Well, we're not in Iran, and we aren't a famous novelist, so it may be safe to do so.
*sighs, turns over "DAYS SINCE LAST MASS SHOOTING IN AMERICA" sign to 0*
- Thread starter Charlie Don't Surf
- Start date
And like many of Obama's executive orders that have been slapped down by the supreme court, Huckabee would have had a very hard time using the military to impose his directives on state soil due to the constitution, if the military even bothered to follow such an illegal order. The states would fight back against the federal invasion(s), and ultimately we would be in the midst of a very strange civil war, the federal government against the state governments.
So that's simply a no-go, no matter how much Huckabee might have wanted it.
Venezuela's economy collapsed. They're essentially in a state of martial law and because they were essentially a communist state, the population has no firearms to defend themselves.
OK, though I'm more asking, what kind of abuses are happening now that might not have otherwise, given that it's a communist (dictator) state that wouldn't have before? Are you implying that there would have been more resistance, revolution, etc? I'm just wondering where you're going with it is all.
I think he's more referring to neighbor v. neighbor conflict, not civilian v. government. When a government no longer has the resources to maintain order, the strong among the populace will eat the weak if they have no means to defend themselves and their property.
--Patrick
Thank you.
This also illustrates why there are waaaaay more gun rights activities and supporters in the US from the South and Mid-West. When the local sheriff is 30 minutes away and your nearest neighbor is 2 miles down the road, your rifle is the only security you got - against both man and animal.
But when civil society breaks down, people that are upstanding, fine citizens normally will eat each other alive once food and water become scarce. There's a reason gun sales spike insanely after these sorts of incidents and during times of economic instability.
Maybe I'm getting old and cynical but the more experience I have dealing with bureaucracy and government agencies in my own line of work, and seeing how truly incompetent and mismanaged these institutions are, the more I'm tempted to stock up on some more ammo. Yes. I'm afraid of trusting the government with my and my family's well being.
Again I must stress that I'm not against gun regulations that increase wait periods after purchase and closing gun show loopholes.
One of my friends is very strongly anti-gun to the point where he asked people if they have guns in their house before he will go or allow his children to go to their home. He's moving this year from Washtenaw County to Oakland County in Michigan.
Washtenaw county has a per capita rate of 81 guns, while Oakland has a 42 per capita rate.
Oakland has 1.2 million people while Washtenaw has 350 thousand.
So while he's moving to a place with half the guns per capita, it has twice the guns that Washtenaw has.
Further, Washtenaw has a huge amount of rural area, while Oakland (which holds a large chunk of detroit metropolitan area) is a lot of urban, some suburban, and little rural.
So the rural gun ownership is a large component of the difference. If I ever get a gun it'll be a semi automatic rifle for shooting nuisance animals - raccoons, coyotes (my neighber says we have some, I've not see any evidence), groundhogs, and only if they're actually causing a problem for me (for instance we lost about 12 chicken recently to a raccoon, and I was this close --->||<--- to buying the cheapest Cabellas 22 semi rifle and taking care of the issue*).
I'd be interested in seeing handguns vs rifles per capita, though.
At any rate, I think he's going into a more dangerous situation, but he seems content to believe that when he asks about guns in the home he should get about half the yes responses in Oakland than he got in Washtenaw. And, of course, the "danger" is significantly less than vehicular accidents and any number of other risks he takes with his children on a daily basis without thought, so, honestly this emotion driven decision making is probably not serving him well.
At any rate - I'm pretty sure rural areas are more likely to have a higher per capita gun ownership, but those guns are going to be a lot more .22 rifles than handguns, and while the per capita ownership of guns in urban areas is lower, a greater percentage of those should be hand guns, and concealable at that, meaning you're more likely to be around guns you aren't aware of in urban areas than in rural areas in any case.
*A neighbor trapped and relocated instead. Relocating raccoons is illegal in Michigan without a special permit and the permission of the landowner - but shooting them or trapping and shooting is ok without license or permit as long as they are on your property, actively causing a nuisance and you aren't going to sell them or their parts.
Washtenaw county has a per capita rate of 81 guns, while Oakland has a 42 per capita rate.
Oakland has 1.2 million people while Washtenaw has 350 thousand.
So while he's moving to a place with half the guns per capita, it has twice the guns that Washtenaw has.
Further, Washtenaw has a huge amount of rural area, while Oakland (which holds a large chunk of detroit metropolitan area) is a lot of urban, some suburban, and little rural.
So the rural gun ownership is a large component of the difference. If I ever get a gun it'll be a semi automatic rifle for shooting nuisance animals - raccoons, coyotes (my neighber says we have some, I've not see any evidence), groundhogs, and only if they're actually causing a problem for me (for instance we lost about 12 chicken recently to a raccoon, and I was this close --->||<--- to buying the cheapest Cabellas 22 semi rifle and taking care of the issue*).
I'd be interested in seeing handguns vs rifles per capita, though.
At any rate, I think he's going into a more dangerous situation, but he seems content to believe that when he asks about guns in the home he should get about half the yes responses in Oakland than he got in Washtenaw. And, of course, the "danger" is significantly less than vehicular accidents and any number of other risks he takes with his children on a daily basis without thought, so, honestly this emotion driven decision making is probably not serving him well.
At any rate - I'm pretty sure rural areas are more likely to have a higher per capita gun ownership, but those guns are going to be a lot more .22 rifles than handguns, and while the per capita ownership of guns in urban areas is lower, a greater percentage of those should be hand guns, and concealable at that, meaning you're more likely to be around guns you aren't aware of in urban areas than in rural areas in any case.
*A neighbor trapped and relocated instead. Relocating raccoons is illegal in Michigan without a special permit and the permission of the landowner - but shooting them or trapping and shooting is ok without license or permit as long as they are on your property, actively causing a nuisance and you aren't going to sell them or their parts.
Weird points to make off of this:
- For reference in the massacre in Florida the perp used a semi-automatic rifle.
- For reference of those not knowing, a semi-automatic weapon means that one bullet is fired for every time you pull the trigger, and you don't need to "cock" the weapon between each time you pull it. Holding it down does not spray bullets endlessly. That's what an Automatic is, and that's widely banned outside of military. For reference, "not automatic" is usually a bolt-action rifle, or something else single-shot. Revolvers are in their own "thing" but usually they are semi-automatic for most practical purposes.
- I think full-auto is illegal in most of the USA (definitely in Canada) outside of Police.
- Surprisingly, I had to explain this to somebody that thought they knew what the categories were (with wiki evidence). What THEY thought they were was "not automatic" was what is actually semi-automatic. What they thought automatic was were things like gatling and/or chainguns that are fed by belts. They thought "semi-automatic" meant hold down the trigger and bullets go until the clip is empty.
GasBandit
Staff member
Despite my enthusiasm for the 2nd amendment, I actually only own one gun, and I only got it a few years ago. It's a pump action shotgun, a Mossberg Maverick 88 with an 18.5" barrel chambered for 12 gauge. Well, technically, my father has also said that the Ruger Mk II target pistol (.22 cal) that I favored when I lived at home is mine for the taking whenever I want it, but I haven't gotten the chance to go get it (I'd have to drive, as I'd rather not try to get it through airport security). Anyway, I got the shotgun thinking it'd have worse wall penetration than a rifle or pistol (and I'd probably have gotten a .45 or a 380 if I'd gotten a pistol), so as to have a reduced chance of perforating neighbors if I had to nail a critter or a home invader, but it turns out 00 buckshot penetrates walls just fine. Whups.
Automatic weapons were banned in the 1930's, expanded upon in the 1980's. Current law is no automatic weapons, for the public, can be manufactured or imported into the US. They exist, you can buy them, if you get a special permit from the ATF and find someone willing to sell one, and you can afford it. For example, current offers I've seen for a M16-A1 automatic rifle are around 18-25 thousand dollars.
Almost all current military rifles that are automatic capable have four settings on them, Safety (won't fire), Fire (one shot per trigger pull), Burst (typically 3 rounds fired for each trigger pull), and Auto (1 trigger pull fires until magazine is empty). Basically speaking, if you have an automatic rifle in your hands, you have the capability to choose what type of fire-rate to use.
Stanley Almodovar III, 23 years old
Amanda Alvear, 25 years old
Oscar A Aracena-Montero, 26 years old
Rodolfo Ayala-Ayala, 33 years old
Antonio Davon Brown, 29 years old
Darryl Roman Burt II, 29 years old
Angel L. Candelario-Padro, 28 years old
Juan Chavez Martinez, 25 years old
Luis Daniel Conde, 39 years old
Cory James Connell, 21 years old
Tevin Eugene Crosby, 25 years old
Deonka Deidra Drayton, 32 years old
Simon Adrian Carrillo Fernandez, 31 years old
Leroy Valentin Fernandez, 25 years old
Mercedez Marisol Flores, 26 years old
Peter O. Gonzalez-Cruz, 22 years old
Juan Ramon Guerrero, 22 years old
Paul Terrell Henry, 41 years old
Frank Hernandez, 27 years old
Miguel Angel Honorato, 30 years old
Javier Jorge-Reyes, 40 years old
Jason Benjamin Josaphat, 19 years old
Eddie Jamoldroy Justice, 30 years old
Anthony Luis Laureano Disla, 25 years old
Christopher “Drew” Andrew Leinonen, 32 years old
Alejandro Barrios Martinez, 21 years old
Brenda Lee Marquez McCool, 49 years old
Gilberto Ramon Silva Menendez, 25 years old
KJ Morris, 37 years old
Akyra Monet Murray, 18 years old
Luis Omar Ocasio-Capo, 20 years old
Geraldo A. Ortiz-Jimenez, 25 years old
Eric Ivan Ortiz-Rivera, 36 years old
Joel Rayon Paniagua, 32 years old
Jean Carlos Mendez Perez, 35 years old
Enrique L. Rios, Jr., 25 years old
Jean C. Nives Rodriguez, 27 years old
Xavier Emmanuel Serrano Rosado, 35 years old
Christopher Joseph Sanfeliz, 24 years old
Yilmary Rodriguez Solivan, 24 years old
Edward Sotomayor Jr., 34 years old
Shane Evan Tomlinson, 33 years old
Martin Benitez Torres, 33 years old
Jonathan Antonio Camuy Vega, 24 years old
Juan P. Rivera Velazquez, 37 years old
Luis S. Vielma, 22 years old
Franky Jimmy Dejesus Velazquez, 50 years old
Luis Daniel Lestat Wilson-Leon, 37 years old
Jerald “Jerry” Arthur Wright, 31 years old
Amanda Alvear, 25 years old
Oscar A Aracena-Montero, 26 years old
Rodolfo Ayala-Ayala, 33 years old
Antonio Davon Brown, 29 years old
Darryl Roman Burt II, 29 years old
Angel L. Candelario-Padro, 28 years old
Juan Chavez Martinez, 25 years old
Luis Daniel Conde, 39 years old
Cory James Connell, 21 years old
Tevin Eugene Crosby, 25 years old
Deonka Deidra Drayton, 32 years old
Simon Adrian Carrillo Fernandez, 31 years old
Leroy Valentin Fernandez, 25 years old
Mercedez Marisol Flores, 26 years old
Peter O. Gonzalez-Cruz, 22 years old
Juan Ramon Guerrero, 22 years old
Paul Terrell Henry, 41 years old
Frank Hernandez, 27 years old
Miguel Angel Honorato, 30 years old
Javier Jorge-Reyes, 40 years old
Jason Benjamin Josaphat, 19 years old
Eddie Jamoldroy Justice, 30 years old
Anthony Luis Laureano Disla, 25 years old
Christopher “Drew” Andrew Leinonen, 32 years old
Alejandro Barrios Martinez, 21 years old
Brenda Lee Marquez McCool, 49 years old
Gilberto Ramon Silva Menendez, 25 years old
KJ Morris, 37 years old
Akyra Monet Murray, 18 years old
Luis Omar Ocasio-Capo, 20 years old
Geraldo A. Ortiz-Jimenez, 25 years old
Eric Ivan Ortiz-Rivera, 36 years old
Joel Rayon Paniagua, 32 years old
Jean Carlos Mendez Perez, 35 years old
Enrique L. Rios, Jr., 25 years old
Jean C. Nives Rodriguez, 27 years old
Xavier Emmanuel Serrano Rosado, 35 years old
Christopher Joseph Sanfeliz, 24 years old
Yilmary Rodriguez Solivan, 24 years old
Edward Sotomayor Jr., 34 years old
Shane Evan Tomlinson, 33 years old
Martin Benitez Torres, 33 years old
Jonathan Antonio Camuy Vega, 24 years old
Juan P. Rivera Velazquez, 37 years old
Luis S. Vielma, 22 years old
Franky Jimmy Dejesus Velazquez, 50 years old
Luis Daniel Lestat Wilson-Leon, 37 years old
Jerald “Jerry” Arthur Wright, 31 years old
Full-auto is not technically "illegal" but the regulations are very, very restrictive. Think "copyright" level of restriction. It depends on when the weapon was made, where it was sold, who it was sold to, etc. It's really complicated.
EDIT2: My response to Gas was moved to that other thread.
EDIT: Can't help but notice they left off "Omar Mir Seddique Mateen, 29 years old" in @Null's list. I guess they didn't feel he was worth including.
--Patrick
Last edited:
you can mark these words, but i agree with the NRA that it's pretty shitty to limit guns using a watchlist. Like i've said before (this thread?) the only thing worse than all guns being legal to everyone in a Walmart is only allowing guns sold to the "right" kind of people.
Y'know, that quote in my signature has been needing an update for a while now, with JCM so long gone...
GasBandit
Staff member
I'm his only son, and he's already verbally promised it to me
But yeah, that thing is awesome. It's got the bull barrel so the balance is exquisite and the recoil is nonexistant, and all the other stuff you said too.
Last edited:
if you're going to misquote me, at least put the ... at the end that indicates there were more words in the thought
Yeah, there's a lot of misinformation about these weapons, and you are correct for all practical purposes, but I'll take a moment to fill out some details.
Fully automatic weapons became illegal to manufacture for civilians in the US in 1986, just 30 years ago. They cannot take away existing fully automatic weapons, but they can make them harder to transfer, which is what they've done. If you want one you have to pay a $200 fee to the ATF (bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, and Firearms - I know, it's weird, but think "prohibition") and pass some background checks, then you are legally allowed to have one transferred to you.
Once you have this you can go to a dealer or another owner and complete the sale.
Due to the rarity, though, you're going to spend a lot of money, and no one is going to use it in a crime because then it will be confiscated and effectively removed from the market. In 1995 there were about 240,000 of these in the US, and the going rate for one is about 10-20 times what they originally cost new (ie, several thousand dollars for the cheapest ones).
They are still manufactured new for law enforcement, and of course the military has them for their use, but they train their soldiers to use "burst mode" which shoots three bullets for every trigger pull. Full auto is wasteful and rarely useful, and even burst auto is wasteful but effective for cover fire. This is why you'll often hear three shot pulses of rapid gunfire in military flicks rather than full auto or single shots - these are almost always cover fire and rarely expected to find their target. These guns are not allowed to be owned even with the ATF permit - they are owned by government organizations, never individuals.
The piece that makes a semi-automatic into a full automatic is often called an "auto sear" and it is regulated just as heavily as though it were a full weapon, and so these are bought and sold on the market more frequently than full weapons because the weapons themselves break down over time, and the originals were never good enough to be valued as highly as they are bought and sold for now, so if you do take possession of a cheap fully auto, you'll often take the one critical part and put it in a newly made semi-auto that's better than the original weapon was.
Sometime after that legislation was strengthened that forced manufacturers to make semiautomatic rifles in a manner that they couldn't easily be made into fully automatic rifles with the addition of a few parts. A skilled machinist could do it, but they would be prosecuted as a gun manufacturer selling illegally manufactured fully automatic weapons if they made the necessary modifications or sold the parts so others could do them with little skill.
So today's rifles can be modified to become fully automatic, but not easily, and unless you are a skilled machinist with intimate knowledge of gun operation it's unlikely that you'd be successful making one that doesn't jam all the time.
So for every 1,300 people in the US there's one fully automatic weapon that can be legally owned and operated by a US citizen.
And I agree with your assessment that most people don't understand the difference between "assault rifle" and "fully automatic weapon" - which is why the media is so quick to refer to the weapons being used in these massacres as "military grade". The reality is that the US military doesn't use any of these weapons anymore, due to the above laws the manufacturers have essentially split the lines so that they are different guns. Although the M16 rifle most commonly used in the US military has its lineage in the AR-15 used in Orlando, the two are now very different weapons, and the differences go well beyond the change to burst and fully automatic mode.
Some interesting facts about mass murder weapons of choice. Guns and rifles are not at the top of the list. http://www.slate.com/articles/news_...it_mass_murder_before_automatic_weapons_.html
And also because technology has advanced quite a bit since 1934, 1968, or even 1986 (the dates of the laws making the biggest changes to full-auto ownership).
For the record, I don't own one, nor do I even want one. Ammo be expensive, yo. Why would I want to blow through it even faster?
--Patrick
The m-4 was rolled out to the Army because as Urban conflict increased the m-16 became increasingly ineffective and dangerous (the longer it takes to swing the barrel around the longer time you have to be shot). Granted both weapons have problems with the middle eastern climate, but that's a whole other issue.
We do have a separate thread for discussing guns, specifically.
Unfortunately, it is located in the private section of the forum.
Is there another, more publicly available thread where this discussion could continue?
EDIT: Well, there is now.
--Patrick
Last edited:
GasBandit
Staff member
http://www.politico.com/story/2016/...ts-talking-filibuster-over-gun-control-224369
Democrats are now engaged in a filibuster in the senate, saying they won't stop until republicans let them prevent people on watch lists from buying guns.
Democrats are now engaged in a filibuster in the senate, saying they won't stop until republicans let them prevent people on watch lists from buying guns.
My question is how many Democrat senators who are FIRMLY up the ass of the NRA want no part of this? I'm looking at YOU, Joe Manchin.
GasBandit
Staff member
The thing about a filibuster is all Chris Murphy needs is one ally he can rely on to take over him for bathroom/food/drink breaks. He started the filibuster without notifying anybody he was going to, not even his fellow Democrats, but already a half dozen or so are helping out. Apparently they plan to do this all night and tomorrow, at least.
For my part, I have absolutely nothing bad to say about any process that brings the washington legislature to a halt for however long.
GasBandit
Staff member
I despise filibusters, especially the weak, impotent ones they do nowadays.
Full auto is legal in some states, but requires a metric SHIT TON of paperwork and the costs are in the tens of thousands. It's literally what rich guys blow money on because they can, and want to show off at a range.
Here's a 3-years-later editorial about how the RCMP (half what you would call state/rural police, half FBI) were confiscating, well, pretty much ALL the guns in a rural town under the guise of "looking for people to evacuate" in a flood. Including pulling out fully-locked gun safes and such out of houses: http://www.calgarysun.com/2016/06/13/damage-claims-from-rcmps-high-river-gun-grab-total-23-million
So to those that think Police won't go house-to-house to confiscate? They will TOTALLY go house-to-house to confiscate. Illegally in this case too! Over half the houses in the town were searched this way.
And no, nobody's getting jail time over this, though IMO they should.
So to those that think Police won't go house-to-house to confiscate? They will TOTALLY go house-to-house to confiscate. Illegally in this case too! Over half the houses in the town were searched this way.
And no, nobody's getting jail time over this, though IMO they should.
We discussed the Katrina version in the forum in real-time, as it was happening.
--Patrick
I spent the time just now going through each of these and reading about them. They all sounded like such wonderful people. I didn't know any of them, but I'm still tearing up here. Is that weird?
I think that's called being human. This isn't meant to sound snarky, compassion can be hard to convey over text