I promise not to debate you…

This forum made possible through the generous support of SDN members, donors, and sponsors. Thank you.
Members don't see this ad.
chocomorsel said:
Funny thing is, there is a little tiny town in Nothern Italy with my last name. A name that Americans butcher and can’t pronounce. A name that Hispanics and Italians have no problem pronouncing. Plus the Italians put the right accent where it should be. It’s lovely when I travel there and people immediately pronounce my name without any difficulty. I take it as a sign. Lol
Click to expand...
Chocomorsel seems very easy to pronounce…
 
chocomorsel said:
Exactly. You forgot the Netherlands.
This mentality is very closed minded to me. I mean we have black folks all over the Caucasian world and they aren't exactly being hunted down and shot.
I mean, besides mostly in America here and there.
Hell as a black male, your chances are better outside the US.
Click to expand...
The Trump era has definitely escalated the tension in the environment.
 
pgg said:
Of course there can be compromise. We already have regulations - many of which are unenforced. You want to keep adding more. I might agree to some.

What you're telling me is that you're not willing to move toward me at all, if I agree to some of the new rules you want. Who's being rigid and unreasonable now?

How about removing sound suppressors from the NFA? National CCW reciprocity, same way we have national reciprocity for drivers licenses? Destruction of 4473 forms 3 months after the transaction is compete and the background check done? Are those reasonable to you?
Click to expand...

I feel like asking for suppressors is such a weird ask but I doubt someone planning nefarious things follows any of the rules in acquiring one like you would so sure, I’m ok with all those asks.

I will never understand the arguments behind “it’s been this way for 50 years, or the Founders…..” etc though. We quite simply have proven that as a society we aren’t mature enough to have guns at the level we do, or the access we currently do. So unfortunately it follows we must sacrifice individual freedom for more control and regulation for the greater good.

I also understand the fear of registries, I’m not the biggest fan of “big brother/big gov” myself and can see the slippery slope from registry to confiscation. But how many things in our lives are already registered? Your guns, your CCW, your ability to drive, your vehicle, a boat if you have one, etc. If 20 years from now electric vehicles are standard, and you have an old ‘69 Camaro gas guzzler that is fun as hell to drive but driving them on city/fed roads is made illegal do you still do it? I feel like you are easily one of the most well read people on here, and you have an obvious sense of duty etc so I assume you may not like it but you would, in the end, follow the laws of the land for the greater good.

The truth (for me) is guns aside from long rifles or shotguns really only have two purposes, they’re “fun” or theyre instruments of destruction. Arguing you need a suppressed whatever rifle or pistol with >10 rounds for home defense is just a nonstarter to the liberals as the two sides are so different. I understand you’d say well if your mind is made up and we can’t discuss it there’s no compromise. And that’s fair.

The vast majority of gun owners that have that setup will remain lawful. This is true. The gun owner that uses it to protect their home is rare. The one that uses tools like that for nefarious things is getting ever more common though unfortunately. So something has to change, and even if better gun laws/more restrictions aren’t the “best” or most targeted way to deal with the root socioeconomic/mental health/societal factors that are most likely the cause they’re likely the easiest way.

So sure, your CCW should be recognized in all 50 states. Extra taxes or forms post-background checks shouldn’t delay you additional months. Sure, you can have a suppressor, but I don’t understand an argument that a suppressor shouldn’t be registered. I think guns should be registered just like your car/motorcycle. I think you should have to have a background check and a course performed prior to purchase. There should be some mandatory wait for any pistol or short barreled rifle regardless of if you own 1 gun previously. I do myself think we just need to ban all handguns and “AR’s”, I just also know that will never happen, but we have to make it harder for people to turn 18 and buy a weapon they can scare an entire police force with, or decide to skip PT after your back surgery, buy a gun, and go looking for your doctor. The background check alone isn’t it.
 
I think that the underlying issue that has changed (is changing) is the mental health and stability of our society. Guns just happen to be the tool of destruction that the mentally unstable and angry people are utilizing with great destructive force. Not saying that in defense of guns, but just as an observation. Angry and unstable people will still find ways to cause harm whether by poisoning, bombs, knives, plane crashes into buildings, etc. Guns are just currently the most popular method.
No matter what is done with guns, we need a more mentally healthy society that cares about the welfare of others and does not have so much pent up anger. We are a very divided nation at present. I wish I knew how to get us there.
 
Gern Blansten said:
I think that the underlying issue that has changed (is changing) is the mental health and stability of our society. Guns just happen to be the tool of destruction that the mentally unstable and angry people are utilizing with great destructive force. Not saying that in defense of guns, but just as an observation. Angry and unstable people will still find ways to cause harm whether by poisoning, bombs, knives, plane crashes into buildings, etc. Guns are just currently the most popular method.
No matter what is done with guns, we need a more mentally healthy society that cares about the welfare of others and does not have so much pent up anger. We are a very divided nation at present. I wish I knew how to get us there.
Click to expand...

I agree with you. But you can’t walk into Walmart and buy a ready made pipe bomb/fertilizer bomb, or a poison and delivery system etc. Sure if we got rid of all guns (literally will never happen) some kid would go to school with an bat or kitchen knife but then could be more easily dealt with by unarmed students/employees or the lone security guard. Certainly police won’t be worried about a kid with a bat or 10” knife.
 
Robotic Wis-Hipple said:
I agree with you. But you can’t walk into Walmart and buy a ready made pipe bomb/fertilizer bomb, or a poison and delivery system etc. Sure if we got rid of all guns (literally will never happen) some kid would go to school with an bat or kitchen knife but then could be more easily dealt with by unarmed students/employees or the lone security guard. Certainly police won’t be worried about a kid with a bat or 10” knife.
Click to expand...
Recently, a kid killed another in school with a knife. Got no national press. There was a guy with a knife at a major university that killed three (I think) before he was killed. The numbers won’t be as high, but a guy with a knife in a crowd can do a lot of damage. A guy driving an SUV into a crowd has been shown to be very effective as well. Doesn’t get the same press coverage, it seems. But still lots of carnage. Mentally ill unstable and angry people find new ways.
I’m not disagreeing with you. Just pointing out again that the underlying problem will still need to be addressed.
 
Gern Blansten said:
I think that the underlying issue that has changed (is changing) is the mental health and stability of our society. Guns just happen to be the tool of destruction that the mentally unstable and angry people are utilizing with great destructive force. Not saying that in defense of guns, but just as an observation. Angry and unstable people will still find ways to cause harm whether by poisoning, bombs, knives, plane crashes into buildings, etc. Guns are just currently the most popular method.
No matter what is done with guns, we need a more mentally healthy society that cares about the welfare of others and does not have so much pent up anger. We are a very divided nation at present. I wish I knew how to get us there.
Click to expand...

Curious as to your thoughts on why it's so much worse (mental health, stability of society, gun violence, etc.) in the US than in other countries that aren't having the numbers of mass shootings or rates of gun homicide/suicide that we are?
 
pgg said:
Just because some state legislature arbitrarily redefines something that has existed for 50+ years (an AR15 magazine) doesn't change the meaning of the words. Words have meaning.

30 rounds is a standard capacity magazine, and has been since the Vietnam War. You might reasonably call a 100-rd drum magazine "high capacity" but 30 is just standard.

California could declare chicken wings to be legs, but that wouldn't mean chickens will suddenly start supplying four drumsticks apiece to the KFC factory farm.


Huh

Remind me what exactly you're conceding to my side of this debate?

Or are you suggesting that if the gun control side takes a LITTLE BIT right now, instead of banning everything in a door-to-door roundup, that's some kind of "compromise" that I should be grateful for?
Click to expand...

Call the magazine non-standard then, I don't care. 10 seems like plenty. For the police and for the public. Canada appears on the cusp of passing national law limiting capacity to 5. I don't care what you call it - 5 or 10 is a lot safer than 30, 50, or 100 when someone with an AR is bearing down on unarmed innocents.

I conceded your suggestions with regard to sound suppressors and your CCW law. I really don't understand your paranoia with the banning of everything gun-related. Even if true, which it isn't in my opinion, it won't happen. Again, you're protected by the constitution. It's not like having the NRA pay off Senators or appeal states to pass semi-automatics for 18 year olds, 100 round drums, no background checks, permit-less carry, etc. does anything to make your right to bear more intact and iron clad. It just makes society less safe and makes it easier for people who have no business owning firearms to get their hands on them and use them in situations where they otherwise wouldn't have been able.
 
Gern Blansten said:
Recently, a kid killed another in school with a knife. Got no national press. There was a guy with a knife at a major university that killed three (I think) before he was killed. The numbers won’t be as high, but a guy with a knife in a crowd can do a lot of damage. A guy driving an SUV into a crowd has been shown to be very effective as well. Doesn’t get the same press coverage, it seems. But still lots of carnage. Mentally ill unstable and angry people find new ways.
I’m not disagreeing with you. Just pointing out again that the underlying problem will still need to be addressed.
Click to expand...

Of course. There has definitely also been a few drive a car into a crowd type of attacks in the last few years. I also remember somewhere in the UK a handful of years (decade?) ago where a guy was running around with a hatchet or machete or something so yes, zero guns will not mean zero senseless attacks on innocents.

But we can’t just let the status quo be and accept kids or young adults shooting kids in schools or movie theaters or concerts or supermarkets as some form of collateral damage to the rights of people who enjoy guns.

I don’t have a perfect or even eloquent idea to fix it, I don’t think anyone does. But I’m with Steve Kerr here.
 
Gern Blansten said:
Recently, a kid killed another in school with a knife. Got no national press. There was a guy with a knife at a major university that killed three (I think) before he was killed. The numbers won’t be as high, but a guy with a knife in a crowd can do a lot of damage. A guy driving an SUV into a crowd has been shown to be very effective as well. Doesn’t get the same press coverage, it seems. But still lots of carnage. Mentally ill unstable and angry people find new ways.
I’m not disagreeing with you. Just pointing out again that the underlying problem will still need to be addressed.
Click to expand...
You are partially right. Lots of angry unstable people in this country. However, those people have easy access to guns.

So the underlying issues are angry unstable people with easy access to guns. Not just one, not just the other. Both need to be addressed equally.

This thing is becoming a fad in America and one of the reasons is because these people know they will get the press and notoriety and most often if they don't kill themselves, they will be kept alive to have a "fair" trial. Yeah, they see easy pickings and no one doing anything but prayers and condolences for the victims and figure, why the hell not? Especially if they have already make up their minds to off themselves.
 
I have no problem with having people own guns in their homes for self-defense as long as they are responsible with them.

I don’t get the arguments around having barriers, checks and training requirements for buying them though.

Most law-abiding citizens who are responsible want to have good training- and are willing to do the due diligence to get their guns. Contrary to most rhetoric - most criminals are stupid and many won’t jump through the hoops. Sure, many will get access to guns illegally but I see fewer crazy 18-year-olds showing up to buy an AR-15 and shoot up a school soon after if there is some sort of vetting, training, wait etc.
 
Southpaw said:
Curious as to your thoughts on why it's so much worse (mental health, stability of society, gun violence, etc.) in the US than in other countries that aren't having the numbers of mass shootings or rates of gun homicide/suicide that we are?
Click to expand...
My two best guesses are divisive politicians on both sides and the 24 hour news cycle trying to get the best ratings and creating discord in the communities.
Lack of access to mental health treatment is another big one.
 
Gern Blansten said:
My two best guesses are divisive politicians on both sides and the 24 hour news cycle trying to get the best ratings and creating discord in the communities.
Lack of access to mental health treatment is another big one.
Click to expand...
How do we fix these problems? Not expecting you to know the answer but there just always seems to be a new problem we need to fix as we dig deeper trying to figure out what is wrong with our society. I can tell you personally, I stopped watching the news all together, unless it’s about stocks and just been focusing on spending time with my family and it has helped a lot.

Unfortunately, we all have to share the same space with those who are adamantly inspired to display and act on their hate and anger.
 
chocomorsel said:
Exactly. You forgot the Netherlands.
This mentality is very closed minded to me. I mean we have black folks all over the Caucasian world and they aren't exactly being hunted down and shot.
I mean, besides mostly in America here and there.
Hell as a black male, your chances are better outside the US.
Click to expand...
Arguable. There are a lot of negatives about the US but if we want to talk about upward mobility, we as African Americans are probably in the best places for that. Again, it's a discussion to be had. If if weren't the case, many upper middle class and upper class black families would've departed a long time ago, but they havent. Hell, even Oprah experienced racism in Switzerland and she's a billionaire.
 
RadOncDoc21 said:
I can tell you personally, I stopped watching the news all together, unless it’s about stocks and just been focusing on spending time with my family and it has helped a lot.
Click to expand...
Me too. The news now is endless outrage porn. My favorite is when cnn reports on how outrageous fox is, then fox reports on how outrageous cnn is. Truly a spiral to the bottom.
 
Gern Blansten said:
My two best guesses are divisive politicians on both sides and the 24 hour news cycle trying to get the best ratings and creating discord in the communities.
Lack of access to mental health treatment is another big one.
Click to expand...

I think the socioeconomic/social angst side of it is so complex and deeply rooted that a fix is literally a decades long cultural evolution/revolution type of thing. I’m positive there’s no legislating our way out of that giant elephant in the room in this country.

The mental health issue is a little bit of a scapegoat imo, though I fully recognize and believe the vast majority of us have moments of mental health issues and a significant portion of our public has chronic untreated mental health problems. But if 18yo Uvalde shooter couldn’t acquire a gun, what’s he do? Maybe he goes in and stabs a few 3rd graders and that’s terrible, or maybe he gets past it or grows out of whatever angst he had to get off his chest or the desire for notoriety? I truly don’t know. At the very least we need to legislate our way out of the acute anger/depression episode walking out with an AR and into a school or hospital in 24-36hrs problem.

But I will say, the mental health issue is equally difficult to make steps forward on in our current bipartisan polarity. Who pays for it? Are your records relating to mental health confidential in regards to employment, background checks, general social stigma? How do we actually provide enough mental health practitioners to service the need? Who pays for their training? Etc, etc.

How about a bill tying mental health healthcare funding and delivery logistics with gun background checks, mandatory waits, but no further restriction on ownership or threat of seizure? Does the gun crowd vote for that or is that too many anti-conservative ideas at once despite the fact it’s aiming at their root cause vs just coming after their guns?
 
Twiggidy said:
Arguable. There are a lot of negatives about the US but if we want to talk about upward mobility, we as African Americans are probably in the best places for that. Again, it's a discussion to be had. If if weren't the case, many upper middle class and upper class black families would've departed a long time ago, but they havent. Hell, even Oprah experienced racism in Switzerland and she's a billionaire.
Click to expand...
Upward mobility without feeling safe makes absolutely zero sense to me. This country is the most violent first world country in the world.
And so what they didn't want to sell Oprah a 100K bag? Racism is everywhere, I know that. If they don't want to sell me their stuff, I will move on to another place that does. Or buy it online. At least they don't go shooting up the stores cuz they are angry at their dogs.
Let's agree to disagree.
A few Black folks are starting to move out of the country BTW.
I am not talking about racism as much as I am talking about safety. To me, they should go hand in had.
 
VA Hopeful Dr said:
I started hunting at 12. Whose gun should I use if not mine?
Click to expand...
Your parents should buy the gun for you to use but should keep it out of reach when not using it. Buying a gun, telling your child it's theirs, and then letting them keep it or gain access to it shouldn't happen.
 
I do agree with people here that we need to address other issues simultaneously with gun reform. First off bullying needs to be a mandatory suspension, and if it continues, expulsion, like this needs to be a law and required. Pass a law that makes it impossible for the bullies parents to sue the kids parents and school, but also let the bullied kid sue the district and anyone involved who didn't act. Make it possible to file criminal charges and massive fines for covering up bullying. No kid should have to learn the majority of people suck when they're 10 by getting bullied by their peers. This is how a lot of school shooters start to incubate the fear and rage to do what they do.

Second off this country needs more mental Healthcare services that are accessible to the average person. Take the money from the military if you have to I'm more scared of a deranged unstable maniac killing me that's from here than other places.

Third and hardest we need to fix this economy. If the average person wasn't struggling to survive and was able to pay for a house, food, and some luxuries like vacations and stuff for hobbies that would really help.

The first thing would keep kids from experiencing trauma that can make them turn violent and the other 2 will give people hope that they currently have don't have now.

Edit spelling
 
Last edited:
Proudfather94 said:
Your parents should buy the gun for you to use but should keep it out of reach when not using it. Buying a gun, telling your child it's theirs, and then letting them keep it or gain access to it shouldn't happen.
Click to expand...
Of course not. Do people really give their 12 years olds guns and say "it's yours now, do whatever you want with it"?.
 
VA Hopeful Dr said:
Of course not. Do people really give their 12 years olds guns and say "it's yours now, do whatever you want with it"?.
Click to expand...
I'm honestly shocked you are asking this question based on what states you have shared you lived in over the years. I say that because I'ved lived there too.
 
Last edited:
apple.news

Ron DeSantis blocks funds for Tampa Bay Rays after team’s gun safety tweets — Guardian US

Florida governor Ron DeSantis defended his veto of $35m in funding for a potential spring training site for the Tampa Bay Rays on Friday
apple.news apple.news

Dude cancels Disney now going after the Rays… this guy has issues!

Saw this one today:
apple.news

Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis reaches disgraceful new low in bullying Special Olympics | Opinion — USA TODAY

Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis has previously appealed to racists and other Cro-Magnon types. His actions against Special Olympics appeal to anti-vaxxers.
apple.news apple.news
 
Last edited:
Gern Blansten said:
My two best guesses are divisive politicians on both sides and the 24 hour news cycle trying to get the best ratings and creating discord in the communities.
Lack of access to mental health treatment is another big one.
Click to expand...

“Mental health” sounds like a cop out to me. What is the diagnosis of these people? Depression? Anxiety? Schizophrenia? Most of these mass murderers are younger males with impulse control problems. The most recent shooters in Buffalo and Texas were not necessarily known to have mental health issues. One was indoctrinated by toxic social media and internet groups and the other seemed to have poor impulse control. How would a better “mental health” infrastructure have prevented these events? Does every angsty teenager need to be locked up or medicated?

The whole “mental health” thing seems like a sleight of hand and a distraction from the fact that an 18 year old with poor impulse control was able to purchase two rifles without a sideways glance. That is the issue.
 
Neopolymath said:
I'm honestly shocked you are asking this question based on what states you have shared you lived in over the years. I say that because I'ved lived there too.
Click to expand...
Maybe I've had a sheltered upbringing, but no one I grew up with or know has stored their guns anywhere but in a locked container if there are children in the house.

I've been shooting since I was 12 and when we were done for the day the guns went right back in the safe.
 
VA Hopeful Dr said:
Maybe I've had a sheltered upbringing, but no one I grew up with or know has stored their guns anywhere but in a locked container if there are children in the house.

I've been shooting since I was 12 and when we were done for the day the guns went right back in the safe.
Click to expand...
Some of the people I know think securing their guns means locking them up in a display case made out of glass and wood. A wannabe school shooter could get to them in probably 5 minutes with a crowbar or sledge hammer.
 
VA Hopeful Dr said:
Maybe I've had a sheltered upbringing, but no one I grew up with or know has stored their guns anywhere but in a locked container if there are children in the house.

I've been shooting since I was 12 and when we were done for the day the guns went right back in the safe.
Click to expand...
My father-in-law stored all his guns, both loaded rifles and pistols, under his bed for like 25 yrs until my mother-in-law made him get a safe. My wife and her brother as kids knew not to touch them, but my wife remarks that it was mostly just sheer dumb luck that there was never any kind of incident.
 
vector2 said:
My father-in-law stored all his guns, both loaded rifles and pistols, under his bed for like 25 yrs until my mother-in-law made him get a safe. My wife and her brother as kids knew not to touch them, but my wife remarks that it was mostly just sheer dumb luck that there was never any kind of incident.
Click to expand...
As a kid, I knew someone who’s dad had his gun stolen from him. Took about 2 weeks to find the person who stole it but things definitely could have gone wrong. I also had a friend who pointed and pulled the trigger to scare someone and had a gun pointed at me in college while parking my car. In every situation, nobody was the gun “owner,” or had any history of mental issues, so I’m over the easy access to guns personally.
 
Last edited:
GravelRider said:
“Mental health” sounds like a cop out to me. What is the diagnosis of these people? Depression? Anxiety? Schizophrenia? Most of these mass murderers are younger males with impulse control problems. The most recent shooters in Buffalo and Texas were not necessarily known to have mental health issues. One was indoctrinated by toxic social media and internet groups and the other seemed to have poor impulse control. How would a better “mental health” infrastructure have prevented these events? Does every angsty teenager need to be locked up or medicated?

The whole “mental health” thing seems like a sleight of hand and a distraction from the fact that an 18 year old with poor impulse control was able to purchase two rifles without a sideways glance. That is the issue.
Click to expand...

Yep. The shooter in Buffalo was definitely racist, drove several hours to a predominantly Black neighborhood to shoot and kill Black people.

There are definitely mentally ill, racist and people with impulse control problems around the world. Easy access to guns is the reason that school kids, teachers, doctors and random people are getting killed while doing their every day activities.

If your child has severe mental health issues and is talking about threats of suicide or shooting someone else, sure you’ll probably get them therapy but the first thing any sane person would do is get rid of guns in the home if they have them.

And we all know that many "conservative" politicians are not willing to spend money for "hand outs" to people who need things like healthcare, mental health and social supports. So it seems like a ridiculous conversation to have anyone since "hand outs" will continue to go to wealthy people and corporations.
 
pgg said:
Small clarification - I favor a repeal of the Hughes Amendment, which closed the NFA machinegun registry. I object first and foremost to a law that manipulates market prices to such an extreme degree that law-abiding wealthy people can easily and freely exercise a right that law-abiding poor people can't.




These are good questions


First, for readers who aren't familiar with the 1934 National Firearms Act and the subject we're talking about ... a brief explanation. This law classified certain firearms as especially dangerous and deserving of regulation. A flat $200 tax (approximately $3500 in today's dollars) was to be paid for a tax stamp, and a federal registry tracing those firearms was created and maintained. Today, to buy these firearms, the tax must still be paid, the registry still exists, and the paperwork can take up to 8-12 months for ATF to process.

Included weapons are (broadly) machine guns, rifles with barrels shorter than 16", shotguns with barrels shorter than 18", sound suppressors (silencers), "destructive devices" (grenades, etc), and some other esoteric stuff classified as "any other weapons". In addition, destructive devices also have the manner in which they're stored regulated. You can buy a box of grenades (if you pay the $200 tax for each one, and you find can them for sale, good luck) but you can't store them in your sock drawer. An appropriate bunker, fire suppression system, etc is required.

Some historical perspective - the reason short-barreled rifles and shotguns are included is because they are more easily concealed. Initially, handguns were to be included in the NFA but that was a bridge too far for the gun control advocates of those days. So handguns were removed, but SBRs and SBSs stayed - despite the fact that easily concealable handguns were not regulated by the NFA at all. (Gun control laws don't have to make sense.)

The reason sound suppressors are included in the NFA is because hungry poor people were using them to illegally poach meals. Recurring theme: gun control is racist and classist. Most countries don't regulate sound suppressors at all, and just consider it good neighborly manners to put mufflers on loud guns.

When a NFA firearm is purchased, the $200 tax is paid, a background check is completed, and the firearm is registered. Generally, to transport it across state lines requires filing a form with the ATF. To transfer ownership to another person, another form must be filed to update the registry, and the new owner must pay the $200 tax again.

Just because something is legal to buy/register via the NFA doesn't mean it's legal in any particular state. You can't buy sound suppressors in California, for example.

In 1986, the Hughes amendment to the Firearm Owners Protection Act (FOPA) closed the machine gun registry. This meant that NEW manufactured machine guns could never be sold to civilians and added to the registry, but all of the existing machine guns in the registry could still be sold/transferred (so long as another $200 tax was paid). The result here is that legally transferrable machine guns are now extremely expensive (limited supply, no new manufacture). A semi-automatic AR15 can be purchased for well under $1000. A fully-automatic AR15 can be purchased for $25,000+ ... and some more "collectable" ones like older M16s routinely sell for $40,000+.


To answer your questions -

1.

The main point I was making was that NFA-registered firearms are almost never used in crimes in the first place, so making that law even more draconian (i.e. the Hughes amendment) was obviously not about public safety, but rather about incrementally banning a class of firearms. It was mostly a commentary about the arbitrary and incremental nature of gun control.

The NFA has a few problems with it that I object to. Subjecting all firearms to its rules would be unacceptable.

One, the tax. $200 is less onerous now, but it does still add a financial burden to the purchase of a firearm that disproportionately affects poor people. (At the time of its passing in 1934, the $200 tax was obviously meant to completely exclude all but wealthy people. Racism and classism again.) Today, $200 might not seem like a big deal when buying a $2500 custom rifle. But if you're poor and you can only afford $400 for a handgun for self-defense, another $200 is unacceptable.

Two, the registry. All of the historical data the world has observed so far is consistent with the idea that registration always leads to confiscation efforts. I want all state and federal records of firearm ownership destroyed. I'm not OK with expanding any of the existing registries to include other weapons. I don't care if the police make up some lies about how their investigative jobs would be harder without being able to trace firearm serial #s. They can stuff it in the same sack they use to keep their lies about needing encryption backdoors to all of our communications to make their investigative jobs easier.

Three, the unnecessary delays associated with the ATF processing the Form 1 & Form 4 transfers. I had to wait more than 6 months for most of the SBRs and suppressors I bought, some approached a year. The ability to exercise any enumerated Constitutional right should not be subject to arbitrary administrative delays. Freedom delayed is freedom denied. Imagine if you had to wait 6 months to get a permit to peaceably assemble and hold a demonstration. Not OK. Instant background check? OK. Eight months to cash a $200 check and issue a tax stamp? Not OK.


2.

As to which weapons should be available for citizens to own - this will always be a subjective issue, and I'll concede a line needs to be drawn somewhere. For the most part, I'm OK with where the NFA draws that line now: small arms, up to and including crew-served weapons and machine guns, some destructive devices. It's imperfect, but mostly appropriate (though again it should be noted that I object to the NFA tax, registry, and absurd delay/administrative burden).

If there wasn't already an NFA framework to build on, I would draw the line at weapons that target individuals. Any man-portable small arm that fires a projectile allows for effective defense and resistance to tyranny.

Tyranny, of course, doesn't come in the form of Army tanks and helicopters to kill you in your suburban home; it comes in the form of goons that show up at 3 AM to take you and your family away to be beaten, tortured, or quietly killed. For some reason this is a point of confusion to people who think armed citizens can't fight back against armies, despite living in a world that constantly gives us real-life examples of the ways people actually do. As well as easy examples of how today's tyrants and despots actually oppress their people. And ordinary guns are perfectly effective against those threats, for those with the will to use them.

This would exclude weapons with indiscriminate effects. Nuclear, radiological, biological, chemical, and large explosive devices obviously have no use for applications such as self-defense, hunting, or recreation. They are also not really appropriate as defensive weapons vs state actors, because of the indiscriminate collateral damage. In the Venn diagram of moral use vs terroristic use, there's too much overlap. Things like mines or autonomous weapons that aren't aimed at specific targets - no.

I think this is a useful framework for evaluating future weapons as well. Laser guns, OK. Microwave antenna area-denial skin-boiling rays, not OK. Drones with guns, maybe OK. Drones with bombs, probably not OK.

I actually think the opposition to civilian ownership of machineguns is a huge red herring. Machine guns, used by individuals are objectively far less effective than semi-automatic rifles. The military trains people not to use their rifles in fully automatic mode, because it's a waste of ammunition and less accurate than firing single rounds. Fully automatic fire has a place in squad and larger group tactics where suppressive fire is needed to support maneuver.

Most issue M4s these days actually have NO fully automatic setting, but rather are limited to 3-round bursts, because again fully automatic fire is generally wasteful and ineffective. A mass shooter with a machine gun would kill fewer people because he'd run out of ammo faster and hit fewer people with the ammunition he was carrying. One notable exception here - the Las Vegas shooter, which was an exceptional set of circumstances (distance, elevation, size of the crowd, no need to aim). And he used a bump stock, not a machine gun.

Banning machine guns doesn't make a lot of practical sense, but they are flashy, so they draw a lot of attention, despite being a non-problem.
Click to expand...
I think I'm missing something. You're saying in the beginning of the post you're in favor of repealing just the Hughes Amendment (meaning civilians can purchase new fully automatic weapons albeit within the framework of NFA), but then later in your post you highlight your issues with fees and registries in general. The crux of the NFA is the fee and the registry, so it sounds like in fact you'd prefer a total repeal, the result of which is that fully automatic weapons have the same ease of obtainment and lack of regulation as semiautomatic ones. Or is that you're ok with NFA for fully automatic weapons and other destructive devices, but not for the weapons which are currently not subject to the NFA tax + registry?

In regard to red herrings, yes I'm aware of the general ineffectiveness of indiscriminate fully automatic fire, but you know what notable exception pops into my mind? The 1997 North Hollywood Shootout, where two guys armed with a modified fully auto XM-15 + modified fully auto AK variants + numerous 100rd drums held off half the LAPD for an hour. I was just a kid but I remember the news coverage and how outgunned the police were. And I'm pretty sure this was one of the sentinel events which led to LEOs today thinking they have to be as armed as the military.

Also of note, I believe the Army's new service rifle based on the SIG MCX platform (which will replace the M4 platform) will have full auto capability.
 
chocomorsel said:
You are partially right. Lots of angry unstable people in this country. However, those people have easy access to guns.

So the underlying issues are angry unstable people with easy access to guns. Not just one, not just the other. Both need to be addressed equally.

This thing is becoming a fad in America and one of the reasons is because these people know they will get the press and notoriety and most often if they don't kill themselves, they will be kept alive to have a "fair" trial. Yeah, they see easy pickings and no one doing anything but prayers and condolences for the victims and figure, why the hell not? Especially if they have already make up their minds to off themselves.
Click to expand...
I feel like it’s not just angry, unstable, or mentally ill people who are capable of violence. We, as a nation, are overlooking irresponsible people, people with poor judgment and poor insight, and people that just make poor decisions.
 
apsapedsurg.org

APSA - American Pediatric Surgical Association

apsapedsurg.org apsapedsurg.org

Statement from the American Pediatric Surgical Association Board of Governors ​


As pediatric trauma surgeons, when a call goes out about an injured child, we are ready. We gather our teams and we plan, prepare and wait in our trauma bays for the victim to arrive. We have trained for this, practiced it, and, unfortunately, lived these resuscitations over and over and over in emergency rooms across the United States. When the weapon used to perpetrate harm is an assault rifle, often the victim does not even make it alive to our doors. The injury inflicted by an assault rifle is so massive and widespread the victim dies at the scene.
In the massacre that happened in Uvalde, TX, the victims were 9 and 10 year old children, averaging about 60 pounds in weight. The damage and injuries that these children sustained were so extreme and widespread that their own parents could not recognize them. DNA samples from their parents were required to identify the children.
The American Pediatric Surgical Association (APSA) calls for a new federal Assault Weapons Ban on military-style firearms. During the decade of the previous ban, public mass shootings and deaths decreased. Although these mass shootings are a small percentage of overall gun deaths each year, they have been used to perpetrate mass shootings of children and adults in public places that should be safe such as schools, grocery stores, theaters and churches. These weapons have the capacity for rapid fire and large numbers of rounds between reloads which increases their lethality and the number of victims. They have been used in many locations including Newtown, San Bernardino, Las Vegas, Sutherland Springs, Parkland, and most recently in Uvalde, each incident killing more than a dozen people.
APSA acknowledges the Second Amendment and the right to responsible gun ownership. However, assault weapons have no place in the civilian arena. Therefore, we call for a new federal Assault Weapons Ban. We support H.R.1808 / S.736, the Assault Weapons Ban of 2021. We strongly urge Congress to move forward in adopting these bills and reinstating a ban on Assault Weapons. Too many children and adults have been killed in the hands of civilians using these weapons. As pediatric surgeons, we are committed to saving lives of children to allow them to live their lifetimes. We need the help of our legislators to remove ready access to these dangerous weapons that have been used, time and again, to commit mass murders in peaceful communities in our country.
Board of Governors
American Pediatric Surgical Association
 
vector2 said:
I think I'm missing something. You're saying in the beginning of the post you're in favor of repealing just the Hughes Amendment (meaning civilians can purchase new fully automatic weapons albeit within the framework of NFA), but then later in your post you highlight your issues with fees and registries in general. The crux of the NFA is the fee and the registry, so it sounds like in fact you'd prefer a total repeal, the result of which is that fully automatic weapons have the same ease of obtainment and lack of regulation as semiautomatic ones. Or is that you're ok with NFA for fully automatic weapons and other destructive devices, but not for the weapons which are currently not subject to the NFA tax + registry?

In regard to red herrings, yes I'm aware of the general ineffectiveness of indiscriminate fully automatic fire, but you know what notable exception pops into my mind? The 1997 North Hollywood Shootout, where two guys armed with a modified fully auto XM-15 + modified fully auto AK variants + numerous 100rd drums held off half the LAPD for an hour. I was just a kid but I remember the news coverage and how outgunned the police were. And I'm pretty sure this was one of the sentinel events which led to LEOs today thinking they have to be as armed as the military.

Also of note, I believe the Army's new service rifle based on the SIG MCX platform (which will replace the M4 platform) will have full auto capability.
Click to expand...
I remember the North Hollywood shootout. They tried to blame “Heat” on that one. It was crazy and I think you can still find the footage on YouTube
 
The internet exists, ban brick and mortar school.
 
Last edited:
June 03, 2022

facebook sharing button

twitter sharing button

linkedin sharing button

email sharing button

print sharing button


Over the past month, a series of tragic and senseless mass shootings have, once again, ripped communities and families apart, destroyed and ended lives far too soon, and further exposed the epidemic of gun violence that grips our nation. The latest attack hit very close to home, when a man opened fire in a medical office building on the campus of Saint Francis Hospital in Tulsa, Okla., killing four people—including two physicians—and injuring several others before taking his own life.

“The physicians of California stand in solidarity with our health care colleagues in Oklahoma and send not just our deepest condolences, but our outrage that such senseless acts of violence continue to plague our nation,” said California Medical Association (CMA) President Robert E. Wailes, M.D. "As healers, physicians are often on the front lines of gun violence, but the latest shooting in Oklahoma targeted physicians in a space that should be devoted to peace and healing. This cannot stand. CMA calls for reform to end this terrible epidemic of gun violence.”

The Tulsa hospital shooting comes just eight days after 19 school children and two teachers were slaughtered in Uvalde, Texas, and two weeks after a white supremacist attack in a Buffalo, New York, supermarket that killed 10 people and an attack at a church in California where one of our own—John Cheng, M.D.—took heroic measures to stop another act of senseless gun violence, and in the process gave his life to save others.

“We cannot become numb to the nearly daily reports of gun violence and mass shootings. We cannot sit idly by and do nothing while more than 45,000 Americans die each year by gunfire,” said Dr. Wailes. “This is a uniquely American public health crisis. We must come together with a united front and call for meaningful action to save lives.”

Since 1975, more Americans have died from firearms than in all the wars in U.S. history going back to the American Revolution. Gun violence is a public health crisis, and as with other public health areas, evidence-based interventions are needed for reducing deaths and injuries.

CMA has long-standing policy recommendations for reducing firearm-related trauma, injury, and death. CMA strongly supports H.R. 7910, the “Protecting Our Kids Act,” an omnibus package of eight bills focused on preventing firearm violence. With gun violence soaring, it is imperative for Congress to act now.

“CMA declared gun violence a public health crisis in 2016 and physicians will continue to demand action to end this senseless epidemic of indiscriminate violence, whether in our schools, our health facilities or our streets,” said Dr. Wailes.

What You Can Do

As physicians, our mission is to heal and to maintain health. Physicians are in a unique position to assess risk, provide education and change behaviors related to firearm violence. In 2017, the CMA Firearm Violence Prevention Technical Advisory Committee, composed of physician experts, performed a comprehensive review and analysis of CMA policy, epidemiological data and current scientific research and developed a CMA position statement on the prevention of firearm violence.

“Physicians have a responsibility as trusted public health figures to respond to the harms associated with firearm violence, both as individual clinicians and as community advocates,” says Dr. Wailes. “I ask my fellow physicians to make a commitment to ask your patients about firearms when appropriate and follow through with support and resources to keep them safe. We can make a difference, one patient at a time.”

In 2019, California Assembly Bill 521 authorized three years of funding for the California Firearm Violence Research Center at UC Davis. Building on the prior work of the UC Davis What You Can Do Initiative, the BulletPoints Project gives clinicians the knowledge and tools they need to reduce the risk of firearm injury and death in their patients.

Visit BulletPointsProject.org for more information on what you can do, as physicians, to help stop gun violence.


www.cmadocs.org

CMA calls for immediate action to address epidemic of gun violence

Over the past month, a series of tragic and senseless mass shootings have, once again, ripped communities and families apart, destroyed and ended lives far too soon, and further exposed the epidemic ...
www.cmadocs.org
 
Gern Blansten said:
You want a whole generation of kids who have had no meaningful social interaction? The effect of the school shutdown for COVID was bad enough.
Click to expand...
Wow, I think we're tapping into the real problem if the only meaningful social interactions kids have occur in schools. It's a sad commentary on our society. You've given me a lot to think about. I'm just spit balling on how to protect kids from these tragedies.
 
yappy said:
Wow, I think we're tapping into the real problem if the only meaningful social interactions kids have occur in schools. It's a sad commentary on our society. You've given me a lot to think about. I'm just spit balling on how to protect kids from these tragedies.
Click to expand...
Social media addiction is bad enough. Take away schools and you’ll really mess up social interaction. What we need is less Fortnite and more soccer leagues.
 
Last edited:
yappy said:
Wow, I think we're tapping into the real problem if the only meaningful social interactions kids have occur in schools. It's a sad commentary on our society. You've given me a lot to think about. I'm just spit balling on how to protect kids from these tragedies.
Click to expand...
I think the in person school social experience is a huge part of kids learning how to interact with humans who are not their family. In the vast majority of situations, in person school is not problematic.
It teaches kids how to get along with others and be functional members of society. For those kids who are home schooled, most that they interact with socially can tell pretty quick that their ability to interact in constructive ways is a bit behind their non home schooled peers. Learning via the internet would likely have the same effect on stunting growth in these areas.
Of course, the social interactions are not always good. There can be bullying, intimidation, and even fighting and violence. However, I feel that most kids thrive when they are able to be socialized at an early age.
 
Gern Blansten said:
I think the in person school social experience is a huge part of kids learning how to interact with humans who are not their family. In the vast majority of situations, in person school is not problematic.
It teaches kids how to get along with others and be functional members of society. For those kids who are home schooled, most that they interact with socially can tell pretty quick that their ability to interact in constructive ways is a bit behind their non home schooled peers. Learning via the internet would likely have the same effect on stunting growth in these areas.
Of course, the social interactions are not always good. There can be bullying, intimidation, and even fighting and violence. However, I feel that most kids thrive when they are able to be socialized at an early age.
Click to expand...
I'm not saying it's a solution for everyone, but I have to defend the home schooled kids. The ones I know (I was not one and am not doing it) are some of the highest functioning, intelligent, and kind, people I know. They are absolutely not societies problem. If anything we need more of them.

So school fills the hole in many peoples lives where family, friends, clubs and polite society used to occupy?
 
yappy said:
I'm not saying it's a solution for everyone, but I have to defend the home schooled kids. The ones I know (I was not one and am not doing it) are some of the highest functioning, intelligent, and kind, people I know. They are absolutely not societies problem. If anything we need more of them.

So school fills the hole in many peoples lives where family, friends, clubs and polite society used to occupy?
Click to expand...
Yes, but this requires very committed parents! Not the result you'd get from everyone being forced to home-school.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

C
New, annoying debate thread?
2
Replies
84
Views
4K
arsene19
A
G
Can you ask to work involuntarily?
Replies
32
Views
3K
deleted1130227
D
Iso4ane
Another victim of hospitals not wanting to pay their group?
Replies
8
Views
2K
MTGas2B
MTGas2B
S
ITE "keywords" that I can't interpret. AI also can't interpret. How am I supposed to learn from this?
Replies
5
Views
773
ToKingdomCome
T
DrOwnage
Would you: Take a pay cut so you don’t work for AMC/pay cut to do your own cases solo?
2
Replies
60
Views
4K
sloh
S
Top