General Gun Control DISCUSSION Thread

[synaesthetic]

Um, you do realize that laser blinder is a military weapon I can't buy, right?

Not to mention there are other dangers of allowing anyone access to very high intensity lasers. Like those assholes that stand outside airports and shine lasers at commercial airliners.

Sound gun is experimental. Not something I'd like to stake my life on. Considering how most ultrasonic devices just make the target feel "unpleasant" (these are used for animal control, mostly) an assailant can still shoot me with his gun. And I will be dead, and he will just have a headache and an upset stomach.

Do you WANT me to get killed?

[Dr. Casey]

Originally Posted by Kaijo

Did they take your gun for evidence? Because that is what they are supposed to do. It sounds like they didn't... which either means poor cops, or we're dealing with made-up instances.

Yeah, I doubt Vexx is lying. >_> I don't think the story is suspect; it's not uncommon for workers in pretty much any job position to cut corners and not adhere perfectly to standard protocol, especially in scenarios that are deemed non-incidents.

[Kaijo]

Originally Posted by synaesthetic

Um, you do realize that laser blinder is a military weapon I can't buy, right?

Hence my statement that I'd like them to be legal to buy, as part of my overall solution.

Not to mention there are other dangers of allowing anyone access to very high intensity lasers. Like those assholes that stand outside airports and shine lasers at commercial airliners.

That danger is overblown. No aircraft has crashed, and no pilot blinded by these. Sufficiently tinted windows and computer take off and landings will solve any potential issue.

Sound gun is experimental. Not something I'd like to stake my life on. Considering how most ultrasonic devices just make the target feel "unpleasant" (these are used for animal control, mostly) an assailant can still shoot me with his gun. And I will be dead, and he will just have a headache and an upset stomach.

Not really experimental when you can buy one. There are two models, low and high power. Lower one is mostly for animals. And if want to see how effective it is, rent one. You might be surprised. Infrasonic weapons are the weapon of the future. Depending on power setting, you can incapacitate someone fairly quickly.

Even if a gun holds anedge vs. 1 person, blinding and sonic hold a definite edge with 2 or more, due to their wide area of effect (military is employing them for crowd control). If you really want to protect yourself...

Originally Posted by Dr. Casey

Yeah, I doubt Vexx is lying. >_> I don't think the story is suspect; it's not uncommon for workers in pretty much any job position to cut corners and not adhere perfectly to standard protocol, especially in scenarios that are deemed non-incidents.

For the record, I don't, either. I prefer to believe people. I was just turning things around, if Vexx wanted to lie about me.

[Kyuu]

Originally Posted by synaesthetic

Um, you do realize that laser blinder is a military weapon I can't buy, right?

Why not? Just go ahead and advocate those Second Amendment Rights to buy those things.

[Ithekro]

Did they take your gun for evidence? Because that is what they are supposed to do. It sounds like they didn't... which either means poor cops, or we're dealing with made-up instances.

And yes, that's right people, the government can legally take your guns. If it is used in any circumstance that is reported to the police, they can seize it for evidence, and odds are you will never get it back. It will most likely get destroyed. The NRA recommends that if your gun gets taken for evidence, that you just give it up and buy another. Then again, getting you to buy more guns is on their agenda.

This is exactly why gun owners don't trust the government and police. They don't want their property confiscated as evidence and later destroyed. Or not returned. Or possibly returned after several years. Especailly if the use of said property was for self-defense. Even with no one being injured or killed.

It almost be like if someone rear ended you at a stoplight. There is a little damage, but both cars are functional. The police come to file a report and impound both cars. Both are later scrapped so as they are never used in a accident again. Even though no one was hurt or killed and both cars could be repaired.

[Kaijo]

Originally Posted by Ithekro

This is exactly why gun owners don't trust the government and police. They don't want their property confiscated as evidence and later destroyed. Or not returned. Or possibly returned after several years. Especailly if the use of said property was for self-defense. Even with no one being injured or killed.

It almost be like if someone rear ended you at a stoplight. There is a little damage, but both cars are functional. The police come to file a report and impound both cars. Both are later scrapped so as they are never used in a accident again. Even though no one was hurt or killed and both cars could be repaired.

This goes for any evidence seized, and has been happening a long time. Have yet to see a gun owner exercise those 2nd amendment rights and stop the gov from taking your guns, however.

I should mention there is a chance you can get your stuff back... but it takes years and there is guarantee. Gun owner told me this. Makes sense why the NRA wouldn't fight it, though. Big Gun wants you to buy another.

[Ithekro]

Depends, there are probably suits against the state and local police departments to have one's firearm returned.

In other instances, the gun owner is arrested I would think. For "impeding an investigation". Most stable gun owners are not willing to open fire on armed policemen.

[Vexx]

Just to answer the question. Yes, they took the weapon. I got it back three weeks later because there was no follow up on the incident. It also helps to have law enforcement in the family. After two weeks, I gave a cousin a call to just have them check on the case.

Basically, they had a bullet from the perp, my bullet, and my gun. No CSI scene like on television. Two officers taking a statement, taking the gun for evidence, fiddling about til they found the bullet, talking to neighbors and that was the end of it. No one ever charged. That's the reality.

That's isn't "poor cop" that is a police force that has a lot more important stuff to do than worry about a short-circuited crime.

And Kaijo, you need to go check your postings prior to my assessment of your behavior, or do I need to quote you? You went personal quite early with your belittling, name-calling, and parlor psycho-analysis to posters here. That's when I decided to stop being nice.

[Kyuu]

Just a bit of insight into the Texas incident this week:

So, basically dumbasses getting into a fight. How quaint. This sort of deal happens far more often than school shootings. Arguing with someone? Got a gun? Go shoot each other and settle it. Yea, that's real safe.

...

Thankfully, if it weren't for the Internet, we'd all probably be settling out fights and squabbles with guns. IN b4 Bleeding Kansas.

[Kaijo]

Another reason to give everyone guns. Before, we'd just punch each other, or settle for getting angry. Now we can simply pull out guns and thus drag bystanders into it.

But hey, 2nd amendment, protection, something something.

Oh, also, apparently a bad guy with a gun can stop another bad guy with a gun, so LaPierre was wrong! We need to be arming the bad guys, too! Oh wait, we're already doing that with legal guns.

[Dr. Casey]

Originally Posted by Kaijo

Another reason to give everyone guns. Before, we'd just punch each other, or settle for getting angry. Now we can simply pull out guns and thus drag bystanders into it.

Actually, there's some ancient civilizations that were highly advanced and possessed weapons more dangerous than guns. There's no small amount of evidence that the pyramids were created using telekinesis, so who knows what destructive wonders they were capable of creating.

[Sugetsu]

@Vexx

In case you miss my previous post, I would like you to know your point of view:

Now if you find yourself agreeing with much of what I say, I have this question for you. Why are people so steadfast in their position of being allowed to carry any type of gun regardless of its firepower? Most of them can think critically and are aware that some weapons are too dangerous, specially in the hands of mentally unstable people. I can understand why the NRA and all gun lobby organizations oppose any regulation. After all it is the same reason why insurance companies oppose health reform, oil companies oppose climate change legislation and wall street opposes bank regulations. But why does the average Joe think like a corporation when in fact he/she is voting against his own self interest?

[Kaijo]

Originally Posted by Dr. Casey

Actually, there's some ancient civilizations that were highly advanced and possessed weapons more dangerous than guns. There's no small amount of evidence that the pyramids were created using telekinesis, so who knows what destructive wonders they were capable of creating.

No no, the ancient pyramids were created with slave labor, to be landing pads for alien spaceships. There was no telekinesis, silly!

And Sugetsu, it's just that the Right has done a good job convincing people that they need to make decisions more line with corporations. Every single line they espouse, from oil, to defense, to climate change, to health care, is designed to fool people into thinking they need to vote against their own self interest. Which wouldn't be so bad, except that it tilts things in favor of corporations. Big Oil, Big Defense, Big Insurance, Big Gun... It will only end when we as a people say, "No, we don't need an army that is 4 times the size of the next biggest army. No, we can work with socialized medicine for the benefit of all. No, we don't need enough guns and ammo to start WW3; we can choose to trust each other and work together and not fear. As long as we allow our fears to be used by the right, we'll keep having these issues. We'll keep allowing them to divide us.

[Ithekro]

People have different personalities and come in different sizes.

A smaller person cannot carry or use a larger firearm very well, and a large person cannot use a smaller firearm very well.

Like people's different tastes in many things from toothpaste to cars, it sometimes comes down to need and other times it comes down to taste or style.

Some people will only have one compact car or one utilitarian car. Others will have a sports car. Others have a pickup truck. Others have a dozen cars.

Some people by generic toothpaste. Some buy name brand. Others got for different flavors. Other for different uses (stain removal, whitening, gum protection).

Some get a basic computer. Other go for high processing power and high powered video cards. Some go with giant cases with fans and lights and sound effects.

It could be the same with guns. Some people has a very basic rifle. Some people have a small pistol. Others get a large caliber pistol. Some people gets the high tech scopes and laser designators. Some people like to have a large selection of guns for different uses. Some people like specific manufactures (either for reputation or quality). Those things are tastes, style, or utility.

[Vexx]

Originally Posted by Sugetsu

@Vexx

In case you miss my previous post, I would like you to know your point of view:

That's a general psychological question that applies to many political topics. People can be convinced to vote against their reasoned self-interests with the use of other irrational social hot buttons. It doesn't help when extreme opposing views help themselves to a big spotlight and thus shoot themselves in the foot. Between the idiot La'Pierre and the idiots at the Brady bunch, its hard to have rational discussion. Most of my views are what people these days call "progressive". Concepts of gun ownership aren't "left-right" like many would assume to characterize. Feminists and Progressives are in the mix.

Like in the recent headlines:

Obama put out a list of items that ... not fabulous but not utter nonsense in balance. Good start point. Then Feinstein puts out her annual "written by idiots" AWB bill and the wagons circle because even moderate gun control advocates start facepalming.

Originally Posted by Ithekro

It could be the same with guns. Some people has a very basic rifle. Some people have a small pistol. Others get a large caliber pistol. Some people gets the high tech scopes and laser designators. Some people like to have a large selection of guns for different uses. Some people like specific manufactures (either for reputation or quality). Those things are tastes, style, or utility.

I have a .45acp handgun (semi-auto), I prefer the heavier bullet and can handle the recoil. The noise is deeper and makes my ears ring less if I have to fire without ear plugs. My petite wife has a 9mm handgun (semi-auto) because she's okay with the recoil and she doesn't care if her ears ring for a day if she has to use it. Both are the smaller Glocks. Two guns that do basically the same thing but different details. My mother likes her .38spcl revolver - it fits her hand, okay with recoil and its a revolver, she's more comfortable with that.

We don't carry that often. Wife carries more than I do because she's a pharmacist and works a variety of locations. Scoping the "safety level" isn't really viable or possible. I usually carry or have available mine these days around my house or property. Police response time *averages* 20 minutes in this part of the county. It isn't fear, it isn't ego, isn't a substitute penis (boy, the female gun owners love that particular slander), it is prudent.

If someone comes up with a path to "gun free nirvana" I'd be fine with that but every proposal just craters when mapped onto the real world, possibly because the proposer rarely understands the ramifications of their ideas.

[Ascaloth]

Originally Posted by Kyuu

Just a bit of insight into the Texas incident this week:

So, basically dumbasses getting into a fight. How quaint. This sort of deal happens far more often than school shootings. Arguing with someone? Got a gun? Go shoot each other and settle it. Yea, that's real safe.

...

Thankfully, if it weren't for the Internet, we'd all probably be settling out fights and squabbles with guns. IN b4 Bleeding Kansas.

Indeed, using guns to settle a score with each other is a crass, vulgar act that causes collateral damage amongst innocent bystanders. We should mandate that guns be banned from being used for such purposes.

We must, instead, promote the use of the rapier for the purposes of such duels once again. En garde!

[Ithekro]

The traditional was to go out behind the shed and beat each other up. Since people are less likely to have manual labor jobs to keep them fit (or at least strong enough to partake in a fight like this), that sort of thing doesn't happen as often anymore.

[Vexx]

This is when my personal counter-theory to gun ownership comes up .. that Americans may be on their way to being just too stupid to own guns. Bleh. But these are anecdotes. The statistics remain that violent crime and gun crime are still declining.

[SaintessHeart]

Originally Posted by Vexx

This is when my personal counter-theory to gun ownership comes up .. that Americans may be on their way to being just too stupid to own guns. Bleh. But these are anecdotes. The statistics remain that violent crime and gun crime are still declining.

Or they are too stupid to commit crimes. Lack of creativity and planning skills attribute to low crime rates too.

[Kaijo]

And statistics are that countries with heavy regulations and bans, have a tremendously lower homicide rate, and lower death rate by firearm. There is such a huge difference it is staggering. When you consider that every country has the same % of stupid people, then we realize the US is no different. But we must stick to the firm belief that nothing that is ever tried in any other country, could possibly work here! That is why we stick with private health care, which costs us over twice as much for less care, compared to other countries. Socialized medicine wouldn't work here, obviously!

And hey, listening to statistics and data is silly. :P