Gun Control

Overheal · 08-06-2014 9:12pm #1

http://dailynexus.com/2014-06-05/sen-boxer-proposes-pause-for-safety-act/

Senator Barbara Boxer proposed the Pause for Safety Act last Friday, which under certain circumstances would grant law enforcement greater power to confiscate firearms, as well as allow family members to prevent someone close to them from being allowed to purchase a firearm.

The proposed legislation — a direct response to the shooting in Isla Vista on May 23 — includes three main provisions. First, the act would allow family members to obtain a “gun violence prevention order” that would allow family members to prevent a person close to them, on a temporary basis, from purchasing a firearm if they are thought to pose a threat to themselves or others. The second includes a “gun violence prevention warrant” that would allow law enforcement to confiscate previously purchased firearms if authorized by a court of law. Lastly, the legislation would make it a mandatory universal practice for law enforcement to make use existing gun registries when responding to a tip, warning or request from a concerned family member or other close associate.

Looks like yet another piece of kneejerk legislation. However, I don't mind the idea that people can refer someone they know might be dangerous to being flagged by the national registry, in theory. Similarly in some states with Mental Health acts, you can refer family members for involuntary care in the most extreme circumstances where they are a present harm to themselves or to others.

The new legislation – The Pause for Safety Act – will include the following provisions:

• One, it would help ensure that families and others can go to court and seek a gun violence prevention order to temporarily stop someone close to them who poses a danger to themselves or others from purchasing a firearm.
• Two, it would help ensure that families and others can also seek a gun violence prevention warrant that would allow law enforcement to take temporary possession of firearms that have already been purchased if a court determines that the individual poses a threat to themselves or others.
• Three, it would help ensure that law enforcement makes full use of all existing gun registries when assessing a tip, warning or request from a concerned family member or other close associate.

I doubt it would pass like that.

Brian? · 09-06-2014 5:32pm

Yeah. That bill will never pass the house.

Amerika · 09-06-2014 5:59pm

Brian? wrote: »

Yeah. That bill will never pass the house.

As well it shouldn’t! The legislation as I understand it allows anyone to ask for one of these restraining orders. Noting to protect an individual from some gun-control activist going to a local gun range and getting the names of people on the sign-in sheet. Then petitioning the judicial system for gun violence prevention warrants claiming that they believe these individuals are about to commit a crime, or a danger to themselves. So you then have a squad of police officers showing up on your doorstep, guns in hand and edgy with the idea you could be armed and dangerous, in order to confiscate your firearms.

comongethappy · 09-06-2014 7:56pm

guns dont kill people.

Americans disproportionate predication towards homicide kills people.

Brian? · 09-06-2014 9:49pm

comongethappy wrote: »

guns dont kill people.

They most certainly do.

Americans disproportionate predication towards homicide kills people.

That helps too.

Brian? · 09-06-2014 9:51pm

Amerika wrote: »

As well it shouldn’t! The legislation as I understand it allows anyone to ask for one of these restraining orders. Noting to protect an individual from some gun-control activist going to a local gun range and getting the names of people on the sign-in sheet. Then petitioning the judicial system for gun violence prevention warrants claiming that they believe these individuals are about to commit a crime, or a danger to themselves. So you then have a squad of police officers showing up on your doorstep, guns in hand and edgy with the idea you could be armed and dangerous, in order to confiscate your firearms.

Guns that are held unconstitutionally should be confiscated anyway IMO. I.e. guns held by anyone not a member of a well organised militia.

Amerika · 09-06-2014 10:21pm

Brian? wrote: »

Guns that are held unconstitutionally should be confiscated anyway IMO. I.e. guns held by anyone not a member of a well organised militia.

Oh that revisionist history again...

"A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed."

This one is much easier to determine than what came first... the chicken or the egg. The Reserve Militia are part of the unorganized militia defined by the Militia Act of 1903, consists of every able-bodied man of at least 17 and under 45 years of age who is not a member of the National Guard or Naval Militia.

Brian? · 09-06-2014 10:28pm

Amerika wrote: »

Oh that revisionist history again...

Excuse me?

"A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed."

This one is much easier to determine than what came first... the chicken or the egg. The Reserve Militia are part of the unorganized militia defined by the Militia Act of 1903, consists of every able-bodied man of at least 17 and under 45 years of age who is not a member of the National Guard or Naval Militia.

So not actually being part of a militia means by law everyone is part of a militia. The logic is brilliant.

Sir Digby Chicken Caesar · 09-06-2014 10:30pm

i love the twisted logic anti gun people have to employ just to argue their way out of understanding a basic english sentence.

sin_city · 10-06-2014 5:21am

Anyone have details on a comparison between people on medication in the USA Vs Switzerland?

Brian? · 10-06-2014 10:11am

Sir Digby Chicken Caesar wrote: »

i love the twisted logic anti gun people have to employ just to argue their way out of understanding a basic english sentence.

Go on.

I'm not anti gun by the way. I'm pro gun control.

sin_city · 10-06-2014 10:36am

Brian? wrote: »

Go on.

I'm not anti gun by the way. I'm pro gun control.

Pro gun control for citizens but not for the state?

Gotcha....I like the Swiss model myself.

Brian? · 10-06-2014 11:14am

sin_city wrote: »

Pro gun control for citizens but not for the state?

Gotcha....I like the Swiss model myself.

Don't be facetious. I'm pro gun control.

sin_city · 10-06-2014 2:15pm

Brian? wrote: »

Don't be facetious. I'm pro gun control.

I can't find out the % of the Swiss on medication but in the US I've seen 70% a lot and somerthing like 48% on anti-depressants.

Amerika · 10-06-2014 3:36pm

Since it seems it’s the Democrats who are all gooey over gun control legislation, perhaps they should introduce legislation to have all handguns and so-called assault weapons confiscated from all Democrats, and make it where Democrats cannot purchase guns in the future. I might even support that legislation.

gavindublin · 10-06-2014 3:43pm

Brian? wrote: »

Go on.

I'm not anti gun by the way. I'm pro gun control.

Just stumbled onto this topic.

Whats your defination of gun control? If you dont mind me asking

Brian? · 10-06-2014 6:17pm

gavindublin wrote: »

Just stumbled onto this topic.

Whats your defination of gun control? If you dont mind me asking

4th times a charm eh?

Healthy gun control for me would be a system that includes:

A register for all owners.
A tracking system for purchasing ammunition.
No concealed carry allowed.
No assault rifles.
Nothing over a .44 caliber unless you are hunting bison/Grizzley bears and have a permit to do so.
All owners must possess a relevant permit. Full FBI background checks for permits at owners cost.

That pretty much sums up the most important changes. Some of which are laws in some states already. My frame of reference is Arizona. Where none of the above are laws.

Amerika · 10-06-2014 7:54pm

Brian? wrote: »

4th times a charm eh?

Healthy gun control for me would be a system that includes:

A register for all owners.
A tracking system for purchasing ammunition.
No concealed carry allowed.
No assault rifles.
Nothing over a .44 caliber unless you are hunting bison/Grizzley bears and have a permit to do so.
All owners must possess a relevant permit. Full FBI background checks for permits at owners cost.

That pretty much sums up the most important changes. Some of which are laws in some states already. My frame of reference is Arizona. Where none of the above are laws.

By "assault rifles" are you referring to fully automatic rifles? Or do you include even those cosmetically mean-looking semi automatic rifles (that require you to pull the trigger every time a bullet is singly fired), that make wussies pee in their pants just by the sight of them?

Brian? · 10-06-2014 8:28pm

Amerika wrote: »

By "assault rifles" are you referring to fully automatic rifles? Or do you include even those cosmetically mean-looking semi automatic rifles (that require you to pull the trigger every time a bullet is singly fired), that make wussies pee in their pants just by the sight of them?

I mean assault rifles. That would include these "mean looking semi auto rifles" as you call them.

Let's be honest, they're generally penis extensions. I'm a fan of shooting for sport and I honestly don't see the point of owning a .22 that looks like an M16 anyway. What are you going to hunt with it? Are you going to use it to protect against home invasion? No, it's too cumbersome.

Can you honestly tell me the use of owning an AR15?

Btw, converting them to fully auto is not rocket science.

Brian? · 10-06-2014 8:29pm

sin_city wrote: »

I can't find out the % of the Swiss on medication but in the US I've seen 70% a lot and somerthing like 48% on anti-depressants.

The point? It's the anti depressants fault ?

Amerika · 10-06-2014 9:47pm

Brian? wrote: »

I mean assault rifles. That would include these "mean looking semi auto rifles" as you call them.

Let's be honest, they're generally penis extensions. I'm a fan of shooting for sport and I honestly don't see the point of owning a .22 that looks like an M16 anyway. What are you going to hunt with it? Are you going to use it to protect against home invasion? No, it's too cumbersome.

Can you honestly tell me the use of owning an AR15?

Btw, converting them to fully auto is not rocket science.

So you would want my Henry US survival rifle 22LR outlawed then? It's a nice compact rifle that can be kept in the car and out of sight to use for target practice at minimal ammunition costs. And a 22LR can be an effective self defense tool, especially being semi auto.
th?id=HN.608039332024091913&pid=15.1

As to an AR15... it is the perfect rifle for self defense. It is also the ideal tool to use for varmints like the nasty coyotes we have around here (unfortunately the state I live in does not allow you to hunt with a semi auto unless it’s a shotgun).

As to “converting them to fully auto is not rocket science,” well you would be breaking the law. And if someone is inclined to ignore the law concerning firearms, then any gun control legislation would be meaningless, wouldn’t it?

Witcher · 10-06-2014 9:51pm

Brian? wrote: »

Can you honestly tell me the use of owning an AR15?

Btw, converting them to fully auto is not rocket science.

You know AR-15's etc. are legal in Ireland right?

Brian? · 10-06-2014 10:25pm

Blay wrote: »

You know AR-15's etc. are legal in Ireland right?

I do. That doesn't give them a purpose.

Witcher · 10-06-2014 10:27pm

Brian? wrote: »

I do. That doesn't give them a purpose.

So the Gardai are licencing firearms to people that have no use for them is what you're saying?

Despite 'good reason' being the single most important aspect of applying for a firearms licence.

Brian? · 10-06-2014 10:34pm

Amerika wrote: »

So you would want my Henry US survival rifle 22LR outlawed then? It's a nice compact rifle that can be kept in the car and out of sight to use for target practice at minimal ammunition costs. And a 22LR can be an effective self defense tool, especially being semi auto.

Yes ban. Are you going to list rifles one by one now ?

As to an AR15... it is the perfect rifle for self defense. It is also the ideal tool to use for varmints like the nasty coyotes we have around here (unfortunately the state I live in does not allow you to hunt with a semi auto unless it’s a shotgun).

There are far more suitable guns for both. In a home invasion I'd want a 9mm or a .38 hand gun. Preferably with hollow point ammunition. Anything larger and you risk shooting through walls and injuring or killing your own family.

Killing coyotes, a .22 bolt action rifle is ideal. Larger game, larger calibre rifles. What do you hunt deer with?Zero need for an AR15 IMO.

As to “converting them to fully auto is not rocket science,” well you would be breaking the law. And if someone is inclined to ignore the law concerning firearms, then any gun control legislation would be meaningless, wouldn’t it?

It would. It's no deterrent to criminals or people with nefarious intent. Remove the AR 15 from circulation and make the whole thing more difficult.

Brian? · 10-06-2014 10:36pm

Blay wrote: »

So the Gardai are licencing firearms to people that have no use for them is what you're saying?

Despite 'good reason' being the single most important aspect of applying for a firearms licence.

Are they? Well they shouldn't be IMO. All opinion here.

Have you a practical use for an AR15 to share?

Witcher · 10-06-2014 10:37pm

Brian? wrote: »

There are far more suitable guns for both. In a home invasion I'd want a 9mm or a .38 hand gun. Preferably with hollow point ammunition. Anything larger and you risk shooting through walls and injuring or killing your own family.

A pistol has a much shorter sight radius, it's much easier to miss with. Even a small movement at the muzzle can have a drastic effect on accuracy at distance.

You can get hollow point ammunition for a rifle.

Witcher · 10-06-2014 10:41pm

Brian? wrote: »

Are they? Well they shouldn't be IMO. All opinion here.

Have you a practical use for an AR15 to share?

Well the Gardai believe there is a need for them so we'll have to go with them.

People use them hunting and target shooting, same as any other firearm. Just because you don't like them doesn't mean there is no reason to own them.

Brian? · 10-06-2014 10:54pm

Blay wrote: »

Well the Gardai believe there is a need for them so we'll have to go with them.

People use them hunting and target shooting, same as any other firearm. Just because you don't like them doesn't mean there is no reason to own them.

I honestly can't see a reason to own them. To me the dangers of having them in circulation out weigh the usefulness in a massive way.

Witcher · 10-06-2014 10:59pm

Brian? wrote: »

I honestly can't see a reason to own them. To me the dangers of having them in circulation out weigh the usefulness in a massive way.

You could say that about any fiream. For minimal risk we should only have air rifles and single shot shotguns.

When's the last time you heard of anyone being killed with a legally held firearm of any type here? It just doesn't happen.

No matter what firearms are available there is always a risk, these threads normally come down to 'Sure you only need a .22 and a shotgun', yeah that's fine but Derrick Bird killed 12 people in the UK with those exact firearms, the death toll could easily have been higher only he killed himself.

No matter what hoops you have to jump through to get a gun; is someone is determined enough they will go through the rigmarole. Anders Breivik waited a year, went to training courses, attended a range regularly..all so that he could get firearms.

Brian? · 10-06-2014 10:59pm

Blay wrote: »

A pistol has a much shorter sight radius, it's much easier to miss with. Even a small movement at the muzzle can have a drastic effect on accuracy at distance.

I'm aware of that. If I'm shooting in a house, no way am I going out my bedroom door with an AR.

Any of gun owning friends who own ARs, sleep with a hand gun close and the AR locked away.

Gun Control

Comments