Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search
 

Atypical Liberal

(5,412 posts)
60. It's not OK to shoot someone that you don't like.
Mon Mar 19, 2012, 08:57 PM
Mar 2012
By not having laws saying it's okay to shoot someone that you don't like.

It's not "okay to shoot someone that you don't like."

Whenever there is a shooting, there is an investigation. Now in the Zimmerman case it looks like the police were extremely slack in their initial investigation, but you can bet there is going to be a rigorous one now.

No one gets a free pass when they shoot and kill someone. Even in clear-cut cases of self-defense you can almost always bank on tens of thousands of dollars in legal expenses.

Floridia's "stand your ground" law simply means that when people are presented with a reasonable threat of violence they do not have a duty to run away. I personally think that is great. There is nothing wrong with running away from bad people doing bad things, but we should always honor and respect those few who stand up to bad people doing bad things, especially when they do so at great personal risk to themselves.

By having background checks so the Jared Loughners of the world would not be able to buy a gun.

Jared Loughner bought his firearm from a Federally Licensed firearm dealer - The Sportsman's Warehouse's in Tucson. As such, he must have (and did) undergone and passed the NICS federal background check.

By not allowing guns into places like bars where people get drunk and then argue. Or onto college campuses.

All of these laws concern people with Concealed Carry Permits. While the specifics vary by state, this means that you must be 21 years old and have undergone a background check. Such people are many times less likely to be involved in any kind of crime, let alone firearm-related crime, than anyone else you will encounter in public.

The law concerning "bars" was mostly aimed at restaurants that happen to serve alcohol. For example, if you carry a concealed firearm and you go to the Outback Steakhouse, Longhorns, Red Lobster, Applebees, Ruby Tuesday's, or any other countless restaurants that have bars on the premises, before many CCW permit holders would have to leave their firearms in their cars.

It was illegal before and it is still illegal for anyone to drink and carry a firearm. Thus the only CCW permit holders who would be carrying firearms into bars are people who are the designated drivers.

As for college campuses, I go to school at the University of Alabama Huntsville. I have class in the very same building where Amy Bishop shot 6 people, killing 3. Guns are not allowed on campus by the University. This did not stop Amy Bishop at all. The only people who are stopped by such policies are the people who obey the rules.

If a person has been judged fit by the state to walk down main street with a gun, surrounded by hundreds of his fellow citizens, there is no reason why he can't walk down main street on a college campus the same way.

By limiting the amount of rounds that can be shot from one clip.

The point of the second amendment was to make sure that the people possessed military-grade small arms appropriate for infantry use. Civilian weapons should have the same ammunition-holding capacity as the military-grade small arms.

By limiting assault weapons as we did in the 90s.

The assault weapons ban was a disaster for the Democratic Party. President Clinton said so himself.

But worse, the assault weapon ban literally accomplished nothing. Nothing. About the only thing it changed is you could no longer buy an assault weapon with a bayonet lug, as if there were a big problem with drive-by bayonettings.

All the manufacturers and importers of such weapons did was change the US-made parts count to comply with the letter of the law. I bought my first AK-47 variant after the passage of the ban specifically because of the ban - I wanted to get in while the getting was good. It has no bayonet lug, and it has a US-made pistol grip and a US-made fire control group. Other than that, it is identical to pre-ban civilian AK-47s.

Note also that the ban made these firearms hugely, hugely popular. Prior to the ban the AR-15 platform was not a very popular weapons platform. Today it is the most popular centerfire target rifle in America.

You'll also note that there are only about 300 homicides every year committed using any kind of rifle, let alone assault rifles. This is half as many people as are killed each year using hands and feet. There is no serious rifle-crime problem in the United States. Even if you made every assault rifle in the country vanish overnight it would hardly make any difference in violent crime in the United States.

You don't need an assault weapon to kill a deer.

Bear in mind that the second amendment is not about hunting. The second amendment is about keeping military-grade small arms appropriate for infantry use in the hands of civilians. The second amendment is about killing people in preservation of liberty, not deer.
There will never be meaningful federal gun control legislation passed in this country ever again. sadbear Mar 2012 #1
Sadly I agree nt XanaDUer Mar 2012 #8
Sadly, I disagree gratuitous Mar 2012 #13
What laws would you propose? Throd Mar 2012 #2
+1 The most important question of all USArmyParatrooper Mar 2012 #33
Let's ban crime instead! appal_jack Mar 2012 #69
Never, hopefully Aerows Mar 2012 #3
+1. Aerows is awesome. nt Codeine Mar 2012 #7
+10000 nt Mojorabbit Mar 2012 #18
It always amazes me when people are so ready to give up their rights. Drahthaardogs Mar 2012 #28
Not to mention it's naive to think we can coerce people into being good. TheWraith Mar 2012 #29
+1 Johnny Rico Mar 2012 #39
YES + 500. Dems want to lose? Ban guns! banned from Kos Mar 2012 #46
In all fairness, savalez Mar 2012 #77
I'm sure the Iragis, Afgans and Paks feel the same way. L0oniX Mar 2012 #4
They did butterfly77 Mar 2012 #5
This message was self-deleted by its author Tesha Mar 2012 #6
Never, our society is progressing backwards. nm rhett o rick Mar 2012 #9
There are thousands of gun laws...what would you suggest? sikorsky Mar 2012 #10
By not having laws saying it's okay to shoot someone that you don't like. jillan Mar 2012 #14
Well, I see you have no knowledge about guns, so I think I'll just skip this discussion sikorsky Mar 2012 #19
Post removed Post removed Mar 2012 #26
WE do NOT have background checks in Arizona - and who do you think you are calling me 'dear'? jillan Mar 2012 #43
Yes you do. It is a federal law. Atypical Liberal Mar 2012 #62
Not at gun shows. Undercover police have gone in and purchased guns without a background check. jillan Mar 2012 #65
Yes, federal law applies at gun shows. X_Digger Mar 2012 #70
Please read the article more carefully. Private, unlicensed people can sell used firearms... slackmaster Mar 2012 #75
... guitar man Mar 2012 #32
WE do NOT have background checks in Arizona - all you need is an gov't id. jillan Mar 2012 #44
Not exactly true OPOS Mar 2012 #52
Untrue. If you buy through an FFL you must, by federal law, undergo a NICS check. Atypical Liberal Mar 2012 #63
But they are not being done - here - jillan Mar 2012 #66
As stated in the cited article, "private and unlicensed sellers" don't have to do background checks slackmaster Mar 2012 #73
To purchase a firearm at a licensed dealer guitar man Mar 2012 #67
Much of what you want is already in place or shown to be ineffective ProgressiveProfessor Mar 2012 #36
I was going to do a point by point refutation, but others have beat me to it. Johnny Rico Mar 2012 #40
How about the "background check" one? savalez Mar 2012 #56
They're talking past each other.. X_Digger Mar 2012 #58
It's not OK to shoot someone that you don't like. Atypical Liberal Mar 2012 #60
When it happens it will seem out of the blue nadinbrzezinski Mar 2012 #11
And there will inevitably be those who will say ... Speck Tater Mar 2012 #12
Oh yeah - that argument was made when Gabby Giffords was shot. jillan Mar 2012 #16
Around here, you'd be hard-pressed to find someone who'd say that. The Doctor. Mar 2012 #23
Not likely.. X_Digger Mar 2012 #15
That is so depressing. jillan Mar 2012 #17
Ehn, depends on your perspective.. X_Digger Mar 2012 #20
I disagree; it's actually quite encouraging! Johnny Rico Mar 2012 #42
Let's pass laws on racism.. sendero Mar 2012 #21
This FL thing will open some eyes. TheCowsCameHome Mar 2012 #22
This country loves its guns. Chorophyll Mar 2012 #24
The insane hate, bigotry and ignorance felix_numinous Mar 2012 #25
There are many laws. A simple Google would have informed you of that. The Doctor. Mar 2012 #27
How about background checks before someone could purchase a firearm for starters? jillan Mar 2012 #41
background checks are already required guitar man Mar 2012 #49
They are not required in Arizona -not sure about other states. jillan Mar 2012 #53
They are required when you purchase from a federally licensed dealer. n/t X_Digger Mar 2012 #61
If buying from a federally licensed firearms dealer guitar man Mar 2012 #74
NICS- National Instant Crime Check System OPOS Mar 2012 #51
I was referring to Gabe Zimmerman, Gabby Giffords aide that was shot and killed. jillan Mar 2012 #55
The "stand your ground" law was the problem here. MrSlayer Mar 2012 #30
Actually, no the defense that Zimmerman is relying on would be precluded by FL law.. X_Digger Mar 2012 #35
Actually it is not ProgressiveProfessor Mar 2012 #37
I disagree. I don't believe Zimmerman's behavior can be justified under Florida law because... slackmaster Mar 2012 #64
We FIRST need a more progressive congress PERIOD and we can get all the laws we want passed uponit7771 Mar 2012 #31
Because there are none now Fla_Democrat Mar 2012 #34
It will never happen so long as some people use irrational fear to pit people against each other LonePirate Mar 2012 #38
If all Really people... Mar 2012 #45
Violent crime is at a decades-long low. Atypical Liberal Mar 2012 #47
You are incorrect. You do not need a permit to carry a weapon into a bar in all states - google it. jillan Mar 2012 #50
It's not legal to transfer a machine gun in the manner you described ANYWHERE in the US slackmaster Mar 2012 #57
"anyone in my state walk into a gun show and buy a machine gun with just a driver's license and Edweird Mar 2012 #59
Here jillan Mar 2012 #68
jillian, this may seem "picky" to you but neither of those stories involves sales of machine guns slackmaster Mar 2012 #72
First of all, lets dispell your hysteria OPOS Mar 2012 #80
Completely Agree and I'm surprised at how hard this message is to say even here... /nt jimlup Mar 2012 #48
Do that and kiss the purple states goodbye. Odin2005 Mar 2012 #54
For the while being fujiyama Mar 2012 #71
Maybe we should lean on "responsible" gun-owners to push for harsher penalties sadbear Mar 2012 #76
Actually, they have.. via.. get this.. the NRA. X_Digger Mar 2012 #79
Certainly such a powerful lobby would have more success? sadbear Mar 2012 #81
You should educate yourself on the subject badtoworse Mar 2012 #78
Please repost in Gun Control & RKBA tammywammy Mar 2012 #82
Latest Discussions»General Discussion»When the fuck are we goin...»Reply #60