Gun Talk - News, Laws, etc.

[allegro]

It's astonishing, worrying, and very very sad that such a key issue in contemporary US policy and every day life (and 30000 deaths a year) are determined by a paranoid fantasy that the government will turn against you and come get you - and that your guns will save you.

You threw the British out 200 years ago. Get over it.

No no, you're misunderstanding. These Americans aren't actually afraid of "the Government" in the way we know our Government, now, taking over; they're afraid of a rogue group TAKING OVER our Government, which is very vulnerable to a takeover. Said rogue group could be some American crazy internal militant group, or it could be something like this current ISIS which is threatening to not stop until "an ISIS flag is hanging in the White House." Once said group takes control, it would have full access to all of those military sites and toys, and could also have plants in the police forces (now fully militarized) across the country. Not that I believe all of this. mind you, but given that our Government still has nuclear missiles on farms using computers that still use giant floppies*, and a grid that uses archaic security, it's not impossible. Any really tech-savvy foreign group could hack into our financial grids and bring us to our knees. Hell, hackers easily fuck with us because we're still the last stupid country using mag strips on credit and debit cards. Anyway, whatever "Government" people are "afraid of," it's not the current inept Congress etc. They're mostly afraid of a religious extremest group taking over our Government and country, i.e. something like ISIS.

*

But the equipment is ancient. This, for example, is one of the computers that would receive a launch order from the president. It uses floppy disks! The really old, big ones.

http://www.cbsnews.com/news/whos-min...clear-weapons/

[DigitalChaos]

See #4 and #5 here:
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2010/0...cond-Amendment

[allegro]

(Something to note: Remember September 11th and the weapons that the terrorists used? Box cutters. They went right through the metal detectors; months of pre-planning, flight lessons where they only learned how to take off but not land, etc. And their only weapons were cheap box cutters; and jumbo jets filled with fuel. But their targets caused financial disasters. The WTC, a financial center, and the Pentagon which is the world's largest government office building [and probably a secondary target when they couldn't actually find the White House through the trees]. My point is that it wasn't that hard for them to catch us off guard and cause all that damage and hit us really hard. With a fucking box cutter.) Anyway, your stupid Uzi won't mean shit if that happens, except to keep looters away from your cash and toilet paper, but your giant toilet paper supply and your safe of cash and your wine cellar will probably be very useful.

[DigitalChaos]

Any really tech-savvy foreign group could hack into our financial grids and bring us to our knees. H

It's no coincidence that the overwhelming majority of people who work in the security field are also very big fans of the 2nd Amendment. But it certainly goes beyond this in terms of theoretical protections against the government.

[screwdriver]

Anyway, your stupid Uzi won't mean shit if that happens, except to keep looters away from your cash and toilet paper, but your giant toilet paper supply and your safe of cash and your wine cellar will probably be very useful.

that actually sounds pretty important then

[allegro]

that actually sounds pretty important then

Shotgun would be a cheaper and more effective way to protect the TP and wine. The ammo is a lot cheaper. A simple small semi-auto would be good, too, with some extra magazines. One of those really cool panic rooms would be cool, too. A panic room / wine cellar.

[Dra508]

. A panic room / wine cellar.

I want one of those.

[Timinator]

The problem with this approach is that it fucks over the individuals who don't fall in the median of the data. That said, at least this is a MUCH better approach than the typical emotionally lead legislation we are used to seeing.

Is it a sufficiently better approach that you'd support it?

And who gives a sweet fuck about the individuals who are "fucked over" because they don't fall in the median of the data?

[DigitalChaos]

Shotgun would be a cheaper and more effective way to protect the TP and wine. The ammo is a lot cheaper. A simple small semi-auto would be good, too, with some extra magazines. One of those really cool panic rooms would be cool, too. A panic room / wine cellar.

Yup!
Shotgun is pretty much the best "if I could only pick one" weapons. They also have the best stopping power and a huge variety of ammo that you can feed it. Their primary disadvantage is their length. If you are navigating through a home or going to be very close to an intruder, that length can really screw you. That's where the hand gun advantage comes in... and it's that advantage where submachine guns like Uzis come in best for self defense (ignoring all legality). To quote Biggy... "I used to have the trey-deuce And the deuce-deuce in my bubblegoose Now I got the Mac in my knapsack." Dude knew when to upgrade his .32 and .22 hand guns to a Mac-10 :P


But seriously, I'm totally with you in terms of the consumables, solar panels, and cash (instead of gold) perspective. I've got a small collection of stuff in my earthquake kit. Personal defense starts with a 16oz can of "crowd control" style pepper spray.

[DigitalChaos]

I want one of those.

Doubles as a S&M room!

[allegro]

Dude, there's always the sawed-off shotgun.

[DigitalChaos]

Is it a sufficiently better approach that you'd support it?

I absolutely support using science and research over knee-jerk proposals (like we saw during the post-SandyHook days). You aren't going to get a solitary answer with that route though. You will get a multitude of potential paths and you need to explore all potential options. You need to also balance it against some basic philosophical concepts too... Like, you could absolutely "solve" certain issues with an insanely authoritarian response, but is that actually the right response? etc...

And who gives a sweet fuck about the individuals who are "fucked over" because they don't fall in the median of the data?

um, what?

[DigitalChaos]

Dude, there's always the sawed-off shotgun.

sits in the same legal category as the sub machine guns, but hell yea. Might as well make it a bullpup design to so you aren't wasting any length on that stock! :P

[allegro]

Illegal, yeah, and yucky recoil. Which is also the problem with a shotgun (recoil). I have a friend with an AR-15 who's offered to let me shoot it at the range. (So we can protect our wine cellars, cash, Spam and tp.) This video sums up what he says



I'm totally serious about my solar panels; I fucking hate the electric company.

[DigitalChaos]

And while we are on this topic, have any of you guys watched Doomsday Preppers on National Geographic? The people on there are FUCKING INSANE to comical levels. My favorite was that extremely trollish kid who thought he was able to give his wife a C-Section and then built his own "body armor" and tested it out... on his own body.. while his friend fired a shotgun at it. He called himself an "apex predator" who would be there to loot everyone's stuff. ... yea... that guy was later caught by the cops because he wasn't supposed to be anywhere near a gun. He is a convicted of a felony. Something about sexually assaulting a minor.



anyway, if you want to get some massive schadenfreude on, watch that episode.

[DigitalChaos]

Illegal, yeah, and yucky recoil. Which is also the problem with a shotgun (recoil). I have a friend with an AR-15 who's offered to let me shoot it at the range. (So we can protect our wine cellars, cash, Spam and tp.) This video sums up what he says



I'm totally serious about my solar panels; I fucking hate the electric company.

That's extremely true. There are a lot of different needs that change what gun is best. I've heard great things about AR-15's for home defense when it comes to light-weight shooters, less-practiced shooters, or really anyone. I haven't looked up the numbers (if they exist) but it tends to be a favorite for many women as a home defense weapon. I actually built one about a year ago (completely legally, mind anyone reading this) from scratch, but have yet to bring it to the range. I have a feeling it may completely change my opinion on what the best weapon is for general home defense. I'd be curious what you think of it if you get a chance to try one.

I'd love to hear more about the solar setup. If I ever get to buying a home, that's one of my projects. Right now, I just have enough panels and batteries to keep a few cellphones and a laptop running. Most of my earthquake kit doubles as camping gear

[Timinator]

I absolutely support using science and research over knee-jerk proposals (like we saw during the post-SandyHook days). You aren't going to get a solitary answer with that route though. You will get a multitude of potential paths and you need to explore all potential options. You need to also balance it against some basic philosophical concepts too... Like, you could absolutely "solve" certain issues with an insanely authoritarian response, but is that actually the right response? etc...

Indeed.

Do you agree that this is exactly what all western nations except the US have done? That previously gun-toting regions like Europe, Canada, and Australia have learned that in the modern world, where very few of us are subsistence hunters, there's very little point to owning a gun? That even in areas where gun ownership is high there are still significant regulations about how guns can be kept and obtained?

I maintain that there is a solitary route to be found via the evidence, and the philosophical concepts are easily considered and addressed, and no "insanely" authoritarian response has been required. The rest of the developed world has done it. The US has no good* reason not to follow.

um, what?

Did I mis-type?

You said: "this approach [weighing up the greater good]...fucks over the individuals who don't fall in the median of the data."
I said: "Who gives a fuck?"
Seriously: what I initially said is that children cannot be trusted with guns, or cars, or the vote. If there are a few responsible children who could properly handle those things, so what? You have to allow something dangerous because it's unfair to those few? No, that's ludicrous. You can't build societies on that, you can only build hypersensitive individualists. This is not a tyranny of the majority: those few stable, wise children are not being oppressed. So I'll say it again: who gives a fuck about what a few outliers are or aren't allowed to do based on sound reasoning and application of a blanket rule?

*There are lots of stupid reasons.

[DigitalChaos]

Indeed.

Do you agree that this is exactly what all western nations except the US have done? That previously gun-toting regions like Europe, Canada, and Australia have learned that in the modern world, where very few of us are subsistence hunters, there's very little point to owning a gun? That even in areas where gun ownership is high there are still significant regulations about how guns can be kept and obtained?

I maintain that there is a solitary route to be found via the evidence, and the philosophical concepts are easily considered and addressed, and no "insanely" authoritarian response has been required. The rest of the developed world has done it. The US has no good* reason not to follow.


Did I mis-type?

You said: "this approach [weighing up the greater good]...fucks over the individuals who don't fall in the median of the data."
I said: "Who gives a fuck?"
Seriously: what I initially said is that children cannot be trusted with guns, or cars, or the vote. If there are a few responsible children who could properly handle those things, so what? You have to allow something dangerous because it's unfair to those few? No, that's ludicrous. You can't build societies on that, you can only build hypersensitive individualists. This is not a tyranny of the majority: those few stable, wise children are not being oppressed. So I'll say it again: who gives a fuck about what a few outliers are or aren't allowed to do based on sound reasoning and application of a blanket rule?

*There are lots of stupid reasons.

Gun ownership goes way beyond hunting.

There aren't really any good reason to follow other countries either. There has been no heavy indication that the gun control had a positive impact when you look at things like total violent crime rates over time, etc. Some countries show a benefit, some show a negative.... it's just not clear. This has a great examination into that data to show how it isn't anywhere near conclusive: http://www.law.harvard.edu/students/...useronline.pdf


I simply disagree with you in terms of throwing the people under the bus in the name of the subjective greater good. That kind of mentality breeds all kinds of horrible things, including mediocrity. Doing something like that requires an extremely high bar of certainty and deliberation.

[DigitalChaos]

As Police Get More Militarized, Bill In Congress Would Make Owning Body Armor Punishable By Up To 10 Years In Prison
https://www.techdirt.com/articles/20...s-prison.shtml


Think about this... that body armor isn't going to harm anyone. The only goal of this bill is to make it easier for police to put holes in your body. The commentary on /r/politics (usually extremely democrat leaning) is very interesting.

So just to be clear... It's perfectly OK for my neighbor to purchase all the guns that he wants (that have the potential to end life) because the Bill of Rights protects his Right to Bear Arms, but I shouldn't own something that might protect me which in no way infringes on someone else's rights‽ Interesting...

Ahh, So owning a gun, that's a right... protecting yourself from guns & gunfire that's a crime. Is this the point where i realize i am in the twilight zone?

As a firefighter and EMT this bothers me a lot. With the recent increase in targeting of first responders many members of our fire department and the local EMS services have purchased their own body armor (bullet resistant vests) for use while responding to calls. This law would almost certainly prevent them from purchasing their own body armor. In many areas the cost of vests for everyone is just not feasible but a surplus vest is definitely a worthwhile purchase for an individual to make. I realize this is just a small counterpoint but I feel it is a very important one.

[Dra508]

That kind of mentality breeds all kinds of horrible things, including mediocrity.

What? I'm sorry, I'm confused.

[DigitalChaos]

What? I'm sorry, I'm confused.

"Censorship is telling a man he can't have a steak just because a baby can't chew it."
- Mark Twain

[Timinator]

Gun ownership goes way beyond hunting.

There aren't really any good reason to follow other countries either. There has been no heavy indication that the gun control had a positive impact when you look at things like total violent crime rates over time, etc. Some countries show a benefit, some show a negative.... it's just not clear. This has a great examination into that data to show how it isn't anywhere near conclusive: http://www.law.harvard.edu/students/...useronline.pdf

I simply disagree with you in terms of throwing the people under the bus in the name of the subjective greater good. That kind of mentality breeds all kinds of horrible things, including mediocrity. Doing something like that requires an extremely high bar of certainty and deliberation.

In what feasible ways does gun ownership go beyond hunting?

You have cherry-picked a single study. I posted one a couple of pages back that showed exactly the opposite result. You are wrong: if you look at the research in total the data is conclusive. Check out Google Scholar for an across the board picture.
"Considerable research in an international context suggests that there is a relationship between access to firearms and deaths and injuries caused by firearms."
This is the kind of public-health-based research I was talking about.
The UN has, as is its remit, looked at the data available around its member nations and recommended that everyone implement gun regulations.

And I wasn't talking about "total violent crime rates". I was talking about deaths: homicides, suicides, and accidental deaths. These things are demonstrably higher in the US than elsewhere.

Look, I won't deny that there are conflating factors. There are historical and political reasons why the US is violent and individualist (a recent frontier nation, overzealous Protestantism, Manifest Destiny, etc). There are some other countries with high-ish rates of gun ownership where we don't shoot each other all the time. And there are violent countries without high rates of gun ownership. The number and availability of guns is not the only thing that explains why your country is where it is. But it is one big thing that explains it.

There's a big difference between disallowing children from target shooting (which is what we were discussing in that point) and "throwing people under the bus". As I tried to pre-emptively say, this is not a tyranny of the majority. We're not denying someone their liberty, or denigrating their race, or preventing them from getting a job. We're telling them that their chosen pastime carries with it too much risk to be permitted. It's why we don't let random people blow things up with dynamite even if they've demonstrated they're careful with it. Its why we don't allow people to smoke inside public buildings any more even if some people will be OK with short-term exposure.

As I said above: the rest of the world has already ascertained that the "extremely high bar of certainty and deliberation" has been met. The US can (and, I expect, will) continue to ignore this, maintain that it's Exceptionally Different From Every Other Similar Place In The World, and therefore continue to allow its citizens to kill themselves in alarming numbers. Enjoy.

[allegro]

In the US, we mostly have guns to protect our homes and our "stuff." This has actually been cited by the Supreme Court of the United States as the primary reasons for the 2nd Amendment.

Also, I don't think we've reached Honduran levels quite yet. We'll have to practice some more. I'll be in my panic room wine cellar.

[Timinator]

Save me a bottle of panicky Cabernet Franc.

[Dra508]

And this is why I believe that Americans should travel inside and outside the US more. We are poor listeners.

[Sarah K]

http://journalstar.com/news/state-an...ac59167e4.html

I posted a while back that a 9 year old shot his 4 year old brother after the school had warned the parents to not have weapons around him.

The mother's boyfriend just got sentenced to 59 - 60 months in prison. The mother gets sentenced at the end of next month.

I'm really glad that they are being held accountable.

[DigitalChaos]

Cody Wilson's trollish PR hits performance art levels with this one. The uproar coming from people who have so divorced themselves from basic human creation is amazing. Wait until they learn that you can do the same thing with a common hand tool that goes for under $80.

The $1,200 Machine That Lets Anyone Make a Metal Gun at Home
http://www.wired.com/2014/10/cody-wilson-ghost-gunner/

[DigitalChaos]

Good news for the Philly lady who got completely screwed over by having her handgun while traveling in NJ. Yes, the NRA helped out here too.

http://www.nbcphiladelphia.com/news/...276985861.html

for those not familiar with the story:


All because of an "illegal lane shift"... another case of "don't talk to the police"

[DigitalChaos]

Woman who posted to reddit for advice about a stalker shoots him just days later after he kicks in her door.
"I hear his scream, his disbelief that I’d stood up for myself.”
http://fox2now.com/2014/10/03/woman-...up-for-myself/


Earlier reddit posts asking for advice. See how little police were able to do for her over 6 months. It was so bad her neighbors tried to have her evicted because THEY didn't feel safe.
Anyone had success with private investigators?
and
Stalker following me. Job going down the drain. Life falling apart. Please advice.


Of course, she gets the armchair dipshits whining that "she didn't use a warning shot" ...

[green]

If someone is stupid enough to either break into my home or try to rob me, then I'll use my .38 to blow the stupid right out of their head. It's not theory nor is it complicated, the reality is gun advocacy is quite simple.