What is your solution to the gun debate in America

[PhatoseAlpha]

Ideally, we'd roll back existing firearms, then go back to the founding principles and require everyone in the militia (by definition, everyone physically able to) to report for monthly musters for training and evaluation.

Essentially going back to what the founding fathers actually imagined, which was close to the Swiss or Israeli setup of allowing firearms, and in the case of Switzerland allowing fully automatic service rifles - but requiring the military service and training to go with it.

We keep the benefits of an armed populace, but the training regimen gives us a chance to drill the importance of "Keep your guns away from your" and "Shooting people is bad" into their heads, plus we get a chance for psychological evaluations of people who probably shouldn't have those guns.

Allow a conscientious objector or other disinterested party to opt out. However, any ownership of firearms would automatically nullify that opt out - you can't be jailed for owning firearms, but you can be for not showing up to the militia musters.

 

[xj0hnx]

Ideally, we'd roll back existing firearms, then go back to the founding principles and require everyone in the militia (by definition, everyone physically able to) to report for monthly musters for training and evaluation.

Essentially going back to what the founding fathers actually imagined, which was close to the Swiss or Israeli setup of allowing firearms, and in the case of Switzerland allowing fully automatic service rifles - but requiring the military service and training to go with it.

We keep the benefits of an armed populace, but the training regimen gives us a chance to drill the importance of "Keep your guns away from your" and "Shooting people is bad" into their heads, plus we get a chance for psychological evaluations of people who probably shouldn't have those guns.

Allow a conscientious objector or other disinterested party to opt out. However, any ownership of firearms would automatically nullify that opt out - you can't be jailed for owning firearms, but you can be for not showing up to the militia musters.

Except that that was NOT the founders intent. And to the bold, you can't be thrown in jail for exercising your rights, and our military is all volunteer. Verdict 1/10: Complete fail.

 

[exdeath]

The effort and materials involved in making a car is nothing like the effort and materials involved in making a firearm.

Do I really need to find the thread where the guy made an AKM from a shovel?

Or an AR15 lower receiver from a hard urethane cutting board

Buy parts gun in the mail for $150 with everything but the serialized receiver and you're all set. Print or carve a lower out of resin/plastic/metal whatever you want.

 

[jstern01]

This

The right to "keep and bear arms" as guaranteed by the 2nd Amendment is related to and a part of the right of the people to defend themselves when necessary, both collectively and individually. It is not an absolute personal right because there are no absolute rights. As Jefferson wrote:

"All natural rights may be abridged or modified in their exercise by law." --Thomas Jefferson: Official Opinion, 1790.

The right to keep and bear arms is a right which the people must be free to exercise in order to accomplish a specific purpose. If the Amendment was intended to make the right to bear arms a personal right in any and all cases, it could easily have used "person" instead of "the people" just as it did in the 5th Amendment when referring to the rights of individuals, and have had the 2nd Amendment read, "no person shall be denied the right to keep and bear arms." This, indeed, would be similar to the wording that Jefferson used in his proposed draft of the Virginia Constitution:

"No freeman shall be debarred the use of arms (within his own lands or tenements)." --Thomas Jefferson: Draft Va. Constitution with (his note) added, 1776.
Of course, Jefferson added the note (which is usually omitted by gun proponents) "within his own lands or tenements" in his final draft. As a personal right, some such limitation would be reasonable, and to limit a personal right to one's own lands or tenements would serve two purposes: it would guarantee the right to own the arms for possible use in a militia, and it would allow free and reasonable use to the individual for all legitimate purposes. If the 2nd Amendment were a personal right, then anyone and everyone could "keep and bear arms" indiscriminately. But when Congress stated the right to bear arms as a people's right, it implied that the people could themselves put in place some control over the exercise of this right in order to fulfil their own purposes. Congress was fully able to distinguish between people and a person when identifying rights, and did so on many occasions. But they made this a People's Right, incorporating into it the purpose that would be associated with the people's exercise thereof and leaving the possibility of other limitations that would not defeat the stated purpose.

 

[exdeath]

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

No Spidey07, there isn't a domestic or foreign makers of guns of guns when established foreign and domestic makers of guns of guns have the inside track of economy of scale.

I am a CNC machinist myself, and I have some understanding of how difficult making an effective automatic weapon is. Even if all the technologies are well established, combining all the technologies is and remains the almost the exclusive providence already established gun makers.

As I could also argue that any competent CNC machinist could create a exact clone of any modern domestic or foreign car. But at what cost and how long would it take me or anyone else to duplicate all those technologies.

As according to you spidey07, the domestic auto market should be flooded by every domestic CNC machinists who can undercut the costs of foreign and domestic automakers.

Tell us again Spidey07, how many self made cars are available in the USA?

As I will call shens on you spidey07 if you can't site a single example of a single US auto that too is well within the capacity of a competent CNC machinist.

Just come up with just one single US auto to prove your contention and I might believe you. Failing that, and I will call you what you are, namely an idiot with a failed bullshit hypothesis that does not exist in the USA.

If you were a machinist you'd know that the ONLY part of a gun that is even remotely difficult is the barrel, and even then the hard part of that is deep center drilling and cutting/displacing the rifling. And those aren't even hard, they just require specialized uncommon equipment.

The rest can all be milled or pressed or stamped in a garage on a $1000 budget.

Cars have thousands of parts including wiring and computers, tires, formed panels, you cant do it all on a CNC. The parts of an automatic rifle on the other hand you can mill every last one except the barrel easily, mail order the appropriate springs from a hardware store, etc. It's not like its hard to understand how a trigger, sear, hammer, and disconnector fit together. A steel bolt with locking logs isn't hard either.

While your at it, double hook the hammer, add in another sear with a bolt carrier tail to trip it, and a disconnector blocker on the selector switch. The mechanics involved in a gun are the simplest around.

AK or SKS would be the best bets since they were basically designed to be built by farmers with whatever shit was laying around.

But even all that would be unnecessary in the face of any potential bans. Just stamp/press an illegal receiver and all the other parts you can mail order. Anybody with the mental capacity to use tracing paper can making an AK receiver.

And if bans went further? Still don't have to make barrels, grab them from a $199 hunting rifle and screw them into a barrel extension/trunion made on a lathe with locking lugs for your new bolt. Drill a hole in the barrel for your gas tube, machine a interference fit gas block and there you go.

Sorry guys, guns aren't going anywhere.

If people haven't made their own, it's only because its easier to just buy/steal one already made so far. the part about it being illegal wont matter if they are all illegal anyway.

Even ammunition is easy. Casting lead? Not a problem. Extruding and pressing brass tubing at home in a 20 ton press? No problem. Powder? The 3 primary components of powder are everywhere.

In fact the only thing tricky about ammunition are the primers, and even if some of those raw compounds arent available by name, they can be distilled and refined from existing consumer devices like mercury thermometers and thermostat switches, hexamine camp stove fuel bars, medical disinfectants, etc.

OK Im going overboard, but it's fun to show that it IS still possible and get the oppositions panties in a bunch that no matter WHAT you do it's still impossible to rewind the clock on gun technology.

2/3 of the history of the world fought wars with guns and ammunition made by hand before the industrial age and mass production. Besides home made guns would only be used in the first sneak attacks after which modern weapons and ammunition would be picked up off the victims...

 

[Matt1970]

Machine guns are 140 year old technology. They just aren't marketable for small manufacturers at the moment but I sure hope we don't ever create that demand.

 

[monovillage]

The effort and materials involved in making a car is nothing like the effort and materials involved in making a firearm.

Do I really need to find the thread where the guy made an AKM from a shovel?

Here it is Schneiderguy. Caution it's a veritable photo tsunami.
http://www.northeastshooters.com/vbulletin/threads/179192-DIY-Shovel-AK-photo-tsunami-warning!

 

[PrinceofWands]

Abandon the gun debate, as guns aren't and have never been an issue. Debate won. It's like Wargames...only winning move is not to play.

 

[exdeath]

Here it is Schneiderguy. Caution it's a veritable photo tsunami.
http://www.northeastshooters.com/vbulletin/threads/179192-DIY-Shovel-AK-photo-tsunami-warning!

I need to do something like this just for fun.

I double checked and I didn't realize it's perfectly legal and allowed to build a home made gun as long as it's not intended for immediate resale or isn't in an otherwise prohibited NFA class like AOW/DD like a pen gun.

I totally have to do this now. I've acquired a profound interest in machining and manufacturing the last couple months and like most things, I acquire the knowledge and skill but can't think of anything to do with it. An assault rifle is perfect!

 

[cubby1223]

We'd have to actually have a debate first, which conservatives are unwilling to do.

Now who's being dishonest?

What is there to debate about? Has a new argument arose recently that has not already been put out there over the course of the last hundred years?

Or are you one of those activists who believe that "if people would just be honest with themselves, everyone would recognize that I am right" ? That's the typical person who demands a debate, whether Democrat, Republican, liberal, or conservative.

 

[WhipperSnapper]

We need to get to what is probably the root cause of the problem--young males confronting the economic problems of adulthood and the difficulty they are having with it. Fixing our nation's economy, reducing the pressure to "perform" and to out-compete other people for the ability to earn a living would go a long way towards doing that. The root cause of the problem is not a lack of gun regulation and the availability of guns.

 

[Angry Irishman]

Access to guns are obviously the problem. Many people and governments would disagree with you. Fact is, IMHO, it's time to take states' rights away from this. Our state lines are porous and anyone can travel from one state to another. It's not the 19th century anymore where going from one town to another or carrying goods across state line took days. That makes it easier for anyone to break state laws. So, either make it extremely easy for EVERYONE to get guns or make it very difficult. This has worked for many countries.

Not obvious at all.....

 

[michal1980]

Now who's being dishonest?

What is there to debate about? Has a new argument arose recently that has not already been put out there over the course of the last hundred years?

Or are you one of those activists who believe that "if people would just be honest with themselves, everyone would recognize that I am right" ? That's the typical person who demands a debate, whether Democrat, Republican, liberal, or conservative.

No they use biden logic "If it saves just one life its worth it"

 

[PokerGuy]

Why is there even discussion about any 'debate' needed about a right guaranteed by the US constitution? Do we need to have 'debates' about having the freedom of speech, or debates about a woman's right to vote? I don't think so.

Idiots need to stop trying to infringe on rights, stop the hysterical nonsense after some nutjob starts shooting, and just realize that with 500 million weapons in the US, there will always be crazies who misuse them. We need to try to stop the crazies, not curtail freedoms of law abiding citizens.

 

[xj0hnx]

I need to do something like this just for fun.

I double checked and I didn't realize it's perfectly legal and allowed to build a home made gun as long as it's not intended for immediate resale or isn't in an otherwise prohibited NFA class like AOW/DD like a pen gun.

I totally have to do this now. I've acquired a profound interest in machining and manufacturing the last couple months and like most things, I acquire the knowledge and skill but can't think of anything to do with it. An assault rifle is perfect!

I'd go with an open bolt, semi auto subgun, something along the lines of a MAC10. Easy to make, simple design and LOADS of fun. You can get the plans for Ingrams all over the internet.

 

[spidey07]

I'd go with an open bolt, semi auto subgun, something along the lines of a MAC10. Easy to make, simple design and LOADS of fun. You can get the plans for Ingrams all over the internet.

A few of my friends, firearms enthusiasts who also happen to make damn good money, have the means to machine and make just about anything they want. Two of them have whatever those 3d metal machines that can make whatever part you want.

The point stands, guns aren't difficult to make and are extremely simple machines made of nothing more than metal and a few springs. Hell, how difficult could it be to make a revolver?

 

[hal2kilo]

I'm fine with them closing the gunshow loophole that allows people to sell guns privately with no background check. Don't really care if they go with magazine restrictions either even though I don't think that will do anything at all to reduce crime.

That's probably the only possible and productive thing that will come out of all of the hooplah.

Spidey better get his orders in first though.

 

[sourceninja]

I am for better screening to buy firearms. I am for better databases to prevent unauthorized purchases. I am for requiring background checks for person to person sales of firearms (aka close the gunshow loophole). I'm even for more competency requirements in my state to get a CCW permit (right now it's just money). I'd also like to see some form of mental health database used in those checks. You can't have seizures and get a drivers license, so why can you be bi-polar and get a firearm?

I will not support any ban or restriction on what a sane law abiding citizen can legally own. In fact, I'm for loosening gun restrictions as to type. I would like to see a lifting on private sale of modern fully automatic weapons. Currently, I can buy many fully automatic weapons as long as they are pre 1986. I see this as a silly restriction. Keep the purchasing restrictions in place (requiring a federal stamp, etc), but allow us to buy newly produced weapons like mp5's.

You can't legislate crime. They are called criminals for a reason after all. What you can do is punish law abiding citizens.

I will support laws banning types of guns or guns altogether as soon as the government shows they can enforce the same bans they have made on illegal drugs with any success.

I guess I'm saying making it harder to get firearms, raise the penalties for improper ownership, and lower the restrictions as to the type of firearms you can buy.

 

[BoberFett]

Ok. Let them have their way.
Guns for everyone. Mandatory guns for everyone.
But this too...
Freedom to use that gun.
Someone cuts you off in traffic? Legally blow them away.
Someone takes too long at the checkout? Bye bye BOOM!
Neighbors new dog crapped on your lawn? KA-BOOM neighbor.

Guns for everyone AND may the best aim win.
At least that might be one way to cut down on the wackos.
Owning a gun is one thing. Knowing how to use it, another.

People like this idiot are the reason there's no point in debate. LOL, Democrats...

 

[spidey07]

That's probably the only possible and productive thing that will come out of all of the hooplah.

Spidey better get his orders in first though.

I'm pretty much set for now.

 

[moonbogg]

Hold people responsible if their gun was not properly secured and was taken by someone else and used in a crime. Then again, noone expects their son to steal their AR and go on a rampage. I hate to say it, but in America this "gun problem" is unsolvable.

 

[TerryMathews]

Hold people responsible if their gun was not properly secured and was taken by someone else and used in a crime. Then again, noone expects their son to steal their AR and go on a rampage. I hate to say it, but in America this "gun problem" is unsolvable.

How about holding doctors and psychiatrists responsible for the patients they fail to treat properly? That would cover both the Texas Bell Tower shooter and the Holmes, probably several others.

 

[BoberFett]

We need to get to what is probably the root cause of the problem--young males confronting the economic problems of adulthood and the difficulty they are having with it. Fixing our nation's economy, reducing the pressure to "perform" and to out-compete other people for the ability to earn a living would go a long way towards doing that. The root cause of the problem is not a lack of gun regulation and the availability of guns.

While I agree with you in theory, but there's a copule problem with that. Aside from these occasional headling grabbing mass shootings, most gun violence in this country is perpetrated by people who have been brought up to believe that working is for chumps. No amount of economic incentive will get them into a 40 hour work week. Why get a job when the taxpayer is on the hook to provide you with the basic necessities. The second part of the problem is the war on drugs. Any luxuries which the government does not provide, dealing on the side will.

End the war on drugs and wind down the welfare state, and you'll do more to combat gun violence than any gun ban could do.

 

[jstern01]

While I agree with you in theory, but there's a copule problem with that. Aside from these occasional headling grabbing mass shootings, most gun violence in this country is perpetrated by people who have been brought up to believe that working is for chumps. No amount of economic incentive will get them into a 40 hour work week. Why get a job when the taxpayer is on the hook to provide you with the basic necessities. The second part of the problem is the war on drugs. Any luxuries which the government does not provide, dealing on the side will.

End the war on drugs and wind down the welfare state, and you'll do more to combat gun violence than any gun ban could do.

Please point to a meanful study that supports your theory I bolded. Because gun violence is a broad across the board, equal socio-economic problem. Not all of it, maybe a slight majority of it is economic related, but I have not seen anything to support that argument lately.

 

[jstern01]

here is a really good paper on the current gun laws, issues and research.

http://www.jhsph.edu/research/cente...search/publications/WhitePaper102512_CGPR.pdf