Sign in to follow this  
mr6666

America's Gun Culture...

978 posts in this topic

I understand your point.  You seem to be saying that the state "militias" would have regulations as to who could be members and that only members could have certain types of weapons.  But in the states that Trump carried and many more, the vast number of gun owners do not want any regulation at all of guns.  Not by the Feds, the states, the local governments or a "militia."  The NRA and gun manufacturers absolutely do not want any regulations.

 

Everybody, with a few exceptions, can own a semi-automatic now.  The question has always been who can own automatic rifles, machine guns, grenade launchers, etc.  Also, how easily weapons can be obtained, such as no significant limitations at gun shows or in "personal" sales.

 

The other problem is that, as I tried to explain, in many states, everybody is in the "militia."   As in S.C. where every able bodied person 17 or over is in the "militia."

Of course, each state could revise what a militia is, but I don't see that happening.  Would they have to certify each person and issue hard to duplicate ID cards?  What testing would be required?  Would every person wishing to join the "militia" have to undergo a psychological exam?  Would the states pay for them?  I was in the Army for 28 years and never had to undergo a psychological exam.

Of course, they could say everybody can "join" unless they have a certifiable mental disorder.  Then the types and severity of disorders would have to be established.

Many (most?) of the mass murderers were not diagnosed with any type of serious mental disorder until after they killed people.

We got to come up with something, just had wringing ain't gonna cut it, where there's a will there's a way, we just want to have it bad enough. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

even killing them is murder.

 

So? They're scum. The fewer of them there are, the better for good people everywhere.

 

If I'm killing myself, why not do something useful at the end and take a whole bunch of those maggots with me?

 

Of course, that's if I want to kill myself and if we have the technology that Joe advises.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We got to come up with something, just had wringing ain't gonna cut it, where there's a will there's a way, we just want to have it bad enough. 

Agreed.

Problem is that while progressives, liberals, moderates and even some conservatives support more restrictive gun/ammunition/weapons regulations, this is only one of many issues about which most are concerned.

On the other hand, the NRA/gun manufacturers have a lock on their members and supporters and they are the epitome of single issue voters.  There are probably many thousands of voters who are totally opposed to gun control of any kind as well.   This issue is more important to them than any other.

They have tremendous influence in every state and local government that has a Republican governor and/or legislature - and that is most of them.  They have the same influence with US representatives and senators.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Relative of slain toddler arrested in killing of suspect

 
 
 

BELLEFONTAINE NEIGHBORS, Mo. (AP) — A relative of a slain 3-year-old has been arrested on suspicion of killing the teenager accused of unintentionally shooting the toddler, authorities say.

 

Police say 17-year-old Kameron Harvey was shot on Oct. 4 while riding his bike in Bellefontaine Neighbors, just north of St. Louis. Harvey was charged with manslaughter in the December 2015 death of the toddler, Xavier “Zae” Robinson, and was on house arrest while the case was prosecuted in adult court.

 

Police say two 17-year-olds, both males, were arrested about an hour after Harvey was killed. At least one of the teens is related to the toddler, said Detective Lt. Shawn Applegate. Both teens have been released, and Applegate says prosecutors are reviewing the case to determine whether to file charges.

 

“There are no winners in cases like this,” Applegate said. “Both families are ripped apart and in mourning.”......

 

https://apnews.com/f3a9456e01424ad39256e5db71a236cc/Relative-of-slain-toddler-arrested-in-killing-of-suspect?utm_campaign=SocialFlow&utm_source=Twitter&utm_medium=AP

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Agreed.

Problem is that while progressives, liberals, moderates and even some conservatives support more restrictive gun/ammunition/weapons regulations, this is only one of many issues about which most are concerned.

On the other hand, the NRA/gun manufacturers have a lock on their members and supporters and they are the epitome of single issue voters.  There are probably many thousands of voters who are totally opposed to gun control of any kind as well.   This issue is more important to them than any other.

They have tremendous influence in every state and local government that has a Republican governor and/or legislature - and that is most of them.  They have the same influence with US representatives and senators.

Lets see what happens with the Supreme Court decision on Gerrymandering.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"I know I've made kind of a half-assed career out of violence, but I abhor violence. I am an ardent supporter of gun control. It seems incredible to me that the United States is the only civilized nation that does not put some effective control on guns."

 

-- Richard Widmark

 

wpwidmark02.jpg

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

May be different in NY, but in the South the vast majority of gun owners do NOT want any regulation of guns.  They have completely bought into the NRA/Gun Manufacturers "slippery slope" dogma.

 

 

AND, it's an easy task to completely discount their little "Slippery Slope" worries in this regard by utilizing the very history of gun control, the little that there is, in this country. But then again of course, they JUST will NOT listen and LEARN from it.

 

The "history" I refer to here is correlated to the history and subsequent regulations of ownership of the Thompson submachine gun, and how by its misuse by certain elements and citizens of this country would elicit the National Firearms Act of 1934.

 

And, although many of this Act's regulations and provisions would later be modified by Title II of the Gun Control Act of 1968, one of the main provisions of the original 1934 Act, that of the highly regulated state of fully-automatic weapons, i.e. "machine guns", is still in existence. 

 

And so, I might now ask: When was the last time a Thompson submachine gun was used in the commission of a mass murder against citizens of this country? I don't know, BUT it's surely been many decades since such an occurrence has taken place.

 

BUT, in the interim, presently some 83 years AFTER the NFA of 1934 became law, how it that it is STILL legal to now own a "bump stock" modified AR-15 with its rate of fire almost to the level of a Thompson or almost any other "machine gun", and IF after these 83 years their whole "Slippery Slope" argument is in any way a valid one?

 

Nope, their whole paranoid "Slippery Slope" argument has NOT proven to be the case in this country and when it comes to some falsely imagined thought that "any control of firearms in this country will eventually lead to a total confiscation of all firearms".

 

Aaaah, but as I said, the "gun-worshiping" element in this country today just can not and WILL not accept let ALONE even contemplate the thought I have just offered up here.

 

And in the meantime, the absolute PITY of this entire situation is that because they won't even contemplate this thought, the next mass murder of our American citizenry will be just around the corner, and mostly because of the "gun-worshiping" element's refusal to get past their whole "Slippery Slope" mindset, and which is basically just a ruse to rationalize their paranoia and then in use to stonewall any and all rational gun control measures which might be proposed.

 

(...bottom line here: while I DO own THREE firearms, first, I have enough FAITH in our American system of government that the idea that it'll ever be required of me to "fend off" some future "tyrannical" version of it is as remote a possibility as the proverbial pig taking flight, and secondly, IF in the minuscule chance of THAT ever happening, I'm ALSO smart enough to know that NO matter how many guns I might have in my possession, it will make NO difference at ALL if some imagined "bad ol'  tyrannical government" will want to "take me out"...but I'm SURE someone possessing this paranoia would reply with some asinine comment as, "Yeah, but at least I'll go out like a 'real man'!"...yeah, suuuuuure, 'macho man"', but you'll STILL be as freakin' dead as the proverbial 'door nail", won't ya!!!) 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

AND, it's an easy task to completely discount their little "Slippery Slope" worries in this regard by utilizing the very history of gun control, the little that there is, in this country. But then again of course, they JUST will NOT listen and LEARN from it.

 

The "history" I refer to here is correlated to the history and subsequent regulations of ownership of the Thompson submachine gun, and how by its misuse by certain elements and citizens of this country would elicit the National Firearms Act of 1934.

 

And, although many of this Act's regulations and provisions would later be modified by Title II of the Gun Control Act of 1968, one of the main provisions of the original 1934 Act, that of the highly regulated state of fully-automatic weapons, i.e. "machine guns", is still in existence. 

 

And so, I might now ask: When was the last time a Thompson submachine gun was used in the commission of a mass murder against citizens of this country? I don't know, BUT it's surely been many decades since such an occurrence has taken place.

 

 

Except as collector pieces, the Thompson has long been obsolete.  It was replaced by M-16 and other automatic weapons.  

The Federal Assault Weapons Ban enacted during Clinton administration was allowed to expire in 2004 with nothing to replace it.

I guess the thought is over what is a machine gun vs. what is an automatic weapon vs. what is an assault rifle.  To me an automatic assault rifle is a "machine gun," although it is nothing like an M-60 or a .50 caliber MG or whatever current varieties. 

The other issue is that there is no real regulation or control over the sales of devices used to convert semi-automatic rifles to automatic assault rifles. Nor on the size of clips.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Lets see what happens with the Supreme Court decision on Gerrymandering.  

I do not see the current Supreme Court ruling against current types of gerrymandering, not with Gorsuch on the bench.  Kennedy will be the deciding vote as he was last time it came up.  However, he was reluctant to vote against it then and may be less inclined now.

If the decision is to not limit gerrymandering except in cases of provable racism, the state GOPers will really jump on it.

 

Even if gerrymandering is restricted and more gun regulation people are elected at state and federal levels, I don't foresee a big change.  The NRA/Gun Manufacturers and their supporters will still exercise considerable influence over the US Senate.

 

Note that in 2004, Congress permitted the Federal Assault Weapons Ban law to expire with no replacement of any kind.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I do not see the current Supreme Court ruling against current types of gerrymandering, not with Gorsuch on the bench.  Kennedy will be the deciding vote as he was last time it came up.  However, he was reluctant to vote against it then and may be less inclined now.

If the decision is to not limit gerrymandering except in cases of provable racism, the state GOPers will really jump on it.

 

I can see a very narrow rulings that requires WI to change their districts but not a overall 'rule' that would require other states to change. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I can see a very narrow rulings that requires WI to change their districts but not a overall 'rule' that would require other states to change. 

I think NC has a case pending and TX will probably reenact its gerrymandering, if it has not already.  Then other states will follow and then groups will file suit and away we go.

This particular gerrymandering is a "political" issue and the Supreme Court has always ruled that political issues are decided by Congress and/or the president. 

Per the Constitution every citizen is allowed to vote and cannot be discriminated against because of race, etc.  No where does it say how the states determine how they district.

Below is an interesting Newsweek article on the subject.

http://www.newsweek.com/outlawing-gerrymandering-comes-down-one-judge-kennedy-681628

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Except as collector pieces, the Thompson has long been obsolete.  It was replaced by M-16 and other automatic weapons.  

The Federal Assault Weapons Ban enacted during Clinton administration was allowed to expire in 2004 with nothing to replace it.

I guess the thought is over what is a machine gun vs. what is an automatic weapon vs. what is an assault rifle.  To me an automatic assault rifle is a "machine gun," although it is nothing like an M-60 or a .50 caliber MG or whatever current varieties. 

The other issue is that there is no real regulation or control over the sales of devices used to convert semi-automatic rifles to automatic assault rifles. Nor on the size of clips.

 

ExACTly, Cid.

 

BUT as we're presently seeing coming from the gun lobby and even after the Vegas tragedy, they're STILL sticking to their "slippery slope" argument in their efforts to thwart any and all measures to regulate this.

 

(...and which of course was my earlier point...how in the hell can they claim their argument is a valid one IF 83 years after the passage of the FIRST "slippery slope" regulations on machine guns, there's not only many many more firearms in possession by the citizenry, but also many many more and different purchasing options available to the citizenry than ever before?...its passage has NOT resulted by any means whatsoever in their irrational feared "disarming of America")

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Btw, and while I absolutely HATE the idea that some morons always attempt to equate the random death toll on our nation's highways with that of the death toll taken via firearms(HEY MORONS...ONCE AGAIN...CARS ARE MADE FOR GETTING FROM POINT A TO POINT B, AND UNLIKE THE PRIMARY FUNCTION OF FIREARMS), but I'm sure we've all heard that those manufacturing and selling "bump stock" mechanisms for use on AR-15s have been sold out of inventory since it was reported that that jackazz in Vegas probably used such a device in commission of his massacre.

 

And so, the reason I brought up the whole "car" thing here at first was because it has brought to mind that old automobile race saying, "Win on Sunday, sell on Monday".

 

BUT, in the case of these morons who seemingly now just HAVE to own the means to ensure that they have "the fastest thing out there", but in THIS case its "rate of fire", I thought FOR ONCE there could be a legit correlation between those in our country into the "car culture" and with those into the "gun culture".

 

(...just a thought...although admittedly, probably a perverse thought)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 I thought FOR ONCE there could be a legit correlation between those in our country into the "car culture" and with those into the "gun culture".

 

(...just a thought...although admittedly, probably a perverse thought)

There probably is between the big pick-up with big V8 and four wheel drive and cars that have high hp engines that can go well over 100 MPH.  And probably motorcycle owners.

For example, Mercedes-Benz has just introduced an AMG model that will go 198 MPH.  Highest speed limit in US (85) is one road in Texas.  Get on the list because at a paltry $200,000 they won't last long.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Lake County, IL. Republicans raffle off guns at fundraiser-

 

".....Lake County Republicans gathered for a fundraiser and, during the course of the evening, raffled off at least a dozen guns. It's part of what's being called a celebration of the Second Amendment

 

.......One of the top prizes from the raffle is an AR-15 assault rifle.

 

"It's one thing getting a shotgun to go duck hunting or pheasant hunting that's one person's prerogative if they're a law abiding citizen, but there's no reason for these AR-K's," said Sen. Link....

 

http://abc7chicago.com/lake-county-republicans-raffle-off-guns-at-fundraiser/2529762/

 

:o:blink:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Lake County, IL. Republicans raffle off guns at fundraiser-

 

".....Lake County Republicans gathered for a fundraiser and, during the course of the evening, raffled off at least a dozen guns. It's part of what's being called a celebration of the Second Amendment

 

.......One of the top prizes from the raffle is an AR-15 assault rifle.

 

"It's one thing getting a shotgun to go duck hunting or pheasant hunting that's one person's prerogative if they're a law abiding citizen, but there's no reason for these AR-K's," said Sen. Link....

 

http://abc7chicago.com/lake-county-republicans-raffle-off-guns-at-fundraiser/2529762/

 

:o:blink:

 

Just a technicality, but the AR (Armalite)-15 is not an assault rifle.  It does not have the capability to fire on automatic - until somewhat purchases the readily available kits and converts it to automatic fire capability.

Still, it is not a hunting rifle in any real sense.  I carried an M-16 (military version of AR-15) in Vietnam.  No way would I consider it a hunting weapon.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Btw, and while I absolutely HATE the idea that some morons always attempt to equate the random death toll on our nation's highways with that of the death toll taken via firearms(HEY MORONS...ONCE AGAIN...CARS ARE MADE FOR GETTING FROM POINT A TO POINT B, AND UNLIKE THE PRIMARY FUNCTION OF FIREARMS), but I'm sure we've all heard that those manufacturing and selling "bump stock" mechanisms for use on AR-15s have been sold out of inventory since it was reported that that jackazz in Vegas probably used such a device in commission of his massacre.

 

And so, the reason I brought up the whole "car" thing here at first was because it has brought to mind that old automobile race saying, "Win on Sunday, sell on Monday".

 

BUT, in the case of these morons who seemingly now just HAVE to own the means to ensure that they have "the fastest thing out there", but in THIS case its "rate of fire", I thought FOR ONCE there could be a legit correlation between those in our country into the "car culture" and with those into the "gun culture".

 

(...just a thought...although admittedly, probably a perverse thought)

 

The number of annual car deaths is useful to illustrate that an activity has an inherent risk that can be mitigated by regulation and what is an acceptable overall risk a society is willing to tolerate.    Risk management is the key factor in determining insurance rates.

 

Of course I understand your point that driving is a necessity while having to own a gun isn't  (but of course may gun owner would disagree).       

 

As for 'car culture' well I assume most folks really into cars resent the fact the government regulates them.   E.g. pollution control restrictions that impact performance.     Note that even guitars are regulated.  E.g. it is illegal to use certain woods because the trees are endangered.    But on the web one can find illegal sources.     The point being that the fanatic will find a way around regulation.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The number of annual car deaths is useful to illustrate that an activity has an inherent risk that can be mitigated by regulation and what is an acceptable overall risk a society is willing to tolerate.    Risk management is the key factor in determining insurance rates.

 

Of course I understand your point that driving is a necessity while having to own a gun isn't  (but of course may gun owner would disagree).       

 

As for 'car culture' well I assume most folks really into cars resent the fact the government regulates them.   E.g. pollution control restrictions that impact performance.     Note that even guitars are regulated.  E.g. it is illegal to use certain woods because the trees are endangered.    But on the web one can find illegal sources.     The point being that the fanatic will find a way around regulation.  

Interesting.  Just got back from an old car show.   Only about 30 or 40 cars there in a church parking lot.  Since it was in city limits, at least three police officers were walking around.  While I was there at least four vehicles arrived being driven and each had extremely loud defective/illegal mufflers in violation of state law (which is enforceable by city police).  Police did not ticket nor even speak to the drivers even though drove right past them and it is a $300 fine.

 

Of course there is no comparison between guns and automobiles. A more objective comparison would be between guns and opioid medications.  Both have legal, valid uses, but both have been tremendously converted into dangerous uses.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Could just be a pr ploy to look good and then just let the issue fade away over time with no changes.

 

 

Yep. Just give it a couple weeks.

 

Here ya go.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The NRA has made up its mind, so that legislation will have a

tough time getting passed. If they couldn't rethink things after

those elementary school children were killed at Sandy Hook,

you can just about hang it up.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Interesting.  Just got back from an old car show.   Only about 30 or 40 cars there in a church parking lot.  Since it was in city limits, at least three police officers were walking around.  While I was there at least four vehicles arrived being driven and each had extremely loud defective/illegal mufflers in violation of state law (which is enforceable by city police).  Police did not ticket nor even speak to the drivers even though drove right past them and it is a $300 fine.

 

Of course there is no comparison between guns and automobiles. A more objective comparison would be between guns and opioid medications.  Both have legal, valid uses, but both have been tremendously converted into dangerous uses.

 

Unless they're combined. ;)

 

Bond-mobile-courtesy-.jpg

 

bond-gun_1748178i.jpg

 

tactical_vw_golf.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The NRA has made up its mind, so that legislation will have a

tough time getting passed. If they couldn't rethink things after

those elementary school children were killed at Sandy Hook,

you can just about hang it up.

 

All this is public knowledge.    Any sitting politician that tries to pass what the NRA doesn't want passed will get a poor NRA ranking.  Those that follow what the NRA wants will get a good NRA ranking.

 

Voters can use this info to decide if that should impact how they vote in future elections. 

 

Again,  politicians support the NRA because that helps them win elections.    For that to change,  how people vote has to change.    (in addition people like you that complain a lot need to vote).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

All this is public knowledge.    Any sitting politician that tries to pass what the NRA doesn't want passed will get a poor NRA ranking.  Those that follow what the NRA wants will get a good NRA ranking.

 

Voters can use this info to decide if that should impact how they vote in future elections. 

 

Again,  politicians support the NRA because that helps them win elections.    For that to change,  how people vote has to change.    (in addition people like you that complain a lot need to vote).

I don't know if most voters know the great power the NRA has in the

halls of Congress. Maybe they do. That power and influence is very

impressive. Most voters probably don't have gun regulation as their

most important issue so would not vote on that issue alone. I would

guess there are more NRA enthusiasts for whom that is their number

one issue. 

 

My, or anybody else's, one vote wouldn't make any difference, even

in the election for dog catcher.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

New Members:

Register Here

Learn more about the new message boards:

FAQ

Having problems?

Contact Us