In general, what kind of gun law do we want?

Status
Not open for further replies.
mke0039 said:
Who was the batshit crazy that shot up the Virginia Tech campus...killing I forget how many.

That dude was diagnosed as batshit, yet he still legally bought his Glock.

How crazy is that?

If we don't pitch in to help stop that bullshit, we are cutting our own throats, and if we actively INHIBIT efforts to stop that bullshit the blowback will be nasty.
Click to expand...

Why is it crazy?

If you are not institutionalized, you have the right to bear firearms.

If you are institutionalized, then released, you still have the right to bear firearms.

If you are not crazy enough to be thrown into an institution, you have your rights. No second class citizens, thank you.
 
IvIax said:
223 years ago, people don't have RPG or anti tank weapons.
Click to expand...

Two hundred and twenty-three years ago the people were armed commensurately with, in fact arguably better than, government. Technological advancements in arms had taken place throughout history, were known to be underway then, were expected to continue. As those developments progress, the Second Amendment is intended to ensure that the people continue to be armed commensurately with the government that serves us.
 
Last edited:
mke0039 said:
Who was the batshit crazy that shot up the Virginia Tech campus...killing I forget how many.
That dude was diagnosed as batshit, yet he still legally bought his Glock.
How crazy is that?
If we don't pitch in to help stop that bullshit, we are cutting our own throats, and if we actively INHIBIT efforts to stop that bullshit the blowback will be nasty.
Click to expand...

And when you "agree to abide by their rules" and agree to allow them to DECIDE who is "suitable or unsuitable", you end up with....
The CommonPuke of LiberChusetts, ruled by wingnuts who allow small-dik as*holes who were bullied in junior and high school to become GESTAPO and simply DO WHAT THEY TELL YOU TO DO...OR ELSE!!

THAT is what we have here in MA, and THAT is what they want to see happen in all 50 states. A utopia of commie pablum.
 
Guys, this is Massachusetts and we all know that as much as we dislike it, and we do dislike it, we are going to have gun laws. I for one wish that at I had at least had a say in what laws would and wouldn't have become law when the whole thing was work in progress. I'm hoping that you all feel this way as well. Remember, wether we will or will not have laws is not the issue here.
 
M60 said:
I think what IvIax meant to say was: If there were no existing gun laws and we were about to get some, if you were allowed input, what laws would you be ok with .


IvIax, is this what you meant to say?
Click to expand...


yup, thought that was pretty obvious in the first post.
 
mke0039 said:
Surely you don't mean not to put ANY law between the Adam Lanzas, Jared Loughners, James Holmes, or any batshit crazy de jour and firearms?

You want to see 2A go the way of 18A? Make it easy for the crazy's to kill rooms full of kids, movie theaters full of...whatever....and God forbid...politicians.

Of course we need good laws regarding guns!

Is that really rocket science?

The OP asked for our opinion on what laws would actually work and be enforceable, a very fair question and one ESPECIALLY relevant to the folks on this forum.
Click to expand...

Yes. You read my mind/post right.
 
Whats your idea of a law that "works"? Murder is illegal, yet it still happens. Is that law "working"?

If you think about it, laws really only offer a deterrent. But you need to put your money where your mouth is, so to speak, for that deterrent to work. Plea bargains, time off for good behavior, early release to relieve overcrowding, etc, has made any punishment a joke for the majority of people who are likely to commit crimes. It is only a deterrent to people who wouldnt do the crime in the first place. What good is that?

Laws are like locks, they only have an effect on honest people.
 
Last edited:
joshk1025 said:
Diagnosed as batshit means the same to me as "found guilty of future crimes", I just don't want to give government that power over anyone. Judge people on their crimes, not their potential. Do you have more than just one hunting gun? You don't need to have more, you are probably a threat that should be disarmed.
Click to expand...

I am in a profession that requires periodic medical exams.

If I get diagnosed psychotic, poof! My licenses disappear along with my power to make a living!

Nobody would raise an eyebrow either, nor should they.

Why should firearm ownership be any different.

I could care less about criminals, plug them or put them in jail, preferably both; at least they are predictable and if you pay attention, you see them coming.

It is the crazies that kill classrooms full of little kids or movie theaters full of people, or college campuses full of students that I am afraid of.
 
mke0039 said:
Who was the batshit crazy that shot up the Virginia Tech campus...killing I forget how many.

That dude was diagnosed as batshit, yet he still legally bought his Glock.

How crazy is that?

If we don't pitch in to help stop that bullshit, we are cutting our own throats, and if we actively INHIBIT efforts to stop that bullshit the blowback will be nasty.
Click to expand...

First, read on this:

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

You can be diagnosed as a mental patient for

ICD-10
The WHO's International Statistical Classification of Diseases and Related Health Problems, tenth edition (ICD-10), has a diagnosis called dissocial personality disorder (F60.2):


It is characterized by at least 3 of the following:
Callous unconcern for the feelings of others;
Gross and persistent attitude of irresponsibility and disregard for social norms, rules, and obligations;
Incapacity to maintain enduring relationships, though having no difficulty in establishing them;
Very low tolerance to frustration and a low threshold for discharge of aggression, including violence;
Incapacity to experience guilt or to profit from experience, particularly punishment;
Marked readiness to blame others or to offer plausible rationalizations for the behavior that has brought the person into conflict with society.
Click to expand...

Can you see a moonbat doc arguing that gun ownership meets the three bold criteria? If not, you are blind.

Doctors will diagnose you with whatever it takes to not get sued, and if a doctor gets sued for NOT diagnosing a patient that later committed a crime, the rush to diagnose everybody will be on.

Second:

The bold part in your quote... which part of it does not apply to requiring men to have a license before having sex in order to prevent rape? A license before speaking publicly to prevent hurt feelings? etc....
 
IMO our whole justice system needs an enema. Not just the gun laws but with all sorts of others as well. The only kind of laws I would like to see put in place are laws that directly effect those that commit crime. I'm sick of the pre-crime crap, and the whole concept disgusts me, as these laws often create what are essentially victimless crimes more often than they catch legit bad guys.

People should be able to live their lives absolutely the way they want as long as their actions do not bring direct harm on to others. That said we also do need to do our part in order to help form something concerning mental illness while at the same time doing our best to preserve our rights.. We can't hold the torch after events like Sandy Hook screaming that "its a mental health problem, not a gun problem", only to vigorously oppose any changes to mental health reform while offering no alternatives in return.

If I had to pick some form of laws, specifically targeting Gang Violence which are the majority of gun deaths in this country, I'd like to see laws where if one uses a firearm in the commencement of a crime (a legit crime) then said criminal instantly gets 25+ years in prison. No negotiation, No back door deals, If found guilty then you're ****ed, and that's that. I seem to recall 1920's NY doing something similar with the Tommy Gun when the local gangs were running amuck, where the penalty of using one in a crime was simply not anywhere near worth the resulting punishment.
 
Last edited:
mke0039 said:
I am in a profession that requires periodic medical exams.

If I get diagnosed psychotic, poof! My licenses disappear along with my power to make a living!

Nobody would raise an eyebrow either, nor should they.

Why should firearm ownership be any different.

I could care less about criminals, plug them or put them in jail, preferably both; at least they are predictable and if you pay attention, you see them coming.

It is the crazies that kill classrooms full of little kids or movie theaters full of people, or college campuses full of students that I am afraid of.
Click to expand...

Yup, I don't agree with those licenses either. I know, my beliefs that government should just leave people alone are ridiculous.
 
IvIax said:
We have sworn too much about the current gun law in our nation. What exactly the gun law we want it to be?

It gets complicated if we start thinking, isn't it?

I say get rid of any form of firearm roster list or mag ban...
Click to expand...
See, this is what happens when they legalize weed... [rofl2]

No.

It isn't complicated.

It only gets complicated when you succumb to the fearmongering about what "might happen" or the bigotry of what "a man with a gun" might do.

If you step back and take in the reality of the human condition, your likelihood of being systematically murdered by the state is roughly 6,000x the probability of being murdered by a "man with a gun".

The truth is that probability is not evenly distributed. If you don't involve yourself in the drug trade or gangs, your likelihood of being murdered by an individual drops again.

So, no. It is very simple. All of the BS spewed about how someone knows best what gun I should have is just that. BS. An excuse to disarm the populous by the ruling elite so they can get back to telling us what to do as they did for most of the prior millennium.
 
Also, look at how many people get killed every year, and then look at who kills them. The most likely person to kill you is yourself. The next most likely to kill you is one of your close friends or family members. The next most likely to kill you are criminals. Mass killings are very very few of the homicides in this country, so if you are going to be afraid of something, choose something more logical to be scared of than a mass murderer.
 
mke0039 said:
I am in a profession that requires periodic medical exams.

If I get diagnosed psychotic, poof! My licenses disappear along with my power to make a living!

Nobody would raise an eyebrow either, nor should they.

Why should firearm ownership be any different.

I could care less about criminals, plug them or put them in jail, preferably both; at least they are predictable and if you pay attention, you see them coming.

It is the crazies that kill classrooms full of little kids or movie theaters full of people, or college campuses full of students that I am afraid of.
Click to expand...

More likely to get struck by lightning than killed in a random mass shooting. In 1926, someone in Michigan blew up a school. He killed 38 kids and injured a lot more. Evil exists, but the chances of someone actually getting killed in an random shooting is very rare. The difference nowadays is there is 24/7 media, and whenever an event happens, it gets blasted all over. Phone, internet, tv, radio, etc. It just seems like more of the events are happening because of the constant media.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bath_School_disaster
 
cekim said:
...So, no. It is very simple. All of the BS spewed about how someone knows best what gun I should have is just that. BS. An excuse to disarm the populous by the ruling elite so they can get back to telling us what to do as they did for most of the prior millennium.
Click to expand...

This. I believe this 110%.
 
IvIax said:
if there is no limit, a normal person can own an RPG...I can think a few reasons that I would not be alive because of a few crazy people.
Click to expand...

The same reason you wouldn't get shot with an RPG is the same reason you wouldn't get shot with a Barrett(IMO a wee bit more precise). They are expensive, take a lot of training/skill patience to operate properly, and a nutjob is most likely going to try an easier way to deal with whatever they're nutty about. Like running you over with his car(more precise than an RPG and a proven killing device.

I'm with Milktree, you're free or you should be in prison.
 
joshk1025 said:
Also, look at how many people get killed every year, and then look at who kills them. The most likely person to kill you is yourself. The next most likely to kill you is one of your close friends or family members. The next most likely to kill you are criminals. Mass killings are very very few of the homicides in this country, so if you are going to be afraid of something, choose something more logical to be scared of than a mass murderer.
Click to expand...

BTW, if schools weren't Gun Free Zones, and instead batshit crazies knew they'd get stopped with minimal carnage, you'd see more school bus hijikings driving off bridges, because it'd be a more effective way to achieve the murderer's goals.
 
IvIax said:
if there is no limit, a normal person can own an RPG...I can think a few reasons that I would not be alive because of a few crazy people.
Click to expand...
Boy, you took a big swig from the nonsense bottle tonight huh?

We have cars careening down the road... gas lines under the street... our drinking water just sitting there in a lake....food on the shelf at the store...

All of these things pose HUGE risks to large numbers of people "what if"TM some crazy dude decides to do something (remember the drug tampering of the 80s?)

Step away from the "fear itself"TM and welcome to adulthood.

The universe and nature are trying to kill you at all times and at some point in all our lives, they will succeed.

In the mean time we can be free and enjoy it as much as possible, or we can submit and hope against hope that someone else will look out for us (which they have no reason to do, nor any historical evidence that they will).
 
Last edited:
warwickben said:
Dude you could own cannons . Mother ****ing cannons.
You shoot one ball at a mass of people do you know how many get messed up. Or you fill it with shrapnel .
Do you know if you where on a boat your more Likely to die from the splinters going through your body .

You can all ready get rpg type stuff if your willing to pay and it's legal . It's not that hard to get a explosives license . I have a few family members with them because of work .

Let alone just learning basics chemistry you can make some pretty deadly shit just out of house hold items .

The idea of banning any thing from privet ownership is just a form of the government controlling you.
Click to expand...

You can still own cannons in Mass with no license, so long as it is muzzle loaded and not breach loaded. They're actually quite fun.
 
Mrs. Flare is making Christmas cookies.

I said, "I just read a whole thread."

"What's the name of it?"

"In general, what kind of gun law do we want"

"How about none," she said.

"And you don't even read Northeastshooters."

"
 
BattleSnail said:
Most gun owners other than fudds don't support any violations of our civil rights. Why should I have to have a background check to buy a gun but voters don't have to get background checks, or bloggers, or news anchors/reporters? I don't support any laws limiting my most basic human rights. Sorry but you're not going to find a lot of support for your statism here.
Click to expand...

maybe a background check before posting WTF questions on NES?
 
cekim said:
The universe and nature are trying to kill you at all times and at some point in all our lives, they will succeed.

In the mean time we can be free and enjoy it as much as possible, or we can submit and hope against hope that someone else will look out for us (which they have no reason to do, nor any historical evidence that they will).
Click to expand...

Nor is there much historical evidence that they're very good at "looking out for us", on those occasions when they DO try.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

What kind of Beretta 1934 is this?
Replies
3
Views
177
67ray
67ray
What not to do with your new gun.
2
Replies
42
Views
1K
Coyote33
Coyote33
Want to know who has a monopoly of force in America?
2 3 4
Replies
111
Views
2K
fencer
fencer
What is “law enforcement technology?
Replies
14
Views
441
dcmdon
dcmdon
What's acceptable Secure Storage for gun safes, guns and ammo in MA when in moving transition for an extended period of time?
Replies
24
Views
465
houdini
houdini
Back
Top Bottom