Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you:
No adverts like this in the forums anymore.
Times and dates in your local timezone.
Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance.
Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely.
Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net.
If you are already a member then feel free to login now.
2017/10/02 18:44:32
Subject: Active Shooter in Las Vegas Attacks Country Music Festival with Automatic Weapon
The answer about what can actually be done about stuff like that has been discussed in every other already locked gun thread on here, and no new answers will come from this incident.
We just need to accept that we, as a nation, have decided that we are okay with stuff like this happening. Anybody can kill people with or without guns, and guns just make it easier to kill more people and to kill them quicker. That's why people carry concealed guns rather than killing concealed hammers, even though one of the popular arguments is "if someone wants to kill you they will just use a hammer and not a gun, so a gun makes no difference." From everything we have read the shooter was a legal gun owner, right until the moment he decided to murder a lot of people. The Orlando shooter was a legal gun owner, right until the moment he decided to murder a lot of people.
I can walk into a school tomorrow and choke students to death or hit them in the head with a hammer to kill them, but I wouldn't be able to take out that many kids before someone stops me. If I use my guns I could take out quite a few kids before someone can stop me. My weapons are all legal, I can carry them legally, my ammo is all legal, and the only thing keeping me from being the next mass-shooter is the simple fact that I have no urge to go around killing people. The weapons I legally own make it easy for me to commit a horrific crime if I wanted to, and we decided long ago that our rights to own these weapons are important enough to accept the consequence that having all these weapons make it easy for anybody, even legal gun owners, to use them for horrific purposes.
There are things we can do to improve it, but we won't do them. For the next week it will be "it's to early to talk about it", then someone will tweet about unpatriotic people not loving our flag and we will move on and be angry about something else. Then the next shooting will happen. Rinse, repeat.
We might be sad that this happen, but we have long ago decided that it's an acceptable consequence of our rights and freedoms. And truthfully, statistically speaking, events like this are a meaningless risk in the grand scheme of things.
2017/10/02 18:45:05
Subject: Active Shooter in Las Vegas Attacks Country Music Festival with Automatic Weapon
skyth wrote: Country music concert would appeal to a more conservative bent which increases the chance of people having guns there. If they did, it did them jack and squat...
Just spit balling here.
I highly doubt any concert would allow attendees to carry firearms, regardless of genre or any perceived political leanings.
I was in TN for a music festival and I saw undercover police and what one guy said being retired carry side-arms.
However, not sure what they could've done as the LV shooter was on the 32nd floor shooting THREE football fields away... (edit, seeing Ouze's post, make that FOUR football fields)
No way they could return fire from the event. Not with pistols anyways. It's possible he was hiding his muzzle flash too. I don't see any flashes in any of the videos (though they wern't good quality). Something as simple as wrapping wet towel around the muzzle will take away most of the muzzle flash. They only found him because of a fire alarm from what is being reported.
Something that will probably become standard for events like this is a tech invented by the army. It uses the sound of the gunshot to locate an enemy sniper quickly. I don't know how many lives could have been saved if they had it but just knowing what direction the shooting was coming from would have been very useful in helping people escape and where to hide.
because these tragedies just aren't tragic enough.
Spoiler:
Democrats are voicing opposition to a Republican measure that would ease restrictions on the purchase of gun silencers.
The measure from Rep. Jeff Duncan (R-S.C.) is in a broad sportsmen’s bill, the Sportsmen's Heritage and Recreational Enhancement Act, aimed at broadening public access to federal lands for hunting and fishing.
But the bill also contains some gun provisions, including Duncan’s, which would make it easier to buy silencers for firearms, a process which currently requires registration and a background check under the National Firearms Act.
Under Duncan's measure, silencers, also known as suppressors, would be removed from the National Firearms Act. Purchasers would need to only undergo a less extensive, instant background check.
At a House Natural Resources Subcommittee on Federal Lands hearing on the bill Tuesday, Rep. Jimmy Gomez (D-Calif.) said silencers muffle the distinctive sounds of a gun and make it more difficult to identify where shots are coming from.
“It is for this reason that silencers are so heavily regulated and why so dangerous if they fall into the wrong hands,” he said. “We should not make it easier for anyone to obtain these weapons of war.”
Gomez expressed dismay that the measure was tied to a hunting and fishing bill.
“It is deeply concerning that our committee is taking up valuable time and resources on a bill loaded with provisions that will weaken gun safety laws instead of a clean bill that could potentially earn all of our support,” he said.
But Republicans defended the measure, saying silencers were used primarily by sportsmen to prevent hearing loss.
Duncan’s measure is dubbed the Hearing Protection Act and has the backing of the National Rifle Association, the country’s most powerful gun rights group.
"Right now we are in a situation where it seems … that sportsmen have to choose between damaging their hearing and being able to hunt, shoot, target practice,” said Rep. Liz Cheney (R-Wyo.).
Democrats invited David Chipman, senior policy adviser of Americans for Responsible Solutions, a pro-gun control group to testify. Chipman, a 25-year veteran of the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives, said making silencers easier to obtain would endanger police officers and the public.
Rep. Donald McEachin (D-Va.) asked Chipman if the legislation would make active shooter situations more dangerous.
“Anytime an active shooter situation takes longer to recognize as an actual shooting causes more injury and death,” he said.
Referencing last year’s mass shootings at the Pulse Nightclub in Orlando, Fla., and the Emanuel African Methodist Episcopal Church in Charleston, S.C., McEachin asked Chipman if the bill would lead to more deadly weapons ending up in the hands of the kinds of people who commit these atrocities.
“This bill in particular would make silencers more readily available to criminals because for the first time in 80 years private parties could sell these guns without background checks on the internet and in gun shows and this has never been the case before,” Chipman said.
“One of the reason we have not seen silencers out there in tons of crimes is the fact that we have a regulatory structure that makes it very difficult to get these.”
Chipman said there would have been more casualties at the congressional baseball practice in Alexandria, Va., where House Majority Whip Steve Scalise (R-La.) was shot and wounded if the gunman had used a silencer.
“Since silencers today are legal, there can be no possible benefit other than a negative undercutting of public safety by making them unregulated,” Chipman said.
Democrats also raised concerns that other gun provisions in the sportsmen’s bill could make it easier to import more firearms into the U.S.
Cheney asked Stephen Halbrook, who has sued on behalf of the NRA, whether additional access to suppressors will result in an increase in gun violence.
“It’s easy to make a suppressor. If you want to make one now you can do it and a person who would not be dissuaded from committing a murder by capital punishment potentially is not going to worry about a National Firearms Act conviction for non-registration of a suppressor,” Halbrook said.
“The fact is we’ve heard a parade of horribles of issues that would apply to criminals and we have criminal misuse of weapons now,” he continued. “This bill would simply make it easier for law abiding people to protect their hearing.”
After the hearing, Democrats held an event to draw more attention to the measure.
Rep. Raúl Grivalja (D-Ariz.) called the gun provisions “poison pills” and said it was “cowardly” and “arrogant” to attach them to “otherwise good legislation.”
“What happened today was a kowtowing to the NRA, to gun manufacturers, their agenda, and now to what they hope is a new industry that expands: silencer manufacturers,” Grivalja told reporters.
Democrats said they did not expect to be able to block the silencer provision in the House.
“Hopefully the Senate will provide a little adult supervision on these issues,” said Rep. Jared Huffman (D-Calif.).
This story was last updated at 5:44 p.m.
What does a silencer have to do with a full auto weapon?
Isn't that pretty mucht he nature of all of these types of events? We all just move-on and think "There was nothing we could do. These things happen". The question always left in my mind.... is there really nothing we can do? Do thee things really "just happen?"
I really don't know.
You actually can do something about all the mass shootings in the US: crack down on guns and gun ownership.
How would you do this under a legal framework where the right to possess firearms and weapons is a fundamental civil right, one which has been affirmed by the supreme court as an individual right at both the federal and state levels? Particularly when there are 9 digits worth of weapons in circulation and essentially no record of who owns what?
the second part is easy, enforce the whole amendment, not just 1/2 a sentence. If you're not in the national guard, nor in the military, turn in your guns. Tell those activist judges to read the whole amendment.
You ever asked 300 million gun owners to turn over their guns? You think this will save lives?
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2017/10/02 18:49:10
If we fail to anticipate the unforeseen or expect the unexpected in a universe of infinite possibilities, we may find ourselves at the mercy of anyone or anything that cannot be programmed, categorized or easily referenced.
- Fox Mulder
2017/10/02 18:51:37
Subject: Re:Active Shooter in Las Vegas Attacks Country Music Festival with Automatic Weapon
I just realized that I had been doing some writing last night/yesterday. I think it's kind of eerie that this happened around the same time...especially now that D-USA just said we can't really do anything to stop such events.
so let's pop bottles, stay ignorant, this is bliss or isn't it?
well I can't change the incidents so it's best to stay indifferent
until the circumstances flip and it's you facing a bananna clip
in the hand of man with a camel lit clap the chest like an anvil hits keeping on squeezing till the piece goes click barely breathing what is this
The only way we can ever solve anything is to look in the mirror and find no enemy
2017/10/02 18:52:43
Subject: Active Shooter in Las Vegas Attacks Country Music Festival with Automatic Weapon
the second part is easy, enforce the whole amendment, not just 1/2 a sentence. If you're not in the national guard, nor in the military, turn in your guns. Tell those activist judges to read the whole amendment.
You seem to have a fundamental misunderstanding of what the Second Amendment does.
"The Omnissiah is my Moderati"
2017/10/02 18:52:55
Subject: Active Shooter in Las Vegas Attacks Country Music Festival with Automatic Weapon
Isn't that pretty mucht he nature of all of these types of events? We all just move-on and think "There was nothing we could do. These things happen". The question always left in my mind.... is there really nothing we can do? Do thee things really "just happen?"
I really don't know.
You actually can do something about all the mass shootings in the US: crack down on guns and gun ownership.
How would you do this under a legal framework where the right to possess firearms and weapons is a fundamental civil right, one which has been affirmed by the supreme court as an individual right at both the federal and state levels? Particularly when there are 9 digits worth of weapons in circulation and essentially no record of who owns what?
the second part is easy, enforce the whole amendment, not just 1/2 a sentence. If you're not in the national guard, nor in the military, turn in your guns. Tell those activist judges to read the whole amendment.
The full 2nd amendment means what it means... not what you'd like it to be.
Militia is not the national guard... the militia are regular armed citizens.
Not sure what additional laws would've stopped this... but, we don't have the full story so I'd wait a few days before figuring out which gun control laws are needed.
Live Ork, Be Ork. or D'Ork!
2017/10/02 18:53:10
Subject: Active Shooter in Las Vegas Attacks Country Music Festival with Automatic Weapon
Isn't that pretty mucht he nature of all of these types of events? We all just move-on and think "There was nothing we could do. These things happen". The question always left in my mind.... is there really nothing we can do? Do thee things really "just happen?"
I really don't know.
You actually can do something about all the mass shootings in the US: crack down on guns and gun ownership.
How would you do this under a legal framework where the right to possess firearms and weapons is a fundamental civil right, one which has been affirmed by the supreme court as an individual right at both the federal and state levels? Particularly when there are 9 digits worth of weapons in circulation and essentially no record of who owns what?
the second part is easy, enforce the whole amendment, not just 1/2 a sentence. If you're not in the national guard, nor in the military, turn in your guns. Tell those activist judges to read the whole amendment.
thats not not so easy. The court has made its decisions and precedent has been set and incorporated to the states. You would need a new case on the subject that makes its way to the SC, the SC would have to agree to hear it (which they generally do not) and then vote to overturn that precedent. Not impossible, but practically so, and thats not getting into the value/weight/meaning/legal value of the preceding militia qualification and what purpose the amendment serves in that form (why would the federal govt need an amendment for its own ability to keep and bear arms?)
Even if you do that however, how do you collect 300 million guns when you have no idea where they are, what kind they are, who has them, etc? How much compensation do you provide for turning over that expensive property? If you do a flat $1k per gun as a general average, you're looking at over $300 billion on just that alone, to say nothing of enforcement/administration costs, or likely resistancr and noncooperation from elements of the population and local level law enforcement, etc. Even the most stringent bans have always grandfathered in existing weapons. The MG ban doesnt apply to pre-86 weapons for example, "assault weapons" owned prior to the enactment of bans have always been grandfathered in, etc. Theres lots of US law that basically says the government cant ban something and apply it post facto, and that would be an issue as well.
There's lots of interlocking and overlapping legal hurdles to overcome there, very little of it simple or easy.
IRON WITHIN, IRON WITHOUT.
New Heavy Gear Log! Also...Grey Knights! The correct pronunciation is Imperial Guard and Stormtroopers, "Astra Militarum" and "Tempestus Scions" are something you'll find at Hogwarts.
2017/10/02 18:54:16
Subject: Active Shooter in Las Vegas Attacks Country Music Festival with Automatic Weapon
Are those numbers worth it, that's the other question. But let's not pretend that reducing the number of firearms wouldn't have any impact on the number of gun deaths.
Edit: aside from the issue of "how do you enforce a reduction in guns in circulation"...
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2017/10/02 18:57:35
2017/10/02 18:54:28
Subject: Active Shooter in Las Vegas Attacks Country Music Festival with Automatic Weapon
Whenever I hear gunfire I am always slightly alarmed by how innocuous the sound actually appears.
Its almost disturbing in a way. 'Firecrackers' is always something that I hear gunfire compared to. This event was no different.
Anyway. The media is being its usual vile self. the desperation from some reporters in trying to find an angle is particularly reprehensible.
I feel for the victims but also the brother and family of the shooter. being hounded so soon after the event.
2017/10/02 18:57:10
Subject: Active Shooter in Las Vegas Attacks Country Music Festival with Automatic Weapon
The full 2nd amendment means what it means... not what you'd like it to be.
Militia is not the national guard... the militia are regular armed citizens.
To be fair, 5 people decided that the term militia means "everybody". And in the future 5 people can just as easily decide that "militia" means national guard.
Constitutional issues only mean what constitutional judges think they mean, and they can change their mind at any point if they so decide.
2017/10/02 18:58:09
Subject: Active Shooter in Las Vegas Attacks Country Music Festival with Automatic Weapon
the second part is easy, enforce the whole amendment, not just 1/2 a sentence. If you're not in the national guard, nor in the military, turn in your guns. Tell those activist judges to read the whole amendment.
You seem to have a fundamental misunderstanding of what the Second Amendment does.
"A well regulated militia," check
there's no drafts anymore, so no civilians will need their own guns to form a militia.
A background check and waiting periods are great places to start.
2017/10/02 18:58:15
Subject: Active Shooter in Las Vegas Attacks Country Music Festival with Automatic Weapon
the second part is easy, enforce the whole amendment, not just 1/2 a sentence. If you're not in the national guard, nor in the military, turn in your guns. Tell those activist judges to read the whole amendment.
You seem to have a fundamental misunderstanding of what the Second Amendment does.
"A well regulated militia," check
Our Supreme Court decided that militia actually means "everybody that can own guns".
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2017/10/02 19:00:51
2017/10/02 19:00:53
Subject: Re:Active Shooter in Las Vegas Attacks Country Music Festival with Automatic Weapon
d-usa wrote: The answer about what can actually be done about stuff like that has been discussed in every other already locked gun thread on here, and no new answers will come from this incident.
We just need to accept that we, as a nation, have decided that we are okay with stuff like this happening. Anybody can kill people with or without guns, and guns just make it easier to kill more people and to kill them quicker. That's why people carry concealed guns rather than killing concealed hammers, even though one of the popular arguments is "if someone wants to kill you they will just use a hammer and not a gun, so a gun makes no difference." From everything we have read the shooter was a legal gun owner, right until the moment he decided to murder a lot of people. The Orlando shooter was a legal gun owner, right until the moment he decided to murder a lot of people.
I can walk into a school tomorrow and choke students to death or hit them in the head with a hammer to kill them, but I wouldn't be able to take out that many kids before someone stops me. If I use my guns I could take out quite a few kids before someone can stop me. My weapons are all legal, I can carry them legally, my ammo is all legal, and the only thing keeping me from being the next mass-shooter is the simple fact that I have no urge to go around killing people. The weapons I legally own make it easy for me to commit a horrific crime if I wanted to, and we decided long ago that our rights to own these weapons are important enough to accept the consequence that having all these weapons make it easy for anybody, even legal gun owners, to use them for horrific purposes.
There are things we can do to improve it, but we won't do them. For the next week it will be "it's to early to talk about it", then someone will tweet about unpatriotic people not loving our flag and we will move on and be angry about something else. Then the next shooting will happen. Rinse, repeat.
We might be sad that this happen, but we have long ago decided that it's an acceptable consequence of our rights and freedoms. And truthfully, statistically speaking, events like this are a meaningless risk in the grand scheme of things.
Your argument is easily defeated by coming up with easier ways to kill lots of people than buying a gun - which the list is endless. The issue here is not how easy it is to kill lots of people though. The issue is why to people want to kill lots of people. Until you can answer that and fix that problem - things like this will happen. The fascination killers seem to have with killing with guns is likely because it's more personal as it makes them feel like the device of destruction rather than...the bomb- or the poison- or the fire. I could be wrong but I am assuming that people that want to kill lots of people will just pick whatever method is most personal to them and use it. Not even to mention that obtaining a weapon in a society that bans guns but has 300 million unregistered guns floating around will be exceptionally easy.
If we fail to anticipate the unforeseen or expect the unexpected in a universe of infinite possibilities, we may find ourselves at the mercy of anyone or anything that cannot be programmed, categorized or easily referenced.
- Fox Mulder
2017/10/02 19:01:19
Subject: Active Shooter in Las Vegas Attacks Country Music Festival with Automatic Weapon
the second part is easy, enforce the whole amendment, not just 1/2 a sentence. If you're not in the national guard, nor in the military, turn in your guns. Tell those activist judges to read the whole amendment.
You seem to have a fundamental misunderstanding of what the Second Amendment does.
"A well regulated militia," check
there's no drafts anymore, so no civilians will need their own guns to form a militia.
A background check and waiting periods are great places to start.
When you are drafted, you arent in a Militia, you're in the active military. Draftees in the modern era don't bring their own weapons, they are issued them by the government. A Militia, is on the simplest level and banding together of Civilians for use in military functions, they would need to provide their own firearms.
2017/10/02 19:02:42
Subject: Active Shooter in Las Vegas Attacks Country Music Festival with Automatic Weapon
Isn't that pretty mucht he nature of all of these types of events? We all just move-on and think "There was nothing we could do. These things happen". The question always left in my mind.... is there really nothing we can do? Do thee things really "just happen?"
I really don't know.
You actually can do something about all the mass shootings in the US: crack down on guns and gun ownership.
How would you do this under a legal framework where the right to possess firearms and weapons is a fundamental civil right, one which has been affirmed by the supreme court as an individual right at both the federal and state levels? Particularly when there are 9 digits worth of weapons in circulation and essentially no record of who owns what?
the second part is easy, enforce the whole amendment, not just 1/2 a sentence. If you're not in the national guard, nor in the military, turn in your guns. Tell those activist judges to read the whole amendment.
The full 2nd amendment means what it means... not what you'd like it to be.
Militia is not the national guard... the militia are regular armed citizens.
Not sure what additional laws would've stopped this... but, we don't have the full story so I'd wait a few days before figuring out which gun control laws are needed.
What is going to happen in a few days that will change the argument?
2017/10/02 19:03:11
Subject: Active Shooter in Las Vegas Attacks Country Music Festival with Automatic Weapon
The full 2nd amendment means what it means... not what you'd like it to be.
Militia is not the national guard... the militia are regular armed citizens.
To be fair, 5 people decided that the term militia means "everybody". And in the future 5 people can just as easily decide that "militia" means national guard.
Constitutional issues only mean what constitutional judges think they mean, and they can change their mind at any point if they so decide.
True... which is unfortunate because the current precedent is how it worked when the constitution was drafted.
Changing the application of the law to be something contrary to it's original interpretation is fraught with perils and something the judiciary ought to avoid... but, that's for a different thread.
Live Ork, Be Ork. or D'Ork!
2017/10/02 19:04:43
Subject: Active Shooter in Las Vegas Attacks Country Music Festival with Automatic Weapon
Xenomancers wrote: Your argument is easily defeated by coming up with easier ways to kill lots of people than buying a gun - which the list is endless. The issue here is not how easy it is to kill lots of people though. The issue is why to people want to kill lots of people. Until you can answer that and fix that problem - things like this will happen. The fascination killers seem to have with killing with guns is likely because it's more personal as it makes them feel like the device of destruction rather than...the bomb- or the poison- or the fire. I could be wrong but I am assuming that people that want to kill lots of people will just pick whatever method is most personal to them and use it. Not even to mention that obtaining a weapon in a society that bans guns but has 300 million unregistered guns floating around will be exceptionally easy.
I know I have my concealed carry bomb, and my concealed carry fire, and my concealed carry poison on me in case I want another easy substitute for self defense when I feel that my concealed carry gun just isn't interesting enough that day.
People use guns to kill because they are cheap, plentiful, and easy. People use guns to commit crimes for the same reason people carry guns to protect themselves. Yet, people who carry guns for self defense because it's super easy to make people dead with them, which is why I carry them, have a strange aversion to admitting that guns make it so much easier to kill people.
2017/10/02 19:06:00
Subject: Active Shooter in Las Vegas Attacks Country Music Festival with Automatic Weapon
Vaktathi wrote: How would you do this under a legal framework where the right to possess firearms and weapons is a fundamental civil right, one which has been affirmed by the supreme court as an individual right at both the federal and state levels? Particularly when there are 9 digits worth of weapons in circulation and essentially no record of who owns what?
the second part is easy, enforce the whole amendment, not just 1/2 a sentence. If you're not in the national guard, nor in the military, turn in your guns. Tell those activist judges to read the whole amendment.
thats not not so easy. The court has made its decisions and precedent has been set and incorporated to the states. You would need a new case on the subject that makes its way to the SC, the SC would have to agree to hear it (which they generally do not) and then vote to overturn that precedent. Not impossible, but practically so, and thats not getting into the value/weight/meaning/legal value of the preceding militia qualification and what purpose the amendment serves in that form (why would the federal govt need an amendment for its own ability to keep and bear arms?)
Even if you do that however, how do you collect 300 million guns when you have no idea where they are, what kind they are, who has them, etc? How much compensation do you provide for turning over that expensive property? If you do a flat $1k per gun as a general average, you're looking at over $300 billion on just that alone, to say nothing of enforcement/administration costs, or likely resistancr and noncooperation from elements of the population and local level law enforcement, etc. Even the most stringent bans have always grandfathered in existing weapons. The MG ban doesnt apply to pre-86 weapons for example, "assault weapons" owned prior to the enactment of bans have always been grandfathered in, etc. Theres lots of US law that basically says the government cant ban something and apply it post facto, and that would be an issue as well.
There's lots of interlocking and overlapping legal hurdles to overcome there, very little of it simple or easy.
You just stop selling the guns & bullets to civilians, so as the guns break, or get confiscated as evidence, they're removed from the pool. 300 million is chump change really, they found 800 million to increase the militaries industrial complex budget. Then take away the cost of these emergency responses and the militarization of the police and the cost is nothing and that's buying them back at your suggested price. You could probably buy them back at 1/2 current value.
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2017/10/02 19:07:15
2017/10/02 19:06:53
Subject: Active Shooter in Las Vegas Attacks Country Music Festival with Automatic Weapon
Are those numbers worth it, that's the other question. But let's not pretend that reducing the number of firearms wouldn't have any impact on the number of gun deaths.
Edit: aside from the issue of "how do you enforce a reduction in guns in circulation"...
Does this all happen before or after the next 30-40 waco and ruby ridge events followed by a possible civil war?
If we fail to anticipate the unforeseen or expect the unexpected in a universe of infinite possibilities, we may find ourselves at the mercy of anyone or anything that cannot be programmed, categorized or easily referenced.
- Fox Mulder
2017/10/02 19:07:07
Subject: Active Shooter in Las Vegas Attacks Country Music Festival with Automatic Weapon
The full 2nd amendment means what it means... not what you'd like it to be.
Militia is not the national guard... the militia are regular armed citizens.
To be fair, 5 people decided that the term militia means "everybody". And in the future 5 people can just as easily decide that "militia" means national guard.
Constitutional issues only mean what constitutional judges think they mean, and they can change their mind at any point if they so decide.
True... which is unfortunate because the current precedent is how it worked when the constitution was drafted.
Changing the application of the law to be something contrary to it's original interpretation is fraught with perils and something the judiciary ought to avoid... but, that's for a different thread.
It was written 200+ years ago. There were people still considered to be property at that time. We made changes to prevent that from happening. Why is it so hard to make other changes?
Are those numbers worth it, that's the other question. But let's not pretend that reducing the number of firearms wouldn't have any impact on the number of gun deaths.
Edit: aside from the issue of "how do you enforce a reduction in guns in circulation"...
Does this all happen before or after the next 30-40 waco and ruby ridge events followed by a possible civil war?
Holy slippery slopes batman. I forgot that Australia has these incidents happen on the daily over there, now that they have very tight gun restrictions. I bet they are hating it!
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2017/10/02 19:08:05
2017/10/02 19:08:05
Subject: Active Shooter in Las Vegas Attacks Country Music Festival with Automatic Weapon
Isn't that pretty mucht he nature of all of these types of events? We all just move-on and think "There was nothing we could do. These things happen". The question always left in my mind.... is there really nothing we can do? Do thee things really "just happen?"
I really don't know.
You actually can do something about all the mass shootings in the US: crack down on guns and gun ownership.
How would you do this under a legal framework where the right to possess firearms and weapons is a fundamental civil right, one which has been affirmed by the supreme court as an individual right at both the federal and state levels? Particularly when there are 9 digits worth of weapons in circulation and essentially no record of who owns what?
the second part is easy, enforce the whole amendment, not just 1/2 a sentence. If you're not in the national guard, nor in the military, turn in your guns. Tell those activist judges to read the whole amendment.
The full 2nd amendment means what it means... not what you'd like it to be.
Militia is not the national guard... the militia are regular armed citizens.
Not sure what additional laws would've stopped this... but, we don't have the full story so I'd wait a few days before figuring out which gun control laws are needed.
What is going to happen in a few days that will change the argument?
Honestly?
I don't know...
Just like we don't know much why this donkey-cave shot up a music concert...
Keep in mind that this hotel was a "Guns Free Zone" and that at least one weapon may have been a fully automatic weapon (unconfirmed though). Besides the flat out murder, this guy went well out of his way to plan this breaking multiple laws in the process.
Live Ork, Be Ork. or D'Ork!
2017/10/02 19:09:19
Subject: Active Shooter in Las Vegas Attacks Country Music Festival with Automatic Weapon
Vaktathi wrote: How would you do this under a legal framework where the right to possess firearms and weapons is a fundamental civil right, one which has been affirmed by the supreme court as an individual right at both the federal and state levels? Particularly when there are 9 digits worth of weapons in circulation and essentially no record of who owns what?
the second part is easy, enforce the whole amendment, not just 1/2 a sentence. If you're not in the national guard, nor in the military, turn in your guns. Tell those activist judges to read the whole amendment.
thats not not so easy. The court has made its decisions and precedent has been set and incorporated to the states. You would need a new case on the subject that makes its way to the SC, the SC would have to agree to hear it (which they generally do not) and then vote to overturn that precedent. Not impossible, but practically so, and thats not getting into the value/weight/meaning/legal value of the preceding militia qualification and what purpose the amendment serves in that form (why would the federal govt need an amendment for its own ability to keep and bear arms?)
Even if you do that however, how do you collect 300 million guns when you have no idea where they are, what kind they are, who has them, etc? How much compensation do you provide for turning over that expensive property? If you do a flat $1k per gun as a general average, you're looking at over $300 billion on just that alone, to say nothing of enforcement/administration costs, or likely resistancr and noncooperation from elements of the population and local level law enforcement, etc. Even the most stringent bans have always grandfathered in existing weapons. The MG ban doesnt apply to pre-86 weapons for example, "assault weapons" owned prior to the enactment of bans have always been grandfathered in, etc. Theres lots of US law that basically says the government cant ban something and apply it post facto, and that would be an issue as well.
There's lots of interlocking and overlapping legal hurdles to overcome there, very little of it simple or easy.
You just stop selling the guns & bullets to civilians, so as the guns break, or get confiscated as evidence, they're removed from the pool 300 million is chump change really, they found 800 million to increase the militaries industrial complex budget. Then take away the cost of these emergency responses and the militarization of the police and the cost is nothing and that's buying them back at your suggested price. You could probably buy them back at 1/2 current value.
So now instead of turning 300 million people into criminals you want to force people who produce the guns and ammo, sell the guns and ammo out of work? Increasing the number of disgruntled people in the populace who would have the means to carry out shootings. Either way, you're increasing the likely hood of violence.
2017/10/02 19:11:31
Subject: Active Shooter in Las Vegas Attacks Country Music Festival with Automatic Weapon
Vaktathi wrote: How would you do this under a legal framework where the right to possess firearms and weapons is a fundamental civil right, one which has been affirmed by the supreme court as an individual right at both the federal and state levels? Particularly when there are 9 digits worth of weapons in circulation and essentially no record of who owns what?
the second part is easy, enforce the whole amendment, not just 1/2 a sentence. If you're not in the national guard, nor in the military, turn in your guns. Tell those activist judges to read the whole amendment.
thats not not so easy. The court has made its decisions and precedent has been set and incorporated to the states. You would need a new case on the subject that makes its way to the SC, the SC would have to agree to hear it (which they generally do not) and then vote to overturn that precedent. Not impossible, but practically so, and thats not getting into the value/weight/meaning/legal value of the preceding militia qualification and what purpose the amendment serves in that form (why would the federal govt need an amendment for its own ability to keep and bear arms?)
Even if you do that however, how do you collect 300 million guns when you have no idea where they are, what kind they are, who has them, etc? How much compensation do you provide for turning over that expensive property? If you do a flat $1k per gun as a general average, you're looking at over $300 billion on just that alone, to say nothing of enforcement/administration costs, or likely resistancr and noncooperation from elements of the population and local level law enforcement, etc. Even the most stringent bans have always grandfathered in existing weapons. The MG ban doesnt apply to pre-86 weapons for example, "assault weapons" owned prior to the enactment of bans have always been grandfathered in, etc. Theres lots of US law that basically says the government cant ban something and apply it post facto, and that would be an issue as well.
There's lots of interlocking and overlapping legal hurdles to overcome there, very little of it simple or easy.
You just stop selling the guns & bullets to civilians, so as the guns break, or get confiscated as evidence, they're removed from the pool 300 million is chump change really, they found 800 million to increase the militaries industrial complex budget. Then take away the cost of these emergency responses and the militarization of the police and the cost is nothing and that's buying them back at your suggested price. You could probably buy them back at 1/2 current value.
So now instead of turning 300 million people into criminals you want to force people who produce the guns and ammo, sell the guns and ammo out of work? Increasing the number of disgruntled people in the populace who would have the means to carry out shootings. Either way, you're increasing the likely hood of violence.
well if that's all it takes to turn "responsible law abiding gun owners" into violent criminals. then we can conclude they're already violent gun owners, and as such they should not be allowed near weapons of any kind.
2017/10/02 19:12:05
Subject: Active Shooter in Las Vegas Attacks Country Music Festival with Automatic Weapon
The full 2nd amendment means what it means... not what you'd like it to be.
Militia is not the national guard... the militia are regular armed citizens.
To be fair, 5 people decided that the term militia means "everybody". And in the future 5 people can just as easily decide that "militia" means national guard.
Constitutional issues only mean what constitutional judges think they mean, and they can change their mind at any point if they so decide.
True... which is unfortunate because the current precedent is how it worked when the constitution was drafted.
Changing the application of the law to be something contrary to it's original interpretation is fraught with perils and something the judiciary ought to avoid... but, that's for a different thread.
It was written 200+ years ago. There were people still considered to be property at that time. We made changes to prevent that from happening. Why is it so hard to make other changes?
So? Doesn't make it less valid.
We have mechanisms to change the laws... it just never reached the necessary threshold. Which is a good thing because changes like this ought to be hard.
Live Ork, Be Ork. or D'Ork!
2017/10/02 19:12:26
Subject: Active Shooter in Las Vegas Attacks Country Music Festival with Automatic Weapon
the second part is easy, enforce the whole amendment, not just 1/2 a sentence. If you're not in the national guard, nor in the military, turn in your guns. Tell those activist judges to read the whole amendment.
You seem to have a fundamental misunderstanding of what the Second Amendment does.
"A well regulated militia," check
there's no drafts anymore, so no civilians will need their own guns to form a militia.
A background check and waiting periods are great places to start.
We already have background checks.
Also according to U.S. Code › Title 10 › Subtitle A › Part I › Chapter 12 › § 246 the militia consists of every able bodied male between the ages of 17 and 45 who is a US citizen or has declared his intent to become a US citizen. There is also the organized militia which consists of the National Guard and the Naval Militia but US law does not limit the militia to only being members of the National Guard.
A majority of the 50 states also have gun rights in their state constitutions which would still allow for widespread gun ownership in those states regardless of the status or interpretation of the 2nd amendment of the federal constitution. You're not going to get rid of guns in the US although doing so would save lives as suicides make up the majority of annual gun deaths.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2017/10/02 19:12:41
Mundus vult decipi, ergo decipiatur
2017/10/02 19:13:07
Subject: Active Shooter in Las Vegas Attacks Country Music Festival with Automatic Weapon
The full 2nd amendment means what it means... not what you'd like it to be.
Militia is not the national guard... the militia are regular armed citizens.
To be fair, 5 people decided that the term militia means "everybody". And in the future 5 people can just as easily decide that "militia" means national guard.
Constitutional issues only mean what constitutional judges think they mean, and they can change their mind at any point if they so decide.
True... which is unfortunate because the current precedent is how it worked when the constitution was drafted.
The constitution didn't mention guns at all when drafted and was ratified without any protections about gun ownership.
The 2nd Amendment was ratified 3 years after the constitution, hence why it's an "Amendment".
The way it works when the Constitution was drafted was that people can decide to add Amendments like the 2nd, which was done, and people can repeal the 2nd if they wanted to. And the way the Constitution was drafted also means that the SCOTUS judges get to decide what the Constitution actually means.
You ever asked 300 million gun owners to turn over their guns? You think this will save lives?
3000
4000 
