Gun control laws and gun violence

[Deleted]

Dec 14, 2012 17:01:19 GMT -5 @financialtexan said:

Dec 14, 2012 16:57:35 GMT -5 @gdgyva said:

how many rounds do the big clips hold for the assault guns?

how many rounds per second are released?

i am pretty sure that THOSE are the guns most of us have issues with....or anything that can be easily converted to do that

machine pistols is think is the term they use for them

Clip size and rounds fired per "minute" are 2 different things.

For example: an AK-47 can fire 600 rounds/minute but has a general clip size of 30 rounds.

The M-16 can fire 700-950 rounds/minute and has a general clip size of 30.

Nowhere near 200 round clip size. Now with a "drum" type clip you can get around 100 rounds but that's still only half of the 200 mentioned.

any gun in the hand of civilians that CAN fire hundreds of rounds a minute is a problem waiting to happen.....

my dad has 7 guns in the house...2 pistols, 4 rifles, and a shotgun i think at last count

but none of them fire more than one round at a time other than the shotgun is a double barrel (so i guess it can)

he hunted for years....not my sport but i understand

i dont understand the need for weapons like you described...ak47, m16, whatever....these are not weapons for hunting unless the targets are human

will the ban on these weapons prevent all these massacres.....no.....but will the ban on them maybe prevent one from happening?

i dont know....but common sense tells me yes

[Deleted]

Dec 14, 2012 17:10:19 GMT -5 @gdgyva said:

any gun in the hand of civilians that CAN fire hundreds of rounds a minute is a problem waiting to happen.....

my dad has 7 guns in the house...2 pistols, 4 rifles, and a shotgun i think at last count

but none of them fire more than one round at a time other than the shotgun is a double barrel (so i guess it can)

he hunted for years....not my sport but i understand

i dont understand the need for weapons like you described...ak47, m16, whatever....these are not weapons for hunting unless the targets are human

will the ban on these weapons prevent all these massacres.....no.....but will the ban on them maybe prevent one from happening?

i dont know....but common sense tells me yes

Having a gun ABLE to fire 600+ rounds a minute and ACTUALLY firing 600+ rounds a minute are 2 completely separate things.

The STANDARD clip size on both those weapons (AK-47 and M16) is 30. That means you would need to reload at minimum 20 times to reach 600 rounds. There is no physically possible way that anyone can do this in a single minute.

I can fire my 9mm clip in it's entirety (16 rounds) in less than 5 seconds. That's a "regular gun".

[weltschmerz]

Clearly you are wrong as handguns are exactly what were used. It's really not that difficult to load a clip into a handgun. Perhaps if you weren't so "anti-anything you don't agree with" then you'd have a clue.
---------------
Lol! That doesn't even make sense. Are you "pro-everything you don't agree with"?

[Deleted]

Dec 14, 2012 17:15:47 GMT -5 weltschmerz said:

Clearly you are wrong as handguns are exactly what were used. It's really not that difficult to load a clip into a handgun. Perhaps if you weren't so "anti-anything you don't agree with" then you'd have a clue.
---------------
Lol! That doesn't even make sense. Are you "pro-everything you don't agree with"?

No...but I also don't come on here saying this should be banned...and you shouldn't have that...and people shouldn't be able to do this. You have a history of it.

[hoops902]

::But I don't really understand why the Average Joe feels the need to own a weapon that is designed SOLELY to kill as many people as quickly as possible. ::

I agree with the sentiment, but just because a gun can accomodate a clip of 30 doesn't mean it's designed SOLELY to kill as many people as quickly as possible. My BIL has a semi-automatic .22 with a 30 round clip, but it's certainly not a gun you'd want to use to "kill as many people as possible as quickly as possible".

[Deleted]

::But I don't really understand why the Average Joe feels the need to own a weapon that is designed SOLELY to kill as many people as quickly as possible. ::

Is that really the "SOLE" purpose of those weapons or are you letting your perceptions and bias make that judgment for you?

[weltschmerz]

Dec 14, 2012 17:16:38 GMT -5 @financialtexan said:

Dec 14, 2012 17:15:47 GMT -5 weltschmerz said:

Clearly you are wrong as handguns are exactly what were used. It's really not that difficult to load a clip into a handgun. Perhaps if you weren't so "anti-anything you don't agree with" then you'd have a clue.
---------------
Lol! That doesn't even make sense. Are you "pro-everything you don't agree with"?

No...but I also don't come on here saying this should be banned...and you shouldn't have that...and people shouldn't be able to do this. You have a history of it.

Do I now? Give me an example. What have I ever wanted to see banned?
I'm not the only one who thinks that guns which spit out multiple rounds with one pull of the trigger are needed by anyone. Aside from that, what do I want banned?
Now you're just making crap up.

[daisylu]

Dec 14, 2012 16:44:43 GMT -5 midjd said:

The horror!

The horror for me was waking up to a stranger in my home who could have hurt my children. Police may show up within an hour if you are lucky. My glock was much more effective than me trying to load up the muzzleloader.

I am not advocating for either side of an ASSAULT gun debate, just stating my reason for having my own handgun.

[midjd]

Dec 14, 2012 17:39:58 GMT -5 @financialtexan said:

::But I don't really understand why the Average Joe feels the need to own a weapon that is designed SOLELY to kill as many people as quickly as possible. ::

Is that really the "SOLE" purpose of those weapons or are you letting your perceptions and bias make that judgment for you?

Is there another purpose? If so, I'll amend my statement. It was my understanding that these types of weapons were designed for military use.

[midjd]

Dec 14, 2012 18:07:37 GMT -5 daisylu said:

Dec 14, 2012 16:44:43 GMT -5 midjd said:

The horror!

The horror for me was waking up to a stranger in my home who could have hurt my children. Police may show up within an hour if you are lucky. My glock was much more effective than me trying to load up the muzzleloader.

I am not advocating for either side of an ASSAULT gun debate, just stating my reason for having my own handgun.

OK...But again, no one is arguing that handguns should be outlawed.

[daisylu]

Dec 14, 2012 16:41:10 GMT -5 hoops902 said:

::We'd have to go back to muskets to get rid of semi-automatics.::

You don't have to go THAT far back. You don't have to go back to guns that you manually load with powder, you just have to go back to guns that need to be cocked back before each shot.

This is what I thought your remark was in response too. If I am incorrect, I apologize. But the mere cocking could have given our assailant enough time to kill my child. He was over DD in a way that she will never forget. Therapy is our family friend.

ETA: Early onset arthritis has made my extremities weak, so I also have difficulty cocking a gun.

[Deleted]

Some random thoughts on this:

We shouldn't all have to go around armed to be safe. The only solution being offered by the pro-gun types is an arms race where everyone carries guns so we can shoot it out when a crazy pops up. I'd take the NRA and their crazy person defense more seriously if they were out there advocating for mental health services for everyone so these types of incidents didn't happen.

I'd love to see better prosecution of gun owners whose guns are stolen. If you gun is so easy to steal then you weren't taking proper care of it and your irresponsibility helped kill someone.

I don't understand why schools don't have armed sheriffs on campus. My high school that never had a problem with crime had an armed sherriff at school every day. My high school was on the same grounds as the elementary and middle school.

And I can't imagine all these parents tonight, going home without a beloved child. It breaks my heart. I'm tired of hearing that gun rights are more important than the lives of people who never even got to enter the debate.

[Pants]

Dec 14, 2012 20:05:31 GMT -5 @anne81 said:

Some random thoughts on this:

We shouldn't all have to go around armed to be safe. The only solution being offered by the pro-gun types is an arms race where everyone carries guns so we can shoot it out when a crazy pops up. I'd take the NRA and their crazy person defense more seriously if they were out there advocating for mental health services for everyone so these types of incidents didn't happen.

I'd love to see better prosecution of gun owners whose guns are stolen. If you gun is so easy to steal then you weren't taking proper care of it and your irresponsibility helped kill someone.

I don't understand why schools don't have armed sheriffs on campus. My high school that never had a problem with crime had an armed sherriff at school every day. My high school was on the same grounds as the elementary and middle school.

And I can't imagine all these parents tonight, going home without a beloved child. It breaks my heart. I'm tired of hearing that gun rights are more important than the lives of people who never even got to enter the debate.

[Pants]

Dec 14, 2012 18:40:50 GMT -5 midjd said:

Dec 14, 2012 18:07:37 GMT -5 daisylu said:

The horror for me was waking up to a stranger in my home who could have hurt my children. Police may show up within an hour if you are lucky. My glock was much more effective than me trying to load up the muzzleloader.

I am not advocating for either side of an ASSAULT gun debate, just stating my reason for having my own handgun.

OK...But again, no one is arguing that handguns should be outlawed.

I am. Get rid of all of them. Make it fucking impossible to own the things as a private citizen. Handguns and assault rifles. You want to hunt? Do it with a bow, a traditional rifle or a shotgun.

Our gun culture leads directly to the violence that we see every day, and the violence that happened today.

I believe that every handgun owner in America has the blood of children on their hands today.

When the NRA holds a rally in CT early next week, I hope you are all proud. Shame on every single one of you who are arguing more guns are the answer.

[damnotagain]

Anne81 says
"I'd love to see better prosecution of gun owners whose guns are stolen. If you gun is so easy to steal then you weren't taking proper care of it and your irresponsibility helped kill someone."


I am sorry but that is the most ridiculous thing I have read today. Protect the criminal at all cost?
Someone breaks into my home steals from me and I go to jail?

[Deleted]

Yes. It should be in a high quality safe that you can't move.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I317 using proboards

[damnotagain]

Well next time someone breaks in an is in the process of raping you. Don't panic, you'll have plenty of time to open the safe.

[doxieluvr]

Dec 14, 2012 20:51:03 GMT -5 @anne81 said:

Yes. It should be in a high quality safe that you can't move.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I317 using proboards

Are we talking bank vault in every house? Does that seem a bit impractical to anyone else?

The largest safe, sold in every outdoorsy store can be hauled out of any house with a few large guys and a truck. I have seen an ATM yanked out of a bank in the same matter. Same ATM was found a few days later, along side of a road with the vault door wide open and cash drawers empty.

[midjd]

The largest safe, sold in every outdoorsy store can be hauled out of any house with a few large guys and a truck. I have seen an ATM yanked out of a bank in the same matter. Same ATM was found a few days later, along side of a road with the vault door wide open and cash drawers empty.

Unless such a law was terribly drafted, a situation like that probably wouldn't be punished. I'm assuming we're talking reasonable efforts to secure the weapons, not bank vaults in every house.

[doxieluvr]

Again the solution is to deal with the mental nut jobs. That would require the people in their lives to step up and report issues long before the idiot goes bat shit crazy. In every case there was warning signs that something was not right.

In the recent school shooting in MD, the kid posted the Columbine shooters as his heroes on Facebook. He did this weeks prior to the shooting. That was a huge red flag. One look at the kids picture and you could see he was a whacked individual. His fellow students stated he was nuts and had behavior issues for years. Why did he not get help?

[doxieluvr]

Dec 14, 2012 21:24:41 GMT -5 midjd said:

The largest safe, sold in every outdoorsy store can be hauled out of any house with a few large guys and a truck. I have seen an ATM yanked out of a bank in the same matter. Same ATM was found a few days later, along side of a road with the vault door wide open and cash drawers empty.

Unless such a law was terribly drafted, a situation like that probably wouldn't be punished. I'm assuming we're talking reasonable efforts to secure the weapons, not bank vaults in every house.

Previous poster suggested safe that can not be moved. I can assure you every responsible gun owner that I know of has these large gun safes in their homes.

[maraqxa]

Here you go, when there's a will there's a way. www.cbc.ca/news/world/story/2012/12/14/china-knife-attack-school.html

[doxieluvr]

Dec 14, 2012 21:29:00 GMT -5 maraqxa said:

Here you go, when there's a will there's a way. www.cbc.ca/news/world/story/2012/12/14/china-knife-attack-school.html

Guess we better ban pocket knives at the same time. The smart thing would be continue to ignore the crazy ass people that are heartless enough to take lives of innocent people. Smh

[Sum Dum Gai]

But I don't really understand why the Average Joe feels the need to own a weapon that is designed SOLELY to kill as many people as quickly as possible.

That's not actually what assault rifles are designed to do. They're designed to reliably and accurately put out enough stopping power to drop a man sized target. Reliability and accuracy are far more important in that equation than pure firing speed. They do tend to have higher capacity magazines than you'd see in a rifle built for game hunting. When you go hunting you're looking to down one deer, elk, or whatever. On a battlefield you're looking to engage potentially multiple enemies and you're useless while reloading. However, weapons designed purely to kill as many people as possible as quickly as possible would be called explosives. Killing a city of 50k people with a machine gun, which has a much higher fire rate than an assault rifle, would take fucking forever. You can do it by dropping one bomb from a plane though.

[midjd]

Message deleted by MidJD.

[Apple]

Dec 14, 2012 16:24:54 GMT -5 DVM gone riding said:

Dec 13, 2012 17:56:36 GMT -5 hoops902 said:

Assault rifles are usually classified as being fully automatic. If you don't have full auto, it's probably not classified as an assault rifle (but could still be an assault weapon which is based on a whole different set of criteria).

And the gunman in Oregon didn't use an assault rifle, just an FYI. His was apparently a semi-auto from the story.

Generally speaking FULL auto is illegal but it can still be sold as an semi auto assault weapon--its the type of gun--then there are conversion kits--probably also borderline illegal that gun enthusiasts use to make them into auto weapons but it is CURRENTLY illegal in most (all???) of the US for normal citizens to buy FULL auto weapons.

Semi auto Fyi (for everyone not just you) means you have to pull the trigger and release for each shot but don't have to re-cock the gun.

*sigh* FULL auto IS legal, depending on state. Conversion kits ARE legal, depending on state. A "regular" semi-automatic weapon is not required to be registered depending on state. A full auto IS required that it be registered, whether bought that way or converted. I know MANY "normal citizens" who own and shoot FULL auto. They all do so responsibly and legally. They are doctors, laborers, carpenters, millwrights, electricians, retired guys, truckers, etc. Just your "everyday Joe".

If they were illegal, these guys wouldn't have them. They are not criminals, they are not nut jobs. They don't smoke pot because it's illegal. They don't do heroine or drink and drive because it's illegal (and also pretty damn stupid). But, yeah, let's make it illegal, it works so well on meth and everything.

[Apple]

Dec 14, 2012 18:39:16 GMT -5 midjd said:

Dec 14, 2012 17:39:58 GMT -5 @financialtexan said:

::But I don't really understand why the Average Joe feels the need to own a weapon that is designed SOLELY to kill as many people as quickly as possible. ::

Is that really the "SOLE" purpose of those weapons or are you letting your perceptions and bias make that judgment for you?

Is there another purpose? If so, I'll amend my statement. It was my understanding that these types of weapons were designed for military use.

A truck is designed to get you from A to B, but that isn't it's sole purpose. It can also go mudding, you can lay in the back and watch stars (or more) on a date, etc.

A full auto weapon is the same thing. Yes, it can kill, but you can also just shoot to shoot, which is what MOST people who have one, either as a job requirement or for a personal item, would rather do with it. If you don't enjoy shooting you'll never get it (have you EVER shot a full-auto weapon? just asking). I have, it's fun. The noise, the vibration, the kick. It's just cool. And I've never thought about trying to kill someone when I've held them in my hands.

I don't "get" going to get your nails done. I think it's kinda stupid and pointless, how could I get any work done if I had to worry about pretty nails? However, I can respect that to you it may not be stupid and pointless. Just because one person doesn't "get it" doesn't mean it's bad.

[midjd]

I don't "get" going to get your nails done. I think it's kinda stupid and pointless, how could I get any work done if I had to worry about pretty nails? However, I can respect that to you it may not be stupid and pointless. Just because one person doesn't "get it" doesn't mean it's bad.

To my knowledge, no one has yet been killed because they or someone else got their nails done.

[Apple]

Dec 14, 2012 22:33:00 GMT -5 midjd said:

I don't "get" going to get your nails done. I think it's kinda stupid and pointless, how could I get any work done if I had to worry about pretty nails? However, I can respect that to you it may not be stupid and pointless. Just because one person doesn't "get it" doesn't mean it's bad.

To my knowledge, no one has yet been killed because they or someone else got their nails done.

Not the point here. The point is you think what I find fun has no other purpose than to kill someone. I could change the example to one that has been known to kill someone, but this was one I just really "don't get" so it was easy. Just because you don't enjoy it doesn't mean others don't.

[midjd]

Not the point here. The point is you think what I find fun has no other purpose than to kill someone. I could change the example to one that has been known to kill someone, but this was one I just really "don't get" so it was easy. Just because you don't enjoy it doesn't mean others don't.

Would it help if I changed "sole" purpose to "primary"? Or is shooting for fun really the primary purpose of those weapons? If it is shooting for fun, is there something that can be done to make them safer/non-lethal? (or does that destroy the fun?)

I'm not trying to be snarky - I don't like loud noises, so generally try to avoid guns. So I really have no idea.