GUN PERMITS

[Duchess]

Everyone that wants guns banned

I can't help but want to see them all put in the position of being at the mercy of a bad person. I don't want anyone hurt but I would like to see them all scared out of their minds for however long it would take to prove a point.

[username]

They're not "banning guns", they're just doing what several other states have already done which is banning the future sale of semi-automatic weapons and "high capacity" magazines.

I think it's somewhat futile since the guns/magazines are still readily available elsewhere but I don't see it as a big deal.

[Jimbone]

Actually user, it's not just 'assault weapons' they are going after. As you pointed out in your post, they are attempting to ban future sales of 'semi-automatic' weapons. Handguns, shotguns, long guns... it doesn't matter.

That is nearly 75% of all firearm products.

[Maggot]

They're not "banning guns", they're just doing what several other states have already done which is banning the future sale of semi-automatic weapons and "high capacity" magazines.

I think it's somewhat futile since the guns/magazines are still readily available elsewhere but I don't see it as a big deal.

When I say "banning guns" I am doing the same thing they are doing by calling a .22 with 20 shots in it a "high capacity" weapon. They are calling a gun that can shoot one bullet after another without re-loading a semi-automatic. So yes I WILL call it "banning guns" in the same sense as "they" are calling for the restrictions on "regular" guns in my book.

These folks are twisting words in their own defense but when the game is reversed they back down. Fear mongers all of them.

[username]

So they're lumping guns in there that aren't traditionally thought of as semi-automatic? I just spent a few minutes reading wiki's definition of semi-automatic. I gather it generally means a gun that, by power of the last bullet fired, inserts another round in the chamber (or moves it up the cartridge) or whatever the fuck.

All I know about guns is that they go boom.

We've sort of had this conversation already but what about just limiting the size of the magazines (forget the guns)? I think Six said it can be done very quickly (reloading) but I wonder if that Connecticut shooter only had ten rounds per cartridge if a few more kids might have been able to escape.

[HairOfTheDog]

I think it's impossible to tell if any more children would have been able to escape had Lanza used a different weapon. Maybe he would have been slowed in getting through the security door, but I don't think any professional analysis has yet been released. I do know that he shot all of his victims multiple times; some up to 11 times according to published coroner report. No one who was shot survived. If he'd shot each once or twice with a standard hand gun (or a semi-automatic) and moved on, maybe he would have been able to kill (and wound) even more. We don't know if his goal was to shoot as many as possible or eviscerate each victim as fully as possible or WTF he was thinking.

I keep coming back to the thought that any smart, driven, well-prepared psycho armed with any deadly weapon against a large group of unsuspecting and defenseless targets is very likely going to wreak a lot of havoc. I wish I felt more optimistic that restricting certain gun types would have a different effect than it did the last time, or that restricting cartridge capacity would truly minimize fatalities carried out by the rare spree killer.

In any event, I read a report today that the FBI processed 39% more background checks and gun/ammo sales skyrocket over the last month. Record breaking period. There are and will be a hell of a lot of semi-automatics and high capacity ammo floating around for years to come, even if the strictest Feinstein- draft proposal were to be approved and voted into federal law.

[Midwest Spy]

I think it's impossible to tell if any more children would have been able to escape had Lanza used a different weapon. Maybe he would have been slowed in getting through the security door, but I don't think any professional analysis has yet been released. I do know that he shot all of his victims multiple times; some up to 11 times according to published coroner report. No one who was shot survived. If he'd shot each once or twice with a standard hand gun (or a semi-automatic) and moved on, maybe he would have been able to kill (and wound) even more. We don't know if his goal was to shoot as many as possible or eviscerate each victim as fully as possible or WTF he was thinking.

I keep coming back to the thought that any smart, driven, well-prepared psycho armed with any deadly weapon against a large group of unsuspecting and defenseless targets is very likely going to wreak a lot of havoc. I wish I felt more optimistic that restricting certain gun types would have a different effect than it did the last time, or that restricting cartridge capacity would truly minimize fatalities carried out by the rare spree killer.

In any event, I read a report today that the FBI processed 39% more background checks and gun/ammo sales skyrocket over the last month. Record breaking period. There are and will be a hell of a lot of semi-automatics and high capacity ammo floating around for years to come, even if the strictest Feinstein- draft proposal were to be approved and voted into federal law.

Well thought out post. I agree with just about everything you said.

This, however, made me wonder:

'... fatalities carried out by the rare spree killer'.

This is the problem.

What is the definition of rare? Once a decade? Once every 5 years? Once every year? 4 times in a year (where we were this past year).

I don't know the answer to gun control legislation, but I do know that these events are no longer 'rare' (by my definition).

[username]

I said forget the weapons, what about the magazines?

[HairOfTheDog]

"Rare" is subjective, MS. I agree.

To me, considering the number of killings that occur each year on an individual basis, the population, etc... spree killers, rampage killers, mass murderers (however they're defined and tracked by different groups) are still comparatively rare, though from 1908 onwards, some years have seen more of them in action than others.

I'm not trying to minimize the devastation they cause, but rather note that these aren't "common" types of killers/killings statistically speaking.

There are about 17,000 homicides per year in the US - the vast majority committed by one person against one other person. About 11,500 of those homicides are carried out using a firearm.

I can understand you not considering spree killings/killers as "rare" depending on your perspective and criteria.

data refs:
http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/fastats/homicide.htm

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_ram...:_Americas

[HairOfTheDog]

I said forget the weapons, what about the magazines?

I understand.

In the case of Lanza, he shot the same people many times over with a semi-automatic rifle and magazines/cartridges. If he would have been required to load a separate bullet each time he shot, I don't know if he'd have shot each person once and moved on - possibly shooting more than 20. Or, maybe he was committed to shooting each victim multiple times no matter what and would have been slowed down and able to shoot fewer people if he'd been required to reload so often. IDK.

[Midwest Spy]

Any evil, sick, demented son-of-a-bitch on the loose in an elementary school armed with 3 guns is going to create carnage, regardless if the weapons are single-shot or semi-automatic.

I've always considered my dad the original 'Mr. Insightful' and he and I had a very good conversation about guns. BTW, he's a gun proponent.

Rampage/spree killings will always be very hard to prevent (goes back to my original statement about 'hoping' you and yours aren't in the crosshairs when someone's going nuts) and therefore more effort needs to be concentrated on how to secure places (schools) better.

Do we want our schools to feel like fortresses? I'm not sure. All I know is, if someone wanted to visit an elementary school today and wreak havoc (even after Sandy Hook), it'd be pretty easy to do.

[username]

I don't expect single bullets but the proposals requiring a max 10 in a clip seem reasonable to a non gun owner like me. I don't know how many seconds it takes to put in a new clip but even that brief pause might give someone an opportunity to escape or an adult to try to disarm the person.

[F.U.]

I don't expect single bullets but the proposals requiring a max 10 in a clip seem reasonable to a non gun owner like me. I don't know how many seconds it takes to put in a new clip but even that brief pause might give someone an opportunity to escape or an adult to try to disarm the person.

Regardles of the capacity of the magazine I can reload/change mags in almost every semi auto I own in under 2 seconds. Limiting the capacity of magazines will do nothing to prevent mass shootings.

[username]

I don't expect single bullets but the proposals requiring a max 10 in a clip seem reasonable to a non gun owner like me. I don't know how many seconds it takes to put in a new clip but even that brief pause might give someone an opportunity to escape or an adult to try to disarm the person.

Regardles of the capacity of the magazine I can reload/change mags in almost every semi auto I own in under 2 seconds. Limiting the capacity of magazines will do nothing to prevent mass shootings.

Bummer.

[F.U.]

user, here is a good read that may help you understand the terms used when refering to these firearms that the media calls assault weapons. As well as info on what they did ban in 94 and are trying to ban again.

http://www.gunsandcrime.org/asltweps.html

[HairOfTheDog]

I don't expect single bullets but the proposals requiring a max 10 in a clip seem reasonable to a non gun owner like me. I don't know how many seconds it takes to put in a new clip but even that brief pause might give someone an opportunity to escape or an adult to try to disarm the person.

Regardles of the capacity of the magazine I can reload/change mags in almost every semi auto I own in under 2 seconds. Limiting the capacity of magazines will do nothing to prevent mass shootings.

This is what makes less sense to me the more that I learn and the more that I think about it.

James Holmes reportedly used an AR-15 with a 100 round magazine (which I understand is unusually high) when he shot up the Aurora CO movie theater. If he'd used 10 round mags instead, would it have made a difference? Doubtful, in my opinion.

The ban plan strikes me more and more as an exercise in futility; restricting the entire public to make some people feel falsely safer from the very few among us who would plan and execute a mass murder.

I don't believe that the bans will do anything at all to deter the murderous individuals and most likely won't reduce the number of fatalities that they're able to rack up. These guys are driven and plan obsessively according to studies; they will simply adjust. If Holmes was unable to get ahold of a 100 round magazine, in only 20 additional seconds he could have used ten 10 round magazines with the same results (not to mention the two extra guns that he also had in tow).

[F.U.]

I don't expect single bullets but the proposals requiring a max 10 in a clip seem reasonable to a non gun owner like me. I don't know how many seconds it takes to put in a new clip but even that brief pause might give someone an opportunity to escape or an adult to try to disarm the person.

Regardles of the capacity of the magazine I can reload/change mags in almost every semi auto I own in under 2 seconds. Limiting the capacity of magazines will do nothing to prevent mass shootings.

This is what makes less sense to me the more that I learn and the more that I think about it.

James Holmes reportedly used an AR-15 with a 100 round magazine (which I understand is unusually high) when he shot up the Aurora CO movie theater. If he'd used 10 round mags instead, would it have made a difference? Doubtful, in my opinion.

The ban plan strikes me more and more as an exercise in futility; restricting the entire public to make some people feel falsely safer from the very few among us who would plan and execute a mass murder.
I don't believe that the bans will do anything at all to deter the murderous individuals and most likely won't reduce the number of fatalities that they're able to rack up. These guys are driven and plan obsessively according to studies; they will simply adjust. If Holmes was unable to get ahold of a 100 round magazine, in only 20 additional seconds he could have used ten 10 round magazines with the same results (not to mention the two extra guns that he also had in tow).

That is exactly right HOTD. It is nothing more than a feel good action to pacify the masses that are yelling we must do something. However the something that they are trying to do will do nothing to help the real problem.

What the talk of a ban has done is it has made for the best month for sales of firearms, ammo and mags I have ever seen. So in their efforts to remove these items from the streets they have actually put more than ever on them.

[SIXFOOTERsez]

Thats true FU. I was looking ar AR mags on ebay for $50-$60 that were selling for $6 to $12 at the gun shows. I went to a gun show here the day after the shooting and had to stand in line to get in, that never happened before. I bought 1k of 5.56 for about $400, that stuff is over $1000 now and the dealers can't keep it on the shelf. There is a waiting list everywhere for anything remotely ARish

[F.U.]

To give everyone a idea exactly how many firearms the talk of banning them has sold in just december, here is a link.

http://www.radioshownotes.com/2013/01/mo...l?spref=fb

More thoughts on mind blowing December gun sales

The FBI reports 2.78 million gun buying background checks in December. And many of those buyers, in the grab-all-you-can panic after Feinstein's gun ban proposal, may have bought multiple guns.

So, it's conceivable that more than 3 million guns were bought last month. The number of buyers documented by background checks would likely have been higher had retail and distributor inventories not been stripped. . .
Read more at the above link.

[Jimbone]

There is a waiting list everywhere for anything remotely ARish

And for things not even close to ARish.

I went to pick up a 10/22, and even those damn things are gone and prices jacked.