CDZ Posting Solutions for Gun Violence

[Skull Pilot]

So what?

Ban it and then some other semiautomatic will be used.

The only way to prevent school shootings is to prevent people with guns from entering a school

There is no gun ban or gun law that will stop a person hell bent on murder

Now if you really want to talk about gun violence why do you focus so much on mass shootings? Mass shootings account for 1% of all murders where 70% of all murders are committed in very small very distinct urban areas that are well known.

Tell me why don't you ever talk about that?

You keep talking about banning. I didn't even bring that up. Is that what you want? If you can't get your way, do we just ban it? Or do we do it the way it's been constitutionally done in the past and regulate it. But if you want it banned if you can't get your way then that's okay too.

So you want to "regulate" all semiautomatic rifles?

It's beyond stupid to "regulate" just one model of one caliber of semiautomatic rifle.

Is that what I said? Own up to it. Tell me where I ever said that. But I do want to handle the AR just like we do all other "Public Safety" items that pose a clear and present danger to society at large. I have already proven that a Mini-14 isn't the right tool for the job. It's too cumbersome to reload. But the brilliance of Stoner makes the AR the right tool for the job when you are needing 60 or more bullets to get the job done. Not just one caliber, just one gun. In 1934, they had the same discussion over the Thompson and not all 45 cals were regulated.

The AR is no different from any other semiauto rifle chambered for 5.56 NATO rounds

So you don't ban the AR chambered for 5.56 NATO you just make it harder to get right?

What's to stop anyone from buying a different semiauto rifle chambered for 5.56 NATO or an even more powerful round and going on a shooting spree??

Now do you see why "regulating just one model of one caliber semiautomatic rifle is beyond stupid?

And I won't even get into pistol caliber carbines

Nice try at another hijacking. Already covered this

No you gave your opinion that a mini 14 is cumbersome.

It really isn't.

But you dodge the question.

So you make an AR 15 harder to get what's going to stop a would be school shooter from using a different semiautomatic rifle or a pistol caliber carbine or even a couple of handguns instead?

If you don't address the problem of people being able to walk into a school with firearms it doesn't matter what gun regulations you pass.

 

[Skull Pilot]

I would be open to implementing the FFL as a way to conduct background checks. I absolutely believe that if the different ideologies could stand to be in a room together for a while, we have the capacity to create a system that minimizes how many firearms get into the hands of dangerous people, without unduly infringing the rights of the massive majority of law-abiding gun owners. It's just the arguing and tribalism that too often gets in the way.

Agreed.

And with the understanding that there is no one solution that will comprehensively solve the problem, including an FFL program.

An important aspect of an FFL program is that if one decides to not renew his license, he’s also deciding to no longer be a gun owner, and intends to sell his firearms to a license holder.

It makes no sense to force a person to pay for a dealers' license which is what an FFL is if he is not going to be selling firearms

Then figure out a way to prevent the use of the AR in the Mass School Shootings instead of all this other BS. It sounds like it's in your hands now. Either help find a solution, lose your AR, or become a FFL licensed dealer. Those are your 3 options. Leaving like it is is NOT an option.

I don't own an AR because I have a perfectly good rifle chambered for 5.56 NATO rounds and I can drop and swap a magazine with no difficulty.

And like I said the only way to prevent school shootings is to prevent people from just waltzing into a school with firearms of any kind no gun regulation will stop them.

Again, what is the solution. You pegged the problem. Now what is the solution. I have seen the solution work. But I am waiting for you to come up with your own solution. Maybe it would be better, who knows. But you can't keep pointing out the obvious and the problem. Move the needle to the next track and go on to a solution.

I told you.

If you want to stop school shootings you have to prevent people from being able to simply walk into a school with guns.

 

[abrere]

somebody doesn't know the diff between an M1A 308 and a 223 Mini-14. You can cut the barrel on a Mini-14 to 11", thin out the stock a lot, install a folding stock and conceal it pretty well under a jacket.

 

[Daryl Hunt]

You keep talking about banning. I didn't even bring that up. Is that what you want? If you can't get your way, do we just ban it? Or do we do it the way it's been constitutionally done in the past and regulate it. But if you want it banned if you can't get your way then that's okay too.

So you want to "regulate" all semiautomatic rifles?

It's beyond stupid to "regulate" just one model of one caliber of semiautomatic rifle.

Is that what I said? Own up to it. Tell me where I ever said that. But I do want to handle the AR just like we do all other "Public Safety" items that pose a clear and present danger to society at large. I have already proven that a Mini-14 isn't the right tool for the job. It's too cumbersome to reload. But the brilliance of Stoner makes the AR the right tool for the job when you are needing 60 or more bullets to get the job done. Not just one caliber, just one gun. In 1934, they had the same discussion over the Thompson and not all 45 cals were regulated.

The AR is no different from any other semiauto rifle chambered for 5.56 NATO rounds

So you don't ban the AR chambered for 5.56 NATO you just make it harder to get right?

What's to stop anyone from buying a different semiauto rifle chambered for 5.56 NATO or an even more powerful round and going on a shooting spree??

Now do you see why "regulating just one model of one caliber semiautomatic rifle is beyond stupid?

And I won't even get into pistol caliber carbines

Nice try at another hijacking. Already covered this

No you gave your opinion that a mini 14 is cumbersome.

It really isn't.

But you dodge the question.

So you make an AR 15 harder to get what's going to stop a would be school shooter from using a different semiautomatic rifle or a pistol caliber carbine instead?

If you don't address the problem of people being able to walk into a school with firearms it doesn't matter what gun regulations you pass.

This horse has been beaten to death. You can only beat it so many times before there is nothing left.

I am waiting for YOU to address the problem of people walking into a school with firearms. We both know that we will always have some kid eat up with stupid that brings his father's handgun to school to impress his buddies but that really isn't a problem that is high on body count or usually even ends up bad. The Gun gets impounded, the kid gets expelled and that's the end of it. It's the kid coming to school going for a high body count that needs to be addressed. Now, how do we prevent that? Whatever the majority of the schools are doing just isn't working.

 

[Daryl Hunt]

Agreed.

And with the understanding that there is no one solution that will comprehensively solve the problem, including an FFL program.

An important aspect of an FFL program is that if one decides to not renew his license, he’s also deciding to no longer be a gun owner, and intends to sell his firearms to a license holder.

It makes no sense to force a person to pay for a dealers' license which is what an FFL is if he is not going to be selling firearms

Then figure out a way to prevent the use of the AR in the Mass School Shootings instead of all this other BS. It sounds like it's in your hands now. Either help find a solution, lose your AR, or become a FFL licensed dealer. Those are your 3 options. Leaving like it is is NOT an option.

I don't own an AR because I have a perfectly good rifle chambered for 5.56 NATO rounds and I can drop and swap a magazine with no difficulty.

And like I said the only way to prevent school shootings is to prevent people from just waltzing into a school with firearms of any kind no gun regulation will stop them.

Again, what is the solution. You pegged the problem. Now what is the solution. I have seen the solution work. But I am waiting for you to come up with your own solution. Maybe it would be better, who knows. But you can't keep pointing out the obvious and the problem. Move the needle to the next track and go on to a solution.

I told you.

If you want to stop school shootings you have to prevent people from being able to simply walk into a school with guns.

Again, that's the problem. What is a solution.

 

[abrere]

move the armed guards and metal detectors from the courthouse to the schools. Tough shyte if it seems like prison to the kids. If you dont like it, home school your kid, like you SHOULD be doing anyway! the people at the courthouse can carry their own guns. the kids cannot. So the resources are being mis-allocated. Fix that, and let the teachers who will take cop training (on fireams and defensive law) and take the same psych exams, ccw a gun at the schools and get paid for his risk, trouble and expense of qualifying (whatever the cops do) If you aint afraid of having the cop carry in the school, why be afraid of the teacher? the teacher is with the kids constantly . If you dont trust him to have a gun, WHY do you trust your kid to him at ALL, hmm?

 

[Skull Pilot]

So you want to "regulate" all semiautomatic rifles?

It's beyond stupid to "regulate" just one model of one caliber of semiautomatic rifle.

Is that what I said? Own up to it. Tell me where I ever said that. But I do want to handle the AR just like we do all other "Public Safety" items that pose a clear and present danger to society at large. I have already proven that a Mini-14 isn't the right tool for the job. It's too cumbersome to reload. But the brilliance of Stoner makes the AR the right tool for the job when you are needing 60 or more bullets to get the job done. Not just one caliber, just one gun. In 1934, they had the same discussion over the Thompson and not all 45 cals were regulated.

The AR is no different from any other semiauto rifle chambered for 5.56 NATO rounds

So you don't ban the AR chambered for 5.56 NATO you just make it harder to get right?

What's to stop anyone from buying a different semiauto rifle chambered for 5.56 NATO or an even more powerful round and going on a shooting spree??

Now do you see why "regulating just one model of one caliber semiautomatic rifle is beyond stupid?

And I won't even get into pistol caliber carbines

Nice try at another hijacking. Already covered this

No you gave your opinion that a mini 14 is cumbersome.

It really isn't.

But you dodge the question.

So you make an AR 15 harder to get what's going to stop a would be school shooter from using a different semiautomatic rifle or a pistol caliber carbine instead?

If you don't address the problem of people being able to walk into a school with firearms it doesn't matter what gun regulations you pass.

This horse has been beaten to death. You can only beat it so many times before there is nothing left.

I am waiting for YOU to address the problem of people walking into a school with firearms. We both know that we will always have some kid eat up with stupid that brings his father's handgun to school to impress his buddies but that really isn't a problem that is high on body count or usually even ends up bad. The Gun gets impounded, the kid gets expelled and that's the end of it. It's the kid coming to school going for a high body count that needs to be addressed. Now, how do we prevent that? Whatever the majority of the schools are doing just isn't working.

I have brought it up many times and all you people have told me that it's impossible to do or that it is cost prohibitive. Of course I don't believe it is but I've been told that since you can't even get kids to walk in a single file line that it's delusional to think you can check for guns.

 

[Skull Pilot]

It makes no sense to force a person to pay for a dealers' license which is what an FFL is if he is not going to be selling firearms

Then figure out a way to prevent the use of the AR in the Mass School Shootings instead of all this other BS. It sounds like it's in your hands now. Either help find a solution, lose your AR, or become a FFL licensed dealer. Those are your 3 options. Leaving like it is is NOT an option.

I don't own an AR because I have a perfectly good rifle chambered for 5.56 NATO rounds and I can drop and swap a magazine with no difficulty.

And like I said the only way to prevent school shootings is to prevent people from just waltzing into a school with firearms of any kind no gun regulation will stop them.

Again, what is the solution. You pegged the problem. Now what is the solution. I have seen the solution work. But I am waiting for you to come up with your own solution. Maybe it would be better, who knows. But you can't keep pointing out the obvious and the problem. Move the needle to the next track and go on to a solution.

I told you.

If you want to stop school shootings you have to prevent people from being able to simply walk into a school with guns.

Again, that's the problem. What is a solution.

Preventing people from entering a school with guns is the solution.

I'm not going to get into the minutiae of it as each school district is more than capable of implementing an agreed upon solution

 

[Daryl Hunt]

move the armed guards and metal detectors from the courthouse to the schools. Tough shyte if it seems like prison to the kids. If you dont like it, home school your kid, like you SHOULD be doing anyway! the people at the courthouse can carry their own guns. the kids cannot. So the resources are being mis-allocated. Fix that, and let the teachers who will take cop training (on fireams and defensive law) and take the same psych exams, ccw a gun at the schools and get paid for his risk, trouble and expense of qualifying (whatever the cops do) If you aint afraid of having the cop carry in the school, why be afraid of the teacher? the teacher is with the kids constantly . If you dont trust him to have a gun, WHY do you trust your kid to him at ALL, hmm?

I won't comment on the metal detectors and entry points but I will about arming the Teachers. To date, there has been more Accidental Shootings in the schools than mass shootings when legal firearms were allowed by anyone other than trained security guards or law enforcement. (see the solution here?)

 

[Daryl Hunt]

Is that what I said? Own up to it. Tell me where I ever said that. But I do want to handle the AR just like we do all other "Public Safety" items that pose a clear and present danger to society at large. I have already proven that a Mini-14 isn't the right tool for the job. It's too cumbersome to reload. But the brilliance of Stoner makes the AR the right tool for the job when you are needing 60 or more bullets to get the job done. Not just one caliber, just one gun. In 1934, they had the same discussion over the Thompson and not all 45 cals were regulated.

The AR is no different from any other semiauto rifle chambered for 5.56 NATO rounds

So you don't ban the AR chambered for 5.56 NATO you just make it harder to get right?

What's to stop anyone from buying a different semiauto rifle chambered for 5.56 NATO or an even more powerful round and going on a shooting spree??

Now do you see why "regulating just one model of one caliber semiautomatic rifle is beyond stupid?

And I won't even get into pistol caliber carbines

Nice try at another hijacking. Already covered this

No you gave your opinion that a mini 14 is cumbersome.

It really isn't.

But you dodge the question.

So you make an AR 15 harder to get what's going to stop a would be school shooter from using a different semiautomatic rifle or a pistol caliber carbine instead?

If you don't address the problem of people being able to walk into a school with firearms it doesn't matter what gun regulations you pass.

This horse has been beaten to death. You can only beat it so many times before there is nothing left.

I am waiting for YOU to address the problem of people walking into a school with firearms. We both know that we will always have some kid eat up with stupid that brings his father's handgun to school to impress his buddies but that really isn't a problem that is high on body count or usually even ends up bad. The Gun gets impounded, the kid gets expelled and that's the end of it. It's the kid coming to school going for a high body count that needs to be addressed. Now, how do we prevent that? Whatever the majority of the schools are doing just isn't working.

I have brought it up many times and all you people have told me that it's impossible to do or that it is cost prohibitive. Of course I don't believe it is but I've been told that since you can't even get kids to walk in a single file line that it's delusional to think you can check for guns.

Okay, you have the floor. Tell us again. WE are listening.

 

[Flash]

[QU


You leave out the data that the highest body counts for mass shootings per shooting goes to the
AR-15. And that has become the weapon of choice in the last few years. Yes, you can go back and include 1992 through 1998 when the AR was regulated and was not to be had in such numbers. That messes up the totals. Or you can go from 1999 forward and get quite a cultural shock. Hand picking data is just plain lying.

That is like saying the highest body count for terrorism goes to airplanes.

The number of people killed in a year with ARs is minuscule compared with the deaths in the big cities from handguns, mostly stolen or cheap.

You are confused about ARs being "regulated" between '92-'98. You could still go to any gun store in the US and buy an AR. The only difference is that if it wasn't a "preban" then it didn't have a bayonet lug or collapsible stock. Everything else was exactly the same. AR ownership soared during that time. By the way, the gun violence decreased after that silly ban was lifted. Slick Willy's AWB had no effect on gun violence at all. Gun crime was on the decline during the ban and continued after the ban.

The hard truth for Liberals is that White people that don't commit many crimes are the ones that own ARs and other expensive firearms. The crime that is committed with firearms are mostly among the Black and Brown drug and gang population with cheap handguns.

If you want to rob a 7-11 and shoot the clerk why go and buy a $900 AR that is not easily concealed when a cheap handgun will do the job?

If my intention was to rob that 7-11 then the cheap hangun is the way to go. It's the weapon of choice. It's the right tool for the job. Now, if I am dead set in going for the highest body count then the AR is the right tool for the job. AFter the Oklahoma Bombing, they placed some controls on the substances to fill up that van with those chemicals. Same goes for the classes of explosives like Dynamite, Nitro, Symtecs, etc.. Only in the movies will you see those on the streets. Fully Automatic Weapons are just not to be had and modifying semi autos to full auto usually takes a Gunsmith with a Machine Shop and again, only in the movies. So you go with the AR. The Right tool for the Job.

Would I want to use a Mini-14 for the Job? Nope. AFter I empty the first mag, the changing of the mag is just too slow and prone to making mistakes. Chances are, when adrenilined up that high, you will drop at least one full mag on the ground before you get one into the slot. The Mag just doesn't just drop to the ground like the AR does. You have to pull it off in an arc. Then you have to take ahold of the new mag and put it back in in an arc. Then you have to rotate the rifle so you can access the charging lever on the right side of the gun to charge it. Then you have to rotate it back again and you are back in business. If you are in a school at least one soon to be hero is going to take advantage of the time that it takes for you to reload and take you down. And you won't see it coming since all your attention will be on reloading your gun. The wrong tool for the job.

Most crimes are not committed with guns that require quick changing magazines. The average number of shots fired in most gun crimes is three.

On the streets of the big American Democrat controlled shithole cities (where most of the gun crime takes place) the weapon of choice is what you can steal or get cheaply.

The first thing that needs to be done is seperate one gun crime from another. The average street shooting from the Mass Shooting. Then there is the 7-11 stickup. Then the "Gimme yer Wallet".

Almost all of these can be prevented by a strong well trained Cop Presence whether it be Law Enforcement or Security. There are other parts to it as well. But each of these have different things about them that make each of them different to prevent in the long run. You are just pointing out just one of the problems. You aren't addressing a solution. Okay, now how would you approach solving the problem you presented.

I am pointing out that most gun crimes do not involve the kind of gun that the Liberals want to ban.

Suicides are the most gun deaths . Most gun crime is the 7-11 stick up or the druggies going after one another or the drunk getting pissed because some guy looked at his Ho.

As horrendous as any school shooting is it doesn't happen very often and it can be stopped with armed guards and/or teachers. Unfortunately that is the world we live in. Not that much different than airport security.

 

[Daryl Hunt]

[QU


You leave out the data that the highest body counts for mass shootings per shooting goes to the
AR-15. And that has become the weapon of choice in the last few years. Yes, you can go back and include 1992 through 1998 when the AR was regulated and was not to be had in such numbers. That messes up the totals. Or you can go from 1999 forward and get quite a cultural shock. Hand picking data is just plain lying.

That is like saying the highest body count for terrorism goes to airplanes.

The number of people killed in a year with ARs is minuscule compared with the deaths in the big cities from handguns, mostly stolen or cheap.

You are confused about ARs being "regulated" between '92-'98. You could still go to any gun store in the US and buy an AR. The only difference is that if it wasn't a "preban" then it didn't have a bayonet lug or collapsible stock. Everything else was exactly the same. AR ownership soared during that time. By the way, the gun violence decreased after that silly ban was lifted. Slick Willy's AWB had no effect on gun violence at all. Gun crime was on the decline during the ban and continued after the ban.

The hard truth for Liberals is that White people that don't commit many crimes are the ones that own ARs and other expensive firearms. The crime that is committed with firearms are mostly among the Black and Brown drug and gang population with cheap handguns.

If you want to rob a 7-11 and shoot the clerk why go and buy a $900 AR that is not easily concealed when a cheap handgun will do the job?

If my intention was to rob that 7-11 then the cheap hangun is the way to go. It's the weapon of choice. It's the right tool for the job. Now, if I am dead set in going for the highest body count then the AR is the right tool for the job. AFter the Oklahoma Bombing, they placed some controls on the substances to fill up that van with those chemicals. Same goes for the classes of explosives like Dynamite, Nitro, Symtecs, etc.. Only in the movies will you see those on the streets. Fully Automatic Weapons are just not to be had and modifying semi autos to full auto usually takes a Gunsmith with a Machine Shop and again, only in the movies. So you go with the AR. The Right tool for the Job.

Would I want to use a Mini-14 for the Job? Nope. AFter I empty the first mag, the changing of the mag is just too slow and prone to making mistakes. Chances are, when adrenilined up that high, you will drop at least one full mag on the ground before you get one into the slot. The Mag just doesn't just drop to the ground like the AR does. You have to pull it off in an arc. Then you have to take ahold of the new mag and put it back in in an arc. Then you have to rotate the rifle so you can access the charging lever on the right side of the gun to charge it. Then you have to rotate it back again and you are back in business. If you are in a school at least one soon to be hero is going to take advantage of the time that it takes for you to reload and take you down. And you won't see it coming since all your attention will be on reloading your gun. The wrong tool for the job.

Most crimes are not committed with guns that require quick changing magazines. The average number of shots fired in most gun crimes is three.

On the streets of the big American Democrat controlled shithole cities (where most of the gun crime takes place) the weapon of choice is what you can steal or get cheaply.

The first thing that needs to be done is seperate one gun crime from another. The average street shooting from the Mass Shooting. Then there is the 7-11 stickup. Then the "Gimme yer Wallet".

Almost all of these can be prevented by a strong well trained Cop Presence whether it be Law Enforcement or Security. There are other parts to it as well. But each of these have different things about them that make each of them different to prevent in the long run. You are just pointing out just one of the problems. You aren't addressing a solution. Okay, now how would you approach solving the problem you presented.

I am pointing out that most gun crimes do not involve the kind of gun that the Liberals want to ban.

Suicides are the most gun deaths . Most gun crime is the 7-11 stick up or the druggies going after one another or the drunk getting pissed because some guy looked at his Ho.

As horrendous as any school shooting is it doesn't happen very often and it can be stopped with armed guards and/or teachers. Unfortunately that is the world we live in. Not that much different than airport security.

DRop the insult and you just might get someone to actually listen. You lost most of us in your opening sentence.

 

[Daryl Hunt]

Then figure out a way to prevent the use of the AR in the Mass School Shootings instead of all this other BS. It sounds like it's in your hands now. Either help find a solution, lose your AR, or become a FFL licensed dealer. Those are your 3 options. Leaving like it is is NOT an option.

I don't own an AR because I have a perfectly good rifle chambered for 5.56 NATO rounds and I can drop and swap a magazine with no difficulty.

And like I said the only way to prevent school shootings is to prevent people from just waltzing into a school with firearms of any kind no gun regulation will stop them.

Again, what is the solution. You pegged the problem. Now what is the solution. I have seen the solution work. But I am waiting for you to come up with your own solution. Maybe it would be better, who knows. But you can't keep pointing out the obvious and the problem. Move the needle to the next track and go on to a solution.

I told you.

If you want to stop school shootings you have to prevent people from being able to simply walk into a school with guns.

Again, that's the problem. What is a solution.

Preventing people from entering a school with guns is the solution.

I'm not going to get into the minutiae of it as each school district is more than capable of implementing an agreed upon solution

Obviously, they aren't.

 

[Pop23]

During the AR ban, the AR crime rate was drastically reduced. Right after it was allowed to run out, the school shootings came on with a "Bang" and the AR was the weapon of choice. You can't dispute that.

I don't want to ban the AR. I want to regulate them to the next level. Whether they are or are not "The Problem" the public percieves them as such. By moving them to FFL status, you still get to keep your AR but you will be required to get a FFL license. From what you say, you are already in compliance with the requirements so what's stopping you from obtaining the FFL license if it's required for you to have your ARs. The fact remains, not one single gun crime has been done by a person possessing a FFL license since the beginning of time of the FFL licensing history. Now, that's a selling point you can shout to the world and the world will believe you. But it's not always about what's real. It's oftentimes, about what is perceived. And this would be within the 2nd amendment. it's already been contested many times.

AR style rifles are used very rarely.

What do we solve with this?

If we can’t even define a public safety issue, one that requires new law, then what do we gain?

An AR can be used in criminal activity, sure, but as we saw in the Indiana shooting and in Texas, they can be simply substituted

It's the weapon of choice for Mass Shootings. Much like the Thompson was in it's day. It matters little that it's a semi auto or not. It's the cheapest, best and fastest in operation semi auto that has ever been made. When you compare it to the Mini-14, the Mini-14 is heavy, sluggish and hard to handle when you have to reload. You can go through 3 mags on the AR in the time it takes you to empty the Mini-14, change mags, hit the recharging lever and go. The Record goes to the AR hands down in body counts. It doesn't take 3 shooters for a high body count. It only takes one. A M-16-A-4 wouldn't do any better for exactly the same reasons. As long as it's the weapon of choice, it can be deemed a Public Safety Issue and can be Regulated. The only question is how to regulate it. I like my idea of making it FFL. That falls well within the 2nd amendment guidelines.

So what?

Ban it and then some other semiautomatic will be used.

The only way to prevent school shootings is to prevent people with guns from entering a school

There is no gun ban or gun law that will stop a person hell bent on murder

Now if you really want to talk about gun violence why do you focus so much on mass shootings? Mass shootings account for 1% of all murders where 70% of all murders are committed in very small very distinct urban areas that are well known.

Tell me why don't you ever talk about that?

You keep talking about banning. I didn't even bring that up. Is that what you want? If you can't get your way, do we just ban it? Or do we do it the way it's been constitutionally done in the past and regulate it. But if you want it banned if you can't get your way then that's okay too.

Correct.

No one is talking about ‘banning’ anything.

Indeed, we can explore ways to both address the issue of gun crime and violence and make gun ownership subject to fewer regulations.

There are 5 categories of gun violence that I posted earlier, a one size fits all solution simply will not accomplish anything. There must be a multi faceted approach starting with gang involvement.

 

[Daryl Hunt]

AR style rifles are used very rarely.

What do we solve with this?

If we can’t even define a public safety issue, one that requires new law, then what do we gain?

An AR can be used in criminal activity, sure, but as we saw in the Indiana shooting and in Texas, they can be simply substituted

It's the weapon of choice for Mass Shootings. Much like the Thompson was in it's day. It matters little that it's a semi auto or not. It's the cheapest, best and fastest in operation semi auto that has ever been made. When you compare it to the Mini-14, the Mini-14 is heavy, sluggish and hard to handle when you have to reload. You can go through 3 mags on the AR in the time it takes you to empty the Mini-14, change mags, hit the recharging lever and go. The Record goes to the AR hands down in body counts. It doesn't take 3 shooters for a high body count. It only takes one. A M-16-A-4 wouldn't do any better for exactly the same reasons. As long as it's the weapon of choice, it can be deemed a Public Safety Issue and can be Regulated. The only question is how to regulate it. I like my idea of making it FFL. That falls well within the 2nd amendment guidelines.

So what?

Ban it and then some other semiautomatic will be used.

The only way to prevent school shootings is to prevent people with guns from entering a school

There is no gun ban or gun law that will stop a person hell bent on murder

Now if you really want to talk about gun violence why do you focus so much on mass shootings? Mass shootings account for 1% of all murders where 70% of all murders are committed in very small very distinct urban areas that are well known.

Tell me why don't you ever talk about that?

You keep talking about banning. I didn't even bring that up. Is that what you want? If you can't get your way, do we just ban it? Or do we do it the way it's been constitutionally done in the past and regulate it. But if you want it banned if you can't get your way then that's okay too.

Correct.

No one is talking about ‘banning’ anything.

Indeed, we can explore ways to both address the issue of gun crime and violence and make gun ownership subject to fewer regulations.

There are 5 categories of gun violence that I posted earlier, a one size fits all solution simply will not accomplish anything. There must be a multi faceted approach starting with gang involvement.

And......tap, tap.....is this mike on?

 

[Pop23]

It's the weapon of choice for Mass Shootings. Much like the Thompson was in it's day. It matters little that it's a semi auto or not. It's the cheapest, best and fastest in operation semi auto that has ever been made. When you compare it to the Mini-14, the Mini-14 is heavy, sluggish and hard to handle when you have to reload. You can go through 3 mags on the AR in the time it takes you to empty the Mini-14, change mags, hit the recharging lever and go. The Record goes to the AR hands down in body counts. It doesn't take 3 shooters for a high body count. It only takes one. A M-16-A-4 wouldn't do any better for exactly the same reasons. As long as it's the weapon of choice, it can be deemed a Public Safety Issue and can be Regulated. The only question is how to regulate it. I like my idea of making it FFL. That falls well within the 2nd amendment guidelines.

So what?

Ban it and then some other semiautomatic will be used.

The only way to prevent school shootings is to prevent people with guns from entering a school

There is no gun ban or gun law that will stop a person hell bent on murder

Now if you really want to talk about gun violence why do you focus so much on mass shootings? Mass shootings account for 1% of all murders where 70% of all murders are committed in very small very distinct urban areas that are well known.

Tell me why don't you ever talk about that?

You keep talking about banning. I didn't even bring that up. Is that what you want? If you can't get your way, do we just ban it? Or do we do it the way it's been constitutionally done in the past and regulate it. But if you want it banned if you can't get your way then that's okay too.

Correct.

No one is talking about ‘banning’ anything.

Indeed, we can explore ways to both address the issue of gun crime and violence and make gun ownership subject to fewer regulations.

There are 5 categories of gun violence that I posted earlier, a one size fits all solution simply will not accomplish anything. There must be a multi faceted approach starting with gang involvement.

And......tap, tap.....is this mike on?

I’ve answered each. You? Silence

Nothing can be done about suicide. people will kill themselves with or without guns. Japan, So Korea and France suicides rates are as high or higher than ours. All have strict gun restrictions

Treat gangs as organized crime

Nothing can be done without making it worse on the victims of domestic violence

Police shoot to save self and others. Leave it alone.

The least killed in a category is mass shooting. Quit putting bullied kids on psyc drugs.

You next.

 

[Daryl Hunt]

So what?

Ban it and then some other semiautomatic will be used.

The only way to prevent school shootings is to prevent people with guns from entering a school

There is no gun ban or gun law that will stop a person hell bent on murder

Now if you really want to talk about gun violence why do you focus so much on mass shootings? Mass shootings account for 1% of all murders where 70% of all murders are committed in very small very distinct urban areas that are well known.

Tell me why don't you ever talk about that?

You keep talking about banning. I didn't even bring that up. Is that what you want? If you can't get your way, do we just ban it? Or do we do it the way it's been constitutionally done in the past and regulate it. But if you want it banned if you can't get your way then that's okay too.

Correct.

No one is talking about ‘banning’ anything.

Indeed, we can explore ways to both address the issue of gun crime and violence and make gun ownership subject to fewer regulations.

There are 5 categories of gun violence that I posted earlier, a one size fits all solution simply will not accomplish anything. There must be a multi faceted approach starting with gang involvement.

And......tap, tap.....is this mike on?

I’ve answered each. You? Silence

Nothing can be done about suicide. people will kill themselves with or without guns. Japan, So Korea and France suicides rates are as high or higher than ours. All have strict gun restrictions

Treat gangs as organized crime

Nothing can be done without making it worse on the victims of domestic violence

Police shoot to save self and others. Leave it alone.

The least killed in a category is mass shooting. Quit putting bullied kids on psyc drugs.

You next.

Funny. The Gun Dealers, Health Care Providers and Cops are meeting next week to start a dialogue about firearm suicide. Maybe they know something you don't. it's never been done bringing those 3 together. But it's a damned good start. And it's done locally.

Street Gangs are already treated like Organized Crime. The problem there is, even a Criminal of any kind has rights. You have to prove a crime has been committed by a specific individual in order to make that arrest or have a good chance of proving it. In Russia, they would just poison them. I don't believe I want to live in Russia. You might want to break this up into individual problems since most will be a bit lengthy in the solutions or at least the debates. Anything less won't solve a damned thing.

I will stop here on your list. IF you want to discuss each and every one please present them one at a time as they will require different discussions and solutions.

 

[Daryl Hunt]

So what?

Ban it and then some other semiautomatic will be used.

The only way to prevent school shootings is to prevent people with guns from entering a school

There is no gun ban or gun law that will stop a person hell bent on murder

Now if you really want to talk about gun violence why do you focus so much on mass shootings? Mass shootings account for 1% of all murders where 70% of all murders are committed in very small very distinct urban areas that are well known.

Tell me why don't you ever talk about that?

You keep talking about banning. I didn't even bring that up. Is that what you want? If you can't get your way, do we just ban it? Or do we do it the way it's been constitutionally done in the past and regulate it. But if you want it banned if you can't get your way then that's okay too.

Correct.

No one is talking about ‘banning’ anything.

Indeed, we can explore ways to both address the issue of gun crime and violence and make gun ownership subject to fewer regulations.

There are 5 categories of gun violence that I posted earlier, a one size fits all solution simply will not accomplish anything. There must be a multi faceted approach starting with gang involvement.

And......tap, tap.....is this mike on?

I’ve answered each. You? Silence
t.

And knock off with the insults. Or at least start your response with the insult so we can start ignoring your response without having to wade through your entire post.

 

[hunarcy]

Much better background check system that actually includes all felons and dv convictions and any ERPO removal of guns. This needs to be kept accurate and current and it needs to apply to every purchase of a gun and any transfers that are not between immediate family members.

IF a legal gun owner loses or has a gun stolen, the owner MUST report it to police. Otherwise, if the gun is used in a crime, that owner shares legal responsibility for the crime.

Ban AR-15's and similar assault rifles.

1. You are talking about National Background Checks. I agree. And background checks for all sales and transfers of weapons. The common person can still get the firearms easy enough and the criminal just lost one of his most sought after ways of procuring guns. And I would include inter family transfers as well.

2. If a Gun Owner has a gun stolen or lost and doesn't report it then he should be held totally responsible for how the gun is used. Same thing if he loans it out. He should be tried as if he were the one holding it. Firearm Security should not be such a joke.

No Firearms can be banned. You can bump it up to the next level though. Make it so that you have to have a FFL license to own one. Those with Firearms Licenses have NEVER been any problem at all. They abide by the laws, keep their firearms secure and don't go loaning them out to others. You want to steal the guns from a Gun Collector, better bring the tools to take out the entire side of his house so you can run your forklift inside and haul off his walk in gun safe. Meanwhile, all those pesky alarms going off and those ridiculous cops showing up to arrest your butt. The good news is, any one of us that can pass a current background check to obtain a hand gun can also pass a federal FFL License background check. Just pay the 200 bucks every 5 years and meet the security requirements. So don't ban it, regulate it.

Yes...those 3 suggestions show you are not serious about stopping criminals or mass shooters...you simply want to punish people who own guns, and you want to put them in legal peril for the act of buying, owning and carrying a gun......

How about focusing on stopping criminals and mass shooters....which none of what you posted will do one thing to stop.

Those with Firearms Licenses have NEVER been any problem at all

Yes.......there is no need to license law abiding gun owners, they will be law abiding without the piece of paper....the criminals cannot own, buy or carry guns so they can't get a license in the first place....this is where you can't see the truth.....

And of course....you have your Poll Tax.....a tax on the exercise of a Right which is unConstitutional......and the securtiy requirements, will be increased to the point where only the rich can own guns...as they already do in Europe.....

200 bucks every 5 years and meet the security requirements.

Murdock v. Pennsylvania 319 U.S. 105 (1943)

Held:
- A municipal ordinance which, as construed and applied, requires religious colporteurs to pay a license tax as a condition to the pursuit of their activities, is invalid under the Federal Constitution as a denial of freedom of speech, press and religion.
- A State may not impose a charge for the enjoyment of a right granted by the Federal Constitution.
- The flat license tax here involved restrains in advance the Constitutional liberties of press and religion, and inevitably tends to suppress their exercise

Opinion:

...It is contended, however, that the fact that the license tax can suppress or control this activity is unimportant if it does not do so. But that is to disregard the nature of this tax. It is a license tax -- a flat tax imposed on the exercise of a privilege granted by the Bill of Rights. A state may not impose a charge for the enjoyment of a right granted by the Federal Constitution....

... The power to impose a license tax on the exercise of these freedoms is indeed as potent as the power of censorship which this Court has repeatedly struck down...

... It is a flat license tax levied and collected as a condition to the pursuit of activities whose enjoyment is guaranteed by the First Amendment. Accordingly, it restrains in advance those constitutional liberties of press and religion, and inevitably tends to suppress their exercise...
Murdock v. Pennsylvania 319 U.S. 105 (1943)

What the hell does the taxation of Religious written material have to do with firearms. Are you saying that we should all bow and pray to our guns? We should build shrines for them? I don't know of a single person that has ever been killed by being beaten to death by a religious pamphlet. Now, there might be a couple of cases where someone was beaten to death by a leather bound bible but I just haven't hear about it. But never a Pamphlet. Firearms are NOT covered by the 1st amendment like Religion is no matter how hard you pray to your guns.

This is another case where you bring this up hoping that the rest of us won't actually read the whole thing. You cherry pick what you think makes you look brilliant and leave out the real meat.

If you REALLY were engaged in honest discussion, you would acknowledge that the relevance of taxation of Religious written material is that it establishes that fees cannot be used to limit the rights of the people. Just as poll taxes were rejected as unconstitutional limitations on voting. Your annoyance is that obviously you can't find a rebuttal to his argument. You would be better served to just admit your proposal is vanquished.

 

[Daryl Hunt]

Much better background check system that actually includes all felons and dv convictions and any ERPO removal of guns. This needs to be kept accurate and current and it needs to apply to every purchase of a gun and any transfers that are not between immediate family members.

IF a legal gun owner loses or has a gun stolen, the owner MUST report it to police. Otherwise, if the gun is used in a crime, that owner shares legal responsibility for the crime.

Ban AR-15's and similar assault rifles.

1. You are talking about National Background Checks. I agree. And background checks for all sales and transfers of weapons. The common person can still get the firearms easy enough and the criminal just lost one of his most sought after ways of procuring guns. And I would include inter family transfers as well.

2. If a Gun Owner has a gun stolen or lost and doesn't report it then he should be held totally responsible for how the gun is used. Same thing if he loans it out. He should be tried as if he were the one holding it. Firearm Security should not be such a joke.

No Firearms can be banned. You can bump it up to the next level though. Make it so that you have to have a FFL license to own one. Those with Firearms Licenses have NEVER been any problem at all. They abide by the laws, keep their firearms secure and don't go loaning them out to others. You want to steal the guns from a Gun Collector, better bring the tools to take out the entire side of his house so you can run your forklift inside and haul off his walk in gun safe. Meanwhile, all those pesky alarms going off and those ridiculous cops showing up to arrest your butt. The good news is, any one of us that can pass a current background check to obtain a hand gun can also pass a federal FFL License background check. Just pay the 200 bucks every 5 years and meet the security requirements. So don't ban it, regulate it.

Yes...those 3 suggestions show you are not serious about stopping criminals or mass shooters...you simply want to punish people who own guns, and you want to put them in legal peril for the act of buying, owning and carrying a gun......

How about focusing on stopping criminals and mass shooters....which none of what you posted will do one thing to stop.

Those with Firearms Licenses have NEVER been any problem at all

Yes.......there is no need to license law abiding gun owners, they will be law abiding without the piece of paper....the criminals cannot own, buy or carry guns so they can't get a license in the first place....this is where you can't see the truth.....

And of course....you have your Poll Tax.....a tax on the exercise of a Right which is unConstitutional......and the securtiy requirements, will be increased to the point where only the rich can own guns...as they already do in Europe.....

200 bucks every 5 years and meet the security requirements.

Murdock v. Pennsylvania 319 U.S. 105 (1943)

Held:
- A municipal ordinance which, as construed and applied, requires religious colporteurs to pay a license tax as a condition to the pursuit of their activities, is invalid under the Federal Constitution as a denial of freedom of speech, press and religion.
- A State may not impose a charge for the enjoyment of a right granted by the Federal Constitution.
- The flat license tax here involved restrains in advance the Constitutional liberties of press and religion, and inevitably tends to suppress their exercise

Opinion:

...It is contended, however, that the fact that the license tax can suppress or control this activity is unimportant if it does not do so. But that is to disregard the nature of this tax. It is a license tax -- a flat tax imposed on the exercise of a privilege granted by the Bill of Rights. A state may not impose a charge for the enjoyment of a right granted by the Federal Constitution....

... The power to impose a license tax on the exercise of these freedoms is indeed as potent as the power of censorship which this Court has repeatedly struck down...

... It is a flat license tax levied and collected as a condition to the pursuit of activities whose enjoyment is guaranteed by the First Amendment. Accordingly, it restrains in advance those constitutional liberties of press and religion, and inevitably tends to suppress their exercise...
Murdock v. Pennsylvania 319 U.S. 105 (1943)

What the hell does the taxation of Religious written material have to do with firearms. Are you saying that we should all bow and pray to our guns? We should build shrines for them? I don't know of a single person that has ever been killed by being beaten to death by a religious pamphlet. Now, there might be a couple of cases where someone was beaten to death by a leather bound bible but I just haven't hear about it. But never a Pamphlet. Firearms are NOT covered by the 1st amendment like Religion is no matter how hard you pray to your guns.

This is another case where you bring this up hoping that the rest of us won't actually read the whole thing. You cherry pick what you think makes you look brilliant and leave out the real meat.

If you REALLY were engaged in honest discussion, you would acknowledge that the relevance of taxation of Religious written material is that it establishes that fees cannot be used to limit the rights of the people. Just as poll taxes were rejected as unconstitutional limitations on voting. Your annoyance is that obviously you can't find a rebuttal to his argument. You would be better served to just admit your proposal is vanquished.

I just know the fundemental difference between Religious Rights (1st amendment) and Firearms Rights (2nd amendment) and know that they don't overlap. I am also very much aware of the supreme court ruling having read the whole thing and there is no way that it can be transferred to a firearm. And I if I go by the other Supreme Court rulings, they don't think so either.