true, but do the side effects of limiting gun ownership, or ease of ownership, outweigh the future of gun violence in this country what with these types of mass shootings with legally owned weapons? Why don't we discuss what rights and liberties might be affected by more stringent gun control?

__________________
This post brought to you by Carl's Jr.

Look, you've beat this horse until it's dead. You want more restrictions on weapons. Period.

Many of us see the fallacy of this approach and can easily show that it doesn't work. Period.

What more is there to discuss with you?

Id say, look north, whats different about the Canadians and what they have done in relation to gun control with lesser violence, and what parts of that can we implement down here?

Yes, id love more restrictions on weapons. What exactly do you want?
From what I gather, you think any and all ideas are bad, and that nothing anyone does or says will have any effect, and that you still have your shotgun. Does that sum it up?
you say it won't work, why does it work elsewhere?

That hasnt been easily shown at all

__________________
This post brought to you by Carl's Jr.

No very limited (because that is all you can get) restrictions on handguns will have any effect whatsoever.

Yes, I still have my shotgun.

It works elsewhere because it's a different society with different values. This fact escapes you.

I've proven it to you with the restrictive handgun laws in place in NY and CT. You, being obtuse, choose to ignore it.

You haven't "proven" any points Mr. Carlton, aside from a cattyness and peevishness in conversation similar to a teenage girl going through puberty, sure. Thats been proven time and again, old news.

You have said that CT has restrictive handgun laws, yes, and you have also pointed out as we know, that the majority of the people killed was with an automatic rifle. The laws on the books may seem overly restrictive to you, however, I do not consider them restrictive in the least if either of these weapons were-

1- available in the first place
2- if available, not secured properly
3- accessible by a known potential problem.

Your restrictive CT handgun laws require an application with 70 buck fee, 8 weeks of waiting for approval more or less, and you gotta take a handgun course, the NRA's pistol course. The sad part, is that CT law IS pretty restrictive compared to other parts of the country, which is the core issue here.

__________________
This post brought to you by Carl's Jr.

Those wanting more restrictive gun laws need to know something VERY important to this case, something YOU have quoted more times than I can count in this thread...

The rifle wasn't an AUTOMATIC action rifle...it was a SEMI-AUTOMATIC. You're too damned busy screaming for laws against automatic guns, which have been banned without special licensing since the mid 1930's. The US also has had bans in place on the manufacturing of automatic weapons for public use since the 1980's.

If you're going to say anything more about creating laws for AUTOMATIC weapons, expect to get called a friggin' moron, because it would be proof that you have ABSOLUTELY no idea what the hell you're talking about.

__________________
1987 560SL
85,000 miles

Which is why I am against banning weapons and for control of how they are sold, who they are sold to and how they are stored.

__________________
Sent from an agnostic abacus

2014 C250 21,XXX my new DD ** 2013 GLK 350 18,000 Wife's new DD**

- With out god, life is everything.
- God is an ever receding pocket of scientific ignorance that's getting smaller and smaller as time moves on..." Neil DeGrasse Tyson
- You can pray for me, I'll think for you.
- When you understand why you dismiss all the other possible gods, you will understand why I dismiss yours.

lets see, whos upset and emotional talking about gun control.

Jplinville
Brian Carlton

Do I see a connection with personality and need for a security blanket here? Did the firearm replace the blankie? Ask yourself that honestly.

If you read back you won't see me screaming, you see me consistently saying that im sick of this kind of rampage crap, and that im sick of the no discussion, no compromise.

Brian won't talk about it, because he doesn't see the point in talking about things that as he sees it, will never happen. Thats the engineer in him he says. Well, apart from his charming way of getting that across, I can see where hes coming from.

You won't talk about because apparently even the idea of such a thing happening around you, or in your circle of people is completely unbelievable because of your force of personality, despite telling us of a crazy kid in your family 300 miles away, and your home defense guns lying around for anyone in the family to use. You've told us many times about your successful application of tough love, and your impressive use of force and size to make a good family point. On a lot of that stuff, we see eye to eye, but not on this.

You are correct, yes, there is a difference between automatic, and semi-automatic weapons. In some of my responses, I have failed to make that distinction for those of us who are nitpickers on name alone.

Let me be clear. I see absolutely no use for any type of weapon being available to the general public that automatically reloads a new round with each pull of the trigger. I see little difference between the level of danger presented to other people from an automatic rifle, and a semi-automatic rifle. In fact, its my opinion that a semi-automatic rifle is more dangerous because it allows aimed, controlled effective shots apart from a spree of bullets from full auto.

Brilliantly demonstrated by this kid in a class room.

Ive already stated my opinion on handguns. Will my kind of gun control come to pass? certainly not, but discussion is certainly worth having. Id be more than happy with compromise in the form of davidmash's proposals. Will you?

__________________
This post brought to you by Carl's Jr.

You've proven to be a person who refuses to see the facts as presented to you. Time and again we show you that the laws in existence today don't make any dent in the gun violence, either because they are not enforced or because they are ignored via illegal weapons.

CT's restrictive handgun laws have done nothing to prevent violence with a weapon. The carnage occured right in CT.

So, just continue onward with your blather regarding more laws and more restrictions on guns. Anyone with an ounce of brain cells knows that it won't make a damn bit of difference in the violence prevalent in society today.

And, yes, talking to you is like talking to a wall...........I think I need my own head examined for continuing with it.

you know you enjoy it. Better to be honest with oneself.

in response to red-

Illegal weapons? Haven't you seen that the VAST majority of these mass shootings are done with legal weapons?

As you are so fond of pointing out to me, this discussion is about these mass shootings, not day to day crime.

__________________
This post brought to you by Carl's Jr.

There is no longer a registration here but you are still required to have a license to buy ammo. I have a POL ( posession only ) which allows me to own what I have but I can't buy more. Since the registraion is gone I think I will be able to buy privately but I would want to find out first.
A PAL is a license to buy a fire arm. You need a special restricted lisence to buy a hand gun or some restricted rifles. Full auto is banned.

When I go to buy shotgun shells they ask to see my paperwork. THey won't sell to me without it. I could buy it from someone so it's kind of limited that way. To get my license renewed they asked me all sorts of questions:
any criminal charges
changed jobs
been fired in last two years
taking any pills for depression
split up with wife or GF ( they have to sign the paper saying you're OK )
moved residence

Many other questions but all are designed to asess your risk factor. I got mine without problem but many people give up before they send it in because they know they won't qualify. The main difference being gun ownership is considered a privlegde here, not a 2nd A right.

truer words were never said

Interesting info, what would you need to buy more guns if you wanted?

__________________
This post brought to you by Carl's Jr.

For me to get a PAL I would have to got to a class and take a course. Then I would have to pass a written and gun handling test. If I couldn't get a POL then taking the course is a waste of my time because I wouln't qualify for a license in the first place.

The course is run by qualified instructors. You have to be able to answer a lot of questions such as safe storage and actual things about fire arms. You also have to be able to identify a gun by looking a picture. It's not that easy to pass either, although they probably help you out a bit. Those who don't have guns here are either not hunters or they could never get the paperwork to own one. Believe me, I know lots of guys who don't have guns and I'm very happy they don't. Over the past number of years at least some of thm would have killed someone by now.

If I want to get a restricted weapon ( not called a fire arm at this point ) it would help if I belonged to a gun range or I had an antigue collection. I'm not sure just how difficult it is but I think they take an even closer look at you. It's possible to buy a gun just like the one the shooter used, which is restricted here, but it would take about 6 months before you ever got your hands on it. Everything has to be kept locked up, no exceptions.
A place near me burned down and the owner was charged with unsafe storage when the remains of a long gun were found outside of the gun safe. It resulted in her loosing her spot as Mayor of the county at the next election - I guess people saw her as being not very law abiding.

The Federal Government controls fire arms. The Provinces administer and enforce the laws through the Provincial police or the RCMP. The Provinces ( read States ) have no control over this, however Quebec was able to keep their list of who owns what for thier own uses when the registery ended this year. They don't come door to door to check but you still want to keep stuff locked up.
Having one source ( federal ) for gun control laws makes a lot of sense. If we didn't have that, people would simply go to the Province next door to get what they want. Sound familiar?

As it is, almost all illegal hand guns in Canada are coming from the USA. Same with Mexico I'm sure.
Your hand gun, which is registered, gets used in a crime here? You're in very big doo - doo.

And the reason all of this works fairly well is because the population wants to feel reasonably safe going about their day to day business. We have never had a constitutional right to own fire arms here so that's why we don't have a gun culture. Given what's seen on TV on a regular basis, I'm pretty sure most people here are glad of that.