A Gun Aside
I don’t like gun posts. They are just about as bad as abortion posts when it comes to generating interesting threads. Having said that, I think I should mention that the only murderer I know personally, killed his victim with a gun he made from a kit.
It was a cap lock pistol and he used to kill his hated stepmother when we were in 7th grade. On the murder day, he shot her with a lead ball through a wall while she stood at the kitchen sink washing dishes. Everyone knew that it was no accident. He had talked about killing his stepmother for two years to anyone who he happened to get into a conversation with.
He went to kids jail for a while. Then he got out. Then he raped and stabbed a girl and left her for dead. Then went to adult jail for life. She lived.
Anyway – I’m not a proponent of handmade guns because they are less lethal. Even with every kid in Pakistan working around the clock – I think the handmade provision would, in time, significantly reduce the number of guns available to criminals.
I realize it is a nonsense position though. The gun nuts have won. It is all just boring button pushing at this point.
I think that fetuses should have the right to bear arms to protect them from abortionists.
You train the little zygote to shoot right between the forceps.
Arming fetuses would have the added benefit of saving them from gay marriage.
One thing to consider. I have several guns that are over 100 years old and they are pristine. Not worth much because the Russians pumped them out by the millions, but that’s not the point.
When properly maintained, a gun can last for a very long time.
I’ve seen the youtube videos of the guys with no teeth making homemade weapons on Pakistan’s border. I don’t think I would want to touch one of those off. But it does demonstrate that guns can in fact be made under the crudest of conditions. If I wanted to, I could make a shotgun with about $20 worth of stuff at the hardware store.
Black powder is also easy to make. It’s just charcoal, sulfur and salt peter.
Making a spark? Pretty sure that technology is attainable as well.
“One thing to consider. I have several guns that are over 100 years old and they are pristine.”
One of my boys has the rifle his great-great-great grandfather carried in the civil war.
“Not worth much because the Russians pumped them out by the millions”
a Nagant?
In the same vein, don’t forget Mexico – look at all the drugs and illegal immigrants we have in this country – how hard would it be to bring in more illegal guns over the border?
Tom,
Yeppers, the Mosin Nagant. Seriously over built and meant to take abuse. I can’t resist buying them when the bores are shiny. About once a year, they go on sale and can be had for $50.
That was same thing that led me to buy my Yugo K98. I’m reluctant to expend the capital to have two tools to do the same thing but hell, if its 50 dollars…
Where do you go to Shoot? We should hit the range some time.
“I realize it is a nonsense position though. The gun nuts have won. ”
I’m glad you’re man enough to admit that.
The right to bear arms. Therefore my weapon of choice is an A BOMB
I’m with you Jason. The threads on gun posts become boring and predictable. In fact, when I see one I think “oh no, not another one.”
Harry Turner?
“I’m with you Jason. The threads on gun posts become boring and predictable.”
I know, not a one can any of you support your arguments for banning guns, or why certain guns need to be banned.
It’s almost like you’re reciting dogma not principal.
The right to abortion. Therefore my choice of instrument is a clothes hanger and plunger.
TT, see how dumb that sounds.
weer’d, when he says the gun nuts have won, i think he means that your position that american youths can continue to slaughter each other with easy to get weapons that require no thought to use has prevailed .. as per a recent supreme court ruling that the 2d applies to individuals, not groups. YAAAYYYYY YOOOOUUUU sleep well, our kids are cappin each other just the way the NRA wants it
yeah h. a meat hook ad a dust buster works better
Weer’d,
How long are you going to ignore that fact that I totally obliterated your whole world view? That my rational and legal approach creates a win/win for gun enthusiast and for law enforcement and that my logic is unassailable?
When will you admit….oh, never mind…
For anyone not keeping the debate score at home. It stands: Jason 5,500 points Weer’d ZERO, ZILCH, NADA.
And that is my last comment on the subject.
I say we create a secure “Libertarian Island” where drugs and guns are legal and freely available to anyone. Let’s see how many Libertarians move in.
“Libertarian Island”
I see a new reality TV show there, anon!
it will also be the best run government and economy ever. president Ron Paul, secretary of Batshit Glen Beck
The thing is, the gun nuts want to enjoy the peace and prosperity of a regulated society, but they think they are special and don’t have to participate in the regulations. They want that little extra advantage for themselves. They are leeching from our freedom. They would piss their pants if they had to live in a community where 100% of the members were just like them.
its a good thing they surround us
Tom,
“Where do you go to Shoot? We should hit the range some time.”
I live in Oregon and go to the ARPC.
anon,
“They would piss their pants if they had to live in a community where 100% of the members were just like them.”
I do live in that community, we have far more guns than people. We have no police department, no fire department and no hospititals.
We also have had not a single murder in the 11 years I’ve lived here. Zero murders, Zero suicides.
jason330, Not exactly. You didn’t address what would happen to guns already in the wild (Kaveman is 100% guns essentially last forever. I have a few 100+ year old pieces that are in near-perfect working order, and more than half of my collection is 50+ years)
Your argument for handmade guns deminishing supply to criminals is a valid one (and made more valid for your smart concession that it would NOT eliminate guns in criminal hands) But you fail to address the subject of defensive arms. Note that your “friend” didn’t need to build a second gun to rape a woman….but the woman could have beifitted from somthing to defend herself. Your plan for taking guns away from those who never had any right to them nor any legal means to aquire them by disarming those who have done nothing but prove themselves as lawful is a flawed system that only marginally inconveniences the criminals, but deeply inconveniences the lawful people they prey upon.
So how will you address those issues, Jason?
Anon: We had a little get-together at a local steak house last night. I think the total headcount was 30+ I don’t think many more than 5 of us didn’t have a gun on us. We all seemed to have a pocket knife of some sort as well. We hung out from about 6pm until about 11. My pants were pleanty dry.
I’m pleanty happy with a regulated society. I’m comfortable not allowing children, mentally ill, and violent criminal access to guns. I’m comfortable having to undergo a background check when I buy a gun. I’m fine being forced to buy all handguns within my state through licensed dealers. I won’t argue much with the ban on full-auto weapons and short-barreled rifles and shotguns. I’m fine with having to get a permit to carry a gun under my coat (tho the states that don’t require such permits don’t seem to have much troubles as far as I can see)
I’m fine with all the guns I can legally own must be made by a federally licenced and inspected manufactuer, rather than Jason’s un-regulated fantasy.
So I’d say every bit of your statement is Bunk, anon. But I’ll discuss the finer points of it if you want.
“I live in Oregon and go to the ARPC.”
Alas, I live in Delaware.
“That my rational and legal approach creates a win/win for gun enthusiast and for law enforcement and that my logic is unassailable?”
Those amateurs at the Supreme Court disagree with you.
“The thing is, the gun nuts want to enjoy the peace and prosperity of a regulated society, but they think they are special and don’t have to participate in the regulations.”
Whoa there little fella, we do “participate in the regulations” we follow federal, state and local gun regulations to the T. We even participate in the crafting of those regulations and don’t especially like to be told we live outside them by folks that couldn’t tell a .22 from a .222.
Kaveman: Why do you wan to buy more when you already have many? Is it strictly for the resale value — are they appreciating that much?
Weer’d,
Go cry in your beer’d elsewhere. You got your ass handed to you five way to Sunday.
Live with it.
“The thing is, the gun nuts want to enjoy the peace and prosperity of a regulated society, but they think they are special and don’t have to participate in the regulations.”
When I got my concealed carry permit, I bought a book from the instructor which gave the class which was the word for word text of every law in oregon dealing with both concealed and open carry.
I read the book cover to cover before I even left the house with a concealed carry piece.
You’re making wild assumptions about people you know nothing about.
“Kaveman: Why do you wan to buy more when you already have many? Is it strictly for the resale value — are they appreciating that much?”
Most of my collection has some historical connection and I also marvel at the difference in designs and the crafmanship. I have made several purchases based on their track record for increasing in value, but, truth be told, I’ve never sold a gun. To me, those guns are no different than any other investment I’ve made. The longer I retain them, the value goes up in the unfortunate event that I must sell it to another collector who has the same idea.
I don’t plan on selling any guns, just like I don’t plan on borrowing against my 401k.
…we follow federal, state and local gun regulations to the T. We even participate in the crafting of those regulations and don’t especially like to be told we live outside them by folks that couldn’t tell a .22 from a .222.
Good point. I’d expect no less from a law-abiding citizen such as yourself.
I can understand how you have a sense of security and freedom walking down the street when you are pretty sure you are the only guy packing.
But if everybody is packing, I think your sense of security and freedom would evaporate pretty quickly.
Do you really want your family’s security to depend on the speed of your draw?
this is a debate that no one can win. Kaveman understands that those of us who live in a metro area have a much different situation than he does.
Kave, while rural oregon sounds nice and pretty, a) i know about your wildfires, no thanks, b) for all the violence that comes with living in a city, there is also an upside that comes along with a ton of different people living around each other than i wouldn’t trade for anything.
I dont need you to defend your personal right to own a gun. if it works in your community great.. i would however say i disagree with your reaction of grabbing a shotgun when you heard your neighbor.. but thats just me. i don’t own a gun.. ive been mugged once, at knife point, and i was able to defend myself with training Ive gotten.
anyway…i think my point is, one rule for the entire nation is clearly not working. More guns than people in small town USA where everyone knows each other is just fine, but you apply that same variable to a large city, and you will have bloodshed on a massive scale.
You say you have no police force, and thats great that you dont need one, i pray you never do… it is important to remember however that when the constitution was written, giving people the right to defent itself, we didnt have anything like a civilian police force. there were militias and people “looked out for each other”. now we have a sector of the community who’s job it is to “look out for people” and while yes, some cops are corrupt and racist and fat, the basic idea of a polce department is so we dont all run around “serving justice”
i like Batman too, doesn’t make it any more legal and we are a nation of laws
I’m rambling….. my point?
keep your guns.. enjoy them and be safe.. if im ever in oregon and i feel that my berry patch is threatened i’ll know i have a friend there somewhere.
Here, guns are a major problem, and yes people will still try and kill each other but it is simply harder to do it with a knife or club. I dont want anyone who lives in a city .. meaning urban area where you vote for the mayor of that town of more than 10,000 to be able to buy or own a gun. if you have a registered gun and you move in, you have to surrender it for whatever you paid. if you refuse…. a fine or jail time. and while yes, Weer’d only the criminals will have guns, you wont have to wait for them to kill someone to call them a criminal and take their gun… you can just take it.
either that or as my favorite philosopher Chris Rock suggested make every bullet cost $5,000
If it’s slow at work, I’ll return. Gotta run
“make every bullet cost $5,000”
Hmmm, that would mean I would have $75 million worth of ammo. And that’s just the hermetically sealed stuff, not my stuff set aside for the range.
I might have to think about that one. Just kidding.
I guess with guns, where you stand depends on where you sit.
If we send a few busloads of knucklehead hoodlum thugs from the city out to live in kaveman’s Oregon town, with $500 gift certificates to the gun store in their pockets, the carry laws would be tightened up by the end of the month.
I’m not sure about that, anon. Most of those thugs don’t spend any time at the shooting range, because their guns are illegal. Given a shootout between Kaveman and the thugs, put your money on Geico Guy.
but the ACLU would go after him for not letting the thug express himself via “bullet speak”
That’s the answer I thought I’d get. But there wouldn’t be a shootout between kaveman and the thugs. Instead, you would have a few old ladies getting mugged here and there… the muggers would be caught and would go to jail. But you would still have these thuggy-looking guys hanging out all day on the street corner with LEGAL guns in their pockets.
H
to each his own
Wouldn’t need to. “knucklehead hoodlum thugs” can not, and will never be able to BUY guns from a gun shop. It’s already illigal, and has been since the 60s.
So nope, that’s a big fat straw-man right there. Also to point out, in Kaveman’s neck of the woods a hoodlum attempts to rob or rape or otherwise harm a person, sometimes they’ll get away with it, but other times they might find themselves staring down the barrel of a gun.
Crime is essentially a form of employment. Hood-rats make their living from taking from others who can’t match their display of strenth. That “career path” suddenly looks a whole lot different when you know that a mugging could net you $100 and some credit cards….or a hollow-point wound to the lung.
Boston and Seattle have almost the same population, similar weather (bitter cold Boston winter nights are fairly quiet as nobody wants to go outside to cause problems), more-or-less similar racial makeup. Seattle actually has MORE reported crime than Boston. But when one LOOKS at those crimes, Boston far-and-wide leads in VIOLENT crime, rape, murder, assault, and “Hot” robberies like muggings, home invasions, car jackings, while Seattle most of its crime deals with theft of unguarded property.
The biggest difference I can see between the two cities is one has reasonable conceal carry laws, the other has more restrictive laws that make it very difficult for the average person to have proper tools of protection.
This comparison works with most cities, BTW.
“knucklehead hoodlum thugs” can not, and will never be able to BUY guns from a gun shop. It’s already illigal, and has been since the 60s.
Really? Even if their only crime of record is a bad attitude?
Knucklehead hoodlum thugs can usually find a strawman to buy for them. Not every gun on the streets was stolen.
Look, I’m a liberal. I just know when a “solution” isn’t working, and our gun laws don’t work — nor can they, given the number of guns already on the streets.
The “gun nuts” are right — the guns might make the knucklehead hoodlum thugs MORE deadly than they might otherwise be, but the deadliness is there whether or not guns are involved.
the gun nuts claim the gun has nothing at all to do with the deadliness, a knife, or sharp pencil would be just as bad
ZZZZzzzz……
Register them all now.
Have a grace period, and afterward, if caught with an unregistered firearm, the sentence must be severe – like 5-7 years hard time.
You must put a stake in the ground; otherwise it will be the same ol shit happening again.
“Instead, you would have a few old ladies getting mugged here and there”
The little ol’ ladies here have more years of practice on the range than I do. That brings up a good point. Criminals will often attack those that they perceive as being weak. Little ol’ ladies certainly fit that stereo type.
It’s no different than a lion going after the scrawny impala with a gimpy leg rather the largest impala prancing about at the head of the pack. It’s a classic predator/prey dynamic seen thoughout the animal kingdom. Human predators are no different.
In all honesty, these thugs you speak of may actually be in more danger from grandma because they simply let there guard down, convinced she’s easy prey.
Even where the little ol’ ladies aren’t armed, you can bet a decent wager that grandpa is.
“Have a grace period, and afterward, if caught with an unregistered firearm, the sentence must be severe – like 5-7 years hard time.”
You mean like Chicago, Washington DC and Oakland does?
Along with ballistic testing – having your signature on bullet would make the user think twice about committing an armed crime.
We have the right to bear arms, but not a right to have it anyway we want it.
“Register them all now.”
One small problem I see there.
The 5th Amendment.
Criminals can not be forced to implicate themselves for committing a crime under the self-incrimination language of the 5th Amendment.
If a prohibited person were to attempt to register any type of firearm, they would be providing evidence angainst themseleves. Therefore, prohibited persons would be exempt from any registration scheme.
That is why they the District Attorneys charge them with “felon in possesion” for example, rather than possesion of an unregistered firearm where these laws already exist in the crime free paradises listed in my last post.
At the end of the day, only people who have the right to own a firearm can be compelled to register it under any future law and the criminals can not only get a good chuckle over it, but will gain legal protection to some degree for their future illegal activities.
Things that “sound good” to some people usually are more complex of an issue.
Gun control is awash with this dynamic.
“the gun nuts claim the gun has nothing at all to do with the deadliness, a knife, or sharp pencil would be just as bad”
Oddly enugh 30 guns gathered in a Metro-Boston steakhouse last night and nobody was killed, yet a boy was stabbed to death in Boston on the very same night.
A screwdriver in the hand of a violent criminal is far more dangerous than the gun in the hand of a law abiding person just looking to keep a tool of personal protection handy.
Hell just look at the numbers of murders happening in prisons. Tooth Brushes, soda cans, bare hands, broom handles, ect. The will to kill is the dangerous part.
“Really? Even if their only crime of record is a bad attitude?”
If that’s the worst they’ve managed to do in their 21+ years, that’s called an “Innocent person”.
Are you telling me that besides the 2nd Amendement you the 5th and 6th are subject to restriction by you?
I thought about that issue before.
The choice of non-compliance is an option. And, of course, that comes with the risk of more prison time.
At that point, you’d think the gun would be at the bottom of a river….
“Along with ballistic testing – having your signature on bullet would make the user think twice about committing an armed crime.”
Despite the popular catch phrase in the media, Guns do not have “ballistic fingerprints” in a true sense.
The finger prints on your fingers will grow back in an identical fashion due to wear and tear and injuries.
The tool marks of a firearm erode slowly over time and do not grow back because they are dead lumps of steel.
Any criminal can take any firearm and alter this “ballistic fingerprint” with a nickels worth of sand paper and a little elbow grease. Parts can even be bought seperately and replaced entirely.
Any marking on the bullet as well can be defeated in the same manner.
we are talking about how easy it is for criminals to get guns christ. it is like arguing with a pair of pants
The purpose wouldn’t be to catch criminals but to protect the gun owners who do everything right in the first place….
I understand that the rifling can be modified, but to make the exception the rule, and say ‘to hell with it all’, is a lame excuse.
If it’s all about no oversight at all, then there’s really no reason to debate this. But if persons on all sides of the argument agree that some measures have to be taken, then a starting point is necessary…that’s all I’m saying about the registration idea….
The 2nd amendment specifically says “well-regulated” – the text itself suggests that the right to bear arms was vital but not unlimited. Currently, the right to bear arms is subject to a number of regulations, some of which were supported by the NRA.
If we all accept that there are some restrictions, we ought to be able to talk to each other about whether existing regulations are adequate or if additional ones would be effective. Unfortunately, this issue makes too many of us put on our partisan hats and our boxing gloves and get emotional.
This is what Jason means when he says it’s a button issue. Clearly, additional gun restrictions aren’t the only way to tackle crime and suicide issues. Without the ability to have dialogue on the issue, we’re just going to have to table it for now. Let’s get back to fiscal regulation, health care, peacecraft, emissions reduction, etc.
I’m not saying “to hell with it all’
But the issue is indeed more complex than most realize.
No ballistic data base is 100% effective at finding a perfect match, case closed.
What the systems do is provides all the images which are likely candidates for a match. From this computer generated list, a living breathing forensic examiner must go through and examine each to make a determination.
That takes time and resources. If the data base were expanded to a federal system including all firearms, that dog don’t hunt.
Very conservative estimate of 200 million guns in the country legally. I’ve seen stats as high as 280 million but oh well.
Given all the different calibers which could serve as an initial filter for any such system, let’s say the number of 9mm’s in the system is only 1 million guns.
Now let’s say that the system is good enough to eliminate 99.9 percent of the images as definitely not being a match candidate.
That still means a living breathing forensics examiner would still have to compare 1000 rounds with the ol’ microscope.
If he spent 5 minutes on each round, it would take an individual more that 83 hours to find ONE match.
BTW, no system out there is even close to being 99.9% effective.
This from wiki…
A California Department of Justice survey, using 742 guns used by the California Highway Patrol as a test bed, showed very poor results; even with such a limited database, less than 70% of cases of the same make as the “fingerprint” case yielded the correct gun in the top 15 matches; when a different make of ammunition was used, the success rate dropped to less than 40%.
Doing a simple cost benefit anaysis, money would be more wisely spent on other LEO uses than a national registration scheme.
“If a prohibited person were to attempt to register any type of firearm, they would be providing evidence angainst themseleves. Therefore, prohibited persons would be exempt from any registration scheme.”
Clearly you are not a lawyer. This is some idiot’s idea of how the law works, not how it actually does, and sounds like some bullshit peddled by your lobbyists.
Unfortunately, when push comes to shove you are just another bunch of sheep — you merely have a different shepherd.
No ballistic data base is 100% effective at finding a perfect match, case closed.
Unless you’re Arlen Spector.
56 comments and nobody thought that the fact that I knew a 7th grader here in Delaware that killed his stepmom with a gun made from a kit was comment worthy.
That’s why I hate these threads.
it’s too heavy for most of the wingnuts to comprehend.
Jason, I figured if you had a link you would have posted it.
So, who was it? Any links? Did he ever steal your lunch money? Did you see the kit? Was his stepmom wicked like in the Fairy Tales? Why did he do it? Did he get away with claiming it was an accident? Where was his Dad in all this? Does a. price want to personally castrate him?
too late.
Awwwwwww, c’mon. Maybe it isn’t really true, then…..hmmmmm 😉
“56 comments and nobody thought that the fact that I knew a 7th grader here in Delaware that killed his stepmom with a gun made from a kit was comment worthy.”
No you just ignored my comments on it, Jason. Typical, really.
“If we all accept that there are some restrictions, we ought to be able to talk to each other about whether existing regulations are adequate or if additional ones would be effective. Unfortunately, this issue makes too many of us put on our partisan hats and our boxing gloves and get emotional.”
I compeatly agree, X Stryker. Just nobody is actually presenting any ideas but us gunnies looking to streamline our effective laws, eliminate non-effective laws, and use the added money to provide more police to actually stop CRIMINALS that are the real problem here.
So do you have any ideas? I’d love to talk about them.
BTW, Jason, you signed off on this thread at #15.
You can’t stop now that you woke up and came back!
no A1 i would just want it legalized.
Jason,
Was she a MILF?
Jesus, I hope there’s an inside joke I’m missing, otherwise you guys appear to be dancing on the grave of a dead woman!
“That’s why I hate these threads.”
Thanks for clearing that up. I thought it was because you routinely get your ass trounced by facts and logic.
Now now, Miscreant, He just gives up and runs away to be a good sport to us. He could win if he REALLY wanted to *snicker*.
I love these threads because they illustrate so perfectly how the anti-freedom, pro-ignorance crowd works, and that they are in fact a religion, not any sort of rational movement.
Guns are not bad, it is the people carrying that use it for some purpose. some carry guns for protection others for oppression.
thanks for sharing a great article.