OT: What will it take for there to be a Gun Reform?

[rammagen]

It is true. Assault rifles are fully automatic military grade. Citizens can’t obtain them and only can get semi-auto. Bump stocks are a whole different story... they don’t make them fully automatic (which is why they are legal) but I proposed in my common sense reform post, that bump stocks be made illegal because they increase the rate of fire regardless which should be a no no.

not true I never said the bump stocks make them fully automatic I said made them close . The ar rifle platform and the ak platform are by definition assault rifle designs, the only difference I quoted was selective fire is missing.
here is the definition of an assault weapons note the only thing missing is the automatic fire, so does the ar or the ak platforms civilians have access to have the below?

Assault weapon is a term used in the United States to define some types of firearms. The definition varies among regulating jurisdictions, but usually includes semi-automatic firearms with a detachable magazine and a pistol grip, and sometimes other features such as a flash suppressor or barrel shroud.

Anybody who knows guns will tell you that an AR is not an assault rifle. The M4 or M16 is an assault rifle.

I know guns and thinking you do not, stop trying to prove a point that you can not logically make. Been a shooter since 1985 when I joined the army. Qualified for sniper school, have shot the m1 16 a1 and a2, m1, m14,m21. So I am thinking I know a little bit about what is an assualt rifle and what is not. You can argue all you want but you are wrong. Look at the ban on the assault weapons put in place by the clinton administration. that definition is above. Just because you have a different one does not meant you are right

[rammagen]

You’re quoting me and telling me to prove something I never even argued about.

again calm down it is a general statement I am quoting you are a starting point because you mentioned home defense the prove to me was meant to people who want those guns

Ok. I never mentioned specific guns, but stated that assault rifles and automatic weapons are illegal. My only stance is that people should be allowed to own guns to protect themselves and their family in their home. Not just from burglaries, but from the many other things that could happen in this crazy world.

AR’s are a different argument altogether. Semi auto is legal and not all that much different than other rifles out there. It’s not the M4 fully auto that the military uses... the AR is for civilian self defense and is widely used for hunting. Again, bump stocks should be illegal.

Again by definition and assault rifle has to have a large capacity removable magazine, pistol grip, intermediate cartridge, you whole argument is based on the fact that there is no selective fire that is the NRA definition. The ar 15 is built on an assault rifle platform. So is the AK.
Websters defines an assault rifle as
Definition of assault rifle
: any of various intermediate-range, magazine-fed military rifles (such as the AK-47) that can be set for automatic or semiautomatic fire; also : a rifle that resembles a military assault rifle but is designed to allow only semiautomatic fire

[Porzingod]

This american fascination with guns is probably a thing no one in the other developed countries will ever understand.
People want to have completely free/no control gun access so that they can "protect themselves".
Which means that you can buy a gun, my alcoholic and mentally ill neighbour can buy a gun and a disturbed emo kid can buy an automatic weapon as easy as buying a candy at the store and then go and **** up his school because some kids hurt his feelings.
Does this sound right?

[Synciere]

Theoretically, I don't think any of this interferes with responsible gun owners' ability to own a gun. Just a bit of added delay. I posted these on facebook and by and large second amendment heads didn't have a problem with them. One of my friends did argue that the limited magazine gives an advantage to home invaders but honestly, I'd trade that in if we could get the other four options.

Simple things Congress could do about gun violence:
• Limit magazine capacity
• Ban domestic abusers from owning (not just buying) guns
• Expand background checks
• Mandate waiting periods
• Allow the CDC to study gun violence

see, remi, this is the stuff i'm talking about.

https://finance.yahoo.com/news/japan-almost-completely-eliminated-gun-200700252.html

the process that Japan puts its people through, i feel, is more than reasonable. i'm all about freedom, and not letting the government get too big. but when it comes to devices that can take the lives of many people (especially young, innocent children - hits extra close to me, as a third grade teacher, as we started having several police officers in our school today, and we're only a preK-5 building), there needs to be a lot enacted to only allow the right people to obtain them.


rant part, you can skip:

it is tough to compare the US to any other country, as the amount of freedom we give our citizens, compared to the rest of the world, is unprecedented and no one comes to close to what we have. add to that, we already have SO many weapons that are unmarked, missing, or in the hands of the wrong people already, this doesn't necessarily apply.


more needs to be done to check everyone before allowing them the chances. it's too easy to legally obtain a weapon.


"If Japanese people want to own a gun, they must attend an all-day class, pass a written test, and achieve at least 95% accuracy during a shooting-range test. Then they have to pass a mental-health evaluation, which takes place at a hospital, and pass a background check, in which the government digs into their criminal record and interviews friends and family. They can only buy shotguns and air rifles — no handguns — and every three years they must retake the class and initial exam."

this seems reasonable

What rights (besides owning guns and the right to be murdered by the police) do we have in this country that is prevented in 80% of the other sovereign states of the world??

[rammagen]

again calm down it is a general statement I am quoting you are a starting point because you mentioned home defense the prove to me was meant to people who want those guns

Ok. I never mentioned specific guns, but stated that assault rifles and automatic weapons are illegal. My only stance is that people should be allowed to own guns to protect themselves and their family in their home. Not just from burglaries, but from the many other things that could happen in this crazy world.

AR’s are a different argument altogether. Semi auto is legal and not all that much different than other rifles out there. It’s not the M4 fully auto that the military uses... the AR is for civilian self defense and is widely used for hunting. Again, bump stocks should be illegal.

Again by definition and assault rifle has to have a large capacity removable magazine, pistol grip, intermediate cartridge, you whole argument is based on the fact that there is no selective fire that is the NRA definition. The ar 15 is built on an assault rifle platform. So is the AK.
Websters defines an assault rifle as
Definition of assault rifle
: any of various intermediate-range, magazine-fed military rifles (such as the AK-47) that can be set for automatic or semiautomatic fire; also : a rifle that resembles a military assault rifle but is designed to allow only semiautomatic fire

the ar 15 is not widely used for hunting the cartridge is too small 556 or 223 will not bring down a deer, that round was designed purpose specific for the military.
For home defense that rifle is close to useless. I will put a 12 gauge up for defense and most experts agree that is the best home defense weapon there is.
http://www.slate.com/blogs/crime/2013/01/02/gun_control_ar_15_rifle_the_nra_claims_the_ar_15_rifle_is_for_hunting_and.html
I for the second amendment but the ak 47 and the ar15 do not need to be in the civilian hands.
this is from the ban in 94 where do you automatic or selective fire. That is a falsely made by the nra.

Criteria of an assault weapon

Under the Assault Weapons Ban of 1994 the definition of "semiautomatic assault weapon" included specific semi-automatic firearm models by name, and other semi-automatic firearms that possessed two or more from a set certain features:[13]
A semi-automatic Yugoslavian M70AB2 rifle.
An Intratec TEC-DC9 with 32-round magazine; a semi-automatic pistol formerly classified as an assault weapon under federal law.

Semi-automatic rifles able to accept detachable magazines and two or more of the following:

Folding or telescoping stock
Pistol grip
Bayonet mount
Flash suppressor, or threaded barrel designed to accommodate one
Grenade launcher

Semi-automatic pistols with detachable magazines and two or more of the following:

Magazine that attaches outside the pistol grip
Threaded barrel to attach barrel extender, flash suppressor, handgrip, or suppressor
Barrel shroud safety feature that prevents burns to the operator
Unloaded weight of 50 oz (1.4 kg) or more
A semi-automatic version of a fully automatic firearm.

Semi-automatic shotguns with two or more of the following:

Folding or telescoping stock
Pistol grip
Detachable magazine.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Federal_Assault_Weapons_Ban#Criteria_of_an_assault_weapon

[newyorker4ever]

I know this is not popular, but I think we should simply ban all guns. Period. Don't give me that garbage about the constitution and the right to bear arms. Different times. If people want to walk around with a musket, go for it.

If not this, it should be damn near impossible for ANYONE to get one. Psych test, background check, and prying into every nook and cranny of that person's life. Don't care.

Wouldn't that only hurt the people that buy guns legally but the criminals will still be able to get all the guns they want illegally??

If the criminals knew they can robb anyone or any home because they most likely don't have guns then i would think it could get pretty nasty pretty quickly. I guess there will always be good and bad to whatever is done but you can't just stop the people that wanna buy guns legally to protect their family and home because you know the police can't stop the criminals from getting guns just like they'll never be able to stop drugs from getting around.

[br7knicks]

see, remi, this is the stuff i'm talking about.

https://finance.yahoo.com/news/japan-almost-completely-eliminated-gun-200700252.html

the process that Japan puts its people through, i feel, is more than reasonable. i'm all about freedom, and not letting the government get too big. but when it comes to devices that can take the lives of many people (especially young, innocent children - hits extra close to me, as a third grade teacher, as we started having several police officers in our school today, and we're only a preK-5 building), there needs to be a lot enacted to only allow the right people to obtain them.


rant part, you can skip:

it is tough to compare the US to any other country, as the amount of freedom we give our citizens, compared to the rest of the world, is unprecedented and no one comes to close to what we have. add to that, we already have SO many weapons that are unmarked, missing, or in the hands of the wrong people already, this doesn't necessarily apply.


more needs to be done to check everyone before allowing them the chances. it's too easy to legally obtain a weapon.


"If Japanese people want to own a gun, they must attend an all-day class, pass a written test, and achieve at least 95% accuracy during a shooting-range test. Then they have to pass a mental-health evaluation, which takes place at a hospital, and pass a background check, in which the government digs into their criminal record and interviews friends and family. They can only buy shotguns and air rifles — no handguns — and every three years they must retake the class and initial exam."

this seems reasonable

As a gun owner, I’d gladly adhere to any of that kind of testing and even believe more should be added. I hate when people are too far left or right... it’s almost an extremist mentality. There’s always room for a compromise.

That's what I try to impress on heads in this debate. Most gun owners and supporters I've spoken with are extremely skeptical of the government but they're open to ideas like extended background checks and a permit system similar to what Connecticut implemented (successfully I might add). I've never spoken with a gun owner who disagrees with allowing the CDC to do research because why would anyone run away from gaining more information about a problem? We can find a middleground on some procedures and at least pilot test them. I'm a big proponent of a national registry but I know a lot of the libertarian side gets pretty nervous about the government having that information. Personally, I think it'd be a huge benefit but I've been trying to piece together suggestions that both sides would agree on without breaking out into ad hominem attacks on each other. There's a conversation to be had if we stop playing these debates as zero sum games.

There absolutely is a compromise that could be found. Yes, us logical and sane gun owners are fully on board with the CDC and other credible, non politically aligned affiliations doing more to limit who and what people get.

The government is useless, no matter who is in power; they're too money driven.

I regret being a lifetime member of the NRA, and am embarrassed. I signed up about 10 years ago when I was in college, in fear of what obama would do. Come to find they're just as crooked as the government and completely useless. I wish i revoke my membership. All they do is ask for more money, while embarrassing us gun owners who would prefer the safety of others (especially children), versus padding their pockets

[NBA Fan 1234]

I know this is not popular, but I think we should simply ban all guns. Period. Don't give me that garbage about the constitution and the right to bear arms. Different times. If people want to walk around with a musket, go for it.

If not this, it should be damn near impossible for ANYONE to get one. Psych test, background check, and prying into every nook and cranny of that person's life. Don't care.

Wouldn't that only hurt the people that buy guns legally but the criminals will still be able to get all the guns they want illegally??

If the criminals knew they can robb anyone or any home because they most likely don't have guns then i would think it could get pretty nasty pretty quickly. I guess there will always be good and bad to whatever is done but you can't just stop the people that wanna buy guns legally to protect their family and home because you know the police can't stop the criminals from getting guns just like they'll never be able to stop drugs from getting around.

I made another post later in the thread that would have a one time buy-back of some sort from the government and then after that harsher penalties on those with illegal firearms. I know it's never going to happen, but I'd like to see something like that happen. Again, at the very least, I'd want incredibly stringent laws on acquiring firearms with all sorts of background checks and tests before they can get one, and then after that they are required to take mandatory classes and whatever else that would make it difficult to acquire one.

[newyorker4ever]

I know this is not popular, but I think we should simply ban all guns. Period. Don't give me that garbage about the constitution and the right to bear arms. Different times. If people want to walk around with a musket, go for it.

If not this, it should be damn near impossible for ANYONE to get one. Psych test, background check, and prying into every nook and cranny of that person's life. Don't care.

Wouldn't that only hurt the people that buy guns legally but the criminals will still be able to get all the guns they want illegally??

If the criminals knew they can robb anyone or any home because they most likely don't have guns then i would think it could get pretty nasty pretty quickly. I guess there will always be good and bad to whatever is done but you can't just stop the people that wanna buy guns legally to protect their family and home because you know the police can't stop the criminals from getting guns just like they'll never be able to stop drugs from getting around.

I made another post later in the thread that would have a one time buy-back of some sort from the government and then after that harsher penalties on those with illegal firearms. I know it's never going to happen, but I'd like to see something like that happen. Again, at the very least, I'd want incredibly stringent laws on acquiring firearms with all sorts of background checks and tests before they can get one, and then after that they are required to take mandatory classes and whatever else that would make it difficult to acquire one.

I get what you're saying but my problem is all the criminals will still have all the guns they want illegally because the police can't stop the illegal gun trades and problems we have and i could see it getting worse if they made it harder for the non-criminals to buy guns legally to protect their families and homes. Don't see any good answer to this either way which is most likely why nothing will change.

[spree8]

not true I never said the bump stocks make them fully automatic I said made them close . The ar rifle platform and the ak platform are by definition assault rifle designs, the only difference I quoted was selective fire is missing.
here is the definition of an assault weapons note the only thing missing is the automatic fire, so does the ar or the ak platforms civilians have access to have the below?

Assault weapon is a term used in the United States to define some types of firearms. The definition varies among regulating jurisdictions, but usually includes semi-automatic firearms with a detachable magazine and a pistol grip, and sometimes other features such as a flash suppressor or barrel shroud.

Anybody who knows guns will tell you that an AR is not an assault rifle. The M4 or M16 is an assault rifle.

I know guns and thinking you do not, stop trying to prove a point that you can not logically make. Been a shooter since 1985 when I joined the army. Qualified for sniper school, have shot the m1 16 a1 and a2, m1, m14,m21. So I am thinking I know a little bit about what is an assualt rifle and what is not. You can argue all you want but you are wrong. Look at the ban on the assault weapons put in place by the clinton administration. that definition is above. Just because you have a different one does not meant you are right

so even tho you were in the military and have been shooting guns since 1985, you still are relying on a vague interpretation of what an assault rifle is from Wikipedia? Ok. Everyone I know in law enforcement, military, hunters, gun advocates in general, (and my own knowledge) all adamantly say that the AR15 is NOT an assault rifle.

You seriously don’t even understand the difference between what an AR15 is and what an M4 is. Like come on. Either you’re lying or are just not up to date with things.

[seren]

I know this is not popular, but I think we should simply ban all guns. Period. Don't give me that garbage about the constitution and the right to bear arms. Different times. If people want to walk around with a musket, go for it.

If not this, it should be damn near impossible for ANYONE to get one. Psych test, background check, and prying into every nook and cranny of that person's life. Don't care.

Wouldn't that only hurt the people that buy guns legally but the criminals will still be able to get all the guns they want illegally??

If the criminals knew they can robb anyone or any home because they most likely don't have guns then i would think it could get pretty nasty pretty quickly. I guess there will always be good and bad to whatever is done but you can't just stop the people that wanna buy guns legally to protect their family and home because you know the police can't stop the criminals from getting guns just like they'll never be able to stop drugs from getting around.

I think this is a reasonable argument. Well regulated gun sales to protect homes sound just fine to me. I think a very vast majority of people agree with this line of argument. Assault weapon ban, universal psychiatric evaluations and background checks, individually stamped weapons and ammo, high taxes on ammo (so that people would use it only if truly necessary), personal liability insurance for gun owners (similar to home insurance for instance) are all types of regulations that would protect all sides. The gun owners should also be part of "well-regulated militias" so that there is some societal checks on who are reasonable gun owners vs who show symptoms of being a potential mass shooters. Such "militias" (or if you will call them gun clubs whatever) could be subject to similar liability insurance in case their members go crazy on the rest of the regular folk.

I never buy the "tyranny" of the government argument. I have not seen a single person arguing for rights of individuals (or militias if you will) purchasing defensive missile systems, purchase of nuclear weapons etc which you would probably need to prevent said "tyranny".

[Da ThRONe]

When in this country history has bans on things stop anything. Ban on liquor, drugs, driving while impaired, murder etc? People who want to obey laws will be the only people who obey these laws. Banning guns will only create a black market. This isn't even getting into 3D printing.

[Capn'O]

As I mentioned earlier, in this political climate a lot of the education/outreach/organization in articulating the dangers of gun ownership has to come from the private/NGO side. Something I've thought of is that local artists could collaborate with local advocacy groups on projects like the one below. It's been done already, sure, but with a project like this there would be a lot of power in duplicity.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/local/guns-running-a-distinctive-sculpture-from-dcs-dark-days-is-on-the-move-again/2017/09/11/38b027a2-96fa-11e7-87fc-c3f7ee4035c9_story.html?utm_term=.f7f9b0be25b0

The four-ton, 16-foot-high sculpture is the blade of a massive plow encrusted with thousands of actual guns taken off city streets during a no-questions-asked gun-buyback program funded in 1994 by heavyweight boxing champion Riddick Bowe, who donated $100 per firearm.

Since then, “Guns Into Plowshares” has moved nearly as much as an Alexander Calder mobile. It was originally installed on D Street NW, outside the D.C. police department’s headquarters and near Judiciary Square. When that area was renovated in 2008, the sculpture was moved to Blue Plains, where for three years it sat forlornly on its side in a weed-strewn lot.

[Iron Mantis]

What will it take? Police militarization and snatching guns out of people's hands with the help of some sort of world government military.

There's really no middle-ground and no compromise from either end. And when that does happen...hold onto your seats.

[CowboyBebop]

It will probably take a prominent GOP figure having one of their children killed in a school shooting.

It's unfathomable that an 18 y/o can buy an assault rifle in this country, let alone with minimal resistance. The FL school had an armed security officer and it didn't matter. Gun nuts don't care, they will never change their mind. Their next suggestion will be to arm every teacher and eventually every student. Because having hundreds of guns in every school will surely lead to fewer incidents.

There’s an idiot in my cohort that’s making this suggestion as I type this

[cuyankees]

Out of lurking for now! Haaa

Seriously though, anytime there’s a mass shooting you can count on the following:

Bubble Living Liberals and Celebrities advocating for gun control
Gun stocks catching a bid
Liberal vs Conservative “crap”

A veteran and did “stuff” for intelligence agencies. Can easily say that no person should own a AR-15 or any semi to auto rifle. As someone earlier stated, there’s 0 logical reasons to own it unless you plan on re-enacting COD. Gun control isn’t the “fix” for this, the **** Bumbling Idiots aka FBI and other agencies in charge of domestic terorism are. Did you know that adults reported this recent shooter to authorities and the FBI did nothing?

Don’t care about stats or rhetoric that talks about gun control working relative to homocides. If that’s your foundation, then you’re living in a liberal bubble. Gun control will never happen no matter how archaic and asinine the 2nd amendment is for modernity.

Go outside of your bubble to anywhere outside of NorthEast and/or an urban area. Gun ownership is “normal” and the same concept applies to the everyone who was surprised Trump won. Get outside your bubble and realize that there are people much different than you with different ideologies and beliefs. Despite what you may think, the world does NOT revolve around you. Your beliefs may be the majority in your bubble, but it’s most likely the minority on a macro scale.

Banning the tool isn’t a macro fix to the real issue @ hand: Humanity. Cars, Drugs, Food, Gun kill people; should we ban all of those? No, it’s a human decision to buy a gun, load it and wreak havoc on helpless humans.

[HarthorneWingo]

Watch on YouTube

[HarthorneWingo]

When the House republicans were shot at while practicing for their softball game and Congressman Steve Scalese got shot, I thought maybe that would do it. But no. Even if one of them dies, they aren't going to say "No" to that NRA money.

[HarthorneWingo]

Interesting bit from a pro gun reform article I read,

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/11/07/world/americas/mass-shootings-us-international.html

If mental health made the difference, then data would show that Americans have more mental health problems than do people in other countries with fewer mass shootings. But the mental health care spending rate in the United States, the number of mental health professionals per capita and the rate of severe mental disorders are all in line with those of other wealthy countries.

A 2015 study estimated that only 4 percent of American gun deaths could be attributed to mental health issues. And Mr. Lankford, in an email, said countries with high suicide rates tended to have low rates of mass shootings — the opposite of what you would expect if mental health problems correlated with mass shootings.

Whether a population plays more or fewer video games also appears to have no impact. Americans are no more likely to play video games than people in any other developed country.

Racial diversity or other factors associated with social cohesion also show little correlation with gun deaths. Among European countries, there is little association between immigration or other diversity metrics and the rates of gun murders or mass shootings.

The mental health bit is what's curious to me.

Can't any killing of another person in any setting that is not "defensive" implicate "mental health" issues? If you kill another person out of anger or because you want their property, you're crazy, even if momentarily. Basically, if you cannot control your anger or emotions, you shouldn't have a gun.

That pretty much includes everybody as far as I'm concerned.

[HEZI]

Follow the money

$13.5 billion
Annual revenue of gun and ammunition manufacturing industry, with a $1.5 billion profit. (IBIS World)

$3.1 billion
Annual revenue of gun and ammunition stores, with a $478.4 million profit. (IBIS World)

10,847,792
The number of pistols, revolvers, rifles, shotguns and miscellaneous firearms manufactured in the U.S. in 2013, the latest full year available. That's 4,441,726 pistols, 725,282 revolvers, 3,979,570 rifles, 1,203,072 shotguns, and 495,142 miscellaneous firearms. (ATF)

4%
Percentage of the above guns which were exported. Of those 10.84 million guns, 10,413,880 stay in America. (ATF)

270-310 million
Estimated number of guns in the U.S. (Pew Research Center)

263,223
Number of full-time jobs related to the firearm industry, up from 209,750 in 2012. (NSSF)

$42.9 billion
Estimated overall economic impact of the firearms and ammo industry in the U.S. (NSSF)

This is a billion dollar industry we are talking about here and some of the most powerful people in our country are all invested in the industry. Shutting it down is gonna be a tough task for anybody.