The Great ILX Gun Control Debate

that silby post = great moments in display name/post synergy

http://www.cnn.com/2017/03/29/us/oklahoma-three-dead-home-burglary/index.html

A third person fled through the door and ran. "I didn't shoot him," the caller says, though later another suspect is found dead in the driveway.
The shooter says he is in a back bedroom with his gun. The door is locked.
The 911 operator tells him when a deputy gets to the house to put the gun away.
He tells her the gun will be on the bed

possible he shot at him and didn't think he was hit, but.....

https://68.media.tumblr.com/710665ceac502bdd4fbf5f3f43a262b3/tumblr_omvjjvokLi1vnq1cro1_400.gif

http://abcnews.go.com/US/manhunt-underway-gun-store-robbery-suspect-manifesto-trump/story?id=46662668

Wisconsin authorities and the FBI have expanded their urgent search for an "extremely dangerous" suspect who they say robbed a gun store, stealing at least 16 weapons, and who may be plotting an act of mass violence with his eye on President Trump.

"Basically, he's angry at all government officials,” Rock County Sheriff Robert Spoden said at a news conference today. “You know, whether it's the president or local officials or whether it's law enforcement. He basically has a dislike for anyone that has authority or governmental power.

he also made a bunch of religious threats in his 160 page manifesto. oh yeah, and the gun store he purchased weapons/ammunition at last week was called ARMAGEDDON SUPPLIES.

but really the suppliers of guns have nothing to do with the problem of gun violence, i mean are we gonna start suing fork makers?? you can kill people with a fork too, it's all about teaching responsibility.

i know, i know, he stole them

just highlighting the name of the gun store...

ARMAGEDDON SUPPLIES

i guess during and after armageddon there will be a need to hunt for food and all of that, but by and large i'm pretty sure the reason you stock up on guns and ammo is to shoot all the people who try to sneak into your compound.

"now, you wouldn't shoot any people with that gun, would you? ...thanks for coming to armageddon supplies!!"

I always think of the apocalyptic Family Guy episode:

"Guys, we need to make some guns."
"Guns? Guns only lead to trouble."
"And when that trouble happens, we'll blow its freaking head off."

Food is people too, my friend

I live 3 blocks from a gun store downtown called Revelation Armaments. Its next door neighbors are a bank and a church.

sounds like the neighborhood in the paranoid android video

https://www.yahoo.com/news/live-updates-san-bernardino-elementary-school-shooting-180311263.html

A Chicago man fatally shot his 22-year-old son after an argument over who would walk the dog erupted into a gunfight between them, say police.

I saw a picture of a guy posing with a matching purple guitar and Dodge Challenger in front of a "guns and guitars" store - it was one bald eagle short of being the most American thing I'd ever seen.

I tell you what, i for one am vv glad that the gun laws in this country are currently the way they are, because if this guy tries to pull a stunt like this again and manages to get to the point of firing his weapons, there's a slim chance a concerned citizen will be quick to pull his concealed carry piece and pop off a couple of shots before getting killed.

PASADENA >> What began as an investigation into public urination at a Pasadena Gold Line station on Wednesday led deputies to seize two guns, high-capacity magazines, suppressors and a machete from the suspect’s duffel bag, authorities said.

Deputies first approached a man about 9 a.m. after spotting a man relieving himself in a planter along the sidewalk outside the Sierra Madre Villa Gold Line Station at Madre Street and Foothill Boulevard, Los Angeles County sheriff’s officials said.

The deputies confronted the man about the offense, and the suspect provided them with what turned out to be a false name, according to Deputy Katherine Zubo of the sheriff’s Transit Policing Division, who took part in the arrest. The man was carrying a duffel bag with him.

A search of the suspect’s bag turned up a loaded AR-15-style rifle, fitted wit with two 30-round magazines and a suppressor, as well as a .40-caliber pistol with a high-capacity magazine and a suppressor and a large machete-style knife, Sheriff Jim McDonnell said. The bag also contained a notebook full of writings and a Bible. He was booked for weapons violations.

“Marking on the handgun specified its use for restricted law enforcement or government only,” sheriff’s officials said in a written statement.

Investigators said they had not determined what the suspect, identified as 28-year-old Christopher Harrison Goodine of Union City, Georgia, may have ultimately intended to do with the weaponry.

“There is no intelligence to indicate there is a nexus to terrorism,” the sheriff’s said.

But he noted that any time a person is walking around with this type of armament in a duffel bag, “The outcome would not have been good no matter what he was going to do,” McDonnell said.
Goodine was believed to have boarded a train in Chinatown before exiting at the Sierra Madre Villa Station in Pasadena and encountering deputies, Zubo said.

Other than the public urination, Zubo said Goodine was not doing anything that would have attracted attention.

The deputy said she was glad she and her colleagues found the weapons before they became involved in a tragedy.

“Upon finding the bags, honestly, the first thing I felt was relief, because we got to this stuff first,” Zubo said.

McDonnell praised the actions of the involved deputies.

“Their proactive actions are commendable,” he said.

According to news reports and records, a man of the same name and birth month has faced similar allegations on the East Coast.

A Christopher Harrison Goodine, then-26 and a resident of New Rochelle, New York, was arrested in November of 2015 after trying to sneak into the Waldorf Astoria Hotel in New York City while wearing body armor and carrying an empty gun holster and a ski mask, according to the New York Daily News. He told police at the time he wanted to take a shower. Information regarding the ultimate outcome of the case was not available Wednesday.

Records show the same man jailed in connection with the New York incident has multiple convictions around the country, including carrying a concealed weapon in Virginia in 2012, obstructing justice by force or threat in in Virginia in 2012 and obstructing police in Georgia in 2013. Records also show arrested in Florida and Washington, D.C.

Deputy Juanita Navarro-Suarez of the sheriff’s Information Bureau said officials could not confirm whether the suspect arrested in Los Angeles County was the same man previously arrested on the East Coast.

According to county booking records, Goodine was being held in lieu of $10,000 bail pending his initial court appearance, scheduled Friday in the Pasadena branch of Los Angeles County Superior Court.

https://mobile.nytimes.com/2017/07/24/opinion/why-i-bring-my-gun-to-school.html?smid=tw-nytimes&smtyp=cur&referer=

when we cede rhetorical ground on this issue -- when we, with a sigh, cite the second amendment and refer to gun ownership as a "right" -- this is the kind of incoherent bullshit we invite.

GIS reveals another gun fetishist, not someone who just wants a small handgun to protect herself

not merely, i should say

distinction without a difference

we have a "right" to a well-regulated militia - that would be the armed forces, national guard and the reserves, who turn their weapons in whenever they go off duty, i.e. at the end of every duty assignment, and every shift.

sign up for a subsistence wage so you can point your gun into a bucket of sand every night and pull the trigger to prove that the chamber is empty, and have every round counted, and get questioned in case the number is less than what you left with. that's a well regulated militia.

thank you

conceding that there is a legitimate reason for owning a person-killer (for "protection", because so many other people have person-killers), is also known as "giving up"

I agree. But the frontier legacy firearms being a necessary tool of daily life has taken on a life that seemingly cannot be killed without well-directed, massive, crushing political force.

bump

maybe I'll c&p from the other thread if I have time

Nationalize the gun industry.

there are only a couple conservative relatives that i haven't defriended on facebook. one of them - actually she's more of an aspirational centrist who thought that we should give trump a chance for the first few months - posted the tearful jimmy kimmel monologue the other day, which was striking because she never ventures into any territory that could be even slightly controversial.

the immediate response was like american gun violence bingo. blaming it all on the mentally ill? check. multiple references to Chicago, "the gun control capital" (actually not, as proof that gun control doesn't work? check. impossibility of stopping violence when knives, machetes, baseball bats, etc, will still be around? yep, that was there. fears that a ban on guns would only lead to all the weapons being concentrated in the hands of "criminals and the government"? of course, someone's gotta mention that. blaming BLM, who "don't give a crap"? uh, yeah that was there too, i guess.

for better or worse (for worse) the "national conversation" that we have following events like this typically take place on facebook, for the most part, and this is the kind of mindnumbing bullshit that someone's stupid uncle barges in with so that everyone spends their time trying to prove the dumbass wrong instead of trying to figure out how to pressure political representatives to do something to fix the problem. maybe that's the ultimate problem - vast majorities of americans favor all sorts of gun control legislation, and yet our representatives do nothing. it's not hyperbole to say our democracy is just fucking WRECKED.

so instead we just yell at our stupid relatives and they yell back with thinly veiled breitbart talking points

People will debate endlessly about this or that particular gun-related tragedy and speculate on how to prevent it from happening again when these things are ultimately just a symptom of a bigger problem. Like, it's not that hard for me to believe that someone who's teetering on the edge would offhandedly decide to massacre dozens of people in the same country where thousands of people offhandedly decided to elect Donald Trump president. Both acts are informed by the same undercurrent of selfish nihilism, of disengagement from anything resembling social consciousness or responsibility to others, of seeing oneself as a righteous island surrounded by the inconvenient Other.

Which is to say that gun control is super important but I don't think gun control legislation alone (particularly in whatever weak tea variety has any chance of passing nowadays) is going to solve the larger issues underlying these instances of insanity.

the internet makes people think they need to have an opinion about everything and an answer for everything [/tr3nch3nt]

or rather, makes them think that they have the answer for everything

i guess thats just how people are though

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/10/05/opinion/guns-second-amendment-nra.html

Necon Bret Stephens says "Repeal the 2nd Amendment." (Nice bon mot here: "The Minutemen that will deter Vladimir Putin and Kim Jong-un are based in missile silos in Minot, N.D., not farmhouses in Lexington, Mass.")

xpost I don't think that's how people always were. I do think the extent to which the internet allows people to broadcast their opinions to the ENTIRE WORLD has some weird psychological effect, makes people feel that their uninformed two cents are worth a whole lot more.

Signed,
A Genius Who Is Never Wrong

I will say that gun control is not a top priority issue for me, just because, in a cold, utilitarian sense, it seems like something that takes the most effort for the least effect. Like we expend enormous amounts of political capital to, IDK, ban assault rifles or something, and even if you get it done most gun deaths come from handguns. Mass shootings like Vegas are horrifying and also not that significant or likely a cause of death overall. At the same time, I feel a little torn about it because I don't want to cede more ground to the insanity of gun culture and the gun lobby in this country.

Whereas single payer healthcare, while politically very hard, would radically transform the quality of tens or hundreds of millions' of Americans' lives and prevent far more deaths.

uh yeah I don't want to live in a cold, utilitarian world, sorry

In terms of 'preventative care', I might argue for making some sort of community service compulsory. We're at a point where an uncomfortably-large number of people seem to have no real perspective on what actually binds a society together, and the longer that goes on the more likely those bonds are to eventually dissolve altogether.

In a rare moment of clarity, Tom Friedman said "save your breath" on this issue til after the '18 elections.

uh yeah I don't want to live in a cold, utilitarian world, sorry

― A True White Kid that can Jump (Granny Dainger), Thursday, October 5, 2017 11:07 AM (one hour ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

Sure, me neither. It's just that we have gotten into this holding pattern of *mass shooting happens* "Oh my god, this is horrific, how can we allow this to happen," --> second amendment gets in the way --> we try to come up with nibble-around-the-edges policy ideas that would not have actually prevented this shooting or most others. Sure we should still ban bump stocks, maybe look at magazine capacity, maybe assault rifles altogether, incremental things you can do to decrease the severity of each of these incidents. If there are minimally intrusive things we can do that would save even a couple dozen lives per year we should do them. But only a massive sea change type policy is going to really address our larger gun death and gun crime problem, and it's made pretty much impossible by our constitution and current supreme court precedent.

bump stocks reported to be flying off the shelves

We're at a point where an uncomfortably-large number of people seem to have no real perspective on what actually binds a society together, and the longer that goes on the more likely those bonds are to eventually dissolve altogether.

Yeah this has been my overarching big worry for awhile now. Esp in a country such as US. Seems to be getting worse and worse.

Unfortunately, the extremely wealthy people who have hijacked our democracy understand that the best way to control the masses is to keep them divided, distracted, and disorganized. They see the entire course of the 20th century from FDR through Carter as a series of mistakes which must be rolled back. They are doing a bang-up job of it, too.

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/10/05/opinion/guns-second-amendment-nra.html

did not see that one coming

From a personal-safety standpoint, more guns means less safety. The F.B.I. counted a total of 268 “justifiable homicides” by private citizens involving firearms in 2015; that is, felons killed in the course of committing a felony. Yet that same year, there were 489 “unintentional firearms deaths” in the United States, according to the Centers for Disease Control. Between 77 and 141 of those killed were children

holy shit

I'm gonna c&p from the "spree shooting" thread cuz these posts should be here

So long as any legalese makes it difficult for anyone, no matter how rich or motivated, to purchase a weapon capable of killing dozens before law enforcement can intervene, or weapons modifications that accomplish the same, I'd be content. I agree with the gun experts that the old assault weapons ban focused on cosmetic aspects, and just caused the manufacturers to cosmetically modify their designs. Focus on measurable quantities like "muzzle energy x rounds per minute when fired by a competent firer". Fix the threshold value so that typical hunting weapons like 1+4 round shotguns or bolt action rifles, or smaller ammunition capacity self-defense handguns, are permitted, but semi auto rifles or submachine guns with higher ammunition capacity, can't. The legislation is a soluable problem.

Would that still permit most gun homicides and suicides? Yes, and that's tragic. But it would prevent murder sprees on the scale of Sandy Hook or Mandalay Bay.

― prelude to abjection (Sanpaku), Tuesday, October 3, 2017 8:09 PM (two days ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

^ should read: "semi-auto versions of military assault rifles and submachine guns with..."

― prelude to abjection (Sanpaku), Tuesday, October 3, 2017 8:11 PM (two days ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

ay be worth starting a “Las Vegas shooting and it’s aftermath” thread as things get bonkers. Not prone to conspiracies, but ready to believe that...well, let’s see...

― Eazy, Tuesday, October 3, 2017 11:01 PM (nine minutes ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

What does that mean?

― a serious and fascinating fartist (Simon H.)

i don't know, but you know they'll be cranking out conspiracies for this one. someone upthread mentioned the absolute horror of sandy hook and how it might have prompted more conspiracies than normal. on one hand you have the people making shit up to try to counter what they believe will be an event that could turn people against their precious 2nd amendment, and on the other you have people subconsciously searching for any sort of explanation other than the real one, that their fellow co-humans are capable of unleashing madness and mayhem on children while everyone around them does literally nothing in response. the same applies to las vegas. the bogeymen of "islamic terrorism" or mythic evil immigrant violence is absent and you have people like jimmy kimmel tearfully addressing the situation and speaking out about it honestly, so those who stand for the 2nd amendment will find another story to tell themselves and they'll find an eager audience that wants to hear any other story other than the one that actually happened.

― you = too slow (Karl Malone), Tuesday, October 3, 2017 8:21 PM (two days ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

when i catch a glimpse of alex jones i begin to morph into a guy with bandaged knuckles who says "...i got mad and punched a wall", so i can't bear to check, but i'm assuming today he talked about everything in las vegas except for what actually happened

― you = too slow (Karl Malone), Tuesday, October 3, 2017 8:23 PM (two days ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

Whats transpired btw with ISIS trying to claim this one? I mean people claim all sorts of rubbish but is it confirmed theirs was rubbish?

― Stoop Crone (Trayce), Tuesday, October 3, 2017 8:31 PM (two days ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

Alfred very OTM here. Gun advocates take full advantage of the lack of information of (many) on the other side to simply paint them as ignorant and alarmist. As a dude who grew up with guns and was a high level competitive shooter as a teen that now has not a single firearm in the home and only technically owns them because of a collection of antique handguns that is stored in a locked location at my mothers house with no available ammunition, I'm happy to clarify things for anybody that wants information. AMA I guess?

― jjjusten, Tuesday, October 3, 2017 8:48 PM (two days ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

Some starter hints - learn the distinction between automatic and semi-automatic weapons, and be careful about using the terms. I've seen hundreds of posts/tweets about how automatic weapons should be illegal, followed by immediate "they are u dumb lib" shutdowns. We can't open the conversation that way anymore.

(Oh and to flappy bird, magazines=clips. It's the removable/replaceable piece of a semi-automatic (or automatic) that allows for how many rounds can be fired before you need to reload the gun. Higher capacity=more shots that can be fired before replacing the magazine. Pedantically yes, bolt action rifles can also use magazines. Revolvers (which is your usual old school film noir/"six-shooter"/cowboy handgun, still heavily used today) can't. "Tactical" shotguns can, pump-action or double barrel/single shot shotguns can't. Yes, there are semi-automatic shotguns, because hey, what a wonderful world we live in. No automatic ones though.)

― jjjusten, Tuesday, October 3, 2017 8:59 PM (two days ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

Yeah, there's a lot of technical information a person can learn about firearms, including not just highly specific details regarding every part of the weapons and their ammunition, but also the forces generated by firing and how or if they can be damped, how to sight in a scope, gun cleaning and maintenance, plus all the accessories - holsters, gun safes, trigger locks. It is a whole world of details heaped upon details and hobbyists and enthusiasts eat that stuff up and never tire of it.

But very little of that massive heap of facts has any real bearing on whether one can understand the basic issues addressed by proposed gun control laws.

― A is for (Aimless), Tuesday, October 3, 2017 9:05 PM (two days ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

while i get how being gun-conversant can be helpful for establishing credibility with the pro-gun advocates, i do think that sane gun policy really shouldn't require knowing the difference between a revolver and a semi-automatic, or, like, a .338 Lapua or .308 winchester. this i think serves the interests of the gun lobby by making gun safety about the lethal capabilities of guns in the hands of a "trained" shooter and not, say, an angry domestic abuser or suicidal person. in those situations, the rounds per minute or stopping power or w/e are largely irrelevant. gun violence in the US is largely banal, and gun legislation should reflect that.

xp

― gbx, Tuesday, October 3, 2017 9:09 PM (two days ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

whoa people still use revolvers? cool

― flappy bird, Tuesday, October 3, 2017 9:09 PM (two days ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

if the focus is on how to limit the lethality of johnny trenchcoat by making large volume magazines and suppressors illegal (both of which: make them illegal!) and not on making garden variety handguns difficult to obtain (they're not!), we're missing the trick imo

― gbx, Tuesday, October 3, 2017 9:12 PM (two days ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

i'm all for the demystification of guns as 'violent objects' if it serves an end result that is: fewer guns, fewer people enamored with them. i worry, a little bit, that an emphasis on the correct understanding of the mechanical details subserves the idea that "guns don't kill people, people do". i realize that i didn't always post that way on here, times change, do not @ me

― gbx, Tuesday, October 3, 2017 9:23 PM (two days ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

i'm just astonished at people who think silencers make gunshots completely silent

― Erotic Wolf (crüt), Tuesday, October 3, 2017 9:31 PM (two days ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

goldeneye has a lot to answer for

― gbx, Tuesday, October 3, 2017 9:35 PM (two days ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

I'm right there with you in general gbx (esp in the way that I've been an endless broken record about the mistaken idea that lethality is linked to gun type on here before) but but if we want to reach rational gun owners, the ones that are largely in favor of workable restrictions and can be turned against the NRA we need to look reasonably educated and informed about the issue. Also we need to avoid the terrible pitfalls of cosmetic assault rifle legislation which I am now convinced set us more steps back than forward and I'm still pissed at weak willed NRA petrified dems for selling that half-measure bullshit instead of actual functional things that might have not only stood up to scrutiny but actually, you know, worked. That political capital could have been spent on closing the goddamn gun show loophole, but yet here we are.

― jjjusten, Tuesday, October 3, 2017 9:51 PM (two days ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

I am curious how many people (not going to speak for gbx but I count myself in this number) have crossed that line of growing up with guns, not being afraid of guns as object or w/e, but ending up mortified and terrified by the way guns function culturally in the modern day. Also, it's terrifying how many of the new culturally identifying pro-gun people are wildly ignorant about the realities of guns - AR15 worship is fucking stupid on a purely logical level. AR15 mod worship is ten times as stupid, and the dudes that fetishize flash suppressors and folding stocks ought to be looked at by hunters the same way car nerds look at those rolling coal assholes. No one with a basic understanding of how this shit works should or does believe in the good guy with a gun myth. I'd like to think there's a whole quiet chunk of people with my background that are ready to get flipped, but maybe that's optimistic/delusional.

― jjjusten, Tuesday, October 3, 2017 10:12 PM (two days ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

OT and XP jjustin: Some gun nuts will be pedantic about magazines ≠ clips. The magazine is the box from which rounds are fed, and most magazines on modern firearms are detachable. However, in some older rifles (Russian Mosin–Nagant, British Lee–Enfield, German Mauser K98k, US Springfield M1903, Soviet SKS) the magazine is fixed, and rounds are fed into it on a clip.

― prelude to abjection (Sanpaku), Tuesday, October 3, 2017 11:28 PM (two days ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

That's true.

― jjjusten, Wednesday, October 4, 2017 12:22 AM (yesterday) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

I'm not mortified or terrified by guns but the gun culture itself has gone 0-60 nutso since ~2010-11 (there was always a present right-wing element, definitely post-2008 but it kicked into overdrive with the tea party/mainstreaming of survivalist culture) where I have basically no interest in being around other shooters at gun ranges or competitions and have sold all but the last couple of guns (which I'm just too lazy to drive to Cabela's to sell).

― louise ck (milo z), Wednesday, October 4, 2017 12:55 AM (yesterday) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

Also since a black guy was let run some things

― passé aggresif (darraghmac), Wednesday, October 4, 2017 1:19 AM (yesterday) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

Yeah, there's a lot of technical information a person can learn about firearms, including not just highly specific details regarding every part of the weapons and their ammunition, but also the forces generated by firing and how or if they can be damped, how to sight in a scope, gun cleaning and maintenance, plus all the accessories - holsters, gun safes, trigger locks. It is a whole world of details heaped upon details and hobbyists and enthusiasts eat that stuff up and never tire of it.

But very little of that massive heap of facts has any real bearing on whether one can understand the basic issues addressed by proposed gun control laws.

― A is for (Aimless), Wednesday, October 4, 2017

If a person doesn't know what the hell he wants banned or regulated, then he's not understanding "the basic issues addressed by proposed gun control laws."

― the Rain Man of nationalism. (Alfred, Lord Sotosyn), Wednesday, October 4, 2017 3:52 AM (yesterday) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

Do potatoes make guns totally silent???

I grew up around a lot of guns, mostly for hunting, but also large "collections" of various firearms that seemed to serve no purpose other than being decorations in our trailer gun cabinets. Now pretty much mortified. Ban them and go into people's houses and take them away. I don't care how unfeasible that is.

― Jeff, Wednesday, October 4, 2017 4:00 AM (yesterday) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

Or just get Luke Cage to go in and bend all the barrels.

― Jeff, Wednesday, October 4, 2017 4:03 AM (yesterday) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

Less 'unfeasible' and more 'high body count'.

― Andrew Farrell, Wednesday, October 4, 2017 4:03 AM (yesterday) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

But the right ppl, perhaps

― passé aggresif (darraghmac), Wednesday, October 4, 2017 4:05 AM (yesterday) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

This guy had a whopping 47 guns ("to protect himself from the gummint" obv), right? Is there even a max limit on how much you're allowed to own?

Heard a replay of this on the radio this morning. From April this year:

(CNSNews.com) – President Donald Trump pledged to never infringe on the 2nd Amendment during a speech at the National Rifle Association’s meeting in Atlanta, Ga., on Friday.
“We all took an oath to preserve and protect the Constitution of the United States, and that means defending the 2nd Amendment. So let me make a simple to every one of the freedom-loving Americans in the audience today: as your president, I will never, ever infringe on the right of the people to keep and bear arms – never, ever,” Trump said. "Freedom is not a gift from government. Freedom is a gift from God,” he added.

― Le Bateau Ivre, Wednesday, October 4, 2017 5:37 AM (yesterday) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

cos God wants you to have guns

― Well bissogled trotters (Michael B), Wednesday, October 4, 2017 6:04 AM (yesterday) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

[....]

He might have set aside some for killing a lot of people, hard to know.

― Andrew Farrell, Wednesday, October 4, 2017 6:09 AM (yesterday) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

if god didn't want us to have guns then why did he give us trigger fingers, think about that

― this is ridcolus (Old Lunch), Wednesday, October 4, 2017 6:11 AM (yesterday) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

Come on, God has always wanted you to kill people, He loves dead people, the more the merrier.

― Tom's Tits Experiment (Tom D.), Wednesday, October 4, 2017 6:19 AM (yesterday) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

the defeatism and apathy in this thread and on the left in general on this issue depresses me

― k3vin k., Wednesday, October 4, 2017 6:29 AM (yesterday) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

A lot of defeatism perhaps but apathy no

― Well bissogled trotters (Michael B), Wednesday, October 4, 2017 6:34 AM (yesterday) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

It's depressing, I agree. When the massacre of young children isn't enough to effect a change, I honestly don't know what it would take. We'll probably have to wait until the majority of Americans have been personally affected by something like this, because mass shootings are still a thing that only happens to Other People.

― this is ridcolus (Old Lunch), Wednesday, October 4, 2017 6:36 AM (yesterday) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

I am curious how many people (not going to speak for gbx but I count myself in this number) have crossed that line of growing up with guns, not being afraid of guns as object or w/e, but ending up mortified and terrified by the way guns function culturally in the modern day.

This is pretty much me - my grandfather was a crazy paranoid gun nut who always, ALWAYS, had a loaded gun nearby. When he lived with us for a while he kept a Mossberg police shotgun (shortest legal barrel, highest capacity) in the closet, kept an unlicensed handgun in his desk at work, and probably always had a loaded pistol under his car seat. He went to gun shows, never hunted, hated the IRS, and I'm sort of glad he never lived til the Fox News era because it would have really soured my memories of him.

That shit was super fun when I was 13 (and, admittedly, probably still would be) - shooting targets and beer cans and clay pigeons with pistols and semi-autos with large magazines and shotguns can be viscerally thrilling, and I see why people get way into it. But being able to enjoy that activity vs. repeated mass murder of innocents isn't even a fucking contest - I'm happy to deprive everyone of their ability to do this forever because it's a dumb, pointless hobby and you can find something better to do with your time.

I think it's true that there is an opportunity to separate the gun nuts from sane, reasonable hunters - people who see guns as toys or some sort of "fuck you you can't tell me what to do" political/paranoid expression vs. people who use guns as a means to an end. I know my inlaws are horrified by gun violence and asshole gun fetishists and the NRA but they love to walk in the woods and hunt birds and deer and eat what they shoot, store their guns unloaded and locked up, and they would have no problem paying insurance to own a gun or to have limited capacity firearms. You don't need a 30 round magazine to shoot a deer.

― joygoat, Wednesday, October 4, 2017 6:58 AM (yesterday) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

yeah and it's depressing that this point seems to be such a nonstarter. I posted a tirade about this on FB and the response I kept getting was "guns can't kill if people don't pull the trigger, the problem is not guns". to which it's like...well you ain't necessarily wrong there but personally I prefer MY murderous lunatics to be wielding a knife or a six-shooter instead of something which can fire a hundred bullets in under a minute.

― frogbs, Wednesday, October 4, 2017 7:22 AM (yesterday) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

especially since this is the same crowd who loves the idea of the border wall. you point out "what's this gonna reduce illegal immigration by, 5%?" and their response is, "that's good enough for me. it's something". hmmm. ya don't say.

― frogbs, Wednesday, October 4, 2017 7:24 AM (yesterday) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

I think it’s past time to stop calling gun collecting a hobby. Table top games and woodworking and reading and playing instruments = hobbies.

If I bought cadavers and butchered them in my garage I doubt my neighbors would think of that as a hobby. And it would still be a universe removed, in terms of harmfulness to life, from gun collecting.

― El Tomboto, Wednesday, October 4, 2017 7:59 AM (yesterday) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

but is owning Clue or Monopoly a right recgonized by the Supreme Court?

― the Rain Man of nationalism. (Alfred, Lord Sotosyn), Wednesday, October 4, 2017 8:00 AM (yesterday) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

Fuck the Supreme Court.

― El Tomboto, Wednesday, October 4, 2017 8:03 AM (yesterday) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

Anyone who thinks guns are not the problem should be shot with one.

― El Tomboto, Wednesday, October 4, 2017 8:04 AM (yesterday) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

Just in the hand, though.

― El Tomboto, Wednesday, October 4, 2017 8:05 AM (yesterday) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

Brand the NRA as a terrorist org, imo. An intermediate step but an important one.

― this is ridcolus (Old Lunch), Wednesday, October 4, 2017 8:06 AM (yesterday) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

lotta good posts here today that I kinda wish were on the gun control thread, thanks y'all

― sleeve, Wednesday, October 4, 2017 8:08 AM (yesterday) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

fuck it, this too:

was curious whether my above suggestion of some sort of more objective measure (sustained aimed fire total muzzle energy) would distinguish hunting and self-defense firearms from assault weapons. As opposed to earlier assault weapons bans based on cosmetic features. After searching around for sustained/effective ROF, I think it would:

semi-auto 9mm/.45 pistol: 40 rds/min x 400 ft-lbs = 16000 ft-lbs/min
.357 Magnum revolver: 30 rds/min x 600 ft-lbs = 18000 ft-lbs/min
bolt-action .308 hunting rifle: 15 rds/min x 2800 ft-lbs = 42000 ft-lbs/min
12 ga 5 rd pump shotgun: 15 rds/min x 3000 ft-lbs = 45000 ft-lbs/min

semi-auto magazine-fed 5.56 rifle: 90 rds/min x 1300 ft-lbs = 117000 ft-lbs/min
automatic 7.62 rifle: 120 rds/min x 1500 ft-lbs = 180000 ft-lbs/min

There's a threshold issue with SMGs (automatic weapons firing pistol rounds), eg an Uzi would come in at 120x383 = 46000 ft-lbs/min, but strengthening current restrictions on automatic weapons would resolve this. How would one obtain sustained aimed rates of fire? Why not have a contest among ATF agents with the candidate weapon, with the winner or top 3 setting the value. Does a weapons modification (larger magazine, bump stock, crank) push values higher? Put it to the test.

― prelude to abjection (Sanpaku), Wednesday, October 4, 2017 12:55 PM (yesterday) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

“I don’t think we ought to punish 80, 90 million gun owners who have a right to own a weapon under the Constitution because of the act of one idiot,” said Sen. John Kennedy (R-La.). “Just like I don’t think we ought to condemn all Muslims because of the act of one jihadist.”

why just condemn when you can ban them from the country outright

― frogbs, Wednesday, October 4, 2017 12:57 PM (yesterday) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

punish 80, 90 million gun owners

totally psyched to help these fine americans out w/ increased risk of meaningless death, glad i could contribute to the american idea somehow

― j., Wednesday, October 4, 2017 2:06 PM (yesterday) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

http://highline.huffingtonpost.com/articles/en/gun-violence

― Chocolate-covered gummy bears? Not ruling those lil' guys out. (ulysses), Wednesday, October 4, 2017 2:26 PM (yesterday) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

xxp -

The number of people on Earth who can reload and fire a .357 five times in one minute is probably in the dozens. Even with Moon Clips/reloaders and practice, that's an incredibly high threshold.

Three magazine changes for a 9mm semi-auto is pretty much anyone who spends a full day practicing.

What any 'objective measure' along the lines of what you're trying to do is going to end up with centerfire semi-autos being the weapons that need to be banned. Just start from that point and skip the million things that could be nitpicked (different ammo and barrel lengths drastically alter force, etc.).

I'd also say that what you're looking is a question relevant to spree shootings and ignores the way guns are used every single day in American violence. A low-powered .22lr or slow revolver is every bit as useful to/dangerous in the hands of gangs or a domestic abuser.

― louise ck (milo z), Wednesday, October 4, 2017 2:42 PM (yesterday) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

Which is to say that trying to make objective measurements that determine the potential lawfulness of a gun would be wasted energy, IMO. Making violence more abstract isn't convincing a soul.

― louise ck (milo z), Wednesday, October 4, 2017 2:45 PM (yesterday) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

The pretense that any gun is designed for anything besides killing other humans is a fucking joke anyway. Usefulness for hunting game remains a side benefit of the basic design

― El Tomboto, Wednesday, October 4, 2017 3:33 PM (yesterday) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

Force gun owners to trade their boomsticks in for bows and spears, imo. And then they have to teach themselves flint flaking if they actually want an edged weapon. Let's just return to the Paleolithic and see if we can get it right with a do-over, is what I'm saying here.

― this is ridcolus (Old Lunch), Wednesday, October 4, 2017 3:44 PM (yesterday) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

narrator: they didn't.

― nomar, Wednesday, October 4, 2017 3:46 PM (yesterday) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

So my congressman Carlos Curbelo is writing a bill to ban bump stock.

― the Rain Man of nationalism. (Alfred, Lord Sotosyn), Wednesday, October 4, 2017 3:48 PM (yesterday) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

milo z: That's the point. I took the most extreme rates possible rates of fire for typical hunting and self-defense weapons, and the total kinetic energy involved is still less than half of what can be achieved with assault rifles, whether semi-auto or fully auto.

What I'm looking for is a way to ban AK and M4/16 type weapons, that isn't mainly cosmetic (and hence comical/circumventable), that could could create fissures amongst gun owning voters. Personally, I'd like to see a day when only (some) law enforcement, and biologists/geologists in the wilderness, carry, but that would require a marked cultural shift, and every journey starts with a step.

― prelude to abjection (Sanpaku), Wednesday, October 4, 2017 3:55 PM (yesterday) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

tombot otm

― k3vin k., Wednesday, October 4, 2017 4:01 PM (yesterday) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

The problem with that is that there are dozens of rifles just as 'capable' as the AK/AR platforms. The Ruger Mini-14 would just make a comeback - it was a favorite of the survivalist types back in the day because it had all the capabilities of an AR without the stigma (or legal restrictions). There is nothing special about AKs/ARs aside from current ubiquity - any magazine-fed centerfire semi-automatic is as capable or more capable. Differentiating beyond that is pointless.

Naming certain types of rifle is a fool's errand - anyone you can convince to get down with a 'ban' on ARs would be fine with banning semi-auto centerfires in general.

― louise ck (milo z), Wednesday, October 4, 2017 4:05 PM (yesterday) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

I'm not sure you're reading Sanpaku's post, there.

― Andrew Farrell, Wednesday, October 4, 2017 4:17 PM (yesterday) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

Heaven forfend such an abomination should come to pass.

― bumbling my way toward the light or wahtever (hardcore dilettante), Wednesday, October 4, 2017 4:18 PM (yesterday) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

xp yeah, Sanpaku only named certain rifles as examples while suggesting a metric that should ban a more general set.

― you are juror number 144 and we will excuse you (Sufjan Grafton), Wednesday, October 4, 2017 4:21 PM (yesterday) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

And I'm giving the general set and it doesn't require speed-shooting competitions or assumptive math about joules of energy delivered (which is also a terrible measure - we adopted a 5.56 round despite generating less power because it tumbles when it hits flesh and causes more damage) : centerfire externally magazine-fed semi-automatic weapons. That's the entirety of the meaningful differentiation and what that math will lead to.

― louise ck (milo z), Wednesday, October 4, 2017 4:32 PM (yesterday) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

ah, I see. Thanks for clarifying.

― you are juror number 144 and we will excuse you (Sufjan Grafton), Wednesday, October 4, 2017 4:47 PM (yesterday) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

If our political goal is to (if possible) find fissures among gun owners between those who have hunting rifles/shotguns and self-defense handguns, and the much smaller number who are hoarding military guns for a revolution, then I'm not sure "external magazine + centerfire + semiauto" would work, as it would include too many handguns. There are centerfire pistol cartridges, some used in external magazine handguns. Politically, we're not going to find final solutions tomorrow, but we can chip away at the margins.

Why are assault style weapons favored by some spree killers? Magazine fed semi-auto volume of fire + rifle cartridge kinetic energy. These aren't cosmetic distinctions. A Mini-14 is little different from the AR-15s found at Mandalay Bay, here (and yes, there are bump stocks for Mini-14s).

― prelude to abjection (Sanpaku), Wednesday, October 4, 2017 4:59 PM (yesterday) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

Why are assault style weapons favored by some spree killers?

This is pretty simple: because AR-15s and AK-47s are the most ubiquitous semi-automatic rifles in the world. Not only are variations available at every gun dealer in the country, they've been front and center in movies, video games and television for 50 years (and the standard weapon for our military and the militaries we've fought). .223 and 5.56 are as common as dirt because they're our primary military caliber. It's not more complicated than that. It's not because of any special capability (beyond semi-automatic/magazine-fed).

Almost* every semi-auto centerfire rifle (chambered for a rifle round) made could been used to commit the Las Vegas shooting - a pistol-caliber rifle probably could not in the same way, but it could have in Sandy Hook or Pulse.

(exceptions being things like very large caliber sniper rifles or weapons made so poorly they wouldn't shoot)

fissures among gun owners between those who have hunting rifles/shotguns and self-defense handguns, and the much smaller number who are hoarding military guns for a revolution

This is a pretty useless distinction today - beyond being a single circle in many respects, if you assume that ARs and AKs belong only to a lunatic fringe of the far right you're simply wrong. You're not going to exploit any fissures by lumping in the guy who bought a Colt because he saw an AR on Call of Duty with anti-government extremists or spree killers - you're just going to make him defensive. Whether or not you believe bans/etc. are the morally right thing to do, thinking that's going to create consensus is incredibly dubious.

The place to exploit fissures would be with the gunshow loophole. It wouldn't do much, if anything, in the short term as far as spree shootings or day to day violence (but no less than an 'assault weapons ban') and could easily be ignored but legally requiring that sales take place at a dealer who can perform the paperwork and background check (and benefits because he gets to charge $30 for the process) normalizes further gun control. That's been the most successful process - background checks at all were anathema thirty years ago but no one bats an eye now, until 1968 we didn't have even the licensed dealer/paperwork setup we have now but no one in the country could imagine returning to completely unfettered new gun sales.

― louise ck (milo z), Wednesday, October 4, 2017 5:24 PM (yesterday) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

This guy bought six of his weapons at a Cabela's, and his (12, according to some reports) bump fire stocks online, it seems. He had enough firepower in that hotel room for not just an infantry squad, but a full section (the ol' half-platoon). Closing gun show loopholes would have had no effect on *this* spree shooting.

Personally, I have to take (too abbreviated) driver's licence testing every decade, have brake tags checked every 2 years, and carry insurance in case my driving harms others or their property. The idea that anyone can obtain more lethal mechanical devices, with no training, no licencing, and no insurance, should appall us.

This actually suggests another, "market friendly", approach. Mandate that home insurance cover medical/civil lawsuit costs of guns in the home. If the insurance lobby can save us from drunk drivers, not wearing seatbelts, and building in flood plains, perhaps they could save us from the American gun pandemic. This hasn't stopped drunk driving, vehicular mortality, or hurricanes, but it has incentivised better behavior.

― prelude to abjection (Sanpaku), Wednesday, October 4, 2017 6:06 PM (yesterday) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

Would I be out of line in suggesting this conversation move to a gun control thread or Repeal the Second Amendment? Y'all are having a good discussion based in real knowledge, but there are times of day one doesn't want to mentally reenact a recent tragedy running hypotheticals of what would have been possible with this or that weapon. It's all 100 percent relevant but idk I feel like this thread despite its horrible title is more an emotional support/processing space (on top of news clearinghouse) and looking-through-the-eyes-of-the-killer type mental exercises are anxiety-inducing in a similar way as watching video of these events and mentally inserting oneself in the crowd. But if it's just me I'll shut up.

― Doctor Casino, Wednesday, October 4, 2017 7:08 PM (yesterday) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

uhhh Bret Stephens otm?

My congressman Carlos Curbelo on Chuck Todd's show now discussing his bump stock legislation.

I was disturbed by how much I agreed with Bret Stephens on this.

He was shockingly cogent and convincing, and I've already been coming around to that position. It was really refreshing to hear someone just say "Wait, why do we have this at all? It's stupid."

Stephens on MSNBC now