The Gun Control Challenge

Post Reply New Topic

Ancalagon - ok you are afraid to say your opinion, I respect that.



sliqua-jcooter - gross
So it doesn't matter that I am an heroin addict or secret service has 1500 pages file about my activities in Al Qaeda's training camp - I may have a gun. Right?

I am asking, what "gun control, strict gun laws" means to you. What do you imagine when someone says this words. So is it "take all guns away from everyone"?

Because if so, it is not what I mean. And this may play a big role in misunderstandings we see here.
For me it means laws in EU/Commonwealth. So in one sentence - laws that prohibits unreliable people to get one.

Ancalagon - ok you are afraid to say your opinion, I respect that.



sliqua-jcooter - gross
So it doesn't matter that I am an heroin addict or secret service has 1500 pages file about my activities in Al Qaeda's training camp - I may have a gun. Right?

I am asking, what "gun control, strict gun laws" means to you. What do you imagine when someone says this words. So is it "take all guns away from everyone"?

Because if so, it is not what I mean. And this may play a big role in misunderstandings we see here.
For me it means laws in EU/Commonwealth. So in one sentence - laws that prohibits unreliable people to get one.

@ Dox47

Would have replied sooner, but honestly gave up waiting after 4 or 5 more pages worth back and forth with alot of charachter attacks in the middle.

will say that, my response was *mostly* a test of my own. I haven't read alot of your stuff till now, and though I know what its like to be the one bastion for a given idea or set there of on a given board over a long period of time, I was unfamiliar with your stance. My post was more an attempt at getting to know your arguments then anything else, thank you for responding ^^. And I aplogize for counter-trolling, or at least baiting, a response, but thanks regardless.

I agree that my hypothetical would, if attempted to be implemented at present, be a resounding failure, mores the pity.... If the solution to gun crime was easy, we'd have pressed that button long ago. I still believe the method I outlined could work, in the correct circumstances, but the thing is, as you have outlined, though I dont believe directly said yet, is that we're very very far beyond being at a set of circumstances where even that authoritarian system has little chance of affecting things regardless. Though I must admit, itd be hilarious to turn the news on one day to discover that Mexicans were jumping INTO Mexico for the chance at smuggling Guns into the US for the insane profit they could make.....

I would continue on the above paragraph though to say that, I believe were so far beyond a place of easy control in large part because of the proliferation of guns, and the lack of respect for life, civility, and guns themselves in our society. I agree that the latter is the bigger issue, but if we could engender even a little respect somewhere, such as with guns, then targeting them as a start, would make sense to me. What do you think? How do you propose we start making a change in our society? We will have to start small no matter what we do, and get bigger once success is demonstrated, and whatever it is will have to eventually become large enough to affect up to 300 Million people (Or more once you factor in time).....

Finally on the topic of my hypothetical, I disagree, at least in part, about the way a Firearms black market would work. Im sure one would spring up given my hypothesis, but remember, my hypothetical is merely a taxation, not a prohibition. And using the ACTUAL prohibition for an example is a poor comparison IMHO with bullets and guns (Admittedly the printable gun could change this in part, but it doesn't technically exist yet). It takes up to a week? I believe? of constant monitoring of a pressurized boiler system to brew enough hooch to serve drinks at a 1920's speak easy for a few days. Add a few more Stills or a few really big ones and you can keep production going full tilt. Further, in the 1920s, boiler steam is common as boilers are common house hold appliances, and the makings for liquor are cheap and easy to come by... You can buy most of what you need from a Hardware store and a Drug store, several different ones if you don't want to be easily tracked.... Please, describe to me how you would go about making bullets (As I believe this would be the crux of any blackmarket scheme in my hypothetical) undercover, in quantity, over time, undetected to fill a niche such as my hypothetical would create? And remember, you're making rounds/shells/cartridges for popular guns designed to fire machine pressed/manufactured rounds here, Primers, Powder, Shell, and Slug/bullet have to be made to certain specs or you're just creating faulty ammunition not worth much and burying first your customers then your business. Finally keep in mind that, in my hypothetical, I don't have to charge $1000 a bullet, I can just charge a nominally higher fee then the Black Market one and guarantee that the purchaser won't be busted by an undercover ATF agent.... This is asked for two reasons: one, I want to see your response.

And Dox, I can't meet your requirements for backing it up. You basically made that impossible with your list of conditions. The entire conversation has to be theoretical.

I am asking, what "gun control, strict gun laws" means to you. What do you imagine when someone says this words. So is it "take all guns away from everyone"?

Because if so, it is not what I mean. And this may play a big role in misunderstandings we see here.
For me it means laws in EU/Commonwealth. So in one sentence - laws that prohibits unreliable people to get one.

I'm actually leaning at this point less towards gun control than towards gun licensing. Like with cars: proving on an intermittent basis that you know the safety rules and aren't a complete idiot.

Did I make it impossible, or is it just that there's no hard proof that commonly proposed types of gun control actually work?

Take even your post as an example, DW; is your concern more for saving lives and you have a rational as to why the proposed action would do so, or is that you just don't like guns and feel that they should be restricted?

It might surprise my regular readers to find out that I am completely in agreement with this: by all means, let’s treat guns like cars.

Once we start treating guns like cars, gun safety and handling courses will be available to all students 15 and over in the public schools, and kids will be encouraged to take Carriers’ Ed classes. Also, when they turn 15 they will be eligible for their learner’s carry permit which will allow them to tote a gun as long as they’re under the supervision of a licensed adult.

Parents will be especially happy because when kids take the class, Mom and Dad will get a break on their homeowner’s insurance premiums. And a natural spin-off of this state of affairs will be that schools and employers will routinely provide convenient, safe gun storage for students and employees (just as they do now with parking lots).

Naturally, when someone turns 16 they’ll go right down to the local cop shop to get their license to carry. They’ll take the written and practical tests and, whether they took Carriers’ Ed or not, if they pass the tests they’ll pay their fee ($20 – $50 unless you are on the upper East Coast who must print theirs on titanium and charge $50 – $100) get their license on the spot. Needless to say about 90% of teens will get their license the first or second time they take the test. These proud new carriers can then go out and buy their first carry gun. Heck, if Mom and Dad can afford it some kids will get their first firearm as a 16th birthday present.

This also means that a permit to carry will be valid in every state in the country and mala prohibita restrictions on possession and carrying (ammo restrictions, magazine capacity limits, Evil Black Rifle bans, etc.) must be clearly posted throughout the jurisdiction (just as speed limit and stop signs are now). In the event that you do wind up with a violation, it can almost always be dealt with by paying a relatively small fine (either by mail or in person) and won’t involve lawyers, court appearances, the possibility of jail time or even loss of your heater. Likewise a cop can’t just arbitrarily stop you and ask to see your license, absent an underlying visible violation.

This new scheme will be a boon to entrepreneurs who will be able to invent, manufacture and/or sell any sort of gun or accessory they think customers will buy. There will be a local, state or federal agencies that can come in and arbitrarily shut a dealer down because when filling out a form a customer accidentally entered a ‘Y’ in the box instead of writing out ‘Yes’. In fact, there won’t be any legal requirement to maintain any sort of records at all.

With the “register ‘em like cars” plan, anyone can walk into a gun dealer, plunk down some cash and walk out with any gun they want, no questions asked (besides name and address for the registration, of course). Registration fees will be minimal (no more than 1% of the weapon’s value) and will be used to build, maintain and upgrade public shooting ranges that are widely available and free to use. And if you are only going to be using the weapon on private property you don’t need to register it at all and it won’t need to be “street legal.” That means silencers, machine guns, mortars, bazookas, RPGs, MANPADS, etc. will be A-Ok.

The problem is that licensing requirements have repeatedly been abused to effectively ban guns.

Isn't that a bit like saying no one should own a pet because some get abused?

No, actually - that's the fundamental point. It's like saying no one has the right to prevent anyone from owning a pet unless and until it can be proven that they are abusive.

Last time I looked heroin is an illegal drug. So is terrorism.

If the state can prove you committed a crime, then they should charge you and get a conviction. Until then, you enjoy all the freedoms associated with being an upstanding citizen.

You consistently imply that 'take all guns from everyone' is what you understand by it, then you take it back. Well, ok, but why did you wait until I had said so for the third time?

Of course my concern is the hope to save lives. That I've been considering off and on for years and, yes, taking into account your informed positions. As a parent, my biggest worry is the idiots who don't know how to lock away and store their weapons, or how to teach their children proper reverence. The innocent kids who get killed playing with weapons. Education would logically reduce those risks.

Do you think that you know how police works? Because it doesn't seem so.
Information - that's is the key word. There are many bad guys outside the bars and police knows them very well. They watch them, "pimp" them, use them to get even bigger fishes. Being an addict doesn't mean police or state wants you in cage. Nobody cares. Living in suspicious camp and meeting well-known terrorists - same thing. They can't prosecute you for this. So, are addicts and "almost terrorists" an upstanding citizens? Do they have your trust to get a gun of their choice?