Urban planning community

Poll results: Should Gun Regulations Be:

Voters
19. You may not vote on this poll
  • Extremely More Restrictive (only cops and military)

    1 5.26%
  • Substantially More Restrictive (Permit hunting rifles and shot guns only)

    1 5.26%
  • Moderately More Restrictive (CCW type training & registration for everyone who buys any gun)

    6 31.58%
  • Slightly More Restrictive (Registration of all guns and CCW type training for handguns)

    8 42.11%
  • It is good how it is (Background checks on handguns and assault rifles)

    2 10.53%
  • Slightly Less Restrictive (Sign a form and a waiver to buy a gun)

    0 0%
  • Moderately Less Restrictive (Waiting list and CCW to get automatic guns)

    0 0%
  • Substantially Less Restrictive (Buy Automatic guns at Wal-mart, no background check)

    0 0%
  • Extremely Less Restrictive (it is my 2nd amendment right to own a bazooka)

    1 5.26%
+ Reply to thread
Page 2 of 6 FirstFirst 1 2 3 ... LastLast
Results 26 to 50 of 143

Thread: Should gun laws and regulation be increased or decreased?

  1. #26
    Cyburbian otterpop's avatar
    Registered
    Jul 2003
    Location
    Down by Dun Ringill
    Posts
    5,897
    Blog entries
    6
    Quote Originally posted by dvdneal View post
    Last, I saw some comedian - can't remember his name - talk about guns. He has this whole routine about going back to muskets. You get one shot and most of those miss. Then he does the whole angry reloading routine. By the time you reload, you're either not angry anymore or the person ran away.

    Whatever side of guns you stand on, can we at least have an inteligent argument and stop with the sound bites about how a gun would have saved lives if an armed person were there.
    I liked Chris Rock's suggestion. He said we should make each cartridge cost, like $5,000. That way you would be very careful to make sure you hit the person you were trying to shoot and there wouldn't be innocent bystanders getting hit by promiscuous shooting. Drivebys would be cost-prohibitive. And it would also make you seriously think just how mad you were at that person? Did you really want to spend $5,000-10,000 just because some idiot cut you off in traffic or because his dog crapped on your lawn?
    "I am very good at reading women, but I get into trouble for using the Braille method."

    ~ Otterpop ~

  2. #27
    Cyburbian ColoGI's avatar
    Registered
    Jul 2009
    Location
    Colo Front Range
    Posts
    2,396
    Quote Originally posted by Wannaplan? View post
    Does anyone know where I can find data - if it exists - on U.S. gun ownership on a per capita basis by metro region, county, tract, or some other geography? .
    Not 100% but I think the NRA forbids it. That kerfuffle in NE where gun owners were publicized makes me confoosid, however.

    Quote Originally posted by otterpop View post
    I liked Chris Rock's suggestion. He said we should make each cartridge cost, like $5,000. That way you would be very careful to make sure you hit the person you were trying to shoot and there wouldn't be innocent bystanders getting hit by promiscuous shooting. Drivebys would be cost-prohibitive. And it would also make you seriously think just how mad you were at that person? Did you really want to spend $5,000-10,000 just because some idiot cut you off in traffic or because his dog crapped on your lawn?
    Exactly, and that is one of the ideas on the table. I have to say, after YouTubing that nutter Alex Jones foaming at Piers Morgan, 5000/per isn't enough to keep some of these fetishists away from the gun safe.
    -------
    Give a man a gun, and he can rob a bank. Give a man a bank, and he can rob the world.

  3. #28
    Cyburbian michaelskis's avatar
    Registered
    Apr 2003
    Location
    Someplace between yesterday and tomorrow.
    Posts
    12,308
    Quote Originally posted by otterpop View post
    And it would also make you seriously think just how mad you were at that person? Did you really want to spend $5,000-10,000 just because some idiot cut you off in traffic or because his dog crapped on your lawn?
    I would like to know how many of those incidences have actually happened. Or how many people with a CPL or CCW have been convicted of using a handgun in a shooting.
    Not my monkey, not my circus. - Old Polish Proverb

  4. #29
    Cyburbian ColoGI's avatar
    Registered
    Jul 2009
    Location
    Colo Front Range
    Posts
    2,396
    Quote Originally posted by otterpop View post
    Makes me feel safer knowing the paranoid have access to assault rifles with large capacity clips. We simply cannot have flash mobs breaking out in unchoreographed dances and assorted tomfoolery..
    The sinister malice of this flash mob makes the always-scared demographic wish for a group of darkies to protect themselves against, surely:

    -------
    Give a man a gun, and he can rob a bank. Give a man a bank, and he can rob the world.

  5. #30
    Super Moderator kjel's avatar
    Registered
    Dec 2005
    Location
    Wishing I were in Asia somewhere!
    Posts
    9,699
    Blog entries
    5
    Quote Originally posted by michaelskis View post
    I would like to know how many of those incidences have actually happened. Or how many people with a CPL or CCW have been convicted of using a handgun in a shooting.
    Probably very few. As someone posted it's how do we keep firearms away from the crazies and the ill intentioned? Registering the damn firearm in a national database would allow for a tracking mechanism. I'd hazard a guess that many a firearm used in the commission of a crime was stolen or missing from a one time legitimate owner. What does someone do if their legal gun is stolen? It probably isn't going to be recovered. But unlike your vehicle that gets stolen they authorities have no clear and fast mechanism to figure out where the gun originated from like a VIN number provides on a vehicle.

    The right to own a firearm comes with the responsibility to maintain it and control it to the best of one's ability. And yes, I think everyone that owns a firearm should have to take a mandatory safety/security training and pass some sort of knowledge/proficiency use test.

    About the photos of the two guns you posted...the difference is what you are hunting.
    "He defended the cause of the poor and needy, and so all went well. Is that not what it means to know me?" Jeremiah 22:16

  6. #31
    OH....IO Hink's avatar
    Registered
    Jan 2005
    Location
    Hang on Sloopy...land
    Posts
    9,748
    Quote Originally posted by michaelskis View post
    Can someone tell me how this makes one gun "evil" and the other one good?
    Nothing makes either of them "good". One is less evil. Unless you think that killing machines are good? My argument would be based on your explanation. One can kill less quickly. One requires additional reloading. One doesn't. You tell me which one is good?


    The fake gun discussion is an interesting one. The argument is that you are just asking to get shot if you have a fake gun. I find this argument to be extremely weak and unsupported. Most people break into houses to steal things, not kill people. That argument would strongly support the need for less guns, not more. You are basically saying that our human nature is to shoot people if we have guns in our hands and we feel in danger. Noting that we might not ACTUALLY be in danger, just that we feel in danger.

    Pretty clear reason to have less guns, in fewer peoples hands if you want to make that argument. Which I would imagine isn't the narrative you are trying to sell.
    A common mistake people make when trying to design something completely foolproof is to underestimate the ingenuity of complete fools. -Douglas Adams

  7. #32
    Cyburbian hilldweller's avatar
    Registered
    Jan 2005
    Location
    Land of Confusion
    Posts
    3,740
    Quote Originally posted by otterpop View post
    I liked Chris Rock's suggestion. He said we should make each cartridge cost, like $5,000. That way you would be very careful to make sure you hit the person you were trying to shoot and there wouldn't be innocent bystanders getting hit by promiscuous shooting. Drivebys would be cost-prohibitive. And it would also make you seriously think just how mad you were at that person? Did you really want to spend $5,000-10,000 just because some idiot cut you off in traffic or because his dog crapped on your lawn?
    I like the punchline of that joke too- "damn.. what did that guy do to get shot up multiple times"

    In all seriousness though: we need to make guns and ammo much more difficult to get a hold of. I read somewhere recently that Walmart (by far the largest seller of guns and ammo in the U.S) loses a ton of inventory to theft each year because their security practices are a joke. Paying someone $8 an hour to watch over its guns and ammo section isn't right. Walmart also sells the AR-15 which is an assault weapon for all intents and purposes.

  8. #33
    Cyburbian michaelskis's avatar
    Registered
    Apr 2003
    Location
    Someplace between yesterday and tomorrow.
    Posts
    12,308
    Quote Originally posted by Hink View post
    Nothing makes either of them "good". One is less evil. Unless you think that killing machines are good? My argument would be based on your explanation. One can kill less quickly. One requires additional reloading. One doesn't. You tell me which one is good?
    So it is not the type or style of the gun but the amount of ammo in the clip. Which as I have said before, is a valid argument. But it also appears that you think that all guns are evil *if one is less than the other. Last I checked, a gun is an inanimate object that is not capable of doing any harm on it's own. It takes someone operating it to do anything at all.


    Quote Originally posted by Hink View post
    The fake gun discussion is an interesting one. The argument is that you are just asking to get shot if you have a fake gun. I find this argument to be extremely weak and unsupported. Most people break into houses to steal things, not kill people. That argument would strongly support the need for less guns, not more. You are basically saying that our human nature is to shoot people if we have guns in our hands and we feel in danger. Noting that we might not ACTUALLY be in danger, just that we feel in danger.

    Pretty clear reason to have less guns, in fewer peoples hands if you want to make that argument. Which I would imagine isn't the narrative you are trying to sell.
    I see the point you are trying to make. The narrative that I was trying to make is that fake guns are a stupid idea. As for if most people break into houses to steal stuff, I think that is true. But here is an example (LINK) to an elderly couple in my area, who was shot and killed in their house just last week. It does happen. The report said that someone tried to break into a few other houses before moving on to this house.

    Maybe if they had a gun, the headline would read more like this break-in, or this strange story, or this one, or this one, or this one I could go on. But I think that you get the point.

    I know that they could have had a gun in the home and all, who knows, maybe they did and they did not get a chance to use it. What I am trying to say is that guns in the hands of people who will use them for protection are a good thing. BUT people also need to secure their guns properly to prevent them from being stolen by those who will use them in a crime.
    Not my monkey, not my circus. - Old Polish Proverb

  9. #34
    Cyburbian Linda_D's avatar
    Registered
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Jamestown, New York
    Posts
    1,681
    Quote Originally posted by Hink View post
    Nothing makes either of them "good". One is less evil. Unless you think that killing machines are good? My argument would be based on your explanation. One can kill less quickly. One requires additional reloading. One doesn't. You tell me which one is good?


    The fake gun discussion is an interesting one. The argument is that you are just asking to get shot if you have a fake gun. I find this argument to be extremely weak and unsupported. Most people break into houses to steal things, not kill people. That argument would strongly support the need for less guns, not more. You are basically saying that our human nature is to shoot people if we have guns in our hands and we feel in danger. Noting that we might not ACTUALLY be in danger, just that we feel in danger.

    Pretty clear reason to have less guns, in fewer peoples hands if you want to make that argument. Which I would imagine isn't the narrative you are trying to sell.
    That's the very best argument for having a dog rather than a gun if you're truly interested in protection. Dogs have better hearing and better sense of smell than any person, and most tend to make it their jobs to protect their territories, including their people. Even a little ankle-biter type like a Yorkie that yips at a strange noise is a deterrent to most burglars, and a real dog, maybe 40-60 pounds of the sporting/working breed persuasion, will deter all the ne'er-do-wells except the ones that have something seriously personal against you.

    That said, I think minimal national standards for gun registration/ownership/background checks are a good idea. It's time to stop pretending that this is 1860 and 90% of us will live and die within 50 miles of the place we were born.

    NYS is moving very quickly to becoming more restrictive. It's likely large ammo clips will become illegal, and that there will be more restrictions on semi-automatic rifles like the AR-14s used for hunting. There may be something in the new law(s), too, to allow permits to be revoked upon the testamony/statement of a mental health care professional.

    One of my bros is all hyper-active about this, and I asked him what will it matter to him if he's got to get a permit for his AR-14? According to him, it's the "principle". Uh-huh. It's just rabble rousing by the NRA gun fetishizers IMO. Just so you know, this brother is a NYS Correction Officer and already has a pistol permit from Erie County, probably the most hand gun-restrictive county in NY outside of the NYC area.

    One more thought: I'm still trying to figure out how these would-be "armed citizen militias" that are supposedly going to "protect" the rest of us wimps from the supposedly evil "gubment" are going to stand up to the high-tech weaponry of the modern military. You don't have to be a military weaponry aficionado to figure out that the army's just gonna track all these good ol' boys to their "hidden" compounds by monitoring their cell phone calls, and then send in drones armed with smart bombs. Watch/read the national news and/or shows like NCIS ... I guess the guys organizing these "armed citizen militias" don't watch much CNN or prime time TV.
    If a free society cannot help the many who are poor, it cannot save the few who are rich. -- John F. Kennedy, January 20, 1961

  10. #35
    OH....IO Hink's avatar
    Registered
    Jan 2005
    Location
    Hang on Sloopy...land
    Posts
    9,748
    Quote Originally posted by michaelskis View post
    So it is not the type or style of the gun but the amount of ammo in the clip. Which as I have said before, is a valid argument. But it also appears that you think that all guns are evil *if one is less than the other. Last I checked, a gun is an inanimate object that is not capable of doing any harm on it's own. It takes someone operating it to do anything at all.
    So you don't place any judgment on inanimate objects? Even if they amplify the evil of the user? We have danced the inanimate object dance before so I will let it go.

    My argument is not that they are evil, but more so that they are not good. There is a difference.

    I am going to now go steal some money to buy porn. You know money is the root of all evil and porn kills bunnies. I mean obviously they don't they are inanimate objects... how silly of me.
    A common mistake people make when trying to design something completely foolproof is to underestimate the ingenuity of complete fools. -Douglas Adams

  11. #36
    Cyburbian ColoGI's avatar
    Registered
    Jul 2009
    Location
    Colo Front Range
    Posts
    2,396
    Quote Originally posted by Linda_D View post

    One more thought: I'm still trying to figure out how these would-be "armed citizen militias" that are supposedly going to "protect" the rest of us wimps from the supposedly evil "gubment" are going to stand up to the high-tech weaponry of the modern military. You don't have to be a military weaponry aficionado to figure out that the army's just gonna track all these good ol' boys to their "hidden" compounds by monitoring their cell phone calls, and then send in drones armed with smart bombs. Watch/read the national news and/or shows like NCIS ... I guess the guys organizing these "armed citizen militias" don't watch much CNN or prime time TV.
    This militia-as-force hokum is either a strawman or an adult child wanting to be a manly, codpieced hee-row. The military, of course, will mow them down like a mower with dandelions in turf.

    What is most telling, however, is how the socially marginal are foaming over any discussion of limits at all. That lets you know that something needs to be done.

    Jon Stewart had a lot to say about this the other day. We may actually be able to have a discussion in civil society about gun control in the near future.
    -------
    Give a man a gun, and he can rob a bank. Give a man a bank, and he can rob the world.

  12. #37
    Cyburbian dw914er's avatar
    Registered
    Oct 2009
    Location
    Southern California
    Posts
    1,120
    Quote Originally posted by michaelskis View post
    So it is not the type or style of the gun but the amount of ammo in the clip. Which as I have said before, is a valid argument. But it also appears that you think that all guns are evil *if one is less than the other. Last I checked, a gun is an inanimate object that is not capable of doing any harm on it's own. It takes someone operating it to do anything at all.
    The inanimate object debate has always been a slight peeve of mine. Sure, it is an inanimate object made from metal, but it's more than just that. It is not a toy or anything that can be used with no regard. It's a tool, and a dangerous one at that. Sure, there are other tools that can also be lethal (knives, bats, cars), but their purpose is defined to a much broader purpose. A knife is used for cooking, or cutting objects. A bat is for our national pasttime. A car is to get from A to B. A gun is to simply destroy something, be it an animal, a clay disk, a paper target, or another person. It's not to say that I am against guns (see prior post, and the fact I was an NRA member (until I got tired of Wayne LaPierre's messages)), but saying it's just an inanimate object undermines the tool.
    And that concludes staff’s presentation...

  13. #38
    Cyburbian ColoGI's avatar
    Registered
    Jul 2009
    Location
    Colo Front Range
    Posts
    2,396
    Quote Originally posted by Hink View post
    My argument is not that they are evil, but more so that they are not good. There is a difference.




    Your task - should you choose to accept it - is to kill 5 people.

    You have the choice between a semi-auto weapon, a knife, and a metal pipe.

    You have 10 seconds to choose,

    This message will self-destruct in 5 seconds.
    -------
    Give a man a gun, and he can rob a bank. Give a man a bank, and he can rob the world.

  14. #39
    Cyburbian imaplanner's avatar
    Registered
    May 2004
    Location
    Snarkville
    Posts
    6,587
    Quote Originally posted by ColoGI View post
    This militia-as-force hokum is either a strawman or an adult child wanting to be a manly, codpieced hee-row. The military, of course, will mow them down like a mower with dandelions in turf.

    What is most telling, however, is how the socially marginal are foaming over any discussion of limits at all. That lets you know that something needs to be done.
    .
    I do agree that responsible and sane people should be allowed to own weapons. IMO however, the gun nuts are neither responsible nor sane, as demonstrated by the nut-job in your link. The people who have fantasies about standing up to the American government and/or killing people who want to take away their guns are precisely the people I am most concerned about.


    Quote Originally posted by dw914er View post
    The inanimate object debate has always been a slight peeve of mine. Sure, it is an inanimate object made from metal, but it's more than just that. It is not a toy or anything that can be used with no regard. It's a tool, and a dangerous one at that. Sure, there are other tools that can also be lethal (knives, bats, cars), but their purpose is defined to a much broader purpose. A knife is used for cooking, or cutting objects. A bat is for our national pasttime. A car is to get from A to B. A gun is to simply destroy something, be it an animal, a clay disk, a paper target, or another person. It's not to say that I am against guns (see prior post, and the fact I was an NRA member (until I got tired of Wayne LaPierre's messages)), but saying it's just an inanimate object undermines the tool.
    Similar lines, a pet-peeve of mine is the response to things like the NY ferry crash or airplane crashes when the gun nuts say - look- ferries kill people too we need to ban ferries! Totally missing the point that when a ferry kills people it is an accident, when a gun kills someone it is an effective use of the tool as designed. The Newtown shooting was not an accident, it was a very effective and successful use of a weapon that was designed exactly for that purpose.
    Children in the back seat can cause accidents - and vice versa.

  15. #40
    OH....IO Hink's avatar
    Registered
    Jan 2005
    Location
    Hang on Sloopy...land
    Posts
    9,748
    Quote Originally posted by ColoGI View post
    You have the choice between a semi-auto weapon, a knife, and a metal pipe.
    Colonel Mustard in the Study with the revolver.
    A common mistake people make when trying to design something completely foolproof is to underestimate the ingenuity of complete fools. -Douglas Adams

  16. #41
    Cyburbian michaelskis's avatar
    Registered
    Apr 2003
    Location
    Someplace between yesterday and tomorrow.
    Posts
    12,308
    Quote Originally posted by Hink View post
    So you don't place any judgment on inanimate objects? Even if they amplify the evil of the user? We have danced the inanimate object dance before so I will let it go.

    My argument is not that they are evil, but more so that they are not good. There is a difference.

    I am going to now go steal some money to buy porn. You know money is the root of all evil and porn kills bunnies. I mean obviously they don't they are inanimate objects... how silly of me.
    There are tons of things that amplify evil. Power, money, time, and association are all examples.

    The LOVE of money is the root of all evil.

    Quote Originally posted by dw914er View post
    The inanimate object debate has always been a slight peeve of mine. Sure, it is an inanimate object made from metal, but it's more than just that. It is not a toy or anything that can be used with no regard. It's a tool, and a dangerous one at that. Sure, there are other tools that can also be lethal (knives, bats, cars), but their purpose is defined to a much broader purpose. A knife is used for cooking, or cutting objects. A bat is for our national pasttime. A car is to get from A to B. A gun is to simply destroy something, be it an animal, a clay disk, a paper target, or another person. It's not to say that I am against guns (see prior post, and the fact I was an NRA member (until I got tired of Wayne LaPierre's messages)), but saying it's just an inanimate object undermines the tool.
    You are correct. It is a tool It is a tool that is to be used for hunting, recreation, and self defense. No legal abiding citizen would buy a gun to go out and shoot people. Just like no abiding citizen would go buy a bat (also intended for recreation) or a knife with the intention on beating someone to death.

    Quote Originally posted by ColoGI View post

    Your task - should you choose to accept it - is to kill 5 people.

    You have the choice between a semi-auto weapon, a knife, and a metal pipe.

    You have 10 seconds to choose,

    This message will self-destruct in 5 seconds.
    None of the above, best way is to make it look like an accident.
    Not my monkey, not my circus. - Old Polish Proverb

  17. #42
    Cyburbian dw914er's avatar
    Registered
    Oct 2009
    Location
    Southern California
    Posts
    1,120
    Quote Originally posted by michaelskis View post
    You are correct. It is a tool It is a tool that is to be used for hunting, recreation, and self defense. No legal abiding citizen would buy a gun to go out and shoot people. Just like no abiding citizen would go buy a bat (also intended for recreation) or a knife with the intention on beating someone to death.
    The point (.)











    you ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------> (.)
    And that concludes staff’s presentation...

  18. #43
    Cyburbian ColoGI's avatar
    Registered
    Jul 2009
    Location
    Colo Front Range
    Posts
    2,396
    Quote Originally posted by michaelskis View post

    None of the above, best way is to make it look like an accident.
    You have to wonder if that pattern is willful, or what. Maybe that is why the intransigence on no changes to gun laws, because here in reality we need changes.
    -------
    Give a man a gun, and he can rob a bank. Give a man a bank, and he can rob the world.

  19. #44
    Corn Burning Fool giff57's avatar
    Registered
    Jul 1998
    Location
    On the Mother River
    Posts
    4,559
    Quote Originally posted by hilldweller View post
    I like the punchline of that joke too- "damn.. what did that guy do to get shot up multiple times"

    In all seriousness though: we need to make guns and ammo much more difficult to get a hold of. I read somewhere recently that Walmart (by far the largest seller of guns and ammo in the U.S) loses a ton of inventory to theft each year because their security practices are a joke. Paying someone $8 an hour to watch over its guns and ammo section isn't right. Walmart also sells the AR-15 which is an assault weapon for all intents and purposes.
    Walmart might have shotgun shells stolen, but all of the guns and ammo except the shotgun ammo are in a locked case. There have been no AR-15s on any shelf in any Walmart since shortly after Sandy Hook. Whether that's from demand or corporate order I don't know.
    “As soon as public service ceases to be the chief business of the citizens, and they would rather serve with their money than with their persons, the State is not far from its fall”
    Jean-Jacques Rousseau

  20. #45
    Cyburbian otterpop's avatar
    Registered
    Jul 2003
    Location
    Down by Dun Ringill
    Posts
    5,897
    Blog entries
    6
    The Second Amendment states: "A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed." My emphasis added.

    The Founding Fathers apparently thought the militia should not only be regulated, but well regulated. Reasonable regulations does not infringe the right of the people to keep and bear arms. So says the Founding Fathers.
    "I am very good at reading women, but I get into trouble for using the Braille method."

    ~ Otterpop ~

  21. #46
    Cyburbian wahday's avatar
    Registered
    May 2005
    Location
    New Town
    Posts
    3,827
    When people, even otherwise sane people, are distraught or upset, angered, frustrated, etc. they are often not thinking clearly or making responsible decisions. Our society is rife with examples of such people making bad decisions who are otherwise considered upstanding and responsible people. If you add the availability of a highly destructive weapon to the mix, there is a recipe for real and serious violence (not just intended killings, but unintended ones, too, even suicide). IMO, its not just about keeping crazy people away from guns. Because "crazy" it not always a permanent state of mind. Lots of people descend into irrational states of thinking when distraught (wife leaves them, got fired and can't find a new job, etc.) so its not as if we can easily identify who might snap and who won't.

    I think this is what people have in mind when they talk about guns being "evil." Consider this study that concluded that holding a gun (even a wii gun) changes peoples' perception by making them think other people are holding a gun, even if its just a shoe. This study relates to police shootings, but I would imagine impacts the thinking of conceal and carry owners as well.

    Or this study that showed people holding a gun appear larger, more muscular and threatening than without, raising questions about the underlying desires that may fuel some people's desires to own and carry one. Or brandish one as a way to resolve a dispute.

    I do believe that possession of a gun can change peoples' perceptions about themselves, the world around them and how they act. Just presenting the potential of having such power to someone changes their understanding of what possible actions and outcomes are at their disposal. If the worst a frustrated and angry person can do is attack people with a pipe, the loss of life is going to be far less than an automatic weapon.

    I'm honestly not sure what the best way forward is now with respect to gun control, but I do believe it needs to be a national standard applied across the entire country. We have to remember that gun violence takes many forms - homicide, suicide, accidental deaths. Much of the public discussion now revolves around the enraged killer, but that's just part of the problem (albeit the problem that has brought this to the fore) The destructive power of these "tools" will never be 100 percent controlled anymore than we can eradicate car accidents. but requiring by law that people wear seatbelts and instituting speed limits and drunk driving checkpoints has certainly prevented a lot of deaths. Instead of looking for the "yeah, but people could still..." scenarios, we should be thinking about legislation that may have the greatest, but perhaps not 100 percent, impact.

    Quote Originally posted by giff57 View post
    Walmart might have shotgun shells stolen, but all of the guns and ammo except the shotgun ammo are in a locked case. There have been no AR-15s on any shelf in any Walmart since shortly after Sandy Hook. Whether that's from demand or corporate order I don't know.
    I haven't been there since Sandy Hook, but Sportsman's Warehouse (which I like because it has many of the same items as REI only cheaper) has ammo stacked on the floor by the pallet right next to the fishing aisle. I didn't look closely enough to see if it was anything more than .22's but I was struck by it just sitting out there in such enormous quantities. I even saw a father grab a box out of his toddler's hand and put it back while I was walking by. Yikes!! Guns are stored behind the counter, though.
    The purpose of life is a life of purpose

  22. #47
    Cyburbian ColoGI's avatar
    Registered
    Jul 2009
    Location
    Colo Front Range
    Posts
    2,396
    Quote Originally posted by otterpop View post
    The Second Amendment states: "A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed." My emphasis added.

    The Founding Fathers apparently thought the militia should not only be regulated, but well regulated. Reasonable regulations does not infringe the right of the people to keep and bear arms. So says the Founding Fathers.
    Quite right. Exactly the same as 'just compensation', although you rarely see complaining about strict construction with 'just compensation'. All the more reason to observe the foamers are out of control and we need to roll back the NRA and some of the laws they paid for.
    -------
    Give a man a gun, and he can rob a bank. Give a man a bank, and he can rob the world.

  23. #48
    Corn Burning Fool giff57's avatar
    Registered
    Jul 1998
    Location
    On the Mother River
    Posts
    4,559
    Quote Originally posted by wahday View post
    I haven't been there since Sandy Hook, but Sportsman's Warehouse (which I like because it has many of the same items as REI only cheaper) has ammo stacked on the floor by the pallet right next to the fishing aisle. I didn't look closely enough to see if it was anything more than .22's but I was struck by it just sitting out there in such enormous quantities. I even saw a father grab a box out of his toddler's hand and put it back while I was walking by. Yikes!! Guns are stored behind the counter, though.
    Sportsman's Warehouse does have all the ammo out in the open.
    “As soon as public service ceases to be the chief business of the citizens, and they would rather serve with their money than with their persons, the State is not far from its fall”
    Jean-Jacques Rousseau

  24. #49
    Cyburbian michaelskis's avatar
    Registered
    Apr 2003
    Location
    Someplace between yesterday and tomorrow.
    Posts
    12,308
    Quote Originally posted by ColoGI View post
    Quite right. Exactly the same as 'just compensation', although you rarely see complaining about strict construction with 'just compensation'. All the more reason to observe the foamers are out of control and we need to roll back the NRA and some of the laws they paid for.
    According to several documents and the Militia Act from that time period, well regulated meant that able bodied males of draft age were required to own a gun in the event that they were called to duty. According to Jefferson's writings, this was based on Sir William Blackstone’s 1768 “Commentaries On The Laws of England," which was further upheld in the Militia Act of 1796.Regulated as applied here was not controlled or limited, but maintained, kept a the ready with adequate provisions.

    Most people at that time already had a hunting rifle so it was not too difficult.

    As I have said before, I think that there still does need to be better control on securing guns without limiting access to those who will use them for proper purposes.

    Quote Originally posted by giff57 View post
    Sportsman's Warehouse does have all the ammo out in the open.
    Don't most places?
    Not my monkey, not my circus. - Old Polish Proverb

  25. #50
    Corn Burning Fool giff57's avatar
    Registered
    Jul 1998
    Location
    On the Mother River
    Posts
    4,559
    Quote Originally posted by giff57 View post
    Sportsman's Warehouse does have all the ammo out in the open.


    Quote Originally posted by michaelskis View post

    Don't most places?
    No, most places have rifle and handgun ammo locked in a case and shotgun out where you can self select it.
    “As soon as public service ceases to be the chief business of the citizens, and they would rather serve with their money than with their persons, the State is not far from its fall”
    Jean-Jacques Rousseau

+ Reply to thread
Page 2 of 6 FirstFirst 1 2 3 ... LastLast

More at Cyburbia

  1. Replies: 36
    Last post: 13 Sep 2013, 9:41 AM
  2. Replies: 10
    Last post: 22 Mar 2013, 11:30 AM
  3. Replies: 10
    Last post: 06 Jan 2007, 9:03 PM
  4. Replies: 0
    Last post: 11 Feb 2005, 11:39 AM