Firearms restrictions

A place to discuss regulations, or the over regulation in most case, that our members have to deal with in their respective countries. Hopefully discussion will lead to more rules based on common sense, rather than fears by the government.

Moderators: skeetshot, deerhunter338mag

Post Reply
User avatar
Corjack
Administrator
Posts: 10260
Joined: Thu Jun 11, 2009 2:28 pm
Location: Missouri
Location: Booger county Missouri
Contact:

Firearms restrictions

Post by Corjack »

I do not mean to make light of the current events concerning shooting deaths, as they are extremely sad, but with all the calls for gun control, I thought I would point out a few statistics.

There have been a little less than 30,000 firearm related deaths in the US since Jan 1. 2012. These are a combination of accidents, suicides, homicides, self defense shootings, and LE shooting bad people.

There have been about 45,000 auto related fatalities in that same time frame.

20,000 people just fell, and it resulted in death.

And to point out another statistic, nearly 2,400,000 times a firearm was used to prevent a crime, in the hands of private citizens.

I think driving a vehicle should be considered only as a last resort, and unless you can pass a severe background check, and attend advanced courses in proper operation of a motor vehicle, for a min. of six years, you should not be allowed behind the wheel of a car.

Anyone who is elevated to a height of more than one meter should be held guilty of a class B felony, fined 10,000 dollars, and serve 90 days in a correctional facility. All bridges, and structures of more than one ground level floor, must be destroyed for the public good.

I am still formulating a plan to limit all bodies of water to a depth of no more than 1 cm. We need to stop the needless deaths of more than 7,000 citizens a year from drowning.
There are no fleas on the 9.3s


Booger county time and temp
Image
Click for weather forecast

User avatar
Vaughan
Moderator
Posts: 3510
Joined: Wed Jun 17, 2009 12:43 pm
Location: Northern Sweden

Re: Firearms restrictions

Post by Vaughan »

Setting aside recent events because no one will disagree about those. I can accept your basic point when it comes to hunting rifles and handguns. I think our restrictions on the number of hunting rifles, for example, is plain stupid. Not exactly the weapon of choice of your average nut job. But can someone explain why your average schmuck needs access to a hoard of assault weapons including, but not limited to, a vehicle mounted 50cal BMG? I don't imagine anyone was murdered with one of those recently but, y'all do realize the Mayan 's aren't going to get it right don't you? :confusion-confused: I'll concede there is likely a lot I don't understand but I really don't get this wannabe pseudo-military tacticool crap. (I guess I'm now banned.... :lol: )
/Vaughan

Real dogs have beards

ROdell

Re: Firearms restrictions

Post by ROdell »

Much is said about "assault" rifles. What is an assault rifle? An assault is an act, but we don't talk about assault knives, do we?

In the last "ban" (1994-2004), AR-15's were "banned" if they contained two of these three features: a collapsible or folding stock, a pistol grip, or a flash hider (compensators were vague). AR-15's are semi automatic, one shot per trigger pull firearms. They cannot be readily converted to select fire (3 shot bursts) or fully automatic operation. There was also a restriction that magazines had to be 10 rounds or less contained in the "ban" for all firearms, including pistols. Other than the magazine size, the ban was about cosmetic features and "doing something".

For those who don't know, fully automatic weapons are regulated by the Gun Control Act of 1934 as well as many states. Essentially they are regulated out of existence in private hands at this point, except for those grandfathered and those are exhorbitantly expensive and difficult to transfer. Not impossible, but difficult.

When the media and politicians talk about semi-automatic firearms, they talk about the AR-15. I own two. Why? They are accurate for varmints, plinking, and target work. They are incredibly reliable and can be customized and worked on by the average guy. It doesn't make me tacticool, but the firearm is just plain fun. I can ring steel at 400 yards with a 16" barrel - not bad at all.

The media forgets that semi automatics include revolvers, browning BARs, Ruger 10/22's, AR-7 survival rifles and many others, in addition to lots of handgun models.

50 Cals are another matter. No automatic 50 cals are allowed, but you can have them in other forms. If you want to mount one on your truck, you can. There are no records I'm aware of where a 50 cal was used in the commission of a crime, and nor is it ever likely unless someone decides to snipe from a mile away. Too expensive. People who own them do like the shooting games of 1,000 yards or more. I respect their right to own them. A 50 caliber Hawken or a 50 cal BMG. Doesn't matter to me.

Anyway, Vaughan, I just wanted to try to answer your question. Did I?

User avatar
Vaughan
Moderator
Posts: 3510
Joined: Wed Jun 17, 2009 12:43 pm
Location: Northern Sweden

Re: Firearms restrictions

Post by Vaughan »

I know, the rock was the first assault weapon but no one wants to take your rocks....

More seriously, good information that helps cut some of the media BS. Although I don't personally see the attraction, I'm neither for or against banning anything, and you folks should decide as y'all see fit. FWIW, I have family over your way, from the mountains in NC - so I have some "gun nuts" in the family and have nothing against it. Even so, it does not seem unreasonable for there to be an open informed discussion on what should or should not be available. I freely admit to NOT being informed so was genuinely curious to know why folks thought such a wide range of weapon types should be available.
/Vaughan

Real dogs have beards

dinsdale
Meister der jagd
Posts: 2459
Joined: Sun Jul 12, 2009 1:42 pm
Location: Hudson Valley,NY
Location: Hudson Valley, NY

Re: Firearms restrictions

Post by dinsdale »

And to add to Rodells' post...

Here in my state (New York) the 94 ban never expired, it was adopted as state law.

To be an assault rifle and therefore illegal in NY state, the firearm must be:
1. Semiautomatic
2. Accept a detachable magazine
3. Manufactured after September 14, 1994
4. Has two or more of the following:

•Telescoping or folding stock
•Pistol grip
•Bayonet mount
•Flash suppressor (this does NOT include a muzzle brake) OR a threaded barrel
•Grenade launcher



The loophool is that having and using pre 94 manufacture of larger capacity magazines is fully legal.

There is a thriving business of folks buying up "pre-bans" from other states and reselling them at a good profit to NY buyers willing to pay more for a pre ban capacity.

To make guns legal they pin the stocks and weld the muzzlebreak to comply with the threaded part.

Londonhunter

Re: Firearms restrictions

Post by Londonhunter »

Guys

I am located in Europe and we are used to TROLLS looking for comments from shooters and posting links on website we shooters are NOT aware of.

I know after what has happened in the past week a lot more activiites have been taken places on european sites from freinds who runs a few forums in the UK

I would suggest the sensible thing if one has something to say is to do it OFFline
no difference from what the NRA line is at the moment

delete this if you guys think is inappropriate

User avatar
Vaughan
Moderator
Posts: 3510
Joined: Wed Jun 17, 2009 12:43 pm
Location: Northern Sweden

Re: Firearms restrictions

Post by Vaughan »

Never been called a troll before - but you might have a good point. :think:
/Vaughan

Real dogs have beards

User avatar
Corjack
Administrator
Posts: 10260
Joined: Thu Jun 11, 2009 2:28 pm
Location: Missouri
Location: Booger county Missouri
Contact:

Re: Firearms restrictions

Post by Corjack »

AR 15s, and other assualt rifles account for less than 2 percent of gun crimes in the US.
There are no fleas on the 9.3s


Booger county time and temp
Image
Click for weather forecast

ROdell

Re: Firearms restrictions

Post by ROdell »

Corjack wrote:AR 15s, and other assualt rifles account for less than 2 percent of gun crimes in the US.
I don't call an AR15 an "assault" rifle. I would call a M16 an assault rifle.

blaserguy
Meister der jagd
Posts: 757
Joined: Mon Jan 10, 2011 4:27 pm

Re: Firearms restrictions

Post by blaserguy »

Until they are willing to even consider mental illness into the debate they are not serious about making things safer. These events never just happen without someone showing up on a radar screen somewhere and being ignored.
If you think about these same people that complain about guns will get behind the wheel of a car after drinking. Its like pointing a loaded gun. What's the difference.

thechamp
Administrator
Posts: 8729
Joined: Fri Jun 12, 2009 11:25 pm
Location: San Antonio
Location: San Antonio, Tx.

Re: Firearms restrictions

Post by thechamp »

Found an article that mentions Highbridge Arms in San Francisco. I've directed people to them for importing or exporting over the years after learning about them from an Australian member who has used them over the years. The gist of the article is that AR15s are selling out which most of us already knew. But there is also some data in the story concerning the increase in privately owned guns in this country and the statistics on murders as gun ownership has gone up. I wish the article had included the change in population during the same time period. As you'll see, contrary to what the demos/media would like Americans to believe the chance of being murdered today are much slimmer than they were in 1994.

According to the NPG.org website the USA as of July 1, 1994 had 260,289,237 people. The NPG estimated that in 2007 the USA had 301 million people, an increase of 40,710,763 or almost 16% more people than we had in 1994.


http://www.gopusa.com/news/2012/12/20/a ... ?current=1

"That complexity is illustrated in a report on gun control released by the nonpartisan Congressional Research Service exactly a month before the Newtown shooting.

From 1994 to 2007, the number of guns in America grew from 192 million to 294 million.

But during that same time the number of firearms-related murders dropped from 16,333 in 1994 to 11,631 in 2007."


The numbers don't lie. We added a tremendous number of guns (65% more in 2007 than 1994) as well as people while the country became a safer place to live. We had a decrease of almost 31% in homicides during that time period.

Were it not for the media and certain politicians seizing every incident they can to harp on their desire to disarm Americans and these facts were made public things would look pretty good to us and the rest of the world.

thechamp
Administrator
Posts: 8729
Joined: Fri Jun 12, 2009 11:25 pm
Location: San Antonio
Location: San Antonio, Tx.

Re: Firearms restrictions

Post by thechamp »

Another item of interest when it comes to firearms restrictions is a poll that USA Today started in 2007 and for some reason they've never taken it down. One can only assume they didn't like the results they were seeing and forgot about it. :lol:


It asked one simple question: Does the Second Amendment give individuals the right to bear arms?.

http://usatoday30.usatoday.com/news/qui ... up5895.htm

There have been 12,067,156 votes case with 97% saying it gives individuals the right to bear arms. 2% say no and 1% hasn't a clue.
I take that to mean that most Americans believe in the 2nd Amendment... inspite of what our ruler and his party of dimwits think.

blaserguy
Meister der jagd
Posts: 757
Joined: Mon Jan 10, 2011 4:27 pm

Re: Firearms restrictions

Post by blaserguy »

There was a day that the insane or crazy were locked away from society. The way it was done has lead to where we are now in making excuses and allowing them to their own accord to fit into society and survive because we want to treat everybody fairly and dont intrude on there rights.
There is so much that is known but it is so hard to get people to get involved with treatment. For example there is a personality dissorder that woman are 800 times more likely to commit suicide than the regular public. That is an incredible stat. I work with a lady that was hit head on by a young lady in a car that was commuting suicide by vehicle. My friend has had a rough two years getting through all the surgeries.
We can't lock up everyone that's a little off and you can't eliminate guns to fix the problem.
Just not that simple of a fix in a "free" society. Unless we want to get rid of the "free" part

thechamp
Administrator
Posts: 8729
Joined: Fri Jun 12, 2009 11:25 pm
Location: San Antonio
Location: San Antonio, Tx.

Re: Firearms restrictions

Post by thechamp »

Good points. I would like to add that the modern way to handle any disruptive child is to send them to a shrink and have drugs prescribed to fix the problem. I'm sure in certain situations this approach is fine. However it is way overdone. Having been in the school setting you wouldn't believe what percent of students are on mind control/help drugs. This is not the answer. But there is a hell of a lot of money to be made by the doctors and the pharmaceutical companies.

I had a co-worker who was terminated from his job. He was having a hard time dealing with it and went to his doctor who sent him on to one of the ‘shrink’ doctors. Not sure exactly what kind but he was then prescribed drugs to help him cope with the problem. In the end he blew his brains out with a 12 gauge. I’ve always believed when bad things happen in one’s life the worst thing they can do is go get ‘help’. You deal with the problem and get it behind you and move on. Unfortunately that concept isn’t what our modern society preaches.

I would wager that every one of these school shooters has been to a shrink of some sort and has been on prescription drugs to help them cope. Yet the media would rather blame the gun.

User avatar
Corjack
Administrator
Posts: 10260
Joined: Thu Jun 11, 2009 2:28 pm
Location: Missouri
Location: Booger county Missouri
Contact:

Re: Firearms restrictions

Post by Corjack »

Found another interesting statistic. In 1995 there were 240,000 registered machine guns in the US. Since 1935 there have only been "TWO" murders with machine guns. One of those was a LE officer who used his duty weapon. Not sure how many registered machine guns are out there now, but it brings me to my point.

The MG owners did not buy them to commit crimes.

I would guess that 99.99999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999%
of buyers of AR15s, and handguns using high capacity mags, do not buy them to commit crimes ether.

The news media, movies and government, lead us to believe that a high percentage of Americans who own guns of ANY, sort, are just demented souls, waiting for the right moment to use their guns in anger.
There are no fleas on the 9.3s


Booger county time and temp
Image
Click for weather forecast

Post Reply

Return to “International Firearms Freedoms”