Let's have a candid conversation about guns.

[Aerows]

This discussion thread was locked as off-topic by Omaha Steve (a host of the General Discussion forum).

There are some serious measures we can take to drag gun culture out of the assholery that pervades it, and the assholery that kills people "accidentally".

You have a handgun. Do you:

A: Carry it into your purse in the grocery store and your 2 year old son kills you.

B: Carry it to a wedding, along with family and friends until they are are running for their lives

C: Now are wary of going into http://www.washingtonpost.com/investigations/lafayette-shooter-able-to-purchase-gun-despite-judge-ordering-him-to-mental-hospital/2015/07/27/3e28ce6a-6ad5-4f89-ae9b-ffa8b2a495dc_story.html]movie theaters

D: Church isn't safe places of worship

How about we leave handguns restricted and if we want home protection and the ability to hunt we leave it to long guns?

[napi21]

1. Yes I gave a hand gun. No I don't carry it anymore.

I bought it years ago after I was faced with an AH baring himself to me while I was walking across a bridge to where I parked. I walked that same route twice every day to & from work. I bought a snub nosed 38 and carried it everywhere, all the time (without a permit). I did that for several months, and finally realized that I could never shoot someone. I knew I'd try talking my way out of trouble. Carrying a loaded gun only meant that, in a bad situation, I'd end up shot with my own gun! I still have the gun, but haven't carried for years.

I think all people who say they carry to protect themselves need to think very hard about how they would react to a problem situation. CIULD YOU REALLY KILL SOMEBODY FACE TO FACE?

[Aerows]

7. Never pull a weapon

That you do not intend and have the ability to use.

That is what I was always taught.

[Recursion]

2. Handguns are what's killing Americans. That's where we need to focus.

If we had spent half the energy on handguns over the past 20 years that we spent on trying to change the grip shape of rifles, we'd be in a much better place.

Handguns are used in about 90% of gun murders and essentially all gun suicides (which outnumber homicides 2 to 1). They are (relatively) cheap, easy to conceal, and easy to transport. Their ammunition is cheap.

Furthermore, the argument from the 2nd Amendment is much weaker for handguns than for rifles: handguns are not generally issued to soldiers, and have little use in a battle situation. The 9th Amendment probably gives some amount of cover to them (and SCOTUS said in Heller that an outright ban along the lines of DC or Chicago is not permissible), but they are already more strictly regulated than long guns and can be still more strictly regulated than that.

One idea I really like is to require licensure. This is not registration (I'd like registration, but that's going nowhere anytime soon), but a certification that one is legally allowed to own and operate a handgun. It would function like the current background check system, but it would be pre-done (with some kind of online database for revocation, like driver's licenses). For that matter, it could just be an endorsement on an existing driver's license, like a motorcycle endorsement.

[Aerows]

10. Well said

and good ideas.

[snooper2]

3. limit the ammo load so it can just about kill a squirrel

then we are all good

[mwrguy]

4. How about we melt them all down and find a less destructive hobby?

[Aerows]

11. In rural areas, guns are necessary

and by necessary, I mean a wild pig or an alligator in your back yard.

You don't get a handgun for those situations, either, because that will just piss them off.

That is why I made the distinction of long guns vs. hand guns.

Long guns should *NEVER* be restricted, especially in the sticks.

[mwrguy]

32. "Long guns should *NEVER* be restricted"

Adam Lanza agrees.

[hack89]

53. CT had an AWB and registration

they have tough restrictions on long guns.

[HereSince1628]

35. Mileage varies on your named pests, even there, probably not necessary for everyone

to have a firearm.

Never had wild pigs or Alligators on the farm in WI, I suppose wild pigs are possible though ground -hogs- in the building foundations are common.

Excluding disease agents, the occasional skunk or raccoon in the hen house were the big threats to life on the farm. Civilization has pretty much eliminated as a danger the wild carnivores.

My uncle who taught me DIY butchering, used a revolver to put down a steer before butchering. I found my hand maul did a reasonably good job for stunning, and was effective on both cattle and sheep. Of course, a spring-loaded stunning bolt is great if you can justify buying a specialty tool.

Big loud dogs were generally sufficient as alarms and repellants for intruders aka the uninvited.

[SheilaT]

36. I've lived in rural areas.

Never saw a wild pig or alligator, although admittedly didn't live where they'd be showing up.

Never felt a gun was necessary, and I feel that "In rural areas guns are necessary" is a totally ludicrous argument. One could just as well say "In urban areas guns are necessary" because of high crime.

Guns are never necessary.

[the band leader]

23. How about we deal in reality instead of fantasy?

[daleanime]

26. If we did that....

we would never make any progress on any thing, oh, right, you're good with that.

[the band leader]

28. Actually, if we did that, we might actually make some progress

but as long as some of us remain stuck in fantasy land where all the firearms in America get melted down, nothing is going to get done with regard to gun violence.

The constitution is clear and the supreme court has ruled, Law abiding Americans have the right to keep and bear arms and self defense is a legitimate reason for them to keep and bear arms. The states can not ban handguns. In your lifetime, you will never see firearms melted down in America, nor will you see a ban on handguns. You tried to ban "assault rifles" and ended up adding millions of them to the Great American Arsenal. Figure it out.

[daleanime]

29. The constitution is clear.....

you "well-regulated militia" you.

There will be no progress at all on this not because of 'dreams', but because a minority of the population absolutely refuses to allow any. And the rest of us have given up on even talking to you.

[the band leader]

31. "Being necessary to the security of a free state"

you like to talk about well regulated militias but you never want to talk about what "Being necessary to the security of a free state" means.
Maybe we should talk about that?

[daleanime]

33. Why brother?

You won't be willing to do any thing.

[the band leader]

34. run along then

[logosoco]

40. Moving about the state and not knowing who has a gun and who could

easily "lose it" and start shooting, or having it even "accidentally" fall out of their pocket/purse or enabling someone else to get a hold of it...
These things don't really make me feel like my security in a free state is happening.

[Nuclear Unicorn]

46. USC Title 10, Section 311

[hunter]

42. In my family fools and their guns are soon parted.

My wife and I are both of strongly matriarchal families. My family U.S.A. wild west, my wife's family Mexican Irish.

In this tradition the women of the family take guns away from irresponsible boys and men. I've seen my mom take guns away from boys and men she didn't even know.

That's my reality.

I think that any love or fascination with handguns should immediately disqualify a person from owning one.

Most handgun owners, including cops, are not competent to carry them.

[A HERETIC I AM]

5. Answers "C" & "D" are written with poor syntax.

The following makes no sense whatsoever.

You have a handgun. Do you: C: Now are wary of going into movie theaters
You have a handgun. Do you: D: Church isn't safe places of worship

Not to mention your entire premise is loaded, pardon the pun.
So the answer to your title line is....

No, let's not. Shall we?

[Aerows]

8. Thanks for the grammar observation

I will *NEVER* in a million years ban long guns, because they are the most useful for hunting and home defense.

You come to my home to break in? You won't be staring a handgun in the face. You will be peering down a shotgun.

So let's get back to the point.

You, obviously, have a reason to walk around 24 hours a day carrying a handgun. And have, not surprisingly, prevented a single mass murder. (I'm being silly here obviously I don't think YOU walk around 24 hours a day carrying)

[A HERETIC I AM]

13. No need to walk around with a gun.

I just whack any threatening person with my prodigious accoutrement.

I have taken to wearing kilts for easy access.

[Aerows]

14. Well that's a whole bunch

of information I didn't need to know.

Glad you are at piece (sp).

[A HERETIC I AM]

15. I thought it would head off any speculation.

As that seems to be a common theme with so many on this board.

No need to carry a gun.

I also own a Corvette, but that's a different thread.

[Aerows]

17. Now you are just

trolling

[whatthehey]

41. I only have one functional hand. Don't I have the right of self-defense

just like you with your shotgun? How am I supposed to effectively use a long gun?

[Big Vincenz]

6. I have a handgun.

I don't do any of those things, because I'm not an idiot.

[Aerows]

9. Most people that own handguns

aren't idiots.

As a cogent point, though, if you are actually a person qualified to shoot a rifle or a shotgun, you were also taught etiquette, compliance with hunting laws, and when to not wave it around like a moron.

Many handgun owners were taught this, too. Unfortunately, not enough of them have been up to and including our police officers.

[hunter]

43. I disagree.

[Aerows]

12. Also, I don't think this is gungeon material

After all of the killing that has been done by guns lately, it's worth having a conversation that isn't stowed away where average DUer's won't go have a conversation.

Lock it if I am in the wrong.

[underahedgerow]

16. I fully support total and absolute gun control on a federal -- not state -- level. Heck I would

totally support banning all guns, everywhere, even in law enforcement. Heck, especially in law enforcement. It sure works in other countries.

Some countries allow guns for hunting purposes only, and I think that's a step in the right direction, although I object to animals being killed for 'sport'. That can descend, however, into the argument that certain wildlife, due to man's interference, have much fewer natural enemies and therefore must be culled (deer). I would like restrictions and regulations on the culling, and prefer it to be humanely; not by bow and arrow.

There are always exceptions; the family that chooses to live off the grid etc. The people that claim they 'hunt for food' can't possibly defend this position when every village, town and city has a super market. No one is forced to eat a deer when they can go to the store, for less money than it costs to 'go hunting' and get an 'animal based meal'.

This is an important video

[beevul]

21. Fake store, fake customers.

Pure propaganda.

[underahedgerow]

24. Yes, it was a social experiment and documentary, no one is pretending otherwise. How do you feel

about the statement that it made?

[aikoaiko]

45. It's not even a social experiment. They recruited actors

[Nuclear Unicorn]

47. "How do you feel about the statement that is made?"

I feel the statement it made was a complete fabrication designed to emotionally manipulate the gullible.

[underahedgerow]

49. To manipulate the gullible to do what, exactly?

Think twice about the horrifying and devastating impact that guns have on human lives?

Was there some negative impact I missed there?

Oh geez, did it maybe cut down on the gun manufacturer profits? Hey Remington profits soared by more than 50% the year after Sandy Hook. They profit by about 200 million bucks a year, lining the pockets of Big Business off the corpses of kids, wives, mothers, fathers, husbands, sisters and brothers.

[Nuclear Unicorn]

52. Lots of things have a horrifying and devastating impact on human life, more so than guns.

And their accessibility to society is jealously guarded even though it means their producers make profits.

Self-defense is a human right. That some abuse that right does not abrogate the rights of others.

[Adrahil]

38. What about historic weapons?

Although I own modern guns too, bay far, most of my guns are historic. Many of them aren't even legally "firearms" having been produced before 1899, but some are WWI/II era. I hate for us to go the way of the UK and destroy these historic artifacts.

[underahedgerow]

44. I think it's important to preserve artifacts, so how about they be registered and permitted on

that type of basis - as historic artifacts? I think that would be quite all right, don't you? It could work that people voluntarily register them and get a permit for a small fee, and if they're sold, the sale or transfer of ownership has to be registered. Heck we have to do it for dogs, should do it for guns too.

[Adrahil]

48. I don't particularly have an objection....

... though the old guns, the pre-1899 guns, aren't even legally guns. No background checks, registration or anything. You can even order them through the mail and have them shipped directly to you (usually necessary, since most are relatively rare). I don't think they are used in crimes very much.

[underahedgerow]

54. In the UK no one with a criminal record is allowed to even own an antique firearm.

There was a big increase in crooks buying, selling and using antique firearms in attempts to get around the older laws. The guy who slaughtered the soldier Rigby in the street a couple years ago had a 90 year old 9mm dutch gun in his possession when he was arrested. It wasn't loaded though.

[the band leader]

19. The incidence of concealed carry handguns has never been higher and yet

the incidence of violent crime is the lowest it has been in decades.


You have a handgun. Do you:....D:Church isn't safe places of worship..How about we leave handguns restricted and if we want home protection and the ability to hunt we leave it to long guns?.

Adkisson used a shotgun, not a handgun btw.

[Aerows]

20. That's your take away

on this post, and this problem?

In a church somebody used a shotgun. In one church massacre.

Oh, you are right, let's just ignore the hell out of the other incidents that involved handguns mowing people down.

[the band leader]

22. Like I said, The incidence of concealed carry handguns has never been higher and yet

the incidence of violent crime has decreased to the lowest level in decades.

That should have been your take away.

Oh, you are right, let's just ignore the hell out of the other incidents that involved handguns mowing people down
perhaps we need more prisons to house the growing crimninal element perpetrating the vast majority of these crimes. Banning handguns certainly won't stop the carnage (as if there was a snowball's chance in hell of that happening anyways). Heller and McDonald you know.

[chervilant]

27. A spurious relationship?

Perhaps a better observation:

https://img.washingtonpost.com/wp-apps/imrs.php?src=&w=480

[the band leader]

30. The correlation is undeniable

?

More guns in the hands of law abiding citizens has not resulted in more homicide. The complete opposite has, in fact, happened. The more armed we have become, the less likely to be murdered we have become. The gun violence problem that we currently have is primarily secondary to a growing gang/drug problem. More prisons will solve the problem. Fantasies about melting down all the guns will not.

[SheilaT]

37. Ahh, yes. The favorite argument of

gun apologists: gun homicides are going down, so there's absolutely nothing wrong with gun ownership as we know it in this country.

I'm sure that's a wonderful consolation to the mothers of all those little kids at Sandy Hook, the movie-goers in Colorado and Louisiana, church-goers in Charleston. Just think how many more gun homicides there might have been? Aren't we just so fortunate that they're declining!

I just hope they decline to zero before one of my children gets killed. Or your kid. Or your neighbor's kid. Or your cousin. Or, well you get the idea here.

[Adrahil]

39. Yes, it would be better if no one ever died of an accident, or murder.

But guess what? we do not live a zero-risk culture.

We continue to allow the production and purchase of alcohol DESPITE the fact that it serves no purpose other than pleasure, and it is responsible for more than TWICE the deaths of firearms.

We continue to allow the production and purchase of tobacco products DESPITE the fact that they are responsible for more than TEN TIMES the number of deaths related to firearms. In fact, deaths related to second-hand smoke alone amount to more than ALL deaths related to firearms, and more than FOUR TIMES the number of firearms-related murders.

We make risk decisions all the time in our culture about how much death we are willing to accept.

[Nuclear Unicorn]

51. Switzerland's gun ownership rate is comparable to the US. They even issue actual military rifles.

What gives?

And Japan may have lower gun deaths but it has 19 times the suicide rate of the US.

[Warren Stupidity]

25. Which was pretty much the situation before the gun-obsessed started demanding a new right to carry

handguns everywhere, and a new right to do so with those guns concealed. Fuck them and the awful society they have created here.

[aikoaiko]

50. So much to talk about!

But I really don't understand what this means:

How about we leave handguns restricted and if we want home protection and the ability to hunt we leave it to long guns?

Leaving carrying restrictions as they are ok with me.



About long guns for home or hunting:

Does this means we can lift statewide bans on certain rifles?

Does this mean we can lift federal import bans?

Does this mean we can allow newly manufactured select/auto firearms into the NFA registry?

So much to talk about!

[Omaha Steve]

55. Locking after a review by forum hosts

Please post in a gun group. Thanks for understanding.

OS

Statement of Purpose

Discuss politics, issues, and current events. Posts about Israel/Palestine, religion, guns, showbiz, or sports are restricted in this forum. Posts about the Democratic primaries, conspiracy theories and disruptive meta-discussion are forbidden. For more information, click here.