Baitlayer wrote:Just read through this thread with some interest.I have only one question.It seems clear that these weapons are being banned because the sight of them might scare the the public.My question.When will they ever see them? At home they are locked in a safe.In transit they are secured out of sight and at a range or hunting location they only likely to be seen by other LAFOs. who I doubt would be scared of them.
If this is not case then I can only assume that the relevant authorities feel that ownership of such a firearm will automatically have us wandering the streets and firing randomly at anything or anyone that moves.
Again, if they don't ever see them, how can they be scared by them?
Ian
Gaznazdiak wrote:"Nope, just vote below the line and put the majors and the greentatds last!"
Trouble is, that's still voting for established entities who have made preference deals and the same cunning stunts end up getting in anyway.
We need to stop voting for any of them, period. Voting only encourages the bastards.
juststarting wrote:16-18 this year, in USA, depends how you look at it.
Let's pause for a moment. A firearm was discharged 18 times in the last two months across schools in the USA.
At some point, it stops being a gun problem. There's just something deeply deeply wrong with mentality of those people. The kids, their parents, media, everything. Just really, really wrong and dark.
Gwion wrote:juststarting wrote:16-18 this year, in USA, depends how you look at it.
Let's pause for a moment. A firearm was discharged 18 times in the last two months across schools in the USA.
At some point, it stops being a gun problem. There's just something deeply deeply wrong with mentality of those people. The kids, their parents, media, everything. Just really, really wrong and dark.
I'd say they have a severe mental health issue in the US. An extension of their mercinary health care system.
bentaz wrote:There are f*** loads of unemployed ex military who would make pretty good guards for schools in the states.
Bam........two problems solved, your welcome 'America!
bentaz wrote:There are f*** loads of unemployed ex military who would make pretty good guards for schools in the states.
Bam........two problems solved, your welcome 'America!
juststarting wrote:Baronvonrort, you going to argue that it's not an intrinsic problem, seriously? Alright... I'll bite.
It is a correct number. The fact that in SOME of those instances nobody got hurt is a. good! And b. irrelevant. It's still 18!!!! times a firearm got discharged in school. 17 times if you don't count the negligent discharge.
With me so far? Guns go boom in school 17-18 times in one and a half months.
Here's a fact checked version:
"So of the 17 'school shootings' before Wednesday’s shooting; three students died; roughly 30-35 were injured."
Source: https://www.dailywire.com/node/27165
Now let's add this one:
20 confirmed dead
85 injured
And unfortunatelly we all know that some of those injured going to fall into the dead category.
That's in one and a half f***ing months! There is something seriously wrong with people in that country. To argue that, is just stupid.
...but I'm happy to hear a rebuttal. Go on?
Baronvonrort wrote:So what has changed since I was a 16 year old doing a year in an American high school where kids would have guns in their car and nobody got shot, the 2 changes I see are police are no longer in schools and they're gun free zones.
I think it's wrong to consider a gun fired with nobody injured as a school shooting, the gun grabbers need to inflate numbers.
Since all schools have become gun free zones and they no longer have police in schools perhaps a few parents suing the schools for not providing security will bring a change from school administrators, lawsuits tend to get a response to prevent future lawsuits.
You are wrong in saying there is something seriously wrong with people in that country
these shootings aren't being done by Alpha males they're being done by despicable losers.
What solution do you suggest to stop school shootings in the US that doesn't violate constitutional rights?
Gaznazdiak wrote:I just read a report this morning that the Republican controlled congress blocked a move that would limit people with serious mentally illness from getting easy access to guns because "That would infringe their constitutional right to bears arms."
And they wonder why this keeps happening?
Seems simple to me, if whacking yourself in the face with a 4 x 2 hurts more than you can stand, put down the 4 x 2 and get another hobby.
In the wake of a horrific school shooting in Parkland, Florida, that left 17 dead in February 2018, media renewed focus on an Obama-era regulation repealed in the early months of the Trump administration. That rule would have given the National Instant Criminal Background Check System, which is used for gun sales, access to Social Security Administration data including the names of individuals receiving certain federal mental health benefits.
As we explained in a 17 February 2017 post, this rule — which never went into effect before being rescinded — did not change any existing laws regulating who is allowed to purchase guns. It merely would have provided a new way to enforce existing restrictions on gun sales by allowing a transfer of information from one agency to another. There are now, and have been for some time, laws that seek to limit gun sales to anyone “who has been adjudicated as a mental defective or who has been committed to a mental institution” per Title 18 section 922(g) of the United States Code.
https://www.snopes.com/trump-sign-bill-revoking-obama-era-gun-checks-people-mental-illnesses/
juststarting wrote:Baronvonrort wrote:So what has changed since I was a 16 year old doing a year in an American high school where kids would have guns in their car and nobody got shot, the 2 changes I see are police are no longer in schools and they're gun free zones.
I have no idea.I think it's wrong to consider a gun fired with nobody injured as a school shooting, the gun grabbers need to inflate numbers.
If you count injuries, it's still a big number, anything over an outlier is a big number in this case. As for gun grabbers, that horse has bolted, handguns in USA will never be banned... I think it's an irrelevant point though, this is by far not a gun issue.Since all schools have become gun free zones and they no longer have police in schools perhaps a few parents suing the schools for not providing security will bring a change from school administrators, lawsuits tend to get a response to prevent future lawsuits.
School and gun free zone, you say it with such casual normality. It just blows my mind, gun free, not gun free, just blows my mind when we talk about armed incident and armed response in schools. It's madness for a first world country.You are wrong in saying there is something seriously wrong with people in that country
I hope so. I know a lot of awesome Americans, but something is undeniably wrong in the psyche, for this to be happening with such boring regularity.these shootings aren't being done by Alpha males they're being done by despicable losers.
Relevance? I don't see where you got alpha males or despicable losers from. It is done, mostly, by American kids. Maybe it's just normal. I sound like the biggest dick when I say I am largely against immigration from war torn countries, that have been so for generations (e.g. middle east, where this is the way of life, rather than a temporary conflict, such as Yugoslavia). If someone is born into it, they are not changing. I am thinking, maybe, America is becoming one of those countries. They have been at war with someone since WWII. Vietnam, Korea, Iraq, Syria, Afghanistan and countless smaller conflicts. Maybe killing is now ingrained into this generation and it will take 3 more generations of peace to unfuck the situation. Again, no idea. I just look at the data...What solution do you suggest to stop school shootings in the US that doesn't violate constitutional rights?
I like how you sneaked "that doesn't violate constitutional rights" in... I am by no means against guns, heck, I'd love a belt fed machine-gun. Like I said, this is not a gun problem. And even if it was, there are too many guns in circulation anyway. So I don't know. Maybe something around better social/support services, but I don't know.
Gaznazdiak wrote:@Baronvonrort
You are right, you can not believe everything you read, which is why I do a background on sources. I got that report from the ABC, no need to background them.
However on backgrounding The Washington Free Beacon:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Washi ... #Reception
Borchers, Callum (2017-10-27). "Analysis | Washington Free Beacon reported 'an unknown GOP client' funded Fusion GPS. It was the Beacon". Washington Post. ISSN 0190-8286. Retrieved 2017-10-28.
Upon reading the entire Snopes Fact Check, I draw your attention to the final paragraph:
"While the law did not change who is required to be the subject of background checks, it is true that Trump signed into law the repeal of a measure that would have plausibly prevented certain classes of mentally ill people from purchasing firearms by allowing a new data source to be included the system that runs those background checks. As such we rank the claim mostly true."
This paragraph supports my above post. Obama tried to keep guns from the hands of loons, the Republicans gave them back free reign.
.
Requirements to Purchase a Firearm
How do I find out if I am eligible to purchase a firearm?
Following are a list of reasons you may be denied a purchase of a firearm:
Felony conviction
Active warrant (felony or misdemeanor)
Unlawful user or addicted to any controlled substance
Adjudicated mentally defective or involuntarily committed by a judge
Illegal alien status
Dishonorable discharge from US Armed Forces
Renounced United States citizenship
Active protection order (injunction for protection, restraining order, etc.)
Convicted of a misdemeanor crime of domestic violence
Under indictment or information for a crime punishable by a term exceeding one year in prison.
Adjudicated delinquent or received adjudication withheld as a juvenile for a felony charge and person is under the age of 24
Adjudication withheld for any felony or a misdemeanor crime of domestic violence and three years has not yet lapsed since the completion of sentencing provisions
http://www.fdle.state.fl.us/FPP/FAQs2.aspx
bentaz wrote:https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=UEihkjKNhN8
on_one_wheel wrote:Just think how much safer well be with such ridiculous restrictions... and the children, think about them to![]()
I whish the USA would hurry up and make Australia their fifty first state.