| Author | Thread |
|
|
06/24/2012 06:03:32 PM · #401 |
Originally posted by Spork99:
Originally posted by RayEthier:
Originally posted by Spork99:
Originally posted by vawendy:
I would like to here the stastics of how many people are accidentally killed by firearms, vs how many killed with firearms stolen from legal owners, vs how many killed in self defence. |
Why? What would the point be? |
It might provide some indication that firearms can be the cause and not necessarily the solution to a problem.
Ray |
How can an inanimate object cause a problem?
A person who uses a gun can cause problems, so can a guy driving like an asshole, or a guy with a couple of bricks in a sack. Do you blame cars for traffic deaths or bricks for someone getting their head caved in?
If you want to look at a statistic that means something, a better analysis might be one that compares the murder rate of people who decide not to defend themselves vs those who do. Unfortunately, the FBI statistics that everyone likes to cite evidently grossly underreport incidents of killings done in self defense. Most estimates say that the FBI figures represent 1/3 or less of the justifiable killings. |
You seem to miss the point that the primary objective of a firearm is to put holes into things, which is not what cars or bricks are designed for. No one buys a gun to tack things to the walls or to simply decorate the inside of a gun safe do they?
I have owned a variety of firearms and can tell you for a fact that I either took it out for shooting practice or because I meant to do some serious damage to someone.
I have no problems with long guns that one would use in a hunt, but truly cannot comprehend the mentality where people want to own and use guns that are best suited for military applications.
Just another man's view.
Ray |
|
|
|
06/25/2012 02:18:45 PM · #402 |
Originally posted by sjhuls:
The Mountain behind our house is burned black, but there is plenty more dry vegetation to catch fire and it doesn't take much, ours was started by target shooters. The governor said that he hopes people will use more common sense when target shooting but there is no way to ban shooting even temporarily. |
|
|
|
|
06/26/2012 07:21:39 AM · #403 |
Originally posted by RayEthier:
I have no problems with long guns that one would use in a hunt, but truly cannot comprehend the mentality where people want to own and use guns that are best suited for military applications.
Just another man's view.
Ray |
Military applications? As in modern or all? Modern military weapons typically are fully automatic or at least select fire. These are quite restricted and have been since 1968. Antique military arms like muskets may have an appeal to those who like antiques or even students of History. Semi-automatic military rifles are functionally no different than any other semi-automatic non-military rifle - except cosmetically. Not sure myself what the draw is, but each has their own definition of "beauty". |
|
|
|
06/26/2012 09:56:29 PM · #404 |
Originally posted by Flash:
Modern military weapons typically are fully automatic or at least select fire. These are quite restricted and have been since 1968. |
Again......this is an example of something that's pretty ridiculous......and it's right there in the store at Cabela's.
Mossberg Tactical Shotgun
PLEASE explain the purpose of this weapon.....you didn't have anything to say about this the last time I posted it.
There is *NO* legitimate justification for this weapon for a typical citizen. |
|
|
|
06/27/2012 08:54:14 AM · #405 |
Originally posted by NikonJeb:
Originally posted by Flash:
Modern military weapons typically are fully automatic or at least select fire. These are quite restricted and have been since 1968. |
Again......this is an example of something that's pretty ridiculous......and it's right there in the store at Cabela's.
Mossberg Tactical Shotgun
PLEASE explain the purpose of this weapon.....you didn't have anything to say about this the last time I posted it.
There is *NO* legitimate justification for this weapon for a typical citizen. |
It is cosmetics. You are hyped about cosmetics. The mechanical mechanism is the same as any other Mossberg or Remington or Winchester etc. States restrict the number of rounds permitted while hunting various game, regardless of the magazine capacity. Synthetic stocks are generally more weather resistant for use when wet weather Duck hunting or winter snow conditions found when Rabbit or Deer hunting. 12 ga is a very versatile round and can be purchased in anything from bird shot to slugs. Some States restrict rifle use during Deer season and thus shotguns are an alternative.
Do you have the same complaint about those who add racing stripes to their automobiles? Are they now "race cars"?
eta: many shotguns have replaceable barrels - meaning a 28" bird barrel can be removed and replaced with a 24" slug barrel which can be removed and replaced with an 18.5" riot barrel for close quarter work. Multiple uses - same shotgun.
Message edited by author 2012-06-27 09:00:42. |
|
|
|
06/27/2012 09:20:18 AM · #406 |
| If you lived in a street in a cold place and nearly all your neighbors had double or triple glazing and they were saving vast amounts on fuel bills, would you still go on and on about the benefits of being able to break the window in case of a fire? How would that sound to those that were paying less? utterly ridiculous I should imagine. |
|
|
|
06/27/2012 09:58:23 AM · #407 |
Originally posted by NikonJeb:
Originally posted by Flash:
Modern military weapons typically are fully automatic or at least select fire. These are quite restricted and have been since 1968. |
Again......this is an example of something that's pretty ridiculous......and it's right there in the store at Cabela's.
Mossberg Tactical Shotgun
PLEASE explain the purpose of this weapon.....you didn't have anything to say about this the last time I posted it.
There is *NO* legitimate justification for this weapon for a typical citizen. |
Perfect example of the hysteria that surrounded the Clinton Era Assault weapons ban. Purely cosmetics. Military "assault" rifles have been restricted since 1968. No change. Primarily cosmetic differences were addressed with the ban. One reason it was repealed. It was ignorance to begin with and finally some folks saw through the hype. For you to state "There is *NO* legitimate justification for this weapon for a typical citizen. " displays a lack of understanding. Who exactly is a "typical" citizen? A small business owner? One like the Korean business owners in 1992 in LA? Would a typical citizen perhaps have been a person of color in the south - say - 75 or 50 or 30 years ago? Not sure who the typical citizen is?
Message edited by author 2012-06-27 10:01:36. |
|
|
|
06/27/2012 11:23:18 AM · #408 |
Originally posted by BrennanOB:
The more dangerous the tool, the more people who are killed and injured by it's misuse, the more reasonable regulating that tool becomes. Cars are killer number one, so we licence drivers, force them to insure their vehicles, inspect them annually and have a whole section of law dedicated to making driving safer. |
A license is not required to buy a car - and "Cars are killer number one". You can buy as many as you want. If you want to drive it on public roads, then a license after certifed training is required. If you want to carry a handgun in the public domain, then a license (except Vermont) is required after certified training. Some states do not allow public carry regardless of training. I beileve approximately 30 or so states do have some license process. |
|
|
|
06/27/2012 11:25:42 AM · #409 |
Originally posted by BrennanOB:
Do scissors cut cloth? Do hammers hit nails? It seems to me they do. They are tools, and they do a specific job. |
Do cars speed? It seems they do. It is the car or the driver? |
|
|
|
06/27/2012 11:35:37 AM · #410 |
Originally posted by Flash:
Modern military weapons typically are fully automatic or at least select fire. These are quite restricted and have been since 1968. |
Originally posted by NikonJeb:
Again......this is an example of something that's pretty ridiculous......and it's right there in the store at Cabela's.
Mossberg Tactical Shotgun
PLEASE explain the purpose of this weapon.....you didn't have anything to say about this the last time I posted it.
There is *NO* legitimate justification for this weapon for a typical citizen. |
Originally posted by Flash:
Perfect example of the hysteria that surrounded the Clinton Era Assault weapons ban. Purely cosmetics. Military "assault" rifles have been restricted since 1968. No change. Primarily cosmetic differences were addressed with the ban. One reason it was repealed. It was ignorance to begin with and finally some folks saw through the hype. For you to state "There is *NO* legitimate justification for this weapon for a typical citizen. " displays a lack of understanding. Who exactly is a "typical" citizen? A small business owner? One like the Korean business owners in 1992 in LA? Would a typical citizen perhaps have been a person of color in the south - say - 75 or 50 or 30 years ago? Not sure who the typical citizen is? |
The only one remotely approaching hysterical in this thread seems to be you, Flash.
Please tell me what it is that I don't understand that I'd think a tactical shotgun isn't a particularly relevant item for a typical citizen?
You don't actually address this question.
I understand that it is a legal item to buy, but I would very much like for you to explain the purpose for this weapon if it's not to, ultimately, kill someone should a situation deteriorate.
|
|
|
|
06/27/2012 11:42:38 AM · #411 |
I have in fact taken a Mossberg tactical shotgun owned by a friend of mine skeet shooting on a number of occasions.
It's kind of a piece of crap, compared to a Benelli. It doesn't have very high tolerances, and is obviously not machined as well as some other brands. It's clunky. However, I don't see how it's ridiculous at all. It's a black shotgun with some rails on it for attaching accessories, accessories that don't particularly alter the performance of the firearm. It still shoots the same shells from the same barrel. Flash is correct, you're getting worked up about aesthetics.
It's as if you think the ability to attach a macro flash bracket or CF card holder will fundamentally change the nature of a camera. You're basically complaining about surface details and attachment points, not what it does, which is almost indistinguishable from a pared-down, camouflage-colored 'hunting' shotgun. And personally, I would much rather use a black 'tactical' style shotgun because I don't like killing animals and would rather look like a gadget nerd than a hunter. Also, black goes with everything.
NJ, Given that I have found a legitimate use for this particular firearm myself, repeatedly and to great satisfaction, are you willing to soften your statement?
|
|
|
|
06/27/2012 12:04:25 PM · #412 |
Originally posted by Mousie:
However, I don't see how it's ridiculous at all. It's a black shotgun with some rails on it for attaching accessories, accessories that don't particularly alter the performance of the firearm. It still shoots the same shells from the same barrel. Flash is correct, you're getting worked up about aesthetics. |
I hear what you're saying, and to a point I agree with you. But I don't think it's really the aesthetics that Jeb and I are railing against. No, it's more the MARKETING aspect of it, and the culture that underlies that marketing.
Are YOU willing to meet ME halfway on that, Mousie? After all, "tactical shotgun" implies only ONE thing: "I'm a weapon designed for use in battles that take place in confined, urban environments."
R.
|
|
|
|
06/27/2012 12:28:45 PM · #413 |
Originally posted by Mousie:
I have in fact taken a Mossberg tactical shotgun owned by a friend of mine skeet shooting on a number of occasions.
It's kind of a piece of crap, compared to a Benelli. It doesn't have very high tolerances, and is obviously not machined as well as some other brands. It's clunky. However, I don't see how it's ridiculous at all. It's a black shotgun with some rails on it for attaching accessories, accessories that don't particularly alter the performance of the firearm. It still shoots the same shells from the same barrel. Flash is correct, you're getting worked up about aesthetics.
It's as if you think the ability to attach a macro flash bracket or CF card holder will fundamentally change the nature of a camera. You're basically complaining about surface details and attachment points, not what it does, which is almost indistinguishable from a pared-down, camouflage-colored 'hunting' shotgun. And personally, I would much rather use a black 'tactical' style shotgun because I don't like killing animals and would rather look like a gadget nerd than a hunter. Also, black goes with everything.
NJ, Given that I have found a legitimate use for this particular firearm myself, repeatedly and to great satisfaction, are you willing to soften your statement? |
Let me clarify that I said "not relevant" as opposed to ridiculous...I have plenty of ways that I spend my money, and have, over the years that go screaming past relevant, and into ridiculous. One man's relevant can easily be another's ridiculous-(See:camera bag of any of us!)
But that's just it......I *know* and fully admit that my camera thing borders on an obsession.
Again.....I'm not worked up at all. I just want to be clear here......a tactical shotgun, as I understand it, is not being marketed as a skeet-shooting piece. Am I correct in that assumption? And if it's a piece of crap, then it's only function would be that "close-in work", right?
I think there's too much extremism in both camps. It's unrealistic to make guns illegal and try to take them away.....it would never happen. But.....by the same token, if that "Tactical Shotgun" is a POS for anything but a riot gun, then it shouldn't be available on the open market.
I also believe that pretty much any sport shooting evolved out of a desire to utilize weapons in a non-lethal manner. Somehow, I don't thing that the Wyatt Earp, the Dalton boys, or General Custer did much skeet shooting, although I would bet that Buffalo Bill's Wild West Show was about the first that weapons were used for something other than killing.
I'm not opposed to guns in the slightest, I just think we ought to be a heck of a lot more careful about how they're monitored and distributed.
It amazes the heck out of me that the NRA, and sporting groups aren't leading the way when it comes to firearm safety & training.
|
|
|
|
06/27/2012 12:57:34 PM · #414 |
Originally posted by NikonJeb:
It amazes the heck out of me that the NRA, and sporting groups aren't leading the way when it comes to firearm safety & training. |
I think they do.
It's registration, licensing, and limitations on numbers and types of weaponry that they object to. |
|
|
|
06/27/2012 01:01:31 PM · #415 |
Originally posted by NikonJeb:
Again......this is an example of something that's pretty ridiculous......and it's right there in the store at Cabela's. |
Originally posted by NikonJeb:
Let me clarify that I said "not relevant" as opposed to ridiculous... |
Given that I literally cut and pasted the word ridiculous from your post since I hate typing it, I'm pretty sure you said ridiculous.
Should I take this inconsistency as evidence that you're indeed just a touch worked up? Just maybe?
And 'piece of crap compared to a Benelli' is relative... a Toyota is a piece of crap compared to a Lexus, yet a Toyota is still entirely adequate for driving. You are trying to twist my words... the Mossberg is obviously functional for skeet shooting, because I just explained how I had repeatedly used it to much satisfaction for that very purpose. You getting 'only functional for close-in work' out of that is disingenuous.
Again, you're complaining about aesthetics and marketing not function. Who the hell cares how it's marketed, what color they paint it, or what uses they highlight for a certain advertising campaign. They're just working different demographics. A shotgun is still a tube that blasts little chunks of metal at targets. I honestly can't believe you're using shotguns to make this point... one of the weapons with the least variation between 'tactical' and 'sport'. I mean, why not pick something more sensible to argue your point, like composite pistols?
And the idea that cheaper, lower-quality firearms should be banned when their expensive, higher quality counterparts that do precisely the same things, but better should remain available... I just don't get it at all. Isn't the problem (from your point of view) the things they can be used for, not the ease of which you can do those things?
Message edited by author 2012-06-27 13:02:30. |
|
|
|
06/27/2012 01:16:05 PM · #416 |
Originally posted by Mousie:
And the idea that cheaper, lower-quality firearms should be banned when their expensive, higher quality counterparts that do precisely the same things, but better should remain available... I just don't get it at all. Isn't the problem (from your point of view) the things they can be used for, not the ease of which you can do those things? |
I believe the argument for this is to reduce availablity among the criminal class -- few bank robbers can afford a Rolls as their getaway car ... and yes, I recognize this restricts availability to all low-income folks. But "cheap" handguns ("Saturday-night specials") are pretty much useless for either hunting or target shooting, leaving close-in homicide as their primary function ... |
|
|
|
06/27/2012 02:15:46 PM · #417 |
Even in Pennsylvania where some claim that firearms are traded and sold at will without any restrictions whatever, the following applies to handguns including Saturday Night Specials...
"the Pennsylvania State Police keep a "sales database" of all handguns purchased within the stateâ€Â¦Pennsylvania’s database of handgun sales is not prohibited by state lawâ€Â¦Private sales of handguns must go through a licensed dealer."
All handgun sales (including private sales)inside Pennsylvania state lines must go through a dealer, must be kept in a State Police database and this data base is not prohibited by State law. Further Pennsylvania State law requires a lock to be supplied by the seller at the time of sale.
Message edited by author 2012-06-27 14:19:39. |
|
|
|
06/27/2012 02:23:14 PM · #418 |
Originally posted by GeneralE:
Originally posted by NikonJeb:
It amazes the heck out of me that the NRA, and sporting groups aren't leading the way when it comes to firearm safety & training. |
I think they do. |
They have comprehensive training programs and even one designed specifically for younger audiences called "Eddie the Eagle" which emphasizes safety and notifying an adult if a classmate or playmate has access to a firearm. Unfortunately many schools (due to politics) will not allow the Eddie the Eagle program to be shared.
Eddie the Eagle safety program
Message edited by author 2012-06-27 14:28:07. |
|
|
|
06/27/2012 02:27:03 PM · #419 |
Originally posted by Flash:
Even in Pennsylvania where some claim that firearms are traded and sold at will without any restrictions whatever, the following applies to handguns including Saturday Night Specials...
"the Pennsylvania State Police keep a "sales database" of all handguns purchased within the stateâ€Â¦Pennsylvania’s database of handgun sales is not prohibited by state lawâ€Â¦Private sales of handguns must go through a licensed dealer."
All handgun sales (including private sales)inside Pennsylvania state lines must go through a dealer, must be kept in a State Police database and this data base is not prohibited by State law. Further Pennsylvania State law requires a lock to be supplied by the seller at the time of sale. |
Do you have any statistics on what percentage of private gun sales actually comply with these provisions? |
|
|
|
06/27/2012 02:29:53 PM · #420 |
Originally posted by GeneralE:
Originally posted by Flash:
Even in Pennsylvania where some claim that firearms are traded and sold at will without any restrictions whatever, the following applies to handguns including Saturday Night Specials...
"the Pennsylvania State Police keep a "sales database" of all handguns purchased within the stateâ€Â¦Pennsylvania’s database of handgun sales is not prohibited by state lawâ€Â¦Private sales of handguns must go through a licensed dealer."
All handgun sales (including private sales)inside Pennsylvania state lines must go through a dealer, must be kept in a State Police database and this data base is not prohibited by State law. Further Pennsylvania State law requires a lock to be supplied by the seller at the time of sale. |
Do you have any statistics on what percentage of private gun sales actually comply with these provisions? |
No. However failure to comply would be a crime and being a criminal would prevent you from owning a handgun. Thus, amongst law abiding gun owners, I would suspect the compliance percentage to be quite high. Amongst criminals, it doesn't matter as they already don't comply. |
|
|
|
06/27/2012 02:42:22 PM · #421 |
Originally posted by Mousie:
Given that I literally cut and pasted the word ridiculous from your post since I hate typing it, I'm pretty sure you said ridiculous. |
Post #404 |
|
|
|
06/27/2012 02:48:19 PM · #422 |
Originally posted by Flash:
Originally posted by GeneralE:
Originally posted by Flash:
All handgun sales (including private sales)inside Pennsylvania state lines must go through a dealer, must be kept in a State Police database and this data base is not prohibited by State law. Further Pennsylvania State law requires a lock to be supplied by the seller at the time of sale. |
Do you have any statistics on what percentage of private gun sales actually comply with these provisions? |
No. However failure to comply would be a crime and being a criminal would prevent you from owning a handgun. |
No, being a criminal would prevent you from legally owning a handgun ... since the participants in such a sale would either already possess a gun or are to imminently aquire it, the issue of legality would be of academic interest only. |
|
|
|
06/27/2012 02:59:13 PM · #423 |
Originally posted by GeneralE:
Originally posted by Flash:
Originally posted by GeneralE:
Originally posted by Flash:
All handgun sales (including private sales)inside Pennsylvania state lines must go through a dealer, must be kept in a State Police database and this data base is not prohibited by State law. Further Pennsylvania State law requires a lock to be supplied by the seller at the time of sale. |
Do you have any statistics on what percentage of private gun sales actually comply with these provisions? |
No. However failure to comply would be a crime and being a criminal would prevent you from owning a handgun. |
No, being a criminal would prevent you from legally owning a handgun ... since the participants in such a sale would either already possess a gun or are to imminently aquire it, the issue of legality would be of academic interest only. |
"No, being a criminal would prevent you from legally owning a handgun " Correct, I should have been clearer and included the more precise "legally".
Not sure I get the rest of your point however. If the concern is percentage of compliance and the vast majority are lawful gun owners, then the percentage would likely be high in compliance. Are you suggesting that lawful gunowners are at a high risk of "turning" to criminal activity and jeopardizing their status? Even the Fast and Furious scandal that involved hundreds of thousands of dollars and many many firearms was primarily about 20 individuals who generated the straw purchases (which were illegal).
I keep going back to the same point - it is a crime problem - not a gun problem. Do we remove all cars because a percentage are irresponsible and drive intoxicated, high, or speed?
Message edited by author 2012-06-27 14:59:50. |
|
|
|
06/27/2012 03:49:36 PM · #424 |
Originally posted by Flash:
Do we remove all cars because a percentage are irresponsible and drive intoxicated, high, or speed? |
No, and I've never said we should remove all guns. I am for more effective (not necessarily "more") and sensible regulation, and certain restrictions/limitations regarding arms with no legitimate sporting or self-defense use. |
|
|
|
06/27/2012 04:29:31 PM · #425 |
Originally posted by GeneralE:
regarding arms with no legitimate sporting or self-defense use. |
You know, 'legitimate' like using an ancient view camera with glass plates just because you find it interesting and a challenge.
In the age of high-performance digital cameras and post-processing, there's no legitimate use for ancient view cameras that hasn't been supplanted by better technology. Yet some people still enjoy using them. I wonder why.
|
|
