U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
 
Old 07-28-2016, 10:40 AM
 
3,217 posts, read 1,719,118 times
Reputation: 1842

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by TKO View Post
So for every gun related crime that takes place we lock up a bad guy and take his gun. I see this taking an awful long time before any kind of meaningful result could be achieved.

It is something, if it's new, and I don't disagree with it on principle.

However, don't we already laws like that? Or is it just harsher sentencing you're promoting?

You also have to consider the cost to us involved with locking people up. Easier, safer and cheaper (though risky in it's own right) to take away their guns before they've done something wrong if they're not willing to play by the rules and register.
The violence in America can be corrected if we stop blaming guns, and start working on solutions that will stop our prison recidivism rate. We can create many fewer victims if we stop with the plea bargains that allow violent criminals to negotiate down to a misdemeanor on violent crimes. We need to stop the early release program for those convicted of violent crimes. The Bureau of justice reports that 71% of those arrested for violent crimes are repeat offenders.
When will we stop letting those with long rap sheets back out into society to create more victims?

We need to treat violent gun crimes as federal offenses that put these offenders away in federal prison for lengthy sentences.

Now the detractors from this idea will say that we already incarcerate too many people. To that I say fine, lets keep what we are doing, lets keep the justice system revolving door open, and just whine about guns instead of dealing with the real problem.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 07-28-2016, 10:40 AM
 
10,137 posts, read 6,263,507 times
Reputation: 5723
Quote:
Originally Posted by lifeexplorer View Post
You are apparently living in a different country. The Democrats don't want to end gun crimes. They just want to ban guns.


So obvious to those that aren't ignorant. What is the first thing in problem solving ? Finding the root cause.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-28-2016, 10:42 AM
 
39,439 posts, read 40,743,367 times
Reputation: 16228
Quote:
Originally Posted by TristramShandy View Post
Certainly if something is military-grade, it shouldn't be in the hands of common citizens.
Let's look at the "military grade" AR-15, it's a semi-auto rifle fundamentally no different than ANY semi-auto It was first marketed to consumers in the early 60's as a sporting rifle. It's light and easy to operate. If for example you were learning to shoot it's good gun to start off with. A common use might be pest control. It has a medium cartridge that is not particularity powerful or deadly. There is semi auto hunting rifles that are much more powerful than this rifle.

The military based the M-16 on it because it's relatively cheap to make, easy to operate and it's light along with the ammo which is important if you are going to be carrying a gun for miles. The major difference between the M-16 and the AR-15 is selective fire, selcetive fire allows for semi-auto fire, 3 round bursts or fully auto. A common complaint from military personnel has always been that it's under powered. In Iraq and Afghanistan they were reissuing the m-14 which is a much more powerful gun, it uses a cartridge common in hunting rifles. Weight was really not an issue there, power was more important.

Now that you have detailed explanation of what an AR-15 is I want you to explain to me the fundamental difference between it and semi auto rifle that is considered a hunting rifle. What makes it a "military grade" rifle?

It's a nonsensical label and this is important. The reason it's important is if you can justify banning the AR-15 solely based on function you can justify banning any semi auto rifle.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-28-2016, 10:43 AM
 
18,796 posts, read 9,612,025 times
Reputation: 5277
Quote:
Originally Posted by scarabchuck View Post
So obvious to those that aren't ignorant. What is the first thing in problem solving ? Finding the root cause.
Who said it's about solving problems?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-28-2016, 10:45 AM
 
39,439 posts, read 40,743,367 times
Reputation: 16228
Quote:
Originally Posted by TKO View Post
To engage in hyperbole, do you think you should be able to own your own nuclear ICBM? Provided you could afford it of course.
Without engaging in Hyperbole if the police can justify having it the citizen can justify having it. I think that is the reasonable line to draw.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-28-2016, 10:50 AM
 
18,796 posts, read 9,612,025 times
Reputation: 5277
Quote:
Originally Posted by thecoalman View Post
Without engaging in Hyperbole if the police can justify having it the citizen can justify having it. I think that is the reasonable line to draw.
I'd agree. When police face criminals, they have backup. When we face criminals, we have nothing.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-28-2016, 10:52 AM
 
39,439 posts, read 40,743,367 times
Reputation: 16228
Quote:
Originally Posted by lifeexplorer View Post
So that background check denial basically just does jack squat then?
People on the no fly list may be able to buy a gun.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-28-2016, 10:56 AM
TKO
 
Location: On the Border
2,939 posts, read 3,096,950 times
Reputation: 2439
Quote:
Originally Posted by thecoalman View Post
Without engaging in Hyperbole if the police can justify having it the citizen can justify having it. I think that is the reasonable line to draw.
I also agree.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-28-2016, 11:01 AM
 
39,439 posts, read 40,743,367 times
Reputation: 16228
Quote:
Originally Posted by TKO View Post
I also agree.
Some law enforcement agencies may have fully automatic weapons. I guess you stepped in that huh?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-28-2016, 11:02 AM
 
10,137 posts, read 6,263,507 times
Reputation: 5723
Quote:
Originally Posted by lifeexplorer View Post
Who said it's about solving problems?

Violence is not a problem ? Not sure what part of the country you live in but here it Detroit it is. If want to solve the violence problem in our country banning types of firearms is not going to fix it.


How did you not get that ?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

2005-2019, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top