Gun laws do they work

[Bladerunner]

I keep trying to not post but somehow I feel compelled to put finger to keyboard every so often.

I basically agree with Blade here :banghead: Connor not only wants to control guns but what we write on the threads,he's got a lot to learn.

Where I disagree with Blade is that he is back to control equal ban.
We have a right to own a car but what we can do with it is controlled by the traffic laws, these controls do not equate to a ban.
Brian

Sorry to post again but this one I missed? Control does not mean BAN as long as it does permit ownership. As long as the rules are not constructed so high to no allow ownership except to certain Group of people.

Here in the USA, we like to stand on our Constitution and RIGHTs of the people. Yes, I have rights but those rights end when they meet, lets say Vassago's rights. I say that only because he lives here in the USA.

In other words, I cannot go out in my yard and start shooting at targets, when Mr. Vassago lives on the other side of the fence. Now, there are laws against this so He (Mr. Vassago) does not have to worry about me shooting where it a ricocheted bullet could cross the boundaries of not only our yards but also our RIGHTs. ' My Rights stop when it meets Mr. Vassago's Rights! '. I can almost guarantee you that most all permitted gun owners will abide by that law.

Now we can go on from here.? My mind is open but t seems that most people who are against owning a gun cannot fathom why we would want to own one. Blocked minds go both ways and on this thread there is enough to go around.

 

[dan-cat]

Good morning Dan-Cat.........I would have to agree with you here. But how would you fix it? LEts see.... you have a gun permit that requires you to go through training and classes on owning the handgun and the responsibility that comes with it. The background (at least in TN) checks for any felonies, even general problems with the law. Now, if there any smudge on a persons record, from what I am told nullifies that ability for that person to own a gun.

OK, What is needed next Mr. Dan-Cat....... Do you too believe in Psch test and checks every year. What about checks at your home to determine if you gun is stored correctly etc.?

Tell us all what YOU believe should be done with the guns in America.

Have a good weekend

This may seem like evading the question but it concerns the point I was trying to make. It seems that everyone is in agreement that Dick's acquaintance should not have access to guns. The pertinent question is should anything be done about it? Is the current situation with that individual a situation that needs to be acted upon?

Now you mentioned barbs that had been directed to you which you are unhappy with. That is fair enough. But let me try to explain the frustration that leads to those insults. When you are faced with a situation that we all agree upon needs resolving, it does you no credit to respond to proposals for such a solution in such extreme, absolute terms.

In summary, we agree Dick's example requires adjustment. This will require some form of intervention. In order for that to happen, we will need to dismiss the notion that such an intervention is inevitably the first step to tyranny.

 

[Bladerunner]

This may seem like evading the question but it concerns the point I was trying to make. It seems that everyone is in agreement that Dick's acquaintance should not have access to guns. The pertinent question is should anything be done about it? Is the current situation with that individual a situation that needs to be acted upon?

Now you mentioned barbs that had been directed to you which you are unhappy with. That is fair enough. But let me try to explain the frustration that leads to those insults. When you are faced with a situation that we all agree upon needs resolving, it does you no credit to respond to proposals for such a solution in such extreme, absolute terms.

In summary, we agree Dick's example requires adjustment. This will require some form of intervention. In order for that to happen, we will need to dismiss the notion that such an intervention is inevitably the first step to tyranny.

Ah, at least you are interested enough to answer! Dick's acquaintance?
Now that is a conundrum! What do you do? Dick believes the fella should hnot own a gun. However, the law says as long as he does not commit a crime, he is eligible to own one. Don't get me wrong, I am just throwing these things out there...fair enough? Dick can complain about his acquaintance's actions, To Whom? Laws are hard to change thus take a long time to do so. Do we need to set up a 'Grand Jury' type panel to check out complaints like Dick should make? Right? Is it voluntary, Who is going to make this panel up, consider race, politics, etc. How are you going to pick them? Also, will the vote made by the panel have a binding effect on the law and therefore the acquaintance in question? There are several more ? I could ask but I will stop here and listen to you out there.

 

[Brianwarnock]

Sorry to post again but this one I missed? Control does not mean BAN as long as it does permit ownership. As long as the rules are not constructed so high to no allow ownership except to certain Group of people.

Here in the USA, we like to stand on our Constitution and RIGHTs of the people. Yes, I have rights but those rights end when they meet, lets say Vassago's rights. I say that only because he lives here in the USA.

In other words, I cannot go out in my yard and start shooting at targets, when Mr. Vassago lives on the other side of the fence. Now, there are laws against this so He (Mr. Vassago) does not have to worry about me shooting where it a ricocheted bullet could cross the boundaries of not only our yards but also our RIGHTs. ' My Rights stop when it meets Mr. Vassago's Rights! '. I can almost guarantee you that most all permitted gun owners will abide by that law.

Now we can go on from here.? My mind is open but t seems that most people who are against owning a gun cannot fathom why we would want to own one. Blocked minds go both ways and on this thread there is enough to go around.

I don't recall any post calling for a total ban on gun ownership, but there have been questions about the ownership of some types of weapons and of the need to have huge arsenal of weapons and ammunition.

Brian

 

[Brianwarnock]

Blade asked for detail discussion a few days ago so I will give it my best shot, tho' with my eyesight I've no chance of hitting the barn door.

It seems to me that you could place the guns into three categories
1 for personal protection
2 for hunting
3 for fun

Group 1 would be a handgun which would be loaded and ready for action at all times that it is in your possession or close by. It would be pointless for it to be locked in a safe unless nobody was at home.

Group 2 would be unloaded and kept secure and separate from its ammunition at all times until you were hunting.

Group 3 I feel should not be kept in the home but in a totally secure situation at the gun club where you went to have your fun. If there was an inter club event the weapons would be transported securely and separately from their ammunition.

Ok I expect my simple statements will be shot to pieces by many , but somebody has to be the fall guy.

Brian

 

[Brianwarnock]

Oh and before anybody got a permit/licence they would not only need checking out but would have to show proof of training with the type of weapon they were applying for, preferably not with fools like the tutor who got shot but as per mentioned by Adrianscotter I think it was.

Brian

 

[Bladerunner]

Blade asked for detail discussion a few days ago so I will give it my best shot, tho' with my eyesight I've no chance of hitting the barn door.

It seems to me that you could place the guns into three categories
1 for personal protection
2 for hunting
3 for fun

Group 1 would be a handgun which would be loaded and ready for action at all times that it is in your possession or close by. It would be pointless for it to be locked in a safe unless nobody was at home.

Group 2 would be unloaded and kept secure and separate from its ammunition at all times until you were hunting.

Group 3 I feel should not be kept in the home but in a totally secure situation at the gun club where you went to have your fun. If there was an inter club event the weapons would be transported securely and separately from their ammunition.

Ok I expect my simple statements will be shot to pieces by many , but somebody has to be the fall guy.

Brian

Hi. Brian: Glad to see you stuck your neck out there. Know how it feels.

Group 1: I almost agree with you however don't you think that personal protection should be 'in the eye of the beholder'. so to speak? You specified a handgun. What about a long gun (shot gun, a hunting rifle or heaven forbid an assault rifle)? A handgun is something that can be concealed rather easily, where as a long gun like a guitar case (use in the 30's for a machine gun cases by the moffia)cannot be. So, you have to have rules for both? You also have the different type of people who need protection. From a younger person having to walk the streets of a large city to the elderly in a country home.

Group 2: Again, I also agree with you to some extent: as far as the separation of the ammunition, if it (the guns) were in a Gun Safe could or would it need to be loaded? Could the ammunition be within the safe's walls? The one thing that most ardent gun owners observe is ; treat any weapon as it were loaded. A lot of people have shot themselves by assuming the gun and ammunition were separated thus unloaded.

Group 3: This group, I don't agree at all. In most states, the gun and ammunition has to be separated during transportation. As far as a gun club, I guess that would depend upon where club is located. In a lot of cities, indoor shooting is available. A lot of these own the guns and let you come in for a price, shoot their weapons. They could also supply some sort of storage for those that has no place to store them or transport them (someone on a bicycle) In the country, where I am, a gun club meets at a building on some leased land out in the country where that shooting of guns (any type) could not harm anyone even if they ricocheted off a rock or two. There is no place on these grounds for guns to be stored safely on site here. One other point, all guns need to be cleaned after firing. If you leave them at a club, you will have to stay over and clean them, you will also have to carry your cleaning equipment with you and you will probably have to lease/rent some room (desk, etc) in a safe place in order to clean it. Rem, You are more than likely in at the very least a semi-public area here.

As far as your list of reasons to own a gun is all too correct. For Protection, Hunting, Sport shooting (tournaments, etc).PHS

 

[ConnorGiles]

let me address that. It the children. ever since the internet went hot, the kids have thought of nothing else. I say kids, I mean young adults of voting age. They are not old enough to stand for something other than what the colleges (>>>>) professors have taught them so they will fall prey to everything the politicians tell them will make their life better. Back then it was handguns, tomorrow, your longguns and next year, you need a chip in your hand so they know who and where you are at all times. It is coming my friend. Beware!

Take Mr. Connor, he is a young fellow and has high ideas. Oh to be 17-18 again with those ideas and that testosterone? lol... I have got to ask him a few questions this evening that should clear things up, hopefully for him and others his age.

have a good evening.

I do strongly object to your first statement, You are claiming people of a young age are not old enough to stand for anything other than what was taught which is utter BS. I have always been one to stray away from the crowd when it comes to debates, I never take things as fact just because the guy in the big white lab coat says so. Evidence is that which is seen and proven not told.

Young people aren't all mindless zombies Bladerunner, and I think its about time you learnt that. In fact as the years progress the younger the age of people classed as geniuses tend to get.

We have opinions just as much as you do, That doesn't in fact make my opinion less valid as you are older than me

I would love to hear these questions in which would "clear up" most things for "children" my age

 

[ConnorGiles]

How are you going to administer them and how much are they going to cost? Who is going to give the test? (gov. pschs or run of the mill pschs?). What is the threshold going to be for being eligible to own a gun? A Hitler type?(possible), A bugs Bunny Type? (no too wimpy), a Rambo type?,(oops no definitely not this type), a Hollywood type?( only if it is a voluptuous female), A preacher type (certainy not, we do not want someone who is a xxxxxxx man to have a gun). What about a pot smoker?(only the ones who say they don't inhale.), a mafia type? (no not this type, they are too family orientated).), The regular citizen on the street? (perhaps if he accepts the big gov. theory and if XXX is not part of his life.), what about an Atheist? (Most defiantly is a candidate).

My point being is when you start down this slippery slop, there is no stopping.

see you at the next post!

Okay lets put it this way, The regular police who would be coming to check your handling and responsibility of you having guns. They could be trained in the (short hand - Basic) knowledge of psychology - Nothing for them to lose, just another qualification, This would as you say "Kill two birds with one stone" a check up and a mentality check. I'm not going to comment on each of the types of people, but lets just cherry pick that snide comment about the atheist shall we.

Atheists would not definitely a candidate because they too could be a drug lord, a pot smoker or anything else - the fact you bring the absence of religion into a matter of Gun control just really shows where your mind is at Bladerunner.

Clear your mind of that anti-liberal and any other religion under the sun then we may have a civilised chat.

Last point - I seriously have no idea what you think you'd have to lose? There is no taking guns away, Only a check to see if you are responsible with your weapons and are not being careless. Surely that would cut down on the nut jobs and the careless gun owners that die or kill people.

Although the number cut down may be small, but thats one less nut job or careless person for us to worry about

 

[ConnorGiles]

OK, we passed the Psch test, I think?????????.......how long do I wait for my gun? How long must I wait before I can buy another. Does this pertain only to handguns and/or long-guns . If long-guns, what kind? shotguns or rifles, What Calibers, .22 or .30-06 or GA. of Shotgun 12GA. or .410 Ga. How big the magazines, what about the sights, does it have a scope. (for killing of course). WWII vets used pep sites back then so I guess they are ruled out. What kind of arm stock? is it retractable?. does it have a sling? is it camouflaged, does it have a chip in it to tell THEM where it is at at all times. (p.s this would increase the people who have a job--this is good no?).

I shall split this into 2 sections, Would a wait time really be that bad. Usually the people who buy mass amounts of guns in one sitting if you wish, tend to be the nut jobs (Given you aren't starting a gun store and you are a ordinary citizen) - Even if you are mentally stable, why would you need many guns at once? surely a wait time would make the cherry sweeter (when you get it even better). Order in any way (any attachments) you wish, But the way it would be examined would be: are you responsible with it? are you a danger to anyone while in possession of the firearm/long rifle/whatever (even yourself)?

Mr. Connor, In this area, I can give you questions you have not even thought about that could be played with by a government intent on removing the guns from society so they might rule better and sleep a little easier at night ? Rem. the request you made some time ago.(I am young in age but do not treat me so)? The only reason a government wants to confiscate your guns is because they want full power over you. This I am afraid you are still to young to remember or understand the ramifications of such actions by the Government. Unfortunately, ou were born into a era and a place where men just tell stories of the days when they were free. It could be worse, you could have been born n the middle east.


See you in the next post!

Keep asking these questions and I shall give a response - I'm not ignorant and shall answer each one. (Please bear in mind - this is not going to happen and these are only opinions, Not fact in any way shape or form).

You yet again seem hell bent on thinking the government is out to get you. I can (more than likely) assure you that if you aren't on the most wanted list or are a danger to anyone (even yourself) I'm sure they have bigger fish to fry.

I think you actually think the words gun control mean gun ban. It doesn't mean that for your information, Safety is a big factor in having a firearm/any weapon at all - enforcing stricter gun control would only be done for necessary reasons and to keep YOU safe and everyone around YOU safe.

Is that such a bad thing? You may think you are more than capable of keeping yourself safe, but the way I see it - It's just like a mother and her child.

No matter how safe you are, You can never be safe enough.

 

[ConnorGiles]

I only have one main question here because after you get past this question the who, where and what do not really matter. Who in their right mind is going to let the law or gov. or an agency of the law/gov. into their house/home for an inspection to determine if you store or take care of their guns properly, without a legal search warrant. If it has gone this far my friends, you already have No freedom over there except that ones given to you by the government in power. I think China already has dibs on that type of government.

I think the term here comes to, "Why not? If you have nothing to hide" - As said before if you are such a model gun owner and do everything by the book then it shouldn't be a problem a 5 minute check-up. Even if they do find minor problems then they will instruct you on the right path on what to do to minimize risk, NOT take them away ONLY give strict guidelines. The only way I would think guns would be stripped from the owner would be if they have failed a mentality check or have been found completely unsuitable for obtaining that weapon due to them being utterly irresponsible when storing which would be a danger to everyone within that household or in the immediate area.

In this country, the USA, Our freedom from government rule is guaranteed at birth. The government over here is for and BY the people. We(Americans) will not sit by for anything less.

Refer to my Signature - you may blame this on a civilised set of rules, but you wouldn't believe the fact that you are actually as free as we are . You are not FREE to wield firearms, They ALLOW you to have them. Rules are set from the moment you are born to the moment you die. You follow them passively without thinking about it, because that is how our way of life is.

Rules aren't such a bad thing, They make civilization what it is today.

Without them there would be anarchy. (The purge :Anarchy would be a good example here - although this proclaims killing more than anything. But also shows a world without rules for 12 hours a year. which somehow shows to be religious in a lot of parts of the film (not to my liking)) .

This is of course the directors way of thinking, My opinion of events would of course be different.

 

[ConnorGiles]

Mr. Connor: How many officers of the law (Bobbies over there?) have been killed in the line of duty. Bet it is less than 179 (2011). So if your law dogs thought it was dangerous enough to wear a gun, then it is dangerous enough to not take anything for granite. Do you have the right to ask the officer (before you get down at their request) what is the problem in order to determine if this is a legal stop or not??

OH, my

You may not believe it - But Policeman/Policewomen (That is what we call them) are actually very polite and would not have a problem telling you what the problem is. - (It's usually what they do when they tell you to get down - Say your under arrest/or so and then while using necessary force tell them what the problem is.) - Over here refusal to obey commands doesn't usually end up in a death, Usually a beating would be given (police brutality isn't unheard of here - but usually it is self defence on the officers part, people round my neck of the woods have a pre conceived view on the police usually from their parents, I wasn't brought up that way.) Every Police Officer I have came into contact with has been very polite and has done everything in their power to help me in any way they could. (But that is just my experience of them of course - I know there is corrupt police officers and brutal ones).

P.S. I think it is very disrespectful to refer to them as dogs, Please refrain from this in the future please. They're there to help, not to be insulted.

 

[ConnorGiles]

It is you and others that are worried about the gun deaths, Just thought it should be spread around.

Gun deaths that are caused by irresponsible owners and via people who weren't supposed to have one in the first place - then yes I am concerned.

You still have not learned that a gov. wanting GUN CONTROL, wants to take your weapons from you. WHY???????? for nefarious purposes I can assure you.

How can you assure this? please link to the article where this was proclaimed please. I would like a good read. If you can't (which I expect) then yet the point stands GUN CONTROL means CONTROL not BAN.

You say: "NOT ABOUT TAKING THEM AWAY!", but that is what history tells us happens when you start down that slippery slope.

Helping you be safe possessing firearms should be a necessary precaution from the get go, let alone when you've had one for years. There is no slippery slope, They wish for you to be safe and know how to achieve this, not to take anything from anyone (disregarding people who are unfit to obtain one).

So, I say, GET OVER IT!. It happened to you in the UK, it is not going to happen here at least in the immediate future. Who knows what is going to happen when I am gone???????LOL ( Well, I know of one that does?)

Yet again you are saying they are trying to rid you of all right to owning a firearm. I'm not going to repeat myself.

Who is this "one"? - One of your anti-liberal sources?

 

[ConnorGiles]

http://www.foxnews.com/us/2014/12/05/austin-cop-sure-shot-stopped-crazed-gunman/

Holding the reins of two horses with one hand, Austin Police Sgt. Adam Johnson raised his service pistol and fired a bullseye into the target some 312 feet away.

Now even you anti-gun people doesn't the above story just warm your heart?

Ill say this in this comment - regarding Blade & Dick, to me it sounds like you are interpreting the words in the ways you wish.

Second of all, Not really warm my heart, That's someone's son - Yes he was a threat (try thinking back to my comment on mentality checks and waiting times for guns ) but a death could have been avoided here. He was probably mentally unstable, He belonged in an asylum not a grave.

 

[ConnorGiles]

I keep trying to not post but somehow I feel compelled to put finger to keyboard every so often.

I basically agree with Blade here :banghead: Connor not only wants to control guns but what we write on the threads,he's got a lot to learn.

Where I disagree with Blade is that he is back to control equal ban.
We have a right to own a car but what we can do with it is controlled by the traffic laws, these controls do not equate to a ban.

Dick and Blade have such closed minds that they cannot accept a discussion that says " this would be the best scenario but how do we get there"
I think we all agree that the USA is past hope on the subject of gun control.

Brian

I do not want to control anything Brian, Its not in my hands, what I can not fathom is why everyone thinks being safer is such a bad idea? Its not any different than before but just less deaths each year.

What do I have to learn Brian? Please go on.

No-one is past hope Brian, It is that state of mind in which nothing gets accomplished - Dick and Blade do not speak for America, They are just 2 people. I do not think I am the only one with something to learn Brian.

 

[ConnorGiles]

Sorry about the Number/Length of the posts, I like to be thorough .

 

[Brianwarnock]

I do not want to control anything Brian, Its not in my hands, what I can not fathom is why everyone thinks being safer is such a bad idea? Its not any different than before but just less deaths each year.

What do I have to learn Brian? Please go on.

No-one is past hope Brian, It is that state of mind in which nothing gets accomplished - Dick and Blade do not speak for America, They are just 2 people. I do not think I am the only one with something to learn Brian.

What do you have to learn? Lots I would think, haven't we all? However here I was talking about what happens to threads, they rarely stay completely on topic but what is considered on topic varies amongst the posters.
You seemed to take umbrage very easily, I suggest you reread the post and if necessary the post it refers to. As to your reference about people not wanting to be safe, well I don't know where you get that idea.

As far as gun control is concerned I do think that the US is beyond hope.

Brian

 

[ConnorGiles]

What do you have to learn? Lots I would think, haven't we all? However here I was talking about what happens to threads, they rarely stay completely on topic but what is considered on topic varies amongst the posters.
You seemed to take umbrage very easily, I suggest you reread the post and if necessary the post it refers to. As to your reference about people not wanting to be safe, well I don't know where you get that idea.

As far as gun control is concerned I do think that the US is beyond hope.

Brian

I was asking in general, I was asking in what you think I should learn?

I can tell topics are lost over time, This thread shows me enough.

I do not take offence easily Brian, In fact I am quite light hearted. Its when people down grade due to age, That is indeed annoying.

I would consider myself quite clued in (nothing in comparison to most) but discouraging someone due to age just isn't right.

I shall also refer to what I said before - (In my opinion) "No-one is past hope Brian, It is that state of mind in which nothing gets accomplished - Dick and Blade do not speak for America, They are just 2 people."

 

[Brianwarnock]

I am puzzled by your posts, you definitely seem upset by my post despite the icons which were intended to display light heartedness , I think that you are letting your frustration with Blade spill over to other posters. You are suggesting in your posts that I am downgrading due to age, I know Blade made an attack , but surely you haven't forgotten the post below from Bluedan's poll thread?

Originally Posted by ConnorGiles
I do think in some cases knowledge does come with age. But on the whole, Knowledge is for those who seek it.

My reply
We should all get more experienced and knowledgeable as we get older, but that does not mean that an older person is necessarily more knowledgeable or experienced than a younger one, we all lead different lives, some do not seek knowledge, some do not have the opportunity to experience different things in life, and we must always remember that in this fast moving world knowledge can quickly become obsolete.

Brian

 

[Brianwarnock]

The reason I say that the US is a hopeless case, lost cause, call it what you will, is because the political will to make any changes is not there, and even if it were I doubt that it would be possible. The resources and cost would be colossal.

Dick and Blade are not the only pro gun people on the forum, others have had their say and moved on.

Brian