of a firearm or where it has been transferred to have led to multiple calls for service being solved to include burglaries, theft and violent crimes.”

In a February 24, 2021 email to GVPedia, the Criminal Justice Division of the Department of the Attorney General of Hawaii wrote, “Hawaii requires a person seeking to purchase or acquire a firearm to apply for a permit from the police chief to ensure that the person acquiring a firearm in Hawaii is qualified to possess the firearm. In addition to obtaining a permit, Hawaii mandates the registration of all firearms purchased or acquired in Hawaii, transported into Hawaii, assembled from parts, or transferred from one person to another. As an added safeguard, Hawaii requires owners to report when a firearm is removed permanently from the State. This comprehensive system creates a record of the transaction(s) transferring ownership of the firearm, whether it be a pistol or revolver, or rifle or shotgun. The law also requires the transferor to verify that the recipient has obtained a permit to acquire a firearm, and, also to verify and record the identity of the recipient. Each county police department maintains its records of firearm transactions for its respective county, and all county police departments have statewide access to firearm information.

“Hawaii’s firearm permit and registration system provides information to law enforcement agencies and the courts that assist in solving crimes and promoting public safety. By requiring each transfer of ownership to be documented, the county police departments may be able to trace the ownership of a firearm involved in a crime. Firearm ownership or transfer information can lead to evidence that is vital to the prosecution of a crime.

“The courts routinely order that firearms are to be surrendered by persons who have been disqualified from ownership of firearms upon being charged with or convicted of felonies and certain misdemeanors, including domestic violence offenses. Also, a restraining or protective order, particularly a domestic violence protective order or gun violence protective order, will prohibit the possession of firearms. Law enforcement officers serving the protective order can verify whether the person being served owns firearms and account for its surrender. Additionally, when law enforcement serves warrants or execute evictions, the firearm registry can provide vital information for threat assessment and officer safety.”

[Straw Man]

177. Police puffery and unsubstantiated claims ...

Officer safety? So that they can figure out how hard and heavy to come when they're serving those no-knock warrants at wrong addresses?

[ColinC]

178. So should I trust a random anonymous poster about how police investigations work?

Or the actual police?

I'm going with he latter if you don't mind.

[Straw Man]

179. Please explain to me how police investigations solve crimes though gun registration.

It wasn't explained in article you posted. We're expected to take their word for it, in the name of "office safety."

[ColinC]

180. What part do you not understand?

“Firearms checks are used on a daily basis to confirm ownership of firearms recovered during the execution of search warrants, of firearms routinely found in the possession of suspects who are wanted for crimes, and firearms located within vehicles during traffic stops. Having the ability to access a person’s firearms information prior to arriving at a domestic violence type call can provide vital information for threat assessment and officer safety. Being able to verify the ownership of a firearm or where it has been transferred to have led to multiple calls for service being solved to include burglaries, theft and violent crimes.”

[Straw Man]

181. The part where you claim this is about solving crimes.

“Firearms checks are used on a daily basis to confirm ownership of firearms recovered during the execution of search warrants, of firearms routinely found in the possession of suspects who are wanted for crimes, and firearms located within vehicles during traffic stops. Having the ability to access a person’s firearms information prior to arriving at a domestic violence type call can provide vital information for threat assessment and officer safety. Being able to verify the ownership of a firearm or where it has been transferred to have led to multiple calls for service being solved to include burglaries, theft and violent crimes.”

It isn't. It's about returning stolen firearms to their rightful owners, about charging suspects who are in possession of stolen guns, and about "officer safety." To me, "solving" a crime means finding out who did it and apprehending that person. None of that is addressed above.

[ColinC]

182. Perhaps you missed the last sentence?

Being able to verify the ownership of a firearm or where it has been transferred to have led to multiple calls for service being solved to include burglaries, theft and violent crimes.”

But it is also about your first question, which was about how it saves lives.

[Straw Man]

184. Nope, didn't miss that.

There isn't a word of explanation there about how the registration information enabled that result. It's an unsubstantiated claim.

[ColinC]

185. It comes from a credible source

Of course, conspiracy theories can often lead people to dismiss credible sources, so I guess I cannot help you there....

[Straw Man]

186. Credible source?

Credible sources usually outline the causal chain that leads to their claim. In the absence of any such explanation, I will withhold my belief in their claims until such time as the mechanisms are explained.

It's not a "conspiracy theory" at all; it's called "critical thinking."

[ColinC]

187. Another part of the article cites this. Did you also fail to read it?

https://www.inquirer.com/news/montgomery-county-guns-shootings-philadelphia-straw-purchase-arrests-20200924.html

This is just one example of many of how a state registry was used to dismantle an illegal straw purchase ring.

But while searching the teen’s home, they found gun boxes linked to firearms purchased by another accused conspirator in the scheme, Anthony McCrary, who did not live there.

After checking the state’s electronic database of gun sales, they linked McCrary to what they described Thursday as an “alarming number” of purchases from stores in Montgomery and Bucks Counties and Philadelphia.

[Straw Man]

191. I read the article you posted. I assumed the link was for attribution.

That's the way this usually works, so no, I didn't read that link and the two or so dozen more links contained therein. But I will respond to what you're now quoting.

The topic was gun registration, correct? Perhaps you missed this, from the same link:

Pennsylvania state law prohibits a firearm registry. The closest thing Pennsylvania has to a registry is a database of handgun sale records maintained by the Pennsylvania State Police.

The case you cite was broken by the appearance of one of the principals at a hospital with a gunshot wound, followed by a search warrant for physical premises and for electronic communications. The state database of sales records clinched it, but that is quite a different thing from firearms being registered to an individual. But you knew that.

[ColinC]

193. Actually the way it works is that a portion of the article is shared

And the link is posted to read the rest for copyright reasons. It is not legal to share an entire article outside a link.

Also, in the case of philly, they were still able to use the registry to track down the illegal guns. Of course you are splitting hairs about what counts as a registry, and suddenly still clueless about how registries can be used to solve crimes?

The second link I shared give s a 36 page run down of guns that have been recovered and crimes that have been solved thanks to Chicago's gun tracing programs. The original link also has a ton more information of all the different ways in which registries of sales and those of individual have been used to solve crimes. After browsing through it, you shouldnt have anymore concerns of how registries can be used to a over crimes.

[Straw Man]

221. Wrong again.

Actually the way it works is that a portion of the article is shared

And the link is posted to read the rest for copyright reasons. It is not legal to share an entire article outside a link.

So you posted the link to cover your ass legally. In others words, for attribution, as I said. And since the excerpt is about Hawaii, why should your readers dig into the part about Pennsylvania? Posting a mass of irrelevant information and then castigating your interlocutors for not reading all of it is a pretty shoddy rhetorical trick.

A registry is not the same as a record of sale. You of all people should know that.

[ColinC]

189. Here's another

Seriously all of this is cited in the link I shared. Did you even bother to click it?

https://www.chicago.gov/content/dam/city/depts/mayor/Press%20Room/Press%20Releases/2017/October/GTR2017.pdf

[Straw Man]

192. Thirty-six pages of PR from the Chicago Mayor's Office?

From five years ago? About the wonderful job they're doing fighting gun crime. No, I didn't read it. Please.

[ColinC]

194. Wait. So the first segment summarizing how it is done wasn't good enough.

Now I sent you 36 pages detailing how it is done in depth and you refuse to read it? I'm beginning to think you do not actually care to know how registries are used to solve crimes.

Buh bye

[Straw Man]

196. The first segment didn't "summarize" how it was done.

It simply claimed results without explaining how they were obtained.

The 36-page screed is a lot of the same old crap about how so many crime guns can be traced back to a few dealerships, with the insinuation that these dealers are somehow "rogue" when the simple fact is that they are the largest dealers, period. Also, there is state preemption of gun registration in Illinois, so obviously these traces were done without benefit of your pet project, gun registration. The article calls for registration, but it isn't clear how or why this would help, since the registration trail goes cold once the gun passes from legal to illegal possession.

I might ask if you even read the full article. And before you leave, and without subjecting us to another barrage of irrelevant documents, could you please explain, in layman's terms, exactly how you envision gun registration working to solve crimes?

[PTWB]

168. That's easy.

When you report a gun stolen, you provide the serial number (along with other identifiers), which are then entered into the federal NCIC database.

In the event that firearm is ever encountered by law enforcement in the future, and they check the serial number (a very common practice), the firearm will flag as stolen and will be associated with the original case in which it was reported stolen.

That happens every day—no registry required.

[ColinC]

169. Super glad that exists.

And is absolutely a type of registry (although different from this discussion obviously).

I still imagine an actual registry at time of purchase could be helpful overall to the process. Thanks for the info!

[BGBD]

172. What clues are you going to get if you don't have the weapon in hand?

Guns leave unique signatures on casings when fired that can be matched to a particular weapon....but you'd have to have a database of these marks to be useful, and even then probably would be so incomplete that it would be almost useless. Even if every new guns signature was placed in the database it would still be missing all of the hundreds of millions of guns in circulation and all of the illicit "ghost guns" that are mass produced and snuck into the country or ones printed with a 3d printer in somebodies basement.

Add to that the fact that you would still need to recover casings to make any match. So a killer could just be sure to pick up their casings or use a gun that doesn't eject them in the first place.

When you take all of that into account there aren't going to be many cases solved using a gun registry database and practically no crimes that it would prevent. That's a very small gain to be traded for a law that would require huge political capital and would be fought in courts for years, if it stood at all.

[ColinC]

173. Law enforcement seems to disagree.

https://www.gvpedia.org/gun-myths/firearm-reg/

Hawai’i is the only state that requires all firearms to be registered and consistently has the lowest or second lowest gun death rate in the country. In a March 15, 2021 letter to GVPedia, Hawai’i Police Department Chief Paul K. Ferreira wrote, “In response to your inquiry about whether the firearms registration process in Hawai’i County has been used to solve crimes or has resulted in prosecutions, firearm ownership or transfer information can lead to evidence that is vital to the prosecution of a crime.

“Firearms checks are used on a daily basis to confirm ownership of firearms recovered during the execution of search warrants, of firearms routinely found in the possession of suspects who are wanted for crimes, and firearms located within vehicles during traffic stops. Having the ability to access a person’s firearms information prior to arriving at a domestic violence type call can provide vital information for threat assessment and officer safety. Being able to verify the ownership of a firearm or where it has been transferred to have led to multiple calls for service being solved to include burglaries, theft and violent crimes.”

In a February 24, 2021 email to GVPedia, the Criminal Justice Division of the Department of the Attorney General of Hawaii wrote, “Hawaii requires a person seeking to purchase or acquire a firearm to apply for a permit from the police chief to ensure that the person acquiring a firearm in Hawaii is qualified to possess the firearm. In addition to obtaining a permit, Hawaii mandates the registration of all firearms purchased or acquired in Hawaii, transported into Hawaii, assembled from parts, or transferred from one person to another. As an added safeguard, Hawaii requires owners to report when a firearm is removed permanently from the State. This comprehensive system creates a record of the transaction(s) transferring ownership of the firearm, whether it be a pistol or revolver, or rifle or shotgun. The law also requires the transferor to verify that the recipient has obtained a permit to acquire a firearm, and, also to verify and record the identity of the recipient. Each county police department maintains its records of firearm transactions for its respective county, and all county police departments have statewide access to firearm information.

“Hawaii’s firearm permit and registration system provides information to law enforcement agencies and the courts that assist in solving crimes and promoting public safety. By requiring each transfer of ownership to be documented, the county police departments may be able to trace the ownership of a firearm involved in a crime. Firearm ownership or transfer information can lead to evidence that is vital to the prosecution of a crime.

“The courts routinely order that firearms are to be surrendered by persons who have been disqualified from ownership of firearms upon being charged with or convicted of felonies and certain misdemeanors, including domestic violence offenses. Also, a restraining or protective order, particularly a domestic violence protective order or gun violence protective order, will prohibit the possession of firearms. Law enforcement officers serving the protective order can verify whether the person being served owns firearms and account for its surrender. Additionally, when law enforcement serves warrants or execute evictions, the firearm registry can provide vital information for threat assessment and officer safety.”

[BGBD]

174. Are we just posting things that have nothing to do with the argument?

Everything they are talking about if with the weapon in hand. There's nothing there about solving any crimes where they didn't have the weapon already. There are national records of all firearms that are legally sold, and if those are transfered outside of that later they will still be tied to someone in the chain of custody where investigators can start. So, that law doesn't do anything.

Beyond that, you're pointing at Hawaii...which has the benefits of being able to control out of state guns from entering becuase everyome basically has to show up on an airplane. No other state has the ability to prevent guns purchaseed out of state, which would avoid a registration law, from entering.

[ColinC]

175. Your argument portends to most crimes not having the weapon

That simply isn't true. And law enforcement can confirm that. The post is also about registries, and my argument has been that they can be used to solve crimes and save lives.

[MichMan]

29. People that do use a gun in a crime are held accountable

When they are prosecuted for the crime it was used in.

How does registration have anything to do with a gun being confiscated if used in a crime ? If the criminal is caught with a gun while committing a crime it isn't returned to them for the next crime. If the person committing a crime is not caught, how would law enforcement know what gun was used.

What makes you think someone pre disposed to murder, maim or commit armed robbery with a gun in the first place, will be diligent about following gun registration laws ?

[ColinC]

33. Actually most people who commit a crime with a gun likely get away with it

Registration can provide an immediate lead when the firearm is found. Without requiring registration, we give up that possibility.

[hack89]

56. Then you should be registering handguns, not rifles.

for every one crime committed with a rifle, nine are committed with a handgun.

There are several problems you will not be able to overcome when it comes to registering rifles:

1. People will simply not comply. Look at the compliance rate for registration in CT and NY - it is in the low teens.

2. There are tens of millions of rifles that are presently unregistered that will never be registered. The government has no idea who owns them so they cannot track down the owners.

3. Criminals will not register their weapons.

4. Mass shooters will register theirs because they don't care. Don't need registration to track down the shooter.

[discntnt_irny_srcsm]

98. Are you thinking that someone who legally bought a gun...

...for $200 - $2,000, depending on the gun, and uses it in a crime, would leave it behind for LE to track him down?

[hack89]

8. Canada tried and gave up

When they figured out it was damned expensive and had no impact on crime.

[Dial H For Hero]

9. There's no need to register an AR-15 in 44 out of 50 states.

[hack89]

11. Better check the compliance rate in NY and CT first

If you can’t get blue state voters to register then what exactly is your plan in the red states where you will have active political and law enforcement opposition?

[BeckyDem]

12. It is insane to own an AR-15.

Americans are armed to the extent they are to do what, exactly? Hunt?

Sick America.

[Dial H For Hero]

15. The AR-15 is actually one of the most popular hunting rifles in America.

[BeckyDem]

16. Yes, like I said, sick America.

[PTWB]

18. What's wrong with hunting?

[ColinC]

20. Sorry you have a typo.

I think you meant "what's wrong with hunting with an AR-15?"

[PTWB]

26. Okay, let's go with your version.

What’s wrong with hunting with an AR-15?

[ColinC]

28. For one it encourages hunters to waste ammo through the high capacity mags

Another is that it isn't necessary as a hunting rifle. Regular hunting rifles are efficicient enough to do the job.

My question is why do you think you need to use the same weapon issued in the military to kill people in another country, for hunting?

[PTWB]

46. Many states limit the maximum magazine capacity when hunting

What is the functional difference between an AR-15 or AR-10 platform from any other semi automatic rifle?

Here is a photo of a semi automatic rifle with a detachable box magazine. This rifle is chambered in 30-06, which is significantly more powerful than anything that AR-15 platforms are chambered in, and moderately more powerful than what you’ll find chambered in the AR-10 platform.

It’s also the same style of hunting rifle used by my grandfather.

What’s the functional, meaningful difference?

[JustABozoOnThisBus]

48. High-capacity magazines are illegal in MI, dunno about other areas.

In MI, all semi-automatic rifles must be limited to a six-shot capacity. While hunting with a semi-auto, you can't have a higher capacity magazine with you, not in the gun, not in your pocket or backpack.

That said, the .223 ammunition is not a great choice for deer hunting. It's borderline too weak for a quick "humane" kill. That's regardless of which style of rifle is used.

[cadoman]

50. that the AR-15 equates to high capacity is a pretty common misconception

The reason the AR-15 platform is so popular is because it's 100% customizable. An AR-15 lower can be customized as a long gun, a pistol, or anything in between. It can be modified to shoot almost any caliber, from plinker friendly 22 LR, to pistol ammunition such as 9MM, up to full blown rifle ammunition. It can be automatic or semi-automatic. The magazines can be low capacity or high capacity.

This is what an AR-15 "lower" is, no joke:

https://search.brave.com/images?q=ar-15%20lower

Someone using their AR for hunting would likely equip a low capacity magazine for weight and ease of transport. The exception to that being people who are hunting wild hogs.

Both hunting rifles and ARs can be deadly. A pistol with a high capacity clip is not really much different than an AR with a high capacity clip. A person with a 9MM and a few magazines is just as scary as someone with an AR-15 in my opinion, especially with how easy it is to hide a small handgun. At least with a larger weapon you can see they have it.

[ColinC]

52. The "easily modifiable" part is kinda my point.

It can just as easily be modified into a far more deadly weapon than otherwise.

[Straw Man]

188. Actually, you missed the point.

Modification can involve changing calibers to either a more lethal or a less lethal one, depending on the size of the game one is hunting. It can also mean using a magazine that has lower capacity than standard in order to comply with hunting regulations.

[ColinC]

190. Definitely didn't miss the point.

If it can be modified to higher caliber, that bothers me. "Easily modifiable" is not an attractive quality to me if risking fewer lives is the goal.

[Straw Man]

197. Definitely did.

Modifying an AR-15 to higher caliber for hunting means that you need to bump it up because the lowly .223 isn't powerful enough to humanely kill a deer. You need something in the .30-caliber range -- y'know, like Grandaddy's .30-30 Winchester deer rifle, that innocent "hunting gun"?

With the exception of Steven Paddock in Las Vegas, none of the mass killers who used AR-platform rifles saw the need to use a larger caliber, probably because the weren't concerned with the humaneness of their kills.

[EX500rider]

211. "If it can be modified to higher caliber, that bothers me."

Bothers you why?
People can just buy a weapon in a larger caliber (up to .50cal) to start with right?

[Dial H For Hero]

215. Are you bothered by the T/C Contender handgun?

It can be switched from firing a .22 LR to a high powered rifle cartridge in seconds.

[Zeitghost]

70. You can't hunt legally with high capacity magazines

And a "regular hunting rifle" like your grandpa's .30-06 is far more powerful than a standard AR.

[Dial H For Hero]

21. Hunters Have been using semi automatic rifles and shotguns for well over a century.

[EX500rider]

36. Yeah the civilian ones don't have 3 round burst

One pull of the trigger for each shot like any semi auto rifle.

[ColinC]

39. Easily modifiable.

And it isn't hard to pull your trigger finger quickly enough to simulate in any ways with a higher capacity magazine.

[EX500rider]

40. What makes you think it is easily modified

In fact I believe the opposite is true

[ColinC]

49. ...

https://www.quora.com/Legality-aside-how-hard-is-it-to-convert-an-AR15-to-fully-automatic

You know what can't easily be converted into full auto? A regular hunting rifle.

[Dial H For Hero]

54. Please tell me you're not taking that video seriously. It's an obvious joke.

[ColinC]

58. Yeah it was funny.

The Quora answer makes more sense, though. Also bump stocks still aren't hard to come by even in places they are illegal.

[MarineCombatEngineer]

59. I wouldn't take anything the OP says about this subject seriously,

pretty obvious that the OP knows not of what he/she is talking about.

[Dial H For Hero]

64. Oh, I don't, believe me.

pretty obvious that the OP knows not of what he/she is talking about.

Painfully so.

Well, enough of this for now, I have Ebay listings to write up!

[MarineCombatEngineer]

67. And I'm just sitting down for dinner before I crawl into my sleeper

and watch some TV before I hit the hay.
Have a good evening.

[ColinC]

69. Right. I'm not a gun nut.

I have however lost two dear friends to guns. One in a mass shooting and the other in an accident.


And I see no reason to think guns have any place in a civil society.

[MarineCombatEngineer]

72. I'm not either,

I lost several friends to hostile gunfire, after I retired from the Corps, I had, and still have, no desire to have any firearms in my home or in my truck, but also don't begrudge anyone who is legally allowed, to own firearms.

Pretty much everything you've posted so far about the AR-15 is false info, you really need to bone up on a subject if you're going to discuss it.

And I see no reason to think guns have any place in a civil society.

Others have a difference of opinion than yours.

[PTWB]

55. It's highly illegal to convert without registration.

Is your assertion that illegal, fully automatic conversions happen in any significant number?

And is it your further assertion that illegal fully automatic AR-15 conversions are used for hunting?

When hunting you need to be precise with your shots. These shots typically occur at medium to long range. The last thing you’d want when hunting is an automatic rifle.

You’ve never hunted before, have you?

[ColinC]

57. Actually I don't think that a criminal is going to convert their weapon to fully auto

For the purpose hunting. But the fact that they can easily do that very highly illegal thing is a very good reason why AR15s should not be sold.

[PTWB]

60. That's ridiculous.

It’s already highly illegal to convert a semi automatic rifle to a fully automatic rifle without following the very restrictive federal guidelines. The machine gun registry has been closed for decades.

Are you under the impression that any fully automatic rifles, illegally converted or legally owned, are used in a significant number of crimes or gun violence?

If you are under that impression, please post some links to studies that back that assertion up.

I’ll go ahead and any that you will not because they don’t exist.

[ColinC]

62. Why do you think semi automatic weapons are necessary?

I don't think they are used in a statistically meaningful way in crimes, but that doesn't mean they should be easily attained.

Why do you believe semi automatic weapons are a practical necessity in American society?

[PTWB]

63. Semi automatic weapons are used in a huge number of crimes.

But they’re semi automatic handguns, not semi automatic rifles.

You were talking about illegally converted fully automatic rifles.

[ColinC]

66. I'm talking about allowing AR15s to be sold en masse.

Easily converting them is one issue that makes them a safety concern. Being an easily modifiable weapon makes them a safety concern. I don't see their purpose in a civil society. What purpose do you see weapons like AR-15s in a civil society?

[PTWB]

68. They're fantastic rifles.

They’re versatile, lightweight, and reliable.

Why are you focused on the AR-15? We’ve already established that they’re not used in a statistically significant number of gun crimes in our country.

If your concern is gun violence, why are you focused on something that accounts for just a few percentage points of our annual gun violence instead of handguns, which account for ~90%?

If you want to ban ARs, you need to come up with a compelling reason, not demand that owners of ARs come up with a compelling reason not to ban them. That isn’t how our constitution works.

[ColinC]

71. For me, I lost a friend in a mass shooting

It happened to be an AR-15 that was used on her.

I do believe that if that person could not attain said weapon she may still be alive.

[PTWB]

74. I'm sorry for your loss.

Most mass shootings, and most shootings in general, are committed with handguns.

An AR ban isn’t going to get passed. It’s going to act as a wedge issue to make sure nothing gets passed. And if it did get passed in a hypothetical alternate reality, it would have a negligible effect on the very real problem of gun violence.

The fact of the matter is that violence is a socioeconomic issue. We could eliminate far more gun violence by enacting universal basic income, a guaranteed living wage, universal healthcare (including mental healthcare), and by fixing the systemic oppression of minorities in our criminal justice system.

I have a post that outlines steps we can take to pass meaningful gun control right now in our current political climate.

Here’s a link:

Compromises to Achieve Universal Background Checks, Safe Storage Laws & Concealed Carry Minimum Standards

[ColinC]

78. Thank you. And you are probably right.

But I don't think that legalizing a weapon because most mass shootings are not committed by them, makes any sense.

[PTWB]

80. Firearms are inherently legal in our country.

Here, you must find exceptional reasons that certain weapons should be made illegal. Semi automatic rifles have been in widespread use for more than a century.

[ColinC]

86. ...

Here, you must find exceptional reasons that certain weapons should be made illegal.

I imagine that might be the case for no longer than the next couple decades. The gun lobby is dying out, and the new generations of voters may be a lot more open minded on. The topic.

[PTWB]

89. Perhaps.

But the historical trends indicate otherwise. There was far more public support for an AR ban in the early 90s, for example. Support has been eroding, not growing, since then.

I’m order to change the legality of firearms here, you’re going to need a constitutional amendment repealing the 2nd, or a reinterpretation of the 2nd by a very different SCOTUS.

Neither of those things is likely in the next couple of decades. Perhaps in a hundred years.

I strongly suspect that our society will collapse and be remade long before the 2nd amendment is repealed or reinterpreted.

[ColinC]

91. Well I include societal collapse as a possible factor within 20 years..

I think guns are the tip of the iceberg in regards to society procrastinating on serious issues that are turning into ticking time bombs.

[PTWB]

92. Societal collapse is much more likely than getting an AR ban passed.

And if society does collapse, do you really want your political enemies to have a huge advantage in firepower? I don’t.

I think every left leaning liberal American who can own a firearm should own a firearm and be trained in its responsible use.

[ColinC]

93. I agree wholeheartedly with the first statement.

Been pondering the second and third statements seriously.

[ColinC]

94. I agree wholeheartedly with the first statement.

Been pondering the second and third statements seriously.

[BeckyDem]

107. These 11 mass shootings involved an AR-15-style weapon.

https://www.politifact.com/factchecks/2021/mar/24/viral-image/ar-15-style-weapons-were-used-10-major-shootings/



Just a small percent? Is that your claim?

[PTWB]

111. Yes.

The best statistics I’ve seen compiled indicate roughly 90% of all gun crime is committed with handguns and roughly 80% of mass shootings are committed with handguns.

The remaining 10% and 20% are committed with all other types of firearms combined, including hunting rifles, shotguns, and modern sporting rifles.

Do you have any better data that indicates otherwise?

[BeckyDem]

113. Your conlusions suggest they're such a "small percent" of the problem, why take them off the market.

I don't need any better data, yours works just fine.

America's tragedy.

[PTWB]

116. You're close to my point but not exactly there.

My question is why we are expending energy and political capital trying to ban the AR-15 when the following statements are true:

1. There is 0 chance that we will get an AR-15 ban passed in this political climate.

2. Even if we could ban the AR-15, doing so would have a statistically insignificant effect on the overall gun violence epidemic in America.

Why are we expending energy on something that isn't going to pass and if it did pass, wouldn't even register as a blip on the gun violence radar? What the hell is wrong with us that we are letting emotion stand in the way of pragmatism? Calling for AR-15 bans, mandatory buybacks, and national registries accomplishes only one thing: making it more difficult to pass gun control measures that actually stand a chance.

I've got a proposal in the RKBA forum that gets us Universal Background Checks, Safe Storage Laws, & Minimum Standards for Concealed Carry. Those things would actually save lives and could actually pass in this political climate if we compromise instead of demonize.

[BeckyDem]

119. That is not demonizing.

That is not a small percent of murders, either...they're dangerous weapons.

Obama was not able to get legislation passed after Sandy Hook due to our side. Do I really have to spell out why? I would rather lose an election than not pass that legislation..they were not so dedicated to the cause despite dead kindergartners.

Thu April 18, 2013
The votes were on a series of amendments to a broad package of gun laws pushed by President Barack Obama and Democratic leaders in the aftermath of the Newtown school massacre in December.

However, fierce opposition by the powerful National Rifle Association led a backlash by conservative Republicans and a few Democrats from pro-gun states that doomed key proposals in the gun package, even after they had been watered down to try to satisfy opponents.

After the votes, Obama angrily criticized the NRA and senators who voted against the expanded background checks for rejecting a compromise he said was supported by a strong majority of Americans.“Instead of supporting this compromise, the gun lobby and its allies willfully lied about the bill,” Obama told White House reporters.

https://www.cnn.com/2013/04/17/politics/senate-guns-vote/index.html

[PTWB]

120. They're not a small percentage of murders?

What percentage of murders do you think can be attributed to the AR-15?

[BeckyDem]

121. I think we're done here.

America lost its sensibilities and humanity some time ago.




An AR-15 is a type of semiautomatic, or "self-loading," assault rifle.

As defined in U.S. law, the term "semiautomatic," as opposed to "automatic," means the gun's operator must pull the trigger to fire each shot. NPR outlined its most recognizable features: it automatically reloads after each shot and holds around 30 bullets before an operator needs to reload the gun.

Dubbed "America's Rifle" by the NRA, the AR-15 is popular for its easy-to-modify design and lack of recoil or "blowback" after firing, which preserves the operator's aim and makes the shot more precise, as The Washington Post detailed in a Q & A on the firearm.

While the AR-15 is not a machine gun, a user can modify the AR-15 to approximate the function of an automatic gun by attaching a device called a "bump stock", as was the case in the Las Vegas shooting.
https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/factcheck/2021/04/22/fact-check-post-missing-context-ar-15-rifles-and-mass-shootings/7039204002/

[PTWB]

123. We're done if you want to be done.

I simply asked you to back up your claim that AR-15s were responsible for more than a small percentage of murders. Sometimes asking for statements to be supported does end a conversation prematurely, but what can you do?

Bump stocks are not legal, FYI.

[krispos42]

233. I waded through the statistics from the FBI

Here's how it looks 1985 through 2019. Rifles are the green line near the X-axis.




Regardless of how much concentrated trauma a mass shooting causes the vast majority of homicides are single-victim incidents. Regardless of how much media attention is focused on a AR-15s, 20 people are murdered with a handgun for every person murdered with a rifle. A person dies in this country every 11 seconds while the mean time between rifle deaths is 24 hours.

Mass shootings have become part of our social fabric. A few decades ago it was pretty much unthinkable. It simply was not something that people thought of. Now it's talked about so much it's never far from anybody's thoughts. Including people who are mentally unstable. And now we're burning school shootings into our children's brains in kindergarten by holding lockdown drills every semester.

We're marinating in it, and it's become... not unexpected, and definitely not unthinkable. Normalized, almost. Mass shootings are covered nationwide for days on end and discussed and debated endlessly on social media. Victims, shooter, victims' families, shooter's families. Friends and neighbors of victims and shooters. And then comes the politicians and pundits and the blowhards and the experts. And then we focus on the hardware, as if the hardware is the core of the problem.

The downside of instant communication is that every news story is presented as if it's local. What happens in Sioux Falls, South Dakota can be covered live and in person from Boston to San Fransisco. For days. It didn't used to be this way.

Unfortunately, I have no solutions, except get progressives running things so we can fix society. Republicans and conservadems can't. Unfortunately, gun control pushes drive Republicans to the polls far more than Democrats.

[MarineCombatEngineer]

75. My deepest condolences to the loss of your friend,

Last edited Mon Jan 3, 2022, 10:29 PM - Edit history (1)

but you're arguing on emotion, not facts.

[ColinC]

77. Thanks

My emotion says that there will be far less shooting murders of people if guns were banned.

Evidence in the vast majority of countries that have banned guns also suggests as much.

[MarineCombatEngineer]

79. Let's game this out.........

if a law were passed tomorrow banning the ownership of firearms, how would it be enforced?
How would you collect the more than 300 million firearms already in private hands, and that's just an estimate, since most states don't require registration.

And, how would you prevent a civil war?
Oh, and how would you get any court in the country to uphold such a ban? You thing the SCOTUS would rule such a ban Constitutional?

These are issues to mull on.

[ColinC]

82. I think the fact that "how would you prevent a civil war if guns were banned"

Is such a reasonable question, makes the need for banning guns sooner even more imminent. I agree it isn't likely to happen anytime soon. Or at least not overnight. But that doesn't make their presence in society any more practical. Or less harmful.

[MarineCombatEngineer]

84. I commend you for your beliefs, even if I disagree with them.

That's what I love about DU, the variety of opinions, unlike the repukes, who, for the most part, walk in lockstep.

[ColinC]

90. Thanks so much for the kind words.

I definitely agree!

[ColinC]

83. On civil war

The truth is, we need to start wondering how we are going to prevent a civil war with or without a gun ban, seeing how things are going that direction right now.

[MarineCombatEngineer]

87. I couldn't agree with you more.

[EX500rider]

85. You mean banned like in Mexico?

Mexico homicide rate: 29 per 100,000
US 5 per 100,000

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_intentional_homicide_rate

[ColinC]

88. No. I mean banned like in Japan. Or the uk. Mexico is definitely an exception.

And really the only I've heard of with an absolute gun ban with so much (or any) gun violence.

[EX500rider]

99. Sure you can cherry pick European states with low rates.

But the overall homicide rate in Europe is 3/100,00 Vs 5/100,00 in the US, not a big difference.
I can cherry pick US states with low rates also, New Hampshire is 0.9/100,000

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_intentional_homicide_rate

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_U.S._states_and_territories_by_intentional_homicide_rate

[ColinC]

104. Actually choosing mexico is cherry picking

And we are discussing shooting deaths. Not general homicides.

[EX500rider]

106. Dead is dead...if you are actually worried about people being murdered and not how.

And if firearms drove homicide rates, why is the US #1 in private firearm ownership but 74th in homicides?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_intentional_homicide_rate

[ColinC]

109. Again. Discussing shooting deaths.

[EX500rider]

125. OK

The US has around 16,000+ homicides a year of which about 450+- are committed with all types of rifles of which AR-15's are a subset. So if you outlawed AR-15's the homicide rate wouldn't budge a bit. More people are killed by knives and hands & fists.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_intentional_homicide_rate

https://www.statista.com/statistics/195325/murder-victims-in-the-us-by-weapon-used/

[ColinC]

130. Cool let's outlaw all guns then.

https://health.ucdavis.edu/what-you-can-do/facts.html

According to UC Davis, shooting deaths accounted for 75% of homicides in 2018. Pretending they don't affect homicide rates at all is absolutely insane. Even if people tried to substitute guns with knives, etc, there isn't quite the same mortality rate associated with them as guns.

Also just focusing on homicide rates disregards the numbers of deaths caused by gun accidents, which contributes to the number of gun deaths overall.

[EX500rider]

131. Sure good luck with that

Step one change the amendment to the Constitution, requiring a majority of states to vote for it.
I don't see that happening.

[ColinC]

132. Thanks I'll need it.

[EX500rider]

140. "disregards the numbers of deaths caused by gun accidents"

Another tiny number, about 450+- when around 40,000 people die just accidentally falling.

[ColinC]

142. Are you seriously comparing a machine designed to kill people with "accidentally falling"?

And yes, there are discussions daily about making things safer in buildings, lofts, etc to prevent such deaths of which many renovations are made as a result. There are also discussions to prevent the deaths of people who are killed by guns. But for some reason, the most obvious solutions are ignored because the deaths are "statistically insignificant?"

Sheesh.

[EX500rider]

145. You brought up accidental deaths by firearms like it was a significant number which is not...

...amoung accidental causes of death.

You are 146 times more likely to accidentally die of poison.

Or put another way more people will die by accidental poisoning themselves in 1 year then will die in 146 years of accidental gun discharges.

83 times more likely to die accidentally falling.
Also 83 times more likely to die in a auto accident.

If you were actually concerned about preventing people tragically dying I would start with the big causes then the small ones.
Unless it's more a culture crusade.


https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/fastats/accidental-injury.htm

Notice I used CDC for facts, not Quora.com.

[ColinC]

195. You missed the point. The issue isn't about the number of deaths

Or the percentage.

Some may argue that car accidents are statistically insignificant so we shouldn't do anything about trying to make driving safer (this was the casein the 70s).


With most accidents -regardlesss of how many there are or what they are, we usually as a society try to take steps to prevent them. If people unnecessarily die every year consistently, the response should never be "well more people died in (name incident here)". The response is, "how do we prevent that?"

Is there some kind of a reason we shouldn't want to prevent the 150 needlessly killed people? Are your guns really more important than their lives? Because if so, that's incredibly sick.

[EX500rider]

204. Getting rid of any guns I might own won't help save anyone's lives

Since they are handled and stored correctly and have never hurt anyone.
Should you sell your car to stop drunk drivers or will that not help?

[ColinC]

222. If we are going to compare guns to cars

Let's go back to what is required for each.

For cars: License, registration, insurance, training, tests.
Doing this saves tons of lives.

If you are against these requirements for guns, then those should be the first to get banned.

[EX500rider]

224. Get back to me when cars are in the Bill of Rights

[EX500rider]

226. And you didn't answer my question

You think it's reasonable to give up your car to stop other people drunk driving?

[ForgedCrank]

135. Hell, I'm even uncomfortable

with this being discussed here. I don't even want to click on that link.
This "modification" is far from simple. And a wise person isn't stupid enough to even try to buy the parts to do it. It's an almost guaranteed one-way ticket to 10 years in the stony lonesome.
Go into any gun shop and ask them for parts for such a conversion. They'll promptly toss you out on your ass for even suggesting such a thing.
I totally don't understand how people believe this stuff.

[EX500rider]

73. Requires machine milling isn't necessarily easy

And do you think it's actually a problem?
When's the last time a crime was committed using a fully auto weapon?
Extremely rare events

[MarineCombatEngineer]

76. I think the N. Hollywood bank robbery was the last time. nt

[EX500rider]

81. Certainly the last one i heard of, 1997 nt

[discntnt_irny_srcsm]

133. Might be a newer instance but...

...all I remember is North Hollywood:
https://www.latimes.com/local/lanow/la-me-ln-north-hollywood-shootout-revisited-20170223-htmlstory.html

[EX500rider]

134. I think there was one in Miami involving the FBI but I forgot when

[Dial H For Hero]

44. An AR-15 *is* a semiautomatic rifle. When used to hunt, the user must obey all relevant game

regulations. One of these (typically) is being restricted to a magazine of no more than 5 rounds.

What is the practical difference between an AR-15 in .300 blackout using a 5 round magazine and a Winchester Model 1905 in .32 SL using a 5 round magazine? Other than looks....nada.

three-round burst

Incorrect. The AR-15 cannot fire in three round burst mode.

Distinctly different from a small magazine hunting rifle that was not produced to fire multiple rounds at once.


Incorrect. The AR-15, when being used for hunting, is a small magazine rifle that was not produced to fire multiple rounds at once. It can only fire once per pull of the trigger.

And by the way, AR-15 shotguns have become quite popular. Here's a pic of one:

[ColinC]

45. The AR-15 when being used for hunting

.... Is not legally allowed to use all of the things that an AR-15 is already built to include. Makes me think a regular hunting rifle built to the regulatory standards will suffice

[Dial H For Hero]

51. The Winchester Model 1905 I mentioned had a 10 round magazine manufactured for it.

It is not legally (when being used for hunting) allowed to use all of the things it was built to include.

So what's the difference?

[ColinC]

53. Was your Winchester originally built for the military?

ARs were.

[Dial H For Hero]

61. Nope. My 1903 Springfield bolt action rifle was, though. So what?

For that matter, the majority of bolt action rifles used for hunting are based on the Mauser Model 1898. As for the AR-15, while they are indeed based upon the M16, they are built for civilian use, not military.

Heck, I have a Colt 1911 .45 that's US Army issue. Should that be treated any differently than a civilian handgun?

[EX500rider]

212. "Is not legally allowed to use all of the things that an AR-15 is already built to include."

Actually it is, you just use a smaller capacity magazine with it, which could have been included with purchase.
It is "built" to include removable magazines, what size you use it up to you and local laws.

[ForgedCrank]

136. None of that is significant or relevant.

AR-15's can be single shot if need be, and there are just as many other gas operated rifles as there are other types, and the action being gas operated is irrelevant. It's just the method used to cycle the thing, and no more dangerous than a spring or blow-back operated action.
All guns are air-cooled, I'm not sure how that matters either.
One must apply for, pay for, and pass a stringent process through the ATF and FBI in order to obtain a license to possess anything capable of "3 round burst" action. These guns are so expensive, no one other than collectors really even own them. They are NOT easy to obtain, even illegally.
And pretty much all rifles are "hand-held" and "shoulder fired".
None of those things you listed are even relevant.

[ColinC]

139. Okay how bout this:

In 2018, according to UC Davis, 75% of homicides were attributed to guns. In 2019 it was 38%. Given the mortality rate of gunshot wounds versus knife attacks, etc; it makes absolutely no sense to have guns available in civil society.

I don't care what type they are. They simply shouldn't be legal. Fuck the gun licenses and registrations, etc. Just ban the motherfuckers entirely. It might take a hundred years or more -given the intense hurdles like the constitutional changes likely needed, but there's never any time like the present to get started

[EX500rider]

141. The law of unintended consequences

So you outlaw all firearms, all legally abiding people turn theirs in, all the criminals keep theirs, do they become bolder & more brazen with a unarmed populace? Chances are yes and the homicide rate goes up. See Mexico.

[ColinC]

143. Curious. There are dozens of countries where nearly 0 people own firearms. Why did you pick Mexico?

[EX500rider]

147. Because it clearly shows how criminals and drug cartels and gangs behave with a disarmed populace

[ColinC]

149. Doesn't sound like banning guns was the issue there, then :)

There are dozens of countries that have successfully virtually eradicated guns. Mexico has very strict gun laws and happens to be one of the countries that is not doing well. The others are.

The United States is not Mexico, and evidence has shown that Mexico's situation would likely be helped if the US did something about their gun problem.

[EX500rider]

152. I'll ask again:

If firearms ownership drives homicide rates, why is the US #1 in private firearm ownership but 74th in homicides?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_intentional_homicide_rate

[ColinC]

153. The two are completely different things.

[EX500rider]

205. Yes good of you to admit it

Number of firearms in circulation and homicide rate not very connected

[ColinC]

207. Of course gun homicides do contribute to homicide rates

Which could obviously be helped if we didn't have any guns

https://www.ppic.org/blog/gun-deaths-drive-californias-largest-ever-rise-in-homicides/

[EX500rider]

206. The US is a lot more like Mexico

Then it is some small homogeneous European country.
Drug cartels gangs etc

[ColinC]

210. Mexico is arguably run by drug cartels

USA has no recent pattern and history of instability of the level as Mexico. We are also a much older nation so I feel like there was more room to grow in that time.

[Straw Man]

225. A "much older nation"?

US independence = 1776
Mexican independence = 1821

45 years older: hardly a significant interval in the timeline of history.

[ForgedCrank]

144. I'd like for you to think

about this point of view if you would.
Look at those homicides in detail. These studies are quite often (meaning almost always) very skewed in order to produce a desired result. Key details are often omitted for this reason.
What we do know about "gun homicides" is that by far, the large majority of them are committed in gang and drug crimes. Those are activities that are not constitutionally protected, and can actually be addressed. Amending The Constitution is simply not achievable, especially by using sketchy information and studies in order to try swaying public opinion. Most people are too smart to fall for that.
So instead, I would propose going after the gang-bangers and drug bastards who are committing these murders (and almost always with stolen guns I might add). Sure, we already do, but how much are we really taking this seriously? For one, stopping the ingress of dope into our country and shut it down would be a proper step to take. Or even better, decriminalize all illicit drugs (and that means no taxing it either) to collapse the price and make the shit worthless? How many people would be killing each other over a truckload of coke if it were only worth the gas money it took to transport it?
We have so many options. And I do NOT support expanding the "war on drugs" as it is currently configured. It's stupid as hell and hasn't ever worked. But that is where a huge bulk of the gun crimes spring from, and it would be a damned good start.

[ColinC]

148. I have two friends killed by guns unnecessarily.

I still think about one who was described as hiding behind the wall bleeding to death as she was shot up by a maniac with an AR15. I think about her family, her baby that was in her stomach when I met her and is now growing up without a mother. I think about the hard work she put into purchasing a home with her husband that must now feel so lonely. I would rather that not happen to anybody else I know.

Fuck guns and all the misery they've given us.

[ForgedCrank]

154. Although I don't think

you are wrong for having that opinion, the solutions can't be based on emotions alone. We have to be realistic and follow that path if we are going to be realistic about solving anything. That is my only point. We can do things that are achievable and make a difference, or just stand around all pissed off about it and demand things that will never come to pass.

[ColinC]

170. I think I have a far different idea of what is realistic and achievable.

I just fundamentally disagree with the idea that just because something seems impossible, we should narrow our ambitions.

Might not get there, but I would imagine we would get a lot closer to it than if we didn't try.

[USALiberal]

95. Was waiting for this! Lol! Nt

[iemanja]

183. I have hunters in my family

and they wouldn't dream of using an AR-15. But then, they actually eat the meat they hunt. How effective do you suppose an AR-15 is at hunting duck and pheasant? Pretending the AR-15 is a hunting weapon doesn't hold water.

[Dial H For Hero]

198. ...And the old myth "The AR-15 will destroy the meat of any animal it hits" rears it's head yet again.

An AR-15 in hunting configuration chambered in (for instance) 6.8 SPC is actually a bit less powerful then your relative’s .30-30 deer rifle.

As for being used for hunting ducks and other migratory waterfall, an AR-15 is normally a rifle, not a shotgun. Your relative’s deer rifle would be equally useless for shooting such birds.

[iemanja]

199. Try to follow the plot

They shoot pheasants and ducks. Fucking obviously they don't use deer rifles. Hunters who shoot deer use deer rifles, not AR-15s. Get a grip. You have no idea what you're talking about. Your goal is to legitimate WMD.

[Dial H For Hero]

201. An AR-15 in 6.8 SPC using a 5 round magazine is a deer rifle.

It is no different functionally than a more traditionally styled semiautomatic deer rifle. If you disagree, please explain how this is not the case.

[EX500rider]

213. "Pretending the AR-15 is a hunting weapon doesn't hold water." Stats say otherwise.

According to a 2014 survey of hunters by the National Shooting Sports Foundation, 27% reported having used an AR-15 to hunt, and 58% of those used one in the last year. Given the continuing rise in sales of AR-type rifles, the percentage today is likely much higher.

https://www.themeateater.com/hunt/firearm-hunting/should-your-next-deer-rifle-be-an-ar-15

[iemanja]

214. Does anyone actually need an AR-15 to hunt?

No. Because some knuckle draggers choose to shoot their game to oblivion doesn't make it a useful hunting weapon.

This thread is about registration of the WMD called an AR-15. That is what is at issue. All the justifications for why a few should be able to have weapons designed to commit mass murder by pretending they are hunting weapons is artifice. Next thing we know they will be wanting their own nukes, claiming it constitutes a well-regulated militia. We are witnessing the destruction of America and its democracy, and guns play a MAJOR role in that.

[Dial H For Hero]

216. How exactly does using an AR-15 "shoot game to oblivion"? I would really like to know.

Next thing we know they will be wanting their own nukes

And the "comparing rifles to nuclear weapons" card has been played!

[iemanja]

218. It's all a joke to you

Thousands dead every year and you think it’s funny. The not giving a shit card has been played too, every day. Yet there you are.

[Dial H For Hero]

219. Au contraire, I find the comparison of a rifle to a nuclear weapon laughable.

[iemanja]

223. I remember you

and your self-deleted post in which you whined about someone invoking "the race card" in a criminal justice case involving a black man. You aren't fooling anyone.

[Dial H For Hero]

227. I haven't the faintest idea who you are or what you're speaking of.

It does appear you're keeping tabs on me, though. Well, everyone needs a hobby.

Now I can be yours.

Be well!

[EX500rider]

234. Thousands certainly aren't dead every year from AR-15's or indeed all rifles.

More like 400+-
Meanwhile pistols will kill 8,000+
But the rifles are scarier looking I suppose...

[EX500rider]

217. 1st you have poor grasp of what is a WMD...

Last edited Tue Jan 4, 2022, 07:47 PM - Edit history (1)

Rifles that don't shoot nukes or nerve gas aren't going to qualify. Originally coined in reference to aerial bombing with chemical explosives during World War II, it has later come to refer to large-scale weaponry of other technologies, such as chemical, biological, radiological, or nuclear warfare.

And AR-15's don't "shoot their game to oblivion" more then any other rifle of the same caliber.
And the Bill of Rights has to do with rights, not needs.
Hard to see how the 450+- people killed by ALL rifles on a avg year will destroy democracy more the say pistols that kill 8,000+

[Kaleva]

220. I don't think there are any hunters in your family

If there were, they'd know the AR-15 platform is capable of firing a wide variety of ammo.

Here is a partial list:

"AR-15 cartridges

Rimfire cartridges
.17 HMR[1]
.17 Mach 2
.17 Winchester Super Magnum[1]
.22 Long Rifle[2]
.22 Winchester Magnum Rimfire[1]

Centerfire cartridges imperial measurement
.17 Mach IV
.17 Remington Fireball
.17 Remington[1]
.17-223[3]
.20 Practical[4]
.20 GPC (wildcat)
.22 GPC (wildcat)
22 Grendel (wildcat) aka 224 Grendel
.22 Nosler
.22 PPC
.204 Ruger[1]
.222 Remington
.223 Remington - Original AR-15 cartridge: .223 cartridges may function in a 5.56×45mm rifle, however 5.56×45mm cartridges may produce excessive pressure in a .223 Rem rifle. On the other hand, a .223 Wylde chamber is used on .223 Rem rifle barrels to allow them to safely fire either .223 Remington or 5.56×45mm NATO ammunition.[5]
.223 Winchester Super Short Magnum[5]
.224 Kritzeck (wildcat of a .223 Remington with shortened neck)[6]
.224 Valkyrie
.24 GPC
.243 LBC[3]
.243 Winchester Super Short Magnum[5]
.25 Winchester Super Short Magnum[5]
.25-45 Sharps
.257 Ocelot (wildcat)
.25 GPC (wildcat)
.26 GPC (wildcat)
.27 GPC (wildcat)
.277 Wolverine (semi-wildcat)
.277 MSR (Dasher Wildcat)
.28 GPC (wildcat)
.30 American[7]
.30 Carbine[1]
.30 GPC (wildcat)
.30 Remington AR[8]
.30 Sabertooth (wildcat)
.300 OSSM[5]
.300 AAC Blackout (7.62×35mm)[8]
.300 Whisper[8]
.300 HAM'R - Wilson Combat[9]
.338 SOCOM (wildcat)[10]
.338 Spectre (wildcat)
.350 Legend[11]
.357 Automag (wildcat)[12]
.358 SOCOM (wildcat)[13]
.358 Yeti (wildcat)[14]
.375 Stalker (wildcat)
.375 SOCOM
.400 AR (wildcat)
.40 S&W[15]
.44 Automag (wildcat)[16]
.44 Remington Magnum (wildcat)[17]
.44 SOCOM (wildcat)[18]
.440 Corbon Magnum (wildcat)[19]
.45 ACP[20]
.450 Bushmaster[1]
.458 SOCOM[21]
.475 SOCOM (wildcat)[22]
.499 LWRC
.50 Action Express
.50 Beowulf[23]
.50 SOCOM (wildcat)[24]"

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_AR_platform_cartridges

One can even purchase AR15 style shotguns which could be used for bird hunting.

Below is a link to a site where one can purchase such:

https://atlanticfirearms.com/ar15-shotguns

[Dial H For Hero]

228. A post with that much info on cartridges might upset someone. Doesn't it need a

(wait for it....)


trigger alert?

[Kaleva]

235. I'm not expecting a reply

because I don't believe there are any hunters, or anyone with guns, in the member's family.

[Dial H For Hero]

236. Likely so.

[Skittles]

137. THANK YOU

SICK of these fucking gun humping COWARDS

[BeckyDem]

200. +1.

There has been persistence in our country to normalize these weapons, we must refuse to go along.

[Dial H For Hero]

202. Given that the AR-15 has been around for almost 60 years,

and that it has also become the most popular rifle in America, it is at this point the most normal gun there is.

[BeckyDem]

203. Oh yes, Murika is normal.

uh-huh.

[krispos42]

232. It really isn't at all

The standard AR-15 shoots .223 Remington ammunition. Many kinds of rifles shoot the .223 Rem, including bolt-action, pump-action, single-shot, and semi-automatic guns.

The .223 Rem is popular among hunters for game coyote-sized and smaller. An AR-15 is merely one rifle that uses the .223 Rem cartridge.

And the .223 Rem is loaded with conventional bullet types: full-metal jacket bullets for target practice, expanding bullets for hunting, and precision-made bullets for target shooting. Neither the civilian nor the military has some magic bullet that is laser-guided, or explosive, or whatever.

The bullets used in the .223 Rem are also loaded into other cartridges of the same caliber, such as the .22-250 and the .22 Swift, both of which are actually significantly more powerful than the .223 Rem. And the ammunition makers scale up the bullets as needed to load other calibers. When an ammo maker releases a line of bullets, they are often available in .223, 6mm/.243, .257, 7mm/.280, .30, and .338 calibers as well. For every bullet size there exists a variety of cartridges that will shoot them at varying levels of power.


A gun suitable for hunting must be:

Able to fire suitable ammunition for the kind of animal being hunted;

Able to shoot the ammunition accurately;

Have sights or scopes that the shooter can use competently;

And be of appropriate size and weight to the shooter's ergonomics.



The AR-15 has all of that, as long as you're not hunting anything bigger than a coyote. Or a deer at pretty close range, with the right ammunition.



The appeal of the AR-15 is that is can also be used effectively for self-defense because it is semi-automatic and reliable, there is a wide range of upgrades and accessories available, and that you can buy what's called the "upper receiver" in different calibers. You're limited o the overall length of the .223 Rem cartridge, but they make uppers that shoot pistol ammo, and uppers that shoot big-but-slow bullets instead of the usual small-but-fast bullets.

[Walleye]

13. I think there should be a blood alcohol limit to carrying firearms

[ColinC]

17. Plus registration, plus insurance, plus license requirements and training.

[EX500rider]

34. Insurance for what?

insurance won't cover crimes

[ColinC]

35. There's never been an accident with a gun where somebody is injured?

Is that what you are telling me?

https://injepijournal.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s40621-019-0220-0

[EX500rider]

38. What I said was insurance won't cover crimes committed with firearms

Was I not clear

[ColinC]

41. You said "insurance for what?"

You were very clear you seemed to believe that insurance for accidents is not necessary for guns, implying you don't believe accidents occur with weapons. Good grief. But in case I was wrong, answering your question of "insurance for what?" The rate of accidents at the hands of guns could absolutely warrant their being insured.

[EX500rider]

96. "The rate of accidents at the hands of guns could absolutely warrant their being insured"

And what is that rate?
Should ladders and stairs and what's under your sink/in your medicine cabinet also require accident insurance?

They certainly kill more people them accidental firearm discharges.

Unintentional fall deaths
Number of deaths: 39,443
Deaths per 100,000 population: 12.0

Unintentional poisoning deaths
Number of deaths: 65,773
Deaths per 100,000 population: 20.0

https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/fastats/accidental-injury.htm

[ColinC]

105. And wherever there is liability in even the cases you provided

There is usually insurance involved.

[EX500rider]

108. How so?

I own my place, paid off, no homeowners insurance required.

[ColinC]

110. And if somebody hurts themselves on your property and you have no insurance

And they signed no waiver, you could be held liable.

[EX500rider]

115. Yes but insurance is not required, people can already get firearm insurance if they want.

[ColinC]

126. Unlike with your house, I think firearm insurance should be required

[Straw Man]

155. Given the very low rate of firearms accidents ...

... liability insurance for it is cheap. You know who sells firearms accident insurance? The NRA.

[ColinC]

156. Good. They can make a comeback by supporting a law to require firearm insurance!

Why wouldn't they support such any idea?

[Straw Man]

161. Being a vendor of gun insurance ...

... they would probably love to have it be mandatory, but making that a public position would be bad PR since they are ostensibly dedicated to removing government-imposed impediments to gun ownership. An insurance requirement is a financial obstacle to a constitutional right -- kind of like a poll tax, if you look at it closely enough. How do you feel about those?

[ColinC]

162. Again. Name checks out.

Voting and guns -besides being mentioned next to each other in the constitution, have absolutely nothing to do with each other.

[Straw Man]

165. I see you that failed Analogy 101.

Both are constitutionally granted rights, impediments to which are usually viewed dimly by those who consider themselves progressives. I say "usually" because the Second Amendment seems to a big blind spot that turns progressives into law-and-order martinets very predictably -- and sadly.

[ColinC]

167. Yes I said that. They are both mentioned next to each other in the constitution.

That doesn't make them the same thing.

One is overwhelmingly required to maintain and support democracy. The other is overwhelmingly required to maintain and support wars.

Prohibition was also in the constitution under the 18th amendment, but it also has nothing to do with voting, or guns. It was also reversed through the 21st amendment because it was a bad idea.

Hopefully we can come to terms the same way with the second amendment

[Straw Man]

176. The 18th Amendment lasted 15 years.

Its shortcomings were manifestly evident from the beginning.

The Second has been around for 230 years and counting. When did it become such a bad idea that it needs repeal?

[InAbLuEsTaTe]

22. Not as insane as owning it in the first place!!

[Dial H For Hero]

25. I own one. Does that make me insane?

[maxsolomon]

42. well, it certainly doesn't prove you're sane.

we'd need to know more to judge if you're insane.

do you regularly ponce about town in paramilitary gear with your MSSA strapped to your chest in order to own the libs?

[Dial H For Hero]

47. I agree. Just as not owning one doesn't prove you're sane.

do you regularly ponce about town in paramilitary gear with your MSSA strapped to your chest in order to own the libs?

No.

Now what?

[maxsolomon]

65. I guess we just go along as before.

You have an MSSA, for reasons, and the rest of us just presume you won't shoot us with it in an impulsive fit of rage.

You know, just like every day in America.

[uponit7771]

101. +1

[EX500rider]

114. How would you strap "methicillin-susceptible Staphylococcus aureus" to your chest? nt

[maxsolomon]

237. Military-Style Semi-Automatic.

I avoid using "Assault Rifle", as I've been told for decades on DU that the term is meaningless.

[uponit7771]

100. The fact no one can say "hell no" is bad enough for you NOT to own a PGR. Calis PGR laws should

... be nationwide

[Dial H For Hero]

129. "PGR"?

[Kingofalldems]

24. Gunsplainers don't seem to mind.

[Kaleva]

112. Democratic Party doesn't mind either which is why there's no serious push to register such guns

[LiberatedUSA]

27. Missouri doesn't have any gun registration.

So a federal ban won’t work. The entire state will say “what guns”?

Edit:

Well there is registration of Title 2 weapons. But not semi-autos.

[LiberatedUSA]

37. Considering we are in a fight for democracy right now.

Gun nuts have zero worry about any sort of gun bans happening right now.

Edit for clarity:

We need to worry about voting. Without voting, you don’t get to pass gun laws.

[uponit7771]

97. All PGR's owners should be licensed and registered IMHO. PGRs are designed for mass kill not defense

[discntnt_irny_srcsm]

102. What's a PGR? n/t

[EX500rider]

124. Here : )

Plant Growth Regulator
Plant Genetic Resources
Presentation Graphics Routines
Post Goods Receipt (shipments)

[discntnt_irny_srcsm]

127. Here :)

Something for you.
https://www.democraticunderground.com/11729858#post654

[discntnt_irny_srcsm]

128. Hmm...

Pathetic gun registrar.

[SYFROYH]

138. I have to assume Precision Guided Rifle

https://defensereview.com/mcmillantrackingpoint-50-bmg-precision-guided-rifle-pgr-meet-the-future-3100-yard-super-gun-with-xactsystem-smart-scope-technology/



DefenseReview has published a couple of articles on the TrackingPoint XactSystem smart scope/precision-guided rifle (PGR) technology, which you can read here and here. Well, not content to sit on their laurels, TrackingPoint is apparently teaming up with McMillan Rifles to create a .50 BMG PGR that can reach out and touch someone consistantly at approximately 3,100 yards.

[LiberatedUSA]

118. What is a PGR?

[BusterMove]

103. What would the state do with the registration info?

[Act_of_Reparation]

117. Yeah, I don't know, either.

Seems like they are confusing the concept of registration with licensure.

[UTUSN]

122. K&R

[Fla_Democrat]

146. I always like these types of posts.....

they are so entertaining and enlightening.

[Sapient Donkey]

171. Is there a difference between the concepts of registered and licensed?

I'm not 100% clear on the opposition to requiring licensing for firearms. At least not from the average gun owning/supporting democrat. I understand why the weird crazy anti-government right-wing militia-types are against it. That's usually something about fear of the government coming to take away their guns. I'm going to guess that's not a common fear amongst most left-of-center folks, or is it?

Registration/licensing, mandatory yearly training & assessments, strong red flag laws, etc... seem like good ideas to me.

I don't think there is any practical way to ban guns in the US. It's not politically possible and it's not feasible to think we would be able to do it. Ideas of instituting draconian laws to deter illegal gun ownership doesn't sit well with me. Filling our prisons up more than they already are seems like a step backward. War on guns? Not sure why that would work out better than the war on drugs. When the police are going door to door looking for guns, they won't just be going to white republican neighborhoods to round up offenders. They will also be going to the low income neighbors with high concentration of people who are not white republicans. I'm sure that isn't what most people who promote such tactics have in mind.

There are just my half-baked poorly thought out thunkens.

[marie999]

208. If a weapon is legal, I am against the government knowing I own it.

If the federal government makes registering it mandatory, I will buy illegal weapons. What if Trump and is reelected and has a Republican Congress? Jews in Germany were not worried because they thought they were Germans.

[krispos42]

229. I fail to see how registering one will stop crime

Call me crazy.

[yagotme]

230. Might find the perp.

And that's a mighty small "might". Stop a crime, no.

[fescuerescue]

231. Very few states require registration

Television has made us believe that registration is the norm.

Quite the opposite.