Revisiting Gun Laws in the U.S.

[Winstonbiggs]

Originally Posted by chiefst2000

I'm confused by your article. It seems like it is saying that in the decade since the Brady Bill assault weapons ban has expired there has been no increase in gun related homicides? How is this possible? I mean with all these gun owning degenerates running around with fully automatic military assault rifles you would think gun homicides went up exponentially. Was that a typo?

Assuming the article is true and firearm death rates have not gone up since the weapons ban expired how does anyone extrapolate that reissuing that ban will lower firearm death rates going forward? It seems counter to common sense logic. Furthermore if it is true that traffic related deaths have gone down due to education programs (not likely) then why not push for gun safety education programs to save lives rather than a weapons ban that has clearly been shown not to work?

So you and I are clear I think the big problem is hand guns. Homicide is only part of the issue. The need for people to own working assault weapons in their homes seems to me to be a different kind of insanity. I don't see how a civil society can exist when a good portion of the country feels that they should be allowed to own these weapons and actually buy them in local Wall Marts.

I'm not only for an assault weapons ban I think all weapons should be licensed, numbered and controlled. You should be able to prove a need and basic competence. Kids are being killed every day by guns left casually in the home. Stress and abuse of spouses is magnified by guns in the home and depression often turns into instant suicide when guns are in the home.

I have a right to live in a civil society and not be threatened by people who clearly don't have the temperament or the training to own deadly weapons, particularly deadly weapons that can have catastrophic and instantaneous impact on the lives of my family or neighbors in a flash.

Just because isn't a reason we can't have rational regulation, including licensing and reasonable liability, background checks and limited clips. The right to bear arms is not an unlimited right to own any kind of weapon for any reason. Guns provide defense but they also are a tool to provide intimidation, end debate, and enforce your will on others. It is a tool that can both protect life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness and take it away when used for its brutal purpose by those untrained or lacking the temperament to carry deadly force.

Statistics on crime tend to be very much tied to demographics. Our society is aging but that is not a permanent condition. Since neither one of us is a statistician and the Gun lobby has done a great job of making sure no good data is available I don’t think any statistical argument is very good at the moment. By the end of the day you can be sure lives will be ended by gun violence in this country and the slaughter will continue…

[chiefst2000]

Originally Posted by crasherino

I wouldn't be so flippant in your response. The Heller decision, and the interpretative gymnastics Scalia went through to come to his opinion, were by no means straightforward. And, prior to the decision (a 5-4 at that), there was no explicit legal precedent that the 2nd Amendment applied to the individual's right to own firearms - much as you (or I) thought that it did. Or should.

I don't doubt that politicians and more so the courts will continue to try and erode the right to bear arms. This already happened in Canada. It starts with a database and gun registry. Then as each type of firearm is banned letters are sent out to turn in the banned weapons. It all happens slowly and orderly. Pretty soon the jails are filled with folks that refuse to turn in their weapons. It is the slow erosion of rights and freedoms.

Speaking of which can anyone here on the anti-gun side present statistics of murders and crime committed using legally owned firearms? How many concealed carry permit holders have used their weapon in a crime? I would love to see that number. Maybe you can convince me to come over to the dark side.. er I mean progressive side.

[Winstonbiggs]

Originally Posted by chiefst2000

I don't doubt that politicians and more so the courts will continue to try and erode the right to bear arms. This already happened in Canada. It starts with a database and gun registry. Then as each type of firearm is banned letters are sent out to turn in the banned weapons. It all happens slowly and orderly. Pretty soon the jails are filled with folks that refuse to turn in their weapons. It is the slow erosion of rights and freedoms.

Speaking of which can anyone here on the anti-gun side present statistics of murders and crime committed using legally owned firearms? How many concealed carry permit holders have used their weapon in a crime? I would love to see that number. Maybe you can convince me to come over to the dark side.. er I mean progressive side.

Good to see you support the Obama administrations legislation that wants to do these studies that the NRA stopped through lobbying.

It's pretty clear the gun lobby has done everything in their power to stop the government from doing studies on the data.

It's also pretty clear that the politicians and the courts have done just the opposite in this country in regard to guns.

[chiefst2000]

Originally Posted by Winstonbiggs

So you and I are clear I think the big problem is hand guns. Homicide is only part of the issue. The need for people to own working assault weapons in their homes seems to me to be a different kind of insanity. I don't see how a civil society can exist when a good portion of the country feels that they should be allowed to own these weapons and actually buy them in local Wall Marts.

I'm not only for an assault weapons ban I think all weapons should be licensed, numbered and controlled. You should be able to prove a need and basic competence. Kids are being killed every day by guns left casually in the home. Stress and abuse of spouses is magnified by guns in the home and depression often turns into instant suicide when guns are in the home.

I have a right to live in a civil society and not be threatened by people who clearly don't have the temperament or the training to own deadly weapons, particularly deadly weapons that can have catastrophic and instantaneous impact on the lives of my family or neighbors in a flash.

Just because isn't a reason we can't have rational regulation, including licensing and reasonable liability, background checks and limited clips. The right to bear arms is not an unlimited right to own any kind of weapon for any reason. Guns provide defense but they also are a tool to provide intimidation, end debate, and enforce your will on others. It is a tool that can both protect life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness and take it away when used for its brutal purpose by those untrained or lacking the temperament to carry deadly force.

Statistics on crime tend to be very much tied to demographics. Our society is aging but that is not a permanent condition. Since neither one of us is a statistician and the Gun lobby has done a great job of making sure no good data is available I don’t think any statistical argument is very good at the moment. By the end of the day you can be sure lives will be ended by gun violence in this country and the slaughter will continue…

Wait a minute. I'm confused again. So assault weapons aren't the problem then? Now its handguns? Are you saying that handguns are not currently regulated and required to be registered and licensed? Because that's not the case where I live. Why the heck is the president so focused on assault rifle bans then? He should be banning handguns and allowing the rifles if true.

To the rest of your points I'm not sure why it bothers so much you if people are using their weapons to kill themselves. To me if someone wants to commit suicide the method they choose to accomplish it is irrelevant. If the gun isnt there are plenty of methods they could use. Furthermore if someone leaves guns around their house and someone in their family gets injured on it again this isn't a threat to you so I'm not clear why you want to take away my rights to protect my family based on that reasoning. A better concept would be requiring gun safety classes or maybe investing in a gun safety ad campaign.

You mentioned that it bothers you that some people stockpile guns in their homes yet you have no examples where a militia force with a stockpile of guns went out and wreaked havoc on society. No examples of how this is a dangerous epidemic in America. Nothing at all. Your claim that the NRA is covering up these crimes does not pass the sniff test.

I am worried about mass shootings and protecting my children. My goal would be to look for causes of these things and find ways to reduce them from happening. Nothing you mentioned or proposed would have prevented any of the recent shootings.

[chiefst2000]

Originally Posted by Winstonbiggs

Good to see you support the Obama administrations legislation that wants to do these studies that the NRA stopped through lobbying.

It's pretty clear the gun lobby has done everything in their power to stop the government from doing studies on the data.

It's also pretty clear that the politicians and the courts have done just the opposite in this country in regard to guns.

This is BS. Any private statistics firm can access the crime database and pull the statistics. How many people with concealed carry permits have used their weapon to commit a crime. It doesn't take a 50million dollar government study to pull a basic number. Don't need the government to do the study. Moveon.org has plenty of Soros cash to push their agenda. If the stats supported your argument they would be readily available.

[Winstonbiggs]

Originally Posted by chiefst2000

This is BS. Any private statistics firm can access the crime database and pull the statistics. How many people with concealed carry permits have used their weapon to commit a crime. It doesn't take a 50million dollar government study to pull a basic number. Don't need the government to do the study. Moveon.org has plenty of Soros cash to push their agenda. If the stats supported your argument they would be readily available.

Like a Moveon.org study would have any cred with you And why restrict it to only those with permits? You seem to want data very restricted and by totally unreliable sources. Why?

[Winstonbiggs]

Originally Posted by chiefst2000

Wait a minute. I'm confused again. So assault weapons aren't the problem then? Now its handguns? Are you saying that handguns are not currently regulated and required to be registered and licensed? Because that's not the case where I live. Why the heck is the president so focused on assault rifle bans then? He should be banning handguns and allowing the rifles if true.

To the rest of your points I'm not sure why it bothers so much you if people are using their weapons to kill themselves. To me if someone wants to commit suicide the method they choose to accomplish it is irrelevant. If the gun isnt there are plenty of methods they could use. Furthermore if someone leaves guns around their house and someone in their family gets injured on it again this isn't a threat to you so I'm not clear why you want to take away my rights to protect my family based on that reasoning. A better concept would be requiring gun safety classes or maybe investing in a gun safety ad campaign.

You mentioned that it bothers you that some people stockpile guns in their homes yet you have no examples where a militia force with a stockpile of guns went out and wreaked havoc on society. No examples of how this is a dangerous epidemic in America. Nothing at all. Your claim that the NRA is covering up these crimes does not pass the sniff test.

I am worried about mass shootings and protecting my children. My goal would be to look for causes of these things and find ways to reduce them from happening. Nothing you mentioned or proposed would have prevented any of the recent shootings.

Are you out of your head. People are being shot up every day in this country. Legally purchased guns are being transferred to criminals with no background checks every day.

The NRA is about selling weapons period. They are a lobbying group for manufacturers to sell as many weapons as they possibly can. Hand guns are a huge problem. People were just killed in schools and movie theaters with assault weapons. Are you really interested in protecting your family from this random savagery?

[chiefst2000]

Originally Posted by Winstonbiggs

Like a Moveon.org study would have any cred with you And why restrict it to only those with permits? You seem to want data very restricted and by totally unreliable sources. Why?

I'm saying that getting simple statistics does not require an all encompassing study. I want to know if concealed carry permit holders are committing crimes with their weapons. I would like to know specifically how many crimes are committed using rifles. I don't need a study that uses biased assumptions. These numbers are static.

The reason the numbers aren't available is because IMO (educated guess here as I don't have the statistics) the numbers are miniscule.

Your primary concern appears to be the transfer of legally purchased weapons to criminals. If you have a proposal that will reduce that I'm happy to listen. I believe that all handguns are already registered. If they arent they should be. As far as the rifles go I don't see any reason to create a database and register all of them as they are rarely used in crimes.

To address the other response, of course I want to protect my family from savagery. The thing for me is that I feel the best way to do so is by owning a weapon myself. Your solution is to take away my right to own one and hope that the government will take the guns away from the criminals. Since I know (Notice I didn't say "think" there) that criminals will always have access to guns the only real assurance of protection for my family is to even the playing field. The gun toting criminals will prefer to go after softer targets (like you?) that don't have the means to defend themselves. At least that's my theory.

[Winstonbiggs]

Originally Posted by chiefst2000

I'm saying that getting simple statistics does not require an all encompassing study. I want to know if concealed carry permit holders are committing crimes with their weapons. I would like to know specifically how many crimes are committed using rifles. I don't need a study that uses biased assumptions. These numbers are static.

The reason the numbers aren't available is because IMO (educated guess here as I don't have the statistics) the numbers are miniscule.

Your primary concern appears to be the transfer of legally purchased weapons to criminals. If you have a proposal that will reduce that I'm happy to listen. I believe that all handguns are already registered. If they arent they should be. As far as the rifles go I don't see any reason to create a database and register all of them as they are rarely used in crimes.

To address the other response, of course I want to protect my family from savagery. The thing for me is that I feel the best way to do so is by owning a weapon myself. Your solution is to take away my right to own one and hope that the government will take the guns away from the criminals. Since I know (Notice I didn't say "think" there) that criminals will always have access to guns the only real assurance of protection for my family is to even the playing field. The gun toting criminals will prefer to go after softer targets (like you?) that don't have the means to defend themselves. At least that's my theory.

You have children in your house and have a loaded gun readily available? I have an alarm system and police response to it is as fast as I could get to a gun and ammo that was properly locked up. Soft target, that's a good one. As if a guy woken from his sleep is actually going to defend himself with a concealable weapon or an assault rifle.

You know what a soft target is a teacher in an inner city school who weighs about 120 carrying a loaded gun. That's the NRA solution, pure stupid.

Weren't the guns used in CT. legally purchased. Weren't they used by a mass murdering criminal?

[palmetto defender]

Originally Posted by Winstonbiggs

You have children in your house and have a loaded gun readily available? I have an alarm system and police response to it is as fast as I could get to a gun and ammo that was properly locked up. Soft target, that's a good one. As if a guy woken from his sleep is actually going to defend himself with a concealable weapon or an assault rifle.

You know what a soft target is a teacher in an inner city school who weighs about 120 carrying a loaded gun. That's the NRA solution, pure stupid.

Weren't the guns used in CT. legally purchased. Weren't they used by a mass murdering criminal?

If you have a gun that takes that long to get to - why have one. And your police are THAT close? I have an alarm used when we are away. It was triggered recently in a T Storm. Police were there in 7 minutes. Not bad. Except if we were home without a gun. My gun is at arms distance at night with a clip separate. It takes 3 seconds to lock and load.
No kids. Very low crime area. With kids, additional precautions should be taken.

[intelligentjetsfan]

Originally Posted by palmetto defender

If you have a gun that takes that long to get to - why have one. And your police are THAT close? I have an alarm used when we are away. It was triggered recently in a T Storm. Police were there in 7 minutes. Not bad. Except if we were home without a gun. My gun is at arms distance at night with a clip separate. It takes 3 seconds to lock and load.
No kids. Very low crime area. With kids, additional precautions should be taken.

You said that your gun is always at arms distance at night. What happens if you are in the kitchen making a sandwich when somebody attempts to break in? Or if you are in the basement (assuming you have one) doing whatever when somebody breaks in. What do you do? Do you decide that you need a gun in every major room so that there is always a piece at arms length? Or do you carry your gun with you throughout the house?

[chiefst2000]

Originally Posted by Winstonbiggs

You have children in your house and have a loaded gun readily available? I have an alarm system and police response to it is as fast as I could get to a gun and ammo that was properly locked up. Soft target, that's a good one. As if a guy woken from his sleep is actually going to defend himself with a concealable weapon or an assault rifle.

You know what a soft target is a teacher in an inner city school who weighs about 120 carrying a loaded gun. That's the NRA solution, pure stupid.

Weren't the guns used in CT. legally purchased. Weren't they used by a mass murdering criminal?

I keep a loaded weapon in a safe very close to my bed. In my drills I can have it in my arms and ready to fire within 20 seconds of hearing a noise. I also have an alarm system that is on every night. If you feel the police can get to you within 20 seconds then you are free to rely on them. If another Sandy hits and hungry thugs show up at your door trying to take your stuff I'm sure that the police will fill out a report in the aftermath. I choose to be prepared. I also pray that I can go through my lifetime without ever having to point my weapon at anyone for any reason.

[chiefst2000]

Originally Posted by Winstonbiggs

You have children in your house and have a loaded gun readily available? I have an alarm system and police response to it is as fast as I could get to a gun and ammo that was properly locked up. Soft target, that's a good one. As if a guy woken from his sleep is actually going to defend himself with a concealable weapon or an assault rifle.

You know what a soft target is a teacher in an inner city school who weighs about 120 carrying a loaded gun. That's the NRA solution, pure stupid.

Weren't the guns used in CT. legally purchased. Weren't they used by a mass murdering criminal?

By the way your guffawing at the possibility of someone being awoken at night and forced to defend themself from a breakin is odd considering that exact scenario happens thousands of times every year.

Furthermore I think your criticism of the NRA solution is what is pure stupidity. Most schools have security guards. Having them sit there unarmed is absurd. If parents or the school district want more security train the guards and give them a concealed pistol. I guarantee you that goes a lot farther in keeping our kids safe than your weapons bans.

[southparkcpa]

Originally Posted by chiefst2000

I keep a loaded weapon in a safe very close to my bed. In my drills I can have it in my arms and ready to fire within 20 seconds of hearing a noise. I also have an alarm system that is on every night. If you feel the police can get to you within 20 seconds then you are free to rely on them. If another Sandy hits and hungry thugs show up at your door trying to take your stuff I'm sure that the police will fill out a report in the aftermath. I choose to be prepared. I also pray that I can go through my lifetime without ever having to point my weapon at anyone for any reason.

Me too.... I am buying my 3rd handgun this month. Ive got a few boxes of 9mm and 380's.

Rather be prepared. My gun is NOT locked as I have no small children around.

It is "hidden" but not locked.

[cr726]

What happens when the intruder just wants your t.v?

New York's Castle Doctrine laws come from a justification statute that has been in place since 1968. The statute allows a person, after making a reasonable judgment, to use deadly force against an intruder who also uses deadly force. Under the law, if you are in your own home and you did not initiate the violent behavior, you are not required to retreat from an armed intruder if you cannot do so safely.

Originally Posted by chiefst2000

I keep a loaded weapon in a safe very close to my bed. In my drills I can have it in my arms and ready to fire within 20 seconds of hearing a noise. I also have an alarm system that is on every night. If you feel the police can get to you within 20 seconds then you are free to rely on them. If another Sandy hits and hungry thugs show up at your door trying to take your stuff I'm sure that the police will fill out a report in the aftermath. I choose to be prepared. I also pray that I can go through my lifetime without ever having to point my weapon at anyone for any reason.

[chiefst2000]

Originally Posted by cr726

What happens when the intruder just wants your t.v?

If an intruder doesn't run from the house when they hear the clack clack of a shotgun being loaded or they head towards the stairs and see an armed lunatic pointing a shotgun at them, and they choose not to run, then they probably deserve what comes next. My worst nightmare is having to actually use a weapon and as I said earlier I sincerely pray that I will go through my lifetime never having to use it.


As to your question on the robbery, I would grab the rifle, then stand at the top of the stairs and yell out "I am armed so you better get out!". An intruder would have a hard time getting my tv's off of their wall mounts regardless. I have never been concerned or worried about someone breaking in to steal my stuff anyway. I worry about intruders breaking in with the intent of harming my family. I always think about what happened to that poor doctor in CT. If he had been armed he may still have his family today. As a man I truly believe that my primary responsibility in life is to provide for my family and keep them safe. I take those responsibilities seriously.

[chiefst2000]

Originally Posted by southparkcpa

Me too.... I am buying my 3rd handgun this month. Ive got a few boxes of 9mm and 380's.

Rather be prepared. My gun is NOT locked as I have no small children around.

It is "hidden" but not locked.

If I didn't have young children I would not necessarily feel the need to lock a weapon in a safe. I use a fingerprint activated safe for quick access.

[quantum]

Originally Posted by Winstonbiggs

Weren't they used by a mass murdering criminal?

From what I've read, the shooter didn't have any murders or gun violations prior to his rampage; nor was he a criminal. Just mentally ill, but that was enough.

[Winstonbiggs]

Originally Posted by quantum

From what I've read, the shooter didn't have any murders or gun violations prior to his rampage; nor was he a criminal. Just mentally ill, but that was enough.

Exactly. Prior to his murdering rampage he was simply a responsible citizen with easy access to assault weapons. Now he is a notorious mass murderer just like the killer in Colorado who bought his weapons who was a responsible gun owner up until he pulled the trigger.

[Winstonbiggs]

Originally Posted by chiefst2000

By the way your guffawing at the possibility of someone being awoken at night and forced to defend themself from a breakin is odd considering that exact scenario happens thousands of times every year.

Furthermore I think your criticism of the NRA solution is what is pure stupidity. Most schools have security guards. Having them sit there unarmed is absurd. If parents or the school district want more security train the guards and give them a concealed pistol. I guarantee you that goes a lot farther in keeping our kids safe than your weapons bans.

I have no doubt security is an issue. I live in a great area where homes are broken into. That's why I recommend you get a good alarm system that will call the police on a break in. I have both sensors on doors and windows along with motion. It works very well, I have unfortunately had experience. No guns were fired they left once the alarm went off.

I suspect an intruder with a gun who you confronted might well do something just as irrational as run, he might actually fire his weapon.

I don't know about your experience with security guards, but having them sit around kids with guns is the dumbest thing I have ever heard. Many of the high schools students today are very capable of disarming a security guard and taking his weapon and might just do it for fun. You have a lot of confidence in weapons. They are highly over rated as protection and highly under rated for their danger.