• Welcome to OGBoards 10.0, keep in mind that we will be making LOTS of changes to smooth out the experience here and make it as close as possible functionally to the old software, but feel free to drop suggestions or requests in the Tech Support subforum!

Gun Control Laws

Gun control laws can and should be stregthened. You can make a longer waiting period, do a mental health background check, ban gun shows among other things.

But the idea that guns could be banned in this country is not realistic. There 300 million guns in the country. The government could probably round up a decent portion of those but the others would be hidden away. If the government tried to round up every gun, then you would see a large number of domestic terrorist organizations rise up with tons of new members. I wouldn't be surprised to see some parts of the country go into out right rebellion.
 
http://www.wired.com/dangerroom/2012/07/aurora/

If you want to kill large numbers of people, you should seriously consider buying a handgun or assault rifle. As the movie-theater massacre in Aurora, Colorado demonstrated, chances are federal law enforcement and homeland security and counterterrorism agents won’t see you amassing an arsenal of assault rifles, handguns and ammunition.

Longtime law enforcement and intelligence veterans say that the feds simply don’t have ways of spotting stockpiles of firearms. It stands in contrast to their successful post-9/11 efforts at stopping the spread of bomb precursors like chemical fertilizer.
 
It scares the hell out of me but I don't really know what to do about it. I've not read up on the issue though.
 
Shorty said:
I would be very interested to see more posts with some specific ideas as to how we fix this problem. It seems almost impossible to me. I am not a gun owner (they scare the shit out of me) but I can understand why someone would want to own a gun.

But what kind of regulations/laws do we put in place to protect the public from the kind of person who would slaughter kids in an elementary school? If there are, in fact, 300 million guns already out there, what can we realistically do about it?
Click to expand...

You could tie the civil liability of the crime to the gun dealer or prior owner, absent a full-blown "clearinghouse" approval from the government involving mental certification and training testing. It wouldn't stop black market deals, but it would it would drastically reduce the number of person-person sales and funnel people buying from stores through a testing program.
 
Shorty said:
I would be very interested to see more posts with some specific ideas as to how we fix this problem. It seems almost impossible to me. I am not a gun owner (they scare the shit out of me) but I can understand why someone would want to own a gun.

But what kind of regulations/laws do we put in place to protect the public from the kind of person who would slaughter kids in an elementary school? If there are, in fact, 300 million guns already out there, what can we realistically do about it?
Click to expand...

Not make it 300 million and 1.
 
Some easy ones:

No gun shows that allow sales.

No multiple purchases of mass produced weapons that were made in the past hundred years. This would allow the sale of antique collections. there would exceptions for licensed security companies and other companies that show need. These sales need to be tied to specific employees who need to be licensed.

No sale of expanded magazines.

No sale of semi-automatic weapons that can be converted to fully automatic.

Every sale of every gun must be registered. If you buy a gun and want to resell it, you must go to either the police department or licensed gun dealer and get a background check of the buyer.

If you lose your gun, you must report it to the police or be held liable for anything that it is used for.
 
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs...guns-and-mass-shootings-in-the-united-states/

mass-shooting-legally.jpg
 
If Columbine didn't move our country to gun control, what makes anyone think this latest atrocity will change anything? The same old tired arguments will be trotted out, namely, (a) if all the teachers had been packing heat they could have stopped this guy, and (b) no matter what rules we put in place, this guy would have circumvented them anyway, so therefore the solution is (a), arm all the second grade teachers.
 
BeachBumDeac said:
http://www.wired.com/dangerroom/2012/07/aurora/

If you want to kill large numbers of people, you should seriously consider buying a handgun or assault rifle. As the movie-theater massacre in Aurora, Colorado demonstrated, chances are federal law enforcement and homeland security and counterterrorism agents won’t see you amassing an arsenal of assault rifles, handguns and ammunition.

Longtime law enforcement and intelligence veterans say that the feds simply don’t have ways of spotting stockpiles of firearms. It stands in contrast to their successful post-9/11 efforts at stopping the spread of bomb precursors like chemical fertilizer.
Click to expand...

But god dammit we keep tabs on cold medicine.
 
WakeForestRanger said:
Gun control laws can and should be stregthened. You can make a longer waiting period, do a mental health background check, ban gun shows among other things.

But the idea that guns could be banned in this country is not realistic. There 300 million guns in the country. The government could probably round up a decent portion of those but the others would be hidden away. If the government tried to round up every gun, then you would see a large number of domestic terrorist organizations rise up with tons of new members. I wouldn't be surprised to see some parts of the country go into out right rebellion.
Click to expand...

These are exactly the type of people who probably shouldn't have the guns in the first place. Stop playing Rambo, people.
 
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/wonkblog/wp/2012/12/14/nine-facts-about-guns-and-mass-shootings-in-the-united-states/

"When we first collected much of this data, it was after the Aurora, Colo. shootings, and the air was thick with calls to avoid “politicizing” the tragedy. That is code, essentially, for “don’t talk about reforming our gun control laws.”

Let’s be clear: That is a form of politicization. When political actors construct a political argument that threatens political consequences if other political actors pursue a certain political outcome, that is, almost by definition, a politicization of the issue. It’s just a form of politicization favoring those who prefer the status quo to stricter gun control laws."
 
Demon09 said:
These are exactly the type of people who probably shouldn't have the guns in the first place. Stop playing Rambo, people.
Click to expand...

You're probably talking about hundreds of thousands if not millions of people.
 
Deacfreak07 said:
If guns are not the problem, someone tell me what is? I think we should invest in mental health like we invest in oil, natural gas, coal, etc. If we cannot make changes to society, and just have to wade through life like cattle waiting to be slaughtered by the next pyscho, then I want no part of this country. What a broken world we live in where we squabble over petty things while we send drones to blow up half the world and refuse to make changes when our children cannot be kept safe.
Click to expand...

The pro gun people will tell you that if you don't want to wade through life like a cow to slaughter, the only solution is to pack heat everywhere you go.
 
WakeForestRanger said:
You're probably talking about hundreds of thousands if not millions of people.
Click to expand...

No. Probably just a few hundred crazies that would absolutely defy the law. Let them hole up Waco style and then we will send the national guard in and exterminate them, simultaneuosly getting rid of moronic rednecks and proving that the domestic weapons for sale will never offer any protection against our military.
 
Last edited:
My thoughts on gun control and American rights:

The original intent of making sure that citizens could bear arms was to prevent government over-reach. That is really no longer applicable. Handguns and semi-automatic weapons aren't going to stop the US government if they decided to lock down on the population. The technology gap between owning a hand gun and what our military has access to is too large. So I see no need in gun laws that are supposed to ensure the safety of the population against the government. Based on that notion I see no reason for the general population to own a gun that cannot be used for hunting. Manual loading shotguns and rifles are pretty much all that need to be readily available to the public. Perhaps we could allow some handguns in rare, heavily monitored situations, but in reality the sooner we get rid of them the better. I Think it is pretty clear there is still a large need for guns to hunt both for recreation and for food (a lot of people in Mississippi kill a few deer each winter and eat off them for the next few months). But we no longer need to look at guns as a method of self defense. The sooner the cops are the only one with guns, the better in my book. That way if someone is caught with a handgun they go to jail for a LONG Time. No matter what they have done. Criminals would be afraid to get caught with a gun much less use it. The penalties should be severe.
 
Deacon923 said:
The pro gun people will tell you that if you don't want to wade through life like a cow to slaughter, the only solution is to pack heat everywhere you go.
Click to expand...

Then let's have that debate. If pro-gun advocates think that is the solution, let them recommend that school officials/teachers are required to carry. If guns aren't the problem, then that should help.

Instead, we will grieve and move on with our heads in the sand instead of actually trying to prevent the next shooting from happening.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top