Existing regulations are not endorsed by the extremists, and there lies the problem.
The 5 minute background checks for firearms transfers for example.
If you read this thread alone, you will see none of the extremists say a word about excluding dangerously mentally ill, convicted felons, etc.
They rant on about *There Rights* as inclusive for everyone.
I don't include myself in that lump of people, not a felon, not dangerously mentally ill, not addicted to drugs, etc.
Since I was "Young & Dumb" at one time I know the ignorant/stupid ideas young folks can come up with.
I'm not a fan of children/adolescents with firearms that are unsupervised.
And again, I was one of those that wasn't too bright back then, I shot up into the air, ect.
I had 24/7 access to firearms, but the idea of using one to harm someone never crossed my mind until I joined the Marines.
It's common sense, which way too many people these days don't have.
See anyone that *Thinks* firearms are going anywhere anytime soon, and the people that won't consider mentally ill, convicts, and handing out "Assault Weapons" to everyone with $100 is a good idea.
Just pipe dreams on both sides.
At the top of this it was a question about "Banning ARs", it's possible...
Particularly when the owners are the vast minority and refuse anything but open access to anything anyone can afford,
With no restrictions, no security, no responsibility with what happens to those firearms.
Since we DON'T live in a vacuum, and we are NOT the majority, it's a good idea to endorse common sense, while rejecting the lunatic fringe of firearms ownership.
Its up to US, the firearms owners to figure this out since the other side is being sold the idea that banning firearms will stop crime, and in particular mass shootings.
The best press around here was armed civilians protecting schools a while back.
The police admitted they couldn't cover all entries/exits of every school,
Civilians took up posts just off school properly and watched the schools (After a 'Credible Threat').
These guys were lauded by locals for what they did, raised awareness of 'Good Guy With Firearms', and generally created goodwill.
Idiots marching in the state/national capitol with firearms isn't good press, reinforces the idea of lunatic militias running around trying to overthrow the government, ect.
Makes them VERY uncomfortable, and scared people go too far...
Existing regulations are not endorsed by the extremists, and there lies the problem.
The 5 minute background checks for firearms transfers for example.
If you read this thread alone, you will see none of the extremists say a word about excluding dangerously mentally ill, convicted felons, etc.
They rant on about *There Rights* as inclusive for everyone.
I don't include myself in that lump of people, not a felon, not dangerously mentally ill, not addicted to drugs, etc.
Since I was "Young & Dumb" at one time I know the ignorant/stupid ideas young folks can come up with.
I'm not a fan of children/adolescents with firearms that are unsupervised.
And again, I was one of those that wasn't too bright back then, I shot up into the air, ect.
I had 24/7 access to firearms, but the idea of using one to harm someone never crossed my mind until I joined the Marines.
It's common sense, which way too many people these days don't have.
See anyone that *Thinks* firearms are going anywhere anytime soon, and the people that won't consider mentally ill, convicts, and handing out "Assault Weapons" to everyone with $100 is a good idea.
Just pipe dreams on both sides.
At the top of this it was a question about "Banning ARs", it's possible...
Particularly when the owners are the vast minority and refuse anything but open access to anything anyone can afford,
With no restrictions, no security, no responsibility with what happens to those firearms.
Since we DON'T live in a vacuum, and we are NOT the majority, it's a good idea to endorse common sense, while rejecting the lunatic fringe of firearms ownership.
Its up to US, the firearms owners to figure this out since the other side is being sold the idea that banning firearms will stop crime, and in particular mass shootings.
The best press around here was armed civilians protecting schools a while back.
The police admitted they couldn't cover all entries/exits of every school,
Civilians took up posts just off school properly and watched the schools (After a 'Credible Threat').
These guys were lauded by locals for what they did, raised awareness of 'Good Guy With Firearms', and generally created goodwill.
Idiots marching in the state/national capitol with firearms isn't good press, reinforces the idea of lunatic militias running around trying to overthrow the government, ect.
Makes them VERY uncomfortable, and scared people go too far...
You are not thinking clearly. Obviously ate too many crayons."Banned" once before, simply grandfathered in the old ones, some minor mods on the new ones.
Another scare tactic BS round of crap.
"O'Bammers cumin fer yer GUNS"!
For the last 12 years is getting REAL old...
Just as a side note...
There ARE other semi-auto rifles in the wild besides ARs and Chinese AK clones.
About as bothersome as a single cloud on a sunny day to me.
What's wrong with crayons!You are not thinking clearly. Obviously ate too many crayons.
They are low in vitamin D3 and they come out funny...What's wrong with crayons!
0% if they put it in a budget bill.What are the chances of a filibuster preventing new AWB?
I'm sitting here trying to catch up on this thread, and then I hit this post, and it reminds me that some peoples' heads are so full of snakes that they can't reason properly.Now this is exactly why the pro-firearms folks don't make any progress at all.
WAY too busy name calling, trying to be more 'Extreme' than the next guy, etc.
(You can thank the NRA coming off the rails for that...)
There are very good reasons we don't pass out firearms in grade schools, prisons, ect.
Try extending that common sense a little further... And you might be into something.
'Good' & 'Bad' are society concepts basked on what is beneficial or harmful to society as a whole...
Regardless if ONE or more persons believe something different.
There are idiots that argue against public utilities that deliver power, clean water, take away sewage...
But it's for the benefit of everyone in the society.
'Good' & 'Evil' is a religious context.
I'm sure the 'Christian' and 'Islamic' details are different, and would be defined differently by the 3,000 or so current religious sects.
I'm not interested in trying to define, quantify or qualify the differences of 3,000 religious sects.
Now, TRY to break down how to identify mass shooters, so the shootings can be prevented...
I'd start with violent criminals, with the violently mentally ill,
With people that promote things like mass shootings, the less influence they have the better...
I'd start with 100% universal background checks when firearms change hands.
That's what the entire call in background check system is for...
If you can't afford $15 for a dealer to do the check, then the buyer simply can't afford the firearm or afford to keep it safe.
A good example would be the Kenosha shooter, underaged and wouldn't have been able to pass the 3 minute phone call background check...
How about firearms lockers?
A bunch of the shootings are legally owned firearms being taken by other than the lawful owner.
A person has to have ACCESS to both firearm & ammunition to commit a mass shooting... Isn't that common sense?
Identifying the firearms status on the state issued ID is a good idea.
Since the far right is so worried about voter fraud, we have had to triple verify our Identity, get a 'Star' on our drivers licences/state ID card.
How about room for FP (firearms prohibited), FR (firearms restricted) or CC (concealed carry) right on state issued ID?
And again, the problem with 'Extremists' is the next guy isn't extreme enough for them, and therefore 'Weak' or an 'Enemy'.
I just call the people that don't agree with me 'Folks'.
Not being an extremist I don't have to name call or carry on like the world is on fire, I'm willing to listen, come up with workable ideas, etc.
How do you filter out the mass shooters,
There ARE other semi-auto rifles in the wild besides ARs and Chinese AK clones.
Probably the smartest thing I’ve seen on INGO in years... and funny enough, more people hold the Constitution in reverence than the Bible.It's not about the constitution anymore. It's about how we feel about the constitution. It's like the bible or any other article of guidance. It's not about what it says, it's about how you can make what it says, work for you.
You apparently consider it guidelines (think Barbosa speaking of the Pirates' Code) or wishful thinking rather than the binding contract between the government and the governed that it was designed to be.Probably the smartest thing I’ve seen on INGO in years... and funny enough, more people hold the Constitution in reverence than the Bible.
Oh, please explain to me how these alternatives are more acceptable to you than ARs and AKs. (Rant Clipped)
ARs and AKs look scarier to the masses. Most of the rest look like "harmless hunting rifles", despite caliber differences, etc. JMHO of course.Oh, please explain to me how these alternatives are more acceptable to you than ARs and AKs. I've carried the M14 and the M16 (and some other things). Is the M14 less deadly, because it doesn't have a pistol grip, despite the caliber difference?
What about the M16 or AR-15 versus the Ruger Mini 14? Same caliber, same magazine capacity. Is one more dangerous than the other because of the pistol grip? How about an SKS-M versus an AK?
What other rifles do you approve or disapprove of? The Ruger 10/22? Is it more or less dangerous with a pistol grip stock on it? Tell us what guns you approve of. I'd really like to hear it. Honestly, I would. I'd like to hear your reasoning that DOESN'T rely on your feelings. Reply with Constitutional arguments. Reply with the arguments free men would make, if it's within your capabilty to understand what free men want.
Honestly I couldn't see them banning the Armalite rifle.. Trump did a great thing by nominating constitutional judges to the federal government and securing a 6-3 Supreme Court in favor of constitutional judges !!My wife and I have been debating lately about the current political reality, historical precedent regarding specific firearm limitations like the Brady Bill, and the potential of specific firearms like the AR-15 being limited during the upcoming democratic majority in DC.
I have been trying to understand what happened then and what could realistically happen now with regards to current owners of these firearms. Would current owners have to turn them in? Are they grandfathered in? Can anyone relate to what happened during Brady and how they handled it then?
I don't want to go down the conspiracy rabbit-hole here, so let's just assume another similar Brady Bill gets passed that limits guns like the AR-15, what do you think would happen with regards to current owners?
Exactly, people don't read either and take them at face value anymore. "shall not infringe" is like "shall not kill"Probably the smartest thing I’ve seen on INGO in years... and funny enough, more people hold the Constitution in reverence than the Bible.
This is key. Feelings not facts. An emotional reaction against a firearm that has been used in a very small percentage of crime (IIRC 2-3%), but looks scary and has been able to be turned into talking points to play well on the news. (gotta think of the children...)ARs and AKs look scarier to the masses. Most of the rest look like "harmless hunting rifles", despite caliber differences, etc. JMHO of course.
[…]
Thousands of gun laws, each one was supposed to help.
Yet here we are.
I'm done "compromising".