Gun control--Just imagine the possibilities! - Jeep Wrangler Forum
Jeep Wrangler Forum

Go Back   Jeep Wrangler Forum > General Discussion Forums > Off-Topic

Join Wrangler Forum Today


Reply
 
Thread Tools

Please support our sponsors and let them know you heard about them on WranglerForum.com
Old 12-21-2012, 12:30 PM   #1
Jeeper
 
werubiblue06's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: Moreno Valley, CA
Posts: 1,175
Gun control--Just imagine the possibilities!

I can't agree more with the people that say guns kill people and advocate gun control! Here is my contribution to all who want to take our guns, because guns kill. Just imagine if teachers in schools, with proper training, chose to arm themselves--it's crazy talk I tell you!!!


__________________
"We can't all be Washingtons, but we can all be patriots."
~Charles F. Browne
werubiblue06 is offline   Quote Quick Reply
Old 12-21-2012, 12:32 PM   #2
Jeeper
 
Raiderfan001's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Knob Noster, MO
Posts: 7,381
And we need more fork and spoon control too. Innocent victims like Rosie O'Donnell have been falling prey to these evil devices for far too long.

Raiderfan001 is offline   Quote Quick Reply
Old 12-21-2012, 12:50 PM   #3
Jeeper
 
werubiblue06's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: Moreno Valley, CA
Posts: 1,175
Let's not forget those EVIL cars. More people die from people using these evil air polluting machines.

Perhaps we should go with horse and buggy! Oh, no we can't, because with the greater use of the horses the EPA may want to penalize us if not outright ban them do to the horse exhaust polluting their air. And, let's not go into what PETA may think of this idea.
__________________
"We can't all be Washingtons, but we can all be patriots."
~Charles F. Browne
werubiblue06 is offline   Quote Quick Reply
Old 12-21-2012, 12:57 PM   #4
Jeeper
 
ed98208's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: Everett, WA
Posts: 390
I haven't read a single serious article about banning ALL guns, or even "taking" the guns that are already out there. The issue is with the easy access to high-capacity assault rifles that allow anyone to shoot dozens of people in seconds. No one in that video, good guys or bad guys, had an AR so it's irrelevant to the problem under discussion.
ed98208 is offline   Quote Quick Reply
Old 12-21-2012, 12:59 PM   #5
Jeeper
 
Raiderfan001's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Knob Noster, MO
Posts: 7,381
An AR15 is not an assault rifle. So tired of explaining that to people.
Raiderfan001 is offline   Quote Quick Reply
Old 12-21-2012, 01:04 PM   #6
Jeeper
 
whetstone's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Posts: 2,529
Quote:
Originally Posted by Raiderfan001 View Post
An AR15 is not an assault rifle. So tired of explaining that to people.
But they look scary and make liberals dribble down their legs a little. It's not about real solutions with them anyway, it's about the perception that they're "doing something"
whetstone is offline   Quote Quick Reply
Old 12-21-2012, 01:04 PM   #7
Jeeper
 
ed98208's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: Everett, WA
Posts: 390
Okay...high magazine capacity weapons. Whatever. So what does AR stand for?
ed98208 is offline   Quote Quick Reply
Old 12-21-2012, 01:06 PM   #8
Jeeper
 
RedBones's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: Wv
Posts: 2,797
__________________
14 JK WW
11 JK
03 TJ
97 TJ
95 YJ
RedBones is offline   Quote Quick Reply
Old 12-21-2012, 01:11 PM   #9
Jeeper
 
Raiderfan001's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Knob Noster, MO
Posts: 7,381
Quote:
Originally Posted by ed98208 View Post
Okay...high magazine capacity weapons. Whatever. So what does AR stand for?
Armalite. And you think limiting magazines is going to stop them? I can tape 10 round magazines together and kill people just as fast as someone with a 30 round magazine. If I really wanted to kill as many people as possible i'd just toss a couple pipe bombs in the room and keep walking to the next one. No "feel good" laws are going to stop these messed up people from doing this.
Raiderfan001 is offline   Quote Quick Reply
Old 12-21-2012, 01:15 PM   #10
MTH
Jeeper
 
MTH's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: North Carolina
Posts: 8,553
Quote:
Originally Posted by ed98208 View Post
I haven't read a single serious article about banning ALL guns, or even "taking" the guns that are already out there. The issue is with the easy access to high-capacity assault rifles that allow anyone to shoot dozens of people in seconds. No one in that video, good guys or bad guys, had an AR so it's irrelevant to the problem under discussion.
Fair point.

The tendency is for everybody to run to the extremes. The right howls in protest about how the left (supposedly) wants to take away all guns, and left howls in protest about how the right (supposedly) wants everyone to have access to fighter jets and tanks.

I think most of America is somewhere in the middle, but that doesn't make for good news so nobody really discusses it much.

Quote:
Originally Posted by ed98208 View Post
So what does AR stand for?
It's short for "Armalite," the company that first designed and manufactured the weapon.

Now, let me say generally to all in this thread, this has got to stay civil or it will be closed.

I note that our Community Rules have specific provisions about politically sensive threads:

Quote:
Fair warning; discussions about politics and religion are likely to be closed or removed if they turn into flame fests.
We've been down this road before with similarly hot-button topics. Play nice or it goes.
__________________
Mike
2010 JKU "Mountain" Edition
TeraFlex 2.5" Coil Lift : Old Man Emu Nitrocharger Shocks : 33x12.5R15 Goodyear DuraTracs : 15x8 Black Rock 909s : Other Stuff . . .
MTH is offline   Quote Quick Reply
Old 12-21-2012, 01:18 PM   #11
Jeeper
 
whetstone's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Posts: 2,529
I haven't verified, but I just read in the other gun thread that CT has some pretty tight restrictions in place now. I'd like to see someone come up with a solution to school shootings that isn't just a knee-jerk "lets ban pistol grips and hi cap magazines" that accomplishes nothing other than to disarm law abiding citizens
whetstone is offline   Quote Quick Reply
Old 12-21-2012, 01:19 PM   #12
Jeeper
 
Raiderfan001's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Knob Noster, MO
Posts: 7,381
If gun control is going to do anything at all to prevent mass murders why did Columbine happen when there was an AWB in place?
Raiderfan001 is offline   Quote Quick Reply
Old 12-21-2012, 01:24 PM   #13
Jeeper
 
RedBones's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: Wv
Posts: 2,797
Right... ^^^^
__________________
14 JK WW
11 JK
03 TJ
97 TJ
95 YJ
RedBones is offline   Quote Quick Reply
Old 12-21-2012, 01:38 PM   #14
MTH
Jeeper
 
MTH's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: North Carolina
Posts: 8,553
Quote:
Originally Posted by Raiderfan001 View Post
If gun control is going to do anything at all to prevent mass murders why did Columbine happen when there was an AWB in place?
Because none of the features that make a military-style "assault rifle" have any significant impact on the ability of a suburbanite to shoot people in a classroom or movie theater.

Military-style weapons are of course designed to shoot efficiently and powerfully, but are also designed to be lightweight, corrosion resistant, have interchangeable parts, and be highly durable and long-lasting. That's all quite important if you're going to slog it through the wet, dirty jungle for 20 miles slung over your shoulder. That's not so important when you're going to drive with it in the back of your Honda Civic and open fire in a small room.

It's no easier to kill a lot of people in a 20x20 room with an "assault rifle" than a pistol. The benefits the assault rifle provides aren't realized in a classroom--much the same way the benefits a Wrangler provides aren't realized on paved roads.

I firmly believe the reason you see "assault rifles" in mass shootings is primarily because they "look cool." The look "military," which is part of these shooters' delusions of granduer. But if they didn't have access to weapons with a military appearance, they'd gladly commit the same atrocities with a sem-automatic handguns, like the shooter at Virginia Tech.

Modern handguns are capable of spraying out enormous amounts of firepower in an area like a classroom. No "assault rifle" is required or even particularly helpful.

So my opinion is that gun control in some form is a good idea, but not the way it's being proposed as I've heard it. Limiting magazine size and whatnot is pretty small potatoes, and isn't anything I think is going to be terribly helpful in reality.

IMO, what the law should be is this . . . .

When you buy a gun, you automatically register it. Just like a car. If that gun is then stolen from you and found to be used in a crime, you're responsible as an accessory unless you can establish that you took reasonable steps to secure that weapon (such as a real, locking safe) and it was stolen anyway (such as if the safe was cut out of the wall and stolen to be opened elsewhere).

The law wouldn't limit gun sales any more than they currently are. But what it would do is provide an incentive to folks to lock up their weapons. You don't have to lock them up, but if you don't . . . the risk is on you that you could find yourself charged as an accessory to a carjacking or a mass shooting if some crazy nephew, friend, or burglar swipes your gun.

The only way to avoid that potential liability would be to keep the gun in a locking safe. If you can't afford a locking safe to hold all of your guns, then you can't afford the guns. Simple as that. It should be part of the cost of ownership--not unlike car insurance.

While such a law wouldn't prevent crazy people from buying their own guns (like the Aurora shooter), it may have prevented tragedies like what we saw in Connecticut. His mom may have had her guns locked up with a combination only she knew.
__________________
Mike
2010 JKU "Mountain" Edition
TeraFlex 2.5" Coil Lift : Old Man Emu Nitrocharger Shocks : 33x12.5R15 Goodyear DuraTracs : 15x8 Black Rock 909s : Other Stuff . . .
MTH is offline   Quote Quick Reply
Old 12-21-2012, 01:49 PM   #15
Jeeper
 
NC Bear's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: North Carolina
Posts: 1,458
Quote:
Originally Posted by MTH View Post
Because none of the features that make a military-style "assault rifle" have any significant impact on the ability of a suburbanite to shoot people in a classroom or movie theater.

Military-style weapons are of course designed to shoot efficiently and powerfully, but are also designed to be lightweight, corrosion resistant, have interchangeable parts, and be highly durable and long-lasting. That's all quite important if you're going to slog it through the wet, dirty jungle for 20 miles slung over your shoulder. That's not so important when you're going to drive with it in the back of your Honda Civic and open fire in a small room.

It's no easier to kill a lot of people in a 20x20 room with an "assault rifle" than a pistol. The benefits the assault rifle provides aren't realized in a classroom--much the same way the benefits a Wrangler provides aren't realized on paved roads.

I firmly believe the reason you see them in mass shootings is primarily because they "look cool." The look "military," which goes with shooters' delusions of granduer. But if they didn't have access to them, they'd gladly commit the same atrocities with a sem-automatic handguns, like the shooter at Virginia Tech. Modern handguns are capable of spraying out enormous amounts of firepower in an area like a classroom. No "assault rifle" required.

My opinion is that gun control in some form is a good idea, but not the way it's being proposed as I've heard it.

What the law should be is this: When you buy a gun, you automatically register it. Just like a car. If that gun is then stolen from you and found to be used in a crime, you're responsible as an accessory unless you can establish that you took reasonable steps to secure that weapon (such as a real, locking safe) and it was stolen anyway (such as if the safe was cut out of the wall and stolen to be opened elsewhere).

The law wouldn't limit gun sales any more than they currently are. But what it would do is provide an incentive to folks to lock up their weapons. You don't have to lock them up, but if you don't . . . the risk is on you. If you can't afford a locking safe to hold all of your guns, then you can't afford the guns. It should be part of the cost of ownership--not unlike car insurance.
Uuuh, This is already law in NC, as covered in General Statute. GS 20-315.1 (applies to minors) is one of the statutes. If you fail to secure a weapon and it is used in a crime, you are guilty of a misdemeanor.

Firearm delivered to the distributer from the manufacturer, then delivered to a retailer, then sold to Jon Q. Public, can be tracked very easily. If you can not provide the location or the appropriate paperwork stating that you sold it when the knock comes at the door....

well you'll be in court.
NC Bear is offline   Quote Quick Reply
Old 12-21-2012, 02:00 PM   #16
MTH
Jeeper
 
MTH's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: North Carolina
Posts: 8,553
Quote:
Originally Posted by NC Bear View Post
Uuuh, This is already law in NC, as covered in General Statute. GS 20-315.1 (applies to minors) is one of the statutes. If you fail to secure a weapon and it is used in a crime, you are guilty of a misdemeanor.

Firearm delivered to the distributer from the manufacturer, then delivered to a retailer, then sold to Jon Q. Public, can be tracked very easily. If you can not provide the location or the appropriate paperwork stating that you sold it when the knock comes at the door....

well you'll be in court.
I cannot find that statute in the General Statutes. Chapter 20 deals with motor vehicles.

But in any event, a misdemeanor is not enough. It needs to provide that you are an accessory to the crime. That way, you've got a sliding scale of penalties--being an accessory to whatever charges arise out of your teenage son's idiot friend brandishing the gun at the mall is likely to be very different than being an accessory to a murder.

And you're actually linked to the crime. Your guilt would rise and fall in large part on the guilt of the primary offender, not just a separate misdemeanor charge that nobody notices. You end up with a criminal record that says something like "Accessory to Carjacking" or "Accessory to Armed Robbery," rather than something more administrative sounding like "Misdemeanor Failing to Secure a Firearm."

Your accessory status may even elevate you to a felony level. Not keeping your guns locked up could net you prison time.

It also needs to be advertised and enforced. And indeed, the same could be said of many of our current gun laws. I say that beyond my accessory to the crime law we should forget doing too much more reform--just increase the vigilence on the existing gun laws.
__________________
Mike
2010 JKU "Mountain" Edition
TeraFlex 2.5" Coil Lift : Old Man Emu Nitrocharger Shocks : 33x12.5R15 Goodyear DuraTracs : 15x8 Black Rock 909s : Other Stuff . . .
MTH is offline   Quote Quick Reply
Old 12-21-2012, 02:03 PM   #17
Jeeper
 
90DesertTanYJ's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Location: JAX, FL
Posts: 635
I think Wayne LaPierre and Ted Nugent speak well as to the problem and what needs to be done.

Personally I own firearms and love hunting and shooting sports and have a Concealed Weapons Permit. If "assault weapons" were banned from sale in the US I wouldnt shed a tear. I do believe that any semi automatic firearm that is specifically designed to kill people should not be available to the general public. I do like the style and would own such if they werent so expensive. I can buy a nice bolt gun and a revolver for what I would pay for an AR15 or similar.

As for needing a semi auto hi cap long gun for home defense, this argument doesnt hold water with me. A 12 gauge can be wielded by novice shooters to devastating effect. I would much rather have 10-11 bullets fly every time I pull the trigger.

My heart goes out to the families who have lost members to recent tragedies. I hope as a nation we can figure out a rational way to prevent this from happening.
90DesertTanYJ is offline   Quote Quick Reply
Old 12-21-2012, 02:03 PM   #18
Jeeper
 
TeleMark's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Posts: 81
Images: 3
Despite last week, schools are still the safest place for children. America only has two settings: arrogant complacency (embassy security, for example) or knee-jerk overreaction (everything that was done after 9/11).
__________________
2013 Commando Green JKR purchased 11/19/12
TeleMark is offline   Quote Quick Reply
Old 12-21-2012, 02:04 PM   #19
Jeeper
 
werubiblue06's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: Moreno Valley, CA
Posts: 1,175
Quote:
Originally Posted by whetstone View Post
I haven't verified, but I just read in the other gun thread that CT has some pretty tight restrictions in place now. I'd like to see someone come up with a solution to school shootings that isn't just a knee-jerk "lets ban pistol grips and hi cap magazines" that accomplishes nothing other than to disarm law abiding citizens
IMHO a good defense is an equally good offense.

Let those teachers that would like to protect themselves or more important those children that can't protect themselves carry a concealed firearm. This of course would have to come with strict FBI background checks and some kind of a yearly certified training as our police officers that are swarn to protect are expected to do. After all we as parent trust the well being of our children to the same teachers already. If we don’t or can’t trust these same teachers/administrators with a concealed firearm to stop horrific events, why would we trust them to leave them in a room with them now?

It sickens me the thought of where the world is now but stricter laws won’t stop people from attempting crazy things. Those with an intent to kill will find a way.
__________________
"We can't all be Washingtons, but we can all be patriots."
~Charles F. Browne
werubiblue06 is offline   Quote Quick Reply
Old 12-21-2012, 02:04 PM   #20
Jeeper
 
DFW6ER's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: FloMo
Posts: 847
I do have a problem with the law allowing folks to bypass the backgroud check when purchasing guns at a gun show. That could catch some folks, obviously not all of the criminals, but some of the folks who purchase them who would otherwise fail a background check
As for the mandatory registration to own a gun, I personally have no problem with that. The paranoid types who say that the first step to genocide is dearming the population (usually accompanied by pictures of Stalin and Hitler) will be the same ones who say those lists will be used by those who invade or take over our country to find and kill all gun owners.
I say this is unlikely given our system of government and the rapid means of digital communication/dispersal of information we have at our disposal...interwebz, social media, etc.
__________________
2012 Black JKUR...stock for now
DFW6ER is offline   Quote Quick Reply
Old 12-21-2012, 02:06 PM   #21
Jeeper
 
DFW6ER's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: FloMo
Posts: 847
Quote:
Originally Posted by telemark View Post
despite last week, schools are still the safest place for children. America only has two settings: Arrogant complacency (embassy security, for example) or knee-jerk overreaction (everything that was done after 9/11).
qfmft!
__________________
2012 Black JKUR...stock for now
DFW6ER is offline   Quote Quick Reply
Old 12-21-2012, 02:14 PM   #22
Jeeper
 
I H8RDS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: Ventura, Ca
Posts: 7,555
Quote:
Originally Posted by werubiblue06 View Post
IMHO a good defense is an equally good offense.

Let those teachers that would like to protect themselves or more important those children that can't protect themselves carry a concealed firearm. This of course would have to come with strict FBI background checks and some kind of a yearly certified training as our police officers that are swarn to protect are expected to do. After all we as parent trust the well being of our children to the same teachers already. If we don’t or can’t trust these same teachers/administrators with a concealed firearm to stop horrific events, why would we trust them to leave them in a room with them now?

It sickens me the thought of where the world is now but stricter laws won’t stop people from attempting crazy things. Those with an intent to kill will find a way.
and it will ALWAYS be like that. One way or another...gun, bomb whatever.
__________________
SUPPORT OUR TROOPS!
I H8RDS is offline   Quote Quick Reply
Old 12-21-2012, 02:17 PM   #23
Rock-Rubber

WF Supporting Member
 
GoldenSahara00's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: SCPA
Posts: 16,741
Nobody wants to hear this, but honestly the only way to keep guns out of the hands of these crazy killers is to make sure they don't buy them, and don't have access to them.

1. A law like MTH said, and all guns locked up.
2. Vigilance. Typically people with these types of motives display some type of signs of mental illness, anger, depression. There are signs of intent 9/10 times.
3. More extensive background checks. I don't want to hear any bull about it's our right to bear arms. No one is taking the right. We should have full access to nearly any gun we want. But with more powerful, deadly weapons, I believe we need more extensive qualifications for purchasing/owning these weapons. If you are mentally ill, have a history of violence, particularly with weapons, have an extensive criminal record, etc. You should not own or fire a weapon. Plain and simple.

Notice the difference between saying "no weapons that the liberals deem scary looking" and "you have to qualify to purchase the weapons that liberals deem scary looking."

I am all for gun rights. I own more guns than most people here. I have shot since I was old enough to hold one.
__________________
Ryan - A good eye, a light foot, and a smart rig.
Bolt-ons are boring
AMERICAN JEEPER
My Build - http://www.wranglerforum.com/f118/pr...a00-74622.html
Rausch Creek Trip: 2014 Trip Coming Soon
GoldenSahara00 is offline   Quote Quick Reply
Old 12-21-2012, 02:20 PM   #24
Jeeper
 
DFW6ER's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: FloMo
Posts: 847
Quote:
Originally Posted by werubiblue06 View Post
IMHO a good defense is an equally good offense.

Let those teachers that would like to protect themselves or more important those children that can't protect themselves carry a concealed firearm. This of course would have to come with strict FBI background checks and some kind of a yearly certified training as our police officers that are swarn to protect are expected to do. After all we as parent trust the well being of our children to the same teachers already. If we don’t or can’t trust these same teachers/administrators with a concealed firearm to stop horrific events, why would we trust them to leave them in a room with them now?

It sickens me the thought of where the world is now but stricter laws won’t stop people from attempting crazy things. Those with an intent to kill will find a way.
I like the idea of your statement, but in reality the majority of teachers I've talked to don't want any part of carrying a gun or being responsible to respond with deadly force from a gun in an event like this. Statistics show that even trained LEOs miss more often than they hit during heat-of-the-moment shootouts (I'm not talking about SWAT snipers in a stand-off situation). And LEOs are required to put in time at the target range, have to qualify during academy, etc.
The consequences of missing when there are kids and others inches away from the shooter would be bad.....a teacher could empty a clip and never hit the shooter.
Now if a couple of teachers wanted to voluntarily undergo extensive training, background checks, get deputized, etc, this might be an option...but I'd think they should be held to as stringent a standard as local LEOs are when it comes to firearm qualification, training, and time put in at the range, even time put in in tactical scenario training with local swat teams so they're not rattled by the sounds of gunfire in a small room, blinded by muzzle flash, etc.
The next question would be, will these folks be paid extra for all this training/responsibility?

I personally think schools are very soft targets, but not as soft as shopping malls, parades, etc.
Schools could be fortified to an extent. Ballistic glass on all ground floor windows and doors. Ground floor doors could be reinforced with locks that can be tripped by panic buttons available to any of the school staff.
If those measures had been implemented, the death toll last week would have been considerably less....possibly no kids would have died.......but then the shooter might have just decided to shoot up the local KFC during lunch. Who knows.
__________________
2012 Black JKUR...stock for now
DFW6ER is offline   Quote Quick Reply
Old 12-21-2012, 02:25 PM   #25
MTH
Jeeper
 
MTH's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: North Carolina
Posts: 8,553
Quote:
Originally Posted by werubiblue06 View Post
Let those teachers that would like to protect themselves or more important those children that can't protect themselves carry a concealed firearm. This of course would have to come with strict FBI background checks and some kind of a yearly certified training as our police officers that are swarn to protect are expected to do. After all we as parent trust the well being of our children to the same teachers already. If we don’t or can’t trust these same teachers/administrators with a concealed firearm to stop horrific events, why would we trust them to leave them in a room with them now?
I assume your first sentence isn't meant to suggest we should give children who "can't protect themselves" a gun? Surely you're refering only to the teachers?

I'll assume so. In any event, the administrative aspect of that (background checks, training, etc.) sounds like an enormous and expensive challenge to impliment.

And the potential issues from having several loosely trained teachers with handguns surrounded by children is pretty alarming. You would be storing firearms near children secured only by vaguely trained educators. This just seems almost guaranteed to--eventually--result in tragedy somewhere, and the resulting outcry that this was always a terrible idea.

Teachers accidentally shooting children or each other, or accidentally arming an intruder who overwhelms them, all seem more or less every bit as likely as a teacher successfully taking down an armed assailent.

This also would only address schools. Mass shootings happen elsewhere as well.

This isn't a bad "knee jerk" reaction, but I don't think it's practical in the long run.
__________________
Mike
2010 JKU "Mountain" Edition
TeraFlex 2.5" Coil Lift : Old Man Emu Nitrocharger Shocks : 33x12.5R15 Goodyear DuraTracs : 15x8 Black Rock 909s : Other Stuff . . .
MTH is offline   Quote Quick Reply
Old 12-21-2012, 02:32 PM   #26
Jeeper
 
vtjohn's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: roanoke va
Posts: 123
I always liked the idea of Air Marshals, never know if one is on the plane or not. Same thing could be done with schools at little extra cost-- many shools in our area have police present anyway, just needs to be a group of plain clothes types that are in a different school everyday.
vtjohn is offline   Quote Quick Reply
Old 12-21-2012, 02:49 PM   #27
Jeeper
 
sparky's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Phila
Posts: 1,950
Quote:
Originally Posted by DFW6ER View Post
I do have a problem with the law allowing folks to bypass the backgroud check when purchasing guns at a gun show. That could catch some folks, obviously not all of the criminals, but some of the folks who purchase them who would otherwise fail a background check

Incorrect, at least in Pennsylvania, gun show purchases are the exact same process as in store, same paperwork, same check.

As for the mandatory registration to own a gun, I personally have no problem with that. The paranoid types who say that the first step to genocide is dearming the population (usually accompanied by pictures of Stalin and Hitler) will be the same ones who say those lists will be used by those who invade or take over our country to find and kill all gun owners.
I say this is unlikely given our system of government and the rapid means of digital communication/dispersal of information we have at our disposal...interwebz, social media, etc.

And what will registration accomplish. How will it stop prohibited persons from obtaining firearms?
You ideas on hardening schools makes no sense.
sparky is offline   Quote Quick Reply
Old 12-21-2012, 03:05 PM   #28
Jeeper
 
scipio337's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 1,380
Quote:
Originally Posted by GoldenSahara00
Nobody wants to hear this, but honestly the only way to keep guns out of the hands of these crazy killers is to make sure they don't buy them, and don't have access to them.

1. A law like MTH said, and all guns locked up.
Agree, and steep criminal liability if a crime is comitted with yours. I'm not sure how well they were secured in CT, but this perp's mother paid for that mistake with her life.

Quote:
Originally Posted by GoldenSahara00
2. Vigilance. Typically people with these types of motives display some type of signs of mental illness, anger, depression. There are signs of intent 9/10 times.
Agree, but how could you legally mandate this?


Quote:
Originally Posted by GoldenSahara00
3. More extensive background checks. I don't want to hear any bullshit about it's our right to bear arms. No one is taking the right. We should have full access to nearly any gun we want. But with more powerful, deadly weapons, I believe we need more extensive qualifications for purchasing/owning these weapons. If you are mentally ill, have a history of violence, particularly with weapons, have an extensive criminal record, etc. You should not own or fire a weapon. Plain and simple.

Notice the difference between saying "no weapons that the liberals deem scary looking" and "you have to qualify to purchase the weapons that liberals deem scary looking."

I am all for gun rights. I own more guns than most people here. I have shot since I was old enough to hold one.
Outside of NICS, what would you suggest? Here are the categories banned from gun ownership with NICS:

Quote:
18, U.S.C. §922 (g) (1)
Quote:
Has been convicted in any court of a crime punishable by imprisonment for a term exceeding one year
18, U.S.C. §922 (g) (2)
Is a fugitive from justice
18, U.S.C. §922 (g) (3)
Is an unlawful user of or addicted to any controlled substance
18, U.S.C. §922 (g) (4)
Has been adjudicated as a mental defective or committed to a mental institution
18, U.S.C. §922 (g) (5)
Is an alien illegally or unlaw-fully in the United States or who has been admitted to the United States under a nonimmigrant visa.
18, U.S.C. §922 (g) (6)
Has been discharged from the Armed Forces under dishonorable conditions
18, U.S.C. §922 (g) (7)
Having been a citizen of the United States, has renounced U.S. citizenship
18, U.S.C. §922 (g) (8)
Is subject to a court order that restrains the person from harassing, stalking, or threatening an intimate partner or child of such intimate partner
18, U.S.C. §922 (g) (9)
Has been convicted in any court of a misdemeanor crime of domestic violence
18, U.S.C. §922 (n)
Is under indictment for a crime punishable by imprisonment for a term exceeding one year

In addition to local, state, tribal, and federal agencies voluntarily contributing information to the NICS Index, the NICS Section receives telephone calls from mental health institutions, psychiatrists, police departments, and family members requesting placement of individuals into the NICS Index. Frequently, these are emergency situations and require immediate attention. Any documentation justifying a valid entry into the NICS Index must be available to the originating agencies

http://www.fbi.gov/about-us/cjis/nic...ion/nics-index


I'm not sure if someone "under the radar" (never treated for a mental illness, etc) would be caught in those cases.
scipio337 is offline   Quote Quick Reply
Old 12-21-2012, 03:18 PM   #29
The Bad Guy

WF Supporting Member
 
daggo66's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: NJ exile living in Baltimore
Posts: 22,290
Quote:
Originally Posted by 90DesertTanYJ
I think Wayne LaPierre and Ted Nugent speak well as to the problem and what needs to be done.

Personally I own firearms and love hunting and shooting sports and have a Concealed Weapons Permit. If "assault weapons" were banned from sale in the US I wouldnt shed a tear. I do believe that any semi automatic firearm that is specifically designed to kill people should not be available to the general public. I do like the style and would own such if they werent so expensive. I can buy a nice bolt gun and a revolver for what I would pay for an AR15 or similar.

As for needing a semi auto hi cap long gun for home defense, this argument doesnt hold water with me. A 12 gauge can be wielded by novice shooters to devastating effect. I would much rather have 10-11 bullets fly every time I pull the trigger.

My heart goes out to the families who have lost members to recent tragedies. I hope as a nation we can figure out a rational way to prevent this from happening.
Without realizing it you just gave the perfect example of why an AWB would be pointless. A 12 gauge is the perfect choice for causing the most damage in a confined space. If a crazy lunatic didn't have access to an "assault weapon", a shotgun could do far more damage.
It's time to look at why these things happen where they do. Have you ever heard of someone shooting up a gun shop or a gun show?

Furthermore what happened to the initial reports of 2 handguns and an AR in the trunk of the car? Then it became 4 handguns and the AR in the trunk. Suddenly it was all caused by an AR 15 and no mention of hand guns. Very convenient for the politicians.
__________________
Tom

"I've got two things in this world, my balls and my word and I don't break them for no one."
daggo66 is offline   Quote Quick Reply
Old 12-21-2012, 03:24 PM   #30
Jeeper
 
ed98208's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: Everett, WA
Posts: 390
Quote:
Originally Posted by daggo66 View Post
Have you ever heard of someone shooting up a gun shop or a gun show?
Here's a guy trying to rob a gun store...and surprisingly it wasn't a gun that stopped him:


ed98208 is offline   Quote Quick Reply
Reply

Quick Reply
Message:
Options

Register Now

In order to be able to post messages on the Jeep Wrangler Forum forums, you must first register.
Please enter your desired user name, your email address and other required details in the form below.
User Name:
Password
Please enter a password for your user account. Note that passwords are case-sensitive.
Password:
Confirm Password:
Email Address
Please enter a valid email address for yourself.
Email Address:

Log-in

Human Verification

In order to verify that you are a human and not a spam bot, please enter the answer into the following box below based on the instructions contained in the graphic.



Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may post new threads
You may post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off




Download our Mobile App

» Network Links
»Jeep Parts
» Featured Product

All times are GMT -5. The time now is 11:00 PM.



Jeep®, Wrangler, Liberty, Wagoneer, Cherokee, and Grand Cherokee are copyrighted and trademarked to Chrysler Motors LLC.
Wranglerforum.com is not in any way associated with the Chrysler Motors LLC