Gun laws and gun bullshit

[Excalibur]

I think this should be a topic on this place since we're all about firearms and we should discuss amongst ourselves.

What's everyone's position on gun control? Laws for guns? Bans, etc

I think we should all feel free to express our honest opinions no matter where we are from.

[MT2008]

It's kind of rare to find people on any message board related to guns who are terribly sympathetic to gun controllers. It would be like going on a hip-hop message board and asking if there are any David Duke fans.

I am generally against gun control. I just don't like some of the arguments that "our" side comes up with (I think I've already mentioned my distaste for the claim about how there's no practical difference between a 30-round magazine and three 10-rounders). And while I don't like the gun control advocates, I'm not such a big fan of demonizing them by claiming they're part of some international communist conspiracy to enslave us.

[MoviePropMaster2008]

Originally Posted by MT2008

It's kind of rare to find people on any message board related to guns who are terribly sympathetic to gun controllers. It would be like going on a hip-hop message board and asking if there are any David Duke fans.

I am generally against gun control. I just don't like some of the arguments that "our" side comes up with (I think I've already mentioned my distaste for the claim about how there's no practical difference between a 30-round magazine and three 10-rounders). And while I don't like the gun control advocates, I'm not such a big fan of demonizing them by claiming they're part of some international communist conspiracy to enslave us.

It's not a conspiracy but a movement of the 'likeminded'. The end result is the same though. Groups of people in power (legislators, media, celebs, their useful pawns/idiots, etc.) who work towards making anything and everything we do illegal, not in collusion, but in essence, 'fellow travelers' who have the same ideas and prejudices.

[Gunmaster45]

That 10 round to 30 round magazine debate was a brain fart, lets try to forget I said it.

What bugs me is we have solid evidence that gun control solves nothing. Scotland and New York City are good examples. No one can own guns legally in those places and guess what. Since these bans, crime has gone up in these places. Why? Because these bans took guns from the law abiding citizens while the criminals (who never aquired gun legally anyway) still have guns to harrass the innocent with.

Poor Henry Getts in NYC gets mugged on a train and wounds his attackers with an illegal gun he kept for self defense and he got in more trouble than the muggers. It's all garbage.

[MT2008]

Originally Posted by MoviePropMaster2008

It's not a conspiracy but a movement of the 'likeminded'. The end result is the same though. Groups of people in power (legislators, media, celebs, their useful pawns/idiots, etc.) who work towards making anything and everything we do illegal, not in collusion, but in essence, 'fellow travelers' who have the same ideas and prejudices.

Exactly. It's kind of like the way that everyone used to think it was common sense that the world was flat.

I do think it's kind of stupid to accuse them of being "communists", though (which isn't to say I have any taste for Marxism, just that I think it's an unfair comparison).

[MT2008]

Originally Posted by Gunmaster45

What bugs me is we have solid evidence that gun control solves nothing. Scotland and New York City are good examples. No one can own guns legally in those places and guess what. Since these bans, crime has gone up in these places. Why? Because these bans took guns from the law abiding citizens while the criminals (who never aquired gun legally anyway) still have guns to harrass the innocent with.

Poor Henry Getts in NYC gets mugged on a train and wounds his attackers with an illegal gun he kept for self defense and he got in more trouble than the muggers. It's all garbage.

Part of the problem there is that it's obvious gun laws aren't going to have any effect if anyone can go to a neighboring city or state where the gun laws aren't as strict and get guns there (whether legally, or by straw purchase).

But it begs the question of whether it's wise to implement those laws in the first place. The DC gun ban is an even better example of such idiocy. Local and state laws are a dumb waste, and a kneejerk reaction by local politicians who think they're making a difference, when they're actually just making it harder for law-abiding citizens to defend themselves.

[MoviePropMaster2008]

Originally Posted by MT2008

Exactly. It's kind of like the way that everyone used to think it was common sense that the world was flat.

I do think it's kind of stupid to accuse them of being "communists", though (which isn't to say I have any taste for Marxism, just that I think it's an unfair comparison).

Communist is not being bandied around like the original term "Communist" i.e. steeped in Marxist/Leninist ideology or a "party member". I still use the term when I speak of 'stomping on the rights of the individual for a "perceived benefit" to the group" mentality. In that respect ... they ARE communist (but since most folks are confused and think of Communist only in the official political party context, tis better to use a different term.)

What is interesting is that these leftists/neo-liberals are embracing the exact ideology as espoused by the classic Marxists .... (a) individual rights are trumped by "the state" (b) no private firearms ownership (c) only the "state" has the monopoly on deadly force (d) power DOES come from the barrel of a gun (mao) and only the enlightened forces of "the state" should have that type of power, (e) redistribution of wealth as a means of maintaining political power, (f) making the masses reliant on "the State" for all their needs, etc. etc. It's the embodiment of "Brave New World" and "1984" (the books) in the real world.

But most guys who throw out the word "commie" don't even think in those terms.

[MT2008]

Originally Posted by MoviePropMaster2008

Communist is not being bandied around like the original term "Communist" i.e. steeped in Marxist/Leninist ideology or a "party member". I still use the term when I speak of 'stomping on the rights of the individual for a "perceived benefit" to the group" mentality. In that respect ... they ARE communist (but since most folks are confused and think of Communist only in the official political party context, tis better to use a different term.)

What is interesting is that these leftists/neo-liberals are embracing the exact ideology as espoused by the classic Marxists .... (a) individual rights are trumped by "the state" (b) no private firearms ownership (c) only the "state" has the monopoly on deadly force (d) power DOES come from the barrel of a gun (mao) and only the enlightened forces of "the state" should have that type of power, (e) redistribution of wealth as a means of maintaining political power, (f) making the masses reliant on "the State" for all their needs, etc. etc. It's the embodiment of "Brave New World" and "1984" (the books) in the real world.

But most guys who throw out the word "commie" don't even think in those terms.

Maybe I'm biased here, as a kind of recovered ex-liberal whose Mom is still a liberal, but the similarities between neo-liberalism and Marxism seem extremely superficial. About as superficial as comparing conservatives to fascists. Not all liberals even want to ban all guns or self-defense (I know I didn't when I was one, though I realize that's an anecdote). I think liberals can be criticized for thinking that giving the government more money to spend (read: waste) on stupid shit like healthcare is doing any good, but that's kind of a far cry from totalitarian ideas like Marxism.

BTW, interesting story - I spent a week in Northern Ireland with a family whose son was co-workers with a member of the Irish political party Sinn Fein (which is linked with the Irish Republican Army). If you think American liberals are Marxists, you should have talked to this guy. First time I ever came near to blows with a real Marxist (which never even happened to me in college).

Originally Posted by MoviePropMaster2008

It's the embodiment of "Brave New World" and "1984" (the books) in the real world.

Just so we're clear on something...you do understand that George Orwell was a socialist, right?

[MT2008]

As far as using the term "communist" to describe anyone who supports regulations on individual rights in America, wouldn't that make it interchangeable with terms like "fascism"? In which case, it's pretty much meaningless and you might as well as say "authoritarian" or "totalitarian"?

[Excalibur]

Going back to gun laws, I agree with some of the laws in place in most places in the US. Background checks, waiting periods, permits, registrations, etc. If you have kids, manditory child proof safeties for firearms, or better, teach your kids about firearms so they know better, not hide them from it. Not teaching your children about guns if you have one, to me, is like not telling them about cars and how to drive them and let them figure it out for themselves.

The rest below is just my personal opinion.

The major gripe I've always had was ban and limitations of magazine capacity, and cosmetic appearences of firearms like "Assault Rifles" that don't do anything to change the function of the weapon, just make them less "threatening".

For example, 3 10 round magazines when comepared to one 30 round magazine. Besides what's been said that this is a stupid arguement, it doesn't change the fact that the shooter with 3 10 rounds can do over what he can do with a 30 round magazine. The weapon still shoots bullets, the same kind of bullets, nothing changes, just reload time.

There was stuff like the ability to accept a grenade launcher in rifles, which is pointles anyway because civilians can't aquire grenade launchers. I don't know about film armorers though.

Retractable buttstocks, barrel length, pistol grip. Though barrel length will affect the accuracy and range of a rifle, I personally don't think it's of any consequences anyway.

Flash hiders. If you're shooting someone on the street, people are going to hear the sound of the gun anyway, so hiding the flash anyway.

Accepting a bayonet. I honestly don't think a criminal would attach one anyway if he's going on a shooting spree. There's really no function for a bayonet on a modern rifle anyway.

The retractable buttstock, folding, telescoptic, etc have no consequence to the rifle itself. It just makes it semi compact for close quarters, storing, etc. The M4 stocks were meant to be adjusting to a shooter's length and what he or she's wearing. It's perfectly reasonable, it doesn't affect how a the weapon fires.

Ammo restrictions doesn't do a thing anyway. And all these limits are only limiting the people who will obey them because it's the law, not criminals who have always been illegally aquiring firearms all the time.

I'm sure we all agree that putting restricting laws on firearms only restrict the people and not the criminals who don't obey the laws in the first place, but the people who supported those rules are too thick headed and over confident of law enforcement to care or too rich to care.

A New York City law I heard had stated that you can't kill a person invading your home unless you can prove the burglar was a real threat on your life.

Colleges don't allow guns, but that didn't stop crazies from going in and shooting around anyway.

I read an article about a Law school shooting and a couple of the men in there were off duty police officers. They went to their cars and got their guns, entered the campus and took down the offender.

The reasons some politicans give us for not having guns is to show us the illusion of security and safety, that this country is the safest place in the world and that we don't need protection because we are constantly protected. If that's the case, there would be no crime at all. I take the same precautiouns going to my car at night and walking around campus during the day. It's not being paranoid, it's just being aware of your surroundings and not cloak yourself in an illusion of safety when it might or might not be.

It's our own instinctual nature for self preservation. Our natural right to defend ourselves.

If someone approaches you with the full intent to harm you, self perservation should tell you to do everything possible to eliminate that threat by all means nessessary for survival, not wait for someone else to come 20 minutes to late to save your sorry ass.

A lot of people have been spoon fed and pampered enough to think that just because they are in a metropolitan city, modern civiliazation, part of a good "civilize" country, that they are completely safe and that they should be ignorant of anything else in the world. People just can't help it. And if something happen to those people because they are ignorant, that's what we need to wake up from apathy. If you honestly think that you are completely safe because of local law, your home security system and your dog, and don't require a firearm, that's your preference. The chances of a break in to prove my point is remote and wouldn't solve anything.

I just hope more people use common sense and look at how the laws are being made and pass, with logic and reasons, look at them and the world around yourself, not hide from it over an illusion of complete safety.

And that's all I'm ranting for now