guns

soberups

Pees in the brown Koolaid
It wasn't about crime prevention, it used the illusion of crime prevention to protect market share for existing gov't connected gun contractors. The so-called legislation had no effect on preventing assault weapons from being on the market but rather it cleared the market from upstart competition. Only if you held patent exclusivity to the new technology, those weapons with the new cosmetic changes, were you still in the game.

Whether you agree or not is up to you but I've always said follow the money so that action is up to you.


There were no patents and there was no "new technology" to protect during the Assault Weapons Ban. The market didnt get "cleared" from any upstart competition.

Take for example the civilian AK-47 pattern rifle that has been available for decades in a semi automatic-only version. Once the AWB was enacted, these guns were still legal to import as long as the magazine well was narrowed to accept only single-stack 10 rd magazines instead of the wider 30-rounders, and either the bayonet lug or flash suppressor was ground off. Other than that, the "post ban" guns were identical in form and function to the "pre ban" versions.

Same deal with American and European guns. "Pre-ban" Glocks, Rugers, Smith&Wessons and SIGs were identical to "post-ban" Glocks, Rugers, Smith&Wessons and SIGs except for the spacers in the magazines of the post-ban guns that limited their capacity to 10 rounds.

The AWB was basically a bunch of anti-gun politicians sitting down and "making a statement" against crime by trying to outlaw hicap mags and "scary looking" cosmetic features on guns. They never actually "banned" anything. The entire thing was a farce.
 

soberups

Pees in the brown Koolaid
When I am considering finding a new place to live I will consider many different factors (taxes, amenities, recreational/cultural activities) but the ability to carry a concealed weapon is the furthest thing from my mind.

For me it is not about the gun itself, its about whether or not I want to live under a controlling, oppressive, overbearing "nanny state" government that has no respect at all for the Constitutional rights of its citizens. I would have to say that Illinois is probably the worst in that regard, with California and Massachussets coming in a very close second.
 

wkmac

Well-Known Member
There were no patents and there was no "new technology" to protect during the Assault Weapons Ban. The market didnt get "cleared" from any upstart competition.

Take for example the civilian AK-47 pattern rifle that has been available for decades in a semi automatic-only version. Once the AWB was enacted, these guns were still legal to import as long as the magazine well was narrowed to accept only single-stack 10 rd magazines instead of the wider 30-rounders, and either the bayonet lug or flash suppressor was ground off. Other than that, the "post ban" guns were identical in form and function to the "pre ban" versions.

Same deal with American and European guns. "Pre-ban" Glocks, Rugers, Smith&Wessons and SIGs were identical to "post-ban" Glocks, Rugers, Smith&Wessons and SIGs except for the spacers in the magazines of the post-ban guns that limited their capacity to 10 rounds.

The AWB was basically a bunch of anti-gun politicians sitting down and "making a statement" against crime by trying to outlaw hicap mags and "scary looking" cosmetic features on guns. They never actually "banned" anything. The entire thing was a farce.

Sober,

If you are comfortable with that then by means believe it. But if you start digging, following money, who backed who and a whole other picture begins to emerge. I'm very comfortable if you are so knock yourself out!
 

soberups

Pees in the brown Koolaid
Sober,

If you are comfortable with that then by means believe it. But if you start digging, following money, who backed who and a whole other picture begins to emerge. I'm very comfortable if you are so knock yourself out!

Do you know anything at all about guns? Have you ever bought one? Did you buy any during the time the AWB was in effect?

I do, and I did. I know what the facts are, and I dont need to dig or "follow money". All I have to do is get up, go over to my gun safe, and look at what is in there in order to know the difference between a pre ban and a post ban gun. If you have different facts, please share them instead of merely being "comfortable" with a few references to some vague conspiracy theory. Which particular brand and type of gun benefitted from this so-called "patent protection" that you keep referencing?
 

wkmac

Well-Known Member
Do you know anything at all about guns? Have you ever bought one? Did you buy any during the time the AWB was in effect?

I do, and I did. I know what the facts are, and I dont need to dig or "follow money". All I have to do is get up, go over to my gun safe, and look at what is in there in order to know the difference between a pre ban and a post ban gun. If you have different facts, please share them instead of merely being "comfortable" with a few references to some vague conspiracy theory. Which particular brand and type of gun benefitted from this so-called "patent protection" that you keep referencing?

I don't know, what's a gun?
 

klein

Für Meno :)
I don't know, what's a gun?

I couldn't imagine a USA with strict gun restrictions.
Like how much worse would it get already being the murder country of the industrialized nations.

Without guns, it would be worse then any middle eastern country, right ?
 

dilligaf

IN VINO VERITAS
Because intelligent people who rationally analyze the situation rather than hysterically reacting to it know what the FACTS are.

The FACTS....are that a disturbed person who makes an intentional and PREMEDITATED decision to go shoot up a school and murder people is going to find a way to obtain a gun no matter WHAT sort of warm and fuzzy "feel good" laws are put in place about storage, trigger locks etc.

There are an estimated 300 million guns owned in this country. They arent going to go away. If a criminal...or a mentally disturbed teenager....wants one badly enough, he will get one. So rather than wasting time advocating for yet MORE worthless laws and rules and restrictions, we as a society ought to be asking WHY these kids are making the choices that they are making in the first place.

If the "easy availability" of guns is to blame for school shootings, why werent they happening in the 1940's or 50's when there were FAR FEWER gun laws and restrictions in place than there are today? In the 40's and 50's there was NO SUCH THING as "background checks" or "waiting periods". You could buy guns at any hardware store. You could buy them at Sears or JC Pennys or even the local flea market.

My father was a member of his high school's RIFLE TEAM in 1958. He and his teammates brought their .22 target rifles to school ON THE BUS with them on match days and left them in the closet in the principals office until after school when the bus would then take them and their rifles to the local National Guard armory where the matches were held. School shootings? UNHEARD OF.

When I went to high school in the early 80's in rural Oregon, it was quite common during hunting season to see deer rifles in the gun racks of pickups that were driven to school by students. We would go hunting in the evenings after school. I had my own deer rifle at the age of 15, as did many of my friends. Guns were easily available. School shootings? UNHEARD OF.


It is a waste of time to ask HOW. HOW is the easy part. What we NEED to ask as a society.... is WHY.


Peace
You have a point here Sober. When I was in HS (grad 1980) it was acceptable and a common occurrence to see rifles in rifle racks in pickup trucks, at the HS and at the Jr High. It wasn't just hunting season either, although more common during hunting season. It was also common to see teachers smoking nearly anywhere, including in the teachers break rooms, but it was frowned upon for students to smoke. There was never a shooting at either of my schools.
 

moreluck

golden ticket member
I couldn't imagine a USA with strict gun restrictions.
Like how much worse would it get already being the murder country of the industrialized nations.

Without guns, it would be worse then any middle eastern country, right ?
You've been told before...D.C. has some of the strictest gun laws and I sure wouldn't walk after dark down an alley anywhere in that city.
 

The Other Side

Well-Known Troll
Troll
You have a point here Sober. When I was in HS (grad 1980) it was acceptable and a common occurrence to see rifles in rifle racks in pickup trucks, at the HS and at the Jr High. It wasn't just hunting season either, although more common during hunting season. It was also common to see teachers smoking nearly anywhere, including in the teachers break rooms, but it was frowned upon for students to smoke. There was never a shooting at either of my schools.

The real difference between 1950 and 2012 is the level of accepted violence in this country. The psychology of violence that plagues our country is only perpetuated by the gun and the ease of using it. GUNS are everywhere. Television is littered with shows where the gun not only causes problems but is the solution as well.

We have to ask ourselves how since 1950, school kids have obtained the idea that taking a family owned gun to school solves problems. Whats even worse, is that school kids are accepting death as a part of the action after using the gun.

When did our kids become little "jihadist" willing to sacrifice their lives as well as taking others?

The GUN will always be the easiest choice to make for our children who want to strike at other children. Irresponsible parents or family members who believe having guns under pillows only re-inforces that a gun is necessary to solve problems. A child does not have the ability to rationalize out all aspects of his actions and a parent who makes a concerted effort to worship his guns only teaches his child to make rash decisions.

In this case, this troubled kid (white) lived with his grandparents because his parents (domestic discourse) have both been arrested and charged with domestic violence over the years (alcohol involved). This kid was removed from the high school he shot up and placed into a continuation school for troubled youth. He took his uncles gun and knife to the school that were left out in the open and unsecured,

To me, this is the kind of family that does not need guns in the home. I dont care how responsible the uncle could have been, if you have a troubled kid in your home, then your guns need to be put on EBAY and SOLD.

If you cant raise a kid to be a normal functioning human being, then you already failed as a responsible adult and the last thing you need is guns laying around.

Its clear that the trend of school shootings continues to increase and get worse everytime. Its only a matter of time before kids start manufacturing BOMBS instead of taking daddys gun to school and causing larger tragedies.

I hope there is a day when guns are restricted and regulated heavily and parents sued for any and all actions where there children take a gun from home and walk out the door with it.

Peace.

TOS
 

moreluck

golden ticket member
Your first paragraph mentions TV showing guns....now add the video game crap and you won't need 5000 words to show where the youth is today.
You don't learn too much violence by playing kick the can!
 

The Other Side

Well-Known Troll
Troll
Your first paragraph mentions TV showing guns....now add the video game crap and you won't need 5000 words to show where the youth is today.
You don't learn too much violence by playing kick the can!


Remarkably, I agree with you. Violence sells, gun violence makes large profits in the gaming industry. Marketing violence to our children only raises the expectations that some children will act out that violence on a school mate or friend.

Our country is sold on violence as a rule of thumb and not an extreme. Why is america full of gun toting murderers? Because they can. If you add up the millions of people killed in this country by guns alone, it would dwarf all other countries death rates combined.

Time for a change in mindsets. We need to bring down the level of acceptable violence in this country and not promote it by providing more guns on the streets.

Peace.

TOS
 

over9five

Moderator
Staff member
Remarkably, I agree with you. Violence sells, gun violence makes large profits in the gaming industry. Marketing violence to our children only raises the expectations that some children will act out that violence on a school mate or friend.

Our country is sold on violence as a rule of thumb and not an extreme. Why is america full of gun toting murderers? Because they can. If you add up the millions of people killed in this country by guns alone, it would dwarf all other countries death rates combined.

Time for a change in mindsets. We need to bring down the level of acceptable violence in this country and not promote it by providing more guns on the streets.

Peace.

TOS
We need to convince your liberal Hollywood friends who make millions from movies PROMOTING gun violence to stop making those movies.
Movies and video games like that make our kids not value human life.
 

The Other Side

Well-Known Troll
Troll
We need to convince your liberal Hollywood friends who make millions from movies PROMOTING gun violence to stop making those movies.
Movies and video games like that make our kids not value human life.

Agreed. But money talks and Bull.... well you know what walks...

Peace.

TOS
 

over9five

Moderator
Staff member
............Parents should be held as criminals if their children carry a family firearm to a school whether they use it or not.

Peace.

TOS
I have not looked at that bill, but I do agree with TOSs statement above.

What does happen to these people who allow their child to get a hold of their gun? I would imagine if they are not criminally charged, they could still be civilly charged.

Anyone have any information on what eventually happened to parents in past cases?
 

soberups

Pees in the brown Koolaid
I hope they pass it. Parents should be held as criminals if their children carry a family firearm to a school whether they use it or not.

Peace.

TOS


The bill has nothing to do with children getting hold of a firearm. It is an attempt to cash in on all the hysteria surrounding the recent school shooting and pass a warm and fuzzy "feel good" law that would ban people with Concealed Handgun Permits from carrying on school property. It wont make anybody any safer, and it wont prevent any school shootings, since no school shooting has ever been committed by someone who took the training class, got the FBI/NCIS backround check, got fingerprinted, and paid the $145 fee in order to get a PERMIT to legally carry. The only thing the bill will do....is to supply the would-be mass murderer with a conveniently located and concentrated group of helpless victims who are now legally guranteed to be unarmed.

Every single school shooting has taken place in a "gun free zone". At some point we need to stop deluding ourselves, get real, and give up on the pathetic fantasy of the "gun free zone". How many more kids need to die before we get a clue?
 

soberups

Pees in the brown Koolaid
If we are going to hold parents criminally responsible if their children get hold of a family-owned gun and wind up killing someone with it....will we also hold parents criminally responsible if their kids get into the liquor cabinet, get drunk, and wind up killing someone in the family car? What if a disturbed teenager gets on the internet and learns how to make explosives using common household ingredients? Will the parents be criminally liable for that? Looks like a slippery slope to me......
 
Top