Talking about guns - DPChallenge Forums

Fujifilm XF 10-24mm f/4 R IOS

05/12/2014 11:37:24 AM · #80

Originally posted by NikonJeb:

I will never understand why people who are perfectly responsible with their firearms in most circumstances would have any issue with registering firearms and doing their best, whatever it takes to keep firearms and their ownership in a good, responsible light.

Why wouldn't you be in favor of licensing, training, and tracking firearms in case one falls off the grid......gets lost, stolen, and/or used in an inappropriate way?

Because that same tracking can be used for malicious purposes.

markwiley

Fujifilm X-Pro2

05/12/2014 11:50:39 AM · #81

Originally posted by Spork99:

Originally posted by NikonJeb:
I will never understand why people who are perfectly responsible with their firearms in most circumstances would have any issue with registering firearms and doing their best, whatever it takes to keep firearms and their ownership in a good, responsible light.

Why wouldn't you be in favor of licensing, training, and tracking firearms in case one falls off the grid......gets lost, stolen, and/or used in an inappropriate way?

Because that same tracking can be used for malicious purposes.

I tend to agree with Jeb. To me, on balance, doing a better job licensing, training, and tracking firearms would do more potential good than harm. Perhaps I am missing something. What potential malicious purposes should I be worried about?

Bear_Music

Samsung Galaxy S21, S21+, S21 Ultra

Sony 24-70mm F4 Vario-Tessar T* FE OSS

05/12/2014 12:07:05 PM · #82

Originally posted by markwiley:

The scenario I hear most often is a federal government gone rogue, disregarding the constitution, and moving to disarm its citizens. It's a Big Brother sort of thing.

jab119

Canon EOS-70D

Canon EF-S 18-135mm f/3.5-5.6 IS

05/12/2014 12:58:58 PM · #83

Originally posted by Bear_Music:

Originally posted by markwiley:
I tend to agree with Jeb. To me, on balance, doing a better job licensing, training, and tracking firearms would do more potential good than harm. Perhaps I am missing something. What potential malicious purposes should I be worried about?

The scenario I hear most often is a federal government gone rogue, disregarding the constitution, and moving to disarm its citizens. It's a Big Brother sort of thing.

Not sure if you folks remember when a New York reporter got hold of registered gun owners personal information and posted their address so people could know where registered gun owners lived.

Releasing public info on Gun Owners

This goes well beyond big brother when people want to point you out like a child molester, or in this case a lawful citizen with a registered gun.

Canada did away with its long gun registry. Why? because it was 100% ineffective, way too costly to manage for the government and provided no benefit to the tax payer or the government.

Legally purchased/obtained firearms purchased from Federally Licensed dealers are already "registered" so to say when you fill out the ATF ffl form 4473, and have your background check done.
ATF FFL Form 4473

The only thing that is missing is the private person to private person sales.
Example, you sell your firearm to your brother. Today you can do so with out any paperwork or anything. Under proposed laws, you would need to go to an FFL dealer/person to fill out the proper ATF ffl form 4473 and have a background check done to legally sell/transfer the firearm to your brother, or you would be considered a felon. This would even be the case if you wanted to just flat out give it to him, just because he is the best Bro a person could have.

Now, how would the government enforce this on person to person sales? The Government cant answer that at all. Its just another law that makes people feel good, but is worthless in application.

Message edited by author 2014-05-12 12:59:49.

Canon 12x IS USM (S3 IS built-in Lens) -- 36-432mm (35mm EQ)

05/12/2014 01:19:03 PM · #84

Originally posted by Bear_Music:

Some people present the desire to not be tracked as paranoia about the government turning on the people. I don't doubt the possibility of that happening, but mostly it's about that data being out there...period. Given the security of databases, or the complete lack thereof, it's not at all unreasonable to think that a reasonably smart criminal would look at gun owner data before committing crimes...if they want guns...go here...if they want unarmed victims...go here.

That's not to mention the cost of maintaining such a database and the lack of value it provides.

It's also not the government's business to track and keep record of people exercising (or not exercising) their constitutional rights.

GeneralE

Canon PowerShot S3 IS

05/12/2014 01:23:32 PM · #85

Originally posted by Spork99:

It's also not the government's business to track and keep record of people exercising (or not exercising) their constitutional rights.

Like voting?

Nikon AF-S DX NIKKOR 18-200mm f/3.5-5.6G ED VR II

05/12/2014 01:38:52 PM · #86

Originally posted by GeneralE:

Originally posted by Spork99:
It's also not the government's business to track and keep record of people exercising (or not exercising) their constitutional rights.

Like voting?

Right.

Or when you spoke your mind or went to church...or not and so on.

You register to vote, but how you vote and IF you vote isn't tracked and your voting record is anonymous.

Message edited by author 2014-05-12 13:42:55.

snaffles

Nikon D7100

05/12/2014 06:18:03 PM · #87

Originally posted by markwiley:

Originally posted by jab119:

Originally posted by markwiley:

Plenty of folks are outraged about people killed by drunk drivers, and I think this has helped change how our society views drunk driving and this has significantly reduced drunk driving deaths. As far as death by knives, fist, feet & clubs goes, the total death toll by these methods is completely dwarfed by deaths caused by guns.

Really, here are some stats for just the first 5 months of 2014, up to today

Murder by gun: 4015
Drunk Driving: 11811

I have two points. 1) I didn't say drunk driving deaths were less than deaths by gun. I said deaths by knives, fist, feet & clubs were far less than deaths caused by guns. 2) Here in Illinois for 2013 the deaths by gun were higher than all traffic deaths (not just drunk driving).

And look at all the measures taken to curtail drivers who are under the influence/impaired or just plain blind pig-drunk. SADD, MADD anyone? As for the overwhelming stats of death by firearm over knives/fist/feet/clubs...and hasn't anyone here pointed out yet that the American Constitution was drawn up at a time when a gun was an actual necessity? Believe it or not, a lot can change in a few centuries' time, including the so-called right to bear arms. The Brits are no longer a threat, but guess who is? Uhm, apparently,anyone...and how (il)legal their weaponry is, and how (in)sane they are, is all up in the air.

The sad reality is, guns make killing easy. With the right gun, sights and ammo you can drop a deer a quarter-mile away. You're pretty damn safe from any kind of retribution. Use the same or better suite of tools on a human and what's the diff? Just another dead mammal bleeding out on the other end.

With knives and clubs, you have to be up close and personal to the target. And there is just as much risk to you as the person you're attacking; what if they have a knife or club too? Killing with feet and fists is a lot harder unless a)you're an MMA fighter or b)there's a whole lot of you stomping/pummelling someone to death. Which would make you part of a mob, and mobs are made up of cowards who would NEVER do such a thing on their own, but hey, if a dozen other guys are doing it...

Frankly, I'm just sick of seeing headlines like 'Toddler kills sister with handgun'. Not because I go looking for them, but my ISP is US-based and so I get to see cute headlines like that on a regular basis.

Message edited by author 2014-05-12 18:38:38.

Canon 12x IS USM (S3 IS built-in Lens) -- 36-432mm (35mm EQ)

05/12/2014 10:31:00 PM · #88

Originally posted by snaffles:

Originally posted by markwiley:

Originally posted by jab119:

Originally posted by markwiley:

Plenty of folks are outraged about people killed by drunk drivers, and I think this has helped change how our society views drunk driving and this has significantly reduced drunk driving deaths. As far as death by knives, fist, feet & clubs goes, the total death toll by these methods is completely dwarfed by deaths caused by guns.

Really, here are some stats for just the first 5 months of 2014, up to today

Murder by gun: 4015
Drunk Driving: 11811

I have two points. 1) I didn't say drunk driving deaths were less than deaths by gun. I said deaths by knives, fist, feet & clubs were far less than deaths caused by guns. 2) Here in Illinois for 2013 the deaths by gun were higher than all traffic deaths (not just drunk driving).

And look at all the measures taken to curtail drivers who are under the influence/impaired or just plain blind pig-drunk. SADD, MADD anyone? As for the overwhelming stats of death by firearm over knives/fist/feet/clubs...and hasn't anyone here pointed out yet that the American Constitution was drawn up at a time when a gun was an actual necessity? Believe it or not, a lot can change in a few centuries' time, including the so-called right to bear arms. The Brits are no longer a threat, but guess who is? Uhm, apparently,anyone...and how (il)legal their weaponry is, and how (in)sane they are, is all up in the air.

The sad reality is, guns make killing easy. With the right gun, sights and ammo you can drop a deer a quarter-mile away. You're pretty damn safe from any kind of retribution. Use the same or better suite of tools on a human and what's the diff? Just another dead mammal bleeding out on the other end.

With knives and clubs, you have to be up close and personal to the target. And there is just as much risk to you as the person you're attacking; what if they have a knife or club too? Killing with feet and fists is a lot harder unless a)you're an MMA fighter or b)there's a whole lot of you stomping/pummelling someone to death. Which would make you part of a mob, and mobs are made up of cowards who would NEVER do such a thing on their own, but hey, if a dozen other guys are doing it...

Frankly, I'm just sick of seeing headlines like 'Toddler kills sister with handgun'. Not because I go looking for them, but my ISP is US-based and so I get to see cute headlines like that on a regular basis.

So, you'd favor tilting the odds towards the criminals in cases of self-defense? Is that right? Straight up survival of the fittest. May the biggest and strongest prevail.

Someone like a 90lb woman with a baby in her trailer should have to duke it out with a couple of drugged up guys with knives breaking down the door while she's on the phone with 911 and the police are 30 min away?

A gun is a tool. It's simplistic to say it makes killing easy because it also levels the playing field. It allows a potential victim to protect themselves and/or their loved ones from physically and/or numerically superior criminals. In a perfect world there would be no need for guns, people wouldn't break into other peoples' homes to take their things and decide they didn't want to leave witnesses. It'd be all rainbows and unicorns.

GeneralE

Canon PowerShot S3 IS

05/12/2014 11:00:03 PM · #89

Originally posted by Spork99:

A gun is a tool. It's simplistic to say it makes killing easy because it also levels the playing field. It allows a potential victim to protect themselves and/or their loved ones from physically and/or numerically superior criminals. In a perfect world there would be no need for guns, people wouldn't break into other peoples' homes to take their things and decide they didn't want to leave witnesses.

I'm interested in comparing the number of gun homicides which contitute legitimate self-defense, with those caused by accident, suicide, and non-drug-related murder (spouse, coworker, etc.). At some point there has to be some kind of risk-benefit analysis applied.*

I don't favor "banning" guns at all, even if it was possible, but I think it's perfectly reasonable to "force" gun owners to be (more) responsible, and to know who they are so they can be held accountable if necessary.

*Oh yeah, I forgot, it can't be done because the NRA lobby has "made" Congress declare it illegal for the NIH (or any Federally-funded program?) to conduct research on gun deaths ... :-(

Message edited by author 2014-05-12 23:02:03.

Fujifilm XF 10-24mm f/4 R IOS

05/13/2014 07:24:25 AM · #90

Originally posted by GeneralE:

Originally posted by Spork99:
A gun is a tool. It's simplistic to say it makes killing easy because it also levels the playing field. It allows a potential victim to protect themselves and/or their loved ones from physically and/or numerically superior criminals. In a perfect world there would be no need for guns, people wouldn't break into other peoples' homes to take their things and decide they didn't want to leave witnesses.

I'm interested in comparing the number of gun homicides which contitute legitimate self-defense, with those caused by accident, suicide, and non-drug-related murder (spouse, coworker, etc.). At some point there has to be some kind of risk-benefit analysis applied.*

I don't favor "banning" guns at all, even if it was possible, but I think it's perfectly reasonable to "force" gun owners to be (more) responsible, and to know who they are so they can be held accountable if necessary.

*Oh yeah, I forgot, it can't be done because the NRA lobby has "made" Congress declare it illegal for the NIH (or any Federally-funded program?) to conduct research on gun deaths ... :-(

Would you apply the same analysis to limiting something like the freedom of religion? Something along the lines of, "Well, most terrorists are Muslims, so let's make Islam illegal."

markwiley

Fujifilm X-Pro2

05/13/2014 11:55:27 AM · #91

Wow. If you see a parallel between "We have a gun violence problem, so let's register all guns" and "Well, most terrorists are Muslims, so let's make Islam illegal" then our perspectives and basic assumptions on this issue are so drastically different further discussion is pretty pointless. Thanks for clarifying things for me.

Nikon AF-S Nikkor 28-300mm f3.5-5.6G ED VR

05/13/2014 12:08:40 PM · #92

Originally posted by markwiley:

Why would you say that?

Both the freedom of religion and the right to bear arms are defined in the Bill of Rights. If you're willing to sacrifice one, who's not to say any of the others are up for grabs next?

If you can't see how erosion of one sets precedence for erosion of the other, that's pretty sad, did you fail history class? How about instead of making Islam illegal, we just insist that Muslims register with the government. I'd hope we'd have learned that lesson 70 some years ago, both at home and abroad.

Message edited by author 2014-05-13 12:13:07.

NikonJeb

Nikon D850

05/13/2014 12:59:45 PM · #93

Originally posted by Spork99:

A gun is a tool.

It's simplistic to say a gun is a tool. A screwdriver is a tool, so is a chainsaw.

But I'm going to operate and utilize a chainsaw with a *much* different skillset than I am a screwdriver, and I have one Hell of a lot of respect for what kind of damage that a chainsaw can do in the hands of an untrained/inexperienced operator..

Originally posted by Spork99:

It's simplistic to say it makes killing easy because it also levels the playing field. It allows a potential victim to protect themselves and/or their loved ones from physically and/or numerically superior criminals.

Actually, the gun doesn't necessarily make killing easy. It takes training and practice to use a gun effectively, and the guy who just goes to Cabela's, buys a 9mm, and drops it in his bedside table drawer is much more dangerous to himself, and everyone around him if he doesn't take the next steps.

Again, why some modicum of sensible training isn't mandatory with a firearms purchase eludes me. Hey, how can that be a bad thing? If you're already qualified, a two minute test to verify your knowledge, and you're down the road with your new gun. If you have *zero* training and experience, you pay for a safety & training course, and the rest of us know that at least there's some sense being brought to bear.