FWIW there are pretty heavy penalties here for not properly securing firearms and ammo. The cops do check, too.Actually no. That horse has left the barn. I want the folks who supply the weapons to be liable, yes, even you owners who don't secure your precious.
And another gun thread crawls away to die in the corner.FWIW there are pretty heavy penalties here for not properly securing firearms and ammo. The cops do check, too.
As for Tom's whining, he's correct and boring at the same time. Correct insofar as no bling added to a 22LR is going to make it anything other than a 22LR but so what, it's just bling, unbolt it, problem solved, stop whining. He just uses it as a distraction anyway. What the lawmakers should do if they actually want to achieve anything of substance is concentrate on lethality & rate of fire/speed of reloading not bling bolted to rabbit guns. I don't know if it's just a desire for publicity without actually changing anything or utter ignorance that they even bother with the 'assault rifle' thing. A lot of that is cosmetic; what counts is bullet mass, velocity and rate of fire.
I don't think anything actually *can* be done in the USA now, you're too far down the road and there isn't any consensus that there is a problem let alone a solvable one. The anti-gun contingent lie & abuse statistics to try to demonise all firearms owners thereby inviting contempt and suspicion and the serious gun nuts won't give an inch anyway.
Yeah. Boring. Predictable outcome - more verbiage, nothing else.And another gun thread crawls away to die in the corner.
So we become subjects like you, for a false sense of security?Yeah. Boring. Predictable outcome - more verbiage, nothing else.
Meanwhile the price of CNC gear drops, the accuracy increases, ditto 3D printers. G-code files get uploaded to Web sites. In the USA it's not illegal to make a firearm for your own use. Getting easier to do all the time.
Ammo is a bit more difficult to do en masse. Concentrate on ammo restrictions.
Needs a *major* cultural shift in US thinking.
Absent that then the trajectory will continue.
Ending the useless drug war might help provided the gang-bangers don't just find some other illegal activity to kill each other & passers-by over. Still worth doing as I've said.
Restricting centrefire semiauto firearms with removable mags would help cut down on stranger mass murders. Maybe - there's so many in circulation it's probably too late.
Compulsory purchase would help remove them but the anti-gun people wouldn't have a bar of that. They want the guns but don't want to pay and attempt to use bogus arguments as to why they shouldn't. That's half smart & shows the priority of financially punishing owners is higher than actually removing guns from circulation. Since this is bleeding obvious it's also counterproductive and nothing happens.
And so it goes.
Not my country. Happy with that at least.
How is the USA inching closer to civil war..?Okay. You are correct and it would be folly for me to continue that argument. Still, we inch closer and closer to civil war, and I can't help but wonder how that changes normal people into killers.
It's an arguable point. Many people in the U.S. are unhappy with the economy, and the disappearance of good jobs, the lack of affordable housing. Especially after the hit economically in 2008, it makes sustaining any lifestyle out of reach for many people.How is the USA inching closer to civil war..?
Whose leading the charge from each side?
Enquiring minds want to know.
Wash the sand out of your vagina, bra. You're being a big fucking pussy and trying to run away from your own request when you didn't like the facts.I would like to address actual facts, not your fantasy of numbers.
Oh Fucking Fucks sake! Are you a total retard or just playing one on TV? The point just whizzed by you like a near miss from a bullet aimed at your head. A miss is a miss.I would submit that firing at "an assailant" fifty yards away might not be considered self-defense.
I see.... so you stipulated MY point to FKT. But you can't be man enough to admit it to me when YOU asked ME for the cite.Okay. You are correct and it would be folly for me to continue that argument. Still, we inch closer and closer to civil war, and I can't help but wonder how that changes normal people into killers.Yeah but you'd be really hard put to argue that they were out by one or even 2 orders of magnitude.
Which still leaves the discussion at essentially the same point - the overwhelming majority of gun owners DO NOT kill others with their firearms.
Give it up - there's absolutely no logical way you can argue against this proposition. To do so requires you to argue that a) firearms killings are *vastly* under-reported or b) ownership of firearms is vastly exaggerated. Or both.
Go for it. Should be entertaining.
You won't, of course, because on this topic you're incapable of shifting from your POV.
Bullshit. More like mid-thirties, in a clear pattern of decline..Since 1980s, the numbers have remained relatively steady around the mid-40% range.
Bozo, you are the worst person on the planet when it comes to thread drift. The topic is solutions, and I would swear you are doing this on purpose.I see.... so you stipulated MY point to FKT. But you can't be man enough to admit it to me when YOU asked ME for the cite.
And then you move the goal posts and talk about Civil War. WTF has that got to do with now or the point that @Happy was trying to make. Start a new thread on your fears of a civil war if its so important to you. I would find that to be a fascinating discussion.
View attachment 446514
How about a few examples? Is "260 mass shootings in 160 days" a stat worth considering?The anti-gun contingent lie & abuse statistics to try to demonise all firearms owners thereby inviting contempt and suspicion
Oh c'mon Jocal - 10,000+ gun homicides per year is a FUCKING TINY problem.
For a certain type of insecure males, the idea of not having their beloved guns is a FUCKING HUGE problem. They don't give a flying fuck how many die, as long as they can have that inner image of themselves as macho fearless cowboys/soldiers/secret agents.Oh c'mon Jocal - 10,000+ gun homicides per year is a FUCKING TINY problem.
1,500,000 gun homicides since I was in high school is a FUCKING TINY problem.
"Just comply" is one answer to another stupid prohibition program. Just don't enact the stupid prohibition program is another. I'm in the latter camp.As for Tom's whining, he's correct and boring at the same time. Correct insofar as no bling added to a 22LR is going to make it anything other than a 22LR but so what, it's just bling, unbolt it, problem solved, stop whining. He just uses it as a distraction anyway.
I support safe storage laws as well. Where we might differ is the question of liability for those of us who lock up guns. Grabbers in my state have tried to remove that liability protection and grabbers here have said dumb stuff like this:I want the folks who supply the weapons to be liable, yes, even you owners who don't secure your precious.
I think we should treat liability for stolen property the same way for guns and cars, which is not how Olsonist thinks we treat cars, nor apparently how he thinks we should treat guns.It also absolves individuals of the LIABILITY FOR USE by others. So if your roommate steals your keys and bypasses your 'secure gun storage' and uses your gun to holdup a liquor store, you're totally good. But if your roommate steals your keys and runs over a little old lady with your car, well that's what you have liability insurance for.
This is another way of saying what Olsonist was saying: peaceful people are liable for the actions of criminals. It's also kinda like a poll tax applied to voting rights, and will disproportionately affect poor people, disproportionately minorities. That's sometimes bad, but I understand that no gun control can be bad.Also, I think an ammo tax to offset the societal costs is more than fair.