WTH is wrong with some people??? Shooting at CT Elementary School - Page 64 - PeachParts Mercedes-Benz Forum

JamesDean · #**946** 12-19-2012, 07:23 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Hatterasguy

The sale of assault rifles is not in question here.

An assault rifle by definition is capable of fully automatic fire, which is a BATFE regulated class 3 NFA item. You can buy them but its a process to say the least.

What they are talking about are bayonet mounts and pistol grips, which CT already has in place because for the most part the AWB did not sunset here in 2004.

A semi automatic Bushmaster rifle like the one used in the shootings is AWB compliant and costs about $900. An M16 which is an assault rifle is an NFA item and costs about $12k-$16k. They look similar but in terms of regulation, cost, and function are in different worlds. The penalty for turning a Bushmaster into an NFA item which is hard as heck but can be done with AR's is 10 years in jail, minimum. Which is why no one does it.

To own a post ban, modern fully automatic weapon, lets say an FN Scar, well you have to be a manufacture of destructive devices I beleive. To make yourself one of those you give up all sorts of rights, and pretty much the BATFE can pay you a friendly visit whenever they want to inspect your books.

Laymen really have no clue about the how regulated firearms are.

Thanks for the clarification! The paper just said assault rifles and wasn't all that detailed about it.

So basically I could get an M16 or like three 126's or maybe a nice SL.

Benz Dr. · #**947** 12-19-2012, 07:26 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dropnosky

truer words were never said

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

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.

engatwork · #**948** 12-19-2012, 07:35 PM

Quote:

Can anyone tell me why/where/when a law abiding gun enthusiast would really need/use something like an AK or Bushmaster with a monster bullet clip?

I enjoy target practicing with mine (300 yards) and then there is always the threat of a coyote in the yard.

Glad to have you back on board Hatty and thanks for the clarification. If I had the means I would own a BAR just for the heck of it

.

The only murders that I remember hearing about in my lifetime where fully automatic weapons were used has always been done by the US Government and may or may not have been justified. Here is one example:

my-lai

Dubyagee · #**949** 12-19-2012, 07:57 PM

This doesn't fit either, dang

iPhone 4

jplinville · #**950** 12-19-2012, 08:07 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dubyagee

This doesn't fit either, dang

iPhone 4

They have the lowest crime in all of Cobb county.

jplinville · #**951** 12-19-2012, 08:12 PM

25 years murder-free in ‘Gun Town USA’

Quote:

In March 1982, 25 years ago, the small town of Kennesaw – responding to a handgun ban in Morton Grove, Ill. – unanimously passed an ordinance requiring each head of household to own and maintain a gun. Since then, despite dire predictions of “Wild West” showdowns and increased violence and accidents, not a single resident has been involved in a fatal shooting – as a victim, attacker or defender.

The crime rate initially plummeted for several years after the passage of the ordinance, with the 2005 per capita crime rate actually significantly lower than it was in 1981, the year before passage of the law.

Prior to enactment of the law, Kennesaw had a population of just 5,242 but a crime rate significantly higher (4,332 per 100,000) than the national average (3,899 per 100,000). The latest statistics available – for the year 2005 – show the rate at 2,027 per 100,000. Meanwhile, the population has skyrocketed to 28,189.

By comparison, the population of Morton Grove, the first city in Illinois to adopt a gun ban for anyone other than police officers, has actually dropped slightly and stands at 22,202, according to 2005 statistics. More significantly, perhaps, the city’s crime rate increased by 15.7 percent immediately after the gun ban, even though the overall crime rate in Cook County rose only 3 percent. Today, by comparison, the township’s crime rate stands at 2,268 per 100,000.

This was not what some predicted.

In a column titled “Gun Town USA,” Art Buchwald suggested Kennesaw would soon become a place where routine disagreements between neighbors would be settled in shootouts. The Washington Post mocked Kennesaw as “the brave little city … soon to be pistol-packing capital of the world.” Phil Donahue invited the mayor on his show.

Reuters, the European news service, today revisited the Kennesaw controversy following the Virginia Tech Massacre.

Police Lt. Craig Graydon said: “When the Kennesaw law was passed in 1982 there was a substantial drop in crime … and we have maintained a really low crime rate since then. We are sure it is one of the lowest (crime) towns in the metro area.” Kennesaw is just north of Atlanta.

elchivito · #**952** 12-19-2012, 08:30 PM

Kennesaw GA might just be an outlier.

Bolding is mine. Interesting that the study was conducted from GA, but not IN GA. Certainly not conclusive, but interesting none the less.

Injuries and deaths due to firearms in the home.
Kellermann AL, Somes G, Rivara FP, Lee RK, Banton JG.
Source
Center for Injury Control, Rollins School of Public Health, Emory University, Atlanta, GA, USA.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE:
Determine the relative frequency with which guns in the home are used to injure or kill in self-defense, compared with the number of times these weapons are involved in an unintentional injury, suicide attempt, or criminal assault or homicide.
METHODS:
We reviewed the police, medical examiner, emergency medical service, emergency department, and hospital records of all fatal and nonfatal shootings in three U.S. cities: Memphis, Tennessee; Seattle, Washington; and Galveston, Texas.
RESULTS:
During the study interval (12 months in Memphis, 18 months in Seattle, and Galveston) 626 shootings occurred in or around a residence. This total included 54 unintentional shootings, 118 attempted or completed suicides, and 438 assaults/homicides. Thirteen shootings were legally justifiable or an act of self-defense, including three that involved law enforcement officers acting in the line of duty. For every time a gun in the home was used in a self-defense or legally justifiable shooting, there were four unintentional shootings, seven criminal assaults or homicides, and 11 attempted or completed suicides.
CONCLUSIONS:
Guns kept in homes are more likely to be involved in a fatal or nonfatal accidental shooting, criminal assault, or suicide attempt than to be used to injure or kill in self-defense.

source:Injuries and deaths due to firearms in the home. [J Trauma. 1998] - PubMed - NCBI

t walgamuth · #**953** 12-19-2012, 08:57 PM

I attempted to snopes the Kenneshaw ga facts and did not find anything.'

Looking it wikipedia I found this as a portion of the listing there:

A 2001 media report stated that Kennesaw's crime rates continued to decline and were well below the national average, making citizens feel safer and more secure.[20] Later research claims that there is no evidence that [the law] reduced the rate of home burglaries [in Kennesaw],[21][22] even though the overall crime rate had decreased by more than 50% between 1982 and 2005.[23]

So apparently it is not as simple and clear as suggested by our pro-gun friends. I believe the contradictory study must have found that yes, the crime rate was down but no there was no evidence that it was because of the gun law.

As our friend likes to say (over and over and over and over) Correlation is not causation. (did I say that right?)

Hatterasguy · #**954** 12-19-2012, 09:06 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by JamesDean

Thanks for the clarification! The paper just said assault rifles and wasn't all that detailed about it.

So basically I could get an M16 or like three 126's or maybe a nice SL.

Yeah but M16's are "cheap", an M2 Browning is $100k, I know of one of only maybe 5 Steyr Aug's in the US and its for sale for $105k. Thompson sub guns are $30k, MG42's are $30k +/-.

Playing in the NFA world is a very expensive proposition, its very easy for the NFA guys to have a quarter million in guns in a safe or more.

Or for $1k you can buy semi auto's that look pretty similar to all of these.

Hatterasguy · #**955** 12-19-2012, 09:08 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by engatwork

I enjoy target practicing with mine (300 yards) and then there is always the threat of a coyote in the yard.

Glad to have you back on board Hatty and thanks for the clarification. If I had the means I would own a BAR just for the heck of it

.

The only murders that I remember hearing about in my lifetime where fully automatic weapons were used has always been done by the US Government and may or may not have been justified. Here is one example:

my-lai

According to my friend who served in Vietnam in the special forces as a medic the US government is responsible for lots of murders. He has some stories...

So in terms of fully auto, civilians have a far better record. I think only one crime in maybe 80 years has been committed with a legal full auto, and I want to say it was a police officer who did it.

Hatterasguy · #**956** 12-19-2012, 09:14 PM

My point to this entire debate is this:

What you have right now are politicians taking advantage of a tragedy, because as they say in politics never let a good one go to waste! There are interests in DC who for the past 8 years have been sidelined with the AWB reinstatement pretty much rotting in committee. They are now using this tragedy in an attempt to ram it threw.

The guys in DC have no interest in actually trying to maybe figure out a way to stop tragedies like this, and nothing on the block now that I hear on the news will prevent it, or really has anything to do with it, its just politics.

Everything they are talking about on the news CT already has on the books in terms of gun laws. The only one I'm a bit concerned about is the silly "hi cap" mag laws that are circulating around. In reality a nation wide AWB might actually be good for me. No longer will CT residents have to import say a Scar17 threw round about channels, now it will be super easy. Same with AK's and a few other rifles.

raymr · #**957** 12-19-2012, 09:23 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Hatterasguy

My point to this entire debate is this:

What you have right now are politicians taking advantage of a tragedy, because as they say in politics never let a good one go to waste! There are interests in DC who for the past 8 years have been sidelined with the AWB reinstatement pretty much rotting in committee. They are now using this tragedy in an attempt to ram it threw.

The guys in DC have no interest in actually trying to maybe figure out a way to stop tragedies like this, and nothing on the block now that I hear on the news will prevent it, or really has anything to do with it, its just politics.

Everything they are talking about on the news CT already has on the books in terms of gun laws. The only one I'm a bit concerned about is the silly "hi cap" mag laws that are circulating around. In reality a nation wide AWB might actually be good for me. No longer will CT residents have to import say a Scar17 threw round about channels, now it will be super easy. Same with AK's and a few other rifles.

On the other hand by waiting through another period of relative peace, the motivation to get something done slowly fades away. The next tragedy happens and there is collective guilt about not doing anything. Then indeed the victims will be our modern day sacrificial lambs, the price of business as usual.

Hatterasguy · #**958** 12-19-2012, 09:52 PM

Well a good start would be beefing up school security, and the hiring of armed school security guards.

Botnst · #**959** 12-19-2012, 10:28 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dropnosky

shall we agree that loopholes exist with each state coming up with radically different rules? thats the point of that story.

Define "radically".

Oh wait, the Supreme Court did that concerning implementation of the 2nd Amendment.

Botnst · #**960** 12-19-2012, 10:30 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by t walgamuth

I attempted to snopes the Kenneshaw ga facts and did not find anything.'

Looking it wikipedia I found this as a portion of the listing there:

A 2001 media report stated that Kennesaw's crime rates continued to decline and were well below the national average, making citizens feel safer and more secure.[20] Later research claims that there is no evidence that [the law] reduced the rate of home burglaries [in Kennesaw],[21][22] even though the overall crime rate had decreased by more than 50% between 1982 and 2005.[23]

So apparently it is not as simple and clear as suggested by our pro-gun friends. I believe the contradictory study must have found that yes, the crime rate was down but no there was no evidence that it was because of the gun law.

As our friend likes to say (over and over and over and over) Correlation is not causation. (did I say that right?)

What's good for the goose is good for the gander.

Perhaps we should look for causal relationships before enacting legislation that restricts fundamental constitutional rights.