HERE COMES THE GUN LAWS

[jjb4900]

7 minutes ago, Culvercreek hunt club said:

I don't have a problem supporting better mental health care BUT, there needs to be a plan outlined (the whole plan) and specific avenues to pay for it. I would then want someone to tell me how this new plan would have stopped this shooter. 

It would have done nothing, if someone is a quiet nutjob who basically leads a normal life on the outside and operates within the law his entire life, while his issues brew quietly inside his head, nobody is ever gonna pick up on it...and as of now they don't drag people in for mental health evaluations because they legally buy numerous weapons or peacefully protest whatever issue is eating away at them.

[OtiscoPaul]

 

I've got no problem with this.  It is specific to this incident and highlights a potential oversight in reasonable regulation.

[Culvercreek hunt club]

1 minute ago, jjb4900 said:

It would have done nothing, if someone is a quiet nutjob who basically leads a normal life on the outside and operates within the law his entire life, while his issues brew quietly inside his head, nobody is ever gonna pick up on it...and as of now they don't drag people in for mental health evaluations because they legally buy numerous weapons or peacefully protest whatever issue is eating away at them.

Oh I know that is the correct answer. So when it does happen again after new mental health efforts and even more gun laws (probably on the state levels), we will be right back here defending an onslaught and accusations that gun owners cause these things. 

 

[jjb4900]

we all know that 90% of gun laws are just feel good laws that do nothing....but at a certain point, when the pro gun groups see the support start to swing the other direction, it might be time to reevaluate how they do business. I know it's BS and it does very little, and the old "give an inch and they'll take a mile", but when you start to lose support because of what's happening and how you deal with it..it's not going to have a very good outcome. I don't see the benefit to finding new ways to legally circumnavigate restrictions to make a gun do pretty much exactly what the banned weapon did.........2 weeks ago nobody knew what a bump stock was, not anymore.

[steve863]

37 minutes ago, jjb4900 said:

we all know that 90% of gun laws are just feel good laws that do nothing....but at a certain point, when the pro gun groups see the support start to swing the other direction, it might be time to reevaluate how they do business. I know it's BS and it does very little, and the old "give an inch and they'll take a mile", but when you start to lose support because of what's happening and how you deal with it..it's not going to have a very good outcome. I don't see the benefit to finding new ways to legally circumnavigate restrictions to make a gun do pretty much exactly what the banned weapon did.........2 weeks ago nobody knew what a bump stock was, not anymore.

Excellent post.  The big problem is that gun owners and the gun lobby are portrayed as having very little compassion about violence committed with guns.  If we are not willing (as responsible gun owners) to take at least the simplest steps to keep a legal firearm from easily being converted to an illegal one, then we will eventually lose the public relations game.  I know the NRA has had a lot of success in the past and has won out, but lets not forget that all things come to an end.  And I've long predicted that there will be a republican president in office when the next significant national gun law gets signed.  It was a political game not to have any laws go thru with a democrat in office, but that is not the case right now.  If you think that a guy like Trump couldn't be swayed to sign something into law, I've got a bridge in Brooklyn that I could sell you.  I don't care if he was the star at the NRA convention this past year.  He is a loose cannon and what he said yesterday, may not hold any water tomorrow.  We will see what happens.

 

 

[Culvercreek hunt club]

11 minutes ago, steve863 said:

  If we are not willing (as responsible gun owners) to take at least the simplest steps to keep a legal firearm from easily being converted to an illegal one, then we will eventually lose the public relations game.

 

I just wanted to clear up that the bump stocks were NOT illegal. Even per the ATF they still classified the weapon with a bump stock on it as semi automatic becasue it required one trigger pull to fir one round. The bump stock reduces the time between "triggger pulls"

Edited October 5, 2017 by Culvercreek hunt club

[jjb4900]

3 minutes ago, Culvercreek hunt club said:

I just wanted to clear up that the bump stocks were NOT illegal. Even per the ATF they still classified the weapon with a bump stock on it as semi automatic becasue it required one trigger pull to fir one round. The bump stock reduces the time between "triggger pulls"

my point of mentioning that was specifically to show how doing something like that. although not illegal, creates something that "appears" to do the same thing that was banned.....it just looks sh%tty to the anti gun people, and sadly more and more to pro gun people.

[Buckmaster7600]

It's very foolish for you to assume that because someone works in a "box" store that they are somehow less competent than someone in a mom and pop shop. Stupid or I'll informed doesn't have boundaries, including store walls, box or not. I couldn't even begin to tell you the number of people that came in thinking they knew something only to accuse everyone in the store of being ignorant, meanwhile you have 3 guys with 50+ years of firearms experience/training telling them they're not right. The coin has 2 sides also...

Sent from my XT1080 using Tapatalk

What I call foolish is having to listen to the water heads behind the counter at these box stores. I will never buy a gun from a box store, never have never will and I average 3 gun purchases a month.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Buckmaster7600]

It's very foolish for you to assume that because someone works in a "box" store that they are somehow less competent than someone in a mom and pop shop. Stupid or I'll informed doesn't have boundaries, including store walls, box or not. I couldn't even begin to tell you the number of people that came in thinking they knew something only to accuse everyone in the store of being ignorant, meanwhile you have 3 guys with 50+ years of firearms experience/training telling them they're not right. The coin has 2 sides also...

Sent from my XT1080 using Tapatalk

What I call foolish is having to listen to the water heads behind the counter at these box stores. I will never buy a gun from a box store, never have never will and I average 3 gun purchases a month.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Culvercreek hunt club]

2 minutes ago, jjb4900 said:

my point of mentioning that was specifically to show how doing something like that. although not illegal, creates something that "appears" to do the same thing that was banned.....it just looks sh%tty to the anti gun people, and sadly more and more to pro gun people.

when I said it was not illegal I was speaking on a national level since this happened in Las Vegas. in NY that would be an banned assault weapon.  (pistol grip, Possible collapsible stock on a detachable magazine semi auto) I get what you guys are saying. This whole thing has turned into WW 1 trench warfare becasue of how both sides approach each other. I don't know what the answer is but I can sympathize with the pro gun not wanting to give an inch becasue of past legislation. The left has proven time and time again that they WILL pass them for the sake of passing them and have no idea if any positive results will be achieved. 

I've shot a bump stock. it's fun for spraying bullets but not very good accuracy. full autos are fun as well to shoot. Everyone should experience it at least once. I have no desire or need to own one though. 

[Five Seasons]

2 hours ago, Culvercreek hunt club said:

Those my only options? Can we tax abortions, unhealthy food and cars instead, since they cause more deaths by double or triple digit factors instead?

 

just a hypothetical. you know the nra would never allow it. so yes, hypothetically those are your only 2 options. it's worked with cigarettes. 

so there's a 5% tax on guns and ammo. Your $20 box of shells adds $1. Your $700 gun adds $35. Or maybe it's less. Would you sign up for that if it allowed you to buy 30 round mags again and ARs and all the stuff the safe act took away?

the money has to be earmarked for mental health programs and anti-violence gang prevention etc. Maybe it's added to gun law enforcement division that goes after illegal gun sales and traffic. Whatever, but it can't be added to the general fund. Similar to how the hunting license system works toward conservation. 

Edited October 5, 2017 by Belo

[Culvercreek hunt club]

just a hypothetical. you know the nra would never allow it. so yes, hypothetically those are your only 2 options. it's worked with cigarettes. 
so there's a 5% tax on guns and ammo. Your $20 box of shells adds $1. Your $700 gun adds $35. Or maybe it's less. Would you sign up for that if it allowed you to buy 30 round mags again and ARs and all the stuff the safe act took away?
the money has to be earmarked for mental health programs and anti-violence gang prevention etc. Maybe it's added to gun law enforcement division that goes after illegal gun sales and traffic. Whatever, but it can't be added to the general fund. Similar to how the hunting license system works toward conservation. 

If it was earmarked I'd go 10%

[ryan]

7 minutes ago, Culvercreek hunt club said:

If it was earmarked I'd go 10%

Do you really believe that the taxes on any thing goes towards where they say it will go .... not even half goes to where it suppose to go... so count me out of paying more taxes 

[jjb4900]

The whole problem is, the majority of the people who commit these mass killings aren't the typical mental health case......I think if you look at Vegas shooter, the Columbine shooters, the Orlando shooter, etc., they aren't your typical mental health case, you can't medicate someone to change their radical beliefs or racism or whatever triggers them..they're not, for the most part, going to be on any "watch list", because they haven't done anything prior...of course you can help people who suffer from manic depression, bipolar disorder and the likes, but then again these people more then likely aren't going to be mass killers anyway...what do we do, red flag people who buy more then 10 guns, certain types of guns, a lot of ammo?? I don't know.

Edited October 5, 2017 by jjb4900

[Culvercreek hunt club]

31 minutes ago, ryan said:

Do you really believe that the taxes on any thing goes towards where they say it will go .... not even half goes to where it suppose to go... so count me out of paying more taxes 

No as a matter of fact I don't but I was answering his hypothetical with all he set forth. And in his it was earmarked. 

[Culvercreek hunt club]

23 minutes ago, jjb4900 said:

The whole problem is, the majority of the people who commit these mass killings aren't the typical mental health case......I think if you look at Vegas shooter, the Columbine shooters, the Orlando shooter, etc., they aren't your typical mental health case, you can't medicate someone to change their radical beliefs or racism or whatever triggers them..they're not, for the most part, going to be on any "watch list", because they haven't done anything prior...of course you can help people who suffer from manic depression, bipolar disorder and the likes, but then again these people more then likely aren't going to be mass killers anyway...what do we do, red flag people who buy more then 10 guns, certain types of guns, a lot of ammo?? I don't know.

and add to that the number of murders using firearms has been in steady decline since the assault weapon ban expiration. Which if you want to believe the lib's shouldn't be happening. 

[OtiscoPaul]

2 hours ago, Culvercreek hunt club said:

I just wanted to clear up that the bump stocks were NOT illegal. Even per the ATF they still classified the weapon with a bump stock on it as semi automatic becasue it required one trigger pull to fir one round. The bump stock reduces the time between "triggger pulls"

This is true...that's the point.  It is an attempt to circumvent reasonable law to recreate the auto experience and it was extremely effective in this case.

By the way these products were released in 2010/11 and it was Obama's ATF who said no worries mates!

This is the point, compromise is not a dirty word and in this specific case it highlights an oversight in reasonable regulation.  

Now both sides budge a little and we all win if for no other reason than coming together.  It used to be what nations did after tragedies.

There are always 2 extremes but in this case the NRA's extreme "cold dead hands" position is the default pro-gun position.  Not true the other way around plenty of rural democrats support 2nd amendment rights.

Edited October 5, 2017 by OtiscoPaul

[jjb4900]

2 minutes ago, Culvercreek hunt club said:

and add to that the number of murders using firearms has been in steady decline since the assault weapon ban expiration. Which if you want to believe the lib's shouldn't be happening. 

I know it's a stretch of a comparison and maybe even a little of a "that's not even close" type of thing, because the reason behind it happening and the pain it causes is so different, but it's like a plane crash to some extent.........planes aren't the problem, but when there is a crash, it's so catastrophic and kills so many at once it puts a fear of flying into a lot of people..but ultimately when all is said and done, planes aren't the problem, it's usually human error that caused it...people tend to blame an object and not the human problem behind it.

[ryan]

10 minutes ago, jjb4900 said:

I know it's a stretch of a comparison and maybe even a little of a "that's not even close" type of thing, because the reason behind it happening and the pain it causes is so different, but it's like a plane crash to some extent.........planes aren't the problem, but when there is a crash, it's so catastrophic and kills so many at once it puts a fear of flying into a lot of people..but ultimately when all is said and done, planes aren't the problem, it's usually human error that caused it...people tend to blame an object and not the human problem behind it.

bang on

[silent death]

On Wednesday, October 04, 2017 at 7:21 AM, bugsNbows said:

Question for Kimmel... did your mother have any kids that lived?

His acting sucks ...i about puked when i watched that crap ....everyone blames the guns ..the media never misses a beat to capatalize on a case that involves guns

Edited October 5, 2017 by silent death

[ryan]

we cant change the views of others likewise they cant change ours and no new gun law or removing one thats already there will bring back the lives that were lost only God can fix this place only God..

[Five Seasons]

2 hours ago, jjb4900 said:

The whole problem is, the majority of the people who commit these mass killings aren't the typical mental health case......I think if you look at Vegas shooter, the Columbine shooters, the Orlando shooter, etc., they aren't your typical mental health case, you can't medicate someone to change their radical beliefs or racism or whatever triggers them..they're not, for the most part, going to be on any "watch list", because they haven't done anything prior...of course you can help people who suffer from manic depression, bipolar disorder and the likes, but then again these people more then likely aren't going to be mass killers anyway...what do we do, red flag people who buy more then 10 guns, certain types of guns, a lot of ammo?? I don't know.

i agree, but that wack job who popped that innocent lady in a park (i think it was batavia) a few weeks ago? That shit just isn't right.

and think of it as a peace offering. Remember when peta gets all huffy puffy and we show how much money we've put into conservation? shuts them right up.

Edited October 5, 2017 by Belo

[steve863]

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2017/10/05/nra-calls-for-atf-review-bump-stocks-new-regulations-after-las-vegas-shooting.html

 

I think the NRA is making the correct move here.

[OtiscoPaul]

51 minutes ago, steve863 said:

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2017/10/05/nra-calls-for-atf-review-bump-stocks-new-regulations-after-las-vegas-shooting.html

 

I think the NRA is making the correct move here.

I'm surprised and hopeful as well.  Let reason prevail.

[philoshop]

I went head-to-head and side-by-side with a bump-fire guy a few years ago. The bet involved 15 seconds of sustained fire with half the score involving amount of ammo fired, and half involving scores on target. It took us six tries before he could even get through the 15 second drill without a malfunction, and he put 3 of his 100 shots on target. I only shot about 40 rounds with my finger, but 75% of them were on target.

Focus on the steak, not the beans.