- This topic has 335 replies, 42 voices, and was last updated 8 years, 11 months ago by
paramount.
-
AuthorPosts
-
December 18, 2012 at 12:30 PM #756578December 18, 2012 at 12:42 PM #756580
ucodegen
Participant[quote=Blogstar]Fertilizer, Now there is something you guys can fight the government with. It’s no longer easy to get bomb grade fertilizer. Where’s the pro liberty lobby on that one? I am sure some of our freedom fighters can answer that.[/quote]Ammonium Nitrate is easy to get. What was limited is the quantity. You used to be able to get it in 50lb bags in the non-farm states, non-farm areas. When I was growing up, we had a 50lb bag we used on our trees. Ammonium Nitrate is not the same as compost from manure (one is white, the other is brown). Nitrates help plants grow, and Ammonia is a base, which helps de-acidify soil. Soil that has compost in it tends to be slightly acidic. Good for some plants, bad for others.
December 18, 2012 at 12:44 PM #756581ParticipantSo we limit our rights to bear arms because some mad-man or psychopath might get a hold of one, but ignore the consequences when the a mad-man or psychopath obtains political power either through force or election. It has happened before and will happen again.
December 18, 2012 at 12:45 PM #756582Aecetia
ParticipantRegarding gun control- that genie is not going back into the bottle. “The prospect of a renewed assault weapons ban in the wake of the Connecticut school massacre has set of a round of buying, as thousands of Americans head to their local gun store to secure the popular AR-15 — the model used by the school gunman — before potential government prohibitions on their purchase.”
Read more: http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2012/12/18/gun-sales-surge-after-connecticut-massacre/#ixzz2FRHgGCFO
“Venezuela recently entered a deal giving them the license to produce the current AK-103 rifle. Venezuela currently is the largest user of the Russian AK-103 rifle with around 100,000 rifles being used by all branches of their military.”
http://www.armoryblog.com/firearms/rifles/venezuela-now-making-ak-103-rifles/
December 18, 2012 at 12:45 PM #756583Participant[quote=Blogstar]When the government wants the guns the government will take most of them. What makes YOU think it will be different?[/quote]This is the whole purpose of gun registration.
December 18, 2012 at 12:54 PM #756586ParticipantHere is a list of school violence related to psych. meds:
December 18, 2012 at 12:54 PM #756584enron_by_the_sea
Participant[quote=Allan from Fallbrook]Enron: Again, I have no issue with restrictions on purchasing weapons, and there are laws/regulations on the books to prevent certain types of weapons, like fully automatic, along with screening potential problem purchasers (see ATF Form 4473).
Do I believe more could be done? Absolutely. Only 11 states have waiting periods. This should be nationwide. While the 4473 form requires info that’s turned over to NICS (a national criminal database), this could be tightened up as well.
The problem here is that you are only offering sweeping generalities. I’ve been a responsible gun owner my entire adult life and I will not voluntarily submit to my weapons being confiscated solely based on the whims of a hysterical electorate.
[/quote]Allan, I have no doubt that you have been responsible and our positions may not even be that far apart.
What I have issue with is people who claim that they have unlimited freedom to do whatever they want as far as firearms are concerned. The fact is that our every other freedom has reasonable limits on it and I believe that firearms should not be an exception. I believe that you will agree. I also have issue with people who say current system needs no change, clearly because it is so obvious that it has failed – We owe it to our future generations to find a solution!
Once we accept that we do not have unlimited freedoms with firearms we can reach a middle ground where responsible owners can own them while we minimize the damage they cause in the hands of bad guys. And we we can achieve that without banning everything – but by definition some limits will be placed even on responsible owners.
We can discuss all kind of things listed bellow. I am not for everything and on some I have no position. But I think they are all reasonable suggestions to consider.
(a) Should certain firearms have no utility in civilan hands? ( We can do better job on defining them)
(b) Should we allow high capacity magazines?
(c) Should we allow sales over the internet?
(d) should there be waiting periods and background checks and mental health checks before you are allowed to buy certain firearms?
(e) Should we mandate locks where kids are in the house?
(f) Should there be electronic registry of certain firearms?
(g) Should we hold manufacturers and owners liable for bad conduct?
(h) Should we mandate certain design changes in firearms sold to civilians?
(f) Should we regulate private party sales and gun-shows more tightly?
(g) What purpose does “pen-carry” serve?You can add your own and you may disagree with many but a sane discussion is the one where we discuss all this so that you don’t need to even think about banning firearms outright.
If there is a will there is way. However the reality is that NRA and certain people would not have good-faith discussion about anything on this list.
December 18, 2012 at 1:01 PM #756585no_such_reality
Participant[quote]
(a) Should certain firearms have no utility in civilan hands? ( We can do better job on defining them)
(b) Should we allow high capacity magazines?
(c) Should we allow sales over the internet?
(d) should there be waiting periods and background checks and mental health checks before you are allowed to buy certain firearms?
(e) Should we mandate locks where kids are in the house?
(f) Should there be electronic registry of certain firearms?
(g) Should we hold manufacturers and owners liable for bad conduct?
(h) Should we mandate certain design changes in firearms sold to civilians?
[/quote]a) might slightly lower the body count
b) probably wouldn’t change the body count.
c) wouldn’t have changed the body count. Not material in the tragedy at hand.
d) wouldn’t have changed the body count. not a waiting period crime. California is already 10 days.
e) wouldn’t change the body count.
f) wouldn’t change the body count.
g) wouldn’t change the body count. might eventually make legally obtained weapons more rate.
h) might lower the body count.December 18, 2012 at 1:11 PM #756588Participant[quote=Aecetia]Here is a list of school violence related to psych. meds:
http://ssristories.com/index.php?p=school%5B/quote%5DAnother drug may start appearing on the list.. it is starting to be used off-label for things including PTSD. It is Olanzapine. It has some pretty nasty side effects. It also tends to make the patient ‘disassociative’ and zombie like, as well as irritable. The reason why pharma is pushing it can be seen in the price. Generic Olanzapine goes for about $1000/month.
December 18, 2012 at 1:13 PM #756589SK in CV
Participant[quote=Aecetia]Regarding gun control- that genie is not going back into the bottle. “The prospect of a renewed assault weapons ban in the wake of the Connecticut school massacre has set of a round of buying, as thousands of Americans head to their local gun store to secure the popular AR-15 — the model used by the school gunman — before potential government prohibitions on their purchase.”
[/quote]
Interesting, stock in both Sturm Ruger and Smith & Wesson are off 20% since Friday.
December 18, 2012 at 1:26 PM #756591ParticipantWhat did lower the body count?
Victoria Soto.
A posthumous,Presidential Medal of Freedom is in order, IMHO.
December 18, 2012 at 2:25 PM #756596UCGal
Participant[quote=sdduuuude]Safety itself is not an illusion.
The illusion is thinking that certain things make you safe when they don’t.
One may feel that laws or guns or people to protect you make you safe. In actuality what makes you safe is a society in which people derive little or no benefit from harming others.[/quote]
This.December 18, 2012 at 2:27 PM #756598Allan from Fallbrook
Participant[quote=enron_by_the_sea]
(a) Should certain firearms have no utility in civilan hands? ( We can do better job on defining them)
(b) Should we allow high capacity magazines?
(c) Should we allow sales over the internet?
(d) should there be waiting periods and background checks and mental health checks before you are allowed to buy certain firearms?
(e) Should we mandate locks where kids are in the house?
(f) Should there be electronic registry of certain firearms?
(g) Should we hold manufacturers and owners liable for bad conduct?
(h) Should we mandate certain design changes in firearms sold to civilians?
(f) Should we regulate private party sales and gun-shows more tightly?
(g) What purpose does “pen-carry” serve?[/quote]
Enron: Thanks for the reasoned response, and we are probably closer on this issue than apart. In terms of your list above, it would appear that (a) and (h) are somewhat connected, especially when it comes to “military-style” assault weapons. The main design change (and the most important) is that these weapons are semi-automatic, versus the full-auto versions found in the military. While there is a legitimate question concerning whether or not the average citizen should own one, I would point out that, statistically speaking, these weapons are among the most popular in the country, but are involved in a miniscule number of deaths/murders each year. This brings up the question of whether or not to ban them would have any material effect at all.
(b) I’m not for limiting magazine size and for two reasons: (1) It’s a personal responsibility issue and (2) The Clinton-era ban showed zero efficacy in this regard (lower capacity weapons didn’t lessen crime rate or casualties).
(c) Absolutely not. I have no problem with ammo sales over the internet, but NOT gun sales. On this topic, it’s my understanding that one has to pick up the purchased weapon at an ATF licensed dealer and fill out an ATF 4473
(d) Yes, all states should have a waiting period. As far as background checks go, the ATF 4473 is submitted electronically to NICS, which is a national criminal database. How successfully this system works is unknown to me. The 4473 does query you regarding mental health issues, but I’m fairly certain that there is NOT a national database for this. There should be, IMHO.
(e) Absolutely, yes.
(f) Oh, hell no. What weapons I own and where they’re kept is NONE of the government’s business.
(g) Manufacturers, no; owners, yes.
(i) Yes, more needs to be done, especially in the case of gun shows. This is a huge problem and the ATF is under-manned in this regard. I attend gun shows infrequently, but have seen some pretty hair-raising stuff, especially in the parking lots. This definitely needs to change.
(j) I presume you meant “open carry”? I actually don’t have a problem with this and, to me, this falls under the personal responsibility category. If someone wants to openly carry a firearm and they’re responsible in terms of safety, let ’em. I’ve seen plenty of open carry in Arizona, Texas and Florida, and I’d imagine there is quite a deterrent effect when you come right down to it.
I’d offer up a personal observation on this as well. A shooting buddy of mine is a former Marine Recon sniper. Dude is into serious distance shooting and has a stable of sniper rifles, including a Barrett .50cal BMG. Some of these rifles are used for deer/elk/moose hunting, but the rest of them, including the Barrett, are strictly for range work. This guy is as law-abiding as it gets and has done three tours of Iraq/Afghanistan when he was in the Marines. Among my former Army buddies (mostly all former Rangers), there are dozens of weapons that would terrify your average street cop, but are only used on the range. My point is this: Personal accountability and responsibility for these weapons and their use was drummed into all of us, either when we were kids, or when we were in the military. I’ve taught both my son and daughter how to use a weapon, including very stringent safety procedures, and have no worries whatsoever when it comes to them and weapons. I also keep the weapons in a locked gun safe and the ammo is separate. I trust them, but I also take no chances, either.
December 18, 2012 at 2:29 PM #756597ParticipantI totally agree re Soto’s heroic act. Selfless disregard for her own safety and fearless in the face of evil.
December 18, 2012 at 2:33 PM #756600ParticipantThis is entertaining: “CBS News host Norah O’Donnell on Tuesday called out Chicago Mayor Rahm Emmanuel for telling Attorney General Eric Holder to “shut the fuck up” about reinstating the assault weapons ban when both men worked for President Barack Obama’s administration in 2009.”
-
AuthorPosts
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.