Gun Bans

[Zimmer Twins]

It's none of the government's business to enforce its own laws! How dare you insinuate that the ATF ought to be able to do a yearly inventory check on gun dealers to see if they're selling under the table to criminals, sirrah! I am shocked and offended at this suggestion that the ATF perhaps needs to hire more full-time agents today than they had four decades ago!

the funny thing is I am not really for banning guns, I am all for requiring a concrete paper trail and licencing.
In my state you have to have a personal firearms permit to buy a gun. Which I think should be enacted country wide. buying a gun should be at least as difficult as getting a drivers licence. I want police to be able to scan the serial number of gun and have its complete history, including ballistic marking. And your licence should be the same way.

Cop scans gun's serial number, hey this pistol is suspected as used in a homicide in 1998 based on its factory recorded ballistic profile.
cop scans your licence, and I can see you bought the gun in 2003 for dealer XYZ. I think I'm going to go check his records, and see where he got it from.

the really surprising thing is most gun owners are for this, while their lobby continues to fight it.

...I am at a loss for words at how someone who is against my views could say something so smart... Anyways these are my new views. Also if the lobby didnt do anything then why are they against this system?

[Big Jim P]

You have a point.. What do we do about the poor who are mentally ill? I personally would defend them. They themselves should not be provided with a gun however.

Well there's the welfare state ... oops no, this is mostly about the US right?

Or you could put psychiatric treatment on the NHS ... oops, ditto.

Or you could invade their privacy with a national psychiatric register, and deny them the "right" to own a gun. This appears to be the NRA position. It's just a variation on the "criminals are criminals, criminals will always have guns" line they've been running for years in defiance of any rational exploration of the causes of crime. But with the added twist of "lunatics are lunatics" and LaPierre's bizarre attempt to redefine the criminal use of guns as "insanity".

Aren't there other national gun advocacy groups you could have joined? Why the NRA, with it's history of lobbying which is at least partially responsible for how dumb the legislative attempts to ban guns are? With their long and inglorious history of opposing any kind of gun control, then turning around and pretending they supported it when it becomes law (eg, background checks). And particularly Wayne LaPierre. Why would you give money and political support to that?

Coming from someone who has heavily implied that anyone wanting to own guns is a criminal, this is funny.

[Zimmer Twins]

Well there's the welfare state ... oops no, this is mostly about the US right?

Or you could put psychiatric treatment on the NHS ... oops, ditto.

Or you could invade their privacy with a national psychiatric register, and deny them the "right" to own a gun. This appears to be the NRA position. It's just a variation on the "criminals are criminals, criminals will always have guns" line they've been running for years in defiance of any rational exploration of the causes of crime. But with the added twist of "lunatics are lunatics" and LaPierre's bizarre attempt to redefine the criminal use of guns as "insanity".

Aren't there other national gun advocacy groups you could have joined? Why the NRA, with it's history of lobbying which is at least partially responsible for how dumb the legislative attempts to ban guns are? With their long and inglorious history of opposing any kind of gun control, then turning around and pretending they supported it when it becomes law (eg, background checks). And particularly Wayne LaPierre. Why would you give money and political support to that?

Coming from someone who has heavily implied that anyone wanting to own guns is a criminal, this is funny.

I personally think that wanting to own certain guns is criminal. (SMG, RPG, Heavy's Gun from tf2, etc.) But stuff like pistols, rifles, etc. isnt criminal. Also I like the idea of placing an id on a gun so police can scan it. Like if your gun is rumored to be murder weapon from years ago and it matches ballistics and stuff they can check to see when you bought it and who from so that way they can get the right guy.

[Big Jim P]

Seeing as one of the targets for gun-control advocates are the inexpensive guns, they have forced the answer to Yeah. By gun-control logic, the most likely victims are priced out of their right to effective self defense. Racist, Classist and wrong.

source? I was not aware an AR15 was an "inexpensive" gun

Another fine example of obscuring the argument.

[Big Jim P]

Coming from someone who has heavily implied that anyone wanting to own guns is a criminal, this is funny.

I personally think that wanting to own certain guns is criminal. (SMG, RPG, Heavy's Gun from tf2, etc.) But stuff like pistols, rifles, etc. isnt criminal. Also I like the idea of placing an id on a gun so police can scan it. Like if your gun is rumored to be murder weapon from years ago and it matches ballistics and stuff they can check to see when you bought it and who from so that way they can get the right guy.

Legal guns already have a serial number.

[Dyakovo]

It's none of the government's business to enforce its own laws! How dare you insinuate that the ATF ought to be able to do a yearly inventory check on gun dealers to see if they're selling under the table to criminals, sirrah! I am shocked and offended at this suggestion that the ATF perhaps needs to hire more full-time agents today than they had four decades ago!

the funny thing is I am not really for banning guns, I am all for requiring a concrete paper trail and licencing.
In my state you have to have a personal firearms permit to buy a gun. Which I think should be enacted country wide. buying a gun should be at least as difficult as getting a drivers licence. I want police to be able to scan the serial number of gun and have its complete history, including ballistic marking. And your licence should be the same way.

Cop scans gun's serial number, hey this pistol is suspected as used in a homicide in 1998 based on its factory recorded ballistic profile.
cop scans your licence, and I can see you bought the gun in 2003 for dealer XYZ. I think I'm going to go check his records, and see where he got it from.

the really surprising thing is most gun owners are for this, while their lobby continues to fight it.

That's because the NRA has gone insane... They used to be much more reasonable.

[Zimmer Twins]

I personally think that wanting to own certain guns is criminal. (SMG, RPG, Heavy's Gun from tf2, etc.) But stuff like pistols, rifles, etc. isnt criminal. Also I like the idea of placing an id on a gun so police can scan it. Like if your gun is rumored to be murder weapon from years ago and it matches ballistics and stuff they can check to see when you bought it and who from so that way they can get the right guy.

Legal guns already have a serial number.

No i'm talking one that tracks purchases and the ballistics right from the serial number.

Heres the quote:

It's none of the government's business to enforce its own laws! How dare you insinuate that the ATF ought to be able to do a yearly inventory check on gun dealers to see if they're selling under the table to criminals, sirrah! I am shocked and offended at this suggestion that the ATF perhaps needs to hire more full-time agents today than they had four decades ago!

the funny thing is I am not really for banning guns, I am all for requiring a concrete paper trail and licencing.
In my state you have to have a personal firearms permit to buy a gun. Which I think should be enacted country wide. buying a gun should be at least as difficult as getting a drivers licence. I want police to be able to scan the serial number of gun and have its complete history, including ballistic marking. And your licence should be the same way.

Cop scans gun's serial number, hey this pistol is suspected as used in a homicide in 1998 based on its factory recorded ballistic profile.
cop scans your licence, and I can see you bought the gun in 2003 for dealer XYZ. I think I'm going to go check his records, and see where he got it from.

the really surprising thing is most gun owners are for this, while their lobby continues to fight it.

---

the funny thing is I am not really for banning guns, I am all for requiring a concrete paper trail and licencing.
In my state you have to have a personal firearms permit to buy a gun. Which I think should be enacted country wide. buying a gun should be at least as difficult as getting a drivers licence. I want police to be able to scan the serial number of gun and have its complete history, including ballistic marking. And your licence should be the same way.

Cop scans gun's serial number, hey this pistol is suspected as used in a homicide in 1998 based on its factory recorded ballistic profile.
cop scans your licence, and I can see you bought the gun in 2003 for dealer XYZ. I think I'm going to go check his records, and see where he got it from.

the really surprising thing is most gun owners are for this, while their lobby continues to fight it.

That's because the NRA has gone insane... They used to be much more reasonable.

Insane people shouldn't have guns. Which is why I don't use them.

[Dyakovo]

Coming from someone who has heavily implied that anyone wanting to own guns is a criminal, this is funny.

I personally think that wanting to own certain guns is criminal. (SMG, RPG, Heavy's Gun from tf2, etc.) But stuff like pistols, rifles, etc. isnt criminal. Also I like the idea of placing an id on a gun so police can scan it. Like if your gun is rumored to be murder weapon from years ago and it matches ballistics and stuff they can check to see when you bought it and who from so that way they can get the right guy.

So...
Because I would like to own a Ma Deuce and a Mark 19, I'm a criminal?

[Zimmer Twins]

I personally think that wanting to own certain guns is criminal. (SMG, RPG, Heavy's Gun from tf2, etc.) But stuff like pistols, rifles, etc. isnt criminal. Also I like the idea of placing an id on a gun so police can scan it. Like if your gun is rumored to be murder weapon from years ago and it matches ballistics and stuff they can check to see when you bought it and who from so that way they can get the right guy.

So...
Because I would like to own a Ma Deuce and a Mark 19, I'm a criminal?

Hold on let me look those up... Wait... If you dont load them then no.

Fully loaded Ma Deuce DEFINITALLY MAN.
Also I meant Heavy's gun from tf2
And also I looked up mark 19 and only got a grenade launcher...

[Big Jim P]

So...
Because I would like to own a Ma Deuce and a Mark 19, I'm a criminal?

Hold on let me look those up... Wait... If you dont load them then no.

Fully loaded Ma Deuce DEFINITALLY MAN.
Also I meant Heavy's gun from tf2
And also I looked up mark 19 and only got a grenade launcher...

Ma Deuce is a heavy machine-gun, not some video game fantasy, and the Mk19 is essentially the same thing except it fires a 40mm grenade.

[Dyakovo]

So...
Because I would like to own a Ma Deuce and a Mark 19, I'm a criminal?

Hold on let me look those up... Wait... If you dont load them then no.

Fully loaded Ma Deuce DEFINITALLY MAN.
Also I meant Heavy's gun from tf2
And also I looked up mark 19 and only got a grenade launcher...

That's because the Mark 19 is a (full-auto) grenade launcher.

[Big Jim P]

Hold on let me look those up... Wait... If you dont load them then no.

Fully loaded Ma Deuce DEFINITALLY MAN.
Also I meant Heavy's gun from tf2
And also I looked up mark 19 and only got a grenade launcher...

That's because the Mark 19 is a (full-auto) grenade launcher.

Gotta love video-game inspired ignorance,

[Zimmer Twins]

Hold on let me look those up... Wait... If you dont load them then no.

Fully loaded Ma Deuce DEFINITALLY MAN.
Also I meant Heavy's gun from tf2 (Image)
And also I looked up mark 19 and only got a grenade launcher...

Ma Deuce is a heavy machine-gun, not some video game fantasy, and the Mk19 is essentially the same thing except it fires a 40mm grenade.

I'm not talking about the Ma Deuce -_- you saw the words Heavy and Gun and got confused...
Also how is a grenade launcher a gun

[Dyakovo]

That's because the Mark 19 is a (full-auto) grenade launcher.

Gotta love video-game inspired ignorance,

Love...
Yeah, I suppose that's one word you could plug into the blank...

[Zimmer Twins]

Gotta love video-game inspired ignorance,

Love...
Yeah, I suppose that's one word you could plug into the blank...

I put a warning on my signature...

[Dyakovo]

Ma Deuce is a heavy machine-gun, not some video game fantasy, and the Mk19 is essentially the same thing except it fires a 40mm grenade.

I'm not talking about the Ma Deuce -_- you saw the words Heavy and Gun and got confused...
Also how is a grenade launcher a gun

The Mark 19 is a belt-fed machinegun that fires 40mm grenades instead of bullets.

[Zimmer Twins]

I'm not talking about the Ma Deuce -_- you saw the words Heavy and Gun and got confused...
Also how is a grenade launcher a gun

The Mark 19 is a belt-fed machinegun that fires 40mm grenades instead of bullets.

Ah ok. You mean like demoman's gun from tf2

[Dyakovo]

The Mark 19 is a belt-fed machinegun that fires 40mm grenades instead of bullets.

Ah ok. You mean like demoman's gun from tf2

No.

[Occupied Deutschland]

Aren't there other national gun advocacy groups you could have joined? Why the NRA, with it's history of lobbying which is at least partially responsible for how dumb the legislative attempts to ban guns are? With their long and inglorious history of opposing any kind of gun control, then turning around and pretending they supported it when it becomes law (eg, background checks). And particularly Wayne LaPierre. Why would you give money and political support to that?

...
Wait, what?

The NRA was behind the NICS check proposal contained in the 1993 Brady Bill, and two previous bills that would've established a similar system (which is what you mean when you say background checks). It was the Brady campaign (I think at the time they were called the Handgun Violence Prevention Association or some such BS) that wasn't excited about the instant checks and was instead pushing for mandated waiting periods.

Besides that, how exactly is their lobbying responsible for the gun-control crowds stupid legislation? There's no connection between the NRA and the gun-control crowds inability to use proper terminology or intelligent reasonings for banning certain weapons.

I mean hell, condemn their current positions on some things (mental health registries, if it's a bad idea for firearms owners its a bad idea for the mentally ill), hell condemn them for their historical positions on other things (video game violence, and that BS is still getting trotted out) but make sure the position you criticize was actually their position.

the funny thing is I am not really for banning guns, I am all for requiring a concrete paper trail and licencing.
In my state you have to have a personal firearms permit to buy a gun. Which I think should be enacted country wide (1). buying a gun should be at least as difficult as getting a drivers licence (2). I want police to be able to scan the serial number of gun and have its complete history, including ballistic marking (3). And your licence should be the same way.

Cop scans gun's serial number, hey this pistol is suspected as used in a homicide in 1998 based on its factory recorded ballistic profile.
cop scans your licence, and I can see you bought the gun in 2003 for dealer XYZ. I think I'm going to go check his records, and see where he got it from.

the really surprising thing is most gun owners are for this, while their lobby continues to fight it.

1) I'd actually be down for a national training/licensing requirement. ASB mentioned something about it possibly verging on some Constitutional questions I think, but I'd have no problems with such a thing IF it was accompanied by a repeal of the 1986 FOPA and the 1968 Gun Control Act. Hell, require a scaled degree of training time even for the automatic weapons if you want.

This is called compromise. It will never happen. It is one reason the NRA has become so reactionary and stubborn.

2) "Voting should be as difficult as getting a driver's license." <--would spur mountains of opposition because of the effect it would have on minority voters and the poor. What makes a similar phrase for guns less racist/classist?

3) Impractical, Inefficient, does nothing productive (ballistic records). The serial number system is already in place thanks to the wonderful world of form 4473...Do I really have to go find the song I wrote again?

Edit: quote tags damn you!

[Zimmer Twins]

Ah ok. You mean like demoman's gun from tf2

No.

Basically they look the same only demoman's is portable

[Dyakovo]

No.

Basically they look the same only demoman's is portable

The Mark 19 is man portable... You just can't carry it and fire at the same time... Also, no, they look nothing alike. One is a crew-served, tripod mounted machinegun, the other is basically a drum-fed M203.

[Republica Newland]

Everyone, we need to calm down please.

This hasn't turned into flaming quite yet, but some of the language is getting heated, and open threats to come running to the mods are unhelpful (and veering towards using mods as weapons, though since the threat isn't over actionable behaviour that would have warranted a warning here, I'll let it pass). If you think behaviour is actively actionable, please report it in Moderation rather than threatening in the thread to report it in Moderation and then not doing anything about it.

I suggest that a couple of you take a deep breath before continuing; and perhaps try and cut back on the profanity, just in case someone uses that as an excuse to turn what's currently fortunately still only general strong language into specifically directed flaming.

It was not a threat ; I did intend to report it but I had to leave my computer,this can be verified by looking over my posting history,between the time at which I posted that and now there have been no more posts from me.

[Republica Newland]

I believe you can buy de-militarized tanks, and even collect them. I am not sure, and no I will not look up a source as this is simply MY opinion.

you can
such tanks have all armament removed as well as any reactive armor.

And that is wrong how? Or relevant to our discussion at all? Threadjacking much? Again?

[Republica Newland]

Two of the three are already restricted from owning firearms.

Precisely.

I am not sure about the homeless, unless the individual falls under the other two categories.

Edit: I was in fact referring to the poor.

A homeless person, sleeping in their car for instance, is more likely to need a gun for self-defense than someone who has a house to sleep in.

Mental illness is very likely to make a person poor. So is a criminal record. Even if that wasn't so, there definitely are people who are poor and also currently disqualified for mental illness or criminal record.

"Yes to the government not restricting the right to self defense for its most vulnerable citizens" isn't answered by what the government does now. Note the difference between "should" and "does".

You're not sure about the homeless, fine. What about someone who is poor AND has a history of mental illness ... surely you would agree they are among the most vulnerable citizens. Should the government provide them with a gun for their own self-defense?

Restricting guns based on whether people are poor or not is classist. The only criteria that should be used in restricting gun ownership is a criminal or mental record.

[Occupied Deutschland]

Yes. Because criminals go through the legal channels of buying guns!

oddly enough yes yes they do,

http://bjs.ojp.usdoj.gov/content/pub/pdf/GUIC.PDF

more importantly most of the guns used in crimes are acquired legally at some point in their history, meaning banning a gun entirely would almost guarantee its removal.

Oddly enough, that BJS paper never goes into where the criminals get their guns beyond mentioning how often they steal them and mentioning that 28% come from street sales and 9% through theft.
Besides that, there's a new paper with a header that's in COLOR that ISN'T from 1995 based off of a survey taken in 1991!

http://bjs.ojp.usdoj.gov/content/pub/pdf/fuo.pdf

This one has a nice, easy to read table at the beginning. As of 1997, at most, some 14% of guns used in crime came from retail stores. "Street sale" and 'family/friend' made up the majority of such things.

Many things are acquired legally before making their way into an illegal use. Hell, a medical marijuana patient may buy a bong from some store for a legal purpose, and then use it to get high. That doesn't really create a justification for banning bongs (well, I guess it does if we're still taking this whole war on drugs seriously, but if we aren't...)