Gun Control Thread- Should we?

[mlmpetert]

Originally Posted by firstdown

I agree you should not be able to buy any guns or ammo over the internet. While I'm for the right to own guns I also think we could improve our laws. Here in Va I'd like to see a back ground checks done for even personal gun sales. As it is today any individual can sell a gun to another individual without a back ground check of any kind. Most people have heard of the Gun Show loophole and that's it because individuals also sell guns at these shows.

I buy all my guns this way whenever possible. While i think it would be ridiculous to require a background check for private sales i would be okay with a law that says you have to personally know someone or show an ID to buy a gun. Or maybe if no ID is avialable you have to write a reciept.

[Alvin Walton]

Originally Posted by SmootSmack

To your second question first, I don't think it should be so easy at a WalMart either but there's no screening at all on the Internet. You say you're a 40 some year old man from Michigan, you could be a 12 year girl in Budapest for all I know.

To your first question, I know where you're going with this. As you already did in the other thread. But I don't know what the need is to have a rapid fire weapon like that.

I have bought ammo on the internet.
I had to register with the buyer first, and supply a fair amount of info.
Then I had to provide a copy of my scanned drivers license and have a matching shipping address for the delivery.
So your Budapest comments are way off.

And I still dont think you know what an "assault weapon" is because they fire as rapidly as a lot of deer rifles. And the large magazine debate is pretty stoopid since they are so easy to modify.

The "need " is - they are a freakin riot of fun to shoot on the range.
And since I'm harmless and practice gun safety like a lot of other guys, why deprive me.

And your I dont know comment that I have marked in red is because you know very little (at least thats the perception you give me) about firearms and the shooting community in general.
And if this is true I would prefer people like you not voting on gun issues.

[SmootSmack]

Originally Posted by skinsguy

If jumping to conclusions was an Olympic sport, you would have already won the gold.

Obviously I did not say the answer is to let everyone have a gun. I'm saying it's fruitless to argue gun laws, since criminals do not follow law anyway. All the gun laws do is keep an honest man honest. Period.

And while the theater massacre was horrific and something that I hope never happens again, there was no absolute way of preventing this guy from doing what he did. Even if gun laws were more strict, he would have gotten his material some other way. If he was psychotic enough to kill a bunch of innocent people, what makes you think he would not have used illegal means to obtain his weapons? It's a moot point.

Go back to ES, jerk!

Seriously though...I quoted the wrong person

[RedskinRat]

Originally Posted by Alvin Walton

And since I'm harmless and practice gun safety like a lot of other guys, why deprive me.

Because society is now decided by the lowest, most inept common denominator.

Thin the fricken herd, already!

[SmootSmack]

Originally Posted by Alvin Walton

I have bought ammo on the internet.
I had to register with the buyer first, and supply a fair amount of info.
Then I had to provide a copy of my scanned drivers license and have a matching shipping address for the delivery.
So your Budapest comments are way off.

And I still dont think you know what an "assault weapon" is because they fire as rapidly as a lot of deer rifles. And the large magazine debate is pretty stoopid since they are so easy to modify.

The "need " is - they are a freakin riot of fun to shoot on the range.
And since I'm harmless and practice gun safety like a lot of other guys, why deprive me.

Well thanks for educating me on the Internet piece.

As for the "need"...we can't always have what we want.

But whatever, it's a culture I just don't understand.

[mredskins]

Originally Posted by SmootSmack

Well thanks for educating me on the Internet piece.

As for the "need"...we can't always have what we want.

But whatever, it's a culture I just don't understand.

I think we are on the same page on this issue but in order for us as country to start getting along better we need to learn/understand the otherside, not take a whatever atittude.

As far as the assualt rifles firstdown hit it on the head they are fun for some and I get that. I be pissed if they outlawed high performance cars because some nuts killed people with them. Are fast cars necassry? Nope, but they are as fun as hell.

[MTK]

Cars aren't built with an intent to kill though. That's where that type of argument comes up short for me.

[RedskinRat]

Originally Posted by Mattyk

Cars aren't built with an intent to kill though. That's where that type of argument comes up short for me.

Then, rationally, we should be WAY more careful with something that isn't designed to kill and yet does.

[Alvin Walton]

Originally Posted by Mattyk

Cars aren't built with an intent to kill though. That's where that type of argument comes up short for me.

A lot of guns US manufacturers make that fit the assault gun profile aren't intended for killing either.

[MTK]

Originally Posted by Alvin Walton

A lot of guns US manufacturers make that fit the assault gun profile aren't intended for killing either.

In general, firearms are made with the intent of injuring/killing. Let's not kid ourselves.

[mredskins]

Originally Posted by Mattyk

Cars aren't built with an intent to kill though. That's where that type of argument comes up short for me.

Yes they may not have the intent to kill; but most LEO's will tell you that is the most dangerous thing you can give a person.

[Alvin Walton]

Originally Posted by Mattyk

In general, firearms are made with the intent of injuring/killing. Let's not kid ourselves.

Thats hardly an accurate statement painted with a pretty broad stroke.
I could poke a million holes in that.

[MTK]

Originally Posted by mredskins

Yes they may not have the intent to kill; but most LEO's will tell you that is the most dangerous thing you can give a person.

Well of course, but we're talking about two separate issues.

[MTK]

Originally Posted by Alvin Walton

Thats hardly an accurate statement.
I could poke a million holes in that.

Ok so what's the intent of most firearms? Educate me. Outside of shooting targets for sport, there's not much else they're used for that doesn't involve killing humans or animals as far as I see.

[mredskins]

Originally Posted by Mattyk

Ok so what's the intent of most firearms? Educate me. Outside of shooting targets for sport, there's not much else they're used for that doesn't involve killing humans or animals as far as I see.

Shooting targets is fun and hunting is legal. Why should that be taken away from responsible people?

Bad guys will find ways to kill; heck look no further the 9/11; no guns used there