Las Vegas shooting

Pretty good analogy of why NRA has become "militant" (lol, you'd be shitting bricks if gun owners truly became militant), and most gun owners won't compromise anymore.

https://www.everydaynodaysoff.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/11/Illustrated-Guide-To-Gun-Control.png

 

That is applicable to a hell of a lot more than guns.

 

That illustrates why I've given up on the Republican Party.

Every time they "compromise " all i do is lose a little more. Where is this mythical "compromise" for me????

Liberals come wanting 10billion in welfare repubs give them 5billion .... and call it compromise lol

 

NRA is pissing a lot people off with this compromise, any give will just create momentum for Feinstien and her anti-2a team.

 

The irony with a guy talking about intercepting phone calls. I bet thats how LEO catch potential molesters as well, tap their phone lines.

 

If this is your view, why do we have laws at all? Perhaps we should just go for anarchy since many in this thread have all come up with a new behavioral theory whereby disincentivizing behavior doesn't work to reduce that behavior.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reductio_ad_absurdum

Or is the more likely and honest answer that laws will work to reduce behavior? If only there was some precedent of other countries who have made these weapons illegal......................hmmmm, I'll have to noodle on that for a bit

https://www.nytimes.com/2015/12/05/world/australia/australia-gun-ban-shooting.html

 

Yes, and I already stated why I believe every one of those seconds counts. In that same amount of time I may be able to find better cover, escape or try and be a hero. With no pauses of any sort in the shooters ability to aim and fire, survivability decreases.

Yes I am classifying totally different types of gun violence and also classifying different criminal profiles. Gang violence and shootings in Chicago has as as much to do with this conversation as domestic violence shootings. The profile of a mass shooter is not typically one who has an extensive criminal background and likely has not established criminal connections necessary to obtain black market weapons. Many of these shooters have in fact gone to purchase or acquire their weapons after it's been established they snapped - VT bought/Sandy Hook raided Mom's house. Many are crimes of passion and are not the well executed situation we just had in Las Vegas. Criminals could also machine or even 3D print their own, I'll take the odds of failure on that over making the item readily available. A former criminal justice teacher I had owed his life (in his words) to a poorly altered 9mm that shredded it's ammunition as he busted into an ambush as the point man on a SWAT team.

Keep reaching though with what international spies can purchase and what gang bangers do over the drug trade - because it totally relates.

 

Seriously, how do you not get that making more laws will not impact the criminals? They already don't care about laws. What is one more to break?? Is this really that difficult? That is NOT advocating total anarchy. It's simply pointing out that additional laws above & beyond what already work for the HUGE majority of the people to keep the peace will NOT suddenly fix the problem of people doing illegal stuff. Are you really that dense????

 

That's rhetorical, right?

 

I have to assume it is at this point.

 

Considering the kill radius of a grenade is about 15 feet, the effective casualty radius is around 45 feet and the grenade can be hidden easily in a pocket while a rifle with a 100 rd magazine is big, bulky and difficult to carry I would be more concerned about the grenade. The gun requires a bit of time to mow down people while the grenades effects are immediate and devastating. I have never been in the situation but I think the psychological effects of watching body parts fly thru the air all around you would have you thinking of other things than charging and subduing.

Lol. Some weapons like tactical nukes, explosive shit like grenades and landmines should definitely stay out of the hands of the public. But strangely I do not put firearms in that same category. So how many lives would it save and at what cost? I would suspect you would save more lives by banning McDonalds and soda...

Yes, cost to consumer. You know, to buy replacement magazines for the ones made illegal or to modify their firearm to comply with new regulations.

Considering that I am hardly an international man of mystery, not really in to the gun scene and know where to acquire weapons that would scare the shit out of alot of people it is not unreasonable to assume that someone hell bent on destruction could get way worse stuff than me.

 

Anybody comparing Australia to the US should probably bow out of the conversation. They dont understand the subject well enough.

 

So what would the cost to do this buy back be? Do you have the slightest clue how many firearms are in the US? Aus has a small population and was not a gun culture like the US. It is really an apples to grapefruit comparison. And how badly would gun owners get fucked on values of their firearms? Will the increased taxes to facilitate this "plan" be paid for by the anti gun segment? Because it would be silly to tax someone to get money to pay that person for their guns. But hey, never let a crisis go to waste. Try to push thru legislation while emotions are high and people will not ask for details...

 

Part of the issue here is the goal. Those who want to "End gun violence" are a problem. I would just like to see us move the line a bit in reducing gun violence. Will any law stop an outright hardened long term, well financed criminal? No. Will it stop a well funded nut case hat already has a big collection of guns and equipment and planning like Vegas? No.

With that said, the right law might help in saving some lives in certain circumstances. Someone who suddenly snaps and goes and gets a gun or two. They don't have time to go build their own stuff or do a bunch of research on machining things (most people don't have easy access to 3D printers or machine shops you know). It would leave them with less effective weapons. That is good enough reason for me to be for banning stuff that is only useful for mass killing and folks getting the jollies by shooting off 100 rounds in less than a minute.

 

The link below says (it's from 2012, so we'll round up) there's 3.8 million assault rifles in the US. Let's call it 4 million for shits and giggles. To keep the math easy, we'll say they're worth $1K/pop (this is way on the high side based on a quick Google search, but we'll quickly see that the cost won't be prohibitive).

4 million times $1K = $4 billion dollars. That equates to roughly $13 more in taxes for each American for one year, although I'm willing to wager one could fully raise that $4 billion via wealthy donors who'd want those guns off of the street (I'd be good for some sheckles).

http://www.slate.com/blogs/crime/20...many_assault_rifles_are_there_in_america.html

 

So what is the definition of "assault rifle"?

 

"B-b-but I can build a tomahawk missile with dental floss and used tampons - what good is a law gonna do to stop me?"

"I can make a nuke outta cigarette butts and day after taco shits so your laws are stupid"

 

I guarantee you there's way more people with access to machine shop equipment than you could even possibly imagine.

 

From the article:

"And in its 2011 annual report to investors, Smith & Wesson Holding Company noted that there was a $489 million domestic, non-military market for “modern sporting rifles,” a euphemism for auto-loading, assault-style rifles."

You can agree or disagree with it (I'm gonna go out on a limb and assume virtually all of you will take umbrage with that broad of a definition, but in full disclosure it was simply the first link I came across which attempted to answer the question of how many "assault" rifles are in the US).

We can assume the number is 1/2 or 2x their number - it doesn't change the discussion at all.