Biden Seeks Assault Weapons Ban and Background Checks

[Steuben Jerry]

15 minutes ago, ApexerER said:

I also have a NY compliant AR 10 .308 with some 5 round magazines.

I'm looking for that very thing - let me know if you ever want to part with it!

[ApexerER]

1 hour ago, Splitear said:

Just to play devil's advocate, and please understand, I am really torn about the idea of carrying. The point that comes to my mind is: 

If a "bad guy" enters an establishment with a firearm intending to kill/injure, and we have lets say 6 people in said establishment who are carrying, and intend to stop said "bad guy". These folks who are looking to stop the shooting are looking for an individual with a gun, not realizing that there are 6x as many "good guys" with weapons drawn, as there is the one "bad guy". Lets say there is a friendly fire incident, one of the good guys come around a corner, sees another person with a gun, and they fire. Additionally, when the police show up, they are looking for someone with a gun, if they come around a corner and someone has a gun, is it justifiable to use lethal force, even if that person is a "good guy". This is just a scenario that plays out when I think about this.

Now, I'm not trained in concealed carry, so there may be intensive training in recognizing a threat that covers this. I'm not looking for an argument here, not at all. If someone can kind of guide my thinking, I would really appreciate the insight. Honestly, thoughts like this, are just one of the reasons that I doubt I will ever CC. 

I'm not saying that the other side of that coin "a good guy with a gun could have stopped this" isn't valid, I totally see that too. Again, not saying any side is wrong.

Hey my friend, you bring up some valid points so as a person that carries almost every single day I will say this. I have no idea what i would do in an active shooter situation. As you know i run a store. 90% of the time i am sitting in my little office with a direct view of the front door. There isn't a back door too escape from. I also go to the bank everyday carrying somewhere in the neighborhood of 5k in cash. Now if someone walks in and holds up my clerk while i am sitting here in my office. I am going to hope he gets the money and leaves. If someone walks in and shoots my clerk, i am stuck in an office with no place to really hide and maybe my little 380auto will save my life, maybe it won't but i will have a better chance of going home to my family with it than i would without it.....I hope i never ever have to find out and NOBODY that i work with knows that i carry......

[Grouse]

The gun control argument can be easily answered with this question. 

BTW, meme's just save me a lot of work retyping the info.

[ApexerER]

49 minutes ago, Splitear said:

I'll echo this. I'm not a fan of AR or military style guns, but that's a personal choice. However, most of the people I know who have them, and this is the feeling I get when they tell me about them, is that they are more of a "toy" than a "tool". I would compare it to someone having a muscle car in their garage that they drive on the weekends. Sure it's a car, but it's a toy to them. Again, this is just the feeling I get when I talk to the few guys I know who enjoy their "black guns". 

I would use my AR's as tools. I used to use my .223 for coyote and would use my AR 10 for deer. But since the stupid safe act they have become primarily dust collectors with the stupid uncomfortable stocks i have to have on them. I don't coyote hunt anymore and use my BAR for deer. Wish that could change!

[Splitear]

1 minute ago, ApexerER said:

Hey my friend, you bring up some valid points so as a person that carries almost every single day I will say this. I have no idea what i would do in an active shooter situation. As you know i run a store. 90% of the time i am sitting in my little office with a direct view of the front door. There isn't a back door too escape from. I also go to the bank everyday carrying somewhere in the neighborhood of 5k in cash. Now if someone walks in and holds up my clerk while i am sitting here in my office. I am going to hope he gets the money and leaves. If someone walks in and shoots my clerk, i am stuck in an office with no place to really hide and maybe my little 380auto will save my life, maybe it won't but i will have a better chance of going home to my family with it than i would without it.....I hope i never ever have to find out and NOBODY that i work with knows that i carry......

Thanks for the insight Chris, and I hope you don't think I'm trying to say CC is wrong. I guess that maybe the answer is that CC isn't right for everyone. Though I'm sure there are a few exceptions, I would say the biggest majority of folks who carry hope they never have to draw. Like I said, I don't know that I'll ever CC, but I realize that is totally my own choice, and not one I want to make for anyone else.

[ApexerER]

8 minutes ago, Steuben Jerry said:

I'm looking for that very thing - let me know if you ever want to part with it!

I would have but it was lost in a boating accident. Should have caught me before last summer.....

[ApexerER]

33 minutes ago, Splitear said:

Thanks for the insight Chris, and I hope you don't think I'm trying to say CC is wrong. I guess that maybe the answer is that CC isn't right for everyone. Though I'm sure there are a few exceptions, I would say the biggest majority of folks who carry hope they never have to draw. Like I said, I don't know that I'll ever CC, but I realize that is totally my own choice, and not one I want to make for anyone else.

This world is getting crazier and crazier....I know you just got your permit. Never say never.  Nobody has to know you are carrying it but you. You never have to pull it out no matter the situation. That decision is yours and yours alone.  But god forbid you are ever in a situation where it could save your life or that of your families and your pistol is at home in your safe. You can't go back in time and grab it....Thankfully that isn't a giant concern in good old Ballston spa. But working in the public like i do with a giant trailer park just up the street you realize how many heroine addicts and crack addicts there are in our little corner of the world.  I find needles in our parking lot occasionally, someone just died of an overdose in the Price Chopper parking lot. Its scary the number of people that ask if we sell glass pipes (i don't and won't) Just something to think about since you got your permit....I am very thankful the State Police are across the street. I am sure that is deterrent to anyone that might be thinking of doing something stupid. 

[Robhuntandfish]

1 hour ago, Grouse said:

Sure, but they don't get the power to take away inalienable rights when they're sworn in.

At it's very base inalienable rights are still those deemed that by the majority of people. 

[Robhuntandfish]

58 minutes ago, Grouse said:

The gun control argument can be easily answered with this question. 

BTW, meme's just save me a lot of work retyping the info.

The very nature of govt is that it will, and has always, eventually failed.  No matter the origin. To explain why I might need a couple of pages and a whiteboard . Lol

But in a nutshell when you put something in to protect the people and the people no longer agree with the original reason it was founded, the government will fail and be replaced by the ideas of whomever becomes the ruling class by majority or by force. For reference see human history. Lol. 

No matter the best intent govt becomes larger and larger as society changes and adds to it until it becomes so heavy that the people can no longer carry it or the people running it become too oppressive. It happens as it is human nature to believe that what you are doing is making things better and people will change as cultures change.  All people want better for the next generation and believe what they are doing is that. Thus the reason more laws are added constantly and rarely taken back.  It's a progression. 

And no I don't think we are there yet. Lol.  

[Grouse]

20 minutes ago, Robhuntandfish said:

At it's very base inalienable rights are still those deemed that by the majority of people. 

Not True.  That's why we have a Bill of Rights.  Unconstitutional laws are void.  Majority Rule is 51% ruling the 49%.  That's tyranny.  That's why we are a representative republic, so the majority cannot tyrannize the minority.

[phantom]

2 hours ago, Nomad said:

Not much time , I’m going shooting , couple random thoughts. ARs are the low hanging fruit, as mentioned above ,handguns proved to difficult for the antis as a starting point , but it’s in theme game .

The poster who said that and most of these shootings could be done with a shotgun, is correct , one of the beauty’s  of the shotgun ,is you never have to run it dry . In an hour I’ll be on my range ,one of the drills I’ll practice is this . 5 rounds 00 buck in the gun 5 on the stock, fire 2 rounds then while moving to next position load two from stock , fire 3, while moving again load 3 from the stock. I also have shell holders I can put on my belt , to,keep it going if I choose , but you get the point .

I watched the 3 hour live video of that shooting , guy dropped two in the parking lot, so plenty of time to top off a shotgun moving to the store where he shot another just inside the door and so on . A SG might not be my first choice ( theory here only ) but it would be quite effective as well .

 what about lever guns same deal 

[Grouse]

12 minutes ago, Robhuntandfish said:

The very nature of govt is that it will, and has always, eventually failed.  No matter the origin. To explain why I might need a couple of pages and a whiteboard . Lol

But in a nutshell when you put something in to protect the people and the people no longer agree with the original reason it was founded, the government will fail and be replaced by the ideas of whomever becomes the ruling class by majority or by force. For reference see human history. Lol. 

No matter the best intent govt becomes larger and larger as society changes and adds to it until it becomes so heavy that the people can no longer carry it or the people running it become too oppressive. It happens as it is human nature to believe that what you are doing is making things better and people will change as cultures change.  All people want better for the next generation and believe what they are doing is that. Thus the reason more laws are added constantly and rarely taken back.  It's a progression. 

And no I don't think we are there yet. Lol.  

True.  But it is corruption that causes them to fail.  If we follow the US Constitution and The Bill of Rights, we will continue to thrive as we have done for 245 years.  If we abuse the Rule of Law, we fail.  The founders built a mechanism for change into the Constitution.  Not using it is corrupt.

[phantom]

2 hours ago, Splitear said:

Just to play devil's advocate, and please understand, I am really torn about the idea of carrying. The point that comes to my mind is: 

If a "bad guy" enters an establishment with a firearm intending to kill/injure, and we have lets say 6 people in said establishment who are carrying, and intend to stop said "bad guy". These folks who are looking to stop the shooting are looking for an individual with a gun, not realizing that there are 6x as many "good guys" with weapons drawn, as there is the one "bad guy". Lets say there is a friendly fire incident, one of the good guys come around a corner, sees another person with a gun, and they fire. Additionally, when the police show up, they are looking for someone with a gun, if they come around a corner and someone has a gun, is it justifiable to use lethal force, even if that person is a "good guy". This is just a scenario that plays out when I think about this.

Now, I'm not trained in concealed carry, so there may be intensive training in recognizing a threat that covers this. I'm not looking for an argument here, not at all. If someone can kind of guide my thinking, I would really appreciate the insight. Honestly, thoughts like this, are just one of the reasons that I doubt I will ever CC. 

I'm not saying that the other side of that coin "a good guy with a gun could have stopped this" isn't valid, I totally see that too. Again, not saying any side is wrong.

Could happen , but  not as likely ,   but wouldn't  they be shooting the guy who is shooting at people running away with no gun you know what I mean . for example I  have a gun I see someone shooting people unarmed in the back well obviously that is the bad guy .  I Know what you are saying but  in most cases it would be obvious who the bad guy is because he is the nut  just shooting anything that moves  at people running away not armed  while the good guys would be just looking for the right target bad guy you  Know what i mean .  besides  friendly fire happens even with cops and military there is  no guaranty just waiting  for cops to show up  will be better probably not   .  

[Robhuntandfish]

31 minutes ago, Grouse said:

True.  But it is corruption that causes them to fail.  If we follow the US Constitution and The Bill of Rights, we will continue to thrive as we have done for 245 years.  If we abuse the Rule of Law, we fail.  The founders built a mechanism for change into the Constitution.  Not using it is corrupt.

Corruption occurs in every govt as long as people rule.  The Constitution will only be a base if the people continue to accept it as that.  If the people decide otherwise then it's still the will of the people. 

[Robhuntandfish]

44 minutes ago, Grouse said:

Not True.  That's why we have a Bill of Rights.  Unconstitutional laws are void.  Majority Rule is 51% ruling the 49%.  That's tyranny.  That's why we are a representative republic, so the majority cannot tyrannize the minority.

Unconstitutional laws are the only void if they are decided upon by the supreme Court that is place on there by.......elected officials. 

So your telling me there are no unconstitutional laws now?? I doubting you believe that.

We are a representative govt but it is based on the majority vote for who is our representative.  

[Steuben Jerry]

11 minutes ago, Robhuntandfish said:

So your telling me there are no unconstitutional laws now??

Backing up your point, I consider the NYSAFE Act to be unconstitutional.

[Grouse]

20 minutes ago, Robhuntandfish said:

Unconstitutional laws are the only void if they are decided upon by the supreme Court that is place on there by.......elected officials. 

So your telling me there are no unconstitutional laws now?? I doubting you believe that.

We are a representative govt but it is based on the majority vote for who is our representative.  

Unconstitutional laws are always unconstitutional, but they need to be removed.  The unconstitutional handgun ban in Wash D.C. took 30 years to be declared unconstitutional and D.C. ignores the SCOTUS decision.  That's corruption.

Enforcing unconstitutional laws is tyranny.  I'm not saying it doesn't happen in this land.  I'm saying it's evidence of a corrupt government that ignores the Rule of Law.

Majority vote elects our representatives, but it doesn't stop corruption, especially when the majority of voters are uninformed, misinformed or clueless.

The people have abdicated their power over the government.  They get the type of government they deserve.

[Grouse]

18 minutes ago, Steuben Jerry said:

Backing up your point, I consider the NYSAFE Act to be unconstitutional.

It is.  All gun control laws are.  

No law can require the individual to prove that he won’t violate another’s rights in the absence of evidence that he is going to.

But this is precisely what gun control laws do. Gun control laws use force against the individual in the absence of any specific evidence that he is about to commit a crime. They say to the rational, responsible gun owner: You may not have or carry a gun because others have used them irrationally or irresponsibly.

This is unjust and intolerable. The government may coercively intervene only when there is an objective threat that someone is going to use force.

The government may respond only to specific threats. It has no right to initiate force against the innocent. And a gun owner is innocent until specific evidence arises that he is threatening to initiate force.

 

“Laws prohibiting or regulating guns across the board represent the evil of preventive law and should be abolished.” - columnist Harry Binswanger

[Robhuntandfish]

19 minutes ago, Grouse said:

Unconstitutional laws are always unconstitutional, but they need to be removed.  The unconstitutional handgun ban in Wash D.C. took 30 years to be declared unconstitutional and D.C. ignores the SCOTUS decision.  That's corruption.

Enforcing unconstitutional laws is tyranny.  I'm not saying it doesn't happen in this land.  I'm saying it's evidence of a corrupt government that ignores the Rule of Law.

Majority vote elects our representatives, but it doesn't stop corruption, especially when the majority of voters are uninformed, misinformed or clueless.

The people have abdicated their power over the government.  They get the type of government they deserve.

That's my point . Regardless of the law being unconstitutional the people will elect as they see for to govern.  The reason Andy gets re-elected. He won't get knocked out because of unconstitutional laws he's signed but because of things he has done that the people disagree with.  Again in reality it's a majority rule.  If the mass of people don't care about the rights that you deem inalienable then those rights will cease to exist and new ones will be put in place to suit the culture at the time.  

[Grouse]

But if it's done in any way other than prescribed in the Constitution, it is illegal.  If the people choose to live under illegal tyranny, they can't expect to be treated as free citizens anymore.

I for one would not submit to such tyranny, and I believe many other's won't either.  That's when there will be blood.

[Grouse]

For all those who have forgotten.

The meme eliminates making me write it all out.

[left field]

 

2 hours ago, Grouse said:

But if it's done in any way other than prescribed in the Constitution, it is illegal.  If the people choose to live under illegal tyranny, they can't expect to be treated as free citizens anymore.

I for one would not submit to such tyranny, and I believe many other's won't either.  That's when there will be blood.

BTW, meme's just save me a lot of work retyping the info.

Me too. Grouse at the end of every day on his backyard ...

 

[Uncle Nicky]

46 minutes ago, left field said:

 

Me too. Grouse at the end of every day on his backyard ...

 

Don't quit your day job, standup comedy may not be your thing.

No doubt 245 years ago there were those willing to fight, those willing to ride their coattails, and those who were happy to be servants. Not too hard to figure out where you'd have been.

[left field]

If I were around 245 years ago, I'm pretty sure I would be making fun of Grouse as well. Though less often as it would take him months and months to diligently copy the memes of the day on parchment and hand them out to the local townsfolk.

Edited March 25, 2021 by left field

[Fletch]

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk