Page 1 of 9 123 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 20 of 177

Thread: Gun Ownership

  1. #1

    Gun Ownership

    After today's shocking tragedy you can be sure that guns and gun ownership will be a hot topic for debate in coming weeks.

    I am aware that Americans are allowed to own guns as a constitutional right; I can see no reason why not responsible citizens should be able to own guns, especially those who are recreational/professional shooters. I can't, however see any reason why someone who lives in a city should be allowed to own an automatic or semi-automatic weapon - or if this use is allowed it should be severely restricted.

    The argument that guns don't kill people but people kill people is clearly a faceitious one; a man armed with a knife won't cause as much carnage compared to if he is armed with an uzi.

    I'm pro-gun ownership, but I'm also pro having guns and their owners registered and the sale of guns and ammunition policed and restricted. Making guns hard to get is one way to ensure that they don't fall into the wrong hands, which is what happened today at Virginia Tech.

    Comments?
    Last edited by Soberphobia; 04-16-2007 at 11:02 PM.

  2. #2
    Just once. Just once I would like to see the evening news where a crazed gunman walks into a school or work or a mall hell-bent on killing as many innocent people as possible but his gun jams. Nearby is a 6'5" muscular & fearless bystander whom takes advantage of the situation and grabs the gun. Then the crazed gunman becomes the victim of the innocent bystander who's now bashing in the skull of the crazed gunman.


    Just once.

    Unfortunately, fate always allows them to get away with it!

    :nono:

  3. #3
    Facetious? Hardly.

    A man can inflict a great amount of harm with some simple explosives, a piece of pipe, and some nails. In fact, if you spent a good 15 mins, I'm sure you could find the plans for a rudimentary pipe bomb on the internet. What was it called, the Anarchist's Cookbook? Then, tomorrow, you could get everything you need at a nearby hardware store.

    If you're crazy enough, you don't need a gun to inflict harm. And, if you are so determined, any amount of gun restrictions won't stop you from buying any of the hundreds of thousands of illegal guns on the black market today.

    Remeber the Summer Olympics in Atlanta? I'm not spinning a fairy tale here. This **** happens. Are we going to ban hardware stores next?

  4. #4
    I just want to add that I don't disagree with you. I'm all for stricter gun laws. But it just seems pointless to me if a law abiding citizen has to wait 6 months to get approved for a license, while a gangbanger in LA can walk to a crack den and pick up an AK-47 that was smuggled over the border with drugs and other guns.

  5. #5
    It may turn out that this kid was here on a student visa from China, what right does a none citizen have to bear arms as a guest of this country?

    Virginia is the easiest State in the Union to get a gun. Most of the illegal guns that are used in committing crimes in NYC come out of VA. I have no doubt that you can walk into a gun shop in VA or find a dealer with almost no background check and walk out with an automatic weapon on the spot.
    I believe everyone has the right to bear arms and based on a strict constructionist view that arm should be a musket, powder and ball.

  6. #6
    Stricter gun laws don't stop this tragedy. This guy was a pro. He knew exactly what he was doing.

    We outlawed booze and we've outlawed drugs. Where did that get us?

  7. #7
    [QUOTE=BrooklynBound]Stricter gun laws don't stop this tragedy. This guy was a pro. He knew exactly what he was doing.

    We outlawed booze and we've outlawed drugs. Where did that get us?[/QUOTE]

    Fair comments in the thread.

    I'm not talking about outlawing guns, but restricting their use to those who are professional/sporting shooters. Besides, guns aren't physically addictive like drugs are. Governments restrict the use of lot of things that aren't good for their citizens - there are many examples. To pick one, thalidomide has been restricted in its use, and thus there are no thalidomide babies anymore. Restricting guns would lower murder rates in the US.

  8. #8
    [QUOTE=Winstonbiggs]It may turn out that this kid was here on a student visa from China, what right does a none citizen have to bear arms as a guest of this country?

    Virginia is the easiest State in the Union to get a gun. Most of the illegal guns that are used in committing crimes in NYC come out of VA. I have no doubt that you can walk into a gun shop in VA or find a dealer with almost no background check and walk out with an automatic weapon on the spot.
    I believe everyone has the right to bear arms and based on a strict constructionist view that arm should be a musket, powder and ball.[/QUOTE]

    And you're source for this rather dishonest claim is? I assume youonce sold guns in VA, and know the process and requirements, eh? I know them, and they sure arn't as you claim here.

    And what happened today has nothing to do with "Gun Control". But trust the Political and Media Vultures, frothing at the mouth for the next round of "Tragedy TV" to sell, to MAKE it the issue in the coming days.

  9. #9
    [QUOTE=Black Death]Fair comments in the thread.

    I'm not talking about outlawing guns, but restricting their use to those who are professional/sporting shooters. Besides, guns aren't physically addictive like drugs are. Governments restrict the use of lot of things that aren't good for their citizens - there are many examples. To pick one, thalidomide has been restricted in its use, and thus there are no thalidomide babies anymore. Restricting guns would lower murder rates in the US.[/QUOTE]


    You're right, if guns were restricted, Nicole Brown Simpson would still be alive... oh wait...

    Well, if guns were restricted, everyone that died in the Oklahoma City Bombing would still be alive... dammit...

    OK, if guns were restricted, surely 3000 innocent Americans wouldn't have perished on 9/11. Right...?

    I just don't buy it; I think there's a much bigger problem, a much greater evil that can be eliminated. I just don't know what that is.

    But like I said in my second post of this thread, if you tighten up the restrictions of gun ownership, that's fine, I don't care. I don't hunt or own a gun myself, whatever. But how is that going to stop a Crip in LA from obtaining an illegal assualt rifle, that may or may not have been smuggled into this country, from a scumbag black market arms dealer?

  10. #10
    Board Moderator
    Jets Insider VIP
    Charter JI Member

    Join Date
    May 1999
    Location
    State Location Here
    Posts
    8,533
    If guns kill people, spoons make Michael Moore fat.

  11. #11
    [QUOTE=pauliec]You're right, if guns were restricted, Nicole Brown Simpson would still be alive... oh wait...

    Well, if guns were restricted, everyone that died in the Oklahoma City Bombing would still be alive... dammit...

    OK, if guns were restricted, surely 3000 innocent Americans wouldn't have perished on 9/11. Right...?

    I just don't buy it; I think there's a much bigger problem, a much greater evil that can be eliminated. I just don't know what that is.

    But like I said in my second post of this thread, if you tighten up the restrictions of gun ownership, that's fine, I don't care. I don't hunt or own a gun myself, whatever. But how is that going to stop a Crip in LA from obtaining an illegal assualt rifle, that may or may not have been smuggled into this country, from a scumbag black market arms dealer?[/QUOTE]

    I'm not saying that restricting guns will stop these types of crimes; but it will lower the amount of crime committed with guns, and it will help to stop the type of spree killing that happened today.

  12. #12

    Our viewpoint is skewed--

    Today's events in VA were a terrible tragedy, but its a national crisis only b/c of the multiple deaths.

    On our local TV news tonight was the story of a 3rd grade boy who's asking people to donate $2.33 to a national organization.

    That organization is MADD! Asked why he only wanted $2.33? Because last year 233 people died in our state in accidents involving drunk drivers. Now if a drunk driver killed 32 people at one time, that would be a national crisis, but since they die 1 or 2 at a time, it's no big deal except to the families losing a loved one.

    Yes people will whine about gun control and making sure this never happens again, but what do they do about the idiots who drink and drive? Zip! Nothing serious, anyway!

    BTW, that 3rd grade boy? He's in a wheel chair paralyzed for the rest of his life b/c his family was hit by a drunk driver.

  13. #13
    Unfortunately, we will never know why this guy went on the killing spree. I can only pray that the dead are at peace and their families find peace!

  14. #14
    [QUOTE=Black Death]Fair comments in the thread.

    I'm not talking about outlawing guns, but restricting their use to those who are professional/sporting shooters. Besides, guns aren't physically addictive like drugs are. Governments restrict the use of lot of things that aren't good for their citizens - there are many examples. To pick one, thalidomide has been restricted in its use, and thus there are no thalidomide babies anymore. Restricting guns would lower murder rates in the US.[/QUOTE]
    Even if it makes it tougher - someone who wants to carry out these acts will find a way. The black market is just way too available. Again, we've outlawed drugs. Where did that get us?

  15. #15
    [QUOTE=BrooklynBound]Even if it makes it tougher - someone who wants to carry out these acts will find a way. The black market is just way too available. Again, we've outlawed drugs. Where did that get us?[/QUOTE]

    I agree restricting guns won't restrict dickheads, but what it will do is if a dickhead wants to go and kill a lot of people it will make it a lot harder for him to get a gun to do so. It is much harder for you to kill 30 people with a knife compared with an automatic handgun. Restricting guns to those who have a legitimate use for them has lowered gun-related crime in other countries; keeping guns out of scumbag hands has been key to this. There are people who are high on the criminal tree who can get guns in this country, but generally they use them to shoot each other, and not the general public. There is no way someone from another country, as the shooter at VT has been postulated as, could get a gun in this country unless he had very good criminal connections. Police here monitor illegal gun activity very closely here; restricting legal gun ownership has allowed them to concentrate on getting illegal guns off the streets and subsequently gun-related murder rates and crime rates have fallen.

  16. #16
    [QUOTE=Warfish]And you're source for this rather dishonest claim is? I assume youonce sold guns in VA, and know the process and requirements, eh? I know them, and they sure arn't as you claim here.

    And what happened today has nothing to do with "Gun Control". But trust the Political and Media Vultures, frothing at the mouth for the next round of "Tragedy TV" to sell, to MAKE it the issue in the coming days.[/QUOTE]


    VA has continually been linked to straw gun sales to criminals. NYC is sueing over this right now in Federal court. I owned a factory in VA and was there almost ever month for years. There are legal gun dealers all over the place and there are gun shows where dealers who aren't licensed dealers are able selling guns with no background checks all over the state.

    Part of the problem is once you have passed a background check in many states there are virtually no limits in the amount of guns you can buy, VA actually had limited legal purchases to 1 gun per month and there was a reduction of these guns moving North but in 04 that law was repealed. The traces of guns committed in crimes in NYC have traced 60% of gun crimes to 1% of gun dealers out of a handful of southern states. The reaction, ban gun traceing.
    [url]http://content.hamptonroads.com/story.cfm?story=107957&ran=54440[/url]

    [QUOTE]11 charged in Virginia-to-N.Y. gunrunning scheme
    By TIM MCGLONE, The Virginian-Pilot
    July 22, 2006



    NORFOLK - Eleven people have been charged here in a Virginia-to-New York gun-running scheme. The arrests, the largest in at least the past three years, has put Virginia back into the spotlight as a popular source for illegal firearm sales.

    The ring was responsible for buying dozens of firearms at Norfolk and Portsmouth gun shops and dumping them on the streets of New York City between 2004 and 2005, according to an indictment unsealed this week in U.S. District Court. Undercover officers acting as buyers removed some of the guns from circulation.


    The U.S. attorney has scheduled a news conference Tuesday to discuss the so-called straw gun purchases in which convicted felons use friends and family members with clean records to buy guns legally; then, the felons sell them illegally for a high profit.

    Seven of the 11 suspects were in custody Friday. The rest are being sought.

    The suspected ringleaders, both convicted felons, were identified in the indictment as Deborah Davis, also known as "New York" and "Dee-Dee," and Dionne Greene, also known as "Trinity," "Darryl," and "Little T." Their ages and addresses were not available.

    They are accused of using nine others in the legal purchase of firearms.

    "The ringleaders were purchasing numerous firearms in the Tidewater area," the indictment says, "using straw purchasers and transporting them to New York, where they were selling the firearms on the streets for a significant profit."

    According to the indictment, Davis and Greene paid the buyers as much as $100 or as little as $20 or with a chunk of crack cocaine. The indictment does not say how much the guns were then sold for.

    The guns involved include 9 mm and .45-caliber semiautomatics, .50-caliber revolvers and rifles. Those models typically sell for $200 or more and can garner double and triple the retail price on the street, according to law enforcement officials.

    Most were sold from Bob's Gun Shop on Granby Street in Norfolk and D&R Arms on Tyre Neck Road in Portsmouth, the indictment reads.

    Robert Marcus, who runs Bob's, said he tries to prevent straw purchases.

    He said he suspects a straw purchase when two people come into his store, and one provides cash while the other chooses a weapon. Marcus said he will show them the door.

    "If a straw purchase is attempted in front of a dealer and it can be recognized, then certainly a responsible dealer is not going to continue with that sale," he said.

    "People are going to do what they're going to do," Marcus said. "I want to stop as much of it as I can."

    Bob's has been a target of the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives in the past.

    In 2002, that shop and 430 other dealers throughout the country were singled out because they each had sold 10 or more guns used in a crime within three years of purchase. Marcus disputed those figures. The bureau used that data to collect sales information from the store to help catch the criminals who used the guns.

    In the latest case, the bureau conducted an undercover operation with the New York City Police Department. New York City officials have complained for years about the large number of illegal guns traced to Virginia. New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg earlier this year sued 15 gun dealers, including four in Virginia, for being the source of 500 crime guns recovered by police in that city. Bob's was not one of the dealers.

    Virginia tightened its gun-purchasing laws in the 1990s, which led to reductions in the number of illegal guns traced back to the state, according to figures from the Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence. Virginia in 1993 enacted a one-handgun-per-month sales limit per person. Since then, the number of guns originating in Virginia and ending up at crime scenes in the Northeast dropped from 38 percent to 16 percent, according to the Brady Campaign.

    Officials with the bureau and the U.S. Attorney's Office declined to comment until Tuesday's news conference.

    The other nine suspects charged are identified in the indictment as: Donnita Meshell Anthony; Leonard Karl Cuffee; Johnny Lydell Harris; Valorie Denise Taylor; Felicia Vaughan; Milton Larry Waddler Jr.; Nicole Yolanda Wilkerson; Donald Wilson; and Felicia Ann Woodson. Their ages and addresses were not available.[/QUOTE]
    Last edited by Winstonbiggs; 04-17-2007 at 07:31 AM.

  17. #17
    Jets Insider VIP
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Van down by the river
    Posts
    23,194
    [QUOTE=asuusa]Today's events in VA were a terrible tragedy, but its a national crisis only b/c of the multiple deaths.

    On our local TV news tonight was the story of a 3rd grade boy who's asking people to donate $2.33 to a national organization.

    That organization is MADD! Asked why he only wanted $2.33? Because last year 233 people died in our state in accidents involving drunk drivers. Now if a drunk driver killed 32 people at one time, that would be a national crisis, but since they die 1 or 2 at a time, it's no big deal except to the families losing a loved one.

    Yes people will whine about gun control and making sure this never happens again, but what do they do about the idiots who drink and drive? Zip! Nothing serious, anyway!

    BTW, that 3rd grade boy? He's in a wheel chair paralyzed for the rest of his life b/c his family was hit by a drunk driver.[/QUOTE]

    I hear you, Asuusa. And alcohol is still legal. And bars still have parking lots.

    We are supposed to be afraid of terrorists. But how many Americans die at the hands of other Americans every year?

    Of course, the idiot leftists are gonna get all riled up about gun control...which has nothing to do with what happened yesterday. Why should my right to own a gun be taken away because of some deranged moron? Should everyone not be allowed to drive because a few people drive drunk?

  18. #18
    [QUOTE=PlumberKhan]I hear you, Asuusa. And alcohol is still legal. And bars still have parking lots.

    We are supposed to be afraid of terrorists. But how many Americans die at the hands of other Americans every year?

    Of course, the idiot leftists are gonna get all riled up about gun control...which has nothing to do with what happened yesterday. Why should my right to own a gun be taken away because of some deranged moron? Should everyone not be allowed to drive because a few people drive drunk?[/QUOTE]

    Let me know why you have the [B]right [/B] to carry an automatic weapon?

  19. #19
    Jets Insider VIP
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Van down by the river
    Posts
    23,194
    [QUOTE=Winstonbiggs]Let me know why you have the [B]right [/B] to carry an automatic weapon?[/QUOTE]


    Because of the 2nd amendment. The right to bear arms was not put in the constitution to protect people from Indians, wolves or criminals. The founding fathers were smart enough to realize that maybe someday our government might get too big for it's britches. The 2nd amendment was a way to guarantee that if the people really wanted to, they could overthrow a corrupt government. And have you seen the guns the government has now? Trust me....we are gonna need more than automatic weapons.

    How many murders are committed with assault weapons in the US every year?

    How many murders are committed with handguns...9 mm in particular?

    Of course the government wants to ban assault weapons. The less firepower the people have, the easier it is to assert their authority...

  20. #20
    Hall Of Fame
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    Boston
    Posts
    11,692
    I don't really have an issue with stricter gun controls laws including background checks and what not. However, restricting gun ownership to only "professionals" or whatever makes no sense, since many people want a gun for protection, not to enter some sharpshooting contest. I may be mistaken, but I think VA has laws about people having guns on school campuses, and forbids. In most places in the South, gun ownership is prevalant and so perpetrators have to worry that their potential victims may be armed and skilled with firearms. It raises the risk of attacking them. Once wonders whether re-thinking this practice may have made a difference at Va Tech. What if someone (a teacher, student) had had a gun as well on campus. What if 5 people did? Would they have been able to subdue the assailant? Who knows. Guns actually prevent violence in some cases where a perp is subdued by somone pointing a gun at them and demanding they drop their weapon. However, in the wrong hands, guns are capable fo doing something like this. You'll actually see cases where states with more guns and "looser" gun laws have a lower incidence of gun violence than states with "tougher" laws, however, many factors go into this, including what Winston mentioned before about illegal guns coming in from out of state, in addition to many other factors.

    There is no easy answer really, and it's way too early to make sweeping judgments about this case since we simply don't have a ton of information right now.

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

Follow Us