More gun control law proposals....

Discussion in 'Politics, Religion, Social Issues' started by PracticalMac, Dec 18, 2012.

  1. PracticalMac, Dec 18, 2012
    Last edited by a moderator: Dec 18, 2012

    PracticalMac macrumors 68030

    Jan 22, 2009
    I never own a gun (I legally could), and I think the NRA are giant selfish bullies, but all of the proposals I heard on news (not all, just what I heard) in the wake of the horrible tragedy in Newtown are useless.
    (In no way am I trying to belittle the horrid tragedy, or defend anyone. Just trying find a lasting solution.)

    It is a simple test, "would proposed law stop the tragedies in CT, or CO, or AZ, for instance?"
    If it won't, why propose it? (Answer: Political brownie points, but I diverge).

    IMHO, the best way just like learning to drive, to teach everyone, from 9th grade (or earlier) and up.

    Suggested topics:
    Gun security (how to safety and prevent from use)
    Gun safety (how to handle weapons and remove ammo)
    Discipline (not to joke around or treat lightly)

    and what some will object to:
    Social monitoring: be aware of unstable people (suicidal, violent, drug user)
    and just like a drivers licenses (another dangerous weapon if you think about it),
    Regular refresher courses, especially if you own a fire arm (or bow for that matter).

    Now, the talk about banning "Assault weapons"?
    Despite the fearsome look of AW's, for close range, nothing beats handguns.

    While I actually do not have nor never owned a gun (firearm to be exact), I have shot many weapons (Glock, 1911, Thompson Semi 45, 22's, etc), even handled and operated a fully functional machine gun (MG-15, if you want to look it up), and even a small collection of ammo each of different size for comparison.
    I am curious about weapons, not "crazy".
  2. quagmire macrumors 603


    Apr 19, 2004
    Regular refresher courses are perfectly reasonable. Pilots have to have biannual flight reviews done. Why not the same for gun owners?

    Not saying a refresher course will do anything to prevent further mass shootings, but I wouldn't be opposed to it.
  3. anonymouslurker macrumors regular

    May 16, 2012
    It would probably do quite a bit as far as addressing a number of the gun-related accidents
  4. NickZac macrumors 68000


    Dec 11, 2010
    Common sense would say start small under the agreement that current statistics on firearms-related deaths are not acceptable and that something has to change. In the fashion on incrementalism, initial intervention efforts should be least 'invasive', with the understanding that if something doesn't change, more radical measures be imposed.

    The least invasive (and possibly most effective) is to enforce our existing laws, close the cash-n-carry loophole, and devise some method of documenting second hand sales. Enforcing existing laws in themselves would take time given many are currently neglected for a variety of reasons. Simultaneously, implement comprensive safety training as mandatory. This way, one's 'right' is not being infringed but there is more control over the process. Start there. A magic bullet it may not be but it is a starting point that is probably a pretty easy agreement to reach from all sides.
  5. sviato macrumors 68020


    Oct 27, 2010
    HR 9038 A
    I'm not sure why Americans are so against gun control in the first place.

    Although I would get one as soon as I can if I move to the states in the future.
  6. CalWizrd Suspended


    Jun 21, 2011
    NYC/Raleigh, NC
    A number of years ago, when Eliot Spitzer was the NY State Attorney General, he was proposing putting serial numbers on bullets! I'm surprised no one has resurrected that insanity yet.
  7. NickZac macrumors 68000


    Dec 11, 2010
    And that idea was about as good as the quality of his character... :p
  8. bogatyr macrumors 65816

    Mar 13, 2012
    I carry everyday and I'm all for more gun control. It should not be this easy to get a handgun. I've voluntarily taken extra courses in self defense and gun safety because the Michigan CPL class requirements were a joke. Little about safety, mechanics or usage taught... 90% was about the laws regarding concealed carry - which is great but there should be more classes required to cover the other topics.

    Renewals should be more often as well.

    I'm legal, sound of mind, etc. Happy to take extra background checks, psychological exams and more if it helps keep weapons away from people that wish to harm others.
  9. PracticalMac thread starter macrumors 68030

    Jan 22, 2009

    It was because of guns the colonials successful rebelled against the heavily armed British military and its political tyranny.

    Admiral Yamamoto said it best:
    "Behind every blade of grass is a rifle"

    There is a fundamental feeling of security for the US to own a gun.

    What is different is back then great respect and care was taken to use of firearms. Parents taught children with great care (along a similar line, in Japan the sword (Katana and like) where also treated with extreme care and reverence.


    You just gave examples why the laws do NOT work.

    In all three cases cited, even the devil himself, can LEGALLY purchase any firearm.

    Laws are not ignored either (but I am sure slips do occur).

    And it is not that hard for someone to get a firearm by illegal means.

    One has to start with the people (you mention safety training), and go from there, not by the guns.

    Put it this way, Hitler, Stalin, Mao, the first things each of these tyrants did was take away ALL guns from the average person (not even allow by permission or license, as one can do in England and Japan).
  10. CorvusCamenarum macrumors 65816


    Dec 16, 2004
    Birmingham, AL
    I find it highly ironic and disturbing that the same government that has little in the way of qualms about supplying weapons to foreign citizens is suddenly so apprehensive about allowing its own citizens to possess them.
  11. NickZac macrumors 68000


    Dec 11, 2010
    The existing laws DO work when enforced and when citizens are educated. I've been around thousands of people carrying. I carried for years. Not once did someone get injured or killed! A miracle? Not was more a result of good ownership and handling practices.

    Simply said, you can't kid proof guns, but you can gun proof your kids. That statement essentially sums up the importance of gun education. Most FFLs will gladly back mandatory education because 1) it means fewer injuries/deaths and 2) it means reduced liability. Most FFLs won't sell someone a gun if they appear to not know what they are doing. As far as on-the-spot background checks, most FFLs currently do this using the 4473 and supplemental material by state. So why not formally close secondary sales loopholes which hurt all gun owners?

    And it clearly isn't hard to obtain an illegal firearm...and if one is struggling with this they could always call the BATF for some assistance for a successful straw purchase. Americans don't want more gun laws, and President Obama himself has advocated that existing laws be what we focus on rather than new laws. Let's work on banning illegal firearms while educating legal firearm owners so they make the best decisions possible.

    Edit: I also want to add that if we are going to examine new gun laws, we need to examine laws banning movies and music that advertise violence with firearms. It is beyond me how someone like George Clooney could support gun control measures while making movie after movie of him 'poppin clips' in various characters.
  12. Vip macrumors regular


    May 8, 2008

    Totally flummoxed... are children's lives worth less than your right to own a killing machine.
  13. Lord Blackadder macrumors G5

    Lord Blackadder

    May 7, 2004
    Sod off
    Speaking as a gun owner myself, these arguments are beginning to ring hollow because 1) many gun owners are not being responsible enough 2) the NRA is increasingly relying on a paranoid fringe and thus losing credibility and 3) mass shootings are becoming far too common for the public to be soothed by the timeworn arguments against gun control the NRA and allied groups trot out.

    If the NRA and gun owners in general continue to refuse to even talk about further gun control measures as well as better enforcement of existing laws (which a agree is an absolute necessity), the discussion will eventually move on without them and their influence will shrink to a rump of what it is now. Most gun owners (in my experience) are failing to see this and continue to (proverbially) shoot themselves in the foot through their own intransigence.
  14. PracticalMac thread starter macrumors 68030

    Jan 22, 2009
    This is very much the same thing I am advocating, only expand it as mandatory education in all schools.

    You just confirmed that education, not restrictions, is the best (not ideal) solution.


    Did you read the entire posts?

    Consider that more children are killed every year by car accidents (both as passengers or drivers) then guns?
    You want to ban cars?

    To solve a challenge like this one must look at the entire picture, not just the guns.
  15. citizenzen, Dec 19, 2012
    Last edited: Dec 19, 2012

    citizenzen macrumors 65816

    Mar 22, 2010
    Speaking as a non-gun owner, these arguments haven't begun to rung hallow ... they've been ringing hollow for decades.

    However, due to U.S. history, the incredible number of guns in circulation, current rulings from the Supreme Court, and the entrenched attitudes of a good percentage of Americans, I find it highly unlikely that anything significant can or will be done.

    So as a non-gun owner, I will simply have to resign myself to live under the conditions that our culture has cooked up, and hope that when the next mass shooting occurs that I and/or my loved ones will not be in the wrong place at the wrong time.

    I've already managed it over my first 52 years. What's a few more?

    Edit: Encouraging news from Bloomberg business week ...

  16. PracticalMac thread starter macrumors 68030

    Jan 22, 2009
    That is why I am advocating mandatory education at the high school (or earlier) level and regular refreshers, not unlike for driving.
  17. Menel, Dec 19, 2012
    Last edited: Dec 19, 2012

    Menel macrumors 603


    Aug 4, 2011
    If it does nothing to prevent mass shootings.

    Why push for more government legislation, that requires oversight, tax expenditure, the risk of criminalizing otherwise innocent people over benign stuff, etc.

    What would that solve. They knew within hours who the killer was and where the weapons came from.

    You're going to have to explain what some of these are, like 'cash-n-carry loophole'?

    The Newtown Massacre, the weapons were purchased by a woman who by every indication passed all criminal and mental health background checks, and bought from a major retail chain going by the strictest letter of the law. She was also vetted by the state gov't as a school teacher to teach children.

    Why propose useless legislation that doesn't address this?

    You can't be safe in a gun free zone when that zone is easily crossed. Nor by creating blockades and hoops for law abiding good people to jump through, criminals don't care anyway.

    You have to ban the sale of all firearms, handgun and long arms combined with nationwide door to door searches confiscating and destroying all firearms, knives, pipes, ropes, wrenches and candlesticks! You'll need a constitutional amendment, 2/3 vote by states to strip us of the bill of rights and the individual right to firearms for self defense. But it's valid path that addresses how Adam Lanza's mother was able to obtain firearms.

    You might also consider stripping away a bunch of gov't laws that restrict law abiding citizens, so that school administrators could carry. Instead of lunging helplessly unarmed, or hiding in closets, they could react when police aren't at hand.
  18. Vip macrumors regular


    May 8, 2008
    Actually I did read the whole post and your comparison of Guns to Cars is at best foolish and churlish. Cars are PRIMARILY designed for TRANSPORTATION, whilst Guns are PRIMARILY designed for KILLING, it serves no other useful purpose. Additionally, America needs a cultural change. It would seem people in America live in constant fear, fear of everything and everyone. Your media/politics/corporations thrive on this constant feed of fear. The people are gullible and that needs to change.

    To give you an example, if such a tragedy happens in any other country, people would be queuing up to give up their guns even recreational weapons, whereas in America, the media (and gun manufacturing corporations) panic the people in to arming itself further. More guns were sold day after the tragedy then any other day this year. Is that really the answer?

    Cultural change + self sense + gradual control seems the only answer.

    Otherwise more kids will die in the hands of GUNS.
  19. Lord Blackadder macrumors G5

    Lord Blackadder

    May 7, 2004
    Sod off
    For the record, I have never been an NRA member, and have always thought them far too extreme. They operate on fear - fear of increased regulation, fear of government. There is no internal dialogue, just one party line.

    The situation we are in now has been long in the making - so any changes, even big ones, will probably take time. But it's past time for people and politicians to be prepared to find common ground and work effectively towards solutions. Liberals should look beyond impose knee-jerk bans that might not do much apart from look good in congress. Conservatives absolutely must force the NRA to soften it's hardline stance against further reform of gun control regulation. Some people on both sides re doing this, but we need more, much more.
  20. quagmire macrumors 603


    Apr 19, 2004
    So you're saying a gun owner shouldn't have to prove he can still safely handle, store, etc a gun like a pilot has to prove he can still fly a plane( or another thing that should be enacted prove a person can still drive a car....)? It isn't something that takes long. For pilots it's 1 hour ground time to refresh them on the latest FAR's and 1 hour flight time. You don't go to jail over it, but it is something that needs to be in your logbook in order to prove your still current to fly the plane.
  21. citizenzen macrumors 65816

    Mar 22, 2010
    No law could guarantee to stop mass shootings.

    So by your logic, why propose any law?
  22. PracticalMac thread starter macrumors 68030

    Jan 22, 2009
    Cars are a very valid example, just like a weapon in the hands of someone who does not know the rules and respect its destructive potential it will easily kill someone.

    Of course the function is different, but the lethality is the same.

    Some crazy person stealing a big truck and crashing it into a bus full of children can do very similar carnage.

    As it is, a nephew of co-worker caused an accident that killed a young girl, injured 3 others, and he lost a leg. He was driving at 100MPH over hills, trying to jump the car, into a tree.

    And in Houston another teen driver flipped his car, killing all 4 teens inside.
  23. erickkoch macrumors 6502a

    Jan 13, 2003
    More gun laws are pointless IMO.

    I live in CA, which has banned "assault rifles" and such more than 10 years ago. It was pointless. Don't believe me?

    Try this, Goggle: CA legal assault rifles.

    The banning of military style weapons merely ban guns with cosmetic features. They banned guns with flash suppressors so they were swapped out with muzzle brakes instead (which look the same). They banned large capacity magazines but because previously owned large capacity magazines are OK (as long as you owned them before the ban) and they rarely have serial numbers or date of manufacture on them we are essentially on the "honor system". Guns with detachable high capacity magazines were banned so the "Bullet Button" design was used which requires a punch or bullet tip to remove the magazine. They banned bayonet mounts (when was the last time you heard of anyone being "bayonetted" to death?) When they ban pistol grips on guns a thumbhole stock or other such design showed up at the gun stores.

    CA also tried to ban the so called "Saturday Night Special", cheap, poorly made, unreliable handguns. How did the gun industry respond? They simply made the guns of better quality and more reliable. I recall reading years ago about the Brady Campaign complaining that too many handguns were passing CA's strict quality control requirements.

    And so it goes.
  24. zioxide macrumors 603


    Dec 11, 2006
    Why aren't more people pressing arms companies to put more resources in to the development of Smart guns?

    There is no reason whatsoever with all of the technology we have here in 2012 that they couldn't make firearms with a safety that unlocks only via a biometric fingerprint scanner.

    Only preauthorized users would be able to fire the weapon. Basically, you'd just have to place your finger on a fingerprint scanner instead of clicking off an old-fashioned safety, and then the gun would unlock and be able to fire. Pressure sensors in the grip could also detect as soon as it left the authorized user's hand, was put down, etc, and the gun would re-lock.

    We have the technology to design and implement systems like this now and you could prevent a lot of tragedies from happening.

    This could eliminate children taking their parents gun and hurting themselves or someone else. Stolen guns would not be able to fire because the person who stole it wouldn't be authorized. It would eliminate the threat to law enforcement of a suspect wrestling their gun away from them. Even if the suspect did get the gun, it wouldn't be able to shoot.

    We as a society will never be able to get rid of guns. They are ingrained in our culture, and for many people in rural areas, are a necessity to day-to-day life. That said, as a society it's very obvious that we need to make changes to make guns safer and keep them away from people who shouldn't have them to eliminate tragedies like we have seen all too often lately.

    Technology here in 2012 would allow for systems like this to be developed quite easily. So what are we waiting for?
  25. Lord Blackadder, Dec 19, 2012
    Last edited: Dec 19, 2012

    Lord Blackadder macrumors G5

    Lord Blackadder

    May 7, 2004
    Sod off
    Cars are far more regulated than guns. You have to take a test to drive one, and carry an ID. And you can't own just any car - it has to meet a myriad of safety and environmental regulations to be road legal. Additionally, Every car must be titled and registered in order to be road legal, and their is a chain of ownership that can be traced.

    In order to buy a gun you do not have to take a test - indeed, if you buy one from another private seller you don't have to do anything at all except affirm you are able to legally own one and then pay for it. Guns are not registered, there is no universal system in place to trace the chain of ownership. There are restrictions on the types of gun available but they are considerably less complicated than with automobiles.

    Yes, both guns and cars are regulated due to the potential dangers associated with them. But in terms of the types you can own and the steps you have to take to obtain one, guns are far less regulated than cars.

    Some of the provisions of the California ban on assault weapons are silly, such as the inclusion of a bayonet lug as an "assault weapon" feature. I understand that it's a roundabout way to legally target military rifles, but when was the last time a criminal holding a loaded rifle chose to bayonet a victim?

    On the other hand, I think it's irresponsible to throw up your hands and say "more gun laws are pointless". Yes, we need to better enforce what's on the books first and foremost. But I cannot and will not let the status quo continue. Something has to change. We have to be proactive. If we haven't yet hit on a system that works, we need to keep trying, not give up.

Share This Page