Firearms.

[Kaptain Krunch]

I agree with everything you said. The three main problems I see are:

1. For the US, to impliment gun control is to remove their constitutional right to bear arms; how do you get around that?

2. Correct, not everyone should have a firearms permit but, where is the line drawn? I, personally, have a criminal record, albeit a single assault charge from 20 years ago, & a history of diagnosed depression. I'm more than stable now but, would that prevent me from getting a firearms permit? If not, WHY? As far as I'm concerned, it should!

3. No matter what laws are in place, the simple fact is if someone wants a gun bad enough, they'll find a way of getting one...

Honestly, you would have no issue getting a gun legally in most states. which i agree is dumb. (no offense) There are many loopholes, such as the gun show loophole, which need to be taken care of. In VT where i live, rifles don't even have to be registered. I can walk down the street with a 30-06 as long as it isn't loaded and the action is open. On the other side of that, for the most part, we are pretty safe because every other guy has a gun in his truck. They even allow guns on campus at my school as long as their checked in and for hunting.

I completely agree, laws don't stop people from doing anything else. If a murderer wants a gun he'll get one. However i can agree tighter laws on convicted felon's and people with a history of mental health issues should not be allowed to touch a gun.

as Toystory said, assault rifles are not needed, which i agree with to an extent. I have a few friends with 45 carbines, and ak 47s which are semi auto and completely legal, and actually used for hunting. However, these are all "overkill", and definitely more than the average joe needs.

However i would argue that you could take out almost as many people with a Ruger 10-22 and a high cap mag, they sell ones that hold 50 rounds+, 22s are considered toys by most, and you can buy boxes of 500 rounds at walmart for $20.

 

[OzFab]

Honestly, you would have no issue getting a gun legally in most states. which i agree is dumb. (no offense)

Absolutely none taken, that was my point! In most cases, a mental health issue doesn't go away, it's managed &, no matter how well managed, can reoccur at any time. IMO, anyone with any history of mental illness shoud not be allowed to own a gun

 

[gvfc2]

only gun i have is a .410 shotgun and it doesnt even work. hammer doesnt strike the pin. its a pitty bought some shells for it when the hammer was striking the pin. went to test fire and bam not hitting anymore

 

[devino246]

only gun i have is a .410 shotgun and it doesnt even work. hammer doesnt strike the pin. its a pitty bought some shells for it when the hammer was striking the pin. went to test fire and bam not hitting anymore

Might be the transfer bar, if equiped with one.

 

[machinist@large]

A small grab bag:

Marlin model #25 22 LR
Marlin model #880 22 LR
Stevens model #940 in .410 Ga.
Stevens model #940 in 12 Ga.
Le Fever Nitro Special 20 Ga. side by side double barrel
Fox model B 20 Ga. side by side DUAL TRIGGER.

The only one's I personally purchased were the Marlins (new) and the Stevens #940 12 Ga. (used).

The Le Fever I inherited from my Dad when He decided he didn't need it any more (Diabetes; his eye sight isn't what it used to be). The Stevens #940 in .410 Ga. I inherited from one Great Uncle (via my Dad), the Fox from another (via my Mom).

Big Head, all I'm going to say about your point of view is this: I've already had some crackpot, lifetime member of the NRA walk up to me at work, draw a gun (he didn't point it at me, but the threat was there), and tell me that I couldn't do a thing about him carrying a gun around me because he now had a CC permit.

I'd just gotten back to the shop; I told him to put it away or I would call the cops. Turns out I didn't have to, someone in the Office already had; he wasn't happy about the reception he got when he went to put them back in his car. The part that blew me away was the fact that after they ascertained that the guns weren't loaded, THEY TOLD HIM TO PUT THEM IN HIS CAR AND WISHED HIM A NICE DAY!!!. He'd pulled this stunt with a couple of other people (only people he didn't like, of course). He got really upset the next day when the company Attn. informed him that, while carrying a weapon in public was legal, carrying it on someone else's private property was not.

So, what say you? I own guns; H###, I like to shoot guns!! But I was also brought up to know that you only use guns in certain circumstances; any where else, you've crossed the line.

As far as I'm concerned, I don't need a CC permit, or a hand gun. I'm a machinist; I can turn almost anything around me into a weapon if I need to to defend myself. And if I ever have to kill someone to defend myself, I'll do it with my bare hands; that way I'll get full satisfaction out of it.

 

[devino246]

Big Head, all I'm going to say about your point of view is this: I've already had some crackpot, lifetime member of the NRA walk up to me at work, draw a gun (he didn't point it at me, but the threat was there), and tell me that I couldn't do a thing about him carrying a gun around me because he now had a CC permit.

That's one case where North Carolina's "Going armed to the terror of the public" law would have come in handy. That guy's a nutcase who was clearly carrying because he thought it was cool.

I'll never join the NRA. They've been known to purposely endorse anti-gun politicians. Why? If there isn't a threat to gun rights, there isn't any money flowing to the NRA. I'd much rather support a state-level gun lobby like the VCDL (Virginia) or GRNC (North Carolina).

 

[Kaptain Krunch]

Just did some research. I guess in VT, if you can own a handgun legally, you can carry it, concealed or not.

 

[devino246]

Just did some research. I guess in VT, if you can own a handgun legally, you can carry it, concealed or not.

Yeah, i believe y'all have "constitutional carry". Also allowss you to conceal a long gun.

 

[fowler]

on the recent shootings

i did like this statemnet that has been spread though social media

aparently by morgan freeman but maybe a hoax
still it makes a good point

"You want to know why. This may sound cynical, but here’s why … It’s because of the way the media reports it. Flip on the news and watch how we treat the Batman theater shooter and the Oregon mall shooter like celebrities. Dylan Klebold and Eric Harris are household names, but do you know the name of a single victim of Columbine?


Disturbed people who would otherwise just off themselves in their basements see the news and want to top it by doing something worse, and going out in a memorable way. Why a grade school? Why children?


Because he’ll be remembered as a horrible monster, instead of a sad nobody … CNN’s article says that if the body count ‘holds up,’ this will rank as the second deadliest shooting behind Virginia Tech, as if statistics somehow make one shooting worse than another.


Then they post a video interview of third-graders for all the details of what they saw and heard while the shootings were happening. Fox News has plastered the killer’s face on all their reports for hours. Any articles or news stories yet that focus on the victims and ignore the killer’s identity? None that I’ve seen yet. Because they don’t sell.


So congratulations, sensationalist media, you’ve just lit the fire for someone to top this and knock off a day care center or a maternity ward next … You can help by forgetting you ever read this man’s name, and remembering the name of at least one victim. You can help by donating to mental health research instead of pointing to gun control as the problem. You can help by turning off the news.”

 

[souperman000]

Yes Fowler, I was going to mention that as well. Saw it mostly on Facebook.

 

[bighead]

http://www.guardian.co.uk/news/datablog/2012/jul/22/gun-homicides-ownership-world-list

 

[machinist@large]

http://www.guardian.co.uk/news/datablog/2012/jul/22/gun-homicides-ownership-world-list

No offence BigHead, but this isn't an answer to the question I asked you.

 

[jamyers]

Two things:

* The US 2nd Amendment was NOT written with hunting or other recreational activities in mind. It was and is the citizen's ultimate protection against government gone wrong. Note also that it makes no distinction as to type of firearm.

* Many private citizens owned long rifles (arguably the most advanced military weapon of its day), and many cannons were owned by groups of private citizens and/or towns, NOT the federal or state gov'ts.

Based on those two points, it's not hard to argue that today I should not only be able to own/shoot/carry not only the most advanced "assault rifle" (a misleading term that I hate), but assuming I could afford it - an M1A2 Abrams tank.

 

[B.M.800]

only gun i have is a .410 shotgun and it doesnt even work. hammer doesnt strike the pin. its a pitty bought some shells for it when the hammer was striking the pin. went to test fire and bam not hitting anymore

Might be the transfer bar, if equiped with one.

My brother has a 12.Ga that does the same thing. I would like to get it and try to fix it... supose there is just some debree jammed in there?


In reply to Toystory regarding assault rifles and and machine guns... as to why would anybody want one?

They are fun to shoot. I never thought Id have any interest in a semi automatic of any sort. That change a lil bit when got to shoot one. (At the risk of sounds crazy or something) It was simply fun to shoot! I wouldnt mind having one just to target shoot.

Now, as for the full automatic, while that would be fun to shoot too, however I can understand why they are hard to, and/or impossible to get in some places.

Something Ive been wondering Toystory, I figured you could tell me... how do the gun laws work up north there?

 

[devino246]

My brother has a 12.Ga that does the same thing. I would like to get it and try to fix it... supose there is just some debree jammed in there?


In reply to Toystory regarding assault rifles and and machine guns... as to why would anybody want one?

They are fun to shoot. I never thought Id have any interest in a semi automatic of any sort. That change a lil bit when got to shoot one. (At the risk of sounds crazy or something) It was simply fun to shoot! I wouldnt mind having one just to target shoot.

Now, as for the full automatic, while that would be fun to shoot too, however I can understand why they are hard to, and/or impossible to get in some places.

Something Ive been wondering Toystory, I figured you could tell me... how do the gun laws work up north there?

Full-autos (real assault rifles) are heavily regulated and require registration. Only devices on the national registry before May 19th, 1986 are legal to possess. Buying one requires rigorous background checks, permission from local sheriff/police, and a $200 tax stamp. Proper paperwork transferring the name on the registration is also required.

BUT, a $300 stock called the Slide Fire Stock can convert a semi-auto into what is essentially automatic and 100% legal.

Also, Gatling guns are classified as single-shots and are legal. You can convert 2 10/22's into one with this kit: http://www.tacticalinc.com/ruger-1022-gatling-machined-aluminum-p-571.html

 

[souperman000]

In California, there is a law that you can only buy 10 round magazines.

At the gun shows they sell 15 - 30 round magazine "rebuild kits" so you can get a higher capacity clip.

 

[Doc Sprocket]

Something Ive been wondering Toystory, I figured you could tell me... how do the gun laws work up north there?

Still studying and learning, but basically-

Firearms are broken into three groups. Unrestricted, restricted, and prohibited. Unrestricted covers long guns- rifles and shotguns of the single shot (non-auto) variety. The restricted class covers handguns, including semi-automatic. Prohibited are the full-automatic, freaky-deaky, F-U guns.

You have to study, train (including hands-on course) and pass a a proficiency exam to get your Posession and Acquisition License for unrestricted OR restricted weapons. Getting a PAL for both essentially involves TWO courses/exams.

There are criminal background checks, friend/neighbour/boss/spouse etc interviews to try to determine if you're a nutjob.

Once you have your PAL you may purchase unrestricted or restricted class guns. Please note that "prohibited" means exactly that. Your average guy doesn't get one, period. Anyhow- you've got the PAL- so you can buy a gun. The purchase of a gun from a store requires full identification, INCLUDING but not just, your PAL. Even just to buy a box of bullets requires you to show all this.

There is no such thing as carrying concealed (except undercover cops, detectives, etc) , and if you are carrying at all, further licensing is required- and it basically boils down to a law enforcement job- cops, security, etc- or you cannot carry at all.

Transporting your weapon in your car from point a to point b requires you to file a report somewhere, and you can't just stick it in your glove compartment, either. We're talking locked in the trunk.

At home, your weapon must be locked in a cabinet (gun safe) and your ammunitions stored seperately.

That basically covers it.

 

[devino246]

Geez. And to think, I was annoyed when I had to wait two days for the state background check to come back on my last shotgun...

 

[souperman000]

Geez. And to think, I was annoyed when I had to wait two days for the state background check to come back on my last shotgun...

If you buy a gun in CA, there is a 10 day grace period you have to wait before you recieve it.

 

[exenos]

Uh, I think your mixing restricted and unrestricted toystory. I am 99.9% sure that you do not need to file a report to bring your rifle up to the hunt camp, that's only for transporting restricted fire arms. And when I took my fire arms safety course last summer semi auto's were not considered restricted. It may have changed due to the scraping of the long gun registry but I don't think it did.