NY State *passes* most restrictive weapons ban ever after being rushed to a vote.

[Moonbeam]

So can you show a study that concludes with a significant level of confidence that gun bans are effective at reducing this type of event?

I could make a claim that if there were no guns in the US there would be no gun murders in the US. I could make a claim that muskets, which were authorized by the Constitution can't be used to kill hundreds of people in a short space of time by a single mad man.

 

[momeNt]

I could make a claim that if there were no guns in the US there would be no gun murders in the US. I could make a claim that muskets, which were authorized by the Constitution can't be used to kill hundreds of people in a short space of time by a single mad man.

Musket shot to something explosive in the room. Boom hundreds dead.

Try harder.

 

[HendrixFan]

Musket shot to something explosive in the room. Boom hundreds dead.

Try harder.

I see you have watched the Dark Knight and found it's action to be positively realistic.

 

[momeNt]

I see you have watched the Dark Knight and found it's action to be positively realistic.

Biggest mass killings weren't even committed with a firearm either.

 

[HendrixFan]

Biggest mass killings weren't even committed with a firearm either.

True. I suppose you favor suitcase nukes being allowed in the hands of anyone who pleases?

 

[momeNt]

True. I suppose you favor suitcase nukes being allowed in the hands of anyone who pleases?

Yes.

 

[OutHouse]

none of these stupid laws would have prevented Auroura, CT, AZ shootings

 

[HendrixFan]

Yes.

Well you have certainly clarified your credibility.

 

[HendrixFan]

none of these stupid laws would have prevented Auroura, CT, AZ shootings

The laws are incremental steps that work to make it difficult for anyone other than reasonable citizens to be able to own firearms, with severe penalties for those that don't fit the definition of reasonable. Registration of guns is the key.

 

[Agent11]

Registration wouldn't have done anything to stop anything. And you should try to get the votes to repeal the 2nd amendment because that is obviously what you want.

 

[momeNt]

Well you have certainly clarified your credibility.

Owning and using are two different things. Using one most likely will harm your neighbors life and property, and I in no way advocate that, but if someone wants to invest their resources into making one, I see no reason to use aggression to stop them. The harm is in the violent act.

 

[HendrixFan]

Registration wouldn't have done anything to stop anything. And you should try to get the votes to repeal the 2nd amendment because that is obviously what you want.

You haven't read this thread then. I don't care if people can have guns or not, I just personally don't want/need one.

Forcing people to register firearms is a necessary step in keeping firearms out of the hands of those who society feels shouldn't have that right. Violent felonies, mental incapacity, etc. Without registration of firearms you can't prevent certain people from having firearms.

Just like seatbelt laws, many will never have had any use for wearing one. On the other hand people still die while wearing seatbelts. At the end of the day what lives are saved by seatbelts make it all worthwhile. Without requiring all automakers to include them, and then requiring any front seat occupant to wear one, those lives wouldn't have been saved. Pointing at people who still die in car accidents does nothing to change that fact.

 

[micrometers]

http://video.msnbc.msn.com/nbcnews.com/50483397/#50483397

 

[Genx87]

You haven't read this thread then. I don't care if people can have guns or not, I just personally don't want/need one.

Forcing people to register firearms is a necessary step in keeping firearms out of the hands of those who society feels shouldn't have that right. Violent felonies, mental incapacity, etc. Without registration of firearms you can't prevent certain people from having firearms.

Just like seatbelt laws, many will never have had any use for wearing one. On the other hand people still die while wearing seatbelts. At the end of the day what lives are saved by seatbelts make it all worthwhile. Without requiring all automakers to include them, and then requiring any front seat occupant to wear one, those lives wouldn't have been saved. Pointing at people who still die in car accidents does nothing to change that fact.

I think you have that backwards. Requiring legal purchases of firearms have a background check would help keep firearms out of felons ect. Registering a firearm is an after the fact action. And people who have them and shouldnt wont register them.

Your seat belt analogy is rather spot on though. Because like registering weapons. People who dont want to wear a seatbelt dont, and people who dont wont register a weapon.

 

[micrometers]

have any of you played war of the roses? It's more fun than COD MP anyways. Firing bows and arrows is so much cooler.

 

[Agent11]

What difference would it have made if the sandy brook shooters mother had or hadn't registered her weapons? None. It wouldn't have made any difference.

What if the rifles were banned and his mother had a collection of revolvers?

He still could have strapped 6 revolvers to his chest blackbeard style and caused just as much devastation.

The solution is to diagnose and manage those who are mentally unstable.

 

[HendrixFan]

I think you have that backwards. Requiring legal purchases of firearms have a background check would help keep firearms out of felons ect. Registering a firearm is an after the fact action. And people who have them and shouldnt wont register them.

Your seat belt analogy is rather spot on though. Because like registering weapons. People who dont want to wear a seatbelt dont, and people who dont wont register a weapon.

Well without registering currently owned firearms the second hand market completely bypasses any serious registration attempts. You can own all kinds of crazy machine guns as long as you register them. You never hear about someone mowing down people with class 3 weapons. Those regulations have been around for, what, 20 years? Of all the violent gun crimes we have here, you never hear about class 3 weapons being involved. The regulation does work. It won't be perfect, but that isn't the goal.

The seatbelt thing results in a fine, I would assume failure to register (or re-register) falls under similar punishment. Though it does make a fine coupling when piling on charges for serious crimes. I recall reading the magazine limits were only misdemeanors.

 

[micrometers]

What difference would it have made if the sandy brook shooters mother had or hadn't registered her weapons? None. It wouldn't have made any difference.

What if the rifles were banned and his mother had a collection of revolvers?

He still could have strapped 6 revolvers to his chest blackbeard style and caused just as much devastation.

The solution is to diagnose and manage those who are mentally unstable.

and take away their guns.

 

[Genx87]

Well without registering currently owned firearms the second hand market completely bypasses any serious registration attempts. You can own all kinds of crazy machine guns as long as you register them. You never hear about someone mowing down people with class 3 weapons. Those regulations have been around for, what, 20 years? Of all the violent gun crimes we have here, you never hear about class 3 weapons being involved. The regulation does work. It won't be perfect, but that isn't the goal.

Well class 3 weapons I would say would be more prevalent if not for their substantial cost. A truely automatic M4 probably runs 10-20K on the low end. Common criminals and whackjobs wont spend that kind of money to mow people down.

I understand what you are saying. But registration imo is too late in the process. A criminal who bought the gun wont register it. A background check is a better option imo. But we both have to recognize people who are breaking the law will not be adhering to either of our ideas. It is matter of how much burden do we want to place on law abiding citizens to weed out a few criminals from buying guns legtimately. That is why I favor a background check on legal gun sales. It is done at the time of purchase. And doesnt require law abiding citizens to register their guns in a govt db that is sure to be compromised or abused in some way.

 

[Hayabusa Rider]

and take away their guns.

That's right... One could make all kinds of explosives, using simple household items.

 

[OutHouse]

Forcing people to register firearms is a necessary step in keeping firearms out of the hands of those who society feels shouldn't have that right.

lol, how?

 

[OutHouse]

You never hear about someone mowing down people with class 3 weapons.

guess you never heard of gangbangers using full auto Tec-9's for the past few decades?

 

[micrometers]

That's right... One could make all kinds of explosives, using simple household items.

We keep sharp objects away from the mentally ill.

 

[Hayabusa Rider]

We keep sharp objects away from the mentally ill.

You missed it.

Define "mentally ill" for the purpose of this discussion. Please be specific.

 

[Matt1970]

The laws are incremental steps that work to make it difficult for anyone other than reasonable citizens to be able to own firearms, with severe penalties for those that don't fit the definition of reasonable. Registration of guns is the key.

This is what nobody seems to be able to digest. The people who are committing the mass millings are not concerned with the penalties for gun law violations.