-
Re: I will just leave this here .... I am the majority !
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Mojouw
You and I agree on that. I have not advocated for giving away any freedoms. Unless the sale of firearms only through a licensed dealer who keeps records, runs background checks, etc and (like I believe DWins suggested) expanding access to the background check/licensing system - is taken as a removal of freedoms.
I would suggest that maybe there be some additional "regulation" of gun ownership - maybe you have to take a safety class/certification much like when you become licensed to own/operate other potentially dangerous tools. Perhaps that already exists and if it does...apologies for ignorance on my part.
I would also throw out there for debate some idea that we explore the linkage between mental health assessment and gun ownership. Perhaps individuals with specific and limited mental/social issues may have their right to gun ownership restricted by some reasonable degree. If we can agree to restrict the right to vote for certain specific reasons -- why is it unreasonable to consider the same for guns?
Again, how does the conversation have to immediately track over to people having their freedoms taken from them? Who has suggested that?
I wasn't singling you out specifically.
I have a CCW myself, and just to walk into the business's I own I have to pass a background check required by law and everybody who works for me. I don't know how it is everywhere where else but it's a $25 fee to run a background check on people here.
The mental health assessment do we give those to everyone who wants to drive a car or using something deemed to be dangerous in the wrong hands? While I agree something can be done to keep the crazies from buying guns, but if they're going to go on a rampage they will find a way.
-
Re: I will just leave this here .... I am the majority !
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Mojouw
You and I agree on that. I have not advocated for giving away any freedoms. Unless the sale of firearms only through a licensed dealer who keeps records, runs background checks, etc and (like I believe DWins suggested) expanding access to the background check/licensing system - is taken as a removal of freedoms.
I would suggest that maybe there be some additional "regulation" of gun ownership - maybe you have to take a safety class/certification much like when you become licensed to own/operate other potentially dangerous tools. Perhaps that already exists and if it does...apologies for ignorance on my part.
I would also throw out there for debate some idea that we explore the linkage between mental health assessment and gun ownership. Perhaps individuals with specific and limited mental/social issues may have their right to gun ownership restricted by some reasonable degree. If we can agree to restrict the right to vote for certain specific reasons -- why is it unreasonable to consider the same for guns?
Again, how does the conversation have to immediately track over to people having their freedoms taken from them? Who has suggested that?
Mental Health:
Can't, and I'd be completely against it because it would open the door to demanding mental health assessments for before someone could use their freedom of association, or freedom of religion, or freedom from self-incrimination, or any other freedom found in the amendments (especially those in the Bill of Rights).
I think it is pretty clear what the way forward is. Fix the NICS system so that all states MUST report to it. Stop depending on the gun industry to support NICS (they have been the largest supporter of it for a long time). Fix the pipeline between court verdicts and NICS, Military Discharge and NICS, and so on. If a person is adjudicated mentally ill, then he or she has gone through due process and I have no problem denying them a gun. However, a psychologist, psychaitric doctor, nurse, etc., has no legal right to adjudicate some else's rights outside of their specific purview (require a three-day assessment, etc). Worse yet, allowing such a thing is RIPE for abuse. Already, there's a strong push among the more virulent left to view anyone who claims to be a Christian as mentally ill because of the claim of being in "a relationship with Jesus" and thus, talking with God. Imagine a situation where a mayor hates guns, so he pushes the county social services director to hire mental health experts who have a similar belief. Now, anyone that admits to having a gun gets labeled with mental health issues and loses their rights.
It may seem farfetched to you, but I assure you it is not. All it takes is two people in the right positions; sadly, that already exists in many counties across this country and the only two things stopping it is personal ethics on the part of the people in those positions and/or the inability to accomplish the task because of current laws.
-
Re: I will just leave this here .... I am the majority !
-
Re: I will just leave this here .... I am the majority !
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Craic
Mental Health:
Can't, and I'd be completely against it because it would open the door to demanding mental health assessments for before someone could use their freedom of association, or freedom of religion, or freedom from self-incrimination, or any other freedom found in the amendments (especially those in the Bill of Rights).
I think it is pretty clear what the way forward is. Fix the NICS system so that all states MUST report to it. Stop depending on the gun industry to support NICS (they have been the largest supporter of it for a long time). Fix the pipeline between court verdicts and NICS, Military Discharge and NICS, and so on. If a person is adjudicated mentally ill, then he or she has gone through due process and I have no problem denying them a gun. However, a psychologist, psychaitric doctor, nurse, etc., has no legal right to adjudicate some else's rights outside of their specific purview (require a three-day assessment, etc). Worse yet, allowing such a thing is RIPE for abuse. Already, there's a strong push among the more virulent left to view anyone who claims to be a Christian as mentally ill because of the claim of being in "a relationship with Jesus" and thus, talking with God. Imagine a situation where a mayor hates guns, so he pushes the county social services director to hire mental health experts who have a similar belief. Now, anyone that admits to having a gun gets labeled with mental health issues and loses their rights.
It may seem farfetched to you, but I assure you it is not. All it takes is two people in the right positions; sadly, that already exists in many counties across this country and the only two things stopping it is personal ethics on the part of the people in those positions and/or the inability to accomplish the task because of current laws.
The bold is along the lines of what I meant. Honestly, I am not all that well versed in the specifics of how the process of gun ownership works and have been hesitant to provide too many details related to process as I suspected my ignorance would shine through!
While I had an initial "C'mon" reaction to some of your post - I then thought about it. And I COMPLETELY agree that any mental health assessment that was made in order to purchase a gun would be a system ripe for abuse and a terrible idea. To be completely honest, that was never what I was thinking. I was totally focused on where your bolded statements seem to be aimed as well. If a person is adjudicated mentally ill/unwell in an entirely separate and unrelated process - that needs to be flagged during the background check/waiting period portion of buying a gun.
I believe that if politicians wanted to have an honest conversation along the lines of your posting - they could adjust the current system in a way that infringes on no one's rights. But they don't want to have a realistic conversation on the issue...at least that is how it seems to me.
-
Re: I will just leave this here .... I am the majority !
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Dwinsgames
see that may be part of our personal misunderstanding ... I do not think you have to " harden " every target with paid personnel but in just taking down the signs you have hardened it a bit by default....
because now Joe Conceal carry is not not forced to shop elsewhere or leave his firearm in the car to be law abiding ( unlike the guy you really want to keep out but the signs do not dissuade him because what he seeks to do is already also against the law ) so all that sign does in reality is tell him 1) he is the one gunman or 2) if anyone else has a gun they are probably intent on doing the same thing he is ... because criminals break laws hence why they are called criminals ...and honest law abiding good people are basically honest good people who will obey the law ( even when it is stupid )
I personally feel like the chances of me being in a mass shooting setting is about as low as anyone on the planet ... why ...I avoid gun free zones like the plague ..if there is a sign saying no firearms I do not enter ...
I am not leaving my gun in the car/truck and I am not entering anywhere where I can not defend myself against deadly force , I just wont do it , to many other places to shop to get what I want/need that welcome me as a law abiding citizen that carries a firearm ....
that said I do not walk around with it exposed and if we ran into one another on the street you would never know I had it on me ....
Hopefully it never clears leather in public !
You make a solid point. I agree that there are no words printed on a piece of paper that are really going to stop a criminal from doing anything - that is why they are a criminal.
But, for me personally, I truly believe that we need to seek other solutions than each individual feeling that the only certain way to be safe is to arm themselves every time they leave their house.
What I find truly interesting about concealed carry and laws about where you can and can not have guns is that I live in a state controlled by a heavily conservative statehouse (just for context - not for judgement). The last several years they have passed a handful of laws that expanded concealed and open carry. One of the few places the politicos refuse to budge on banning guns from? Their workplace(s). Something about that doesn't sit right with me. The politicians fought the local university system hard on the issue of guns on campus. Made arguments about safety and individual rights, etc. But then banned them from government spaces?
-
Re: I will just leave this here .... I am the majority !
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Mojouw
You make a solid point. I agree that there are no words printed on a piece of paper that are really going to stop a criminal from doing anything - that is why they are a criminal.
But, for me personally, I truly believe that we need to seek other solutions than each individual feeling that the only certain way to be safe is to arm themselves every time they leave their house.
What I find truly interesting about concealed carry and laws about where you can and can not have guns is that I live in a state controlled by a heavily conservative statehouse (just for context - not for judgement). The last several years they have passed a handful of laws that expanded concealed and open carry. One of the few places the politicos refuse to budge on banning guns from? Their workplace(s). Something about that doesn't sit right with me. The politicians fought the local university system hard on the issue of guns on campus. Made arguments about safety and individual rights, etc. But then banned them from government spaces?
I can not speak for every state as I have not done the research , however I know most states BAN firearms in state houses and court houses along with any federal buildings ( and rightfully so IMO )
High profile targets sitting defenseless for anyone to try and get their 15 mins of fame , pissed off over a Bill , a court decision , a suspect on trial etc etc ... I get it
at the same time ( in my area anyways ) you have to pass through a metal detector with armed sheriffs deputies manning the detector assuring us that nobody is getting in armed ...
they are protecting themselves without a firearm because they know nobody else is going to have one either ( except those paid to have them at the door )
that is the difference in those places and other " gun free zones" they take the necessary steps to insure the law is enforced and NOBODY other than the enforcers are armed ....
I believe in my heart of hearts if schools and other places do not remove the signs they should be forced to act in the same manner by providing safeguards that their signs are obeyed and if not then forced removal of the sign that stops nobody with evil intent
-
Re: I will just leave this here .... I am the majority !
This in my state.
Are there places where I cannot carry a concealed weapon?
Yes. You may not carry a concealed weapon in a courthouse, juvenile detention facility, adult correctional facility, prison, jail, public school or private school.
Federal law may prohibit you from carrying a weapon in places such as federal courthouses and airports
-
Re: I will just leave this here .... I am the majority !
In Wisconsin it got extended to any government building and any business, church, or school that posts that you can not carry.
Basically, what ended up happening is that you can not carry on any state owned building (or at least very few). I get courthouses, detention facilities, jails, statehouses, etc. Solid and rationale reasons for that were laid out by previous posters.
But the same lawmakers who publicly pushed very very hard for the laws being passed and pushed back against business and organizations opting out -- immediately made it so that no where they work on a daily, weekly, or monthly basis (most have multiple offices) has any guns on the premises.
I know this is a bit of a pointless side rant, but what is good for the goose should be good for the gander, no? Honestly, I should just let this go and move on...it really isn't important. For some reason it just sticks in my craw...
-
Re: I will just leave this here .... I am the majority !
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Mojouw
In Wisconsin it got extended to any government building and any business, church, or school that posts that you can not carry.
Basically, what ended up happening is that you can not carry on any state owned building (or at least very few). I get courthouses, detention facilities, jails, statehouses, etc. Solid and rationale reasons for that were laid out by previous posters.
But the same lawmakers who publicly pushed very very hard for the laws being passed and pushed back against business and organizations opting out -- immediately made it so that no where they work on a daily, weekly, or monthly basis (most have multiple offices) has any guns on the premises.
I know this is a bit of a pointless side rant, but what is good for the goose should be good for the gander, no? Honestly, I should just let this go and move on...it really isn't important. For some reason it just sticks in my craw...
a lot of things stick in my craw ... when I was a smoker ( even still since I quit ) built in tax on every pack of smokes here in Pa its well over a buck a pack in tax ..... then they charge sales tax on the already taxed amount ( tax on the tax ) ....something seems terribly wrong about that but we are WAY WAY off topic now
-
Re: I will just leave this here .... I am the majority !
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Dwinsgames
a lot of things stick in my craw ... when I was a smoker ( even still since I quit ) built in tax on every pack of smokes here in Pa its well over a buck a pack in tax ..... then they charge sales tax on the already taxed amount ( tax on the tax ) ....something seems terribly wrong about that but we are WAY WAY off topic now
Yeah. Sin taxes are always controversial.
Another one that makes me shake my head is that state and federal politicos pass laws that impact regular folks pay, pensions, and benefits. Then they turn around and exempt themselves from a lot of the same systems.
-
Re: I will just leave this here .... I am the majority !
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Mojouw
Yeah. Sin taxes are always controversial.
Another one that makes me shake my head is that state and federal politicos pass laws that impact regular folks pay, pensions, and benefits. Then they turn around and exempt themselves from a lot of the same systems.
Like obamacare?
-
Re: I will just leave this here .... I am the majority !
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Dwinsgames
good post with exception to the bold ...
an AR 15 or AK 47 that is legally owned by private citizens are NOT Military grade firearms
an M16 or M4 is military versions of the AR they have burst mode/ full auto capabilities that the AR simply does not have
same with the AK the civilian versions like the AR have no burst mode or full auto mode
if either did they would be $8,000 and up in price and would require a federal tax stamp in order to purchase ...
this " military grade crap" is the evening news and uninformed politicians spouting off about things in which they have no clue about ...
semi auto 1 shot fired for every 1 trigger pull not much different in that found in old wheel guns ( 6 shooters / revolvers ) used in the old west
one of my AR's here
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/DUazJReVAAAjh5x.jpg:large
note the bullet chart ( ar is .223 / 5.56 ) I hunt deer with a 30.06 note the size in that round also in pic below
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/DaOncoWX0AA8gzc.jpg:large
lastly the primary 2 reasons the US Military went from 30 caliber to the M16 ( 22 caliber ) is
1) ammo weight was a huge factor you can carry way more rounds of smaller lighter ammo into battle
2) it is a far less lethal round , meaning you could shoot 1 person and effectively take 2-3 more out of the battle for a time while they drug their wounded compatriot to safer ground
M16-A1 has full auto, A2 has 3 round burst.
I think the issue is that the rounds "tumble"; they go in your leg and go out your chest. They are designed to wreak havoc to whatever it hits.
Personally I don't agree with having those types of weapons. It has nothing to do with the 2nd amendment, that amendment has NOTHING to do with the weapons of today so IMO that argument is moot.
With that said, I also disagree with anyone telling me what I can or cannot own. I do agree however with being a certain age in order to buy those weapons "as a civilian". I don't care if you're former military, being former military does NOT mean you know your way around a weapon.
I was in the USMC and took the primary marksmanship instructor and coached many people to expert shooter who had never shot expert before. I could have made that my MOS but chose instead to get out to see what it's like being a civilian.
To me, owning a firearm is not worth the risk. Too many stories about kids getting ahold of weapons etc. If I need protection, a high powered nail gun would do just fine.
-
Re: I will just leave this here .... I am the majority !
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Mach1
Like obamacare?
Sure. Or the system before that. The current system. Doesn't really matter. Whatever system it is, Congress always votes that their healthcare and benefits are different and separate from yours and mine. Many state legislatures do the same. Often times even portions of their taxes are different.
-
Re: I will just leave this here .... I am the majority !
Quote:
Originally Posted by
BnG_Hevn
M16-A1 has full auto, A2 has 3 round burst.
I think the issue is that the rounds "tumble"; they go in your leg and go out your chest. They are designed to wreak havoc to whatever it hits.
Personally I don't agree with having those types of weapons. It has nothing to do with the 2nd amendment, that amendment has NOTHING to do with the weapons of today so IMO that argument is moot.
With that said, I also disagree with anyone telling me what I can or cannot own. I do agree however with being a certain age in order to buy those weapons "as a civilian". I don't care if you're former military, being former military does NOT mean you know your way around a weapon.
I was in the USMC and took the primary marksmanship instructor and coached many people to expert shooter who had never shot expert before. I could have made that my MOS but chose instead to get out to see what it's like being a civilian.
To me, owning a firearm is not worth the risk. Too many stories about kids getting ahold of weapons etc. If I need protection, a high powered nail gun would do just fine.
thats why there are gun safes and small bedside hand/fingerprint safes for handguns it allows you to get ahold of it quickly but keeps the kids out
-
Re: I will just leave this here .... I am the majority !
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Dwinsgames
thats why there are gun safes and small bedside hand/fingerprint safes for handguns it allows you to get ahold of it quickly but keeps the kids out
That's true, but I can respect his position as well. I have a good friend that is the same way. He is one hundred percent pro-gun, but will not have a gun in his house until his son grows up because he doesn't want that one-in-a-million-mistake to be his mistake.
I, on the otherhand, have no children in my house. As such, all my guns, whether in the safe or not, are fully loaded and chambered because I consider them all self-defense weapons and will grab any one of them in a self-defense scenario, depending on the issue. Heck, I have one sitting at my elbow on the desk right now. Of course, every single one of my handguns are holstered to protect the trigger and my long guns have the safeties on (I don't buy handguns with safeties. My finger knows where it should and should not go when it comes to weapons).
-
Re: I will just leave this here .... I am the majority !
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Craic
That's true, but I can respect his position as well. I have a good friend that is the same way. He is one hundred percent pro-gun, but will not have a gun in his house until his son grows up because he doesn't want that one-in-a-million-mistake to be his mistake.
I, on the otherhand, have no children in my house. As such, all my guns, whether in the safe or not, are fully loaded and chambered because I consider them all self-defense weapons and will grab any one of them in a self-defense scenario, depending on the issue. Heck, I have one sitting at my elbow on the desk right now. Of course,
every single one of my handguns are holstered to protect the trigger and my long guns have the safeties on (I don't buy handguns with safeties. My finger knows
where it should and should not go when it comes to weapons).
oh I respect it to , was just pointing it out in case he is out of the loop on such things as safes have chanced a lot in the last 10-15 years esp small handgun safes
-
Re: I will just leave this here .... I am the majority !
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Dwinsgames
oh I respect it to , was just pointing it out in case he is out of the loop on such things as safes have chanced a lot in the last 10-15 years esp small handgun safes
Gotcha.
To be honest, I avoid most of those like a plague because so many of them are now electronic. When I bought my gun safe, I purposefully avoided any safe that had a keypad. It just takes one hiccup for that stupid thing to lock and stay that way. No thanks! Give me the old fashion dial and tumblers. Especially when you think about what could happen in a fire. Dial - still has a very good chance of working. Keypad? Not so good. The wiring can melt because of the heat, or the pad short circuit from the water used to put out the fire.
-
Re: I will just leave this here .... I am the majority !
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Craic
Gotcha.
To be honest, I avoid most of those like a plague because so many of them are now electronic. When I bought my gun safe, I purposefully avoided any safe that had a keypad. It just takes one hiccup for that stupid thing to lock and stay that way. No thanks! Give me the old fashion dial and tumblers. Especially when you think about what could happen in a fire. Dial - still has a very good chance of working. Keypad? Not so good. The wiring can melt because of the heat, or the pad short circuit from the water used to put out the fire.
its not as bad as you may think ... mine has the digital keypad ( brands and model probably vary though ) ... BUT , if the keypad shits the bed or the batteries die you can easily remove the keypad ( 10 seconds ) and use the elongated key that is like 6 inches long to get back into the mechanism and open the safe .... I keep the key to my big safe in my small safe that is a dial only ..
-
Re: I will just leave this here .... I am the majority !
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Dwinsgames
its not as bad as you may think ... mine has the digital keypad ( brands and model probably vary though ) ... BUT , if the keypad shits the bed or the batteries die you can easily remove the keypad ( 10 seconds ) and use the elongated key that is like 6 inches long to get back into the mechanism and open the safe .... I keep the key to my big safe in my small safe that is a dial only ..
Ahh. The ones I was looking at didn't seem to have that feature. That's a great option. It makes buying my next safe a little easier if I know I can do that. Thanks.
-
Re: I will just leave this here .... I am the majority !
I have an old smaller liberty centurion safe with electronic lock that crapped out a couple different times. No long key for it, had to wait for the locksmith to open it. Good thing they have lifetime warranty. I did get a liberty fatboy safe and I made sure it had a dial. The small one is now an ammo/overflow catch all safe.
-
Re: I will just leave this here .... I am the majority !
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Mach1
I have an old smaller liberty centurion safe with electronic lock that crapped out a couple different times. No long key for it, had to wait for the locksmith to open it. Good thing they have lifetime warranty. I did get a liberty fatboy safe and I made sure it had a dial. The small one is now an ammo/overflow catch all safe.
Yep, that's what I'm afraid of. I do like the idea of having a longkey hidden in another safe though.
-
Re: I will just leave this here .... I am the majority !
-
Re: I will just leave this here .... I am the majority !
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Dwinsgames
I think I already answered that. If course, there's some other stuff that goes with it as well, but I think what I said in the earlier post is about 75 percent of the problem, with another 25 percent going to the broken metanarratives.
-
Re: I will just leave this here .... I am the majority !
-
Re: I will just leave this here .... I am the majority !
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Dwinsgames
Yet, the media in general is very quiet about this story. Hmmmm, I wonder why?
-
Re: I will just leave this here .... I am the majority !
Quote:
Originally Posted by
43Hitman
Yet, the media in general is very quiet about this story. Hmmmm, I wonder why?
doesn't fit the narrative ... I was really shocked it was on yahoo
-
Re: I will just leave this here .... I am the majority !
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Born2Steel
I do not agree that the average American should have military grade weapons in their home.
However, the constitution does give that right to the average American. And that is the part I do agree with. I am against any movement that takes rights away from the average American.
I grew up with guns in the house so maybe I am biased. But I completely agree that the entire reason we live in a free society now, is because we have the right to bear arms, and not just the hunting rifle variety, but a right to the military grade weapons as well. How and why do people slip through the system is a completely different topic for conversation, and the conversation that needs to be had rather than what guns are within my rights to own.
Define military grade.
- - - Updated - - -
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Dwinsgames
doesn't fit the narrative ... I was really shocked it was on yahoo
Exactly. There are probably many stories like this, but liberals want to keep them quiet so they can push their anti-gun agenda.
I laugh when I hear liberals claim the NRA is responsible for shootings.
-
Re: I will just leave this here .... I am the majority !
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Dwinsgames
doesn't fit the narrative ... I was really shocked it was on yahoo
yeah I knew that, I was being sarcastic. :chuckle:
-
Re: I will just leave this here .... I am the majority !
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Steeldude
Define military grade.
:chuckle:
https://i.pinimg.com/736x/16/d0/1a/1...-too-funny.jpg
-
Re: I will just leave this here .... I am the majority !
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Mach1
Haha. Sadly, that's pretty much true