NRA in turmoil, gun manufacturers going bankrupt, Thanks Trump

Page 7 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

Skel

Diamond Member
Apr 11, 2001
6,178
552
136
thats the point of all the alt right militia groups. They dont talk about invasions by other countries being the reason they need guns.
I don't disagree, but that wasn't my point I was making. I was pointing out that the people that wrote the thing put it number to as a means to defend themselves and their country/state/land. It may very well be outdated in today's standards, but I don't think it'll change in my lifetime.

I do have to point out that I don't view those "alt right militia groups" as people that should own guns. In fact, I'm more on the side of most of those people shouldn't have guns. I'm thinking of the idiots that decided to camp out in that government building because the ranchers couldn't graze wherever they wanted.
 

Muse

Lifer
Jul 11, 2001
33,441
5,239
126
School attacks by homicidal maniacs have become an epidemic in the USA. Bullets tearing threw the flesh of innocent kids is a nightmarish outrage. Add to that nationwide terror among our youth with routine active shooter drills and you have a problem with one apparent solution -- GUN CONTROL. If you aren't part of the solution, you are part of the problem. Vote out (and boycott) the stone wallers.
 

JSt0rm

Lifer
Sep 5, 2000
27,399
3,943
126
I don't disagree, but that wasn't my point I was making. I was pointing out that the people that wrote the thing put it number to as a means to defend themselves and their country/state/land. It may very well be outdated in today's standards, but I don't think it'll change in my lifetime.

I do have to point out that I don't view those "alt right militia groups" as people that should own guns. In fact, I'm more on the side of most of those people shouldn't have guns. I'm thinking of the idiots that decided to camp out in that government building because the ranchers couldn't graze wherever they wanted.
Good so then we need to regulate gun ownership. Thats the solution.
 

JSt0rm

Lifer
Sep 5, 2000
27,399
3,943
126
School attacks by homicidal maniacs have become an epidemic in the USA. Bullets tearing threw the flesh of innocent kids is a nightmarish outrage. Add to that nationwide terror among our youth with routine active shooter drills and you have a problem with one apparent solution -- GUN CONTROL. If you aren't part of the solution, you are part of the problem. Vote out the stone wallers.
They will wink at you and say try to take it. Basically horrible humans.
 

Muse

Lifer
Jul 11, 2001
33,441
5,239
126
They will wink at you and say try to take it. Basically horrible humans.
I propose making the ownership of guns a very serious offense. What good will it be to possess a gun if it's a ticket to prison? They would become very scarce indeed. Winking would get you nowhere.
 

Muse

Lifer
Jul 11, 2001
33,441
5,239
126
Good so then we need to regulate gun ownership. Thats the solution.
That word "regulate" can mean a lot of things. We have regulation now. I propose making it illegal for anyone to own a gun, doesn't matter who you are... EVERYONE. If you are in the military, law enforcement, you might have access to them under certain controlled circumstances. If you are a hunter, you can have licensed and monitored access to them in a tightly regulated systematic manner. Yes, this will rub a lot of people the wrong way. Tough. Things need to change. Screw you if you can't accept necessary change.
 

JSt0rm

Lifer
Sep 5, 2000
27,399
3,943
126
That word "regulate" can mean a lot of things. We have regulation now. I propose making it illegal for anyone to own a gun, doesn't matter who you are... EVERYONE. If you are in the military, law enforcement, you might have access to them under certain controlled circumstances. If you are a hunter, you can have licensed and monitored access to them in a tightly regulated systematic manner. Yes, this will rub a lot of people the wrong way. Tough. Things need to change. Screw you if you can't accept necessary change.
we nationalize the gun manufacturers and claw back all of their blood money. We use it to do buy backs at a significant higher price then the gun is worth on the private market. We allow certain guns for hunting and home defense. Once we get down to a low number of guns in circulation we have cops keep their firearms in their trunks and go from there.
 
  • Like
Reactions: DarthKyrie

Jhhnn

IN MEMORIAM
Nov 11, 1999
62,365
14,674
136
The next part from what you like to quote is "being necessary to the security of a free State". It's so the common people can defend their land and keep it as part of a 'free' country. From what we're lead to believe from other documents at the time that could include any government.
"Other documents at the time?" Like what?
 

Skel

Diamond Member
Apr 11, 2001
6,178
552
136
Good so then we need to regulate gun ownership. Thats the solution.
Absolutely. We do, and should regulate guns and their ownership. I personally think even more so than we have now.

we nationalize the gun manufacturers and claw back all of their blood money. We use it to do buy backs at a significant higher price then the gun is worth on the private market. We allow certain guns for hunting and home defense. Once we get down to a low number of guns in circulation we have cops keep their firearms in their trunks and go from there.
Significantly better than a lot of the proposals I've heard. My only question is, when you mention allowing guns for hunting and home defense, what's the difference between the guns? They all work the same way, striker hits primer, gunpowder ignites, and bullet goes flying out. Most are semi-auto (I'll never advocate, nor defend the personal use of a full auto anything), and work the same way. How do you classify one kind over an other? By caliber? The aesthetics?

"Other documents at the time?" Like what?
The Federalist Papers and other historical stuff. I've personally not seen (though I've no doubt they're out there) history buffs of the time period debate what the point was.. only that it's outdated.. and it might just well be.
 
  • Like
Reactions: IJTSSG

Veliko

Diamond Member
Feb 16, 2011
3,597
127
106
Wait? Is this about saving the children or overthrowing the government? I'm confused now???

Anyway, I have agreed many, many times that a complete ban and removal of all guns in America would pretty much end gun violence. IT'S JUST THAT NEITHER YOU NOR ANYONE ELSE KNOWS HOW TO ACCOMPLISH THAT! So, instead, you go after the low-hanging fruit of lawful gun owners and want to disarm us, even though it will do NOTHING to stop sick/evil/criminal individuals from obtaining guns. Not to mention an unarmed populace has and always will be victims of those who refuse to give up their arms.
The concept is fairly simple:

Announce ban/restrictions are coming, but with a period where people can get some financial compensation.
On Date X, guns of type Y are banned.
On Date Z, guns of type F are banned.
Etc.

Anyone who attempts to subvert this are treated the same way as anyone else who breaks the law.
 

JSt0rm

Lifer
Sep 5, 2000
27,399
3,943
126
Absolutely. We do, and should regulate guns and their ownership. I personally think even more so than we have now.



Significantly better than a lot of the proposals I've heard. My only question is, when you mention allowing guns for hunting and home defense, what's the difference between the guns? They all work the same way, striker hits primer, gunpowder ignites, and bullet goes flying out. Most are semi-auto (I'll never advocate, nor defend the personal use of a full auto anything), and work the same way. How do you classify one kind over an other? By caliber? The aesthetics?



The Federalist Papers and other historical stuff. I've personally not seen (though I've no doubt they're out there) history buffs of the time period debate what the point was.. only that it's outdated.. and it might just well be.
Bolt action rifles and shotguns
 

Jhhnn

IN MEMORIAM
Nov 11, 1999
62,365
14,674
136
The Federalist Papers and other historical stuff. I've personally not seen (though I've no doubt they're out there) history buffs of the time period debate what the point was.. only that it's outdated.. and it might just well be.
so you were just talking out your ass, right?
 

Paladin3

Diamond Member
Mar 5, 2004
4,933
877
126
I don't disagree, but that wasn't my point I was making. I was pointing out that the people that wrote the thing put it number to as a means to defend themselves and their country/state/land. It may very well be outdated in today's standards, but I don't think it'll change in my lifetime.

I do have to point out that I don't view those "alt right militia groups" as people that should own guns. In fact, I'm more on the side of most of those people shouldn't have guns. I'm thinking of the idiots that decided to camp out in that government building because the ranchers couldn't graze wherever they wanted.
I agree that many of those folks probably shouldn't have guns, but we MUST take them away via due process under the law. And if they haven't committed a crime or been found otherwise unfit then there is simply nothing we can do. We can't violate the rights of a law-abiding citizen without a legal reason to do so or The Constitution means nothing.

Either change the 2A or find some way to disarm these folks legally, those are our only options. Trump seems very willing to suspend The Constitution to get his way via executive order, and hopefully our courts will continue to fight to keep him in check if/when he oversteps his bounds.

We can't toss that entire system of law and checks and balances out the window just because you or anyone else deems it necessary. Who's to say what some other group will deem necessary next?
 

Paladin3

Diamond Member
Mar 5, 2004
4,933
877
126
I propose making the ownership of guns a very serious offense. What good will it be to possess a gun if it's a ticket to prison? They would become very scarce indeed. Winking would get you nowhere.
Unless you are already engaged in criminal activity that is already a ticket to prison. Easy money is a very powerful motivator for the disenfranchised. Every heard of "get rich or die trying?" Not to mention those who are so unbalanced mentally that no threat of punishment will stop them.

No one has ever said "I was going to rob that bank and shoot up that school, but I didn't want a gun charge on my record."
 

Paladin3

Diamond Member
Mar 5, 2004
4,933
877
126
we nationalize the gun manufacturers and claw back all of their blood money. We use it to do buy backs at a significant higher price then the gun is worth on the private market. We allow certain guns for hunting and home defense. Once we get down to a low number of guns in circulation we have cops keep their firearms in their trunks and go from there.
Violating how many basic property laws along the way? Why not do the same to Google and Apple? Think of the lulz.
 

Paladin3

Diamond Member
Mar 5, 2004
4,933
877
126
Any legal for duck hunting, which is a 3 round capacity.
The 3 round max capacity for hunting is usually achieved with a wooden or plastic spacer place inside the tube magazine of a shotgun. Pull the barrel off, remove the spacer, and you are back up to full capacity. Which is still only around 5-8 shots for most shotguns, unless you have an extended tube mag.

My point is that where there is a will to kill the sick individual will find a way. I'd rather use all these resources you folks want to spend in a vain attempt to remove the tools on actually attacking the problem of why people choose to kill. Mental health care and compassionate public services, FTW.

Sounds a lot better to me than picking fights with the already law-abiding in an attempt to MAYBE stop the criminals. Plus it keeps our constitution intact.
 

kage69

Lifer
Jul 17, 2003
21,534
18,909
136
Declaring something illegal and likely turning millions of law abiding people into criminals with a pen is something I have a problem with. For me the fulcrum here is mental illness and criminal records, portions of the populace vastly more important to the violence issue IMO.

I feel it's appropriate to control/prevent ownership of all firearms for people who are mentally unwell as well as those with histories of any kind of assault, especially the kind directed at women. The gun show loop hole is a travesty and requires immediate attention IMO, has for years.

I'm also a proponent of making parents and gun owners liable for gun violence. Education starts at home, and so does enforcement. If you don't secure your iron and someone uses it to commit a crime, get ready to duck because there's a big ass painful book incoming. There are 3rd would countries that mandate adequate protective storage for guns as a condition for ownership, even if you live in a damn hut. I feel it's definitely time for America to live up to that common sense standard, hopefully next to a few more. Maybe we'll see some progress here now that the NRA is shriveling up and about to die.

I have a spotless record and a hog gun in 7.62x39 if you know what I'm saying. I'd sure like to keep both.
 
Last edited:

Jhhnn

IN MEMORIAM
Nov 11, 1999
62,365
14,674
136
The 3 round max capacity for hunting is usually achieved with a wooden or plastic spacer place inside the tube magazine of a shotgun. Pull the barrel off, remove the spacer, and you are back up to full capacity. Which is still only around 5-8 shots for most shotguns, unless you have an extended tube mag.

My point is that where there is a will to kill the sick individual will find a way. I'd rather use all these resources you folks want to spend in a vain attempt to remove the tools on actually attacking the problem of why people choose to kill. Mental health care and compassionate public services, FTW.

Sounds a lot better to me than picking fights with the already law-abiding in an attempt to MAYBE stop the criminals. Plus it keeps our constitution intact.
Shotguns aren't necessarily made that way, nor do they have to be. I owned a Remington model 48 sportsman that had a 2 round magazine.
 

ASK THE COMMUNITY