Advertisement

A "common sense" proposal that will piss off both sides

I agree with getting rid of NFA items.

I agree that the government needs to do better updating their database.

I agree that background checks should be completed for retail and private purchases.

With everything else on the "gun" side, I disagree.

If people wanna do currently illegal drugs (in some states but hopefully repealed to legal drugs in all states) and get taxed to the nines, I am all for it.
 
True. But the mass shootings that make national news typically involve high capacity magazines.
The 2012 Sandy Hook Elementary School shooting killed 20 children between six and seven years old, and 6 adult staff members.
The shooting involved 156 shots fired.

The 2017 Las Vegas mass shooting killed 61 and injured 867 with over 1,000 shots fired.

Most recently, the school shooting in Texas killed 21 with the shooter having seven 30-round magazines.

From a political perspective, limiting high capacity magazines may be likely target sooner or later.
There was a 10-year ban on "assault weapons" from 1994-2004.
From one perspective, one might argue that the ban did not solve the problem.
From a different perspective, one might argue that most mass shootings have involved high capacity magazines.
My only question is, what defines "high capacity"?

I have 14 round magazines for a bolt action rifle. Old school hunting rifle with bottom feed magazine.

I have a 17 shot 22LR.

I have 9 shot magazines for my 9 mm semiautomatic pistols

I have 19 round magazines for my other 9 mm pistol

Where do you draw the line?

6 shot pistol, 3 shot shotgun, and 4 shot rifle? You know, "Because it should take 30 rounds to kill a deer."

I also think it is funny when government officials call a .223 rem firearm a "high power rifle". The official Power Factor for a 24" barrel .223 REM bolt action rifle loaded "hot" is still lower than a 7mm REM MAG with factory ammo.
 
A broader conversation, new ideas, better listening. Again, it is not that it is a discussion point, but rather it has become the only discussion point.
I am actually glad you brought up new ideas, thoughts, and deeper intellect into the "fray". I am a believer in the Constitution and the Bill of Rights. I am not a gun nut, NRA guy, or any other group. I am simply an American and I do not want my freedoms curtailed.

My biggest concern is not for the Second Amendment, it is all the others... If we make it possible to legislate "rules" for one amendment, then we can for all of them. I worry that Congress is not wise enough to properly temper these rules for the average American based on the last 20 years. Special interest groups are all the rage and I could see the rule making becoming rapant and extremely devisive towards every Americans' freedoms.
 
BigJay great post and gives a lot to think about on top of many other posts
One thing IMO $ wouldnt be an issue if we had 535 people that would do their jobs and really look at all the BS they call a budget
Im sure we blow 100 billion plus on crap OH but I must be dreaming to think they would do that
 
I was referring to every actual, real-life "compromise" that has eroded the 2nd Amendment. You know, the ones that have gotten us to where we are today. Your ideas are well thought out and reasonable. Except this is NOT how politicians work. It's not how we've gotten to volumes of gun laws that don't get enforced or are selectively or minimally enforced except for the ones that target mostly law-abiding citizens. So, while I agree you make reasonable points, I wasn't really addressing the content of your post. For not being clear about that, I do apologize. But my position regarding any further compromise on the 2nd is unapologetically NOPE! The government needs to start enforcing the laws on the books before writing more laws. The 2nd Amendment has been compromised enough and if that makes me closed minded then it is what it is. I don't care and truthfully, I don't understand why so many gun-owners seem to accept getting kicked and beatdown over issues they are not responsible for.

Certainly, 2A has not been eroding in recent years. We have more guns, we carry more guns in more places, we are far better armed than we have ever been as a society.

Meanwhile, I'm wondering what laws I can break that I be assured won't be enforced?


So, I gather for many the position on this issue is, we don’t care about building a viable mental health system, we don’t care about turning around the economic decay of rural towns and urban core, we just want more guns to defend ourselves while we watch society burn. Wonderful. I really do want my sub now.
I think what you are seeing is everyone is all about themselves. Certainly NOT about the greater good. Viable mental health care, in this state, in particular, is under siege, or would be if it even existed anymore. It largely does not, and we have seen some pretty horrendous impacts of that here, to no effect on improving the situation.

This has been a much more interesting and civil thread that I expected at the outset, but the end result is the same. Guns, guns, and more guns coupled with the occasional plea to magically forecast which offbeat, possibly mentally deficient person will go postal and just lock'em up and toss the key.

One thing is certain, if you think 2A has been seriously eroded now, you ain't seen nothing yet.
 
The fact that the group of 2A-friendly, enthusiastic gun owners who are open to some small changes that could make a difference are already sick of the aggressive hard-headedness displayed here doesn’t bode well when it comes to convincing the rest of the country. Just something to think about.
 
The fact that the group of 2A-friendly, enthusiastic gun owners who are open to some small changes that could make a difference are already sick of the aggressive hard-headedness displayed here doesn’t bode well when it comes to convincing the rest of the country. Just something to think about.
It comes from a lack of trust and a lifetime of observation…
 
Let us not forget the millions upon millions of unarmed people that were killed BY THEIR OWN GOVERNMENT IN THE 20th CENTURY! These weren’t isolated incidents. They were widespread by several different governments….and it wasn’t very long ago. I hate school shootings as much as anyone. But if we let the 2A be eroded over some evil nut jobs, our children or grandchildren will eventually pay the price.

1653836815802.jpeg
 
Let us not forget the millions upon millions of unarmed people that were killed BY THEIR OWN GOVERNMENT IN THE 20th CENTURY! These weren’t isolated incidents. They were widespread by several different governments….and it wasn’t very long ago. I hate school shootings as much as anyone. But if we let the 2A be eroded over some evil nut jobs, our children or grandchildren will eventually pay the price.

View attachment 223991

I'm sorry but the 2A did not prevent the Civil war, or as it was called by truth deniers from the south, the war of northern aggression.

Nor did it do anything to stop the world from any of the other wars or our involvement in a number of them.

I would highly doubt the USSR backed down in the Cuban missile crisis because they realized we had the 2A.
 
Can you be a little more genuine? Since when has self defense equated to “playing security officer”?
Come on now. If we’re really striving to be genuine, when has self defense equated to being responsible for enforcing the safety of several hundred students and coworkers? It’s disingenuous to keep suggesting teacher carry is simply about self defense.

Interesting thread premise, predictable result.
 
Arming teachers may not be the right answer. It may depend on the local areas and of course the teachers, but either way it's not about engaging the bad guy.

It's about providing areas of refuge during initial lock down while the bad guy engaged by responders
 
I once suggested to a teacher that maybe teachers should have a gun in the classroom. She asked me what I thought the odds were that she could use that gun to protect her students compared to the odds of an out-of-control student getting his hands on that gun and shooting up the class. I hadn't thought of that.

Right after this latest shooting I was listening to someone talking about gun control. He basically said that if gun control advocates had branded their cause as "gun safety" rather than "gun control" most of the laws they have proposed would already be in affect with the blessing of the NRA. Everyone is in favor of safety, but nobody wants to be controlled. I think he might be right.
Biometrics on the grip solves the problem of anyone but the owner using the weapon. Or biometric safe ....
 
It wasn't directed at you, but if the shoe fits.

Smokeless gun powder does not go back 150 years. The fouling from the burnt black powder would have made any rifle comparable to an AR irrelevant. It would have gummed up with the first magazine.

You might check your gun history. Short barreled shotguns, no matter their action were outlawed by the Federal government. Most would agree an AR is as lethal as a 14 inch barrel break open action shotgun.
Outlawed for lethality or concealability? I am suspecting the latter. Again, a little homework on your part is needed.
 
So this thing kinda devolved.

So, it seems if you are for actually enforcing the laws on the books, wanting the systems that are currently in place to actually function to their maximum capacity, think schools should be hardened, think the mental health system is a huge part of the issue, well you are just delusional, because guns, guns, guns.

Compromise my butt…
 
I'm sorry but the 2A did not prevent the Civil war, or as it was called by truth deniers from the south, the war of northern aggression.

Nor did it do anything to stop the world from any of the other wars or our involvement in a number of them.

I would highly doubt the USSR backed down in the Cuban missile crisis because they realized we had the 2A.
Why would you quote me and then not address my post? My statement was regarding the people of the world that were disarmed by their government and slaughtered by the millions and millions by their government less than a century ago.

1653853259623.jpeg
 
The fact that the group of 2A-friendly, enthusiastic gun owners who are open to some small changes that could make a difference are already sick of the aggressive hard-headedness displayed here doesn’t bode well when it comes to convincing the rest of the country. Just something to think about.

I think, that most “common sense” “small changes” 1.have already been tried, 2.are current law elsewhere without measurable effect 3.would do nothing to stop what happened and is happening. Definition of insanity, doing the same thing expecting a different result.

20 years ago, a few of my family, pro 2A, were heavily involved in politics and public education, in California, and held your same sentiments, today they admit they were wrong and have basically embraced the line in the sand sentiment per 2A. Teachers and law enforcement, one of which, my aunt, who started as a prison guard in one of the roughest state men’s prisons in CA, went on to become a correctional phycologist, then later went on to become a special education teacher and counselor with the goal of helping youth before they enter the system and become part of it.

I deleted my previous post, but a law does nothing to treat the disease. I know far too many examples. It is simply fact, nearly all of these people had extensive history of warning signs, nearly all had previous interactions with school resource counselors, teachers, and law enforcement. So why are they slipping through the cracks? The laws are not stopping them, the system isn’t treating them, and a stay in county, state or federal prison isn’t solving their mental illness.

Treat the disease, not the symptom.
 
Leupold BX-4 Rangefinding Binoculars

Latest posts

Forum statistics

Threads
114,061
Messages
2,042,974
Members
36,442
Latest member
Grendelhunter98
Back
Top