[sleeprequired]

Originally Posted by Delta0311

Ok for the sake of your argument, let's say I am willing to give up my Glock. I live in NJ, population almost 9 million.
Now let's go over the shitty areas of NJ; I'm pulling these from the top of my head.
Newark
Irvington
East Orange
Camden
Atlantic City
Patterson
Parts of Jersey City
Elizabeth
parts of Asbury
parts of Perth Amboy
New Brunswick
Neptune
Trenton
You can safely bet that many of the criminals living in these cities are going to be packing. Now do you honestly think they will simply give up their firearms if guns where made illegal in the US?

In the last 50 years there have been 948 people killed in mass shootings. Mass shooting make up less than 1% of gun deaths in the US.
That's 948 victims in 50 years
Right now in Chicago we are at 530 MURDER victims for the year and it is only October, last years total was 751. So compare the numbers. There is deafening silence when it comes to the insane crime rates of the inner cities.

50 years = 948 victims of mass shootings
1 year and ONE SINGLE inner city gave us 751 murder victims
The first one is such are problem that late night show hosts are growing vaginas and crying like little girls. The second one no one gives a fuck about not even BLM.

ok this is a very rational argument so i'll respond with a counter argument. I think with law changes and a buyback, some will return because it's the law and some would return because they can get money. I think one needs to consider what the balance would be between law abiding citizens and criminals/junkies with guns.

Add to that with tighter laws you'd have less people purchasing hardcore weapons and it would be easier for the police to track the registered owners of guns. Right now you have so many keeping tabs is practically impossible.

And onto the culture. It can change you know... it might take some time but it can possibly change for the better....

Regardless of the percentages 59 people died because this bloke had ready access to (for all intents and purposes) automatic rate of fire weapons.

Try telling the people who lost family that it's ok because it's only 1%

And gun restrictions would help with all firearms, not just mass shootings. You might find that with no ready access to a gun, people might resort to less lethal means of settling disputes even when it becomes physical.

[Fundguy1]

Originally Posted by sleeprequired

there you go... nothing anyone can say or do will change your mind, no cost is too great for you.

That's fine. I respect your right to have an opinion.

I'm done trying to talk sense into people who would gladly see mass shootings continue rather than reexamine, or even think about, their point of view.

The cost would be the 2mm people robbed, beaten, raped, and murdered that are stopped by people with guns. How you going to weigh that vs what you propose? How are you planning on stopping that? Jedi mind trick?

[Fundguy1]

Originally Posted by sleeprequired

ok this is a very rational argument so i'll respond with a counter argument. I think with law changes and a buyback, some will return because it's the law and some would return because they can get money. I think one needs to consider what the balance would be between law abiding citizens and criminals/junkies with guns.

Add to that with tighter laws you'd have less people purchasing hardcore weapons and it would be easier for the police to track the registered owners of guns. Right now you have so many keeping tabs is practically impossible.

And onto the culture. It can change you know... it might take some time but it can possibly change for the better....

Regardless of the percentages 59 people died because this bloke had ready access to (for all intents and purposes) automatic rate of fire weapons.

Try telling the people who lost family that it's ok because it's only 1%

And gun restrictions would help with all firearms, not just mass shootings. You might find that with no ready access to a gun, people might resort to less lethal means of settling disputes even when it becomes physical.

You really have no clue. What you "propse" has been in effect for years.

Buybacks happen constantly. Police will buy any gun no questions.

There had been laws for decades that buying any gun, hardcore or mot, it's background checked and registered. The government knows where they are.

As for culture, you're an idiot if you think this will change. If you haven't experienced being here how in the hell can you comment on it? I'd be like me talking to a north Korean about culture.

Finally, as I've said, like the other points above too many times to count, the places with the strongest restrictions have the most gun crime. He'll, in DC you can't own a handgun but it's still the wild west. And Chicago has some of the most restrictive laws in the country. These laws just push criminals to get them knowing they will be unopposed and have the power. They embolden criminals. You are truly clueless in your liberal utopian views.

[Delta0311]

Originally Posted by sleeprequired

ok this is a very rational argument so i'll respond with a counter argument. I think with law changes and a buyback, some will return because it's the law and some would return because they can get money. I think one needs to consider what the balance would be between law abiding citizens and criminals/junkies with guns.

Add to that with tighter laws you'd have less people purchasing hardcore weapons and it would be easier for the police to track the registered owners of guns. Right now you have so many keeping tabs is practically impossible.

And onto the culture. It can change you know... it might take some time but it can possibly change for the better....

Regardless of the percentages 59 people died because this bloke had ready access to (for all intents and purposes) automatic rate of fire weapons.

Try telling the people who lost family that it's ok because it's only 1%

And gun restrictions would help with all firearms, not just mass shootings. You might find that with no ready access to a gun, people might resort to less lethal means of settling disputes even when it becomes physical.

Don't have a lot of time now but I'll respond to the first part. Buybacks don't work. They police departments basically get a bunch of hunting rifles and revolvers; the stuff that's been sitting in people's attics. They also get tons of guns that won't fire. Essentially turning the buy back program into a waste disposal service. No criminal in his right mind will give up a semi-automatic handgun that's in good working condition.

[Mr Tonka]

Originally Posted by Delta0311

Don't have a lot of time now but I'll respond to the first part. Buybacks don't work. They police departments basically get a bunch of hunting rifles and revolvers; the stuff that's been sitting in people's attics. They also get tons of guns that won't fire. Essentially turning the buy back program into a waste disposal service. No criminal in his right mind will give up a semi-automatic handgun that's in good working condition.

Nope, that's like a fisherman giving up his fishing pole for 1% of the income he can generate in a year by catching fish.

___________________________________


I've already said my piece about things i think could change to slow down gun violence in the US. But when people are talking about removing the rights of millions because of the actions of a few it's gong to fall on deaf ears and be met with strong opposition. Mainly, because the gun control argument comes up as an illogical, emotional response to a horrific, yet rare event.



This graph may not have exact figures on it, but from my fact checking in years past, they seem to be reasonable. If this doesn't illustrate the idiocy of the gun control argument, nothing will.

One has to be smart enough to not be duped by the media who generally includes ALL gun deaths in their figures. Including justified police shootings and suicides which those two combined make up the lion's share of gun deaths. About 1/3 of the gun deaths in the US are murders and the lion's share of those are from previously illustrated intercity gang fighting. (note that inner cities with the highest gun violence often have the nation's strictest gun laws) That's followed by domestic violence incidents, then more random shootings like robberies and what not. Finally you get what's left which is made up of mass shootings. (mass shooting = 4 or more murdered in the same event)

Nobody is saying they don't care about the lives lost due to mass shootings, (it's obvious that no one cares about the intercity people shooting each other) but the actions of a few lunatic mass shooters can't justify constitutional rights of millions being removed.

[Fundguy1]

This^^^

[sleeprequired]

All homicides
Number of deaths: 15,872
Deaths per 100,000 population: 5.0

Firearm homicides
Number of deaths: 11,008
Deaths per 100,000 population: 3.5

3.5/5.0 = 70% of all homicides in the US are gun related.

So if you remove the 3.5 from your 5.0 you come into line with the rest of the western world!!! Well bugger me!!

Of course it’s all these other factors EXCEPT guns. Give me a spell.

Stay on point and stop including stupid shit like heart disease to and the fact that people don’t live forever Into charts.

2016 was 71.5%.

Statistics for other weapons dropped.

That’s 11,008 lives lost due to firearms. Don’t tell me all those stats would just transfer over to death by pool cue or pocket knives pleeeeeeease

[are0lies]

Originally Posted by sleeprequired

All homicides
Number of deaths: 15,872
Deaths per 100,000 population: 5.0

Firearm homicides
Number of deaths: 11,008
Deaths per 100,000 population: 3.5

3.5/5.0 = 70% of all homicides in the US are gun related.

So if you remove the 3.5 from your 5.0 you come into line with the rest of the western world!!! Well bugger me!!

Of course it’s all these other factors EXCEPT guns. Give me a spell.

Stay on point and stop including stupid shit like heart disease to and the fact that people don’t live forever Into charts.

2016 was 71.5%.

Statistics for other weapons dropped.

That’s 11,008 lives lost due to firearms. Don’t tell me all those stats would just transfer over to death by pool cue or pocket knives pleeeeeeease

I don't favor either side, but part of the issue is this attitude. Guys like these do not care about buy-backs, the 2nd amendment, or most of any other laws. Unfortunately, we have quite a few of these types.

[Delta0311]

Originally Posted by sleeprequired

All homicides
Number of deaths: 15,872
Deaths per 100,000 population: 5.0

Firearm homicides
Number of deaths: 11,008
Deaths per 100,000 population: 3.5

3.5/5.0 = 70% of all homicides in the US are gun related.

So if you remove the 3.5 from your 5.0 you come into line with the rest of the western world!!! Well bugger me!!

Of course it’s all these other factors EXCEPT guns. Give me a spell.

Stay on point and stop including stupid shit like heart disease to and the fact that people don’t live forever Into charts.

2016 was 71.5%.

Statistics for other weapons dropped.

That’s 11,008 lives lost due to firearms. Don’t tell me all those stats would just transfer over to death by pool cue or pocket knives pleeeeeeease

I showed you what the issue is and it is NOT gun. Most of the gun murders in the US occur in the inner cities and it is black on black crime. Our issue is cultural.. We have a culture of young men growing up without dads; who then look up to thugs as strong male role models. In turn they become thugs and the cycle continues. Stats don't lie but because this is race related we turn a blind eye and no one wants to address the issue because it would be racist. You don't see late night talk show hosts crying about Chicago do you?
If you stand for something you got to stand for it all the way. When it comes to guns it is only a problem when a mass shooting occurs. Yet no one bats a fucking eye that some of our cities have become war zones. If you where to take the gun murder rate and take out the murders committed in the inner cities; you can be rest assured then that America does not have a gun problem. We have a violent thug problem.

[Maestro]

Originally Posted by Fundguy1

Misleading again. 44% of households have guns in America. This "chart" neglects to say spouses aren't included. Since it shows 22% with guns, slide over another 22% to get to 44% because of spouses. Which is go figure, the % of households with guns.

Another stupid bogus stat from the left.
http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2016/...-about-it.html

Have to agree, we have guns in our house and my wife will shoot and I have taught both my kids to shoot. So there is 4 in our house who have guns. The problem with the state is 4 of us never went into a gun store and bought a gun, there is only one person same on the sale of the gun.

[BOOF-M3]

Originally Posted by sleeprequired

ok this is a very rational argument so i'll respond with a counter argument. I think with law changes and a buyback, some will return because it's the law and some would return because they can get money. I think one needs to consider what the balance would be between law abiding citizens and criminals/junkies with guns.

Add to that with tighter laws you'd have less people purchasing hardcore weapons and it would be easier for the police to track the registered owners of guns. Right now you have so many keeping tabs is practically impossible.

And onto the culture. It can change you know... it might take some time but it can possibly change for the better....

Regardless of the percentages 59 people died because this bloke had ready access to (for all intents and purposes) automatic rate of fire weapons.

Try telling the people who lost family that it's ok because it's only 1%

And gun restrictions would help with all firearms, not just mass shootings. You might find that with no ready access to a gun, people might resort to less lethal means of settling disputes even when it becomes physical.

I haven't been keeping up with this discussion but what are you proposing on gun laws? No more guns? Gun makers to stop making, selling and distributing them? Everyone hand in what guns that they do have? Again my apologies as I have not read too many of the posts here in the last few days.

[Hawkeye]

Originally Posted by sleeprequired

I'd say it's related to a few things

1. we don't have massive firearms manufacturers or associations with political vested interests and significant influence How does this affect murder rates?
2. while laws may have been 'similar' prior i think you'll find wholesale availability of military weapons has never been possible in any practical sense in Australia. They just weren't/aren't as pervasive in any of those countries as what it is in the US. That's why it's such a hot topic for you guys.
3. It's also definitely a cultural issue too. In the US guns ARE YOU'RE RIGHT!!! sort of thing, here they are frowned up at best. Personally I enjoy shooting but will gladly sacrifice that entertainment to make sure no-one 'busts a cap in my ass' for a parking spot.

And we are back. Thank you for showing your ignorance and making me chuckle this morning. Right when I was thinking you might actually have a fact based debate.

You're right though, there's bigger issues at hand than just guns. Again though, as Aussies we are with you. When the chips are down we have your back.

There is SO much that you cannot capture in a 2D chart, so the support I am showing obviously can have flaws due to other variables. Having said that, it is not just Australia but also other countries where the trend is present. The years directly following a ban on guns leads to increased murder rate. After a few years it normalizes back to what it was prior to the ban. Australia is the oldest datapoint I know of that we have decent data for, if you want to contribute the more recent trend to a ban on guns go for it. I do not believe it is correlated to something done 20 years ago. It could have something to do with the public opinion on violence in general, or the education, or the poverty rates, or any of a million other things.

I think it is very telling that the gun murder rate in the US is very highly correlated with poverty rates and is slightly inversely correlated with gun ownership rates.

[Fundguy1]

Originally Posted by Delta0311

I showed you what the issue is and it is NOT gun. Most of the gun murders in the US occur in the inner cities and it is black on black crime. Our issue is cultural.. We have a culture of young men growing up without dads; who then look up to thugs as strong male role models. In turn they become thugs and the cycle continues. Stats don't lie but because this is race related we turn a blind eye and no one wants to address the issue because it would be racist. You don't see late night talk show hosts crying about Chicago do you?
If you stand for something you got to stand for it all the way. When it comes to guns it is only a problem when a mass shooting occurs. Yet no one bats a fucking eye that some of our cities have become war zones. If you where to take the gun murder rate and take out the murders committed in the inner cities; you can be rest assured then that America does not have a gun problem. We have a violent thug problem.

Exactly. It's not addressed because it's not pc.

[upstatedoc]

OK, so lifetime NRA member here. Agree that stricter gun laws won't accomplish much. Have any of you guys ever thought about stricter control on ammunition sales? I mean, New York state already has some of the most strictest laws concerning this already. I have to produce my pistol permit to buy ammunition for them.

[Mr Tonka]

Originally Posted by upstatedoc

OK, so lifetime NRA member here. Agree that stricter gun laws won't accomplish much. Have any of you guys ever thought about stricter control on ammunition sales? I mean, New York state already has some of the most strictest laws concerning this already. I have to produce my pistol permit to buy ammunition for them.

Would not have stopped Vegas asshole. He successfully fooled everyone, including family that he was not a shooting enthusiast or that he even had a gun. He was meticulous in planning and would simply have bought a reasonable amount of ammo every week as if he shot every week. Stock piled it for his terrible act.

Thugs, probably not going to help either unless you make it a felony to sell ammo to private parties.

I personally buy ammo at 1000 to 3000 rounds at a time. And i do it when the ammo is priced lowest or very reasonable. I don't want to be labeled a threat to society because i want to save a buck on my target ammo.

Just my $.02.

[Fundguy1]

Originally Posted by upstatedoc

OK, so lifetime NRA member here. Agree that stricter gun laws won't accomplish much. Have any of you guys ever thought about stricter control on ammunition sales? I mean, New York state already has some of the most strictest laws concerning this already. I have to produce my pistol permit to buy ammunition for them.

That's a bs left try to sneak in the backdoor. They for example wanted to try to stamp bullets with serial numbers and register them. Cost to the consumer, astronomical. Would criminals care? No. Bullets are destroyed enough you'd never be able to read them but it would hurt legal gun owners going to the range.

You do realize now that NY is ridiculous this way already right? Basically zero carry permits, especially in NYC. Max clip size 10 rounds. No hollow tips, which endangers innocents. Here's the laws on Florida handgun sales and ownership.

Look at NYs bs:
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gun_laws_in_New_York

Compare it to Florida
If you're 21, are a Florida resident, and not a felon, go to the store and buy one. If you have a carry permit, they do the Fed background check and you walk out with it on the spot. If not, wait 10 days for Brady bs.

Anyone able to legally own a handgun can carry it in their glove box in a holster safety on, no permit needed. With a permit I can legally drive around with an ak47 on my dash loaded safety off, though not recommended.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gun_laws_in_Florida

Anyone over 18 can buy any kind of bullets they want. Hollowtip, tracer, armor penetrating.

And yet its not the wild west. And many more states are even more liberal than this. I just drove to SC and back with a 380 with hollow tips in my pocket and didn't even shoot anyone for a parking spot. Imagine. Where's the gun violence? In liberally governed strict gun ownership areas. Hmmmm

[Maestro]

Originally Posted by upstatedoc

OK, so lifetime NRA member here. Agree that stricter gun laws won't accomplish much. Have any of you guys ever thought about stricter control on ammunition sales? I mean, New York state already has some of the most strictest laws concerning this already. I have to produce my pistol permit to buy ammunition for them.

That is crazy, that means when I go shooting and I want to shoot my friend gun I can not bring my own Ammo. The shooting range I belong to has M1 Garands, and you can shot them but you have to bring your own ammo, you can only buy on after you participate in the M1 Garand - Civilian Marksmanship Program.

[Fundguy1]

Why do you need CMP ammo? You can buy CMP ammo outside the CMP program btw. It's just Greek surplus. I know. I have 2 Garands and feed it to them regularly. Buy it mail order in the sardine cans.

M1 Garand is just a semi auto 30-06. Nothing special except historic value.

[Maestro]

All those who advocating some sort of gun control, the best thing to limit guns sales is keeping Democrats with their gun rhetoric out of office.

http://money.cnn.com/2017/08/03/news...n-sales-trump/

Gun sales continue to lag the highs of the last 8 yrs, some companies and guns stores have reported sales off as much as 60% since last Nov.

But this author claims 2017 is going to be bigger than 2016, and he bases on background checks, never talked to the people who actually make guns and sell them

http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/20...rticle/2627883

The only reason gun sales have been growing year over year was all the Democratic talk about taking away guns. Guns sales would naturally decline since less and less people require the for things like hunting, When I grew up everyone I know hunt today I hardly run into people who hunt anymore.

[Maestro]

Originally Posted by Fundguy1

Why do you need CMP ammo? You can buy CMP ammo outside the CMP program btw. It's just Greek surplus. I know. I have 2 Garands and feed it to them regularly. Buy it mail order in the sardine cans.

M1 Garand is just a semi auto 30-06. Nothing special except historic value.

In NY the guy said you can not buy the ammo unless you can show you own the gun I do not own a 30-06. If you shoot the M1 at the range you have to bring you own ammo or buy it from the range which cost a lot more. My point about the CMP, was buying the gun not the ammo, I personally never bother buying the M1 always thought about it, but never pulled the trigger so to say. I do own a British 303 from WWI which was an RAF rifle and it is getting harder and harder to find ammo.

[Fundguy1]

Originally Posted by Maestro

In NY they guy said you can not buy the ammo unless you can show you own the gun I do not own a 30-06. If you shoot the M1 at the range you have to bring you own ammo or buy it from the range which cost a lot more. My point about the CMP was buy the gun not the ammo, I personally never bother buying the M1 always thought about it, but never pulled the trigger so to say. I do own a British 303 from WWI which was an RAF rifle and it is getting harder and harder to find ammo.

Oh stupid NY ammo law. Got it. The range owns the gun. They should be the ones supplying the ammo. That's what they do here if you want to rent, even belt fed full auto.

[Fundguy1]

Shopping for an SMLE III myself. Hard to find an unmolested nice WW1 British one.