Senate Gun Control

Gay marriage got you down? Get your "Equal footing nuke" today! Don't let the oppressive government stomp on your rights, get your nuclear deterrent and escalate things out of the friend zone. Let's heat up the cold war, the civil cold war!

In all seriousness, it is an interesting argument that semi-auto ban is banning progessive technology. But the people don't necessarily have a right to the cutting edge of technology. I don't know of any privately owned F-22's.

I'm a pilot, damnit, why can't I have the best aircraft?!

 

Exactly. For instance, it would be very interesting to see white gun owners joining up with Black Lives Matter in a protest about Philando Castile. I'm pretty sure that if a white man with a concealed carry license was killed by the police, the NRA would kick up a ****storm like you've never seen before. But that's not going to happen. And let's just recall that a white gun owner carried a rifle into a Walmart and the police quietly and respectfully approached him to find out what was going on; meanwhile, a black guy picked up a plastic rifle on the toy aisle of a Walmart and the police killed him. A white gun owner is a hunter; a black gun owner is a gangster; a brown gun owner is a terrorist. That's just the way it is. When white gun owners stop demonizing black & brown people for carrying weapons, I'll give them more respect.

 

I would like a food irradiation machine for my home. Why can't I have this cutting edge food preservation technology for personal use?

 

I think you're conflating "semi-automatic" with "tactical rifle". Semi-autos are favored among hunters.

For instance, the Browning Mark 2 Safari is a semi-automatic rifle used for big game hunting, but it's probably not what you were thinking of when you say "semi-automatic".

It only holds 5 rounds: four in the magazine, one in the chamber. To reload it, you actually have to stop and open the bottom.



Not exactly something with which someone would go on a murder spree. Unless you're one of the PETA-type things that thinks harvesting a deer is somehow equivalent of killing another human being.

 

SithSense I didn't know that. I should probably do some more research on these definitions

 

1. Because F-22's are prohibitively expensive thanks to scarcity and the technology they use. Only 195 were ever built and the base price is $65 Billion.

2. People do privately own warplanes.
https://www.warhistoryonline.com/mi...sale-1942-fg-1d-corsair-bring-25-million.html

3. "Why can't I have the best aircraft?"

a. Why can't you?

b. The F-22 Raptor is not the "best aircraft". It was expensive both to operate and to maintain, which is why the Obama administration cancelled the program.

c. Because you aren't John Travolta.


Yep. That's Travolta's house.

 

What the actual ****?

 

"Best aircraft" is pretty subjective, and while I love the F-35, the F-22 is no doubt the world's greatest dogfighter.

Yes people own warplanes, i have a friend who owns the F4U Corsair, but this is an aircraft from WWII, with no guns attached to it, that would be highly illegal.

I can't own the F-22, F-35, or the F-16 because they aren't yet demilitarized. These are military weapons, not for sale to the public. The cutting edge of military aviation is absolutely not available to the public.

 

Going by the sizes there, he's apparently preparing for a Goldilocks situation.

 

Armed personal drone aircraft is a reality. People are already trying to arm their personal drones. It's two hobbies at once! And it's only a matter of time until someone tries to sell personal armed drones for self defense or defense of property, or an armed drone gets used in a terrorist attack, for example a large camera drone dropping a Boston Marathon style pressure cooker bomb into a crowded venue.

 

blimey . presumably Thunderbird 1 is under the swimming pool .

.

 

It's easy.

- Break-action is a gun that you actually have to "break" open. The barrel breaks forward and you reload it manually. This is generally for shotguns and revolvers.


Speaking of revolvers....there are two types, Single-Action or Double-Action.
Single -Action revolvers require the shooter to cock the hammer back in order to shoot again. Double-action revolvers have additional mechanics so that pulling the trigger automatically cocks the hammer.

- Lever-action is a gun that has a lever on the bottom of it. You fire a shot, then bring down the lever to eject the spent cartridge and load another one in.


- Bolt-action is a gun that has a bolt inside it to contain the round. After firing a shot, you pull the bolt back with a handle on the side of the gun to eject the spent round and load another. This is mostly with rifles, though there is also a market for bolt-action pistols.


- Semi-automatic is a gun that fires one round when the trigger is pulled. It harnesses the gases expelled by the burning gunpowder to push the action backwards and chamber another round. This round won't fire until the trigger is pulled again. Semi-autos come in all shapes and sizes.

The two guns pictured here are virtually the same, aside from the magazine size (5 rounds on the top, 10-12 on the bottom) and the cosmetics.



- Full-automatic is a gun that fires multiple rounds by holding down the trigger. These are hard to get as they involve the BATF doing a federal background check, including the feds calling your local police district for more information and to let them know you own it.
Full-auto is a bullet-waster, which is why the military no longer uses full-auto, instead their weapons have a switch to go from semi-automatic mode to a three-round burst.
The best examples of this would be the M1928 Thompson "Tommy Gun", being seen here fired by Winston Churchill

or the original AK-47 (Automat Kalashnikov model 1947).


Both of these are banned for private ownership, however there were legal semi-automatic versions made. Modifying a semi-automatic version to fire automatic is illegal.

 

Hey, the scientologists have to keep Travolta happy somehow. Why not buy him an airliner?

 

I just want a drone with arms, so it can wave at me when it is flying in the sky.

 

I reported Slicer's post, for bringing Star Wars into an adult discussion.

Slicer87, if you are so unworldly and undereducated that you can only make a point using Star Wars references - much less prequels, the poor man's B-grade schlock - then you should probably just not make references at all, ever.

The only time a mass movement has enacted social change in America was when it was lead by black people.

They are literally scared silly of blacks.

 

Tone - deaf GOP Gubernatorial candidate holds 'bump stock' giveaway.

 

That's the GOP for you.

 

I had typed out a nice long post about my thoughts regarding gun control and how it should be handled and then it got eaten by my account being logged out.
Suffice it to say:

Gun control should be managed at the Federal level with the same rules/laws being in place in all 50 states. Each state having its own laws is a technical violation of the 10th Amendment as the right to keep and bear arms is already spelled out in the constitution meaning that the Federal government has the enforcement responsibilities: "The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people." This should include background checks, mental health screens, consent of others in the home where guns will be kept, training courses to know how to properly handle the firearm and qualification courses if you are going to want to carry it outside of your home. This can be done at the expense of the gun owner as long as a program exists for lower-income people to get the same access as gun ownership/carrying privileges can't be reserved only for "well off" people as that is a civil rights issue.

Guns should not be banned because they look scary but we can impose a 15 round limit on all magazines and ban bump stocks and similar devices which violate the spirit of the laws on the books. Automatic weapons ban should continue.

Each state should have its own militia formed that can not be called up to Federal service. These militia's can perform traditional NG functions such as SAR or disaster relief but also can be called upon in the event of invasion or of a tyrannical government (right now would be a good time lol). These militia's will have training requirements, fitness requirements (probably less than NG so that some of these wannabe militia types can join and we can keep them happy and under watch). These organizations would have access to some higher grade, military style stuff that can only be checked out for training and is protected by some state agency (State Police?) so that they don't just have it with them.

My original post was more coherent and laid out (had like 11 bullet points) but I think this is the gist of it.

 

The National Guard is the state militia.

 

It actually is but it isn't.

State Defense Forces

These are units that are distinct from the National Guard and can not be federalized but not every state has them. If you make it so that every state has them I think it would go a long way.

 

What's that, 30-06?

Tell me why a bolt action, chambered in the same calibre, is somehow less of a right than a semi-auto?

 

It is. Hunting, in any form, should be illegal.

 

That's overkill, DANNASUK

 

Sustenance hunting is one thing, but hunting for 'sport' or sadistic pleasure is something I'd be quite happy to see the end of.

 

There may also be a need for hunting to keep some wild animal populations under control, like bears.

 

It is barbarism and primitive behaviour.