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)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 08-11-2019, 06:31 PM
 
9,974 posts, read 4,699,889 times
Reputation: 5582

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by trobesmom View Post
I've had people ask for suggestions on gun reform.

14 day waiting periods.
No sales by private owners
No sales at gun shows
10 rounds magazine limit
No bump stocks
No cranks
Licenses for all arms
Child Lock Requirements
Minimum age of purchase 21
Assault rifle ban
Universal background checks
Domestic violence ban

Perfect. This is what Congress should be working to implement. I'm sure some of you will have a field day with this. But I won't be responding to any yeah buts or what abouts.
Still wondering what "cranks" are?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 08-11-2019, 06:35 PM
 
Location: Louisiana
7,531 posts, read 4,285,380 times
Reputation: 6080
Quote:
Originally Posted by Floorist View Post
Still wondering what "cranks" are?
Gatling gun?
I hear they're used in crimes all the time.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-11-2019, 06:39 PM
 
Location: The South
5,320 posts, read 3,691,929 times
Reputation: 8081
Quote:
Originally Posted by trobesmom View Post
I've had people ask for suggestions on gun reform.

14 day waiting periods.
No sales by private owners
No sales at gun shows
10 rounds magazine limit
No bump stocks
No cranks
Licenses for all arms
Child Lock Requirements
Minimum age of purchase 21
Assault rifle ban
Universal background checks
Domestic violence ban

Perfect. This is what Congress should be working to implement. I'm sure some of you will have a field day with this. But I won't be responding to any yeah buts or what abouts.
Do you know how long it takes swap magazines? Not very long and it allows the barrel to cool a little
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-12-2019, 08:06 AM
 
Location: NW Nevada
14,434 posts, read 11,744,100 times
Reputation: 13489
Quote:
Originally Posted by trobesmom View Post
I've had people ask for suggestions on gun reform.

14 day waiting periods.
No sales by private owners
No sales at gun shows
10 rounds magazine limit
No bump stocks
No cranks
Licenses for all arms
Child Lock Requirements
Minimum age of purchase 21
Assault rifle ban
Universal background checks
Domestic violence ban

Perfect. This is what Congress should be working to implement. I'm sure some of you will have a field day with this. But I won't be responding to any yeah buts or what abouts.

I haven't seen a "crank" in a LONG time. Referring to trigger cranks which were around a bit back in the 80s. They never really caught on as anything useful. They only worked with from the hip shooting which to a real shooter is just a waste of ammunition. Personally both cranks and bump stocks are worthless accessories.


14 day waiting periods. Ummm, CA hasn't had any luck with that. Anyway, nothing here meets what I see as a proactive measure. Nor will criminals of any stripe be effected. Criminals get their weapons from "private sales" so to speak and denying someone like me the right to sell personal (and legal) property to someone else won't stop criminal sales.


I won't sell a firearm to someone I don't know. And when I am gone my firearms will pass to my son. A practice many would see banned under "private transfer" laws. So personally I don't see allowing more government man handling of our privacy and lifestyle as being proactive. Yet I do appreciate your presentation of suggestions in a civil manner. It didn't take long for someone to throw out the "gun nut" label which I specifically asked people not to do in addition to such counters as "sheeple."


Still for the better part folks have stayed civil allowing at least for honest discussion whether we all agree or not. Gotta start somewhere. Getting back to the CCW and more folks carrying issue I do believe this will help. That being said I am willing to budge a bit on requirement for that.


As an instructor for CCW applicants and a range master for competitions I have seen folks come through both training and competition who are not at a level that trul makes it feasible for them to be carrying a firearm for defense. One guy came to a competition who had just gotten his CCW. We have a rule that if you are LE armed security or a CCW holder your level of competition needs to be at B class or above.


C class is for youth, elderly and rank beginner first timers. No sandbaggers allowed. This young man (around 22 or so) was so nervous he could barely charge his weapon. He was shaking like a dog sh****** peach seeds and fumbling his weapon pointing it off the 180. I had to stop the match and ask him to clear holster and step off the line.


I then called another safety officer to the line and went to talk to him in the safe area. There is absolutely no way I would have passed this kid in a CCW class. But he had attended one of the various shake n bake classes herebouts who have far more lenient requirements than our class does. An 8 hour cram and slam. Our class is three days, 24 hours, for basic qualification and students must demonstrate proficiency in weapons handling in addition to being able to function properly under induced stress.


This kid could not do that. Yet he had a CCW. I'm not OK with that. So I am willing to concede that people who have a CCW should be much better trained and conditioned than someone who just has a firearm for informal range sessions shooting at cans. Our entire CCW training program, the full Monty, is two weeks long and that entire time is spent in intensive training. Both classroom and on the range.


When our students graduate they are better prepared than most police officers. I am willing to see requirements for a CCW be like this across the board. Doing away with shake n bake "courses" I am OK with. A CCW holder should be an attackers worst nightmare incarnate. Not a shaking mass of lack of control and fear unable to handle adrenaline.


This is probably the biggest thing I am willing to move on in terms of any new firearms regulations. We who carry defensively owe it to our loved ones, ourselves and to the public to be the best we can be. Better than the police which isn't that hard to do truth be known. OK then. No "yea buts" or whatever. Solid and thought out suggestions as you requested. I look forward to discussing this further.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-12-2019, 12:22 PM
 
37,613 posts, read 16,317,275 times
Reputation: 8540
Quote:
Originally Posted by NVplumber View Post
I recently read a quote I found to be quite true. "Laws define a criminal act. They do not prevent them." Simple and on target. No pun intended. These recent mass shootings and all others before them were committed with complete disregard for every single law regarding the use of a firearm and a slew of other laws against committing murder and mayhem whether a firearm is used or not.


OK, I understand we are a nation of laws, but obeying of those laws is up to the citizens to carry out. Which 99.9 % of citizens do. Certainly we citizens who own and use firearms. OK my percentage number is off the cuff and not "scientifically proven" but it's the point not the actual math I am trying to convey. Far more firearms owners obey the law than not.


Yet legal and legitimate firearms owners are the focus of all the hoopla surrounding the call for more and more laws restricting firearms rights in light of recent events. Using logic and "common sense" does that dog actually hunt? Or is it just feel good reactionary leftist emotion driven tempt at "doing something." Something, anything even if it harms more than it helps.


We already know that there is no such thing as rational discourse with the left anymore and the far right is just as immutable in their position. This makes coming up with some sort of action that can mitigate the situation in question rather ...problematic. I am of the opinion that more armed, ready willing and able citizens who are proficient in defensive tactics will help a lot. No, this won't stop criminal misuse of firearms but I think it will slow things down greatly and help prevent casualties that result from shooting events.


Total reliance on the police gives a shooter far more time and opportunity to keep shooting at helpless targets. If those targets were not so helpless how can that be a bad thing? Even if return fire were put over the shooters head so as not to it innocents it serves to distract him and covers peoples retreat. Till the cops get there and fire directly whether there are civilians in the line of fire or not. that is my answer to those who will tell e armed citizens will cause more casualties. OK, they MIGHT but the odds will be that the police WILL.


More and more laws regarding firearms will not be proactive. More armed and ready as can be citizens will be. Disarming citizens, folks like me, will do nothing but increase the number of totally helpless potential victims. I am under no delusion of being some sort of "hero" in a shooting event and actually being able to kill an active shooter. As an armed citizen I have to operate under constraints that don't apply to LE. However I can and probably will be limited to covering the retreat of would be victims.


If I and others like me can distract a shooter and make him duck that at least gets his finger off the trigger. Time he spends on the trigger being a critical factor that can count for a lot. At any rate I am open for civil and productive discussion. My opinions are just that. Opinions. I have formed them from a lot of training and experience as well but that does not mean I see them a graven in stone by the hand of God.


I am open to other points of view and am not taking an immutable stance. I am completely wiling to move should a truly productive and proactive idea for any sort of solution to at least curb acts by violent madmen be put out there. Again, my opinion, is that there is nothing that can actually totally stop such acts. Evil is shrewd and calculating and nobody can see everything coming, nor can any written law preempt acts of evil. Since evil has no regard for law.


Nevertheless I am open to actual rational discussion about this. Something that is severely lacking. Things always seem to degenerate into insults and name calling which accomplishes nothing and makes things worse. Please no "gun nut/humper" or "sheeple" commentary. Lets use our words and actually put some thought into discussion an debate shall we? It's really not that hard to do.
If you DON'T approve of the 2nd amendment, work to get it amended. Until then....!
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-12-2019, 12:25 PM
 
11,687 posts, read 2,893,442 times
Reputation: 5404
Laws are so people can feel virtuous for passing them.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-12-2019, 12:26 PM
 
Location: Wasilla, AK
7,403 posts, read 4,269,930 times
Reputation: 16285
We already have about 30,000+ gun control laws. How about we start enforcing those first, before we pass even more laws.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-12-2019, 12:35 PM
 
24,572 posts, read 12,132,906 times
Reputation: 10463
Quote:
Originally Posted by travis t View Post
While I support gun control, I did hear a pundit the other day tick off the red flags, laws flouted, etc. in the case of the Parkland school shooter. One after another law and rule was brushed aside until the dam finally broke.

It does seem nonsensical that the solution to this mess should be to pass yet another new law.
Now youíre getting it.

Your transformation will be complete when you realize gun bans donít work either.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-12-2019, 12:39 PM
 
Location: USA
18,582 posts, read 9,133,392 times
Reputation: 13969
Quote:
Originally Posted by StillwaterTownie View Post
Gun free zones should be banned unless metal detectors are installed at the entrance and armed security monitoring them.
They had all that at the California Garlic Festival, but the guy gained access ILLEGALLY by cutting through the back fence. He didn't care about that law either.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-12-2019, 02:09 PM
 
Location: NW Nevada
14,434 posts, read 11,744,100 times
Reputation: 13489
Quote:
Originally Posted by Quick Enough View Post
If you DON'T approve of the 2nd amendment, work to get it amended. Until then....!

Soooo....what would amending the 2A accomplish? Pave the way for more restrictive laws or outright bans and confiscation I suppose. Still no effect on criminal misuse of firearms. Just denial of citizens to legally possess firearms. For any purpose if "amendment" means striking the 2A from the Constitution.


The US is and has always been an armed nation. In terms of national security this has always been a consideration to any who have considered an invasion of the country as an option in war. Admiral Yamamoto warned the Imperial Japanese government of this in WW2. "A rifle behind every blade of grass" was the warning he issued to the Imperial command in regards to an invasion of the US.


Domestically armed citizens have always been a factor to criminals when making plans for violent crime such as robberies. And potential murder victims have also not been totally helpless in the face of such acts being carried out. Until more recently that is as more and more laws have taken firearms away from citizens in locations where such laws have been implemented.


This has allowed violent street gangs to take over and occupy many areas and pretty much establish their own systems of governance. These mass shootings are not near as common as violent oppression of local populations by criminal gangs who also carry out mass shootings every day that do not receive any coverage on news sources.


There is a LOT to discuss on this issue and not very many people are doing so. Rather they are ranting and raving about ban this and ban that, do away with the 2A, confiscate privately owned firearms, and slinging insults about "gun humpers, wannabe Rambos, firearms being penile substitutes, and stereotypes of gun owners as tobacco drooling unkempt beard sporting, beer swilling, backwoods Bubbas." Or on the flipside "sheeple, rabbit breed, wannabe intellectual supermen, ignorant, John Lennon looking, gated community dwelling, college educated idiots."


Both stereotypes accomplish nothing and just serve to tick people off and stifle any real discourse on the issue. OK, personally I'm not willing to give up any more than I already have in terms of laws and government regulation and intervention.


Other than my stated willingness to move on CCW requirements. I am also open to letting mental health records of violent and/or potentially violent people who courts and mental health professionals have deemed to be so into the current BC system. Other than that I believe we have enough laws. I'm sure I'm missing things that have merit as suggestions and am willing to listen and not hurl invective at these things.
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

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