DawgTalkers.net Forums DawgTalk Everything Else... A Discussion On Guns...

I've kinda been thinking about this a little..

I think having a discussion about guns is probably not the right topic.

It could be that I'm just old and don't remember as well as I should but growing up I don't remember everh hearing about mass murders of students in schools, moviegoers in theatres, or shoppers in Malls.

I was thinking about it and I came to a VERY unscientific conclusion.

The problems with these kids started happening a number of years after we stopped allowing prayer in school. Stick with me for a second.

We stopped praying and kids began not hearing the word of god on a daily basis from at least one place.

No school that I ever attended MADE anyone pray if they didn't want to, But they couldn't help but hear the words.

Guns is what we blame it on.. an object that I admit I have little understanding of. But if someone has the capacity to understand that killing is wrong by the teachings of prayer, then maybe they don't pick up that gun and start blowing people away. At least they didn't in my day.

So really I see only two differences between now and 40+ years ago when I attended high school...

No Prayer and access to automatic(semi) weapons.

Keep in mind, I'm not the kinda guy that goes to church every week, I don't live my life with my nose buried in the bible, I can't quote you chapter and verse of any part of the bible.

I also can't shoot a gun with any degree of accuracy either.

So, I'm not preaching to you about religion. I'm just saying, there is a correlation between when we stopped allowing school prayer and when these things starting happening.

I mean, we are now at a point where an entire generation has grown up without any school prayer.

And isn't it interesting that this is happening?

instead of blaming guns or the NRA, perhaps we should look at our legislators and those that attempt to impose their will on them to stop school prayer.

Maybe, Just maybe, we are looking for answers in the wrong place.

Another thing I find rather odd,, we still say the pledge of allegence to the flag,,, One nation under God is still in there as far as I know (it is when I say it)

So we can see one nation under god and can't pray openly and together if we wish in schools?

What am I missing here. once again, special interests have taken over reason...

Maybe it's time we tell them to shut up and go away.. you don't want you kids to pray, nobody is telling them they have to.

The breakdown of the family is one of the biggest contributing factors IMHO. Too many kids, especially lower income kids, are being born to single mothers, often with multiple kids, and are beind raised by their friends and by the street. Their role models are frequently violent, abusive people, as are many of their heroes. Kids do as they see, and these are the examples they see.

As far as gun control, once more, I am of the opinion that gun control laws control law abiding people only. Those who have a disregard for other laws regarding personal property, murder, drugs, and so on, will have no more regard for gun laws than they do today when they merely go get a gun illegally if they want one.

This guy is now a novelist but was heavily into the building, sale of guns and trained law enforcement for years.

Kind of lengthy but good info

http://larrycorreia.wordpress.com/

This has been going on for some time before that:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_attacks_related_to_post-secondary_schools
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_attacks_related_to_primary_schools

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bath_School_disaster
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Poe_Elementary_School_attack
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Charles_Whitman#Prelude_to_the_tower_shootings
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brenda_Ann_Spencer

J/K

Aviod Hunter, just going to stste my views, agree or disagree with me dosent matter, but I'm allowed to say:

1st, what happened in connecticut is appauling, sickning and at the least sad, No child should ever go thru what these children did and no child should ever die at the hands of a sick coward. My heart goes out for the children & families....something must be done...This country budgets billions to feed Iraq, pakastain and other countries, One would think we could find some money to protect our schools.

In my eyes guns are not the problem,

Drunk drivers kill thousands of people & innocent children every year why are we not eliminating car....bars...alcohle, now we could go on with this type of arguing which is really tick for tat talking it dosent do anything or solve anything except get people angry.

I own many guns which are stroed behind lock & key all the time, they also have trigger locks, just in case,

I use a 20 gage shot gun, and a .22 for my hunting along with a compound & crossbow, I dont use a AR15 no need for it but others might, if they want one, these people need to go thru at thier own cost training and mental evaluations, not saying that would work, but maybe it would eliminate some.

Keep in mind criminals who want to do harm will find a way to do harm, banning guns will only take guns out of desent gun owners, criminals who dont obey gun laws to begin with dont care one way or another if we ban them, they will find them or a way to act cowardly.

This is all i'm going to post, but this is a huge topic with many what if's to me bottom line its' up to us to once aggain get this sociaty back to respecting human life and each other. We must go back to being parents and teaching our children.

I believe whole-heartedly that guns are not the problem, and treating them as the problem is totally misguided and wrong. The problem is that these kids, for one reason or another, are throwing away their lives and taking countless others with them for reasons that none of us can understand.

That is the problem. Its a problem that is much more complicated, and much more difficult to deal with than simply slapping a bunch more regulations on guns and gun owners.

That is not the answer.

I believe that we really need to examine what we are really teaching our children, and how much pressure society is putting on them to become "successful."

Its the kids that are lost here, they are the ones that need help. Blaming the guns is a ploy on the part of government to exonerate society and our current culture from any meaningful analysis.

As I said earlier, its a shortcut--and a shortcut that infringes on the rights that we have been guaranteed for centuries.

My solution involves education from a young age about how to treat people. How to differentiate reality from fantasy, and understanding what you are watching on tv, hearing in music, and reading on the internet.

In my mind, I think that a lot of these killers have lost their grasp on reality, and it was a long process that started at a young age, and went on for years until they finally snapped. These kids need to have classes that teach them to get along with one anothre, and learn that everyone is a worthwhile individual. They need to understand success and failure and how to cope with it, and they need to learn how to socialize with other people in a meaningful, honest way.
i believe that long ago, we could count on the nuclear family and church, and the community to teach these lessons.

But in todays society, all of these systems have broken down. And so these kids aren't learning this stuff anywhere.

They can't cope with society and they lash out against it.

The gun just happens to be their weapon of choice. but the gun is NOT the Problem.

I think that the many of the problems in today's world can be traced back to a basic decline in morality and responsibility in today's world.

No law will stop the Lawless, it's futile.

So I guess we should do nothing... in fact, give everyone an AR15 or whatever and a few extra clips - that'll be awesome.

Lethal force would be to kill. I didn't know that you could kill a target or tin can. Target shooting is not lethal and many weapons are bought with that "intent".

To know that there are many criminal elements in society that are armed with guns, then to prevent a law abiding citizen the right to protect him or herself against said criminals with equal strength is a far more criminal act than anything you have described IMO.

Many seem to wish to make criminals out of every day citizens, rather than actually uphold their right to have the ability to protect themselves.

I'm all for holding people accountable for not using precautionary measures, but what you are suggesting would indicate even if you own a gun to protect your family, it would have to be secured in such a way, that the gun owner wouldn't even have quick enough access to it in order to protect themselves or their family.

When you start making laws to prevent people from protecting themselves, you only embolden criminals.

If preventing law abiding citizens from protecting themselves, while at the same time insuring that criminals who will always break the law have even less deturrent and are more embolden is your goal, you have the perfect solution.

As was mentioned, criminals steal, break in and commit such crimes. Yet you wish to make laws that punish those who are not criminals.

Ludicrous.

J/C

My brother in law and I (both gun owners) were having this discussion the other day and he made an interesting point. He said he's going to start stocking up on ammo, because while the right to own a firearm is protected by the Constitution, the right to buy ammo isn't. It's a sobering thought. What if the gov't leaves the guns alone, but makes it illegal to buy/sell ammunition. I don't know if it's realistic, but it is food for thought.

What if the gov't leaves the guns alone, but makes it illegal to buy/sell ammunition. I don't know if it's realistic, but it is food for thought.

If congress does something that stupied, Gun owners need to start the enpeachment process....Our votes sent these people to Washington we can get them out of there, If us Gun owners let this happen we deserve it, For congress to try & pull this childish act, everyone will be enpeached,

Congrss understands the world biggest army is USA gun owners, I do think something will be done on gun ownership and maybe it should take longer than three days and a back ground check to purchase a gun, maybe manditory classes, yearly checks or registrations, One would think if we can budget 88 billion dollars for misc. items in pakastain congree can budget something to protect our schools and make it harder for guns to get into cowards hands, it's a big argument & wont be fixed with a childish law or a knee jerk reaction. This reminds me of buying a toy for a child, telling them it's thiers but not letting them play with it.

They're not going to make it illegal....they're going to make it unaffordable. Have you seen the price of ammo lateley?

I am no constitutional scholar but it says we have the right to bear arms, it doesn't specify how many or what type. What if a law was passed that stated all citizens passing a background check were allowed to purchase only one firearm. You still are able to bear arms, that isn't being infringed. Or what if they pass a law stating you can only bear arms of the rifle/shotgun variety? Since a majority of the gun violence is perpetrated with a pistol.

just thinking out loud . . .

Quote:

---

Since a majority of the gun violence is perpetrated with a pistol.

---

You should also take into account that the majority of firearm self defense is also conducted with handguns.

New 9 MM and a assult rifle in the house for Christmas

I guess there was a shooting in Orange this morning. An attempted car jacking. They caught the guy but still locked down all the hotels...



http://www.wkyc.com/news/article/275429/33/Orange-Hotels-placed-on-lockdown-after-shooting

Do people break into occupied homes or rather wait till the occupants are not home? Would make sense to do the latter not the former . . . I can't recall the last time I read a story about a homeowner having their house burglarized when they are home.

Either way, isn't most gun violence centered around drugs/gangs or robberies at stores anyway?

ARPS:

Quote:

---

What would you do with the people that already have several? What about private collections where people have hundreds of guns (I know 2 people with over 100)? More importantly..
How do you insure that criminals dont have them anymore?

---

I don't know, just thinking out loud really. Would it still be constitutional to limit type and quantity. As for what you do with those that already have more than one, laws are usually passed and are not retroactive, meaning it doesn't make what was done prior to criminal. I would suppose from this day forward one could make a law that limits ownership.

As for the last part on criminals not having them, I suppose if you got tough on crime . . i.e anyone committing a felony or crime of violence or drug related offense, or any domestic charge could be forbidden to own a gun.

I don't know. Gotta do something man on all fronts. I don't think changing gun laws in an of themselves is the only way to go, we need to do something about the other things I mentioned too, but you have to start somewhere and start strong.

As far as I know, anyone convicted of a felony cannot legally own a gun.

So many do so illegally.

As far as being Constitutional to limit the types of guns that can be sold, we had an assault weapons ban for about a decade, and it wasn't struck down on Constitutional grounds.

...and so it begins. Remember all the Obama folks saying "we don't want your guns"? Well guess what. This is from Feinstein's own website. You know her, she's the one that continuously speaks out for gun control, but fails to tell her constituents that she herself has a concealed carry permit. Even though some of these weapons will be grandfathered in, they'll have to be registered. What she also fails to mention is that these lists of registered weapons become public records....accessible to anyone. Might as well paint a bullseye on your back if you're a law abiding gun owner.

http://www.feinstein.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/assault-weapons

Stopping the spread of deadly assault weapons

Stay informed

In January, Senator Feinstein will introduce a bill to stop the sale, transfer, importation and manufacturing of military-style assault weapons and high-capacity ammunition feeding devices.

To receive updates on this legislation, click here.




Press releases
Feinstein to Introduce Updated Assault Weapons Bill in New Congress, December 17, 2012
Feinstein Statement on Connecticut School Shooting, December 14, 2012



Summary of 2013 legislation

Following is a summary of the 2013 legislation:
Bans the sale, transfer, importation, or manufacturing of:
120 specifically-named firearms;
Certain other semiautomatic rifles, handguns, shotguns that can accept a detachable magazine and have one or more military characteristics; and
Semiautomatic rifles and handguns with a fixed magazine that can accept more than 10 rounds.
Strengthens the 1994 Assault Weapons Ban and various state bans by:
Moving from a 2-characteristic test to a 1-characteristic test;
Eliminating the easy-to-remove bayonet mounts and flash suppressors from the characteristics test; and
Banning firearms with “thumbhole stocks” and “bullet buttons” to address attempts to “work around” prior bans.
Bans large-capacity ammunition feeding devices capable of accepting more than 10 rounds.
Protects legitimate hunters and the rights of existing gun owners by:
Grandfathering weapons legally possessed on the date of enactment;
Exempting over 900 specifically-named weapons used for hunting or sporting purposes; and
Exempting antique, manually-operated, and permanently disabled weapons.
Requires that grandfathered weapons be registered under the National Firearms Act, to include:
Background check of owner and any transferee;
Type and serial number of the firearm;
Positive identification, including photograph and fingerprint;
Certification from local law enforcement of identity and that possession would not violate State or local law; and
Dedicated funding for ATF to implement registration.

A pdf of the bill summary is available here.



Effectiveness of 1994-2004 Assault Weapons Ban

Following are studies that have been conducted on the 1994-2004 Assault Weapons Ban:
In a Department of Justice study (pdf), Jeffrey Roth and Christopher Koper find that the 1994 Assault Weapons Ban was responsible for a 6.7 percent decrease in total gun murders, holding all other factors equal. They write: “Assault weapons are disproportionately involved in murders with multiple victims, multiple wounds per victim, and police officers as victims.”
Original source (page 2): Jeffrey A. Roth & Christopher S. Koper, “Impact Evaluation of the Public Safety and Recreational Firearms Use Protection Act of 1994,” The Urban Institute (March 1997).
In a University of Pennsylvania study (pdf), Christopher Koper reports that the use of assault weapons in crime declined by more than two-thirds by about nine years after 1994 Assault Weapons Ban took effect.
Original source (page 46): Christopher S. Koper, “An Updated Assessment of the Federal Assault Weapons Ban: Impacts on Gun Markets and Gun Violence, 1994-2003” (June 2004).
In a Washington Post story, reporters David Fallis and James Grimaldi write that the percentage of firearms seized by police in Virginia with high-capacity magazines dropped significantly during the Assault Weapons Ban. That figure has doubled since the ban expired.
Original source: In Virginia, high-yield clip seizures rise. By David S. Fallis and James V. Grimaldi, Washington Post.
In a letter to the editor in the American Journal of Public Health (pdf), Douglas Weil and Rebecca Knox explain that when Maryland imposed a more stringent ban on assault pistols and high-capacity magazines in 1994, it led to a 55 percent drop in assault pistols recovered by the Baltimore Police Department.
Original source (pages 297-298): Douglas S. Weil & Rebecca C. Knox, "Letter to the Editor, The Maryland Ban on the Sale of Assault Pistols and High-Capacity Magazines: Estimating the Impact in Baltimore," 87 American Journal of Public Health 2, Feb. 1997, at 297-98.
A recent study by the Violence Policy Center finds that between 2005 and 2007, one in four law enforcement officers slain in the line of duty was killed with an assault weapon.
Original source (pages 6-7): Violence Policy Center, "Target: Law Enforcement—Assault Weapons in the News," (Feb. 2010).
A report by the Police Executive Research Forum finds that 37 percent of police departments reported seeing a noticeable increase in criminals’ use of assault weapons since the Assault Weapons Ban expired.
Original source (page 2): Police Executive Research Forum, "Guns and Crime: Breaking New Ground by Focusing on the Local Impact," (May 2010).