Guns, Guns Guns

Hi JimHacker

Jumping out of the frying pan into the fire. Interest groups on both sides of the issue get money from others. NRA gets most from dues money and selling products including add space to gun manufactures. Big Shock I'm member and, bigger shock I think they go to far in the rhetoric at times.

Humm, we're crazy for defending our rights? Well at least we're not yellow bellied curs putting up our legs and bellies in surrender.

@demosthenes "When freedom is outlawed only outlaws are free," a saying of the counterculture of the 1960s. Welcome to the forums hope to see more of your posts in the future.

@Donnachaidh I've had PMs from three others warning me to be careful they had been warned by the Duckk, all three on the conservative side, and one Namelessfly banned. In all these cases the individual responded to name calling with name calling. Any of you on the other side get warnings from the Duckk for name calling? If not a certain unconscious bias in enforcing the rules may be indicated. But having people who used to post here fearful to express their opinions does not allow the free flow of ideas.

Poker

Hello once again to all who follow this thread and comment upon it. For those of you who have never been arrested in a case of mistaken identity or had a police officer threaten to shoot you because he could not tell the difference between a 6 ft. brown haired, crew cut Caucasian wearing a denim jacket and blue jeans and a 6 ft. 2" American Indian with 2 ft. long black hair wearing black leather jacket and pants when you were standing under a porch light, you might still trust your local police. I stopped calling to report crimes the third time a police officer told me it wasn't worth his time to come out and write up a report for the insurance company. If you trust your local police with your life, good for you. Personally, I don't trust the police in town to find their behind with either hand by accident, let alone on purpose. Until local police forces start repairing the damage to their reputations, enough for people to trust them again, gun control will continue to be a polarizing political factor.

KNick wrote:Hello once again to all who follow this thread and comment upon it. For those of you who have never been arrested in a case of mistaken identity or had a police officer threaten to shoot you because he could not tell the difference between a 6 ft. brown haired, crew cut Caucasian wearing a denim jacket and blue jeans and a 6 ft. 2" American Indian with 2 ft. long black hair wearing black leather jacket and pants when you were standing under a porch light, you might still trust your local police. I stopped calling to report crimes the third time a police officer told me it wasn't worth his time to come out and write up a report for the insurance company. If you trust your local police with your life, good for you. Personally, I don't trust the police in town to find their behind with either hand by accident, let alone on purpose. Until local police forces start repairing the damage to their reputations, enough for people to trust them again, gun control will continue to be a polarizing political factor.

Thats interesting. Out here in Nz, there was a survey a while back as to the most trusted professions. All three emergency services (fire, police, ambulance) took all 3 most trusted professions with a rating of around 87% for the police, 89% for the ambulance crews, and 94% for fire crews, so the police are pretty trusted over here.

demosthenes I agree with nearly all of your long post. One slight difference is the matter of automatic or semi automatic assault rifles. Even though or because I did own both I'd regard the large magazine semi auto as being just as dangerous. Military are trained to only use full auto if being subjected to a "human wave" attack, as the aimed semi auto mode is more effective than spraying full auto unless you have so many targets that you can't miss. A party trick of mine was to keep a can rolling across a paddock using the 30 round SKK semi auto. The same trick was impossible with an AK on full auto. To the best of my knowledge the only accurate full auto shoulder weapon was the Bren, all others produce a rising cone of fire.
To explain my cynicism regarding any law or constitution; while working as a public (civil) servant I showed a knack for writing guidelines and law, so was often seconded to do so. Bit like sausages, if you know what went into them you aren't quite as convinced that they are pure. Not saying that what I did was remotely near as significant as the US Constitution or the Old Testament, but I imaging the process was similar with lots of horse trading to appease factions and the knowledge that times change and so do requirements.
I've had no PM from Duckk and hope not to as I've never intended to insult anyone personally.
Regarding an attitude to police we here generally respect and trust them now after several major inquiries since 1980 or so have cleaned out the institutionalized baddies. Still get an occasional individual bad apple. The main problem we have now is that multigenerational welfare has led to a small minority of 14 to 20 year olds who have never been told no, so have no respect for anyone in authority (police, teachers, ambulance, firemen, welfare officers). I couldn't be a cop now as I'd just have to sort them. Not an old codger comment as I also believe that most young people are actually better behaved and informed than ever.

The first plastic gun has been manufactured using a 3-D printer. It worked for 6 shots before it failed. The first thing the law-makers did was scream for new laws. Unfortunately, the law-makers can't remember the laws they have already passed. The man who made it complied with all the laws regarding the manufacturing of firearms. He is in fact licensed to do manufacturing of firearms of any type. He has a Third Class Federal Firearms License, which means every year he pays an ungodly amount to the FBI for a complete background check. It also means he can buy, sell and possess fully automatic weapons, as well as build new guns. It also means he can have up to 10 tons of gunpowder in his home.

Everything he did was perfectly legal. He told lawmakers he was going to do it over a year ago. He did part of it on 60 Minutes last year. Yet as soon as he actually did it everyone freaked out.

There are laws on the books that cover every aspect of the current gun debate except the important one, mental health. Why can't the lawmakers realize that we don't need new laws, just better enforcement of existing laws.

Sorry, Pokermind, I was blowing off steam and maybe I went a bit too far to the other side in my post. But you also went too far when saying:
"Humm, we're crazy for defending our rights? Well at least we're not yellow bellied curs putting up our legs and bellies in surrender."

The fact that I don't have the same system of values as you and don't hold that right in as high regard as you doesn't make me a coward. While weapons are very useful tools of fighting a possible government oppression, they are not the only ones or the most effective. Hell, even a cursory reading of history shows that guns are at most useful in the last stage, after you won the tacit support of the population and when the dictatorship is already weakened and bloodied.
Yes, you do have the right to bear arms. I totally agree with this. But you go too far when you ask for no restrictions to be imposed upon you. Sorry, but this right gives a very real power and with power must come a system of checks and balances, otherwise the power will go to your head. History again.
Regarding the murky issue of "assault rifles" mentioned by Donnachaidh, I agree that it is just fear-mongering from the gun control side. That is why I never used the term. But my understanding is that with pretty basic machining tools you can modify a semi-auto to go to full auto. I think Pokermind mentioned that he could do that in his own toolshed. Coupled with large magazines and half an hour practice on changing mags, you can kill large number of people even with poor marksmanship (and, fortunately, madmen are not trained soldiers and have pretty terrible hit ratios, which gives most people time to flee or, in some cases, counter-attack). That is why large mags should be just as difficult to buy as rifles that can be modified this way.
Finally my point about the police officers is not that I don't trust them. Police is usually pretty trusted around here, is just that I was appalled at their terrible marksmanship. Stress, jerking the trigger I understand, but these are people who are expected to practice weekly?/monthly? If they are so terrible, what can you expect from John who got the gun for self-defense and practices once in a blue moon. That's why regular range time should be mandated by law (at first) and then by custom and social pressure (later).

Hi demosthenes,

You're right "Humm, we're crazy for defending our rights? Well at least we're not yellow bellied curs putting up our legs and bellies in surrender," was an illustration of what I'm talking about, IE things in these discussions tend to be taken personally by those on the other side of the issue. Another would be charges of treason etc.

Knick was the one with the friend licensed to make fully automatic weapons, I've made firearms here's a couple with my cat:



I prefer muzzle-loaders, don't like cap guns, if it ain't got a rock in the lock and gives forth fire and flame in both ends it don't tickle my fancy. Also being Scottish they are far cheaper to shoot

Being from Idaho where Senator Frank Church was from, so I don't trust the government, look up the Church committee to see some of the things our government did to citizens here, and in other lands. See if you would trust the government

Poker

Spacekiwi wrote:

pokermind wrote:Hi Tenshinai,

Several of us have tried and failed to to make you understand the reverence of the American People for the Constitution of the United States. Like denunciation of belief in God will by insulting believers cause negative reactions. I have PMs from some saying to just unfriend you so as not to have read your venom.

"But oh dear no. In USA, it goes a step further, a piece of paper is considered THE ultimate thing to be loyal to." In fact in the United States the constitution is the supreme law of the land, it can be amended only with a super majority so, remains rather static as temporary political factions rise and fall. Dissing the constitution is fighting words to most Americans and, you have done it more than once.

Poker

If I may butt in a bit? I believe he may be trying to say that the paper/constitution is being viewed as sancrosanct, and its being followed in letter more then spirit now. IMO of course

Correct. And the issue of turning it into something venerated on a religious level.

It goes back to something i´m VERY serious about, law and religion does NOT belong together. Regardless if it´s by making religion into law, or treating law as sacred or something.

It is a VERY dangerous thing.

Unthinking allegiance to an unchanging idea is just as bad as moral lassitude and cowardice

+1.

Pokermind specifically brought up that the Constitution can be changed upon the approval of a super-majority. Every part of the Constitution can be remove and/or rewritten including both the first and second amendments (though it is not likely).

Never going to happen in a beneficial way, the way your politics are looking now.

I agree with almost everything you've said. The reason I called Tenshinai out was not because I disagreed with him but because I felt he'd gone from attacking certain views to attacking pokermind with an alternately sarcastic and condescending tone.

Pokermind was acting too much like a conspiracy-theorist(of the nutcase type) and i called him on it, no i wasn´t entirely nice, but the more far out claims are, the more acid i tend to add to the mix, both intentionally and not.

At the same time, i have exchanged more PMs with Pokermind than with any other on this(and many other sites for that matter), so i expect he wont hold a grudge, at least not once smoke stops coming out of his ears...

pokermind wrote:Humm, we're crazy for defending our rights? Well at least we're not yellow bellied curs putting up our legs and bellies in surrender.

That is an interesting claim you know?

Exactly what are you ACTUALLY defending that I`M not?
I live in one of the most gundense regions of Sweden, i´m member of a pistol club, i have the OPTION of getting a gun of my own IF i spend the cash to make sure i can store it safely, and i have enough practise that i´ve shot gold a few times at 25m and bronze at 50m(and i don´t miss).

Getting a permit to carry such a gun would be difficult as i have no specific reason for needing to do so, but IF i had such a reason, i COULD probably get such a permit as well.

And if i need to DEFEND my rights? Guns are completely USELESS for that. If you´re going to do that, what you SHOULD have is the right to free assistance from a lawyer!

Because face it, if your government goes completely rotten and REALLY wants to put you under its thumb and opress you? You simply have ZERO ability to oppose that, regardless if you have a gun or not.

You´re much better off using a phone to get people pissed off and gathered to protest. The police or military are going to be wary about starting to hurt a LOT of people, no matter what their superiors tell them or threaten them with.

Guns, guns are just going to make sure you end up dead or in jail.

pokermind wrote:@demosthenes "When freedom is outlawed only outlaws are free," a saying of the counterculture of the 1960s. Welcome to the forums hope to see more of your posts in the future.

But those outlaws rely on being able to get their guns from somewhere, and they get them from the open market, or from people keeping them in unprotected storage. No need to ban anything, but making sure that guns can´t be sold/traded willynilly, or can be stored anywhere, that IS needed, because that would cut down the amount of guns the outlaws get ahold of.

pokermind wrote:@Donnachaidh I've had PMs from three others warning me to be careful they had been warned by the Duckk, all three on the conservative side, and one Namelessfly banned. In all these cases the individual responded to name calling with name calling. Any of you on the other side get warnings from the Duckk for name calling? If not a certain unconscious bias in enforcing the rules may be indicated. But having people who used to post here fearful to express their opinions does not allow the free flow of ideas.

Poker

I´ve had one warning from Duckk, early on when i was careless once in how i wrote a reply to a VERY insulting post. Possibly to Namelessfly...

And Namelessfly, he deserved banning several times over, you´re nothing like him i´m VERY happy to say.

Oh and BTW, about restricting the internet?
This tells you where you should be looking for culprits:
http://openmedia.org/blog/meet-michael-froman

Might want to sign the petition linked there as well.