Its Assult Weapon time again....yea!!!!!

[SifuPhil]

Has it ever been tried?

Many times. As was previously said the majority of the guns are non-working. You don't believe the bad guys are going to turn in their new nickle-plated S&W .38, do you?

I've never said that there should be no guns in the hands of civilians but that people who own guns should have a good reason for having them.

Many of us HAVE a good reason - it's called "the OTHER guy has one".

The trouble as I see it in the US is that the country is awash with firearms and there needs to be a curb on production and sales of certain categories favoured by nutters who want to take out scores of innocents in one afternoon. With the right to bear arms there must surely also be a responsibility to ensure that gun ownership does not become a serious risk to public safety.

If I were of a mind to, I could take out scores of people with totally legal firearms, even just a pair of pistols. This mania about "assault weapons", when the majority of speakers don't even know what they're talking about, is simply smoke and mirrors, designed to frighten the herd and drive it in the direction desired - total disarmament and dis-empowerment of the population.

IMO, only registered guns would be considered to be legal and any others should be confiscated and destroyed. An period of amnesty could be declared to allow people to surrender illegal and prohibited weapons without prosecution. Of course, my opinion is just that. Others see things differently but all voices need to be listened to in any serious debate so I do not apologise for expressing my opinion.

How would they go about confiscating and destroying the unregistered guns? How would they find them? And once again, they've had plenty of amnesty periods, and they were all laughable. If I were a bad guy with a nice collection of weapons, why would I fear a little fine for owning them when I could make so much more by using them?

No, the genie is out of the bottle and it's far too late to try to stick the cork back in. The only workable option at this point is to allow armed citizens full carry privileges. This has already been done in several of our Western states and has proved to be a powerful deterrent to crime.

 

[Warrigal]

Many of us HAVE a good reason - it's called "the OTHER guy has one".

In all your life, Phil, have you ever been held up by someone with a gun, or have you ever had to threaten someone with your gun to protect yourself ?

 

[Ozarkgal]

Warrigal:

IMO, only registered guns would be considered to be legal and any others should be confiscated and destroyed. An period of amnesty could be declared to allow people to surrender illegal and prohibited weapons without prosecution.

Chicago body count: So far this year 344 people were murdered by firearms in Chicago. Chicago has one of the strictest gun control laws in the entire US. It's obvious that the laws are not working out as planned.

Do you think these murders were committed by owners of legal, registered weapons? How would you propose confiscating the illegal firearms from the gangsta's?

 

[Anne]

Happyflowerlady, you make a good point - it sure does seem like some of these shootings happen conveniently for someone, doesn't it?? Seems there's something else going on elsewhere that we don't notice until later. Smoke and mirrors, as Phil mentioned...you don't notice what the magicians left hand is doing as he distracts your attention with the right.
Conspiracy?? Yes, but after this happens so many times, one has to wonder what is it we're not seeing??

Ozarkgal, you're so right about Chicago. Strict gun control just doesn't work.

Seabreeze, that must have been a terribly frightening experience for you, a lot of people would definitely be anti-gun after something like that.

 

[Warrigal]

How far from Chicago do you have to travel to acquire a gun under laxer legislation ? Not too far, I'll warrant, which I why I said you need national legislation.

As for confiscation, it won't be easy and it might take a decade or so to achieve significant change but if people want to change society, they can. But they have to want it.

 

[SifuPhil]

In all your life, Phil, have you ever been held up by someone with a gun, or have you ever had to threaten someone with your gun to protect yourself ?

Yes.

Next question? :numbness:

 

[rkunsaw]

How far from Chicago do you have to travel to acquire a gun under laxer legislation ? Not too far, I'll warrant, which I why I said you need national legislation.

But in Chicago it's illegal to Have a gun, no matter where you got it.

As for confiscation, it won't be easy and it might take a decade or so to achieve significant change but if people want to change society, they can. But they have to want it.

We DON'T want it. Change is what the idiot called president promised. What a mess he's made

 

[Jackie22]

The people that do not want legislation on background checks and assault weapons are in the minority no matter how loud they scream about their constitutional rights, ALL RIGHTS HAVE LIMITS....the safety of innocent citizens is being compromised, these citizens lives are more important than anyone's rights to own a closet full of AK whatevers and magazines that will hold enough bullets to wipe out a classroom of children.

NO ONE is proposing banning of ALL guns...and when you hear..."Yea, but that is what 'they' want eventually"...you are living in speculation and fear...what if, what if, what if....this country has a real and immediate problem that needs addressing,
the innocent people that have died are real.



It was a Republican president (Reagan) that initiated this ban that lasted 10 years and it proved effective, President Bush said he would sign it if it was reinstated after 10 years, but it was voted out by rural congresspeople.

[h=1]Data indicate drop in high-capacity magazines during federal gun ban[/h]http://www.washingtonpost.com/inves...6d3bb6-4b91-11e2-a6a6-aabac85e8036_story.html

During the 10-year federal ban on assault weapons, the percentage of firearms equipped with high-capacity magazines seized by police agencies in Virginia dropped, only to rise sharply once the restrictions were lifted in 2004, according to an analysis by The Washington Post.

The White House is leading a push to reinstate a national ban on large capacity magazines and assault weapons after a gunman armed with an AR-15 and 30-round magazines killed 20 children and seven adults in Connecticut. Vice President Biden is holding advisory meetings this week to hammer out a course of action that will address the issue of the larger magazines, which under the lapsed federal ban were those that held 11 or more rounds of ammunition.

In Virginia, the Post found that the rate at which police recovered firearms with high-capacity magazines — mostly handguns and to a smaller extent rifles — began to drop around 1998, four years into the ban. It hit a low of 9 percent of the total number of guns recovered the year the ban expired, 2004.

The next year, the rate began to climb and continued to rise in subsequent years, reaching 20 percent in 2010, according to the analysis of a little-known Virginia database of guns recovered by police. In the period The Post studied, police in Virginia recovered more than 100,000 firearms, more than 14,000 of which had high-capacity magazines.

 

[SifuPhil]

I can change-out a magazine in under 3 seconds - how is banning high-capacity mags going to stop me from shooting up a classroom? I'll just carry more low-capacity ones.

NO ONE is proposing banning of ALL guns...and when you hear..."Yea, but that is what 'they' want eventually"...you are living in speculation and fear...what if, what if, what if....

Speculation based upon informed research and historical precedent. Not fear. Anyone with eyes to see can discern the path this country is taking - if they cannot, then perhaps they are purposely keeping them shut. The recent thread here about the prank full-body scans for a candy shop shows that the majority of the people of this country will go along with anything the authorities tell them, so why is it such a stretch of the imagination to suppose that the government desires a citizenry that is incapable of mounting any type of defense?

Look what they did to the protesters during the "1%" sit-ins. Look what they did to political dissenters at rallies. Then look at how they gave a light wrist-slap to Bank of America, even when their own employees stated that they were ordered to lie to their customers. Look at all the corruption in the political system and how the cops are the pawns tasked with carrying out inane laws. Look at the Patriot Act in detail, and how it makes ANYONE a target.

Speculation? Hardly.

 

[Jackie22]

Phil, are you disputing the results of the gun legislation that Reagan put forth?

As for your second comment, let me make sure I understand what you are saying....

Are you saying the government is out to take guns from citizens so the citizens can not rise up against the government? As in Hitler's reign?

 

[Davey Jones]

Why am I not surprised that you've already resorted to name calling Davey? Is everyone that has a different point of view than you an nitwit?? I'm thinking yes. I am a responsible law abiding citizen, born and raise in the United States of America, and I believe that American citizens should keep their rights to keep and bear arms to protect themselves and their families in any situation. Also, to hunt or target practice, or just collect guns if they choose. NRA member, and far from a nitwit here Davey.[/QUOTE]

Sorry about that "nitwit"it wasnt really ment for law abiding gun owners.
Im sure the NRA,like any organization, has a lot of nitwits on board that gives it a bad name.
Those are the ones Im talking about.

 

[SifuPhil]

Phil, are you disputing the results of the gun legislation that Reagan put forth?

I'm disputing the overall validity, yes. An analysis by The Washington Post is like getting a compliment from a prostitute - it's shallow, probably only partially true and only lasts as long as you pay for it.

As for your second comment, let me make sure I understand what you are saying....

Are you saying the government is out to take guns from citizens so the citizens can not rise up against the government? As in Hitler's reign?

No.

Hitler's methods were crude compared to ours. We have the advantage of 70 years of hindsight into what does and does not work.

Hitler's methods were Orwellian. Our methods are definitely Huxlean. Huge difference ...

In Orwell's world, communication would be limited between people to prevent conspiring against the government. The destruction and ban of information and knowledge would limit knowledge. Truth would be concealed through repressive control.

In the Huxlean future governments encourage mass distribution of entertainment, as it pacifies the people and diverts attention away from political issues. Our transfixion with entertainment would drown our desire for real knowledge and society would allow itself to be consumed solely with that which is amusing, disregarding anything of importance.

 

[That Guy]

 

[SifuPhil]

... and of course the "semi-automatic assault weapon" version - the Disintegrator ...

 

[Davey Jones]

I hit the nun with one of those elastics ,BOY!!! Did I get it from Dad.

 

[Anne]

Agreed about the entertainment, Phil!! Young people are so involved in 'Walking Dead' , MTV awards, and what the Kardashians are doing, they've no clue and no interest in what's going on politically or anywhere else. If they vote, it's for the one who promises them more 'help'.

It's not that some of us live in fear - we're cautious and watchful. Our forefathers knew what happens when people in power get too greedy and corrupt, and that's exactly what is happening now.

 

[Warrigal]

I can change-out a magazine in under 3 seconds - how is banning high-capacity mags going to stop me from shooting up a classroom? I'll just carry more low-capacity ones.

Interesting use of the first person.
OK, here's my next question.
Why do so many people want to shoot up a classroom full of children or a theatre full of people?
Identify the problem so that it can be addressed in a practical way.

Sydney is currently having almost nightly drive past shootings of houses of men involved with drugs and other illegal activities. Last night a 13 year old daughter of one of the men was hit in the back by shotgun pellets fired through the front door. Otherwise, there is little gun crime except for the occasional armed holdup. We have police units targeting the criminal gangs and criminal bikie groups that are also heavily involved with the illegal importation of guns. It is a constant ongoing battle.

But there have been zero gun massacres since Port Arthur.

 

[SifuPhil]

Interesting use of the first person.

Okay, you got me.

OK, here's my next question.
Why do so many people want to shoot up a classroom full of children or a theatre full of people?
Identify the problem so that it can be addressed in a practical way.

It's a mental problem. Of course, simply knowing that is not a solution, not until we require mandatory testing of EVERY person every month, and even then it isn't going to catch all of them.

Sometimes there's a long-festering resentment, jealousy or hatred that a skilled sociopath or psychopath can hide away from friends and family for years, then due to one trigger or another they lose control and cross over the line.

That's why gun control is such a non-issue. It doesn't matter if you get rid of the guns - these people will use bombs, knives, clubs and bare hands to take out classrooms and theaters full of people. The gun is just a tool, like all those other weapons. It's the rage, the mentally-unbalanced primal rage, that is the real problem.

And you can't legislate against that.

Taking away guns from everyone because of these few scattered incidents is like legislating against every single screwdriver in Home Depot because someone was once stabbed with one. It's like punishing the entire class for the wrongdoing of a single student - and every good teacher knows that isn't going to work. It's only going to breed more violence.

In short, I believe the only way to reduce these incidents is to:

• reduce the reliance upon pharmaceuticals to solve emotional problems
• institute more stringent guidelines for the ownership of firearms, including training in safe use and storage
• bring back the two-parent household

Not likely to happen in MY lifetime ...

Sydney is currently having almost nightly drive past shootings of houses of men involved with drugs and other illegal activities. Last night a 13 year old daughter of one of the men was hit in the back by shotgun pellets fired through the front door. Otherwise, there is little gun crime except for the occasional armed holdup. We have police units targeting the criminal gangs and criminal bikie groups that are also heavily involved with the illegal importation of guns. It is a constant ongoing battle.

But there have been zero gun massacres since Port Arthur.

Granted it's a totally different legislative atmosphere there. There are so many pertinent factors that would need to be weighed in order to make a valid comparison between your country and mine, and I am unfortunately nowhere near qualified to do so. I only go by what I personally see, know and experience.

 

[drifter]

When I want a gun I go to a gun show. There's one comes to my town about four times a year because dealers sell a lot of guns, knives and other items here in the western part of the state. I have also sold guns at gun shows. Interesting, someone said guns don't kill people, people kill people. That's what the ARA said, too. People shooting people is a problem, but I'm sure we'll find an answer one of these years. By the way I don't own a gun, but I'm hell on wheels when I take out my bow and arrows or, my slingshots.

 

[Warrigal]

That's why gun control is such a non-issue. It doesn't matter if you get rid of the guns - these people will use bombs, knives, clubs and bare hands to take out classrooms and theaters full of people. The gun is just a tool, like all those other weapons. It's the rage, the mentally-unbalanced primal rage, that is the real problem.

You keep missing my point. Since Port Arthur and our PM's work establishing uniform gun control across the entire country (not gun elimination) we have not had any more gun massacres and we had several before that. NOR HAVE WE HAD ANYONE RUNNING AMOK WITH BOMBS, KNIVES, CLUBS OR BARE HANDS to kill dozens of people. Yes, we still have murders and armed holdups and we will always have those, but things are much better and the population is not being regularly terrorised by mad men with military style guns.

An optimist is someone who looks at a situation and asks how it might be improved. A pessimist looks at the same situation and despairs because it will never be perfect. The optimist acts. The pessimist does not. Only one way will ever result in a better situation.

I'm an eternal optimist, otherwise why would I bother to talk about gun control to a bunch of Americans? eace:

 

[Jillaroo]

I don't wish to be a pain but hasn't there been enough talk over these gun problems on a previous thread of which there is 11 pages, i live in Australia and realise the gun laws in USA are quite different to yours, but no amount of talking about it is going to rectify the problem,i personally would prefer to be talking about nicer subjects, just my opinion.

 

[Warrigal]

Posting is optional, Jillaroo, as is reading a thread that clearly indicates the subject matter.

 

[Jillaroo]

Well the way i see it i will refrain from posting as i am disillusioned by all this talk of guns and laws etc , who needs it i thought these topics were supposed to be on the group site.

 

[SeaBreeze]

I think of myself as an optimist and a realist. I'm optimistic that crimes like this can be greatly lowered if, as Phil already mentioned, mental illness and overmedication with mind altering prescription drugs is addressed. Now that's something that the government might be able to help with.

That likely won't happen, because the big pharmaceutical companies are in control and they want profits...period. They're coming up with new medications all the time, now some they want you to take simultaneously with another for results. Of course, the side effects are always depression, nervousness, suicidal feelings, homicidal...not to mention the physical dangers, liver damage, etc.

Also, gun safety education for those who own guns, so that they don't get into the hands of the wrong people, and I believe the NRA started out in the interest of gun safety and education. In addition, concealed or open carry will greatly cut down on these crimes. States with little gun control are usually states with much less violent crimes, because the criminals know that their potential victims aren't sitting ducks.

As Phil also mentioned was a two parent household, too many children are raised by what they see on their computers, facebook, video games, etc. They have no social interactions with others, no friends or family and parents to model themselves after...no role models. Easy for mental issues to develop, so many kids are put on Ritalin at a young age, and it goes on from there. Single parents aren't too bad if they're present to raise the child, and instill some moral, ethical and financial responsibility...but we're seeing less and less of that.

I'm not being pessimistic, but realistic when I agree that things are not likely going to change in our lifetime. Taking the guns away from responsible law abiding citizens will not keep the insane and the criminals from getting hold of their firearms.

 

[SifuPhil]

You keep missing my point. Since Port Arthur and our PM's work establishing uniform gun control across the entire country (not gun elimination) we have not had any more gun massacres and we had several before that. NOR HAVE WE HAD ANYONE RUNNING AMOK WITH BOMBS, KNIVES, CLUBS OR BARE HANDS to kill dozens of people. Yes, we still have murders and armed holdups and we will always have those, but things are much better and the population is not being regularly terrorised by mad men with military style guns.

An optimist is someone who looks at a situation and asks how it might be improved. A pessimist looks at the same situation and despairs because it will never be perfect. The optimist acts. The pessimist does not. Only one way will ever result in a better situation.

I'm an eternal optimist, otherwise why would I bother to talk about gun control to a bunch of Americans? eace:

... and a realist knows that Australia has ALWAYS had a relatively low firearm homicide rate, certainly lower than that of the U.S. Your government also rammed the legislation through by disallowing gun owners to join the Liberal party and charging-off $500 million to your Medicare Levy program. As well, 47% of your population supported gun control.

You won't get those kinds of numbers here. What you WILL get is that we have 313 million inhabitants compared to your 22 million; that we have a much more active gun culture; and that we are perhaps a lot more manic when it comes to individual's rights.

I'm sorry, Warri, but you can't compare apples to oranges.

... In 2010, a consortium of researchers concluded that Australia's gun laws were a high cost intervention with ecological evidence only for a possible role in firearm suicide reduction, and noted that firearm suicide reductions could not be attributed unequivocally to the legislation; on this basis, they included the gun buyback and associated legislative changes in their list of "not cost-effective preventive interventions".[SUP][45]


[/SUP] Most recently, McPhedran and Baker found that there was little evidence for any impacts of the gun laws on firearm suicide among people under 35 years of age, and suggest that the significant financial expenditure associated with Australia's firearms method restriction measures may not have had any impact on youth suicide.[SUP][46]

[/SUP]

A recent report by the Australian Crime Commission said a conservative estimate was that there were 250,000 longarms and 10,000 handguns in the nation's illicit firearms market. The number of guns imported to Australia legally has also risen, including a 24 per cent increase during the past six years in the number of registered handguns in NSW, some of them diverted to the black market via theft or corrupt dealers and owners[SUP][47][/SUP] ...