10 shot dead at Batman showing in Denver

Father Damo wrote: »

The UN Treaty has absoloutely nothing to do with the freedom of Americans to buy US manufactured firearms. It MAY lead to a situation where treaty signatories would refuse to export arms to the USA, but I am fairly sure the US has enough of an internal industry to keep the NRA boys stocked.

Won't really matter. US law already has restrictions on the import of foreign manufactured firearms, and has done since 1986. As a result, there are a number of more recent firearms which are not uncommon in Canada or Europe (eg G36, Tavor) which cannot be purchased in the US. As a result, the foreign companies either have to license, or just set up their own manufacturing facilities. Steyr's AUG is an excellent example: After 1986, they became harder to come by. About four years ago, they built a factory in the US and the AUG is now available for sale again. Incomplete firearms may still be imported, but require a number of US manufactured parts. My FAL is a case in point, it came as an ex South African Army R1, but I needed to buy a US receiver and exchange a futher six parts from a specified list with some from a US manufacturer of the rifle (DS Arms)

The salient point is that weapons like this...
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedi...x-Stag2wi_.jpg

...should not be available over any counter, or at the very least the person wanting to buy such an item should have to go through some ridiculous hoops to get one. An evaluation of one's mental capacity and a rigorous examination of their justification for wanting to own one in the first place should be a basic minimum. "Hunting", or "defence" doesn't cut it and shouldn't cut it.

Can't help but notice you picked an American-made EBR for your picture. Why not something like this Benelli R1 from one of our favourite Italian companies and used worldwide with little issue. I'll not be surprised if some people in Ireland have one.

http://www.benelliusa.com/assets/silos/medium_png/silo_1004_r1_300wm_aawalnut_standard_rifle_r1sights.png

Nowhere near as scary with the same emotional effect you desire, is it? Of course, the problem is that this is basically the same rifle:

http://www.hitman.co/wp-content/uploads/2011/12/Benelli-MR1-1600x2133-768x1024.jpg

Look at the mechanism and upper receiver design. All they did was take an inoffensive hunting rifle, and attack it with a screwdriver and some plastic. I'll bet you nobody has taken their Benelli to the local Garda superintendent in that condition for licensing, it wouldn't pass what is known as the "Idunlikedalookadat" test. This is why any arguments based on pictures, or accessories not related to the mechanism of the rifle is a complete red herring.

The only practical thing you object to is that of the semi-automatic rifle. You believe that there is no place for it in pastimes like hunting. This hunting magazine article goes over the pros and cons of bolt action vs semi-auto for those who are undecided.

http://www.gameandfishmag.com/2010/10/07/hunting_guns-shooting_bolt_action_or_semi-auto_big_game_hunting_rifles_1010/

Bottom line, semi-autos have their place in hunting, and are getting more common.

And whether you personally think 'defense' doesn't cut it doesn't really matter in a country where police can have long response times. When the zombie apocalypse comes, the guys with the semi-autos will have a nice advantage. More realistically, and contrary to common opinon, such rifles are actually better for home defense than any other weapon, shotgun or pistol, if the owner knows what he's doing.

The whole basis for allowing military grade weapons dates to a time when a Soviet invasion was, due to paranoia, a possible situation, and the belief that if the US regular army was defeated guerilla resistance would be the Plan B.

Eh?! It dates back to the founding days when the militia were expected to bring their personal weapons to go fight the British Army. .30-06 bolt actions were used for hunting at the same time as the Springfield 1903 .30-06 bolt action was the standard service rifle of the US Army. M1 Garands as the service weapon in the Army? Guess what, privately owned as well. Restricting privately owned weapons to things less powerful than military grade is a relatively recent phenomenon. There's a bit of reverse process as well: With so many personnel getting out of the military every year, when they go shopping for a rifle, they tend to gravitate to what they already know and have been trained to use and maintain. This explains the popularity of the Garand in the post-war years, the Springfield M1 after Vietnam, and the AR-15 today (In addition to the fact that they're just damned good rifles).

The idea at the DoD level isn't so much that the locals will go 'wolverine', given that an invasion of the USA is a tad unlikely, but that in the event that the US military needed to undergo a rapid expansion, such as in WWIII, the population they would be drafting from would already know how to shoot, and thus reduce the training time required. (Which experience has shown to be true, in published results new recruits who already knew their way around the service rifle tended to score better on the rifle range than gun-neophytes).

Some people in this thread were agog at the idiot who brought a baby to a midnight showing of Batman, but the above trumps that by a considerable amount.

Why? Might as well teach kids about firearms at an age that they can understand them. They will encounter them in their lives before they hit the age of 18, and as long as they are capable enough to understand some basic lessons of safety, and also as long as the 'mystery' is taken out of it, what's the problem? Or we can just hide the issue of firearm safety under the table, and let them figure out the truth of guns behind the bike sheds in school.

Now, I don't know if I'll be getting my daughter a .22LR at the age of 8... Just because some kids are suited for it doesn't mean they all are, but I'm sure she'll have her own rifle by her teens. Locked away where she can't get at it, but she can come to the range with me and do a little father/daughter bonding in a fun, safe manner.

As to "rapid fire" weapons - you can make anything rapid if you practice with it enough.

Fair point. The record for a Lee Enfield (Bolt action loaded with 5-round-clips) is 38 rounds into a 12" target at 300 yards in one minute. That ain't bad. Of course, it's a very well designed rifle, I own one. Shooting rapidly is very easy.

Here's another fun video: 12 shots from a six-shooter revolver in under 3 seconds.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lLk1v5bSFPw