I really doubt they would do it for military or police force here. They like selling weapons to our enemies and allies too much.
Ban all semi-automatics. Would do the most good and not harm real hunters in any way. Exception would be for military and police force.
Alright, let's walk down the list. .223 isn't considered very large, though it's quite capable of killing a human. Most of the stuff humans shoot at for food or sport is larger than a human, so a .223 is on the low-end there. White-tails and whatnot, though you may want larger. Banning by the caliber will eliminate the primary reason of even having guns.
Semi-auto fire, you're unlikely to get anything passed to mandate single-shot or bolt actions. Worth noting that several shootings we've had in American history were done with bolt actions, though as far as I know none of the more recent 'mass shootings'. Eliminating semi-autos would effectively ban like 75% of firearms.
Long barrels, not even sure how to define that. Long barrel just means accuracy over distance, as far as I know, minus the Vegas shooting, most mass shootings were done in medium-close quarters, enough that all the shooters had pistols with them. Long-range accuracy is the battlefield of snipers and hunters.
Magazine capacity is about the only direction I feel you could go, and that path has been tread many a time. Maybe this time around it'll get traction, but I guarantee you it will not stop shootings, and imho a shooting that kills 10 people isn't 'better' than a shooting that kills 20.. That's the definition of 'feel-good legislation'.
I get it man, really. I grew up with a partial-farm family (grandparents ran a beef farm) and kept loaded guns around to deal with coyotes and crap. Never thought they were a big deal. I went to school during the Columbine generation, guns themselves weren't a worry, just the nutjobs that killed poeple. Sold guns at walmart, not a big deal. Own one, not a big deal. Joined the mil, still not a big deal. Now, I worry every damn day that me and the gf are going to get randomly shot at while shopping, or that my kid cousins are gonna get gunned down at school. I know the statistics, and I also know that I'm human and irrationally worry about things.Ah yes okay, I give up. Best I go buy some full body armor and riot gear then since it's too hard to make sure the local nut job can't blow me and my wife away when are out buying groceries next week.
And if 75% of guns get banned, whatever. How many of us in this country are on a day to day basis are needing guns that are not for hunting or tactical purposes? Other than leisure, when is the last time like... 90% of people needed a gun? I'd actually rather go hunting white tail with a bow than with a rifle anyway .
The real issue is gun culture and how many guns already are in circulation. We have like 50% of the country thinking having a gun is a god given right and "Taking them away" is an attack on freedom, democracy, etc.
https://www.yahoo.com/news/hero-grandmother-persuaded-her-19-150944501.html
"The FBI worked closely with our partners at the ATF and Lubbock Police Department to prevent the defendant from potentially committing a violent act," Matthew DeSarno, Special Agent in Charge of the Dallas Field Office, said in a press release. "This case is a perfect example of law enforcement agencies coming together to find a solution that protected the public from harm."
- The US Attorney's Office of the Northern District of Texas announced on Friday that William Patrick Williams, from Lubbock, Texas, had been arrested.
- Officials said Williams was plotting a mass shooting, but was stopped when his grandmother learned about his plan and persuaded him to go to a hospital instead.
Magazine capacity is about the only direction I feel you could go, and that path has been tread many a time. Maybe this time around it'll get traction, but I guarantee you it will not stop shootings, and imho a shooting that kills 10 people isn't 'better' than a shooting that kills 20.. That's the definition of 'feel-good legislation'.
We made that on the global scale, it's MAD. I wonder if the concept can be introduced tactically. We're pretty good at tactical stuff, I bet someone's up for the challenge.Not the way to go in my opinion. I think we need to invent a gun that when fired will kill everybody. Once in the hands of the public, there will hence forth be only one case of gun violence and it will end. 300 million guns in the US is just trying to do that the hard way.
Ah yes okay, I give up. Best I go buy some full body armor and riot gear then since it's too hard to make sure the local nut job can't blow me and my wife away when are out buying groceries next week.
And if 75% of guns get banned, whatever. How many of us in this country are on a day to day basis are needing guns that are not for hunting or tactical purposes? Other than leisure, when is the last time like... 90% of people needed a gun? I'd actually rather go hunting white tail with a bow than with a rifle anyway .
The real issue is gun culture and how many guns already are in circulation. We have like 50% of the country thinking having a gun is a god given right and "Taking them away" is an attack on freedom, democracy, etc.
I get it man, really. I grew up with a partial-farm family (grandparents ran a beef farm) and kept loaded guns around to deal with coyotes and crap. Never thought they were a big deal. I went to school during the Columbine generation, guns themselves weren't a worry, just the nutjobs that killed poeple. Sold guns at walmart, not a big deal. Own one, not a big deal. Joined the mil, still not a big deal. Now, I worry every damn day that me and the gf are going to get randomly shot at while shopping, or that my kid cousins are gonna get gunned down at school. I know the statistics, and I also know that I'm human and irrationally worry about things.
Should I still be concerned about the nutjobs and how to stop them, how to help them, how to fix a society that generates them? Or should I take my chances that I can protect myself against a rabid stabber over an active shooter?
These convos have come up several times on this board, and I still will state that there's a few places in the US where guns are still used/needed for survival, though a vanishingly small number. There's ways to mitigate gun ownership if that's truly what we're after, but I don't know if that's what we should be after.
I agree with you on the gun culture, but honestly I see the resistance as a sign that people feel insecure, in no small part due to our current leadership. When people feel unsure about their leadership they get defensive. In a job, you revise your resume. At home, you buy a gun apparently. I'm sure a thousand years ago, the blacksmiths got a rash of orders every time a king died.
There are no solutions with dishonest idiots like you. Guns have one purpose in life. And as a matter of fact, I have a family member (not blood related) whose drivers license has been suspended for a very long time due to mental health issues and treatments.
And there's the rub. If you can imagine a competent version of his administration, that could truly be the kind of administration that would bring about a second civil war. Totally disregarding who thinks who is right, there's a vast, angry divide between Americans right now... A few additional pieces of legislation, some additional tweets, and a spark, and you could legitimately see people attacking each other in the streets. Now imagine that the government backs half those people, and you understand why some people are super duper hesitant to back down from defending gun rights legislation, despite the horrors that come out of permitting it. As much as I talked earlier about worrying about statistically insignificant events, I fear a competent Trump far more.I have to say, if I wanted a gun to protect me from the government, Trumps administration is certainly the one that would make me reconsider giving up my rights...
If someone has anxiety and take medication, do we stop them from having access to deadly things like vehicles? Name calling doesn't help us find solutions.
When you have no ideas, solutions, or thoughts but only daily anonymous trolling, you don't have much left besides name calling.
If someone has anxiety and take medication, do we stop them from having access to deadly things like vehicles? Name calling doesn't help us find solutions.
When you have no ideas, solutions, or thoughts but only daily anonymous trolling, you don't have much left besides name calling.
The more I think about it the more I think this is what needs to be done ASAP. Why would your average Joe need an auto or semi-auto pistol or rifle? The only reasons I can think of have an extremely slim chance of happening. In the meantime these weapons make it extremely easy to inflict real harm to large groups of their fellow Americans on a daily basis.Ban all semi-automatics. Would do the most good and not harm real hunters in any way. Exception would be for military and police force.
Tonight 80,000,000 - 100,000,000 gun owners (the number varies depending on where you get the estimate) will go to bed tonight without having shot anyone. Some percentage of them will shoot paper or other targets, though. Are they using their guns wrong, in your opinion, giving that a gun has "one purpose in life."
Quite unlikely. He'll probably be sentenced to federal prison where he'll be indoctrinated into some extreme cause, given that he's a young male with clearly very little to attach himself to. I predict instead that he'll become a life-long criminal, unless he SBC's himself soon after release.
Ah yes okay, I give up. Best I go buy some full body armor and riot gear then since it's too hard to make sure the local nut job can't blow me and my wife away when are out buying groceries next week.
And if 75% of guns get banned, whatever. How many of us in this country are on a day to day basis are needing guns that are not for hunting or tactical purposes? Other than leisure, when is the last time like... 90% of people needed a gun? I'd actually rather go hunting white tail with a bow than with a rifle anyway .
The real issue is gun culture and how many guns already are in circulation. We have like 50% of the country thinking having a gun is a god given right and "Taking them away" is an attack on freedom, democracy, etc.
Whatever we do, we should continue to undo regulations that would prevent people with mental health issues from owning firearms.
The Virginia Tech shooter used semi-automatic handguns.The problem is (regardless of your stance on semi-automatic) is that 95%+ of crimes are comitted with hand-guns. The school shooter that killed the most people had it done with hand guns.
So you could say "Well, that would eliminate 5%! That's progress!" Nope. They would just utilize what is available instead.
I wish our health care system wasn't such complete dogshit that people with mental health issue could have gone to any doctor they wish without worrying about the astronomically life crippling costs so they won't even get to the stage of possibly considering purchasing a firearm to plan these kind of attacks.
The Virginia Tech shooter used semi-automatic handguns.
A lot of those people don't know or think there's anything wrong with them. I don't know how you solve that problem other than have people around them speak up when they see warning signs. An FBI expert was on some news show and said many of them appear completely normal and function just fine until they snap. How can anyone stop that? I agree with your post though.I wish our health care system wasn't such complete dogshit that people with mental health issue could have gone to any doctor they wish without worrying about the astronomically life crippling costs so they won't even get to the stage of possibly considering purchasing a firearm to plan these kind of attacks.