Mr. President, do NOT ban assault weapons!

[Genivaria]

No one can rely on the authorities for protection. Even the best police response time is minutes, and that assumes you contact them as the crime begins.

They might take time to come, but I think that's a bit defeatist. Saying they are always late.

Banning semi autos seems a bit extreme to me, given how popular they are with collectors, hunters, sportsmen, and for self defense. Semi auto pistols don't have an increased deadliness, statistically, over revolvers.

More bullets equal more possibilities to hit. In the case of hunters and people in isolated communities,I can see how that is useful. In an urban environment? Not so much.

I also think collectors should blind (is that how you call rendering a gun useless in English?) their weapons by law.

Also OP specify who he was talking about:

Thanks for pointing it out!

Which is one of the reasons I'm in favor of a CCTV system like the Brits have.
It's not big brother if it's in a public space.

I wholeheartedly agree.

js, but this is a fully automatic weapon with a rate of fire about that of a fully-auto AR-15.
(Image)

That idea is terrifying.[/quote]
Semi-autos do not mean 'more bullets', especially since most guns nowadays are actually semi-autos.

[Imperializt Russia]

js, but this is a fully automatic weapon with a rate of fire about that of a fully-auto AR-15.
(Image)

That idea is terrifying.

That's a product of the Soviet era, so if you find that scary, don't Google for the Glock G18, which is smaller and I think has a higher rate of fire.

[The balkens]

That idea is terrifying.

That's a product of the Soviet era, so if you find that scary, don't Google for the Glock G18, which is smaller and I think has a higher rate of fire.

Those ingenious Bastards at glock. i want one.

[Sleet Clans]

If they ban assault rifles and other semi-autos, people are just going to make and use more advanced shotguns. Hell, in certain situations shotguns can do a hell of a lot more damage than a rifle can. That spread isn't for nothing. So if assault rifles do get banned, shotguns just may be next.

[The balkens]

If they ban assault rifles and other semi-autos, people are just going to make and use more advanced shotguns. Hell, in certain situations shotguns can do a hell of a lot more damage than a rifle can. That spread isn't for nothing. So if assault rifles do get banned, shotguns just may be next.

w8.

what about Automatic shotguns?

[Union Of Autocratic Empires]

That idea is terrifying.

That's a product of the Soviet era, so if you find that scary, don't Google for the Glock G18, which is smaller and I think has a higher rate of fire.

TBH, I'm prone to being terrified of real guns, no matter how they are or what they do.

Semi-autos do not mean 'more bullets', especially since most guns nowadays are actually semi-autos.

I just mistook semi automatic with fully automatic
My bad, I'm not too versed into firearms.

[Licana]

Sure Hollywood style badguys break into home (most likely in the afternoon when noone is home) and take your TV.
Now their car and license plate is on a recording, good job dumbasses.

Doesn't do much for you if said hollywood style badguys kill you and your family in the process, as hollywood style badguys are prone to do.

Also,
>using your personal vehicle to commit a preplanned crime

That idea is terrifying.

That's a product of the Soviet era, so if you find that scary, don't Google for the Glock G18, which is smaller and I think has a higher rate of fire.

Much higher.

[Spirit of Hope]

No one can rely on the authorities for protection. Even the best police response time is minutes, and that assumes you contact them as the crime begins.

They might take time to come, but I think that's a bit defeatist. Saying they are always late.

A good police departments response time is around 5-7 minutes. They only start to respond once they learn of a crime. That isn't defeatist it is the reality of police. They will do their best to catch the criminals, and to responds as quickly as possible but there is only so much they can do.

Banning semi autos seems a bit extreme to me, given how popular they are with collectors, hunters, sportsmen, and for self defense. Semi auto pistols don't have an increased deadliness, statistically, over revolvers.

More bullets equal more possibilities to hit. In the case of hunters and people in isolated communities,I can see how that is useful. In an urban environment? Not so much.

I also think collectors should blind (is that how you call rendering a gun useless in English?) their weapons by law.

Alas statistical studies of shootings with semi automatic pistols vs. revolvers shows no increased chance of injury or death. All semi automatic pistols due is increase the number of shots fired, from ~2 to ~3. I feel like that isn't a big enough difference to warrant banning semi automatics.

Doesn't actually change anything. Police still take time to respond, and they aren't going to be able to monitor all the cameras at the same time. It just gives the police a better ability to catch criminals after the fact.
Plus I'm not really in agreement with the later statement.

Sure Hollywood style badguys break into home (most likely in the afternoon when noone is home) and take your TV.
Now their car and license plate is on a recording, good job dumbasses.

Increasing the likelihood of getting caught and punished reduces the chance of an attempt in the first place.
And what do you disagree with?

I disagree with the statement that "It's not big brother if it's in a public space." I find the idea of the government recording most of my activities in public to be very much big brother.

[Genivaria]

That's a product of the Soviet era, so if you find that scary, don't Google for the Glock G18, which is smaller and I think has a higher rate of fire.

TBH, I'm prone to being terrified of real guns, no matter how they are or what they do.

Semi-autos do not mean 'more bullets', especially since most guns nowadays are actually semi-autos.

I just mistook semi automatic with fully automatic
My bad, I'm not too versed into firearms.

To put it shortly:
A single shot firearm is one where you must manually reload over round after firing the previous one.
The slowness of this is why single shots are almost completely obsolete in modern warfare and law enforcement.

A semi-automatic is a firearm where every the kinetic energy one of round being fired actually pushes the next round into place.
This is the design of the majority of firearms in use.

A fully automatic is a firearm where one round after another is chambered and fired rapidly with a single pull of the trigger.

[Genivaria]

Sure Hollywood style badguys break into home (most likely in the afternoon when noone is home) and take your TV.
Now their car and license plate is on a recording, good job dumbasses.

Doesn't do much for you if said hollywood style badguys kill you and your family in the process, as hollywood style badguys are prone to do.

Also,
>using your personal vehicle to commit a preplanned crime

That's a product of the Soviet era, so if you find that scary, don't Google for the Glock G18, which is smaller and I think has a higher rate of fire.

Much higher.

Yes Hollywood doesn't really do criminals well do they?

[Genivaria]

They might take time to come, but I think that's a bit defeatist. Saying they are always late.

A good police departments response time is around 5-7 minutes. They only start to respond once they learn of a crime. That isn't defeatist it is the reality of police. They will do their best to catch the criminals, and to responds as quickly as possible but there is only so much they can do.

More bullets equal more possibilities to hit. In the case of hunters and people in isolated communities,I can see how that is useful. In an urban environment? Not so much.

I also think collectors should blind (is that how you call rendering a gun useless in English?) their weapons by law.

Alas statistical studies of shootings with semi automatic pistols vs. revolvers shows no increased chance of injury or death. All semi automatic pistols due is increase the number of shots fired, from ~2 to ~3. I feel like that isn't a big enough difference to warrant banning semi automatics.

Sure Hollywood style badguys break into home (most likely in the afternoon when noone is home) and take your TV.
Now their car and license plate is on a recording, good job dumbasses.

Increasing the likelihood of getting caught and punished reduces the chance of an attempt in the first place.
And what do you disagree with?

I disagree with the statement that "It's not big brother if it's in a public space." I find the idea of the government recording most of my activities in public to be very much big brother.

Why? You think the government gives a shit about you scratching your ass?

[Union Of Autocratic Empires]

Alas statistical studies of shootings with semi automatic pistols vs. revolvers shows no increased chance of injury or death. All semi automatic pistols due is increase the number of shots fired, from ~2 to ~3. I feel like that isn't a big enough difference to warrant banning semi automatics.

Yes, I just realized I mistook semi automatics with fully automatic weapons. Sorry for the misunderstanding.

[Imperializt Russia]

That's a bizarre assertion making the unrealistic suggestion that someone will ever view most of that footage.

Most of it is recorded for crime resolution. So you say you were assaulted around this street at about 2am on a Saturday, and they dredge that footage out of the archive and see if there's anything they can use.

Very little CCTV footage is actively monitored, because that requires an astounding amount of manpower and vigilance. Only areas like high streets are actively monitored, excepting secured areas for obvious reasons. Almost all CCTV footage from public spaces is never viewed.

[Washington Resistance Army]

No one can rely on the authorities for protection. Even the best police response time is minutes, and that assumes you contact them as the crime begins.

Banning semi autos seems a bit extreme to me, given how popular they are with collectors, hunters, sportsmen, and for self defense. Semi auto pistols don't have an increased deadliness, statistically, over revolvers.

Also OP specify who he was talking about:

I'm really not concerned about semi-autos.
Automatics yes but they're harder to sneak into place anyway.

This defeatist attitude about law enforcement however is a problem.

>implying autos have to be large and unwieldy

Just you wait until I Form 2 a select fire Glock

[Genivaria]

I'm really not concerned about semi-autos.
Automatics yes but they're harder to sneak into place anyway.

This defeatist attitude about law enforcement however is a problem.

>implying autos have to be large and unwieldy

Just you wait until I Form 2 a select fire Glock

No I was just under the mistaken impression that machine pistols were already illegal.

[Spirit of Hope]

That's a bizarre assertion making the unrealistic suggestion that someone will ever view most of that footage.

Most of it is recorded for crime resolution. So you say you were assaulted around this street at about 2am on a Saturday, and they dredge that footage out of the archive and see if there's anything they can use.

Very little CCTV footage is actively monitored, because that requires an astounding amount of manpower and vigilance. Only areas like high streets are actively monitored, excepting secured areas for obvious reasons. Almost all CCTV footage from public spaces is never viewed.

I find the potential for governmental misuse of such a program to be immense. While most of the footage will never be viewed that doesn't stop it from being abused, the government doesn't have to target everyone to misuse it's power.

[Washington Resistance Army]

>implying autos have to be large and unwieldy

Just you wait until I Form 2 a select fire Glock

No I was just under the mistaken impression that machine pistols were already illegal.

No more so than other MG's, machine pistols are some of the most common starter MG's in the form of Mac's and whatnot.

[Genivaria]

No I was just under the mistaken impression that machine pistols were already illegal.

No more so than other MG's, machine pistols are some of the most common starter MG's in the form of Mac's and whatnot.

They sound like a security nightmare if anything.

[Washington Resistance Army]

No more so than other MG's, machine pistols are some of the most common starter MG's in the form of Mac's and whatnot.

They sound like a security nightmare if anything.

Ha, good luck doing anything with a Mac. Assuming it actually works right you still aren't going to hit anything

Daily reminder that no civilian owned machine gun has ever been used in a crime to the best of my knowledge. If someone is willing to jump through NFA hoops it's a safe bet they're a law abiding gun owner.

[Spirit of Hope]

No more so than other MG's, machine pistols are some of the most common starter MG's in the form of Mac's and whatnot.

They sound like a security nightmare if anything.

Well all legal MG's are registered, require a strong background check, and a couple thousand dollars to get. New production for civilians is also illegal. Given I have found reference to two legally owned full autos being used in a homicide they are the least of a security planners concern.

[Genivaria]

They sound like a security nightmare if anything.

Well all legal MG's are registered, require a strong background check, and a couple thousand dollars to get. New production for civilians is also illegal. Given I have found reference to two legally owned full autos being used in a homicide they are the least of a security planners concern.

Ah, then consider my concerns calmed.

[Imperializt Russia]

That's a bizarre assertion making the unrealistic suggestion that someone will ever view most of that footage.

Most of it is recorded for crime resolution. So you say you were assaulted around this street at about 2am on a Saturday, and they dredge that footage out of the archive and see if there's anything they can use.

Very little CCTV footage is actively monitored, because that requires an astounding amount of manpower and vigilance. Only areas like high streets are actively monitored, excepting secured areas for obvious reasons. Almost all CCTV footage from public spaces is never viewed.

I find the potential for governmental misuse of such a program to be immense. While most of the footage will never be viewed that doesn't stop it from being abused, the government doesn't have to target everyone to misuse it's power.

How can they misuse footage of an activity you do in public, that a police officer could stumble upon by happenchance anyway?
Surely, you'd notice the camera and not engage in unlawful activities under its field of sodding view.

[Licana]

How can they misuse footage of an activity you do in public, that a police officer could stumble upon by happenchance anyway?

That's not an equivalent scenario. Wide-spread CCTV monitoring isn't a police officer bumbling into someone in public; it's a police officer watching your home, and then following you around every time you step out of your home with a notepad.

You can argue that no one will read his notes, that they're just "for the record" and will be carted off into the basement of a government building as soon as they are taken, but that's still not alright. Such an activity would not sit right with me, so why would I be fine with it happening by remote?

Surely, you'd notice the camera and not engage in unlawful activities under its field of sodding view.

Or you'd make yourself unable to be identified by the camera. Or render the camera inoperable.

[Imperializt Russia]

Because that's not an "equivalent scenario" to what actually happens.

[Spirit of Hope]

I find the potential for governmental misuse of such a program to be immense. While most of the footage will never be viewed that doesn't stop it from being abused, the government doesn't have to target everyone to misuse it's power.

How can they misuse footage of an activity you do in public, that a police officer could stumble upon by happenchance anyway?
Surely, you'd notice the camera and not engage in unlawful activities under its field of sodding view.

And what if I'm doing something embarrassing instead of illegal? What if the government decides I must be silenced due to opposition? They can go through all of their video and find something to use.

It doesn't even have to be the government who misuses the program. NSA employees used their power to spy on their lovers. This program has the exact same potential for misuse.