Darwin definitely had it right.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-21049942
[quote]During the press conference, the president urged Congress:
to ban “military-style” assault weapons such as those used in several recent mass shootings
impose limits on ammunition magazines to 10 rounds
introduce background checks on all gun sales; currently private sales and some sales at gun shows are exempt
pass a ban on possession and sale of armour-piercing bullets
introduce new gun-trafficking laws
Finally approve the appointment of the head of the federal Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives
Mr Obama added he would sign a directive so that government agencies can conduct research into gun crime
[/quote]
Still a topic I don’t know enough about, but would be interested to hear what the above posters think. I’ve always lived in places with gun controls, i.e. places where guns are not part of the culture.
Logic would dictate that getting the guns off the streets would be the priority but does that reduce other types of civil disobedience as well? Guns aren’t even carried by the majority of British police but the discussion rising from that burnt out RS4 in Aberdeen thread got me thinking…
I don’t think America will ever change. Too many Americans think it’s too important to have guns. You’re not going to change them with some legislation and ‘gun control’
As I said above, I don’t think control works anyway.
The most significant thing to me is that they all want to focus on the assault weapons like it’s a big deal. Sure it’s retarded to have an AR15 or something, but let’s really think about it:
- Sandy Hook guy killed 26 people in the school. Not bad…but not as many as the kid in Virginia killed with 2 handguns. So should you ban all the handguns too?
- Mass shootings are supernumerary (in the grand scheme of things). While the president weeps and has 4 kids on stage to read their notes about how sad seeing little kids get killed is, everyone else in the room misses the big picture
SINCE SANDY HOOK 960 PEOPLE HAVE BEEN MURDERED WITH GUNS!
12,000/year is the average. Who cares about mass shootings? The mass shootings end up on CNN, and paint America as a bad place. The reality is that the 12,000 OTHER murders per year that are not mass shootings are the real problem facing the country, but it’s not sexy to talk about so it won’t get any thought.
reserved
Do you think that the President would like touch on the Fast and Furious scandal?..there are still ~1300 assault style weapons missing that were sold to Mexican cartels. Everyday our states that border Mexico are plagued with murder and violence…I’m 100% sure that weapons that our government put into circulation are being used to conduct that violence.
Like I’ve stated before, law is only going to affect the people who follow it. I honestly can say that disarming America is very dangerous amidst our economic situation. I prefer to keep my guns and I don’t think that the federal government has the right to control anything…I wouldn’t even let them hold a fucking dollar bill.
I really enjoyed this video…
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ooa98FHuaU0&sns=fb
Is there really a problem? or is it just a certain few with an agenda. Tragedies happen, so do natural disasters…there is still genocide in the world…why worry about America’s guns!
Great post Beem, the concern over this matter is so minuscule
I think because mass murders with guns is embarrassing for your country. That’s really the only reason. As I mentioned, nobody cares that 12,000 a year die…only when 20 kids die and it’s on the cover of just about every newspaper on earth as a reflection of ‘America’.
I’m not anything close to a conspiracy theorist nut job, but there are a lot of holes in the CT shootings. It’s kind of sickening to think that certain things may be be construed or hidden to paint a picture that is causing a lot of tension in American Society.
Most people against guns are uneducated and couldn’t even tell you what the Bill of Rights or even the constitution establishes.
Whilst I don’t agree that citizens should necessarily have guns, I do see where euro and beem are coming from. The law abiding will indeed be the ones punished. The idiots who ruin it for everyone else will continue to do so. The 12,000/yr will continue to die as a result of gun crime.
And +1 on the drink driving. Why not spend some money there? As saki said, because of the stigma attached to mass shootings.
And euro’s point about the Fast and the Furious - now that is embarrassing (1) what were they thinking and (2) how did they lose them!
[quote]barring citizens from owning a means to protect themselves from the government
[/quote]
This sounds like the crazy guy who was spitting in Piers Morgan’s face while screaming for 15 minutes non-stop without pausing for a rational debate. No offense…just sounds like a pretty extreme theory to justify gun ownership.
That rationale makes doing just about anything ‘fair and justified’. i.e. you should be allowed to kill your neighbour and take his land because if the government comes one day you need extra land to setup all of your rifle towers to protect yourself.
Nobody is banning guns. The only thing I’ve heard proposed is a tighter protocol for who to give a gun to…and to ban militaristic weapons.
If you are so scared of your government that you need military tactical weapons, I submit that you should move out of that country immediately. People who speak of this potential tyrannical smothering government who against whom you need to have military weapons to kill said government…they are frankly not thinking very straight if they decide to stay there.
Anyone else think it’s funny that people in Canada and the UK don’t have these conversations about protecting ourselves against the government with machine guns? Ever wonder why?
So EVERYONE heard about the CT shootings, especially because they were children.
Who heard about this incident?
http://abclocal.go.com/wabc/story?section=news/national_world&id=8930383
My brother-in-law was part of the vol. fire department and wasn’t on call that day. Now was it the AR-15 that killed them, or the failure of our law system that allowed a man who killed his grandmother with a hammer… out of prison??? He was obviously rehabilitated…right?
Should we ban lawyers and judges…nope it’s still gun control that is the problem. Did he own the gun legally? I doubt it, but what did he care…he just wanted to kill people. With guys like this in and out of prison living down the road, I’d once again prefer to keep my guns for defense because honestly I don’t trust some fucker right out of the academy to show up at my house if my family is in distress and not shit his pants because of nervousness. I’d rather rely on my past experience and occupation and defend my family myself.
I think the existence of the AR15 sure made him more effective. But as you said, maniacs will kill people however they can, whether it’s an AR15 or a hunting rifle or a good old handgun.
Again though, is anyone talking about banning guns? I haven’t seen that. I’ve seen them make it a bit harder to get a gun and I’ve seen them talking about banning military style weapons.
The weird thing about the prisons is that America just can’t afford to keep a guy like that in prison forever. It’s an incredible cost. He was apparently a decent citizen for like 10 years before going ‘postal’ there. I think someone who murders someone should earn life without the benefit of parole.
yeah, I’m not referring to Massechusetts (is that close spelling?)
I am referring to America.
You are a smart guy…and I am sitting here in Canada, and wondering ‘if this guy really has this need to own assault rifles to protect himself against the government, why the fuck does he still live there?’
The NY law that was passed regarding “military like” weapons, or guns similar to an AR-15 are really kind of silly. Here is a breakdown in general terms…don’t quote me word for word.
There used to be a ban on assault rifles that stated, if you had TWO items that met this criteria you could not legally own the gun prior to the year the ban was implemeneted. An example of said items are; a folding stock, a bayonnet lug/attachment or a muzzle/flash suppressor. NOW (Jan 2013) you only need to have ONE of those items on your gun to qualify it as illegal unless you owned it prior this new law. They also added a “pistol grip” to the list.
Think about it, the folding or adjustable stock - it allegedly makes it easier to conceal or make “sweeping” movements while firing. ?? Who the hell is trying to conceal a RIFLE? If you can hide a rifle with an adjustable stock you can hide a rifle with a fixed stock. = Stupid.
Bayonnet - really? If you run out of bullets are you really going to kill people with a knife at the end of your gun? No you’re going to get shot or tackled = stupid.
Muzzle/flash suppressor - most civilians don’t even know how to set up in a sniper like location and no one is going to NOT be able to locate you because your flash is suppressed. How the hell is this even relevant? = Stupid.
Reducing the number of rounds from 10 to 7… = stupid.
Now as an AR-15 owner, do I care about any of these new laws? Not really. No one is asking to take my gun(s) away and all of the other law amendments added involve stricter sentences for those who use a weapon during a crime. IMO, good. Fuck those idiot criminals.
Now if they try and continue this amendment process to the point where they want us to give up our guns, I’d take issue.
The United States are riddled with issues such as incarceration. Some states pay cops for arresting someone so they just pick on the low hanging fruit and arrest minorities carrying personal amounts of drugs (this is only an example). In the end, there are way too many people in American jails for petty crimes, thus costing the government too much. This has a trickle effect causing rehabilitation programs or training programs on how to deal with mentally ill prisoners receive very little money.
In the end though, the gun deaths/murders that the USA is seeing is at least contained within their own country (somewhat). It doesn’t affect me so I’ll stay out of the debate. They can decide whatever they want, they can claim there’s a risk the government will become a dictatorship and that the masses will team up and fight the army (haha, I’d like to see residents fight tanks and drones and fighter jets, with their rifles and lack of training lol.).
Have fun with your guns, just don’t bring them over to my country (that’s the only impact it has on Canada, guns are being smuggled up here and the border guards aren’t stopping enough of them unfortunately).
The ar 15 debate is such smoke and mirrors!!!
Who needs an AR when you can get this…
Glock 17. Video shows the 100 round mag
http://www.ianmacgregger.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/08/glock-18.jpg
http://youtu.be/tmrggqzwhFc?t=31s
you prefer shotguns?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WOoUVeyaY_8
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tD0PKDGlwiw
Who needs an AR 15 to do serious damage!!
So apparently, no AR15 was used at Sandy Hook, but yet that still turns out to be the focus of the new legislation. Seems like the politicians really have the real issues on their mind. . .
http://www.ijreview.com/2013/01/30208-nbc-admits-no-assault-rifle-used-in-newtown-shooting/
Bush master 223 but I believe the aurora batman psycho and the guy in Rochester and the guy at the Sikh temple all used ar15
I am still waiting for a reason to own one of those anyway. What’s it for?
Here’s what lanza had
Bush master 223 that he killed everyone with at the school
Glock that he used to blow his brains out
Some other handgun forget the name of
Shotgun that he left in the car
That info is accurate.
Dont get hung up on names
they are both the same thing!
One is made by Colt Manufacturing Copmany the other is made by Bushmaster Firearms International… other than that… identical!
The blood and guts of the firearm is whats betwwen the front of the mag and ends at the pistol grip. No matter what barrel, butt / stock and any bling attachments you put on… the core stays the same.
Bushmaster 223
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/0/02/M4gery.jpg
Colt CAR 15
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/3/39/Colt_CAR-15_-_earliest_version.jpg
As a side note the Candian C7A1 assault rifle (CAR-15) was produced in Kitchener Ontario by a company called Diemaco until 2000. The company was bought out by another in Longeuil Qc. In 2005 Colt bought out the contract and they now directly supply us.
I was going to say, that looks like a C7/M16 rifle.
Was fun sleeping on them in the field to ensure our NCOs didn’t take them from us in the middle of the night to test us…not.
Bingo, that the key issue here. The AR15 is really nothing that fancy, just a semi-auto. So people who are educated can’t understand how you can ban “assault style” weapons? The “Style” is mostly just a look. They’re not talking about firing rate, barrel length, or anything else.
When you think about what makes up the guts of an AR15, it really isn’t too different between that and dozens of other guns. At that point you pretty much have semi-auto, bolt action, revolver, or break apart shotguns. So making an attempt to ban Assault Style also sounds like, attempt to ban semi-auto.