United States & Gun Control discussion.

Devildoc said:
Whether or not this is a good idea or if it'll work, here's the problem I see: How much do you pay to vote? Aside from a permit fee, how much do you pay to peaceably assemble? How much do you pay to use any of the other Constitutional rights? I don't think it's a bad idea, but I appreciate both sides.
Click to expand...

I agree with you, and throughout this thread, going a few years back, I've always stated that I thought all laws restricting ownership and carry were unconstitutional. And I do believe they are. But I've shifted my position, unrestricted ownership and carrying is never going to happen. My meet them in the middle, is what I lined out. Funny thing is, @TLDR20 wrote about AZ CCW permit being stupid easy to get, he is right, I have my out of state through them because it's stupid easy and cheaper than TX. However, I would deal with what I outlined in order to have a national carry permit.

The end of the day, I'm always going to own guns and be armed. Who decides to make me a criminal because of it is the one infringing on my rights. However, if I can jump through a few hoops and make the process acceptable for us both and still be armed, path of least resistance and all that jazz.

On personal level, I don't think it's unreasonable to prove I'm safe and proficient in both the use of my weapon and my knowledge of the laws.
 
"Bearing arms" is a bit vague. What qualifies...owning or concealed carry? Your ability to accidentally kill my family is almost nil if your untrained ass keeps your gun at home.

I'm very pro-2A, but 100% onboard with demonstrating proficiency before you leave your home carrying a gun.
 
Devildoc said:
Whether or not this is a good idea or if it'll work, here's the problem I see: How much do you pay to vote? Aside from a permit fee, how much do you pay to peaceably assemble? How much do you pay to use any of the other Constitutional rights? I don't think it's a bad idea, but I appreciate both sides.
Click to expand...
This is exactly the debate I was talking about earlier. If you're "pure" 2A- you carry whenever the constitution already lays that out, right? I'm preventing tyranny, I am not joining a club.

Even those that are very pro 2A- @Diamondback 2/2 and @Ocoka One - think there should be some "reasonable restrictions/common sense gun laws" put in place, background checks and courses and such. For the record I agree with that logic and won't mind continuing to abide by those laws. I can legally carry in 35 states (90% sure here) as it is.

So I am wondering how the administration will square that circle, because when they stop attacking the press and presenting "alternative facts" and decide to tackle the gun issues, someone that voted for Pres Trump is going to be upset by exactly what "very pro 2nd amendment" means to the POTUS.

It'll be interesting.
 
Yeah, it would be nice to know that every swinging dick packing legal heat had some decent training and knew how to use the damn thing, and when not to use it.
 
Reading these articles had watching these videos has me happy I qualify and possess my LEOSA. I don't have to worry about 90% of state bullshit, though I was in the fortunate position of being able to shoot and train next to guys like @amlove21... even after I so eloquently put my foot in my mouth.
 
ThunderHorse said:
And this happened today: Maryland's Assault Weapons Ban Upheld by US Appeals Court

As I understand it...the homicide rate has continued to climb in Baltimore since the passage of this law.
Here's some current statistics.
Baltimore MD crime rates and statistics - NeighborhoodScout
Click to expand...

So as you understand it, the reason homicide rates have continued to climb in Baltimore is because of the MD's Assault Weapons Ban? A lot of things also have continued to climb since the passage of the law, like the number of iPhone 6 owners.
 
Single Malt said:
So as you understand it, the reason homicide rates have continued to climb in Baltimore is because of the MD's Assault Weapons Ban? A lot of things also have continued to climb since the passage of the law, like the number of iPhone 6 owners.
Click to expand...
Nope. Just said that since the passage of the Law, Homicide rates have climbed, also violent crime rates have climbed. My correlation would be that the passage of that law did nothing to change the trend of criminal activity in Baltimore and Maryland in general.
 
ThunderHorse said:
Nope. Just said that since the passage of the Law, Homicide rates have climbed, also violent crime rates have climbed. My correlation would be that the passage of that law did nothing to change the trend of criminal activity in Baltimore and Maryland in general.
Click to expand...

Do you think most gun crime is committed with assault weapons?

I don't get your point?
 
TLDR20 said:
Do you think most gun crime is committed with assault weapons?

I don't get your point?
Click to expand...

Not attempting to understand anything cav oriented because it just makes my head hurt, but the simple fact is that the vast majority of bans by states are not against weapons used in offense or defense of the individual... but of weapons used for those purposes most often against "the state"...
 
Considering one of the major rationales behind banning "assault" weapons is to decrease crime, an increase in crime while they are banned helps to further disprove this fallacy. Even the FBI's own incomplete numbers show a massively disproportionate count between crimes committed with handguns vs rifles. An AWB is an emotional bandaid, not something that contributes to an increase in public safety.
 
AWB come out of a desire to prevent mass shootings. Their ban doesn't lower crime rates nor do they prevent the few and far in between mass shootings that happen using a Assault Rifle. AW are the weapon of choice for psychos for the same reason they are that of the military, they are light, accurate, have a lot of fire power, and most importantly are easier to successfully operate than hand guns (success factor being eliminating targets). Their ban doesn't stop psychos, just makes them pick another tool.
 
TLDR20 said:
Do you think most gun crime is committed with assault weapons?

I don't get your point?
Click to expand...
I'm not being obtuse and y'all know it. The point. AWB in Maryland has done nothing to curb the homicide or violent crime rate.

The statistics if we all chose to deep dive rather than being dicks just to be dicks are out there, you also know them off the top too. The vast majority of crimes involving firearms overwhelmingly involve pistols, not rifles. So, what's the purpose of an AWB which only stops law-abiding citizens from arming themselves? It seems the purpose of AWB is just that, stop law-abiding citizens from being able to purchase firearms at the same grade of local LEOs and the military. Which, this plays into the fears of conspiracy theorists that say tyrannical government is just around the corner.
 
ThunderHorse said:
I'm not being obtuse and y'all know it. The point. AWB in Maryland has done nothing to curb the homicide or violent crime rate.

The statistics if we all chose to deep dive rather than being dicks just to be dicks are out there, you also know them off the top too. The vast majority of crimes involving firearms overwhelmingly involve pistols, not rifles. So, what's the purpose of an AWB which only stops law-abiding citizens from arming themselves? It seems the purpose of AWB is just that, stop law-abiding citizens from being able to purchase firearms at the same grade of local LEOs and the military. Which, this plays into the fears of conspiracy theorists that say tyrannical government is just around the corner.
Click to expand...

So why didn't you make your whole point in the first place, instead of your usual passive aggressive bullshit? You made the point that the ban didn't contribute to a lower gun crime rate. The obvious conclusion to draw from that is that you think it should have. Jesus Christ dude.
 
Why are we using the made-for-TV, sound-bite-ready term assault weapons? Adopting a term made up to serve a public relations purpose by the anti-gunners does not serve our interests and lets them control the narrative.
 

Similar threads

Devildoc
House discussing citizen-only voting bill...
Replies
19
Views
431
The Quartermaster
The Quartermaster
Marauder06
1911 Questions--Barrel and Slide Swap
Replies
14
Views
830
Diamondback 2/2
Diamondback 2/2
T
Group 35 Series Training Opportunities
Replies
1
Views
157
Marauder06
Marauder06
Devildoc
Western NC/Hurricane Helene
2 3
Replies
54
Views
1K
DA SWO
DA SWO
R.Caerbannog
Distortion of History
2
Replies
32
Views
684
R.Caerbannog
R.Caerbannog
Back
Top