Outrage after NY paper publishes names of gun permit holders

[IslandTractor]

Strict gun laws in Great Britain and Australia haven't made their people noticeably safer, nor have they prevented massacres. The two major countries held up as models for the U.S. don't provide much evidence that strict gun laws will solve our problems.
l

You are joking right????

Those countries have far lower murder rates and gun homicide rates than we do. Orders of magnitude lower.

 

[sweettractors]

TripleR -- You're right...they take baby steps...little by little the guns can be gone..just like was done with cigarette smoking...first it was certain areas in restaurants, airplanes then at work, then public buildings, then not at all in public buildings , then not in your own home, then not in parks or outside of public buildings....

I am not a smoke just using that as an example for the incremental-ism you mentioned...to show how it has happened and is once again under way....except to take away the guns...to disarm the public.

I agree 100 %. Ken Sweet

 

[IslandTractor]

TripleR -- You're right...they take baby steps...little by little the guns can be gone..just like was done with cigarette smoking...first it was certain areas in restaurants, airplanes then at work, then public buildings, then not at all in public buildings , then not in your own home, then not in parks or outside of public buildings....

I am not a smoke just using that as an example for the incremental-ism you mentioned...to show how it has happened and is once again under way....except to take away the guns...to disarm the public.

We agree. Saturday night specials were an issue mostly with urban youth violence, not mass killings. It is not a simple problem but tightening the laws can still be part of the solution without interfering with real hunters. Aussies and Brits still hunt with guns. Some of the Youtube nitwits might have their fun disrupted but I'd be willing to trade that for fewer and less lethal mass killings.

 

[Gunny]

Is that a good or bad thing? Ken Sweet

It's a good thing, nothing like getting the old blood pressure up and the brain cells going! Though I did get awful windy on my last post, I just couldn't hold back any longer.

I retired after 24 years in the Army and as the old saying goes "I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it!"

And while the Constitution does guarantee freedom of speech, it doesn't give anyone any guarantee that I have to listen

 

[Gunny]

You are joking right????

Those countries have far lower murder rates and gun homicide rates than we do. Orders of magnitude lower.

Google is your friend, only read all the articles, not just the ones that favor your side of the argument.

 

[TripleR]

With Stinger missiles from the USA. Without those the Ruskies would still be there. Modern high tech weapons trump militias in the absence of outside support.

But as you brought it up, the competing warlord militias in Afghanistan are probably the best you could hope for with lack of central command and control of a militia in the USA.

And they would still be getting killed by resistance fighters.

We are a free country because of outside support also, do you not think any insurrection against our government would not receive such support again? Do you really think an organized resistance in the US could not get stinger missiles or more from defectors who cannot wage war against their fellow countrymen.

All this is pure speculation and pray to God it never happens though I do think there is a tipping point for many. I have mentioned in this or another thread where acts of civil disobedience against the government and certain laws has taken place and the government's position proven indefensible.

 

[Gunny]

You are joking right????

Those countries have far lower murder rates and gun homicide rates than we do. Orders of magnitude lower.

And since you only wanted to object to that one paragraph, and dismiss the part about mental reporting: How many of the mass shooters were judged mentally incompetent or had behavioral problems? Like I said, attack the real problem.

 

[MF1433V]

TripleR -- You're right...they take baby steps...little by little the guns can be gone..just like was done with cigarette smoking...first it was certain areas in restaurants, airplanes then at work, then public buildings, then not at all in public buildings , then not in your own home, then not in parks or outside of public buildings....

I am not a smoke just using that as an example for the incremental-ism you mentioned...to show how it has happened and is once again under way....except to take away the guns...to disarm the public.

2nd hand smoke kills, so a persons right to smoke ends when their action (ie smoking in public) gives other people cancer and health issues. So that is not a good comparison at all. I didn't know people can't smoke in their own home...you sure about that one?

Just like I can own guns, but going around shooting innocent people is against the law. A person can have cigarettes and smoke they just can go around making innocent people inhale that dangerous smoke is against the law.

 

[TripleR]

We agree. Saturday night specials were an issue mostly with urban youth violence, not mass killings. It is not a simple problem but tightening the laws can still be part of the solution without interfering with real hunters. Aussies and Brits still hunt with guns. Some of the Youtube nitwits might have their fun disrupted but I'd be willing to trade that for fewer and less lethal mass killings.

Please for the love of Pete do some research, no where has hunting been mentioned in the "rights" under the 2nd Amendment or that of many states. Hunting is abhorrent to many gun owners I know.

As to "Saturday Night Specials", something that was never really that big of a deal in reality. I worked in a couple of counties with poverty designations, my sub office was in the Sheriff Departments and I watched a steady stream of poor people come in to get "Permits to Acquire Concealable Firearms"; couldn't buy a handgun without a permit and you had to describe the gun to get the permit. Pretty much all of he guns purchased were cheap because that's all anyone could afford. Would they have chosen a nice Colt or Smith and Wesson, you bet, but they needed protection and had limited funds so they got what they could afford.

I dealt with real criminals on a daily basis and never knew one to use a "Saturday Night Special", they wanted to be on a par or better armed than the Police.

 

[IslandTractor]

And since you only wanted to object to that one paragraph, and dismiss the part about mental reporting: How many of the mass shooters were judged mentally incompetent or had behavioral problems? Like I said, attack the real problem.

I did not disagree with that at all. I agreed with much of your post. I have never held that better gun control is the answer but I think it is part of the answer. I disagree with the NRA position which simply put says we need more easily obtained weapons.