[Newfie]

Folks,

The point about rounds per kill is simply this.....
The AR, or any full auto weapon, is an indiscriminate killer.
Spray and pray.
So if you are basing your argument on the right to defend yourself against a specific threat then high rate of fire weapons are not fit for the purpose.

[Cog]

What is an acceptable rate of fire and acceptable by whom? Is it 1 round a minute, 60 rounds a minute, 700 rounds a minute? You see where I'm going with this?

The cyclic rate of an AR15 is around 800 rounds a minute. That is fully automatic fire. A shooter can achieve around 180 rounds a minute of un-aimed shots without a bump stock by simply pulling the trigger fast. Now of course you have to change magazines and your finger does get tired so you can sustain around 60-90 rounds a minute or until the rifle overheats and you have failures.

Comes down to this. Are you going to ban large magazine capacity semi-automatics like the Ar-15 or Ak-47 or are you not? There are a lot of them out there in civilian hands. Well over a million and could be as many as 3 million. Going to send a cop to take them? I wouldn't recommend it

[evilgenius]

I keep trying to say that there should be a registry. If the government won't do it, then someone else will. The information can be gained. This is the era of big data, and I am not the only person to whom this idea will come. Let property values enter into this discussion. If a street or neighborhood remains depressed in price because buyers discover there is a gun nut, or several gun nuts, living there and decide not to buy there, then the message will be clear to them. If a person on a street succeeds in depressing property values because of their gun nut attitude, then they will have to endure the scorn and derision piled upon them by everybody else on their street. If the gun nuts prevail, and entirely take over a street or neighborhood, they may soon discover that they don't have as much in common as they thought. You reap what you sow.

My point in bringing this up is that this is the time to discuss what such a registry would include. You see, it doesn't have to get all namby pamby and exclude semi-automatic weapons because of some person's insistence that the government might come after them some day. Obviously, hunting rifles, most pistols, rifle scopes meant for hunting and other things wouldn't be included. Most of the stuff people argue about, always citing the second amendment, would. I think it would be a good idea to also include people who own too many guns, but that comes with a host of issues which may or may not be acceptable to people in terms of privacy. It wouldn't violate the second amendment. It wouldn't infringe anything about owning any of those legal to own things, especially if it came with no cost to the buyers of anything that would put them on the list, except in terms of how other people out there took a look at the list and made decisions based upon it. You see, it wouldn't just be property values that were affected. Businesses would be able to take a look and decide not to hire somebody who looked to them like they might make a potential work place shooter. Apartment communities may respond to the voices of the majority of their tenants and decide not to let in potential gun nuts who might act out within the complex. Credit rating agencies might decide that certain types of gun nuts posed a higher suicide risk, and ought to pay higher interest rates on loans they took out.

[Plantagenet]

We’ve just had the largest mass murder in US history done Using bump stocks. No doubt the mass murder community has taken notice of this new way to do mass murder.

IMHO It’s a sensible precaution to restrict the sale of bump stocks and ban their use to try and protect against copycat killers

OVERTURN THE OBAMA ERA LEGALIZATION OF BUMP STOCKS AND SIMILAR DEVICES

Cheers

[evilgenius]

Eventually, it will be the right wingers who will call the loudest for the government to operate the gun nut registry, so that it will be accurate. Imagine how inaccurate it would be if, say, the people behind the leftest slant at the Huff Post put it together. No self-respecting personal property and life protecting right wing gun owner who winds up on such a list will be able to keep quiet, if they got on it for simply owning their Browning High Power. Yet, without such a government run list, people will use what they've got. The information is out there. Somebody will do it, and use their own rules. This is the era of big data. Your credit rating is at stake.

Don't think you can't be discriminated upon based upon whether or not you are on such a list. Gun ownership is definitely a choice. Gay people argue they don't have a choice and the law allows for open discrimination against them, even though it is no longer illegal to be gay in most places. And that is just one example of a precedent upon which such a list could not only go forward, but flourish. There's denial of contraception to women based upon an employer's religion, which was just in the news, and a whole bunch of other precedents which set the legal framework in place. The only way out is accuracy.

[evilgenius]

"These three armed security guards are here to escort you from the building. Here is a box for all your valuables. We'll put whatever doesn't fit into it out back, by the dumpster." That's what a new entry on the gun nut registry can expect at work.

Oh, you think you have rights as a worker? People who get suddenly discovered as gay can be turned out of their jobs just like that. Why should a dangerous potential work place shooter be treated any differently?

The Right will call for accuracy. They may even begin to see the logic behind giving workers some rights, but don't count on it.

[Newfie]

Cog,
You can't answer the questions so you are trying to change the direction of discussion.

I don't think anyone here is buying your logic this time.

Lets just let it be for now. Agree to disagree.

[Cog]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Newfie', 'C')og,
You can't answer the questions so you are trying to change the direction of discussion.

[vtsnowedin]

A gun nut registry?
Sure first it will be anyone with more then fifty guns. Can't have that, they might use all fifty of them at one time and kill some innocent people. Then there will be a person that losses it and kills a bunch of people even though he only owned twenty guns. He also used thirty round magazines so that must be the problem so we must go to no more then five guns and five round magazines.
Then we will have the person that had just two guns and used one of them to kill ten people one shot at a time but was judged to be mentally unstable.
Then you will have anybody that wants to own a gun to be judged to be mentally unstable because the idiot wants to own and use a gun.

[Cog]

Not to mention a registry would in no ways be accurate. Most states do not require you keep any record of private sales and they don't have to go through a FFL. Although Illinois does require I keep a copy of private sales, as soon as I'm a Missouri resident, I'm going to burn them all.

Although there is not an explicit right to privacy in the Constitution, the Supreme Court has derived a generalized one through their reading of the Fourth, Fifth, and Fourteenth Amendments. The creation of a registry of this nature would immediately result in a court challenge to it.

[onlooker]

I think in fairness, we focus too much on guns. It would be helpful for all concerned in this country to try and focus more on the mental health issue. Illicit Drugs and the whole dysfunction of the policies associated with it, is obviously a big area of concern. So, is over prescription of pychotic drugs and overabuse of the same. But the problem is a holistic problem stemming from frankly a toxic environment within most US large cities and even smaller ones. Too many addictive agents, too much stress, alienation, depression, violence both physical and of a psychological kind. So, this is all part of this toxic brew that I personally believe spawns these extremely mal adjusted individuals who are like ticking time bombs. They reach a tipping point via detachment from reality and a pathological train of thinking. Some with the help of drugs or alcohol and others probably without it. So, my point is when a person is so unstable , they can commit violence in different ways , as we have witnessed with the ramming of people with cars. So, they can always find some weapon or weapons to commit attacks. The bottom line is somehow the policies of local, state and Federal decision makers should focus on this.

[Cog]

It is interesting that while pictures and types of guns used in the attack were leaked almost immediately, nothing else about the shooter himself and a possible motive has leaked. I find that sort of convenient for the investigators but annoying to me.

[Newfie]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Cog', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Newfie', 'C')og,
You can't answer the questions so you are trying to change the direction of discussion.

[Ibon]

A little humor on this topic.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4T41M7cCqsU

[Cog]

@Newfie

Ok I went back to read the question you really wanted answered>

How do you intend to control the guns in the hands of the lawLESS population? How do you intend to limit their access to weapons

I don't intend to control that and its impossible task to even try it. I know you probably think this is a cop-out answer but its really the only answer I can give. Gun control schemes do not work, no more than Prohibition worked or the war on drugs.

I suppose mandatory harsh sentences for anyone committing a crime with a gun would take more bad guys off the street but that doesn't seem to be a popular idea with big city mayors.

[vtsnowedin]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('onlooker', 'I') think in fairness, we focus too much on guns. It would be helpful for all concerned in this country to try and focus more on the mental health issue. Illicit Drugs and the whole dysfunction of the policies associated with it, is obviously a big area of concern. So, is over prescription of pychotic drugs and overabuse of the same. But the problem is a holistic problem stemming from frankly a toxic environment within most US large cities and even smaller ones. Too many addictive agents, too much stress, alienation, depression, violence both physical and of a psychological kind. So, this is all part of this toxic brew that I personally believe spawns these extremely mal adjusted individuals who are like ticking time bombs. They reach a tipping point via detachment from reality and a pathological train of thinking. Some with the help of drugs or alcohol and others probably without it. So, my point is when a person is so unstable , they can commit violence in different ways , as we have witnessed with the ramming of people with cars. So, they can always find some weapon or weapons to commit attacks. The bottom line is somehow the policies of local, state and Federal decision makers should focus on this.

[Newfie]

Cog,

Your arguments were all based around a lawful citizenry. You simply ignore the major component of gun deaths.

The world is much more complicated, as you seem to acknowledge. And, we need to make adjustments to deal with the changing real world.

Allowing full autos would simply put them into the hands of the lawless. It's very hard to see any benefit from such a move and much negative impact.

Unless you can persuade me with some positive benefits I think I need to stand firmly against full auto.

[Cog]

@Newfie

Remember when I asked you what rate of fire you would be ok with? I wasn't throwing that out there as some sort of trick question but its very germane to the discussion of fully automatic rifles. The definition of the difference between automatic and semi-automatic is what takes place when the trigger is pulled. With truly automatic fire, you press and hold the trigger and the rifle will fire at its cyclic rate until the magazine is empty. With semi-automatic, one pull of the trigger results in one round being fired. Bump stocks or bump-firing in general is a trick to use the recoil of the rifle to press your finger against the trigger faster than you could normally do so.

So instead of being able to fire 180 rounds a minute by simply pulling the trigger very fast, you get a cyclic rate somewhere in between 180 rounds a minute and the true automatic fire cyclic rate of 800 rounds per minute. And you can do this with practice in the way you grip the stock and hold your finger against the trigger without a bump stock attached.

Therein lies the problem with regards to all semi-automatic rifles. Which is why I see no reason to discriminate with regards to semi auto and full auto rifles and their legality. Because it makes no practical difference unless you want to ban all semi-auto rifles. Just like its in the nature of trucks to deliver useful cargo, they can also be used to deliver bombs or run people over, the semi-auto rifle can deliver precisely aimed shots or a lot of un-aimed bullets going down range. The user decides the function he wants to put to use.

[Newfie]

But it does make a dfference. Right now we have a ban on full autos and their use in crime has been very low. It has been successful in the real world.

AND where restrictions are not successful is with the lawless element. Where guns are banned outright (i.e. Full auto) they are found in the lawless society. When they are not banned they are found.

I'm not arguing for further restrictions. It's pointless, we can not enforce the ones we have on people.

You clearly feel threatened and that you need multiple home defense weapons. I have guns, as tools, not for home defense. On the other hand I no longer reside in the USA (2 months/year). We have each accommodated he situation, differently.

As the partisan divide widens the civil situation in he USA worsens. At some point no amount of weaponry will protect you. I know you have fantasies of mortal combat and killing he bad guy via your comments about civil war and you being on the winning side. Remember that there are always deaths on both sides, being on the winning side only makes you a dead hero vs a dead enemy.

It's time to put your intellectual skills to better use. You've done all reasonable to am yourself. Now seek ways to avoid conflict. It requires a more nuanced set of social skills, if you are up for the task.

PS. Sorry for being so preachy.