Gun control

Ignatius · Dec 19, 2012

. If you want something more efficient at killing people than a bolt action rifle, shotgun or revolver you have to belong to a shooting range for some period of time (6 months, a year), complete a training program, demonstrate proficiency and pass

I like the idea of certification before fire arm purchase, if for no other reason than you will learn basic firearm safety; going to most ranges today I cringe at some of the things I see people do.

But a huge difference between the sick bastards that do this kind of stuff, and the gun nuts that are good upstanding citizens is we know how to use our guns. Do you really want the other guys to get proficient? The Colorado shooting would have been much worse if that retard knew how to use that weapon.

Zodiac · Dec 19, 2012

Thorne_sl said:
This sensationalism about rate of fire and number of rounds fired is completely misplaced. It does not represent the lethality of a certain type of rifle, it represents the amount of preperation the shooter went through prior to the event. The same results could have been accomplished by an Enfield rifle, which is bolt action with an internal 10 round magazine (non removable) and was put into service in 1895. 115 years ago....

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Charles_Whitman

TBH I think people should be more worried about a dude with a Rem 700 setup in a nest somewhere rather than some clown with a drum magazine that has a 75% chance of failing.

Fuse · Dec 19, 2012

Ignatius_sl said:
I like the idea of certification before fire arm purchase, if for no other reason than you will learn basic firearm safety; going to most ranges today I cringe at some of the things I see people do.

But a huge difference between the sick bastards that do this kind of stuff, and the gun nuts that are good upstanding citizens is we know how to use our guns. Do you really want the other guys to get proficient? The Colorado shooting would have been much worse if that retard knew how to use that weapon.

I would hope that in the 6 months or whatever of range time, training and psych screen that guy would have been denied a certification and reffered to mental health services. From what little I know about that guy, I dont think he would have been capable of completing any sort of legnthy program before he snapped. The guy was pretty clearly looney tunes. Same with the Newton shooter, that look in his eyes alone screams 'should not have access to firearms'.

Uhaul_sl · Dec 19, 2012

ObservantBastard_sl said:
You can, with handguns, put out the same volume of fire as a single assault rifle.

You have to consider caliber lethality (I hope that's a word). For instance, a full metal jacket round is designed to injure as was purposed to penetrate, and pass through the target, and thus wound the enemy at war. The resources it takes for the enemy to deal with a wounded soldier vs. a dead one is much higher and considered a good thing on the battle field. Hollow point bullets are meant to stop and kill the target by spreading apart thus being a more efficient killer.

Now start adding this to caliber and the speed of the bullets, a 9mm FMJ round fired from a pistol is much more survivable then a hollow point .223 round fired from a rifle.

Zodiac · Dec 19, 2012

Uhaul_sl said:
hollow point .223 round fired from a rifle.

wat? 99% of 5.56 and .223 are 2 variations of fmj.

Edit: I should say that 99% of ammo used by most people in ar style weapons are a normally a variation of Lake City M855 and M193.

Fuse · Dec 19, 2012

Thorne_sl said:
If you knew anything about firearms at all you would know that the only thing these statistics indicate is that these peple were prepared. They had multiple magazines/stripper clips/speed loaders ready to go. It takes a significant amount of time to load 500 rounds into magazines and store them in a way to facilitate quick access.

This sensationalism about rate of fire and number of rounds fired is completely misplaced. It does not represent the lethality of a certain type of rifle, it represents the amount of preperation the shooter went through prior to the event. The same results could have been accomplished by an Enfield rifle, which is bolt action with an internal 10 round magazine (non removable) and was put into service in 1895. 115 years ago....

I dont understand this argument. Are you saying that the average shooter could put out the same rate of fire with an enfield and stripper clips as with an AR-15 with 30 round magazines? Isn't the whole reason modern weapons use magazines instead of clips that it is easier to put out a higher rate of sustained fire?

Why dosent the military still use an enfield like platform?

Uhaul_sl · Dec 19, 2012

That's what the Bushmaster rifle used in Newtown was loaded with. From what I was looking up I saw both a FMJ and hollow point. regardless the killing power of a rifle fired bullet is, in most cases, deadlier then a handgun shot.

Gavinmad · Dec 19, 2012

Uhaul_sl said:
You have to consider caliber lethality (I hope that's a word). For instance, a full metal jacket round is designed to injure as was purposed to penetrate, and pass through the target, and thus wound the enemy at war. The resources it takes for the enemy to deal with a wounded soldier vs. a dead one is much higher and considered a good thing on the battle field.

No. Just...no. The shift to full metal jacket rounds was due to Declaration III of the Hague Convention of 1899, not because 'hurr durr wounded soldiers consume more resources than dead ones'. That is easily one of the most retarded myths I've ever heard.

Zombie Thorne_sl · Dec 19, 2012

Fuse_sl said:
It's depressing, but not surpising, to see our politicians go right back for the 'ban scary looking guns' approach. Typical easy fix that dosen't adress the problem.

I am just as frustrated with the people shitting up my facebook with 'Guns dont kill people' as I am with the 'Ban Guns' people. As usual the national conversation is being driven by people on the lunatic fringe.

I would like to see something like the following.

1. Background checks for 100% of gun sales and a recorded transfer of ownership (like the title to a car)
2. If you want something more efficient at killing people than a bolt action rifle, shotgun or revolver you have to belong to a shooting range for some period of time (6 months, a year), complete a training program, demonstrate proficiency and pass a psych evaluation before you are allowed to take the weapon home. Same type of deal for CCW permits.
3. Gun owners have to provide proof of secure storage for thier firearms.
4. Periodic requalification for owned firearms.
5. Gun safety taught in schools starting in elementary school.

And really, most of that is not much different than obtaining a drivers license.

If people want military style weapons, they should go through vetting and training similar to military or law enforcement personnel. I dont even mind full auto ownership (zomg actual assault rifle!) if the vetting and training were stringent enough. I'd probably draw the line at belt fed weapons and explosives, maybe large caliber weapons (.50 and up?)

I imagine most responsible gun owners want only responsible people owning guns, just like everyone else.

So, that's the easy part, the harder, and at least equally important part is revamping mental health care. Don't even know where to get started there, but not having to wait until people commit a crime to get care might be a good start.

I like you.

As a hardcore firearms enthusiast i would accept regulation like this. I do not personally agree with every point, but i can not argue that it would not effectively lower gun violence. Which is what we all want. Right?

It just seems like so many of the anti gun folks dont give a shit about "gun violence", they just want to get rid of guns.

Uhaul_sl · Dec 19, 2012

Gavinrad_sl said:
No. Just...no. The shift to full metal jacket rounds was due to Declaration III of the Hague Convention of 1899, not because 'hurr durr wounded soldiers consume more resources than dead ones'. That is easily one of the most retarded myths I've ever heard.

I stand corrected. That's what I was taught during my handgun class. Maybe the lack of regulation on the curriculum is a good place to start.

So the FMJ is just as good at killing as a hollow point?

Zodiac · Dec 19, 2012

Uhaul_sl said:
So the FMJ is just as good at killing as a hollow point?

Way too many variables such as caliber, round velocity, grain etc to make a sweeping statement - but in general in handguns against unarmored targets *some designs* of hollow points do make a larger wound channel (some bad designed hollow points packup with clothing and end up worse than fmj).

5.56 is designed to fragment and make a large cavity rather than a large channel.

Fuse · Dec 19, 2012

Thorne_sl said:
It just seems like so many of the anti gun folks dont give a shit about "gun violence", they just want to get rid of guns.

Yep. And on the otherside of the coin, so many anti-anti-gun folks seem to think it would be some violation of their constitutional rights and that Joe Stalin is going to rise from the dead to enslave us all if they can't buy AR-15s at 7-11.

Both extremes are so afraid that there is no room for reasonable discussion, which is going to result in stupid shit of one sort or another happening and further polarize people.

Fadaar · Dec 19, 2012

Uhaul_sl said:
That's what the Bushmaster rifle used in Newtown was loaded with. From what I was looking up I saw both a FMJ and hollow point. regardless the killing power of a rifle fired bullet is, in most cases, deadlier then a handgun shot.

Inside of a classroom? Incorrect, even 9mm hollow points (probably the most common round used for conceal carry, no proof just an educated guess) would do WAY more damage to a person than a 5.56mm round when you're talking about extremely short distances like in Newtown. At that short of a range a 5.56mm round would probably go right through whatever it hit, doing little tissue damage comparatively.

Karloff_sl · Dec 19, 2012

I'd never handled a gun of any type much less fired one till I moved to Alaska in the late 90's. After I got married to woman who hunts she suggested I learn how to handle a gun. I took 4 week class in firearm safety, which included handguns, rifles and shotguns. I ended up buying a steyr handgun and tlol an additional 1 week refresher class on handguns. That coupled with the background checks seemed like common sense to me.

I don't hunt or shoot for pleasure, it was mostly to learn about using a gun for self defense, which for me meant when we camped and went fishing I'd have some idea what I was doing if the local wildlife got rough.

Personally if someone comes in my house I'm going for the double barreled 12 gauge.

UnobservantBastard_sl · Dec 19, 2012

Uhaul_sl said:
You have to consider caliber lethality (I hope that's a word). For instance, a full metal jacket round is designed to injure as was purposed to penetrate, and pass through the target, and thus wound the enemy at war. The resources it takes for the enemy to deal with a wounded soldier vs. a dead one is much higher and considered a good thing on the battle field. Hollow point bullets are meant to stop and kill the target by spreading apart thus being a more efficient killer.

Now start adding this to caliber and the speed of the bullets, a 9mm FMJ round fired from a pistol is much more survivable then a hollow point .223 round fired from a rifle.

No you don't. Remember we're talking about unarmed and unarmored civilians in close quarters, not trained soldiers in the field. .223 has effective range and penetration over handgun rounds, and neither of those considerations matter in these shootings.

Zombie Thorne_sl · Dec 19, 2012

Fuse_sl said:
I dont understand this argument. Are you saying that the average shooter could put out the same rate of fire with an enfield and stripper clips as with an AR-15 with 30 round magazines? Isn't the whole reason modern weapons use magazines instead of clips that it is easier to put out a higher rate of sustained fire?

Why dosent the military still use an enfield like platform?

This goes to Tuco too, im not going to multiquote a ton of crap like Mik.

I was kinda cheating by using the Enfield in my example, but in no way am i overstating its capabilities. It was designed from the ground up to increase the firepower of a single soldier. The bolt is designed to cycle as fast as possible with minimum movement/manipulation and the trigger can be depressed while the bolt is cycled. It takes about 1/4 the movement to cycle an Enfield bolt as it does a more traditional Mauser type action (most bolt guns today are based on the Mauser action). With an afternoons worth of practice and training you can put 50 rounds accurately downrange in well under 60 seconds consistently.

And yes, the AR platform is faster, but not overwhelmingly so. I just point this out because so many people do not realize that there are so many platforms out there that would be just as effective in these situations.

Big Phoenix · Dec 19, 2012

Uhaul_sl said:
You have to consider caliber lethality (I hope that's a word). For instance, a full metal jacket round is designed to injure as was purposed to penetrate, and pass through the target, and thus wound the enemy at war. The resources it takes for the enemy to deal with a wounded soldier vs. a dead one is much higher and considered a good thing on the battle field. Hollow point bullets are meant to stop and kill the target by spreading apart thus being a more efficient killer.

Now start adding this to caliber and the speed of the bullets, a 9mm FMJ round fired from a pistol is much more survivable then a hollow point .223 round fired from a rifle.

Uhh rifle caliber hollow points are pretty shitty and not even comparable to handgun caliber hollow points.

And say you implement your awesome idea for gun control, what do you do in a situation which just happened when the guns where stolen more or less?

Uhaul_sl · Dec 19, 2012

I don't think I offered an idea for gun control. I guess it was leaning toward less semi auto rifles in the house, but I certainly don't have a clear cut solution. I thought that was why we had these threads.

I liked Fuse's idea quite a bit.

SAIDIN_sl · Dec 19, 2012

AIDS, car accidents, medical malpractice, acts of God (tree falling on you, lightning strikes,locust swarm ?) and heart disease kill more people every year than criminals with guns would in 100. Take away the guns and that shit is likely to change. Police, politicians, government officials and feminist cunts are likely to be targets by people who have just one more reason to fight back.

The Civil War wasn't too long ago. A drop in the bucket compared to the span of human history. Give people a reason to fight and you're going to fucking have it. I'm not a bad ass by any means. But do you think a fucking cop could take me out after having been in the Airborne Infantry for 4 years and 2 deployments ? Rights will be stripped step by step to avoid uprisings.

Tuco · Dec 19, 2012

SAIDIN_sl said:
AIDS, car accidents, medical malpractice, acts of God (tree falling on you, lightning strikes,locust swarm ?) and heart disease kill more people every year than criminals with guns would in 100. Take away the guns and that shit is likely to change. Police, politicians, government officials and feminist cunts are likely to be targets by people who have just one more reason to fight back.

The Civil War wasn't too long ago. A drop in the bucket compared to the span of human history. Give people a reason to fight and you're going to fucking have it. I'm not a bad ass by any means. But do you think a fucking cop could take me out after having been in the Airborne Infantry for 4 years and 2 deployments ? Rights will be stripped step by step to avoid uprisings.

First no one is taking away your guns. Second I think anyone with a firearm has a good chance of taking you out. Including a child.

Gun control

#thePewPewLife

Lord Nagafen Raider

Silver Knight of the Realm

shitlord

Lord Nagafen Raider

Silver Knight of the Realm

shitlord

Mr. Poopybutthole

shitlord

shitlord

Lord Nagafen Raider

Silver Knight of the Realm

That guy

shitlord

shitlord

shitlord

Pronouns: zie/zhem/zer

shitlord

shitlord

I got Tuco'd!