Crap! A "Gun Control Task Force"

OK two gun threads going on at the same time, fine.

NO for nearly all it’s about regulation and education. Switzerland is often cited as an example of another ‘gun culture’ but it has an incredibly different outlook on guns to how pro-gunners see them in the US. To the Swiss it is about communal civil duty not individual rights. And the Swiss are not Americans they haven’t the same cultural landscape and even in the US the cultural factors might be the same but there are huge differences in socio-economic pressures.

A kitchen knife was designed to be used in the kitchen to aid in the preparation of food and that has been the main function of knives throughout human history, they can be used to kill but they are not especially efficient often depending on the strength and skill of the wielder.

Guns were designed for war - to specifically kill or maim other human beings (the hunting aspect only came later and has always been secondary) one of the reasons was because it wasn’t dependent on the strength and skill of the wielder (there was little accuracy in the first guns it was just pointed into a crowd of the enemy) but was a great way of killing and maiming people. Handguns are very much an example of this being specifically driven by military requirements, to kill or maim other human beings.

Again a lot of the impetus behind pro-gunner thinking seems motivated by fear and paranoia.

 

According to the FBI most guns in criminal hands in the US were once purchased legally in the US and either passed on to criminals or stolen by them.

To try and alleviate that problem I have suggested a few ideas

Any gun kept at home or place of work (including businesses that involve guns) would have to be held in a secure (and approved) safe. People that didn’t have an approved safe would not be allowed to own a gun

If a person looses or has their gun stolen, and it is shown that they did not show due diligence in securing their weapon they would be subject to a heavy fine and banned from owning a gun.

Any guns would have to be presented for inspection 6 months after purchase then again one year after purchase and then every five years after that. Not presenting the gun would mean loosing the owner’s gun license and being banning from owning a gun.

 

I feel unrestricted gun ownership is more appropriate, more in the Spirit of 76. The 2nd amendment isn't about duck hunting or sport shooting, but it is about a citizens ability to protect themselves against a corrupt government, like the one we have.

 

When you say, "There's no way to prevent this sick tragedy", you're saying there is NO prevention. Ever hear of sarcasm? Here's another way of putting it, "20 dead kids, oh well."

Here's some prevention for you....

 

You are NOT going to "protect" yourself from the U.S. military with any amount of weapons. That's a ridiculous argument. Iran may be building a nuke for the same stupid reason.

 

You just had to start another "gun" thread, didn't you? :toetap05:
Now that Balbus has set-up his soap box, this thread is going to go on for years........sigh.............:svengo:

 

Sandal wearing mud hut dwelling Afghani's have done a good job of fighting our troops, and alot of them are armed with old worn out guns from 100 years ago, just ask any returning vet, longest military action in American history, except for the genocide against the Native Americans. Same in Viet Nam. Most of our military would probably turn on the corrupt government anyway, after all most of them take their oath seriously to defend our country against all enemies - foreign and DOMESTIC.

 

The 2nd amendment clearly says that the right to bear arms shall not be infringed (infringement means the placement of undue limitations, not the placement of limitations: what is or is not a due limitation has changed since the writing of the 2nd amendment, guns are something totally different now), TO THE END that the US can support a well-regulated militia.

The idea isn't being able to fight the army or government back, it's to keep the government accountable to the people by, instead of having a standing army indoctrinated far from home, have a national-guard type army. You bring your gun, you train on the town common, your name is on the list, and you can be called to defend the country, with the militia, in a well-regulated fashion.

Well-regulated is very far from un-restricted.



And by the way, "firearms license" translates, directly, to "fire-weapons liscense". "Arm" means "weapon", there's no "sport" to it.... JUST sayin'. They can be USED for sport, and I'm all for that, but they're still weapons.

 

I currently vote in a Militia District of the State of Georgia, and any able bodied man over the age of 18 is considered a member of the Militia in our state. This seems to be a very emotionally charged subject, just like States Rights was in 1861, and Colonists right to bear arms - Lexington and Concord 1775. So I imagine this could grow legs and turn into something few can imagine at the moment. I do remember what happened to the STASI in East Germany after the Berlin wall fell.

 

This thread is specifically following the announcement yesterday that there will be a task force. It'll be headed by Biden and he'll have recommendations by Jan 2013. I hope somewhere in the proposal we see:

1 arm teachers
2 make criminals take classes about how to say no to guns
3 make the mentally ill take classes for how to not go near guns
4 make non gun owners take classes about why owning is a gun is advisable

 

What?

You're worried about limitations on gun ownership, but you like the idea of forcing free people to attend classes on why they should or should not have a gun?

 

It's slightly fasicious, but it makes the point about the inefficacy and backwardness of such practices.

 

My child will not attend public school if teachers start carrying guns to school

 

Then you best not fly anywhere when you travel.

 

I don't see what that has to do with teachers carrying guns.

Where would they keep them? Obviously they would have to be locked away and in that case what are the chances of anyone reaching the gun in time?

The idea is far too reactionary. There are better solutions

 

Teachers carrying guns is a disaster. If no teachers lose it and blow away kids (I've had teachers who I wouldn't put it past) then unstable kids will simple.... take guns from teachers. They're TEACHERS, not fucking prison guards.

Where you fly when has nothing to do with guns in school. Yes, airports are full of guns, and are fascistic, and best avoided, but this has nothing to do with not wanting your child taught by an, essentially, armed guard.

And WHAT point, exactly, does your suggestion about mandatory classes make? I don't see any point, other than that you really like guns and think that everyone should be just like you, and if they're not, that the government should force them to be -- which is typical of people who want unrestricted access to tools of violence and coersion.

To Mr. "everyone in my state is automatically in the militia", does that mean that your state has a draft, and that these people have a commanding officer, an approved weapon, a role in this militia, regular training, etc etc etc? Because otherwise, it's not a well regulated militia, it's a paramilitary excuse for nutjobs who are NOT patriots, are NOT helping their country, and are NOT to be trusted, especially once they think that having a bunch of unregulated guns makes them militamen.

 

Not a big fan of Obama.
But it's about time someone said it's time that mental health services are as easy to get as a gun.

 

As I understand, the "right to bear arms" is always taken out of context by the gun fanatics. It was originally intended as a right to form armed military against invading armies from Britain or Canada etc. I don't believe it was ever intended for random civilian families to stockpile a thousand rounds of ammunition for recreation.

Also Guns are fucking Guns, argumenting that fact makes you look like an idiot.

So the gun fans think mental health services are going to help prevent these events? Seriously? These are the same ppl usually against healthcare? Who's going to fund this futile service? No amount of mental heath services are going to prevent people snapping and mass killings, this is delusional completely clueless unperceptive thinking. Minds are fragile chemical states. People are stupid, people make bad decisions, people snap, sanity is a weak thread.

As someone who's lived with guns, plans on getting a gun and license soon to go hunting... there is no fucking need for any civilian to possess 100 rounds of ammo. Guns are tools, I'm not nuts or in love with my tools, I don't need 6 power drills and 500 quarter inch bits. I don't need to go deer hunting with 6 guns and 500 rounds of ammo for one fucking deer tag.

Get a fucking grip on your priorities ppl, FUCK!!!

 

Sure their is, because 100 rounds for any firearm is hardly anything.. Especially if you can no longer buy ammo and the country is in a rough situation...you gonna wish you had more than 100 rounds..

For my AR i wish i had 20,000 rounds in 5.56NATO hollow point 74grain..amazing amazing ammo...but...i don't have a single one because its already wicked fucking expensive.. so i have to resort to buying .223. 20k rounds is easy to go through.. with any firearm, because each caliber has a different purpose.

Then the recent shooting happens and every site that i buy bulk ammo from was closed tell further notice. 3 days. 3 days ok big deal...but if 3 days ends up being a month..or longer...for whatever reason....100 rounds is not a lot.

Stock up buddy.

 

Ya, you're right. What was I thinking?

We should just continue to warehouse the mentally ill in prisons.

Dude, take a deep breath. Or in other words, practice your name. Really. :love: