Reminder that Ron Reagan has a close family member who was shot down in an assassination attempt by a sick bastard who should not have owned a gun.
Visit NBCNews.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy
134 Thoughts to “Ron Reagan: We need stricter gun purchasing restrictions”
Comments are closed.
We tried a stopgap measure before in the form of an Assault Weapons Ban between 1994 and 2004. The Columbine Massacre occurred in 1999, so the ban was clearly not effective in doing what it was supposed to do. I have also pointed out mass shootings that have taken place with some frequency in Europe, despite its very stringent gun regulations.
So what makes you so confident that stopgap measures would be effective this time around?
[rolling eyes] So let me get this straight….one incident means that something doesn’t work? There are no instant fixes. You want to make it more difficult. If someone is going to be a mass murderder, at least make them work for it.
I wish I had not looked. The USA doesn’t copmpare favorably to other developed countries.
Again, there is the royal WE. Does that mean you are in the same club as Cargo?
I think I get it. The rest of us will continue to be at risk while you fellows protect your toys.People are going to get real sick of that eventually. You all will run out of good road eventually. Live it up now.
Why not do it now! I would be advising my Democratic candidates in the upcoming election that it is time to take action! Tell them that America is ready for a “change!”
You know the answer to that. Not enough people have had to learn the hard way yet. Give it a little time…all things are possible.
@Cargo,
The semiautomatic assault rifle used by the gunman in a mass shooting at a midnight showing of the latest Batman movie jammed during the attack, a federal law enforcement official told The Associated Press, which forced the shooter to switch to another gun with less fire power.
@Slow,
While it would make things a lot more clear cut for the election – don’t count on it. The only dems calling for more gun control are in true blue areas where they won’t be voted down for taking a hatchet to the Constitution. Vulnerable Ds in purple or red areas know that this issue is a loser for them. http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0712/78803.html
“I agree it is a hell of a lot more complicated. Whny aren’t we discussing the complications of that dude buying so much ammo, etc.”
I don’t see 6,000 rounds or whatever he had as a ‘lot’. I know plenty of people that make their own ammo in garages, basements or in their bedrooms. I do not see a reason to legislate the amount of ammo people have or to regulate the purchase of.
“Do you not find it strange than when this horrific incident was less than 24 hours old, VCDL somehow found a posting for that exact theater about firearms?”
That posting has been up for years. There is no conspiracy theory here. You can go back to at least 2008 when it was discussed on OpenCarry.org that the theater was anti-freedom.
“Your rights stop when they start stepping on mine.”
That’s not correct.
“If people can sue based on coming back in the out, then every school and office in the country is vunerable. You cannot lock a door from inside. so if someone goes out, which they must be able to do, then they can stick a pencil in the door and get back in.”
I’m unaware that its ok to use an emergency door in a school for coming and going. That would see odd to me. Why call it an emergency door then? The issue here is – why didn’t an emergency door when opened trigger an alarm?
“It would be difficult to “bear” a cannon. They are heavy. But fine. Set one out in the front yard. Just don’t fire it at the neighbors.”
Isn’t that the same thing as I can carry a gun wherever I may please but that if I discharge it in a way not consistent with the law that I get locked up? That’s what people want. The anti-freedom crowd doesn’t even want us to be able to carry – openly or concealed.
“What can we do to keep fire arms from those who would commit heinous acts on unsuspecting americans? What ideas do you have?”
I think I’ll borrow from Elena here and say we need to work on our mental healthcare system. Now that is not a complete solution because this guy may not be crazy. He may just be evil. And if that’s the case nothing will stop that. Nothing. I’m just glad that with his knowledge over IEDs that he didn’t go the suicide bomber route. 12 people dead is certainly tragic but I don’t want to imagine what he could’ve done with an explosive in that theater.
“The rest of us will continue to be at risk while you fellows protect your toys.”
We protect your toys too. And Elena’s. And Moe’s. And Bear’s. And Censored. The list goes on.
@marin, it won’t always be a losing issue if enough people are touched by gun violence. Right now, the specialty issues (God, guns, gays, abortion, environment) are not across the board enough to sway an election an opposite direction. I am warning you though, you might not keep the status quo for ever. I am a good example. I don’t vote one way or the other in an election having to do with 2A. 1A would pull me in but not 2A. I just don’t care enough.
What would make me care? A few more incidents like Batman Massacre. I would start looking at what we do as Americans to prevent gun violence and what we do to keep guns out of the hands of nut cases. If I lived in a violent city. I might change nut case to the word thug. Its all what impacts someone personally.
That really is the political reality of how it all works in the absense of court interference.
Oh? It isn’t? Suppose you tell me what give you the right to tromp on MY rights?
You might want to rethink how many people have been shot thinking exactly what you are thinking.
There’s that WE again. Of course the mental health system needs some revamping. They got right on that after VA Tech massacre. Oh? Yea, I fogot, that’s right where the budget cuts came first, with tea party types screaming stop the spending.
What a bunch of effen hypocrites. There will always be crazy people. You all need to figure out how to keep them out of your gun supply that you want everyone to have equal access to.
If you don’t come up with some solutions, eventually someone will do it for you. You probably won’t like it.
I agree that our mental health system in America is totally screwed. We got rid of insane asylums and now we’re left with prisons, which is where practically all mentally ill who are not part of Obama’s cabinet or otherwise liberal are kept. Problem is, there is no money in it, so they’re in prison. But heck, even the government doesn’t seem to put the mentally ill as a priority. My only explanation is they need the mentally ill for votes, so solving the problem is not in their interest either.
Many of the nation’s mentally ill live on the streets. Who ever closed down insane asylums was absolutely …insane. The movement who gave the nod for that one had never visited one, obviously. I had taken enough field trips back in the day of being a psych major to know that was not wanted or needed on the streets. Sad but not exactly who you want to give a bunch of rights to other than minimal human rights.
If I close my eyes I can still see a few of the wards I visited at St. E’s, Western and Eastern State. It is horrifying and something you never forget. I think its when I first decided there really was evil in the world. Some of it wasn’t distinquishable from just being horribly nuts.
Elena was spared the sights that are haunting me now and I wish I had not thought of (shudder) because she is too young. The great turn out on the street had happened by the time her psych classes took their field trips.
It was a real deal breaker for me, by the way.
@Moon-howler
Can you tell me how exactly carrying a firearm violates your rights? I’m not seeing it. Bonus points of you can provide legal citation.
marin, carrying a firearm doesn’t violate my rights. Allowing crazy bastards to continue to get hold of guns and take out multiple people might very well violate my righs and the rights of others. I was thinking along the lines of life, liberty and persuit of happiness. Additionally, there are a few gray areas out there. Establishments have the right to say if they want or don’t wabt guns allowed. I don’t care to drink my coffee next to someone with a huge gun slung over their shoulder or to shop for my groceries with someone like that going up and down the aisle.
Why? Because I can’t distinguish the good guys from the bad guys and neither can anyone else. This issue is the issue that will not be able to sustain. A couple of decades ago people were removed from walking around the stores looking like Grizzly Adams. Those days will return for just the reason stated. It bothers most people because they are unable to distinquish who bears them harm and who does not. I look forward to those days coming back.
The WE that you speak of…is the plural of I since I am talking about ideas supported by a plurality and its in context, example…Marin, Emma, ME, gun bloggers, Pro-2nd amendment supporters, and perhaps the NRA, SAF, etc….
As for the closing down the asylums….I think it was done with “good intentions” by the ACLU/liberals in the 70’s. I don’t think it was liberal Republicans…. but I was young. I only learned about it in the 80’s.
And your statement that Americans might change things if violence continues…well then its a good thing that gun violence is actually dropping, even as gun sales are up by millions. However, even if it wasn’t…. problems are no excuse for tyranny. Law abiding citizens’ rights must be protected. America HAS responded to attacks like this….They are buying guns.
Here’s a report that states that more OR less restrictive gun laws will not stop such things. The author advocates, in general, for more restrictions, but not because of this.
http://edition.cnn.com/2012/07/20/opinion/fox-mass-murder/
Actually, and I think this has already been brought up….there doesn’t appear to be anything mentally ill about this guy until the last week or so. If I am not mistaken, many mental illnesses can appear in a person’s 30s, 40s, or 50s. How can we keep guns out of the hands of crazies when they can already have them and then just lose it? I don’t claim to know the answer.
Detecting mental illness will never be a single issue for one governance. It will have to be a multiple pronged approach.
I believe his school program thought he might be a little odd. Again, you aren’t going to catch it all but even if you catch one, Gabby Giffords might be normal and those 6 people around her might still be alive.
To bring it back to Reagan’s statement of needing more restrictive gun laws…. if this guy didn’t get flagged NOW and he did this over months and jumped through the hoops, what type of laws WOULD have prevented this, then, law abiding model citizen from buying arms?
Of course, I believe that we’re going to find out that he DOES have a history of mental problems that were not properly acted upon. His mother did not seem surprised to hear about his attack.
I dont believe Ron Reagan said we need more restrictive gun laws. I think he said that we needed to treat gun ownership with the same importance as we treat driving a car. Perhaps that says restriction to you. To me, it says common sense. Probably a lot of people hear common sense in all that.
If there are 20% gun lovers and 20% gun haters, that leaves about 60 % of US (to match the royal WE) in the middle to worry about. i would be convincing those who aren’t ideologues that there is some room for some common sense measures so we don’t join up with the wrong 20%.
Fox had some gun control wackos on while I was going to the grocery store and back. What was an assault weapon? Anything beyond a single shot device. They were expressing disappointment in the Democrat’s unwillingness to go gun-control-happy. I’m disappointed too. Of course, what they don’t mention about single shot devices, is something like an H&R Handi-Rifle in 500 S&W magnum. That will easily kill the guy in front of you, the guy behind him, and the guy behind that guy, and whoever might be downrange for, say, a mile or so! And with a little practice, you can reload that thing in a hot second.
Most of us who are not in to guns think of assault weapons as those things that fire multiple rounds and that stands on them and make rat tat tat sounds. Now that might not be correct to you experts but I dont see what difference it makes really. I don’t think your ever day neighbor needs one of those rat tat tat things like gangsters and soldiers carry to kill people with.
I will probably continue to call those kinds of weapons assault weapons. It gives the gun boys something to laugh at the rest of us know what we are talking about amongst ourselves.
@Pokie
Maybe you could mention adding those weapons to my list of weapons that should have deeper background checks to own.
Right! nobody is talking about that thing with his mom! She said right away “that’s him alright”. WTF? What did she know?
I was thinking about that thing with his mom but I dont know what was said to her. She might have been asked if she was Holmes’s mom. That’s the reason I haven’t commented. Obviously the quote was taken out of context since we don’t know what the context was.
So his rifle jammed. I don’t know the make of the rifle…(AR-15s can be all over the place), but jamming issues are normally the magazine. Everybody and his brother used the term “clip” over the last 48 or so hours. It was a specialized 100 round gimmick-magazine, so I’m guessing he didn’t practice much with it. semi-autos are finicky about magazines, that’s for sure.
Moon,
I agree with you that we need to take another look at the mental health systems and the problems and conditions attendant to it. Part of the homeless problem that Reagan was blamed for was the release of countless ‘crazy’ people from institutions because the thought was that they could be treated medically at home, local hospitals, etc. Um…not so much.
Loughner should have been institutionalized. Cho was even adjudicated, but because he was not found to be a “danger to others” but only to himself, they let it slide. I bet we find similar things with the latest guy.
@Moon-howler
We’re not trying to make fun of you. We just want to make sure what you are talking about.
You seem to be talking about an automatic weapon, an assault rifle. One trigger pull, multiple rounds fired. These are very expensive and very regulated. Very, very few crimes are committed with them.
What has been used are semi-automatic rifles that shoot once for every trigger pull and are no different than any other semi-auto rifle. Each have different cosmetic appearances and different accessories, and it was those things that were used to determine the term “assault weapon.” It was a made up term, invented to fit a political agenda.
assault weapon — I doubt that thugs who use them and call them assault weapons have much of a political agenda. You might want to rethink that being political term.
I think it is more of a descriptor….that is what one does with guns like that. I think some of those probably need much tighter restrictions. Operative word: some
@Cargosquid
I think the average person thinks “assault weapon” is an adequate description. It’s more than what is needed for hunting and more than what most people think would be necessary to scare an intruder out of the house.
@Moon-howler
“I don’t believe Ron Reagan said we need more restrictive gun laws. I think he said that we needed to treat gun ownership with the same importance as we treat driving a car.”
I’m going by the title on the video you posted. “Reagan: we need stricter gun purchasing restrictions.” Now if he wants to treat gun ownership with the same importance as we treat driving a car…really?
Look at how we treat driving a car. We treat gun ownership with greater responsibility and regulation. I can sell a car to anyone. I abuse my right to drive, sorry..privilege granted to me by the state, and I get a ticket. I can drive anywhere in the Western hemisphere, with the appropriate license, which will be granted to me easily. In many locales, no license is needed on private property or registration, or tags. You can buy and drive a car at 16.
But here’s the kicker….. total number of all homicides by gun in 2009 (last CDC data) is about 1/3 of vehicle homicides. If there had been that many killed by firearms, we’d be hearing about it. And by all gun homicides, that includes accidents and suicides which is about 60% of that total. Granted car MURDER is at a much lower rate.
Every time a gun control supporter talks about regulating guns like cars, they mean that they should be registered and use of it should be a privilege granted by the government. They are not talking about a universal recognition of the right to drive anywhere being applied to gun rights. And registration ALWAYS leads to confiscation.
purchasing restrictions certainly wouldnt apply to what was already owned.
On the other hand, you don’t have to title your weapon, now do you? I would have no problem titling my guns or deeding them or whatever it takes. I think you want to argue everything that avoids having to come up with a plan to reduce guns getting into the hands of the wrong people.
No one has acknowledged the idea of stricter background checks and competency performance checks for more complicated weapons that have the capacity to kill many in less than a minute.
The fact is, you all don’t think you should have to change.
Car murder isn’t at a lower rate, at least in PW Co. We recently had a someone convicted of murder from drunk driving. I think it was a horrible conviction, btw.
@Censored bybvbl
But it is an inaccurate description that leads to inaccurate discussion.
Furthermore, many people hunt with AR platforms now..usually in a larger caliber. The common ammo in usage today, ironically, is considered underpowered. The AR-15 is not a high powered rifle. Its a .22 caliber rifle.
That aside, weapons are not for scaring intruders, they are for shooting them. And most people do use hand guns for that, or shotguns. Rifles are expensive. I don’t reach for mine when things go bump int the night. Thought experts tell me that I should. Technically, I would be more effective.
However, rifle rounds in a neighborhood….not a good idea. Though pistol rounds go through sheet rock too. Trade offs. I’d use a shotgun, but mine only holds two rounds. I have a plan, and I have a backstop of a fireplace for that plan.
Here’s a good link for empirical testing: http://www.theboxotruth.com/docs/theboxotruth.htm
And lastly, we’re back to basic principles. Need has nothing to do with it. And hunting is not mentioned in the 2nd Amendment. The right to self defense and the ownership of tools to do so is a natural right, that predates the Constitution. I don’t need a reason to own a certain type of gun.
I don’t think you are entitled to own whatever you want to own. That is where we will just have to disagree.
Ummm, gonna call you on this one here. The muzzle velocity on an AR15 is about 3200 ft/s, even higher with the right cartridge. Your average .22 LR is about 1400 ft/s. I can put a round through the a$$hole of a gnat at 500 yards with mine, and I’d be hard pressed to do the same from 150 with a .22 LR. Make no mistake an AR15 in the right hands is a devastating weapon.
Yes I own assault weapons, and even a belt-fed M60. The BATF boys come over to the house once a year and I make them coffee. We shoot the S and I show them my book, my ID and my FFL. They congratulate me for keeping meticulous records and it’s “see ya next inspection” and they hit the road.
I guess this makes me crazy. But then again, I don’t take them to the supermarket. Ever.
I am glad that there is an inspection done on that kind of arsenol.
I don’t know why people have those kinds of arsenols but People probably don’t understand why I have some of the things I have. Mine are much less harmful if they fall into the wrong hands.
So should just anyone be able to buy this stuff or should there be some regulation of it?
I say regulation.
To a varmint, the AR15 is a VERY high-powered rifle! These days we use bullet weights and twist rates that over-stabilize the projectile. Back in the Vietnam era, though, that .223 would do some genuinely scary things to people.
Love me some box o’truth!
@Cato the Elder
I was talking about the .223 as underpowered compared to larger calibers, like the .30 cal family. Power is relative. Its at the bottom range of rifles, and considered by many in the military as barely adequate. That’s all that I was saying. It is a fast round and stable over long distances. The caliber is small…and yes it is more powerful than a typical .22…. but compared to modern hunting cartridges its small. When I think about high powered rifles, I think about .30-06 and up. The Garand is a high powered rifle.
How the heck do you afford to shoot the pig? I shot at a machine gun shoot with free ammo and it was still expensive! 🙂
But I’ll say that to many that aren’t familiar with it…it may seem high powered.
@Moon-howler
There is quite a bit of regulation already on anything automatic. Or anything bigger than .50 cal, I think.
One needs to meet all sorts of regulation to own these toys.
http://unitedconservatives.blogspot.com/2011/06/lucky-gunner-blogger-shoot-finally.html
http://unitedconservatives.blogspot.com/2011/07/lucky-gunner-blogger-shoot-part-2.html
Those two new rounds…whisper and blackout something-or-other are pretty exciting.
Well, I’d say for myself (and only for myself) two reasons. One is nostalgia. I spent my formative adult years humping a 60. The second is investment, I bought that 60 for 6K during the early 90s. I could unload it today for 18K. I don’t need to tell you that a 200% return is good money.
Regulation is a fine thing I’m willing to abide, but like so many threads of this nature no one really goes out and delves into specifics. I can’t say whether I agree or disagree based on some general statement about “gun control needs to be more restrictive.”
So, what exactly are we talking about here?
I’m open to the idea, but what specifically is it that you have in mind?
@Cargosquid
My only point is that it is indeed a high powered round. The wound path on a tumbling .233 is flat out awful, as the combat medics here will tell you. That round was designed to disable people, not kill them like a .30. If you give someone a horrible wound, and two of his brothers need to carry him, you just made 3 enemy soldiers ineffective. That’s the point of the .223, well that and staying on target for the 2nd shot. Hell I’ve seen a .223 enter the wrist and tumble out the neck (nice shot!). Point being, it’s not how big the projectile is its how fast you launch from the barrel and how does it behave when you encounter resistance.
@Cato the Elder
I was talking about the comments I’ve had from Marines on its inability to incapacitate with one shot and its lack of penetration compared to larger rounds. It was designed to wound. In longer barrels, it can be effective. However, Marines and soldiers are finding it to be much less effective in the shorter M-4’s. That’s why there was an attempt made by non-coms in the infantry to go to a 6.5 or 6.8 mm round.
Your point about its wounding potential is valid. Unfortunately, that doesn’t happen all the time. Iraq and Afghan theater vets are mentioning that the rounds are “zipping through” and not tumbling. The enemy is not going down in many cases. Perhaps current rifles have changed something.
As I said, power is relative. I was just comparing it to its bigger older brothers. Aslo, the media will call anything that it wants to disparage, “high powered” to make it seem more dangerous.
@SlowpokeRodriguez
Those are really good for quiet shooting. Here’s a sample of .300 BLK with a silencer. No supersonic crack http://youtu.be/Q5ALp8-d3dQ
“marin, carrying a firearm doesn’t violate my rights.”
Thank you for admitting that. It seemed odd that you were saying that it did.
“Establishments have the right to say if they want or don’t wabt guns allowed. I don’t care to drink my coffee next to someone with a huge gun slung over their shoulder or to shop for my groceries with someone like that going up and down the aisle.”
Correct. This establishment used that right to restrict carry and then did not provide any other means of security or defense against this attacker.
“If there are 20% gun lovers and 20% gun haters, that leaves about 60 % of US (to match the royal WE) in the middle to worry about. i would be convincing those who aren’t ideologues that there is some room for some common sense measures so we don’t join up with the wrong 20%.”
Watching ABCNews tonight your numbers don’t jive. Even after the shooting the majority of Americans only want our current laws enforced and not anything ‘new’. Independents swing pro-liberty and pro-freedom on this issue.
“I think he said that we needed to treat gun ownership with the same importance as we treat driving a car.”
That is a non-starter with me. Guns are a right. Driving is a privilege granted by the government.
Censored, the AR-15 is not a bad self defense platform. It’s easy enough that a child can use it. http://youtu.be/j-q2zHIovOE
“So should just anyone be able to buy this stuff or should there be some regulation of it?”
MH, that’s what we’ve been saying all along. TRUE assault weapons are heavily regulated and extremely expensive. I recall a case where the government took a veteran to court and convicted him because his non-assault weapon malfunctioned and was able to perform ‘burst-fire’ in violation of the NFA. He’s still in prison.
The AR in .223 may be under powered when compared to the 556 but when the SHTF and either ammo is confiscated OR the zombies or UN attacks us 223 ammo is a lot easier to get an is more interchangeable with hunting rifles. Multifunctional tools become more critical when your limited to the GO bag and whats left in your alternative arsenal (Bug-Out Location).
@Cargo, very cool videos and pictures. I r jealous. That automatic Glock looked SWEET. I’d die for an MP5. I may have to send my kids to public college instead of private to get my hands on one of those..
@Cato, you are my hero. Do you have a daughter of legal age so I can divorce mine and get into your good graces?? 😉 If you have grandkids I’m looking to arrange a marriage for my son or daughter..
“I don’t think you are entitled to own whatever you want to own. That is where we will just have to disagree.”
Wow. Just wow. I think that really says it all. I also think thats why the middle swings our way on this issue. Wow.
Marin, I can not like something without feeling something is violating my constitutional rights. I would not sit with someone shouldering a machine gun in Starbucks. I would get up and leave. Yes, that person has taken away from my right to drink coffee in peace buyt I don’t have a constitutional right to do that anyway. Its just a figure of speech.
I can also contact home office and tell them how much I hate it. they can listen or not listen. I expect the number of complaints and sales for the month will be the real judge, jury and executioner on this one.
Marin said:
1. It isn’t an exact science but usually that is the number of die hards on each side, regardless of issue.
2. That is a reaction poll. You have people still reeling from an horrific event. Plus, we don’t really know what was asked.
3. Think what you want. The extremes always need to worry about the 60 % middle. That’s the reason you always want to appear reasonable and not have some wack job like Ted Nugent or Rush Limbough as your spokesperson.
Marin said:
“I don’t think you are entitled to own whatever you want to own. That is where we will just have to disagree.”
So when are you buying the nuclear war head? Will ytou worry about your children if the wrong jerk buys one?
@Cato the Elder
Heh. Just realized that even here, there might be disagreement just on definitions. You think its high powered while other experts (NOT ME. I’m not an expert.) think that its not. And we have a common reference and knowledge base.
Now expand that to all discussions on firearms, laws, etc and we see a reason for such…… discourse on the subject.
Cargo, somewhere you made a remark about Diane Feinstein wanting to round up everyone’s guns. I think she wants to ban assault weapons. (my definition, not yours and since you said its made up, then it can’t be wrong.)
Also, remember her past. She was the first person to arrive on the scene when Harvey Milk was assassinated. That leaves an impression.
Yeah, I can’t comment on the sentiment about the rounds zipping through other than to say that it may be due to the range of these shots and the type of ammo being used. I don’t think much of it for a CQB weapon other than the ability to stay in the black on subsequent shots i.e. it’s pretty easy to hold in the black for 4 center mast and 2 in the head. If you have impact at ~2700 ft/s or better chances are the round is going to fragment. You need the projectile to be travelling slow enough such that the point gets slightly deflected and the base begins to tumble forward.
@Moon-howler
“If I could have banned them all – ‘Mr. and Mrs. America turn in your guns’ – I would have!”
– Diane Feinstein
@Cato the Elder
You are right about it being accurate. If I can qualify expert (NAVY expert…. doesn’t mean much) then that rifle allows you to be very accurate.
And that is from where? Perhaps she is speaking from her personal self rather from her legislative self. That is her right to feel that way, especially in light of her finding poor assassinated Harvey Milk.
How people feel personally is really fine. She votes the right way on reproductive rights. Yesterdays discussion reaffirmed my commitment to my own causes. I sure won’t hang her out to dry.
@Moon-howler
There’s nothing to hang her out to dry for. She wants to ban guns. Many people do. She supports your causes.
That’s the beauty of America. This tension between opposing viewpoints and the drive to bring those to fruition. Like I said… this fight won’t end.
She was just on TV.
Cargo, is she not entitled to want to ban guns? Whny can’t she have her personal opinion?
I doubt if she supports all my causes but definitely she supports a couple of them.
@Moon-howler
“So when are you buying the nuclear war head? Will ytou worry about your children if the wrong jerk buys one?”
A nuke would be impractical for me. Wildly expensive and I’d never get to ‘use’ it. So, its not something I’m in the market for. As a parent I worry about a lot of things. Not all of them I have any control over. I think as I get older I have to realize that I can’t bubble wrap the world but show my kids how they need to make their own decisions, back one another up and try to do right. Of course I’ll teach them that when their backs are to a wall to use force on force to protect life.
“Cargo, is she not entitled to want to ban guns? Whny can’t she have her personal opinion?”
She’s entitled to her opinion – no matter how wrong it is – but keep in mind that she is one of the rare elite few that have a concealed weapons permit in California, she’s advocating gun control from the safety of her district where she will not lose her elected office for having that position and as a member of Congress she can obtain security for her and family at taxpayer expense very easily and quickly. Try being a commoner like us and getting that.
She also takes on an added risk with her job. She can think what she wants. It is the implementation of policy that makes me angry, not their personal opinions. I don’t think opinions are wrong, just perhaps misguided.
Basically, I don’t care what she thinks about weapons on way or the other.
Um, I just said that: There’s nothing to hang her out to dry for. She wants to ban guns. Many people do. She supports your causes.
That’s the beauty of America. This tension between opposing viewpoints and the drive to bring those to fruition. Like I said… this fight won’t end.
I dont want to ban guns. some guns yes…but not all ones. not even close. I don’t blame Diane Feinstein though, not after her experience.
@Moon-howler
I’m curious. What guns do you want to ban? All semi-auto rifles? Handguns? And why would you want THOSE specific ones banned?
I don’t know that I have ever said this before, but I agree with Rupert Murdoch. He tweeted Saturday night:
“We have to do something about gun controls. Police license okay for hunting rifle or pistol for anyone without crim or pscho record. No more.”
When does the NRA start its Fox News and Wall Street Journal boycott?
http://thehill.com/blogs/twitter-room/other-news/239341-rupert-murdoch-on-twitter-presses-for-more-gun-control
Can you translate that from aussie into English por favor?
@Morris Davis
There won’t be. It shows he’s fair and balanced because now we can call him a liberal. 🙂
The power to license makes it a privilege. No license needed. I don’t need gov’t approval to exercise my rights, thank you very much.
Showing ‘tude won’t get you much more than an ultra sound there, Cargo.
@Moon-howler
That wasn’t “tude.” That was politeness. I was being thankful.
Of course, when I exercise my rights, I like to be fully informed. I can’t imagine exercising my rights without all the possible information available. I might make a bad, irreversible decision. I try to do that with all of my rights. And if the gov’t wants to give me more information so that I can do so… great!
You didn’t even laugh over the threat of ultra sound!
@Moon-howler
Yes I did. You just couldn’t hear the chuckle. Apparently my overly dry response didn’t trigger the mild satire alert.
I liked it.
To clarify the actual rules for getting more controlled weaponry, link to a refutation of Bill O’Reilly, from the ATF: http://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2012/07/bill-oreilly-and-rep-jason-chaffetz-in-epic-gun-rights-blowout-video/
The Federal government requires a $200 SOT Tax Stamp for certain firearms listed below, along with an NFA application, a background check, and approval by the ATF, as well as, the local Chief Law Enforcement Officer. It’s an extremely rigorous and expensive process. The government makes it very difficult to own one of these and they make the burden on the individual to get it right quite brutal. Note: the machine guns that Bill O’Reilly said you can “just grab one at a gun show” are on the ATF’s list. You can’t just grab one at a gun show. This even applies to any piece of metal, i.e. a sear, that allows a rifle to become fully automatic.
The process takes many, many months. And if an owner wants to give or sell any of these firearms to another individual they must repeat the process, along with another $200 payment to the ATF.
From the ATF‘s website,
Q: The types of firearms that must be registered in the National Firearm Registration and Transfer Record are defined in the NFA and 27 CFR, Part 479. What are some examples?
Some examples of the types of firearms that must be registered are:
Machine guns;
The frames or receivers of machine guns;
Any combination of parts designed and intended for use in converting weapons into machine guns;
Any part designed and intended solely and exclusively for converting a weapon into a machine gun;
Any combination of parts from which a machine gun can be assembled if the parts are in the possession or under the control of a person;
Silencers and any part designed and intended for fabricating a silencer;
Short-barreled rifles;
Short-barreled shotguns;
Destructive devices; and,
“Any other weapon.”
A few examples of destructive devices are:
Molotov cocktails;
Anti-tank guns (over caliber .50);
Bazookas; and,
Mortars.
A few examples of “any other weapon” are:
H&R Handyguns;
Ithaca Auto-Burglar guns;
Cane guns; and,
Gadget-type firearms and “pen” guns which fire a projectile by the action of an explosive.
[26 U.S.C. 5845]
Q: How can an individual legally acquire NFA firearms?
Basically, there are 2 ways that an individual (who is not prohibited by Federal, State, or local law from receiving or possessing firearms) may legally acquire NFA firearms:
By transfer after approval by ATF of a registered weapon from its lawful owner residing in the same State as the transferee.
By obtaining prior approval from ATF to make NFA firearms.
[27 CFR 479.62-66 and 479.84-86]
Q: What is the tax on making an NFA firearm?
The tax is $200 for making any NFA firearm, including “any other weapon.”
Q: How is this tax paid?
A money order or check made payable to the Bureau of ATF together with the application forms are to be mailed to the Bureau of ATF, NFA Branch.