Re: DC is Now the One Lone Area of the Country ....
I agree the Mags will have almost zero effect on anything, but people will feel like they did something and sleep better, meanwhile some psychopath is learning how to quickly magazine change for the exact same results. In the interest of gun ownership though, id say keeping your AR and having to reload once is a pretty fair compromise vs trying to take them away entirely, thats all. not really supporting that notion.
I think storing guns is part of being responsible gun owner, which is why I dont think even some that are good gun owners by all other definitions still arent being responsible gun owners. I know of too many houses where ive walked in and just seen a gun lying around, or worse a fully functioning gun safe thats left wide open. If proper storing enforcement is something even gun owners are for, id jump on board with that in a heartbeat. Problem is how do you enforce it? Random house inspections?
I heard that in the case of Aurora, the guy was buying guns, ammunition stockpiles, armor, and all this other stuff over a a few month period. Isnt there someway to red flag those purchases and have the police look into it? seems with background checks and credit card use there should be an option for that.
Re: DC is Now the One Lone Area of the Country ....
Quote:
Originally Posted by
NCRAVEN
I wish Mrs. Lanza took the precautions folks like you and I do,but reports are she was of the belief the world was going to end and trained her son to use the guns, so even if she secured them he probably knew how to get them without much effort.
Seven of her friends and family were on The Today show yesterday and all of them debunked that claim.
That claim came from her ex-husbands sister and one of her friends believe she made it up since they never got along.
Re: DC is Now the One Lone Area of the Country ....
I routinely buy ammo in bulk. I do it for the same reason Mrs. HR and I shop at Costco -- it's cheaper.
Ammo at the gun range, at Wal-Mart, etc is marked up sometimes double the bulk price. Last month, I'd estimate I purchased 500 rounds of 9mm, 500 rounds of .45 and a crate of 1,000 rounds of .223 (yes, that's the same round that may have been used in CT). It will take me about 6 months or so to go through that allotment. My wife and I joke is the press ever looked inside my gun safe, it would be described as "an arsenal". I'd estimate I have about 2,500 rounds of ammo currently in my safe. Every shooter / hunter I know buys in bulk.
So again, checks on folks who buy ammo in bulk will be nothing more than a burden to legit, folks all the while doing nothing on the prevention side.
Re: DC is Now the One Lone Area of the Country ....
Quote:
Originally Posted by
HoustonRaven
Seven of her friends and family were on The Today show yesterday and all of them debunked that claim.
That claim came from her ex-husbands sister and one of her friends believe she made it up since they never got along.
Interesting. I'd like to know why (not that it makes a difference now) she didn't secure her guns when she knew and was worried about her son...
Re: DC is Now the One Lone Area of the Country ....
Quote:
Originally Posted by
JAB1985
I think storing guns is part of being responsible gun owner, which is why I dont think even some that are good gun owners by all other definitions still arent being responsible gun owners. I know of too many houses where ive walked in and just seen a gun lying around, or worse a fully functioning gun safe thats left wide open. If proper storing enforcement is something even gun owners are for, id jump on board with that in a heartbeat. Problem is how do you enforce it? Random house inspections?
.
Fortunately and unfortunately you have to make a law that punishes after the fact.
I say fortunately because you can't just start allowing people in other peoples house because they own a gun. If you did that, where do you stop? You might as well throw out the constitution if that was allowed (and I know you weren't pushing that, simply asking).
And I say unfortunately because, well I think it's pretty clear, you don't know if someone didn't properly secure their gun until it's too late. It may not always result in someone being shot but you'd find out when someone who shouldn't have the gun until they do.
So you'd have to make a law that says, if you have a handgun that was possessed or used by a person under age you're liable for whatever in hopes it serves as a deterrent, kinda like the speed limit ;)
Re: DC is Now the One Lone Area of the Country ....
Quote:
Originally Posted by
NCRAVEN
Interesting. I'd like to know why (not that it makes a difference now) she didn't secure her guns when she knew and was worried about her son...
Has that been proven that she did not secure her weapons?
I legitimately don't know...that's why I am asking...
Re: DC is Now the One Lone Area of the Country ....
Quote:
Originally Posted by
wickedsolo
Has that been proven that she did not secure her weapons?
I legitimately don't know...that's why I am asking...
I don't know either. But either she didn't or she didn't secure them well enough.
Re: DC is Now the One Lone Area of the Country ....
Quote:
Originally Posted by
HoustonRaven
I routinely buy ammo in bulk. I do it for the same reason Mrs. HR and I shop at Costco -- it's cheaper.
Ammo at the gun range, at Wal-Mart, etc is marked up sometimes double the bulk price. Last month, I'd estimate I purchased 500 rounds of 9mm, 500 rounds of .45 and a crate of 1,000 rounds of .223 (yes, that's the same round that may have been used in CT). It will take me about 6 months or so to go through that allotment. My wife and I joke is the press ever looked inside my gun safe, it would be described as "an arsenal". I'd estimate I have about 2,500 rounds of ammo currently in my safe. Every shooter / hunter I know buys in bulk.
So again, checks on folks who buy ammo in bulk will be nothing more than a burden to legit, folks all the while doing nothing on the prevention side.
And thats fine, but purchasing multiple "flags" like guns themselves, large quantities of ammo and Body Armor and other items should trigger something. You should be able to see a pattern in your case, and others, under that scenario. One visit from a cop or a more in depth background check at that point is viewed as a "burden" by you but again, its your right to own a gun, but that doesnt mean its without burdens. I drive a car, i still have to go through check points now and then. I dont drive drunk and its a "burden" but its part of having the right, imo.
Re: DC is Now the One Lone Area of the Country ....
Quote:
Originally Posted by
JAB1985
And thats fine, but purchasing multiple "flags" like guns themselves, large quantities of ammo and Body Armor and other items should trigger something. You should be able to see a pattern in your case, and others, under that scenario. One visit from a cop or a more in depth background check at that point is viewed as a "burden" by you but again, its your right to own a gun, but that doesnt mean its without burdens. I drive a car, i still have to go through check points now and then. I dont drive drunk and its a "burden" but its part of having the right, imo.
Driving is a privilege not a right. Privileges come with clauses, right are a lot less strict.
What about the right to privacy?
I am not suggesting no compromise what so ever. But at some point JAB you have to realize you can't prevent everything - especially in a free society.
Even if we weren't a free society, you still can't prevent things from happening, free will is a bitch.
Re: DC is Now the One Lone Area of the Country ....
Quote:
Originally Posted by
JAB1985
And thats fine, but purchasing multiple "flags" like guns themselves, large quantities of ammo and Body Armor and other items should trigger something. You should be able to see a pattern in your case, and others, under that scenario. One visit from a cop or a more in depth background check at that point is viewed as a "burden" by you but again, its your right to own a gun, but that doesnt mean its without burdens. I drive a car, i still have to go through check points now and then. I dont drive drunk and its a "burden" but its part of having the right, imo.
A few points here ....
I never claimed that the background check I have to go through is a burden. In fact, I am in favor of background checks on all gun purchases.
Not to keep touting Texas, but the system here works. When you purchase a firearm in Texas, a call is placed to the Texas DPS and they run your background on the spot. It's a nationwide background check, not just a state one. Bulk purchases of firearms (anything over 3 in a 24 hour period) and you get flagged and will most likely get a visit from a cop. If you pass, you get your weapon.
The Columbine shooters obtained their weapons illegally as they were underage (by the way, the assault weapons ban and high capacity mag ban were both in effect that day; did nothing to stop them). No gun limit would have stopped them. The guy in Aurura bought his legally, but it was over several months. Again, no gun limit ban would have stopped him. In CT, the mother legally owned her firearms. Yet again, a gun limit ban is useless.
Re: DC is Now the One Lone Area of the Country ....
Quote:
Originally Posted by
NCRAVEN
I am not suggesting no compromise what so ever. But at some point JAB you have to realize you can't prevent everything - especially in a free society.
Even if we weren't a free society, you still can't prevent things from happening, free will is a bitch.
Thats what I keep hearing though. "Its my right, I dont want to be burdened" (thats a generalization). well, thats not really compromising. Keeping your guns but being burdened by this or that is just that, a compromise. you keep your right and your gun. I think to help out police in a very difficult job, something has to give.
I agree bad things will happen regardless, but i dont think saying theres nothing we can do about it, is the best mindset, when some measures certainly have the potential to lessen the frequency in which they do.
Quote:
Originally Posted by
HoustonRaven
Not to keep touting Texas, but the system here works. When you purchase a firearm in Texas, a call is placed to the Texas DPS and they run your background on the spot. It's a nationwide background check, not just a state one. Bulk purchases of firearms (anything over 3 in a 24 hour period) and you get flagged and will most likely get a visit from a cop. If you pass, you get your weapon.
The Columbine shooters obtained their weapons illegally as they were underage (by the way, the assault weapons ban and high capacity mag ban were both in effect that day; did nothing to stop them). No gun limit would have stopped them. The guy in Aurura bought his legally, but it was over several months. Again, no gun limit ban would have stopped him. In CT, the mother legally owned her firearms. Yet again, a gun limit ban is useless.
stealing guns, should go back on who they were stolen from (back to our convo of properly storing them), or in Columbines case, a bunch of felony gun sales. Aurora, VT, etc all bought their guns, in particular Aurora, who bought multiple guns, large quantities of ammo and body armor and clip holders in a short time of 2 months (guess you can call that several) which should trigger something when all together. VT, was actually court ordered to psychiatric assessment but still legally purchased guns because he just didnt fill out the mental health area, which should have been enough to not sell him a gun. I think i remember hearing Aurora was also under some psychiatric monitoring. To me thats just a failure to actually follow through with laws we do have, at least in some states.
From Wiki, about Aurora shooter:
Quote:
On May 22, 2012, Holmes purchased a Glock 22 pistol at a Gander Mountain shop in Aurora, and six days later bought a Remington Model 870 shotgun at a Bass Pro Shops in Denver. On June 7, just hours after failing his oral exam at the university, he purchased a Smith & Wesson M&P15 semi-automatic rifle, with a second Glock 22 pistol following on July 6. All the weapons were bought legally.[49] In the four months prior to the shooting, Holmes also bought 3000 rounds of ammunition for the pistols, 3000 rounds for the M&P15, and 350 shells for the shotgun over the Internet.[50][51] On July 2, he placed an order for a Blackhawk Urban Assault Vest, two magazine holders and a knife at an online retailer.
when looking at the incidents as one thing, a massacre, sure youre not going to be able to blanket it all with one action. Breaking it down into those who stole guns and those who purchased you can come to some results. Stolen guns = storing laws, Buying = more psychological testing or more strict enforcement. I would actually be for getting rid of the limit ban so guys like VT, who followed the 30 day law, stand out more. Cops need as much help as they can get.
I hope my intentions of not limiting guns but holding owners responsible is coming through. may not agree on how best to do that, but i do think we agree in principle.
Re: DC is Now the One Lone Area of the Country ....
Quote:
Originally Posted by
JAB1985
Thats what I keep hearing though. "Its my right, I dont want to be burdened" (thats a generalization). well, thats not really compromising. Keeping your guns but being burdened by this or that is just that, a compromise. you keep your right and your gun. I think to help out police in a very difficult job, something has to give.
I agree bad things will happen regardless, but i dont think saying theres nothing we can do about it, is the best mindset, when some measures certainly have the potential to lessen the frequency in which they do.
I support instant background checks like Houston has said, there is nothing burdensome about that.
I was referring to the right to privacy. You said what about him purchasing all that ammo online, his credit card should have thrown up a red flag. If I own one gun and by ammo in bulk you're saying my credit card company should alert the government? I am saying what about privacy? IF you bought 500 condoms online should you're credit card company alert the government because you might be a serial rapist?