One Political Plaza - Home of politics
Home Active Topics Newest Pictures Search Login Register
Main
Rather Than No Tolerance For Even Sensible Gun Policy, What Do You Think Is Reasonable?
Page <<first <prev 10 of 15 next> last>>
Sep 16, 2019 03:59:42   #
Blade_Runner Loc: DARK SIDE OF THE MOON
 
Coos Bay Tom wrote:
And what else? I have ideas but it will be dismissed as liberal snowflake Bull chips. How about classifying assault weapons as class 3. You can still get them but you are going to go through some extensive background and phsycological checks. The beauty of it is you had better not have one without the class 3 permit. No problem if you don't have problems. Red Flag laws do save lives. Well there it is get to telling me I'm full of crap.
Automatic firearms ("assault weapons") were prohibited for civilian purchase by the National Firearms Act of 1934. One must hold a valid Class 3 FFL to purchase and shoot a Class 3 firearm. Semi auto firearms, including the AR15, ARE NOT classified as Class 3 firearms (assault weapons).

The upper two photos show semi-auto rifles. Both are chambered for .223 or 5.56mm x45 NATO ammunition. Both can be loaded with magazines with a 5, 10, 20 or 30 round capacity. Both are approximately the same length and weight.

The bottom photo is the semi-automatic civilian version of the AK47. Chambered for 7.62mm x 39 ammunition.







Reply
Sep 16, 2019 04:01:16   #
Larai Loc: Fallon, NV
 
Blade_Runner wrote:
Automatic firearms ("assault weapons") were prohibited for civilian purchase by the National Firearms Act of 1934. One must hold a valid Class 3 FFL to purchase and shoot a Class 3 firearm. Semi auto firearms, including the AR15, ARE NOT classified as Class 3 firearms (assault weapons).

The upper two photos show semi-auto rifles. Both are chambered for .223 or 5.56mm x45 NATO ammunition. Both can be loaded with magazines with a 5, 10, 20 or 30 round capacity. Both are approximately the same length and weight.

The bottom photo is the semi-automatic civilian version of the AK47. Chambered for 7.62mm x 39 ammunition.
Automatic firearms ("assault weapons") w... (show quote)



Reply
Sep 16, 2019 04:30:12   #
Tug484
 
Larai wrote:
Well alrighty then.. I can identify with red neck.. I wear it like a badge of honor.. so I will apologize... smiles and thank you for not bein mean to me..that my darlin is appreciated... I do, by the way feel that both sides of the isle are fulla shit for the most part but I will Not give up my right to keep n bear arms, and God forbid, be ready to be called up to a militia, should it come to that.. cold dead hands come to mind. Also, for the record, I have zero need of any kind of "assault rifle".. I have always felt that if you can't hit a som bitch with one shot two at most go back to school... hence my partiality to wheel guns and lever actions.. I've also always felt that one or two serviceable weapons and enough ammunition for both was adequate for me.. not lookin to start a war.. but really that isn't the point of this discussion.. in the Barest terms all the laws that have been made against weapons over the years has been exactly what the Gov't is NOT supposed to do, Which is to Infringe on our rights...

infringe
[inˈfrinj]
VERB

actively break the terms of (a law, agreement, etc.).
"making an unauthorized copy would infringe copyright"
synonyms:
contravene · violate · transgress · break · breach · commit a breach of · disobey · defy · flout · fly in the face of · ride roughshod over · kick against · fail to comply with · [more]
act so as to limit or undermine (something); encroach on.
"his legal rights were being infringed" · [more]
synonyms:
undermine · erode · diminish · weaken · impair · damage · compromise · limit · curb · check · place a limit on · encroach on · interfere with · disturb · disrupt

So you see where I have a problem with ANY gov't "Infringement" of our 2nd ammendment rights Period!!.. No bull shit.. not interpretation.. what OUR gov't is doin is flat out infringing on our rights!! and to give them permission in Any context of infringement may as well just walk up and hand in your guns...or Fight!!. I choose to fight thanks!.. they can have my weapon when they pry it from my cold dead hands! Period...These rights were given to us to over throw a tryranical gov't such as we have running in 2020....any one that wants to infringe on these rights INCLUDING TRUMP can kiss my rosy red ass... and my bright red neck!
Well alrighty then.. I can identify with red neck.... (show quote)



Reply
 
 
Sep 16, 2019 05:10:13   #
PeterS
 
woodguru wrote:
The fight by the hard right, and I say hard right, is that anything is a slippery slope. They object to anything and everything...that is going down like a porn star fluffer. Moderate republicans, and there are a lot of them agree with the middle of the road, background checks that include police reports, mental health, histories of violence and anger issues.

So the dialog is about what is reasonable, if you are part of the pure opposition that fights against everything you will not have a voice, this will be done without you.

The ground that needs to be discussed are the things that can make differences, it isn't about anything being able to completely eliminate mass murders, it's about the things that can make a difference.

Background checks along with a wait period sufficient to check databases, that's the common sense ground that is being reported as having support out at as high as 90%. Ground for debate exists with what does background checks include... Those databases should include...
...police reporting of domestic violence reports, restraining orders, and general red flag behavior
...felonies

Red flag laws, which allow the police and FBI to intervene when unhinged behavior and threats are reported or detected on social media.

Magazine size limits, they actually are effective in that they make it harder to carry larger numbers of mags that have only ten shots in them. Their effectiveness is curtailed whe they are limited in some states but not others. Everyone I know that wants 20/30/and even 40 round mags has them because it's easy enough to get them in Nevada.

I am a gun owner, I recently bought an AR in a tiny caliber (.204 Ruger) for coyote and target shooting. I am against people being forced to give up an array of assault oriented rifles, I favor the approach California took when they banned assault rifles It banned new ones. It was later relaxed to a standard of safety features and magazine size limits, also better than a forced taking of all of them, that is a line too far. I oppose total bans and prefer allowing the modified ARs that are available in california, although total bans are what they are as long as they don't come with being forced to turn in existing ones, mine is a custom super accurate one that cost $2500. California did not try to take people's AR's when they banned them, they grandfathered in the ones people already owned.

The right rants on about the government wanting to take our guns, it's not all of them so that is a fear mongering rhetoric. The country has a long history of having bans on different military grade weapons, also things such as fully automatic and suppressors, which are prohibited in many states.

Rather than talking about the negative and what you are afraid is a slippery slope, talk about what is reasonable and acceptable to you. I'm curious how many people on the right will say what's acceptable, although I know that to say so is to be labeled by the hard right as a traitor.
The fight by the hard right, and I say hard right,... (show quote)


Fox News found that two-thirds of Americans favored a ban on semi-automatic weapons. What's "sensible" changes with each shooting. As for people on the right, we are a democracy and rights aren't a one-way street. When the second amendment was written the intent was to have a Well-Regulated Militia to protect the country in place of a free-standing army.

Well, there isn't a conservative in this country that would favor a reduction to the military so the question begged is how can someone with an AR-15 stand up against a police force and military trained in the use of automatic weapons, drones, and explosives. Cons wouldn't stand a chance if they attacked our government and because of that, the second amendment is largely negated. We are following a fossil that is being misinterpreted solely to allow the misguided amongst us to play Rambo when doing so would get their asses shot off!

https://www.foxnews.com/politics/fox-news-poll-august-14
https://www.fff.org/2013/03/04/gun-control-and-the-dangers-of-a-standing-army/

Reply
Sep 16, 2019 05:13:02   #
PeterS
 
Blade_Runner wrote:
Automatic firearms ("assault weapons") were prohibited for civilian purchase by the National Firearms Act of 1934. One must hold a valid Class 3 FFL to purchase and shoot a Class 3 firearm. Semi auto firearms, including the AR15, ARE NOT classified as Class 3 firearms (assault weapons).

The upper two photos show semi-auto rifles. Both are chambered for .223 or 5.56mm x45 NATO ammunition. Both can be loaded with magazines with a 5, 10, 20 or 30 round capacity. Both are approximately the same length and weight.

The bottom photo is the semi-automatic civilian version of the AK47. Chambered for 7.62mm x 39 ammunition.
Automatic firearms ("assault weapons") w... (show quote)

This is why the ban should be on all semi-automatic weapons to put aside all unnecessary bickering over what is and isn't an assault weapon.

Reply
Sep 16, 2019 05:25:38   #
Coos Bay Tom Loc: coos bay oregon
 
Blade_Runner wrote:
Automatic firearms ("assault weapons") were prohibited for civilian purchase by the National Firearms Act of 1934. One must hold a valid Class 3 FFL to purchase and shoot a Class 3 firearm. Semi auto firearms, including the AR15, ARE NOT classified as Class 3 firearms (assault weapons).

The upper two photos show semi-auto rifles. Both are chambered for .223 or 5.56mm x45 NATO ammunition. Both can be loaded with magazines with a 5, 10, 20 or 30 round capacity. Both are approximately the same length and weight.

The bottom photo is the semi-automatic civilian version of the AK47. Chambered for 7.62mm x 39 ammunition.
Automatic firearms ("assault weapons") w... (show quote)


Thanks for this post. I am not in favor of a ban just a re classification. Not that many years ago we did not have to worry about the insanity of mass killings--now we do.

Reply
Sep 16, 2019 07:49:00   #
zillaorange
 
JFlorio wrote:
Of course they do. How can I possibly be biased about social Security? You aren't making any sense. I am biased about the cavalier attitude many have about our Constitution and Rights. Makes me a Constitutionalist. There, are you satisfied?


hat's wrong about being a CONSTITUTIONALIST ???!!!

Reply
 
 
Sep 16, 2019 07:50:38   #
zillaorange
 
Ricktloml wrote:
Red Flag laws undermine the very foundations of this country. Due process, innocent until proven guilty. Law-abiding gun owners would be required to prove their innocence, because their property would be confiscated FIRST, then even if they win in court, they are out attorney fees, court cost, ect. America has had easy access to guns for 240 some-odd years, mass shootings didn't start until the 1960s. As the left defined deviancy downward, cheapened life, basically debased, degraded and corrupted the culture these killings are the results. Of course the left wants to blame guns, and they certainly don't want to even consider any real solution because it would require them to examine the true underlying cause. There are already 270-300 gun laws on the books, (they are rarely enforced.) It is actually sick and twisted to USE the senseless deaths of innocent people to advance your political goals. The leadership of the left KNOW law-abiding citizens participating in their Constitutional right are not the problem...but they ARE the target.
Red Flag laws undermine the very foundations of th... (show quote)



Reply
Sep 16, 2019 07:57:05   #
zillaorange
 
Coos Bay Tom wrote:
Citizenship can go a long way with the illegal problem. Assault weapons can be regulated by the class 3 weapons license which has long been in existance. If you are not licensed you better not have one.


Then it'll be the Garands, the M1 carbines, Mini 14.s etc !!! The gun grabbers will be responsible for BLOOD IN THE STREETS !!!

Reply
Sep 16, 2019 08:00:36   #
zillaorange
 
Coos Bay Tom wrote:
Citizenship can go a long way with the illegal problem. Assault weapons can be regulated by the class 3 weapons license which has long been in existance. If you are not licensed you better not have one.


Ya mean like il duce cuomo forcing me to bring my birth certificate, passport etc. !!! But ILLEGAL ALIENS can just show up & get 1 ???!!! Get real Tom !!!

Reply
Sep 16, 2019 08:02:23   #
zillaorange
 
Tug484 wrote:
Cars, ice picks, hammers, rocks, etc. can kill.
They just want power and guns for their body guards.
Makes no sense. These weapons are dangerous, but you can't have them to protect your family.
We're important, so we get to protect ourselves and our families. Your lives do not matter.
You're just little serfs and peons.


More murders in London, where ALL FIREARMS ARE BANNED than in N. Y. !!!

Reply
 
 
Sep 16, 2019 08:09:10   #
zillaorange
 
Coos Bay Tom wrote:
I read the same statistics. More modern statistics point to the AR. Remember El Paso Wal Mart just a few weeks ago? I proposed Making the AR the m-16 The AK etc, part of the class 3 weapons class which means you have to have a class 3 permit to own one. There was a ban on their manufacture from 1994 to 2004 and it did help. Every one clamors about nuts with guns. A nut will not pass the class 3 weapons check.


The right to own & bear arms shall not be INFRINGED !!! Infringe - violate, transgress, encroach, trespass. Pick 1 & tell me the gun grabbers are ANTI CONSTITUTION !!!

Reply
Sep 16, 2019 08:10:33   #
Tug484
 
zillaorange wrote:
More murders in London, where ALL FIREARMS ARE BANNED than in N. Y. !!!


Yes

Reply
Sep 16, 2019 08:13:02   #
zillaorange
 
PeterS wrote:
This is why the ban should be on all semi-automatic weapons to put aside all unnecessary bickering over what is and isn't an assault weapon.


There ya go lefty ! What part of the Constitution goes next ??? Go read w's Patriot Act !!! It's O.K. to violate the Constitution, but don't transgress on the moslem political movement !!!

Reply
Sep 16, 2019 08:48:04   #
Smedley_buzkill
 
Coos Bay Tom wrote:
Thanks for this post. I am not in favor of a ban just a re classification. Not that many years ago we did not have to worry about the insanity of mass killings--now we do.


Tom, these mass shootings still account for less than 2% of the total murders in this country. 14 million AR and AK style rifles privately owned. Maybe 50 used in mass shootings.
How about we stop drunk driving, which kills far more people than semi auto rifles, by banning the cars of non-drinkers?

Reply
Page <<first <prev 10 of 15 next> last>>
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.
Main
OnePoliticalPlaza.com - Forum
Copyright 2012-2024 IDF International Technologies, Inc.