Bull Ring What is “within reason” in relation to gun ownership: Saki & Dhunt

Discussion in 'The Bull Ring' started by sakinago, Sep 6, 2018.

  1. ding
    Offline

    ding Confront reality

    Joined:
    Oct 25, 2016
    Messages:
    45,065
    Thanks Received:
    1,916
    Trophy Points:
    1,855
    Ratings:
    +17,224
    Peaceable law abiding citizens owning and possessing the technology of the day that any light infantry ought to own and possess.

    Today that would be semi-automatic weapons with high capacity magazines.
     
  2. Daryl Hunt
    Online

    Daryl Hunt Gold Member

    Joined:
    Oct 22, 2014
    Messages:
    5,042
    Thanks Received:
    293
    Trophy Points:
    140
    Ratings:
    +1,404
    You notice that the gun grabbers don't follow me around and try and lend support since I don't agree with them at all. I wonder why the gunnutters follow you around?
     
  3. sakinago
    Offline

    sakinago Gold Member

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2012
    Messages:
    3,592
    Thanks Received:
    441
    Trophy Points:
    130
    Ratings:
    +1,723
    You’re not answering my question. How do you enforce universal background checks? In other words, how do universal background checks help curb person to person gun transfers, particularly among the criminal? Think this through.
     
  4. sakinago
    Offline

    sakinago Gold Member

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2012
    Messages:
    3,592
    Thanks Received:
    441
    Trophy Points:
    130
    Ratings:
    +1,723
    LE isn’t catching them now. How is this policy going to increase the rate law enforcement can stop person to person sales without a gun registry? Here’s how a scenario would go.
    LE: “where did you get this gun?”
    Suspect: “I got it as a gift 10 years ago from my pops (or insert any other easily conjurable excuse).
    LE: “Ok, have a nice day (since I have no gun registry to compare your story to what is reality).
     
    • Funny Funny x 1
  5. sakinago
    Offline

    sakinago Gold Member

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2012
    Messages:
    3,592
    Thanks Received:
    441
    Trophy Points:
    130
    Ratings:
    +1,723
    This is bull ring. Invite only, 1 on 1 conversation for posting. You can watch, you can’t post.
     
  6. sakinago
    Offline

    sakinago Gold Member

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2012
    Messages:
    3,592
    Thanks Received:
    441
    Trophy Points:
    130
    Ratings:
    +1,723
    IDK, and don’t care why. I feel as though I try to take a principled stance on guns that is; the purpose of the 2nd was government shouldn’t have a monopoly on the ability to enact force, I agree with that, I also believe in following the rule of law, especially the constitution, if you don’t like a law, do not ignore it, change it. The 2nd cannot/shouldn’t be ignored, just like the 1st or 4th shouldn’t. Gun control doesn’t really work all that well, maybe there are some effective GC laws, but they tend to cause a greater amount of civil liberty violations than they produce safety benefits. I’d rather air on the side of promoting freedom. Also there is no evidence that guns are actually the problem, if they were, Switzerland would be hands down the most dangerous country on the planet, but they’re actually the safest. That’s the cliff notes version of my view. If people like it, then all that means is we happen to overlap with some of our views in this single area of debate. That’s all that is. Maybe the “gun-grabbers” are too heavily influenced by intersectionalism, and you’ve been deemed an enemy because you tow the line slightly to the right. I don’t know what to tell you, don’t be friends with those people. I wouldn’t consider it martyrdom using non-radical reasoning, it’s a good thing you aren’t radical but like my pops said “don’t take praise for doing something you should be doing.”
     
  7. Daryl Hunt
    Online

    Daryl Hunt Gold Member

    Joined:
    Oct 22, 2014
    Messages:
    5,042
    Thanks Received:
    293
    Trophy Points:
    140
    Ratings:
    +1,404
    We are a country of Laws. Like you said, if you don't like the law, get it changed. Otherwise, follow it. But it's okay to do a little Civil Disobedience as long as you are following the law. They even issue permits to do a little of that. But until you do, follow that law.

    As for whether gun regulations make it worse or not. We can go back to 1871 and see that it does. Or the total lack of them is not a good thing for the general public. The reason I am totally against open carry without some form of license is because of what was learned then. There was a lot of innocent lives taken, property damaged, people scared whitless, and more inside of many western towns and cities until they outlawed open carry of weapons. In most of these cities and towns, the Town Marshal told you once to check your weapons. If he saw you again, he just gunned you down. The Earps were naive and foolish in compared to the Town Marshal of Dallas of the the same time period. Can anyone even recall his name?

    You bring up Switzerland. Yes, many homes have at least one service rifle in it by law. Those rifles are government issue and do not belong to the individual. The bulk of the Swiss Military are Reserves who have all done at least 2 years full time obligation. They are trained and in the event of an invasion, they are ready to go. Ever wonder why the Swiss have never been invaded? Could it be this or is it that they capitulated every time an invader started to come in. Unless you fit the Military Reserve category, you cannot own a firearm that is not registered. And NO handguns. Even your shotgun has to be registered. Plus, for a sillyvillian to own a firearm, they must attend classes. You have used one of the most Regulated Countries in the world as an example. Not a good thing on your part.
     
  8. Daryl Hunt
    Online

    Daryl Hunt Gold Member

    Joined:
    Oct 22, 2014
    Messages:
    5,042
    Thanks Received:
    293
    Trophy Points:
    140
    Ratings:
    +1,404
    Well, if it was manufactured newer than the law then you just lost the gun and probably lost your gun rights at the same time. It takes time to catch up. But it does catch up sooner or later. It took about 10 years to get rid of the Thompson MG from circulation after the 1934 Firearms Act. Attrition works.
     
  9. sakinago
    Offline

    sakinago Gold Member

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2012
    Messages:
    3,592
    Thanks Received:
    441
    Trophy Points:
    130
    Ratings:
    +1,723
    Addressing your OP paragraph on open carry. CCW holders have a lower negligent discharge rate than police do. I think you hold a false characterization, or generalization of gun owners as irresponsible, the basic white trash hick getting loaded on jack while waiting for the racoons to raid their chicken coop. Those people certainly exist. Those people also become cops with plenty of firearms training.

    What is the problem with open carry??? This argument makes no sense. If anything, concealed carry should be outlawed (it shouldn’t). It’s the whole, if you have nothing to hide concept. Wouldn’t you want to know whose armed. Again I think you have a skewed view of guns and gun owners in general. Your point on open carry implies that if you open carry you intend to harm, or display dominance. Who cares? The only thing that matters is what you do with the gun. The dousch in a Porsche doesn’t bother me (other than the fact I think they’re probably a dousch), until they drive that Porsche in a manner than threatens my life or those around me. Then they cross over into the threshold of that becoming a crime. The open carry guy doesn’t bother me until they threaten me with that gun, which is a crime. Porsch is to reckless driving as gun is to reckless endangerment. You’re assuming motives, just like I’d be assuming motives if I see you in a Porsche and think you’re a dousch.
     
  10. Daryl Hunt
    Online

    Daryl Hunt Gold Member

    Joined:
    Oct 22, 2014
    Messages:
    5,042
    Thanks Received:
    293
    Trophy Points:
    140
    Ratings:
    +1,404
    Last year, in Colorado, there were 174 failed Background checks. Out of those, 34 felons were returned to prison. That's 34 stupid criminals no longer on the streets. There is nothing that can be done about the smart criminals because they know how to get around the laws but they are also the least likely to get violent during a quickymart holdup due to a stupid blunder. We do what we can do and not cry over what we can't do. To make laws or not make laws over the things you have no control or no hope of controlling is just bad governing.
     

Share This Page