Gun control

[Jiro]

I think it gets my point across. However, to humor you here it is: 1966, Charles Whitman a former marine sharpshooter, went up the tower at the University of Texas at Austin. In 96 minutes he killed 15 and wounded 31 others. His weapons were: 1 Remington 700, 1, M-1 carbine, 1, Remington Model 141, 1, Swears Model 60 shotgun, 1, S&W Model 19, 1, PO-8 Luger, 1, Galesi Brescia and a knife. Not one of his weapons was an AR type weapon. 2017, Stephen Paddock went up to the 32 floor of the Mandalay Bay Hotel and opened up on 20,000+ concert goers and in 12 minutes he killed 59, including himself and wounded 546, in TWELVE MINUTES! His weapons included 4, DDM4 rifles, 3, FN-15 rifles, 1, AR-15, 1, AR-10 rifle, 1, AK-47, 1, LMT rifle and 1, handgun. Some of his weapons were outfitted with bump stocks turning them into basically machine guns. The weapons Paddock used are basically weapons you would find on a battlefield, for Whitman other than the M-1, the Luger and the Galesi Brescia his others would be found in a hunters arsenal. All of them will kill or can be used to kill, but Paddocks weapons were designed to kill a lot of people in a short period of time.

it's not because it was his guns that killed a lot of people in a short period of time. it's because he was shooting fish in a barrel. it was his meticulous planning that killed a lot of people in a short period of time.

in the interest of public safety, we should ban all public venues of large gathering.

 

[Double-U]

Colt marketed it as a civilian semi automatic copy of the M-16 in a 1964, ad. Out of the box it might be just a rifle, but once you add on all the accessories that are available it isn't like any rifle the framers could of imagined.

"AR15" was the original name of the rifle. The military adopted the AR15 and designated it the M16.

 

[Double-U]

I'm going to guess that your relatives are into big game hunting. so if you know anything about hunting and gun... AR-15 (which is mostly 5.56) is a wrong rifle for hunting big game. it can't even kill a deer. in fact... it's illegal to hunt a big game with that kind of rifle in several states because since it can't effectively kill a deer, it is considered as cruel and inhumane.

there are handful of other semi-automatic rifles capable of killing a deer but lot of hunters typically don't carry those types because once you fire and you miss, deers are long gone. and plus - they hike for hours on foot. why carry all the unnecessary weight? they don't need 30 rounds magazine.

duh. your logic is invalid.

oh - there are plenty of Texan hunters with semi-automatic weapons flying around in helicopters, killing dozens of wild hogs. YEEEEEEE HAWWWWWWWWWW!!!!!!!!!!

if you have $35,000 to spend... you can do this! .... with fully-automatic guns! yeeeeee hawwwwwww!!!!

Gun control advocates really ought to stick to what they know. There's a lot of incorrect information in this thread.

 

[Double-U]

I think you've been reading too many NRA Freedom magazines.

Your statement doesn't refute one thing I wrote.

 

[Double-U]

I have relatives who have been and are still hunters in upstate NY and I haven't heard of anyone taking their weapons away. But last time I heard they weren't using a semi automatic or bump stock equipped weapon to go deer hunting. It wouldn't be sporting in their eyes!

I don't hunt. I own a small number of guns for self-defense, and I have no interest in juvenile aftermarket accessories like bump stocks. New York State is very restrictive when it comes to handguns, and the less said about NYC the better. One must obtain a license to buy one, and the approval process takes months. Magazine capacity is limited to 10. A visitor to New York cannot carry a handgun across state lines. Local laws vary, so there's a very high risk of getting into trouble while transporting a gun in a vehicle. It's a textbook example of liberal politicians making it onerous and risky to obtain a firearm, all for the purpose of discouraging people from buying one in the first place.

And let me stress that I would support legislation that banned bump stocks as long as said legislation was limited strictly to that purpose and was written in unequivocal language. In other words, the bill would have to explicitly ban bump stocks and do nothing else.

 

[Double-U]

I think it gets my point across. However, to humor you here it is: 1966, Charles Whitman a former marine sharpshooter, went up the tower at the University of Texas at Austin. In 96 minutes he killed 15 and wounded 31 others. His weapons were: 1 Remington 700, 1, M-1 carbine, 1, Remington Model 141, 1, Swears Model 60 shotgun, 1, S&W Model 19, 1, PO-8 Luger, 1, Galesi Brescia and a knife. Not one of his weapons was an AR type weapon. 2017, Stephen Paddock went up to the 32 floor of the Mandalay Bay Hotel and opened up on 20,000+ concert goers and in 12 minutes he killed 59, including himself and wounded 546, in TWELVE MINUTES! His weapons included 4, DDM4 rifles, 3, FN-15 rifles, 1, AR-15, 1, AR-10 rifle, 1, AK-47, 1, LMT rifle and 1, handgun. Some of his weapons were outfitted with bump stocks turning them into basically machine guns. The weapons Paddock used are basically weapons you would find on a battlefield, for Whitman other than the M-1, the Luger and the Galesi Brescia his others would be found in a hunters arsenal. All of them will kill or can be used to kill, but Paddocks weapons were designed to kill a lot of people in a short period of time.

I would be amenable to restrictions on military style semi-automatics, although you and I would probably disagree on a lot of the details. Remember that I said I'm a de facto absolutist due to the fact that liberal gun control legislation is always a sweeping attack on gun ownership at all levels, which is something I am staunchly opposed to.

What gun control measures would I agree to? Well, I wouldn't miss bump stocks or drum magazines. Those are two examples. Universal background checks are a good idea. Perhaps a buyer should have to register semi-auto assault rifles so that someone would notice if a person has bought an unusually large number of them.

I oppose any restrictions (other than background checks) on handguns, shotguns or rifles other than semi-auto assault rifles.

 

[seb]

I don't hunt. I own a small number of guns for self-defense, and I have no interest juvenile aftermarket accessories like bump stocks. New York State is very restrictive when it comes to handguns, and the less said about NYC the better. One must obtain a license to buy one, and the approval process takes months. Magazine capacity is limited to 10. A visitor to New York cannot carry a handgun across state lines. Local laws vary, so there's a very high risk of getting into trouble while transporting a gun in a vehicle. It's a textbook example of liberal politicians making it onerous and risky to obtain a firearm, all for the purpose of discouraging people from buying one in the first place.

And let me stress that I would support legislation that banned bump stocks as long as said legislation was limited strictly to that purpose and was written in unequivocal language. In other words, the bill would have to explicitly ban bump stocks and do nothing else.

NY has always been above the curve in many matters regarding the safety and wellbeing of it's citizens. I may be wrong, but I think they were the first or one of the first to ban fireworks almost 100 years ago, although the law was recently changed to allow some "safe and sane" fireworks to be sold in counties that will issue permits. NYC still bans them. All my relatives who live in NY would like to see NYC become it's own state!

 

[seb]

it's not because it was his guns that killed a lot of people in a short period of time. it's because he was shooting fish in a barrel. it was his meticulous planning that killed a lot of people in a short period of time.

in the interest of public safety, we should ban all public venues of large gathering.

Whitman also had meticulous planning, but he was unable to get off as many rounds as Paddock did because he was unable to procure a machine gun like Paddock did when he put bump stocks on his.

So you now want to have Soviet style banning of large gatherings to protect our citizens from nuts with guns. Why not just have a six O clock curfew and make everyone stay home for their own safety! Yes, we will have many restrictions, but you all will be able to keep your guns!

 

[seb]

"AR15" was the original name of the rifle. The military adopted the AR15 and designated it the M16.

I stand corrected. The ad however, was how they marketed the AR15 in 1964.

 

[seb]

and the interpretation continues to hold which is why Amendment Two is still intact. God bless America.

But please enlighten me, because it has changed over the years.

 

[seb]

I'm going to guess that your relatives are into big game hunting. so if you know anything about hunting and gun... AR-15 (which is mostly 5.56) is a wrong rifle for hunting big game. it can't even kill a deer. in fact... it's illegal to hunt a big game with that kind of rifle in several states because since it can't effectively kill a deer, it is considered as cruel and inhumane.

there are handful of other semi-automatic rifles capable of killing a deer but lot of hunters typically don't carry those types because once you fire and you miss, deers are long gone. and plus - they hike for hours on foot. why carry all the unnecessary weight? they don't need 30 rounds magazine.

duh. your logic is invalid.

oh - there are plenty of Texan hunters with semi-automatic weapons flying around in helicopters, killing dozens of wild hogs. YEEEEEEE HAWWWWWWWWWW!!!!!!!!!!

if you have $35,000 to spend... you can do this! .... with fully-automatic guns! yeeeeee hawwwwwww!!!!

I think deer and elk are as big as they hunt. You missed the point of my post, they still have their guns, Duh!

Hunting from a helicopter, now that is truly sporting of them, talking about fish in a barrel! I personally would even consider it to be cruel and inhumane.

 

[Double-U]

NY has always been above the curve in many matters regarding the safety and wellbeing of it's citizens. I may be wrong, but I think they were the first or one of the first to ban fireworks almost 100 years ago, although the law was recently changed to allow some "safe and sane" fireworks to be sold in counties that will issue permits. NYC still bans them. All my relatives who live in NY would like to see NYC become it's own state!

My point was that I think their gun laws are far too restrictive.

 

[Cappy]

There is no such thing as an assault weapon. It is the person behind the "tool" assaulting someone else. People assault other people, not the tool. Weapons, alone do not assault anyone.

 

[Foxrac]

NY has always been above the curve in many matters regarding the safety and wellbeing of it's citizens. I may be wrong, but I think they were the first or one of the first to ban fireworks almost 100 years ago, although the law was recently changed to allow some "safe and sane" fireworks to be sold in counties that will issue permits. NYC still bans them. All my relatives who live in NY would like to see NYC become it's own state!

After I saw your argument, so I’m all for state rights to regulate on guns and border security, so you can tell California to regulate and close all of border with your tax money.

Federal government? Not happen, beside ban on convicted felons, sex offenders and convicted of domestic violence from own the guns, if court declare that you are mentally ill and require to commit to hospital so you can’t buy or own a gun until court said it is OK, so states could impose more restrictive if they want.

Important, don’t mess with our military, especially National Guard, period.

 

[Lau2046]

Say, isn't this thread political and prohibited by the administrators of All Deaf?? How did this thread get past them? But since everyone's such a gun authority....here's an article by the super duper Liberal Washington Post:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opin...8c702d2d975_story.html?utm_term=.5a2ff677b051

Another:

https://www.ammoland.com/2017/10/gun-statistics-tortured-gently-cross-examined/#axzz4wdR9YZYi

Finally from the murder capitol:

http://chicago.cbslocal.com/2017/10/18/mass-killings-shootings-research-university-illinois/

 

[Cappy]

Say, isn't this thread political and prohibited by the administrators of All Deaf?

Nope. We are not being political at all. Maybe a wee bit. Your links were TL;DR. What is your gist of it?

 

[Reba]

-I'm sure the made more than 12 of them. So others have them.

Yes, that's right, and they haven't been committing mass attacks.

 

[Reba]

. . .

Hunting from a helicopter, now that is truly sporting of them, talking about fish in a barrel! I personally would even consider it to be cruel and inhumane.

They're hunting wild hogs, which in most places are a nuisance beast. People are paid to get rid of them, as a service. In SC, we don't need hunting tags or permits for them, for as many as you want. Wild hogs are aggressive and very destructive.

 

[Beowulf]

They're hunting wild hogs, which in most places are a nuisance beast. People are paid to get rid of them, as a service. In SC, we don't need hunting tags or permits for them, for as many as you want. Wild hogs are aggressive and very destructive.

As long as you are not using the MOAB.

 

[seb]

Yes, that's right, and they haven't been committing mass attacks.

YET!