A Poll About Gun Control

[Ernie S.]

Side note to all my 2nd Amendment friends. Google "tannerite" Fun stuff!

An AR at night with tracer rounds and some tannerite = fun.

You could make your own war movie!

 

[Ernie S.]

You are welcome. We still have crime, we have gun crime, yes, but mass killings by crazed people with a gun? Doesn't happen anymore, and that is thanks to the gun control that over 90% of us supported, and still do.

So gun control is the answer, the answer to why there is no more mass killings by crazed people with a gun in Australia.

Really? Just because there is gun control laws in your country, that does not completely guarantee that someone could not snap and do a mass killing of people. You already acknowledge that there still is gun crime in your country.

Let me point something out to you since it is obvious that you support gun control in your country and you believe that it is doing a good job.

In Switzerland almost every adult male is legally required to possess a gun. One of the few nations with a higher per capita rate of gun ownership than the United States, Switzerland has virtually no gun crime.

So Switzerland has virtually NO GUN CRIME, because they are legally required, and Australia has gun control laws and still does have gun crime.

Maybe Australia could learn something from Switzerland.

We haven't had a mass killing in years, and its highly unlikely it will ever happen. The US experiences one every other week, and while you like to claim that if someone had a gun, they would shoot the bad guy, why are the bad guys able to cause so much damage before anyone stops them?

Mass shootings, while newsworthy, result in a tiny percentage of gun related deaths. They serve only to motivate the left to try for another gun grab.

Perhaps your time and emotionalism would be better spent stopping inner-city youth from killing each other.

 

[eflatminor]

One of O'Reilly's emails last night was pretty good.
It was something like, blaming murders on the guns is like blaming hangings on the ropes.

Stated differently, blaming firearms for murder is like blaming spoons for Rosie O'Donnell's fat ass.

 

[Ernie S.]

I am shocked at the number of people who would prefer that a known dangerous man should be allowed to keep his guns. That shocks me. One would think that you would believe that no dangerous person be allowed to own a weapon.

I don't agree with most opinions expressed here, but I do like the discussion my question generated.

What you fail to take into account is that we already have laws that prohibit dangerous people from having guns.
The problem is that criminals, by definition, have no regard for the law and will find a way to obtain a gun.
Your scenario would make the other 99 citizens helpless to defend themselves.
Your well intentioned (but unconstitutional) effort to keep everyone safe from gun violence has resulted in only 1 person who is safe and 99 potential victims.

 

[Lonestar_logic]

You are welcome. We still have crime, we have gun crime, yes, but mass killings by crazed people with a gun? Doesn't happen anymore, and that is thanks to the gun control that over 90% of us supported, and still do.

So gun control is the answer, the answer to why there is no more mass killings by crazed people with a gun in Australia.

Really? Just because there is gun control laws in your country, that does not completely guarantee that someone could not snap and do a mass killing of people. You already acknowledge that there still is gun crime in your country.

Let me point something out to you since it is obvious that you support gun control in your country and you believe that it is doing a good job.

In Switzerland almost every adult male is legally required to possess a gun. One of the few nations with a higher per capita rate of gun ownership than the United States, Switzerland has virtually no gun crime.

So Switzerland has virtually NO GUN CRIME, because they are legally required, and Australia has gun control laws and still does have gun crime.

Maybe Australia could learn something from Switzerland.

We haven't had a mass killing in years, and its highly unlikely it will ever happen. The US experiences one every other week, and while you like to claim that if someone had a gun, they would shoot the bad guy, why are the bad guys able to cause so much damage before anyone stops them?

Really?

Churchill Fire - 10 confirmed deaths due to a deliberately lit fire. The fire was lit on 7th of February 2009.

Quakers Hill Nursing Home Fire - 10 confirmed and as many as 21 people may have died as a result of a deliberately lit fire in a Quakers Hill nursing home. The fire was lit early on 18th of November 2011.

Melbourne gangland killings - 36 underworld figures murdered so far in gang related violence between 1998 and 2010.

Monash University shooting - In October 2002, Huan Yun Xiang, a student, shot his classmates and teacher, killing two and injuring five.

Childers Palace Fire - In June 2000, drifter and con-artist Robert Long started a fire at the Childers Palace backpackers hostel that killed 15 people.

Merrylands has become the Sydney suburb most frequently hit by drive-by shootings as the city as a whole reaches the ignominious milestone of 100 instances of gun violence this year. Sept. 2012

 

[Ernie S.]

"Eric manufactured three more pipe bombs: the Charlie batch. Then he halted production until December. What he needed was guns. And that was becoming a problem.

Eric had been looking into the Brady Bill. Congress had passed the law restricting the purchase of most popular semiautomatic machine guns in 1993. A federal system of instant background checks would soon go into effect. Eric was going to have a hard time getting around that.

"Fuck you Brady!" Eric wrote in his journal. All he wanted was a couple of guns - "and thanks to your fucking bill I will probably not get any!" He wanted them only for personal protection, he joked: "Its not like I'm some psycho who would go on a shooting spree. fuckers."

Eric frequently made his research do double duty for both schoolwork and his master plan. He wrote up a short research assignment on the Brady Bill that week. It was a good idea in theory, he said, aside from the loopholes. The biggest problem was that checks applied only to licensed dealers, not private dealers. So two-thirds of the licensed dealers had just gone private. "The FBI just shot themselves in the foot," he concluded."

Eric was rational about his firepower. "As of this date I have enough explosives to kill about 100 people," he wrote. With axes, bayonets, and assorted blades, he could maybe take out ten more. That was as far as hand to-hand combat would get him. A hundred and ten people. "that just isn't enough!"

"Guns!" the entry concluded. "I need guns! Give me some fucking firearms! " p.280 'Columbine' by Dave Cullen [bold added]

I stopped taking this seriously at "semiautomatic machine guns".

 

[RKMBrown]

"Eric manufactured three more pipe bombs: the Charlie batch. Then he halted production until December. What he needed was guns. And that was becoming a problem.

Eric had been looking into the Brady Bill. Congress had passed the law restricting the purchase of most popular semiautomatic machine guns in 1993. A federal system of instant background checks would soon go into effect. Eric was going to have a hard time getting around that.

"Fuck you Brady!" Eric wrote in his journal. All he wanted was a couple of guns - "and thanks to your fucking bill I will probably not get any!" He wanted them only for personal protection, he joked: "Its not like I'm some psycho who would go on a shooting spree. fuckers."

Eric frequently made his research do double duty for both schoolwork and his master plan. He wrote up a short research assignment on the Brady Bill that week. It was a good idea in theory, he said, aside from the loopholes. The biggest problem was that checks applied only to licensed dealers, not private dealers. So two-thirds of the licensed dealers had just gone private. "The FBI just shot themselves in the foot," he concluded."

Eric was rational about his firepower. "As of this date I have enough explosives to kill about 100 people," he wrote. With axes, bayonets, and assorted blades, he could maybe take out ten more. That was as far as hand to-hand combat would get him. A hundred and ten people. "that just isn't enough!"

"Guns!" the entry concluded. "I need guns! Give me some fucking firearms! " p.280 'Columbine' by Dave Cullen [bold added]

I stopped taking this seriously at "semiautomatic machine guns".

Selective fire?

 

[Luddly Neddite]

"Eric manufactured three more pipe bombs: the Charlie batch. Then he halted production until December. What he needed was guns. And that was becoming a problem.

Eric had been looking into the Brady Bill. Congress had passed the law restricting the purchase of most popular semiautomatic machine guns in 1993. A federal system of instant background checks would soon go into effect. Eric was going to have a hard time getting around that.

"Fuck you Brady!" Eric wrote in his journal. All he wanted was a couple of guns - "and thanks to your fucking bill I will probably not get any!" He wanted them only for personal protection, he joked: "Its not like I'm some psycho who would go on a shooting spree. fuckers."

Eric frequently made his research do double duty for both schoolwork and his master plan. He wrote up a short research assignment on the Brady Bill that week. It was a good idea in theory, he said, aside from the loopholes. The biggest problem was that checks applied only to licensed dealers, not private dealers. So two-thirds of the licensed dealers had just gone private. "The FBI just shot themselves in the foot," he concluded."

Eric was rational about his firepower. "As of this date I have enough explosives to kill about 100 people," he wrote. With axes, bayonets, and assorted blades, he could maybe take out ten more. That was as far as hand to-hand combat would get him. A hundred and ten people. "that just isn't enough!"

"Guns!" the entry concluded. "I need guns! Give me some fucking firearms! " p.280 'Columbine' by Dave Cullen [bold added]

I stopped taking this seriously at "semiautomatic machine guns".

That's luxury that survivors don't have.

 

[numan]

'

Civilized people in civilized countries do not need guns.

The real question is: Is there any possibility that Americans can ever become civilized?

.

 

[PredFan]

"Eric manufactured three more pipe bombs: the Charlie batch. Then he halted production until December. What he needed was guns. And that was becoming a problem.

Eric had been looking into the Brady Bill. Congress had passed the law restricting the purchase of most popular semiautomatic machine guns in 1993. A federal system of instant background checks would soon go into effect. Eric was going to have a hard time getting around that.

"Fuck you Brady!" Eric wrote in his journal. All he wanted was a couple of guns - "and thanks to your fucking bill I will probably not get any!" He wanted them only for personal protection, he joked: "Its not like I'm some psycho who would go on a shooting spree. fuckers."

Eric frequently made his research do double duty for both schoolwork and his master plan. He wrote up a short research assignment on the Brady Bill that week. It was a good idea in theory, he said, aside from the loopholes. The biggest problem was that checks applied only to licensed dealers, not private dealers. So two-thirds of the licensed dealers had just gone private. "The FBI just shot themselves in the foot," he concluded."

Eric was rational about his firepower. "As of this date I have enough explosives to kill about 100 people," he wrote. With axes, bayonets, and assorted blades, he could maybe take out ten more. That was as far as hand to-hand combat would get him. A hundred and ten people. "that just isn't enough!"

"Guns!" the entry concluded. "I need guns! Give me some fucking firearms! " p.280 'Columbine' by Dave Cullen [bold added]

I stopped taking this seriously at "semiautomatic machine guns".

That's luxury that survivors don't have.

Yes it is, why wouldn't it? Are you going to take away the rights of the survivors?

 

[Ernie S.]

"Eric manufactured three more pipe bombs: the Charlie batch. Then he halted production until December. What he needed was guns. And that was becoming a problem.

Eric had been looking into the Brady Bill. Congress had passed the law restricting the purchase of most popular semiautomatic machine guns in 1993. A federal system of instant background checks would soon go into effect. Eric was going to have a hard time getting around that.

"Fuck you Brady!" Eric wrote in his journal. All he wanted was a couple of guns - "and thanks to your fucking bill I will probably not get any!" He wanted them only for personal protection, he joked: "Its not like I'm some psycho who would go on a shooting spree. fuckers."

Eric frequently made his research do double duty for both schoolwork and his master plan. He wrote up a short research assignment on the Brady Bill that week. It was a good idea in theory, he said, aside from the loopholes. The biggest problem was that checks applied only to licensed dealers, not private dealers. So two-thirds of the licensed dealers had just gone private. "The FBI just shot themselves in the foot," he concluded."

Eric was rational about his firepower. "As of this date I have enough explosives to kill about 100 people," he wrote. With axes, bayonets, and assorted blades, he could maybe take out ten more. That was as far as hand to-hand combat would get him. A hundred and ten people. "that just isn't enough!"

"Guns!" the entry concluded. "I need guns! Give me some fucking firearms! " p.280 'Columbine' by Dave Cullen [bold added]

I stopped taking this seriously at "semiautomatic machine guns".

Selective fire?

Do you know what a machine gun is?

Selective fire:

Machine gun:

 

[JWBooth]

Sort of.

Hypothetical:

You have 100 people living in a small town, and in order to be safe (lets not question why, as this is NOT the topic of the thread) they decide to hand in their firearms.
The only person who refuses to is a man who is known to be dangerous, and is not trusted.

So. Do you a) forcibly remove the guns from that one person in order to make everyone safe, or do you b) give back guns to 99 people to protect themselves from one person?

Life isn't an episode of Under the Dome

 

[Jimmy_Jam]

'

Civilized people in civilized countries do not need guns.

The real question is: Is there any possibility that Americans can ever become civilized?

.

Nice non-objective and inflammatory opinion.

Try more next time.

 

[Meister]

'

Civilized people in civilized countries do not need guns.

The real question is: Is there any possibility that Americans can ever become civilized?

.

They just use another source to break laws.
There are no true "civilized countries"

 

[eflatminor]

Civilized people in civilized countries do not need guns.

I'm sure the tyrants that murdered millions after disarming their subjects used a similar argument.

The real question is: Is there any possibility that Americans can ever become civilized?

Another real question: Is there any possibility you could read a history book???

 

[eflatminor]

So gun control is the answer, the answer to why there is no more mass killings by crazed people with a gun in Australia.

Really? Just because there is gun control laws in your country, that does not completely guarantee that someone could not snap and do a mass killing of people. You already acknowledge that there still is gun crime in your country.

Let me point something out to you since it is obvious that you support gun control in your country and you believe that it is doing a good job.

In Switzerland almost every adult male is legally required to possess a gun. One of the few nations with a higher per capita rate of gun ownership than the United States, Switzerland has virtually no gun crime.

So Switzerland has virtually NO GUN CRIME, because they are legally required, and Australia has gun control laws and still does have gun crime.

Maybe Australia could learn something from Switzerland.

We haven't had a mass killing in years, and its highly unlikely it will ever happen. The US experiences one every other week, and while you like to claim that if someone had a gun, they would shoot the bad guy, why are the bad guys able to cause so much damage before anyone stops them?

Really?

Churchill Fire - 10 confirmed deaths due to a deliberately lit fire. The fire was lit on 7th of February 2009.

Quakers Hill Nursing Home Fire - 10 confirmed and as many as 21 people may have died as a result of a deliberately lit fire in a Quakers Hill nursing home. The fire was lit early on 18th of November 2011.

Melbourne gangland killings - 36 underworld figures murdered so far in gang related violence between 1998 and 2010.

Monash University shooting - In October 2002, Huan Yun Xiang, a student, shot his classmates and teacher, killing two and injuring five.

Childers Palace Fire - In June 2000, drifter and con-artist Robert Long started a fire at the Childers Palace backpackers hostel that killed 15 people.

Merrylands has become the Sydney suburb most frequently hit by drive-by shootings as the city as a whole reaches the ignominious milestone of 100 instances of gun violence this year. Sept. 2012

Facts aren't relevant here! Don't you know that? It's about feelings...

 

[RKMBrown]

Selective fire?

Do you know what a machine gun is?

The National Firearms Act of 1968 (NFA) defines a number of categories of regulated firearms. These weapons are collectively known as NFA firearms and include the following:

Machine guns—this includes any firearm which can fire more than 1 cartridge per trigger pull. Both continuous fully automatic fire and "burst fire" (i.e., firearms with a 3-round burst feature) are considered machine gun features. The weapon's receiver is by itself considered to be a regulated firearm. A non-machinegun that may be converted to fire more than one shot per trigger pull by ordinary mechanical skills is classed as a machinegun. Such as a TEC-9 pistol (pre-ban ones are "grandfathered").

 

[Ernie S.]

OK NFA definition.
The original line I objected to was "semiautomatic machine gun" which is an oxymoron. A weapon is either a semiautomatic OR a machine gun. Under NFA, a select fire weapon is a machine gun.
Select fire weapons would be better classified as assault weapons, but you anti 2nd Amendment people have already corrupted the meaning of Assault weapon to include semiautomatics that frighten you because they don't have pretty wooden stocks.

 

[RKMBrown]

OK NFA definition.
The original line I objected to was "semiautomatic machine gun" which is an oxymoron. A weapon is either a semiautomatic OR a machine gun. Under NFA, a select fire weapon is a machine gun.
Select fire weapons would be better classified as assault weapons, but you anti 2nd Amendment people have already corrupted the meaning of Assault weapon to include semiautomatics that frighten you because they don't have pretty wooden stocks.

What makes you think I'm among the "anti 2nd Amendment people?" I didn't write the NFA rules and I sure as hell don't support them. Most of our federal laws limiting liberty are moronic.

 

[idb]

Care to speculate why violent crime rates rose in England and Australia immediately following the confiscation of civilian owned firearms while at the same time crime rates where dropping in the US as the number of firearms and conceal carry permits were skyrocketing (yes, right word)?

I don't agree that the Australian violent crime rates increased any faster than before the ban.

Then you're denying reality. The government supplied statistics have been provided here and elsewhere numerous times. They prove without a doubt that violent crime increased following the ban.

As for the UK, who knows, I'm no criminologist but it appears to be one if the most crime-ridden countries in Western Europe.

Which was only the case after the ban. Again, you can choose to deny reality, but it's not helping your case.

A proliferating gang culture is one if the reasons being put forward.
Are you suggesting that the increase in crime is because of the restrictions on guns? How can you know that?

I'm suggesting there is no way the gun grabbers can associate civilian firearm ownership with violent crime rates. So please, leave law abiding citizens alone and focus on those that actually harm others.

Please, I said that violent crime in Australia increased no faster than before the ban.
As gun advocates have said many times...if someone is going to commit violence and they haven't got a gun then they'll use a different weapon.