Illinois gun BAN???????
Printed From: CorrectCraftFan.com
Category: General Correct Craft Discussion
Forum Name: Off Topic
Forum Discription: Anything non-Correct Craft
URL: http://www.CorrectCraftFan.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=28639
Printed Date: January-14-2025 at 5:34pm
Topic: Illinois gun BAN???????
Posted By: 62 wood
Subject: Illinois gun BAN???????
Date Posted: January-02-2013 at 4:09pm
|
Anyone hear or know about IL Senate president Cullerton trying to ban nearly all guns in IL? Sounds like it would include semi-automatics and even Pump Shotguns!!!!! http://campaign.r20.constantcontact.com/render?llr=86exi4bab&v=001mlQdTtwnjRDahckam4bGLxIbLfeFoyy__NjfukosErM6MPUP8j6ONIRSJbFQvJbUs63si2hhfguEl8Z30HnE7D1dTg3MRnBAoH-ABkVwdkumC7RehzveGXtBiMqVP23z8vSi6htNi4mkZRxj8BWCeioP5_x2t64FCnofEwFh25Dh6M53g1MeZ-fpVoyakQbpExdnEwbZF0F6G3kiI0n7a6eYvSGKc-BKRKnsHnWEhrhlFDsyjilnor_xjbo5ll_9" rel="nofollow - Ilinois State Rifle Association article... ------------- http://www.correctcraftfan.com/diaries/details.asp?ID=1117&sort=&pagenum=6" rel="nofollow - 64 American Skier 62 Classic.. 73 Ski Nautique |
Replies:
Posted By: SN206
Date Posted: January-02-2013 at 4:33pm
|
Good luck with that. ------------- ...those who have fallen and those who will. |
Posted By: peter1234
Date Posted: January-02-2013 at 4:38pm
|
they should rename the state new massachusetts ------------- former skylark owner now a formula but I cant let this place go |
Posted By: davidg
Date Posted: January-02-2013 at 4:40pm
Steve.....Chicago's gun bans have worked so well, maybe the pols are going to institute it statewide.  |
62 wood wrote:Posted By: 62 wood
Date Posted: January-02-2013 at 10:40pm
Well, one good thing. If it passes it would get rid of all those pesky guns the criminals in Chicago own.  ------------- http://www.correctcraftfan.com/diaries/details.asp?ID=1117&sort=&pagenum=6" rel="nofollow - 64 American Skier 62 Classic.. 73 Ski Nautique |
Posted By: 05 210
Date Posted: January-02-2013 at 11:48pm
|
I was just reading about this. I do not normally post in gun threads on non gun forums because it can create too much controversy, but you guys are pretty level headed so I'll throw this out there....And I'LL ATTEMPT TO DO IT WITHOUT SOUNDING LIKE A RIGHT WING NUTJOB :) I am an avid shooter,I have enough "scary looking" military rifles, ammo and high capacity magazines to make the evening news. I am also a law abiding citizen who preaches firearms safety and responsibilty. My children, ages 14 & 15 are proficient with firearms, and enjoy going to the range. My guns are locked in a safe when not in use and I am the only one with the combination. I do not hunt. I have heard alot of my "hunting" type buddies since the Ct school shooting say maybe its time to let that stuff go away. As long as I can still have my hunting guns etc,blah blah blah. This stuff in Illinois is exactly why tactical gun owners, handgun owners, hunters and "non" gun owners need to stand beside each other. Gun control does not prevent these tragedies from happening and it never will. Timothy McVeigh did not use a gun and he killed 168 people, 19 of them were children under 6 years old. Gun ownership is a guaranteed right of every US citizen and that right WAS NOT guaranteed to you so you could hunt! It was guaranteed by our forefathers so you could protect yourself from tyranny. It is also the only ammendment to the Constitution that says "SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED". If the state and federal governments are willing to try to do this anyway, don't think they won't try to take other things from you down the road. We as citizens of the US shouldn't be divided over gun control, we should be united in a fight fought for a freedom guaranteed to US citizens by the Constitution. I almost lost my daughter a year and a half ago. I still cannot even begin to imagine how the parents of those kids must feel. I hope I never know that feeling. I also know that we can't regulate these tragic events out of society. Laws only work on people who abide by them. If you're reading this and you think you may support more gun legislation, I ask you to please put your "emotion" aside and base your decision on intelligence and facts. Whether you own a firearm or not, your voice needs to be heard. Contact your reps and let them know you are not going to support your rights being taken away. Do it now. It only takes a few minutes. Mike ------------- http:/diaries/details.asp?ID=2219" rel="nofollow - Air Nautique 210 Team 640 hours, not 1 regret |
Posted By: davidg
Date Posted: January-03-2013 at 12:17am
I finally got time to open the link and read it. DAMN!! They are not just talking banning certain guns sales, but, CONFISCATING these guns as well!! HOLY &$IT!! A great way to insure that only criminals will have guns and honest law abiding folks won't. All these gun laws in Chicago, and the homocide rate reached 500 in 2012. Truly scary times we live in with these govt regs and mandates. |
Posted By: OverMyHead
Date Posted: January-03-2013 at 12:18am
|
Is anyone following the story of the New York paper that published a map of addresses of all the licensed gun owners in their area? A blogger in the do unto others spirit posted the addresses of the 50 journalists that worked on the map. The Paper now feels threatened and has hired ARMED guards for their property. Lets recap. The paper, so offended by people who wish to protect themselves with guns that they printed their addressees now feels they need guns to protect themselves, but this is OK. The Irony is just too much. I hope they put themselves on the map! Of course the paper failed to consider how many of the gun owners whose addresses they printed were subscribers, and is now experiencing massive cancellations of subscriptions, and their competitor a massive jump in new subscribers.  ------------- For thousands of years men have felt the irresistible urge to go to sea, and many of them died. Things got better after they invented boats. 1987 Ski Nautique |
Posted By: jbach
Date Posted: January-03-2013 at 12:54am
|
05 210. you hit the nail on the head. our worst enemy right now is not the anti-gun people or any specific political or religious group. they'll never get what they want. i'm afraid the worst enemy to our 2ND amendment rights are other gun owners. these people go by names like "collectors", "hunters", "sportsmen" and many other terms that sound like they are on your side. but they are far from it. they have the delusion that their pretty wood and blued steel firearm is safe. they have no "need" for a high capacity magazine in their $10,000 double rifle. they sure as hell do not have a "need" for a vertical grip or any of that tactical crap on their trap gun that gets rubbed with a diaper misted with gun oil scraped from the thighs of virgins. unfortunately i had to have this conversation with my father over christmas, i couldn't belive it. he mentioned no need for "assault rifles". he couldn't even give me a definition of one when i asked for one. i was pretty upset, this is the same man that has spent hundreds off hours with me in thhe field teaching me how to hunt and fish, be an active conservationist and a good steward of our lands. luckily he saw the light during our conversation. the 2nd amendmend is very clear and concise which "shall not be infringed". it is not open to interpretation, you are either for it or against it. period. |
Posted By: davidg
Date Posted: January-03-2013 at 3:01am
|
A bit of a threadjack from the Illinois gun story, but, an interesting story you probably haven't heard about that relates to the whole gun control issue. Its about a shooting in San Antonio in December that was similar to the theater shooting in Aurora, Colorado last July. You may not have heard about this shooting on the national news. Give it a read to find out why..... On Sunday December 17, 2012, 2 days after the CT shooting, a man went to a restaurant in San Antonio to kill his X-girlfriend. After he shot her, most of the people in the restaurant fled next door to a theater. The gunman followed them and entered the theater so he could shoot more people. He started shooting and people in the theater started running and screaming. It’s like the Aurora , CO theater story plus a restaurant! Now aren’t you wondering why this isn’t a lead story in the national media along with the school shooting? There was an off duty county deputy at the theater. SHE pulled out her gun and shot the man 4 times before he had a chance to kill anyone. So since this story makes the point that the best thing to stop a bad person with a gun is a good person with a gun, the media is treating it like it never happened. Only the local media covered it. The city is giving her a medal next week. Just thought you’d like to know. http://www.mysanantonio.com/news/local_news/article/Two-wounded-in-theater-shooting-4122668.php#ixzz2GOP72zBX" rel="nofollow - Article on Shooting in San Antonio |
Posted By: OverMyHead
Date Posted: January-03-2013 at 3:07am
A good story that not only started with a bang, but also was ended with one.  Gun bans assume that everyone with a gun is a criminal looking to do harm, which could not be farther from the truth.------------- For thousands of years men have felt the irresistible urge to go to sea, and many of them died. Things got better after they invented boats. 1987 Ski Nautique |
Posted By: ononewheel
Date Posted: January-03-2013 at 4:44am
|
It's painful. I cannot imagine the the "forefathers" thought it (2nd amendment) should trump the lives of innocent Americans. Get real guys. Range shooting is a far far far far far far far far far far far far far far far far far far far far far far different case than firing when fired upon. Your second amendment was written to protect yourself from tyranny from the GOVERNMENT. I ask you, what is your semi- auto assult rifle going to do against a drone, or a tank. Nothing, right, so why have it? 2 Marines would extinguish all your arsenals in a second, and you wouldn't be able to even think about protecting your toilet before you were 86'ed, whatever size your arsenal was. Get real. ------------- If we let the professionals do everything it takes all the fun out of youtube |
Posted By: mark c
Date Posted: January-03-2013 at 9:46am
| It will do alot more than a handful of rocks. It will at least give those two marines pause for thought before they extinguish (what ever that means) your arsenal. |
Posted By: OverMyHead
Date Posted: January-03-2013 at 10:27am
The for fathers did not think we would use gun bans to set up "slaughter houses" of helpless sheep in which wolves could freely roam. They envisioned the second amendment would create a level playing field. Almost all these incidents end when and only when armed confrontation arrives. On an individual basis, If you want to protect you self from a guy with a 10 round clip, you should probably have a 10 or better yet 30 round clip yourself. That is what our police and military do. Remember the story about the new york paper. Actions speak louder than words. When the paper felt threatened they hired armed guards. That says more about what they believe than a 10,000 word editorial.
Seth, your ideology seems to have overridden your common sense. Our armed forces are incredibly effective when motivated to fight a centrally controlled uniformed opposition. We can take out planes and tanks better than anyone. Where our military stumbles is when they face a loosely organized gorilla force that is highly mobile and has the support/appearance of the local population. I would say a tyrannical government would have more to fear from 10 million people able and motivated to take one shot each than a 100,000 man well armed military unit. That is real. Your second amendment argument actually indicates we should allow our citizens more arms than less, unless you believe in government tyranny. ------------- For thousands of years men have felt the irresistible urge to go to sea, and many of them died. Things got better after they invented boats. 1987 Ski Nautique |
Posted By: 05 210
Date Posted: January-03-2013 at 11:31am
They probably also never thought that people would roll over and give up everything they fought and died for. So by your argument, We should ban gas, fertilizer, and box trucks? You do realize that the single most horrific act of violence in this country was carried out by $2 box cutters right? Murderers will murder. If they can not use a gun, they will use something else. It has been proven time and time again that gun laws only take guns out of the hands of law abiding citizens. That sure will slow the crime right down now, won't it. Look at drugs. Those are illegal and that obviously works, lol. As a matter of fact, 99.8% of all gun owners are legit. How many car owners don't drink and drive? 99.8%? I doubt it. And for the record, there is no such thing as a "semi automatic" assault rifle. Assault rifles by defination have a selector to switch to full auto and have not been manufactured for sale to regular citizens since 1986. The rifles being used in these recent shootings are not assault rifles. Mike ------------- http:/diaries/details.asp?ID=2219" rel="nofollow - Air Nautique 210 Team 640 hours, not 1 regret |
Posted By: peter1234
Date Posted: January-03-2013 at 11:35am
|
and on that note . supposedly since its inception in 1968 not one felony has been commited by a legal holder of a full auto weapon. ------------- former skylark owner now a formula but I cant let this place go |
Posted By: JoeinNY
Date Posted: January-03-2013 at 12:14pm
|
I should stay out of this if for no other reason than because the starting article is silly and noone will ever even propose such a regulation... But I don't buy the slippery slope arguements that say we can't have any discussion about reasonable regulations without it leading to an encroachment on our rights. ... the truth is that we do heavily regulate box trucks, and we heavily regulate fertilizer, and most of the constituents chemicals of any weapons of mass destruction. We here a lot of comparisons about how cars kill more people than guns but what if we treated guns like cars.. you needed a license and to pass a regular test to keep it (if you get too old or cant see maybe you lose it), if you want a bigger gun you need a bigger license (like a CDL), you need to register your guns, have insurance for your guns. If your kid (or someone else)takes your gun and does something with it you are responsible for it (or your insurance company). Might sound a little extreme.. but it wouldnt deter any of the responsible gun owners I know. Might keep someone with more money than brains from picking up an impulse purchase ar15 at gander mountain and leaving it under thier bed where anyone can get it though. ------------- http://www.correctcraftfan.com/diaries/details.asp?ID=1477 - 1983 Ski Nautique 2001 1967 Mustang 302 "Decoy" http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cO5MkcBXBBs - Holeshot Video |
Posted By: 62 wood
Date Posted: January-03-2013 at 12:17pm
So, my Ruger 22 cal. SEMI automatic is considered an assult weapon... geee, didnt realize SWAT teams used them. Do you REALLY think taking away every law abiding citizens gun would stop the senseless killings? YOU my friend need to "Get Real" WHY have them? Because the LAW says I CAN. ------------- http://www.correctcraftfan.com/diaries/details.asp?ID=1117&sort=&pagenum=6" rel="nofollow - 64 American Skier 62 Classic.. 73 Ski Nautique |
Posted By: C-Bass
Date Posted: January-03-2013 at 12:24pm
|
There are more people killed by drunk drivers than with guns. Why don't we talk about banning alcohol, or cars. ------------- Craig 67 SN 73 SN http://www.correctcraftfan.com/diaries/details.asp?ID=6103" rel="nofollow - 99 Sport 85SN |
Posted By: ononewheel
Date Posted: January-03-2013 at 12:29pm
|
Screw it, why have speed limits then? ------------- If we let the professionals do everything it takes all the fun out of youtube |
Posted By: C-Bass
Date Posted: January-03-2013 at 12:34pm
|
Seems that Joe has already addressed my comment before I even sent it. I wouldn't see any issue adding more "hoops" to jump through to for getting weapons. I do not agree with any sort of ban though. ------------- Craig 67 SN 73 SN http://www.correctcraftfan.com/diaries/details.asp?ID=6103" rel="nofollow - 99 Sport 85SN |
Posted By: ononewheel
Date Posted: January-03-2013 at 12:35pm
Yeah, get real. I never said "take away every law abiding citizens guns", quite the opposite my friend. But if you think your Ruger .22 is going to do much of anything in the face of a tyrannical government you shouldn't own a gun. ------------- If we let the professionals do everything it takes all the fun out of youtube |
Posted By: ononewheel
Date Posted: January-03-2013 at 12:38pm
A full auto huh, that is a new ball game compared to what we were talking about. And those guns currently require an FFL anyway. So are you advocating that type of regulation? You also point out, what I am trying to say, regulation works. Ever try to get an FFL? ------------- If we let the professionals do everything it takes all the fun out of youtube |
Posted By: ononewheel
Date Posted: January-03-2013 at 12:41pm
How many shots will it take you, or anyone on this forum to take out a Predator drone? Life is different these days my friend. With your logic about clip sizes, it then should be allowed to posses nukes. ------------- If we let the professionals do everything it takes all the fun out of youtube |
Posted By: 62 wood
Date Posted: January-03-2013 at 12:43pm
|
ononewheel, I never bought my 22 with the intention of stopping a tyrannical government. If I thought that, I would own a much larger arsenal. I use it for varmints and plinking. And they are threatening to take it away from a LAW ABIDING CITIZEN. ------------- http://www.correctcraftfan.com/diaries/details.asp?ID=1117&sort=&pagenum=6" rel="nofollow - 64 American Skier 62 Classic.. 73 Ski Nautique |
Posted By: ononewheel
Date Posted: January-03-2013 at 12:49pm
Thank you for the bit of sanity, I agree with you. I am a gun owner and shooter. I want to ban guns, but only from the mentally ill, and those wishing to harm another. That though is the challenge, finding just those types of folks. ------------- If we let the professionals do everything it takes all the fun out of youtube |
Posted By: JoeinNY
Date Posted: January-03-2013 at 12:56pm
Who is this they and are they really doing that? Or does someone else (possibly also a they) want to get you fired up to send them some money so that they can take your money and your good name and apply it in the service of some gun manufacturer's agenda? (Well the part they dont get to keep for themselves anyway). ------------- http://www.correctcraftfan.com/diaries/details.asp?ID=1477 - 1983 Ski Nautique 2001 1967 Mustang 302 "Decoy" http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cO5MkcBXBBs - Holeshot Video |
Posted By: 62 wood
Date Posted: January-03-2013 at 1:03pm
The "THEY" is Senate president John Cullerton.. In the past I wouldnt worry too much about something like this, but today, who knows? here is part of the copy from the link in my first post... CULLERTON TO INTRODUCE NEAR TOTAL GUN BAN ON JANUARY 2ND The ISRA has learned from a credible source that Illinois Senate President John Cullerton will introduce a so called “assault weapons” ban on Wednesday when the legislature returns for its “lame duck” session. Cullerton hopes to ramrod the bill through and get it to Governor Quinn for signature by Friday. If he is successful at doing so, nearly every gun you currently own will be banned and will be subject to confiscation by the Illinois State Police. Based on what we know about Cullerton’s bill, firearms that would be banned include all semiautomatic rifles, pistols, and shotguns. Pump action shotguns would be banned as well. This would be a very comprehensive ban that would include not only so-called “assault weapons” but also such classics as M1 Garands and 1911-based pistols. There would be no exemptions and no grandfathering. You would have a very short window to turn in your guns to the State Police to avoid prosecution. ------------- http://www.correctcraftfan.com/diaries/details.asp?ID=1117&sort=&pagenum=6" rel="nofollow - 64 American Skier 62 Classic.. 73 Ski Nautique |
Posted By: C-Bass
Date Posted: January-03-2013 at 1:21pm
On that note, I guess I can't say I don't agree with ANY sort of ban, because I do agree with a ban for the types you mention. I think the problem is just as you mention, how do we filter this? And how do you filter for someone who isn't mentally unstable now but in 1 year his girlfriend breaks up with him, his dog runs away and he runs out of toilet paper all in the same day...now he snaps and decides to be "unstable" with some weapons he purchased back in the day when he was perfectly normal. How do you filter for that? ------------- Craig 67 SN 73 SN http://www.correctcraftfan.com/diaries/details.asp?ID=6103" rel="nofollow - 99 Sport 85SN |
Posted By: ononewheel
Date Posted: January-03-2013 at 1:26pm
So then you cannot stand behind the 2nd amendment anymore, since it was written to protect yourself from the gov. I still think you should have the .22 2nd amendment or not. I agree with Joe here, don't let some article get your pants in a bunch. There is attempted legislation all the time. But it really does come down to this. The shooter in CN, should not be able to trump the lives of people, just because of the 2nd amendment. He did after all use legal guns, that for the most part were designed to kill PEOPLE. It isn't like he used a pump shotgun. Guys can say, oh he'd use a box cutter, knife, etc., but that just is not the same. We just need to ban guns from these guys, and it is long past the time we get serious, and make that happen. I don't know the answer. ------------- If we let the professionals do everything it takes all the fun out of youtube |
Posted By: JoeinNY
Date Posted: January-03-2013 at 1:32pm
|
It is january 3rd today, was the credible source right? Are they coming to get your guns? Did you read the law? Including all the exceptions? Or are you letting someone else read it for you ------------- http://www.correctcraftfan.com/diaries/details.asp?ID=1477 - 1983 Ski Nautique 2001 1967 Mustang 302 "Decoy" http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cO5MkcBXBBs - Holeshot Video |
Posted By: jbach
Date Posted: January-03-2013 at 2:27pm
i did, did you? it's crap, trying to push it through during lame duck. "One measure would ban the possession, delivery, sale and transfer of semiautomatic handguns and rifles. People who currently own such weapons could keep them but would have to register them. The bill would allow semiautomatic weapons to be used at shooting ranges, but those facilities would be regulated. National Rifle Association lobbyist Todd Vandermyde told lawmakers the bill would restrict about 75 percent of handguns and 50 percent of long guns in circulation today. He also said it would treat law-abiding gun owners like criminals, and is in conflict with Second Amendment rights upheld by the courts." from here; http://www.humanevents.com/2013/01/03/illinois-pushes-for-gun-ban/" rel="nofollow - http://www.humanevents.com/2013/01/03/illinois-pushes-for-gun-ban/ |
Posted By: JoeinNY
Date Posted: January-03-2013 at 2:43pm
|
Yes I read the law, the whole law including the exceptions... Not a law I would support but it is impossible to discuss what is appropriate when we spend all our time arguing about what other people (who have an economic incentive) tell us they are trying to do to us ... ------------- http://www.correctcraftfan.com/diaries/details.asp?ID=1477 - 1983 Ski Nautique 2001 1967 Mustang 302 "Decoy" http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cO5MkcBXBBs - Holeshot Video |
Posted By: 62 wood
Date Posted: January-03-2013 at 2:44pm
seth, I agree totally. We have had guns in our family as long as I can remember (early 60's). Some of my guns were my grandfathers. Question: Why are we seeing all these crazies today? I dont remember shootings like this when I was growing up. I have the same guns in my home now as my parents/grandparents had then, the guns have not changed.... Why are we seeing all the criminal activity (at this level) today? ------------- http://www.correctcraftfan.com/diaries/details.asp?ID=1117&sort=&pagenum=6" rel="nofollow - 64 American Skier 62 Classic.. 73 Ski Nautique |
Posted By: Riley
Date Posted: January-03-2013 at 3:49pm
There's always been nuts, just not as many as today. In 1927 a school committee member blew a school up in Bath, Michigan and killed a lot of young kids. The Texas tower shootng was in the early to mid 60's. I think most of the nutty criminal activity today is due to a degrading society that is caused by libralism run amok. |
Posted By: jbach
Date Posted: January-03-2013 at 5:09pm
|
i read an article that actually shows that there are less violent crimes being commited per capita today than ever before. it's the 24 hour news, social media that brings the doom and gloom to the forfront. that's what sells. i'll try and find it. |
Posted By: quinner
Date Posted: January-03-2013 at 6:45pm
|
Think we should implement the Barney Fife law. You can have all the weapons you want...but you only get 1 bullet!! ------------- http://www.correctcraftfan.com/diaries/details.asp?ID=1143" rel="nofollow - Mi Bowt |
Posted By: jbach
Date Posted: January-03-2013 at 7:51pm
|
illinois gun ban vote scrapped, not enough votes to pass. http://www.bnd.com/2013/01/03/2446276/senate-dems-put-off-votes-on-gun.html" rel="nofollow - Vote Scrapped |
Posted By: peter1234
Date Posted: January-03-2013 at 8:36pm
actually doesnt require an f.f l it requires a curios and relics from the feds and depending on your state .(mass requires a green card issued by local P.D ------------- former skylark owner now a formula but I cant let this place go |
Posted By: peter1234
Date Posted: January-03-2013 at 8:45pm
|
give an inch the true extreme anti's will take a mile that is not even arguable . I have seen more bad inaccurate information from the press lately than i have ever noticed.. why dont you people that believe there should be more gun control spend some of your energy and time finding some social service ideas to help the mentally ill people that commit these crimes or is that just much harder than taking the guns away from law abiding people .. seems like there would be more accomplished with that ------------- former skylark owner now a formula but I cant let this place go |
Posted By: jbach
Date Posted: January-03-2013 at 10:50pm
amen, i bet this will shock a few people. this is the type of crap that makes me want to wear a tin foil hat. the media should be ashamed. you don't think they have an agenda. http://video.today.msnbc.msn.com/today/50208495#50208495" rel="nofollow - NO AR15 USED AT SANDY HOOK |
Posted By: bhectus
Date Posted: January-03-2013 at 11:10pm
The real shocking thing is they actually aired that information. Just makes me want to vomit. Same crap happened down here with the Trayvon Martin case. The media convicted George Zimmerman before all the evidence even surfaced. ------------- '02 Ski Nautique 196 w/ 5.7 Apex bowtie - Sold '87 Barefoot - sold '97 Super Sport Nautique - originally custom built for Walt Meloon '97 Ski Nautique '83 SN 2001 |
Posted By: peter1234
Date Posted: January-03-2013 at 11:32pm
|
if you look at the pics released it was an a/r 15 variant in 22 rimefire and he killed his mom with it then put it in his trunk i believe. did anyone see the stamford connecticut advocate . it might have been today or yesterday . it was a half page on the updated school the kids are using on the right half is a fine firearms show being held... thats some good editing...... my dad was a 40 yr pulitzer prize winning writer for the boston globe . He told me enough times it doesnt matter what they write its only to sell papers. he would probably still roll over on that one . ------------- former skylark owner now a formula but I cant let this place go |
Posted By: 05 210
Date Posted: January-04-2013 at 12:22am
|
I think you all make some valid points, but I'll post another wall of text and address a few things.You can thank me later Currently, it is already illegal to purchase a firearm if you have a mental illness. Problem is, the method for enforcing it sucks. You basically self advocate on the background check form and if there is no recorded evidence about you, all you have to do is lie. Adam Lanza used legally purchased guns to commit this crime, however they were not purchased legally by him. His access to those items was a complete failure on his mother's part and she paid the ultimate price. There are currently laws in place to punish people who allow guns to fall into the wrong hands. Unfortunately lives are usually lost before that happens. Assault rifles have select fire capability. AR-15's do not. AR-15s are not assault rifles. Please stop calling them assault rifles.AR stands for "Armalite", not "assault rifle". They are called "magazines". High capacity "clips" do not exist. The media is as much to blame for this stuff as anyone. I can name dozens of people who can tell you the Newtown shooter's name, the Columbine Shooters' names, The Aurora shooter's name, and the Virginia Tec shooter's name and not one of those people (including myself) can give you one name in all of those tragic events combined of an actual VICTIM. The wrong people get the attention in these events because the media sensationalizes everything. An analyst said after the Oregon Mall shooting that the most fearful thing about that event was that within two weeks someone else who was watching the media coverage would get the idea that he could top that and go on a spree himself. Three days later we had Newtown. We may regulate box trucks, fertlizer, gas etc.but I gotta feel pretty confident that if I had the knowledge and the where-with-all to build a bomb, that I could source the necessary items under the radar and make it happen. My sister in law would rent me a box truck without even asking for my ID  .Not that I'd ever even consider that.And this is very real. While the gun ban in Illinois was shot down, it was voted thru two commities last night and passed and was sent to the floor.Today, a democratic rep from Colorado introduced a magazine ban in the House. Ct and Ny are working on enormous gun legislation pieces right now. Anti gun legislators have been waiting for a chance to get their agenda thru and although they have been trying desperately for years unsuccessfully they finally have a *************** ton of support due to Newtown. A pump shotgun is a devastating weapon. Seth's post "It's not like he used a pump shotgun" was alittle absurd. A pump shotgun with a 5-7 round tube and someone who knows how to load it can do a miriad of damage in a very short amount of time. On a more somber note: Adam Lanza shot those children multiple times with that "high capacity magazine." Over 100 rounds for 26 people. He did not have to do that. The grotesque facts are that he could have killed those kids with one shot each, out of a 10 round magazine in a handgun and reloaded it 5 times in less than 90 seconds. The fact that he shot some of them several times, just shows you what his mental capacity was at the time. The first shot killed, the rest were just rage. I believe The gun used in Newtown was an AR15, I think that video is old and was wrong information.I'll have to look into that. I find it interesting that the President thinks schools should be gun free zones, yet he chooses to send his children to a private school that employs 11 armed security guards. So guns are good enough to protect his children, but not ours? Why is it that the govt can illegally traffic guns over the Mexican border and said guns can be used to kill hundreds of people including a US Border patrol agent and when it is brought to fruition it is swept under the rug and the likes of AHoles like Eric Holder are all but pardoned by our politicians? Hypocrisy Much? The problem here is the individuals. The shooter in NY who killed those firemen was previously paroled from prison on a murder charge. Brilliant. Don't know how he got a gun.Felons are prohibited by law from even holding a gun. No self respecting felon would ever be caught breaking a gun law....oh wait a minute. I am not a tinfoil hat wearer, but I simply can not understand how some people can look at the facts and say that they think more restrictions on rifle styles and magazine capacity are the answer. It' s all feel good bull***************. For the record, I am all for closing the gunshow loophole. If some *************** crashed his 60 MPH skiboat into a float full of schoolkids and they perished, would you want the government passing legislation to ban all 60mph ski boats? Joe? I mean, no one really needs a 60 mph ski boat, do they? Who skies at those speeds? I realize that a bit of a stretch lol, but u get where I'm coming from I hope. "Those who would sacrifice essential liberty for a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety" Benjamin Franklin Mike ------------- http:/diaries/details.asp?ID=2219" rel="nofollow - Air Nautique 210 Team 640 hours, not 1 regret |
Posted By: WakeSlayer
Date Posted: January-04-2013 at 12:59am
|
The US 7th Circuit Court of Appeals deemed the IL ban on carrying firearms unconstitutional, and has moved to demand a permanent injunction against the bans. They have further instructed the IL legislature to rewrite the laws to be far more reasonable. The laws in that state are simply ridiculous, and need to be changed. Look what city just had over 500 gun related homicides. ------------- Mike N 1968 Mustang |
Posted By: 74Wind
Date Posted: January-04-2013 at 1:02am
Having grown up in Stamford and an Advocate paperboy circa 1972 I had to look it up. Google Stamford Advocate Newtown and there it is.....yikes.... On the plus side..violent crime in the tri-state area continues to drop. The 2012 NYC murder rate is the lowest since 1963. Go Bloomberg. ------------- 1974 Southwind 18 1975 Century Mark II |
Posted By: ononewheel
Date Posted: January-04-2013 at 6:41am
Call it a magazine or clip, you are parsing words. I'm not impressed. Your gun knowledge might be impressive to some be me, YAWN. Give it up. A pump shot gun can cause alot of damage, and there might be someone who could fire off 30 rounds with a 5-7 shot tube as fast as some one with a 30 round MAGAZINE in an AR-10 or 15, but I don't know any. Considering as well the distance capabilities between the two, and you really are comparing two different weapons. Ninjas, could kill many with a simple blade if they wanted to, but that takes training, and usually that training leads to a higher, disciplined individual who wouldn't kill needlessly. In the Newton case you have neither, training or discipline. So I find it understandable why you cannot understand why the Presidents children might need a little more protection than the average Joe. Maybe he should fly his Cessna to Hawaii too? Besides trained security guards of the caliber that protect the Presidents children are a far far different matter than a principal with a gun, and maybe even a police officer. You are not in reality on this one. ------------- If we let the professionals do everything it takes all the fun out of youtube |
Posted By: 05 210
Date Posted: January-04-2013 at 11:13am
I am not trying to impress you with gun knowledge. I am simply stating facts so that you can talk without sounding uneductated when it comes to this stuff. Magazines and clips are not the same thing.Period I also did not say someone could fire the same amount of rounds out of a pump as a 30 round mag in the same amount of time. Again, that is not what I said, so please don't turn my words around. In your rush to try to shrug off the facts, you completely missed the point about the presidents kids. The armed guards at that school are not there because of his kids. His kids obviously are going to need more protection than other kids. Again, I Never said they didn't. The point is, he could have sent his kids to a school without armed security and they still would have been protected by the secret service. Those 11 armed guards are at that school whether his kids attend or not, and they are not "highly trained security" they are regular security guards. Oddly enough, He has openly stated that more guns aren't the answer to keeping our kids safe (I actually agree with that, but less guns isn't he answer either) You seem to be taking this all so personal. I am not attacking you, I was simply correcting some errors, so that people can make decisions based on facts, not emotion. The very problem with gun regulations is that all of the laws are written by people who really have no understanding of firearms and their beliefs are based solely on fear. Dianne Feinstein doesn't even know what half of the stuff is on guns that she's been fighting to ban for years. How is it a good thing to have someone pushing to ban long guns with barrel shrouds, when they don't even know what a barrel shroud is? That's a very dangerous line to be walking and it applies to everything they could possibly legislate, not just guns. Mike ------------- http:/diaries/details.asp?ID=2219" rel="nofollow - Air Nautique 210 Team 640 hours, not 1 regret |
Posted By: bhectus
Date Posted: January-04-2013 at 11:35am
After reading your numerous posts in these off-topic threads I'm starting to think that you just like to post for the sake of argument. I think the masses are really missing the point of these threads. The government over the years has increasingly tried and been successful at taking things away from the general public because they deem these inanimate objects "unsafe". Who are they to decide what is unsafe for me? I grew up riding 3-wheelers. A bunch of people got hurt on them and the govt banned them. I flipped mine a few times and every time it was my fault. Vans skate park just closed here in Orlando. It was a great place for kids to go after school and on weekends to do something constructive with their time, stay out of trouble, stay in shape, be social with peers. They shut it down due to increased liability insurance making it no longer a profitable business venture. Seems as though when some kids get hurt, their parents like to sue the facility for damages and our f'd up legal system allows it even after those parents signed the waiver releasing the facility from liability. An idiot can sue McD's for serving them coffee that was too hot at the drive-thru. How much did they get from that lawsuit? Our society continues to allow all this b.s. to happen and things are going to continue to only get more restricted. What are you all going to do when the govt tries to take our boats away because they aren't fuel efficient enough? It could happen. ------------- '02 Ski Nautique 196 w/ 5.7 Apex bowtie - Sold '87 Barefoot - sold '97 Super Sport Nautique - originally custom built for Walt Meloon '97 Ski Nautique '83 SN 2001 |
Posted By: 74Wind
Date Posted: January-04-2013 at 11:43am
When inboards are outlawed, only outlaws will have inboards...  ------------- 1974 Southwind 18 1975 Century Mark II |
Posted By: OverMyHead
Date Posted: January-04-2013 at 11:54am
Seth, are you saying if a guy enters a school with a gun, the presidents kids are more deserving of armed protection than the kids at Sandy hook? ------------- For thousands of years men have felt the irresistible urge to go to sea, and many of them died. Things got better after they invented boats. 1987 Ski Nautique |
Posted By: quinner
Date Posted: January-04-2013 at 12:11pm
|
Easy Dave, clearly Seth was not saying that, simply that the presidents kids are more likely to be in the crosshairs of some maniac then the average student is. If I was the president I would want my kids to have EVERY means of protection possible. Nice posts Mikey!! ------------- http://www.correctcraftfan.com/diaries/details.asp?ID=1143" rel="nofollow - Mi Bowt |
Posted By: Nautiquehunter
Date Posted: January-04-2013 at 1:16pm
| Why is it that the states with the most restrictive gun laws seem to have the most gun violence? |
Posted By: 62 wood
Date Posted: January-04-2013 at 1:21pm
just think how bad it would be with out them... ------------- http://www.correctcraftfan.com/diaries/details.asp?ID=1117&sort=&pagenum=6" rel="nofollow - 64 American Skier 62 Classic.. 73 Ski Nautique |
Posted By: JoeinNY
Date Posted: January-04-2013 at 1:35pm
|
Why is it the states with the most gun violence seem to have the most restrictive gun laws might be the right question.. and the answer is then self-evident. Although the word “seem” is always a problem.. Virginia is not exactly a hotbed of gun control (at least it wasn’t when I lived there) but home to the worse school massacre in history. No offense to Mike but I didn’t see a single compelling reason why we shouldn’t regulate guns and ammo.. just an analogy about why it might annoy me if someone proposes banning ski boats. I don’t agree with banning any type of gun… I think the NRA and some over enthusiastic gun supporters by fighting against realistic regulation of every gun makes it more likely that many types of guns will be banned. It is obvious that a ban on guns with certain trigger styles or the ability to fold a stock isn't effective, and is in general silly. I feel the same way about boats letting any moron who can pry enough money out of daddys pocket buy a cigarette boat and run down the lake at a hundred miles per hour seriously increases the likely hood of bans on certain speeds, types, horsepowers of boats (not to mention puts the safety of others in jeopardy. But here is obviously a cost to society for gun ownership, 20 children are not killed by a lone man with a knife, it should be paid by those who choose to own guns and not school children. Just like the cost to society to own a high horsepower recreational boat should be paid by the boater not the kid on the beach. In this case are we trying to say that the right of a bored housewife to keep an unsecured arsenal in her house is greater than the right of 20 kids to go to school without being slaughtered? If there are rules on the books that hold her responsible for what happens with her guns they certainly weren’t enough to make her think twice that day about making them secure. They also didn’t do much to discourage the neighbor of the deranged scumbag up the road from me from going to gander mountain and buying him the guns he pointed out, but if they were going to be insured under her name the case of beer he bought her (making that up the story isn’t out yet) he gave her probably wouldn’t have gotten him a gun that day. The mother in the CT shooting case was not a responsible gun owner her irresponsibility cost some family the life of their 6 year old. Economically the cost of that gun to society was not borne by the one that it benefited. If we simply treated guns like cars then the private market would achieve many of the goals that we all know government is not adequately able to produce. As soon as you require every gun to be covered by liability insurance then the insurance companies will create training, safe requirements, background assessments, etc to assign a cost to each gun owner as well as type and class of gun. Just like a kid with a Ferrari would pay more for insurance than a soccer mom with a mini van, a 25 year old untrained owner without a safe trying to insure an AK-47 is going to be about as likely to get insurance as someone with 3 dwi’s. Think your insurance company wouldn’t check into your background and mental status? Make you take a vision test when you get a bit older? Got a classic gun that you rarely fire, uses expensive rounds, lives in a padded case in a safe… hagertys will probably insure that for a great rate. Mark and track every bullet, register and insure every gun… ban nothing. Not necessarily a solution I would propose but how does that negatively effect any legitimate gun owner? I know it would effect the sales of guns and ammo because it would discourage the impulse driven gun owner, but frankly those are the worst kind. Lifelong responsible gun owners wouldn’t be deterred, nor would their insurance rates be high. Personally I would rather use the registration fees of gun owners to pay for armed police in schools… rather than raise the taxes of those who do not choose to have guns to pay for it. But that is just my tendency to be a market driven solutions type of guy. ------------- http://www.correctcraftfan.com/diaries/details.asp?ID=1477 - 1983 Ski Nautique 2001 1967 Mustang 302 "Decoy" http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cO5MkcBXBBs - Holeshot Video |
Posted By: Gary S
Date Posted: January-04-2013 at 1:41pm
Great post Mike It ought to really scare people when a politician says we have to pass a bill to find out whats in it. ------------- http://www.correctcraftfan.com/diaries/details.asp?ID=1711&sort=&pagenum=1&yrstart=1966&yrend=1970" rel="nofollow - 69 Mustang HM SS 95 Nautique Super Sport |
Posted By: OverMyHead
Date Posted: January-04-2013 at 1:45pm
I am not the president but I want my kids to have EVERY means of protection. These attacks happen enough that they have to be considered a plausable occurrance so my guestion is do my kids deserve less protection than the presidents in the event of a mass shooting? ------------- For thousands of years men have felt the irresistible urge to go to sea, and many of them died. Things got better after they invented boats. 1987 Ski Nautique |
Posted By: Riley
Date Posted: January-04-2013 at 1:53pm
|
Cars only have to be registered and insured if operated on a public road and anyone can buy one without a background check or any type of special permission. People can collect as many as they want without anyone elses permission. Car ownership really isn't a good analogy to gun ownership. So far no one has stated how the kid got the guns, whether his mother allowed access to them or he somehow he obtained the key or combo, or if he broke into where ever it was stored. Certainly the mother bears responsibility for the kid getting the guns for just about any way it was obtained. I don't know how the woman became a bored housewife or how that plays into her owning a legal product, but there has been so much bogus info put out by the press from the time this event happened all due to all of the media being anti gun biased. Bob Sheafer from Texas on the Sunday after the shooting happened was incredulous that the woman owned 4 guns. As if a guy from Texas doesn't know that 4 guns is not very many guns for just about anyone that owns guns. Not one proposal put forth that involves gun control since Newtown happened would have stopped it from happening. |
Posted By: 05 210
Date Posted: January-04-2013 at 3:00pm
|
Good points Joe and as always your responses are well thought out. Keep in mind though, that none of the other activities you list are guaranteed to US citizens by our constitution. Now, I can't sit here and make an arguement for someone who does not secure their guns as I do not agree with that. I also have some common sense and realize that under certain situations, your right to swing your fist should end at my nose. And I don't think that any gun rights advocates are saying that gun rights are more important than childrens'(or anyone's) lives. I think the point here is that a ban on semi auto guns and shotguns really isn't going to make a lick of difference. Until someone sits down at the Capital and says we need to have a sane discussion about this and come up with a solution will there ever be any headway. Unfortunately, we seem to have 2 very divided sides. One says no regulation at all, and the other wants to get rid of everything. That's why nothing ever gets done, both sides are too extreme in what they want. So far, I have not seen anything rational as far as registering and insuring guns. Politicians want to document what is in circulation and then prohibit any further manufacture of those items and the future transfer of those any items. They want all of that stuff gone eventually, that is their only goal. I'm not sure if anyone knows this, but 99.8% percent of firearms are used legit. So basically, people want more regulation on 99.8% of guns , due to negligence on behalf of .2% of the rest. Those .2% are held by criminals or the mentally unstable. Both conditions require different solutions. CT, NY, NJ, CA, MA, MD, Chicago & D.C. all have more restricted laws for gun owners than many of the other states. Most require waits to purchase,have capacity restrictions, some regulate ammo,some require a license to own or purchase guns, some require all guns to be registered and have trigger locks when not in use and some flat out ban the posession of many types of firearms by civilians. With the exception of New York City, which I believe is now considered to be very safe in all aspects of crime not just firearms, all of the other states have huge problems. How is the firearm Murder rate in Chicago? Los Angeles? New Haven & Bridgeport? Baltimore ? D.C ? Springfield ? All already heavily regulate firearms for responsible gun owners. I can't look at that and see a compelling argument that says more restriction is the answer either. Mike ------------- http:/diaries/details.asp?ID=2219" rel="nofollow - Air Nautique 210 Team 640 hours, not 1 regret |
Posted By: john b
Date Posted: January-04-2013 at 3:54pm
|
The guns are out there and you can't legislate the genie back into the bottle. As so many of you pointed out in earlier threads, freedom is not free. Murders by firearms of all kinds is the price you pay for allowing citizens to own guns. The majority of murders are by handguns, not rifles. Chicago is unique in many ways, gun violence is only one of them (lets not even touch on our politics). During the 2011-2012 school year, the last full school year, 319 Chicago students were wounded by firearms and 24 were killed. The recent school shooting was tragic, but overall children are pretty safe in our schools. I am happy to see the discussion on firearms, as that is the first step to a solution for any problem, but in this case I don't believe there is a solution, only incremental improvement. Can someone tell me, what is the purpose of high capacity magazines other than killing people? We have 30 round mags in the AR15s in our squad cars and we did a lot of training with them. Like military weapons, their only purpose is to kill people. Is there something I am missing? I will readily admit, the 223s are a very fun weapon to shoot targets and plink with, but a 10 round mag is just as much fun. I think Illinois has a pretty good system for screening gun owners despite the very high level of gun crime. The Illinois Firearm Owners Identification Card (FOID) is issued after you pass a background check by the Illinois State Police. You do not register your individual guns or tell anyone how many or what type you own. You must present it when buying a firearm or ammunition. Most shootings and murders that I have investigated involved someone who did not have a FOID. One problem with the law is that guns are freely sold at swap meets, and most Illinois residents, living in the Chicago area, can take a short drive out of state and buy guns and ammunition without this restriction. I have seen many people convicted of gun crimes that serve little or no time, that must change as well. Here is one personal example of what's wrong. "Back in the day" (late 90s), I had a gang member come out to supposedly do a drug deal and sell me a bunch of dope, but he intended to rob me of the buy money instead. Something didn't look right to me as he approached my car, because he was wearing different gang colors than the gang I was buying from. I drove away as reached for my door handle to get in. A short time later ater a minor car chase he was arrested with the three other gang members in his car by my surveillance team and two guns were recovered. The gun on the guy who was going to rob me was a five shot S&W with a spent shell in one chamber. The spent round was there because he did a drive by in Aurora IL on the way to the deal. He spent one night in jail TOTAL and took a felony conviction. No FOID, did a drive by on the way, admitted in the arrest interview that he was going to shoot me and take the money, and he spent ONE NIGHT in jail, and that was only because he had to wait for a bond hearing the next morning. He was charged with: 1. Attempt armed robbery 2. Unlawful use of weapon (concealed weapon) 3. Possession of a firearm without requisite FOID 4. Possession of ammunition without requisite FOID 5. Attempted acquisition of a controlled substance The S/A accepted a plea of attempt armed robbery and a felony conviction with no jail time because they were so overwhelmed by caseload and the lack of jail space. Unfortunately, this is not uncommon. Until we enforce the laws we have on the books there is no reason to waste more ink. ------------- 1970 Mustang "Theseus' paradox" If everyone else is doing it, you're too late! |
Posted By: Nautiquehunter
Date Posted: January-04-2013 at 4:21pm
| I just served 5 days on the Grand Jury in Hall county. We indited 180 suspects to go to trial. The one thing all of them had in common was a long history of criminal activity. They were in and out of jail so often that the cops knew them by first name. As I see it regulating ,restricting and banning will only prevent the 99.8% of honest responsible gun owners from doing acts of violence they wouldn't do anyway . It will be just another source of revenue for a money hungry government and will do nothing to solve the problem. If you do the background checks on these murderers you will find a long history of bad behavior and or mental disease that went unchecked for years . Banning the gun will have the same effect as banning alcohol did in the 20s making honest citizens into criminals. Why dont they go after the real criminals and keep them off the streets and leave the law abiding citizens alone. |
Posted By: 05 210
Date Posted: January-04-2013 at 4:40pm
Honestly, A valid point could be made here. Not that it's a comprehensive reason to have a 30 rounder but for me, depending on what type of shooting I'm doing it is easier than reloading twice. But then the argument could be made for having 3 10 round mags ready to go. Someone practicing tactical stuff at the range or competing in an event, or taking a carbine class could very easily dump 10 rounds, drop a mag , dump ten more, drop a mag and so on. Probably would add what? Maybe 5 seconds to the whole process of expending 30 rounds? You obviously have some carbine experience John so I'm curious as to your thoughts. Is an added 5 seconds accurate taking into account 2 combat reloads over 30 straight rounds? I'm not really sure that this would change the end result a whole lot, but maybe? Each situation would be different I guess & we could probably "what if" these scenarios forever . Alot of people use these rifles for home defense as well and they are very effective for that purpose. I am assuming as a LEO, that you would want a 30 rounder for the most available protection when you encounter a life altering situation. In a world where seconds count, but the police are minutes away, why should I as a homeowner/ protector of my family be denied the same level of protection as a police officer ? I guess there really is no straight foward solution. Thanks for chiming in. I have alot of friends/customers in law enforcement and it is always interesting to hear their opinion on these sorts of things. Stay safe out there. ETA: Also a very good point that you and Mike Hunter make about the justice system failing us do to certain circumstances as well. Mike ------------- http:/diaries/details.asp?ID=2219" rel="nofollow - Air Nautique 210 Team 640 hours, not 1 regret |
Posted By: john b
Date Posted: January-04-2013 at 4:50pm
|
You are probably right, Mike. I think 5 seconds for a 2 tactical reloads is reasonable for a skilled person with extra mags in a belt case. It is harder to so when you are being rushed by someone and the pressure is on unless you train frequently, well, and under the stress of realistic conditions. It may not make any difference at all though. Most people freeze when involved in an in ident like this. We can only hope that the distraction of reloading causes a moment of opportunity for someone else to take action. I know from rapid response training using sim munition and paint ball that the best opportunity you get to neutralize the active shooter is when he is reloading or retreating. ------------- 1970 Mustang "Theseus' paradox" If everyone else is doing it, you're too late! |
Posted By: JoeinNY
Date Posted: January-04-2013 at 5:16pm
|
Keep running with the all or nothing argument.. if you “win” and get no regulations then enough people will die in public enough ways that eventually you will end up with nothing. Same reason why we can’t balance a budget in this country, half the country assumes they are a complete genius and the other half are complete idiots. The give them an inch and they will take a mile argument seems pretty silly considering we had an “assault weapons ban” in place for 10 years and it didn’t exactly result in them coming to pry your guns out of your cold dead hands. Responsible owners advocating for the rights of uneducated morons to buy high powered high capacity toys and leave them lying around just don’t make any sense to me, but that is the all or nothing argument. If you want all gun owners to be grouped together, which without regulation/training/certification/licensing of some form they must be then any type/shape/capacity of gun we don’t want in “their” hands we can’t allow you to have in your hands and therefore you allow the 99.8% to be ruled by the .2% When you get irresponsible bans on shapes of guns – know that it will be largely because the NRA was representing the rights of its corporate sponsors and not its members. ------------- http://www.correctcraftfan.com/diaries/details.asp?ID=1477 - 1983 Ski Nautique 2001 1967 Mustang 302 "Decoy" http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cO5MkcBXBBs - Holeshot Video |
Posted By: jbach
Date Posted: January-04-2013 at 5:29pm
how would 5 seconds have changed anything in the sandy hook tragedy? would 2.5 seconds be enough for one of these unarmed grade schoolers to stop the maniac? how about an unarmed techer? the guy have 4 handguns. the problem isn't 10 round mags, or 30 round mags, or 500 round mags. these shootings almost always have one thing in common. they take place in so called "safe zones" where firearms are not allowed. this does nothing but create an entire building of helpless victims. the aurora colorado shooting, "gun free". the century 16 theater's parent, has a strict "gun-free" policy at all of its 459 theaters, even for those who have concealed carry permits. 3% of colorado has a CC permit. there were over 200+ in the theater. do the quick math yourself. virginia tech, same thing, "gun free zone". does anyone see a common denomonator here? safe zones are not a solution to gun violence, they are the problem. every willing, able bodied, law abiding citizen should be armed. period. |
Posted By: Riley
Date Posted: January-04-2013 at 5:30pm
| It's kind of funny how so many people point their finger at the NRA itself as being the cause of any legislation that can't get passed. Like they're this huge organization that controls congress. They're the oldest civil rights organization in the country, but they only have about 4M members. What makes them powerful is not their money or their lobbyists, but the gun owning public in general that supports their position on the 2nd amendment. |
Posted By: john b
Date Posted: January-04-2013 at 5:49pm
|
Joe, I started my post with saying at least we have a dialogue started about it, and that is the first step. Of course there will be disagreement, but maybe we can reach a reasonable compromise. It has been done before. I still believe in the power of debate. I hope se good ideas are explored. ------------- 1970 Mustang "Theseus' paradox" If everyone else is doing it, you're too late! |
Posted By: 05 210
Date Posted: January-04-2013 at 7:16pm
|
Joe, I gotta tell you, as much as I like you and as intelligent as I think you are, that last post made you sound just as closed minded as the people oppsosite you that you are pointing out as being so one sided. Drownings cause more child deaths per year than firearms. Do we ban pools? No. Because drownings usually only occur to one person at a time. It is also usually solely due to someone being negligent (go figure). I see zero difference between a child drowning every day for a month, or 30 children drowning once a month. The tragic outcome is the exact same, especially for the families. You just don't hear about it on the news because one child perishing isn't nearly the headline as 30 all at once. I don't see anyone here saying "all or nothing". What I see is a group of people who have obviously proven that no matter what side you are on or what facts are presented from either side, there is an arguable abuttal to every comment and every statistic and alot of it is logic and makes sense. From both sides. Seems like good healthy convo to me and no one is advocating mayhem and death by gun to everyone. One innocent gun death is too many. One of the things that has been lost in the media coverage lately is that these shootings have been just as much of an atrocity to responsible gun owners as they have been to people who hate guns. I personally, live a quality, legal lifestyle and am tired of being looked down upon as a criminal or being treated like I approve of or don't care about the deaths of innocent kids because I have a 30 round magazine. Maybe if more people had discussions like this everyone may realize that the root problem is a sum of several things combined, not just guns, and a solution that works can be found. I am against any further gun legislation being passed out of spite. I want all the angles examined and every option on the table when decisions are made. The big rush now in the govt is to get something in place ASAP to stop these tragedies. I find it ironic that protecting our kids wasn't that important when the current administration was cutting the funding established by Clinton for keeping our kids safer at school. If they are our most important asset, why is that funding being cut, but the current administration is giving themselves a raise? These politicians don't care about your kids. All they care about is their own personal agenda. And you're right....no one came to pry anyone's guns out of their cold dead hands during the last ban, but gun crimes didn't go down either. Columbine happened in 1999. Right in the middle of the last ban. Mike ------------- http:/diaries/details.asp?ID=2219" rel="nofollow - Air Nautique 210 Team 640 hours, not 1 regret |
Posted By: peter1234
Date Posted: January-04-2013 at 8:07pm
|
in mass we have had a law for about 12 yrs that says if you are caught with a firearm and you are not legally allowed to possess it you will serve a mandatory year in jail.. I have never seen or read anything to show me that anyone has been convicted and sent to jail... I read the papers every day and watch boston news maybe i missed one.... ------------- former skylark owner now a formula but I cant let this place go |
Posted By: SN206
Date Posted: January-04-2013 at 8:08pm
|
Qualified expert with a side arm(92F) and a rifle( evil M4A2) and would want a 30 round magazine when needed. That said, compare hits on target paper vs. a moving shooting target. Ironically the best trained military shooters in the world(ours) confirms one kill with as many as a hounded 30 round magazines. When it comes to me and my family I'll keep my P Mag's. I also use that same magazine for hunting, 3 event, and plinking. "I don't always shoot, but when I do it's with a tactical advantage". ------------- ...those who have fallen and those who will. |
Posted By: JoeinNY
Date Posted: January-04-2013 at 8:24pm
|
Guns are guns, not boats, not pools, not cars - however I am well aware more children accidently die per year drowning than gun accidents - but that doesnt include the gun murder rate which is sadly another 2500 kids a year - neither issue is something that we should fail to attempt to fix in any way possible- Most in this thread have equated regulation with a ban.. thats a huge jump and it is all or nothing thinking. However I haven't suggesting banning a single gun... if I had my way with the right insurance, training, and license you could have a full auto if you could afford to buy and maintain it. None of these things are cut and dry, nor are the opinions of the people the NRA and groups like them purport to represent. However the NRA as a rule supports people that vote against all regulation of guns... those same people vote against all spending - whether for school safety - or embassy safety - or mental health services, or metal health facilities, or for the bridges they drive over, or the soldiers that protect them. They call it conservatism, or libertainianism, or some other ism.. it's stupidism. We give up some of our liberties in a society to protect our basic freedoms, none are absolute. All my last post states is that gun owners not looking to lose thier rights should do something to seperate themselves from those who should, willingness to submit to reasonable regulation would do that, insisting that because 99.8% of gun owners are law abiding that we shouldn't do anything about the other .2% is not productive in a country where 53% of the people don't own guns. Most industries self regulate. they get together in manufacturers groups, talk about what is reasonable and submit proposals to the goverment to adopt, or form a certifying body to enforce those standards. They do this to keep some tragedy from inducing public (government) overreaction and getting back a set of standards that would put us all out of business. Seems logical to me that the NRA would be proposing a set of workable standards rather than doubling down and waiting for an overreaction, both because that would best serve thier membership and because nobody wants someone who would shoot up a school to have easy access to a weapon. Guns are certainly not all of the problem, probably not even the majority of the problem. But that doesn't mean we shouldn't look at how to fix that part of the problem, or put some restriction on what else we have to do before we look at it. Still dont know why people need to bring guns, religion, and politics to a perfectly good boating site... ------------- http://www.correctcraftfan.com/diaries/details.asp?ID=1477 - 1983 Ski Nautique 2001 1967 Mustang 302 "Decoy" http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cO5MkcBXBBs - Holeshot Video |
Posted By: SN206
Date Posted: January-04-2013 at 8:34pm
|
Well said Joe. ------------- ...those who have fallen and those who will. |
Posted By: OverMyHead
Date Posted: January-04-2013 at 8:52pm
|
Joe, You like to say all or nothing, but many see it as a slippery slop. For liberals regulating is like eating potato chips, they never can stop at one and they justify the new regulations as just an extension of the first one that did not seem so bad. Baby steps. They also completely ignore the fact that most gun regulations have accomplish nothing except to make life more difficult and expensive. The anti gun crowd will not be satisfied until every single gun is out of the hands of private citizens. Constant vigilance is the only cure. ------------- For thousands of years men have felt the irresistible urge to go to sea, and many of them died. Things got better after they invented boats. 1987 Ski Nautique |
Posted By: 05 210
Date Posted: January-04-2013 at 8:59pm
Mike ------------- http:/diaries/details.asp?ID=2219" rel="nofollow - Air Nautique 210 Team 640 hours, not 1 regret |
Posted By: JoeinNY
Date Posted: January-04-2013 at 9:33pm
Well there we have it - name calling, dehumanizing of those with different opinions, fear mongering, false statements, and other assorted nonsense - all marks of stupidism ------------- http://www.correctcraftfan.com/diaries/details.asp?ID=1477 - 1983 Ski Nautique 2001 1967 Mustang 302 "Decoy" http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cO5MkcBXBBs - Holeshot Video |
Posted By: SN206
Date Posted: January-04-2013 at 10:01pm
|
FWW, I think it is ironic that at one point when we were in Iraq we allowed each household to keep a Kalashnikov yet some politicians want to take them away from the homes of Americans. ------------- ...those who have fallen and those who will. |
Posted By: OverMyHead
Date Posted: January-04-2013 at 10:32pm
Joe, I re-read the above posts, and I do not see any name calling or dehumanization, at least on my part. By the way, stupid-ism is hyphenated. As for fear mongering I would offer you the example of smoking bans. They went from smoking sections to no smoking in government buildings, then indoors at all work places, outdoors at workplaces, indoors at bars, outdoors at bars, in cars with children, private apartment/residences and even outdoor venues like parks, and the anti smokers do not seem to yet be satisfied. All baby steps on a slippery slope of regulating a legal product. I don't have to make this stuff up. The left is stranger than fiction. Speaking of stupid-ism, whats up with reading a topic of gun ban, making several often lengthy posts, and then after being a full participant declaring the subject does not belong on a boat forum as if you are above it all? Mama says Stupid-ism is as stupid-ism does. ------------- For thousands of years men have felt the irresistible urge to go to sea, and many of them died. Things got better after they invented boats. 1987 Ski Nautique |
Posted By: peter1234
Date Posted: January-04-2013 at 11:05pm
|
"As for fear mongering I would offer you the example of smoking bans. They went from smoking sections to no smoking in government buildings, then indoors at all work places, outdoors at workplaces, indoors at bars, outdoors at bars, in cars with children, private apartment/residences and even outdoor venues like parks, and the anti smokers do not seem to yet be satisfied. All baby steps on a slippery slope of regulating a legal product. I don't have to make this stuff up. The left is stranger than fiction." cigarettes dont kill people only the smoke kills ------------- former skylark owner now a formula but I cant let this place go |
Posted By: jbach
Date Posted: January-05-2013 at 12:37am
you'd be right. i'll bet a $100 gift certificate to the vendor of our choice that the first piece of federal legislation will contain a BAN of production of a certain type of firearm, or BAN of a certain capacity of magazine. apparently we all know what regulation really means sans you. i'll take that bet with the first 10 takers on this site to post up.
i read none of that, was it racist too? |
Posted By: OverMyHead
Date Posted: January-05-2013 at 12:50am
Thanks for having my back Josh, but even I did not rule out assorted nonsense.  ------------- For thousands of years men have felt the irresistible urge to go to sea, and many of them died. Things got better after they invented boats. 1987 Ski Nautique |
Posted By: 05 210
Date Posted: January-05-2013 at 12:52am
|
I find this tidbit of info kind of interesting, no way advocating we should do this in the U.S. and can't help to think that the answer cannot be this simple. I am sure there is more to it than this... In Switzerland, all males upon a certain age are required to partake in Military training and recieve issued rifles that they are required to keep. Strangely enough..... there is virtually no gun crime in Switzerland Also, in light of a few recent posts I think it's important to remember that we are all adults here. While we may have differing opinions, we have that right, and it's important for all of us to keep our big boy pants on and remain civilized. I hope I wasn't wrong when I stated in my first post that I thought we could have this conversation. I think it's healthy and I have given alot of thought to some of the things that have been posted in this thread by people who may not see eye to eye with me. I hope that others have as well, on both sides. Mike ------------- http:/diaries/details.asp?ID=2219" rel="nofollow - Air Nautique 210 Team 640 hours, not 1 regret |
Posted By: 05 210
Date Posted: January-05-2013 at 1:06am
|
And I agree with Josh on the ban issue. Because all you have to do is spend 2 minutes listening to any politician talk about guns and none of them are talking about any type of regulation that does not contain a ban of some sort. That is a fact. The reason they are pushing so hard right now is that they know without a doubt that if they can't get a bill passed RIGHT NOW while the disgust of the Newtown tragedy and the heartfelt loss of all those children is still fresh in the minds of this countries population, that they will never get it done. Ever. Mike ------------- http:/diaries/details.asp?ID=2219" rel="nofollow - Air Nautique 210 Team 640 hours, not 1 regret |
Posted By: jbach
Date Posted: January-05-2013 at 1:18am
well, since i'm a stand up guy, i'll save Joe his $100. didn't realize these were proposed today. all democrats, per usual. Joe, did you get the privilege of voting for carolyn mccarthy in your district? today she proposed "prohibition on the transfer, sale, or possession of ammunition clips beyond a certain size", among other things. you would think that she would have used the correct term for magazines when proposing legislation. they are NOT the same and can not be used interchangeably. http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Government/2013/01/04/Dems-push-eight-bills-gun-control" rel="nofollow - ON FIRST DAY, DEMOCRATS PROPOSE EIGHT ANIT-GUN BILLS |
Posted By: OverMyHead
Date Posted: January-05-2013 at 1:40am
|
No one under 21 being allowed to carry a gun is going to mess with the military . ------------- For thousands of years men have felt the irresistible urge to go to sea, and many of them died. Things got better after they invented boats. 1987 Ski Nautique |
Posted By: 05 210
Date Posted: January-05-2013 at 1:42am
|
In other news conclusive to Josh's finds, it looks like the AWB that got shot down yesterday in Illinois has been added into another bill today by one of the reps, apparently in hopes that no one would notice? What a snake. Here is a http://www.ar15.com/forums/t_1_5/1415469_BREAKING__IL_Rep__Acevedo_s_Assault_Weapons_Ban_Amendment.html" rel="nofollow - Link . Warning, if you're not a gun enthusiast don't spend too much time browsing the linked site ETA: I also read today that Mayor Bloomberg is fighting the release of the names of NYC concealed carry permit holders. He is the biggest proponent of banning firearms in the city. Anyone care to guess why he doesn't want the list released ??? Mike ------------- http:/diaries/details.asp?ID=2219" rel="nofollow - Air Nautique 210 Team 640 hours, not 1 regret |
Posted By: SN206
Date Posted: January-05-2013 at 2:09am
|
http://www.wsbtv.com/news/news/local/woman-hiding-kids-shoots-intruder/nTm7s/" rel="nofollow - Guns save children? ------------- ...those who have fallen and those who will. |
Posted By: jbach
Date Posted: January-05-2013 at 2:11am
ooh ooh ooh. me me me. i'll take "i'm a hypocrite" for $500 alex. he's a typical liberal "what's good for you is not good for me". you guys will appreciate this, speaking of hypocritical. i chuckled when the interviewer mentioned having to go through security and frisked to get to interview with him, but to secure schools is "rediculous" according to this idiot. i know it's new york and all, but wow, he is some kind of stupid. http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=4ee_1356368895" rel="nofollow - Bloomberg interview on gun control |
Posted By: 05 210
Date Posted: January-05-2013 at 12:29pm
|
I find it disheartening that in the video in josh's link, that the lady conducting the interview knows more about the ins and outs of firearms than Bloomterd. This was exactly what I was pointing to when I said it is a dangerous line to be walking with these politicians. Their proposed legislation is based solely on misinformation, fear and personal agenda. Here is a link to http://www.nraila.org/legislation/federal-legislation/2013/1/feinsteins-new-gun-ban-bill-likely-to-be-introduced-january-22.aspx" rel="nofollow - Info on Feinstein AWB . Sorry for the link to the Evil NRA, but it was the quickest one i could access. On Dec. 17th, Feinstein said, "I have been working with my staff for over a year on this legislation" and "It will be carefully focused." Indicating the depth of her research on the issue, she said on Dec. 21st that she had personally looked at pictures of guns in 1993, and again in 2012 If nobody sees the "WTF" in the part in red, then I feel sorry for you. These people are writing all of our laws, not just the ones on guns. Bad juju. Mike ------------- http:/diaries/details.asp?ID=2219" rel="nofollow - Air Nautique 210 Team 640 hours, not 1 regret |
Posted By: skicat2001
Date Posted: January-05-2013 at 11:29pm
Now do what the left does or wants and take that women's guns out of her hand and instead of the crimnal being the winner was the loser.And if she had no gun,her kid and her would have been dead.------------- 1985 CC 2001-SOLD Lee Michael Johnson |
Posted By: 62 wood
Date Posted: January-06-2013 at 12:02am
|
I just took time to watch the Bluminidiot-berg interview that jbach linked to. Is that guy serious? Somebody needs to take that boy hunting and show him what its all about. He certainely does NOT have a clue! ------------- http://www.correctcraftfan.com/diaries/details.asp?ID=1117&sort=&pagenum=6" rel="nofollow - 64 American Skier 62 Classic.. 73 Ski Nautique |
Posted By: Nautiquehunter
Date Posted: January-06-2013 at 1:27pm
|
I watched the Bloomberg interview on gun control he is a poster boy against gun control. No facts or knowledge about guns or the people that legally own them. Chicago has had a gun ban for as long as I can remember how is that working out? Of the 450 plus gun murders in Chicago 2012 how many were by law abiding citizens? So how will requiring insurance,registration and training of legal gun owners do anything to change this? These murders are done by habitual criminals that have been caught and released many times before they kill somebody. If you want to stop gun violence you need to stop violent people. |
Posted By: jbach
Date Posted: January-06-2013 at 1:28pm
|
well well well, isn't this surprising. from the beginning of the sandy hook tragedy, the media as well as anit-gun politicians have been steppping over these dead children to get their agenda passed by feeding off the emotion and falsifying the facts. this was about a gun grab from the very beginning, plain and simple. there wasn't even a rifle used or involved. this makes me sick. look like my tin foil hat was not worn in vein on this one. http://www.digitaljournal.com/article/340113" rel="nofollow - Rifle found in Lanza's trunk NOT a Bushmaster |
Posted By: SN206
Date Posted: January-06-2013 at 9:50pm
|
"A militia, when properly formed, are in fact the people themselves …" Richard Henry Lee writing in Letters from the Federal Farmer to the Republic, Letter XVIII, May, 1788. "The people are not to be disarmed of their weapons. They are left in full possession of them." Zachariah Johnson Elliot's Debates, vol. 3 "The Debates in the Several State Conventions on the Adoption of the Federal Constitution." "… the people are confirmed by the next article in their right to keep and bear their private arms" Philadelphia Federal Gazette June 18, 1789, Pg. 2, Col. 2 Article on the Bill of Rights "And that the said Constitution be never construed to authorize Congress to infringe the just liberty of the Press, or the rights of Conscience; or to prevent the people of the United States, who are peaceable citizens, from keeping their own arms; …" Samuel Adams quoted in the Philadelphia Independent Gazetteer, August 20, 1789, "Propositions submitted to the Convention of this State" The Founding Fathers on Arms "Firearms stand next in importance to the constitution itself. They are the American people's liberty teeth and keystone under independence … from the hour the Pilgrims landed to the present day, events, occurences and tendencies prove that to ensure peace security and happiness, the rifle and pistol are equally indispensable … the very atmosphere of firearms anywhere restrains evil interference — they deserve a place of honor with all that's good." George Washington First President of the United States ------------- ...those who have fallen and those who will. |
Posted By: 62 wood
Date Posted: January-06-2013 at 11:37pm
|
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9wWs86inw_Q" rel="nofollow - Celebrity Hypocrisy? ------------- http://www.correctcraftfan.com/diaries/details.asp?ID=1117&sort=&pagenum=6" rel="nofollow - 64 American Skier 62 Classic.. 73 Ski Nautique |
Posted By: JoeinNY
Date Posted: January-07-2013 at 12:39am
Don't get too sick that story is still bogus ------------- http://www.correctcraftfan.com/diaries/details.asp?ID=1477 - 1983 Ski Nautique 2001 1967 Mustang 302 "Decoy" http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cO5MkcBXBBs - Holeshot Video |
Posted By: 05 210
Date Posted: January-07-2013 at 12:48am
Exactly. Imagine that. Pot > Kettle > black. Here is a short clip with her majesty Carolyn McCarthy. Talk about stupid-ism. She has about the same amount of firearms knowledge as Bloomberg. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ospNRk2uM3U&feature=youtube_gdata_player" rel="nofollow - McCarthy on AWB The fact that half of the country can't watch something like this and clearly see that this hag has no business submitting any legislature on firearms is precisely what is wrong with this country. Be it guns, healthcare, immigration, or whatever. This type of thing ..... Is. Not. Good. I equate it to me being allowed to re- write the electrical codes in my town when I have never even wired an outlet. See what I'm sayin? Mike ------------- http:/diaries/details.asp?ID=2219" rel="nofollow - Air Nautique 210 Team 640 hours, not 1 regret |
Posted By: jbach
Date Posted: January-07-2013 at 12:55am
source? |
Posted By: JoeinNY
Date Posted: January-07-2013 at 12:56am
Reality ------------- http://www.correctcraftfan.com/diaries/details.asp?ID=1477 - 1983 Ski Nautique 2001 1967 Mustang 302 "Decoy" http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cO5MkcBXBBs - Holeshot Video |
Posted By: 05 210
Date Posted: January-07-2013 at 2:07am
I think that story broke due to misinformation or confusion between reporters and police. Unless you believe there was some sort of conspiracy there, which is relatively far fetched. M.E. Said long gun was used inside school. He ought to know. I don't think we'll ever really know. All the facts of this investigation have been funky , or at least the release of them has. Doesn't really matter to me anyway. Nothing will bring those 26 people back. I wouldn't feel any better about this tragedy if it involved a shotgun or a pistol instead of a 223 rifle. Those kids would still be dead and the sheep would still be blaming the guns. Mike ------------- http:/diaries/details.asp?ID=2219" rel="nofollow - Air Nautique 210 Team 640 hours, not 1 regret |
Posted By: Nautiquehunter
Date Posted: January-07-2013 at 12:17pm
|