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.

Illeix wrote:Well, seb, that's the American culture.

America's history was written with a quill in one hand, and a rifle in the other.

But as for a need to own firearms, I say they do play a neccisary part in modern society (don't believe me? check the nearest police officer's belt)
I own several, and I have needed one to remove unwanted "guests" a few times.

There is a need, a small one, but you also need to know how to properly handle one!

Well, yeah, guns play a part in life. People who are trained to engage in conflicts like policeman and soldiers will need to have a gun. That’s the same the world over.

The difference is when civilians start feeling the need to carry a gun, because they feel trouble is likely to be just around the corner, and they’ll need a gun to stop it. Whether this is because trouble really could be just around the corner, or because they believe it could despite all evidence to the contrary, it is not a healthy society.

Well, your arguement is very solid, until the off chance that trouble is around that corner.

like I had just mentioned, I have been in situations that called for a firearm.

I carry every day. It's legal for me to do so.

Do I feel anxiety or paranoia? No, none more than you. Just because I have a gun does not mean I expect nor want to be forced to use it.

Illeix wrote:Well, your arguement is very solid, until the off chance that trouble is around that corner.

like I had just mentioned, I have been in situations that called for a firearm.

I carry every day. It's legal for me to do so.

Do I feel anxiety or paranoia? No, none more than you. Just because I have a gun does not mean I expect nor want to be forced to use it.

But there it is, you're walking around with a gun because you believe you might be in a violent situation any second now. If it's true, then there's a serious problem. If it isn't true, then it's a different problem, but still a very serious one.

In fact, in either case it's a far bigger problem than the guns themselves.

I CC every day and have since I could legally. Why you may ask? Its not cause I live every day In fear that someone is going to mug me, its not because I fear that the government is going to storm my house or russians are going to come falling out of the sky... I CC because if I ever was in the situation where I needed one id rather have one and never need it then need one and not have it.

I can think of two times when CC has helped people in my area. One included stopping a Mountain Lion headed toward the grade school, and the other my close friend awoke one night to find someone trying to gain access through the kitchen window. He stopped immediatly when my friend greated him with the business end of his Ar-15 from Rock River Arms. Never fired a shot. Just told him very calmly that "This isnt your house and I suggest you leave immediatly." in which he replied something along the lines of "My Bad!" and left.

The Op's story is very tragic indeed, but it is in no way shape or form a valid argument for even more gun restrictions. If anything the Dad, the 15 year old kid and the owner of the gun should all spend some time in jail for being idiots.

Perhaps I misspoke; what would probably be better would be more COGENT gun restrictions, ones that address the actual problems surrounding guns (idiots having access to and responsibility for fully-automatic weapons being one), rather than more of the same piecemeal, virtually-unenforceable ones in existence. Of course, for that to happen, the powers for gun ownership (the NRA most notably) would have to cooperate and not wage their fact-starved, scorched-earth campaigns in pursuit of "any gun, for any person, at any time". That may not be their ACTUAL goal, but it's how they're playing the game.

I'm not going to say anything about gun control laws and such in the US. I don't think I would be able to give a real oppinion about it.

BUT! Bringing an 9-year old to a GUN-FAIR (!) sounds like a pretty dumb idea to me. I mean, there's now way in hell we can stop children come in contact with fictional violence, but bringing him to a fair full of gun-nuts (I don't want to offend anyone with that word, it's just what's in my head right now) just is a terrible idea.

Illeix wrote:Well, seb, that's the American culture.

America's history was written with a quill in one hand, and a rifle in the other.

But as for a need to own firearms, I say they do play a neccisary part in modern society (don't believe me? check the nearest police officer's belt)
I own several, and I have needed one to remove unwanted "guests" a few times.

There is a need, a small one, but you also need to know how to properly handle one!

Well, I live in a modern society ( apart from Norfolk perhaps) and we do alright without armed police mainly.

Whilst I agree it is impossible to completely disarm American society -- and indeed I'll grant that would unfairly penalise the 90+% of owners who aren't a problem-- one can't help think if some of the many "issues" American society has might well be due to the attitude and usage of guns no ?

I'm actually for some gun regulation. But the OP saying that this incident, while tragic, somehow means that greater gun control is necessary is just silly.

I agree, but how is some regulation not gun control anyhow ?

The point is that the gun controls already in place, that should have prevented this incident, were not followed.

For example, providing a qualified instructor to supervise the user.

So I don't see how adding more controls would make a difference.

The republic of ireland counts as a modern society too, and we don't arm our police.

Aside from that though, I think stricter controls on fully automatic weapons would be a good thing, but getting the guns out of america is probably impossible.

lord_sutekh wrote:If it hadn't been available, it wouldn't have happened. Simple, straightforward cause and effect.

Same argument can be made about, well anything-cars, knives, sticks. Cars kill children by the thousand.

Same argument can be made about freedom of speech. If all those political prisoners would just tow the line in China and elsewhere, well they wouldn't be in trouble now would they?

Da Boss wrote:The republic of ireland counts as a modern society too, and we don't arm our police.

Aside from that though, I think stricter controls on fully automatic weapons would be a good thing, but getting the guns out of america is probably impossible.

Fully automatic weapons have been illegal in the US since the 1930s. This is the problem, people who don't have the facts see something in the media and go "Ban it! Ban it!" Never mind a little thing like the COnstitution, or that THERE ARE LAWS ALREADY IN PLACE.

The kid was an idiot. The parents and show are being prosecuted.

I think calling the 9 year old here an idiot is uncalled for. I agree the adults were to blame, but why was/is it even acceptable for people to let a nine year old handle something like that in the first place ? You wouldn't let a nine year old drive.

Frazzled: I wasn't aware that that was the case, thanks for correcting me. (It's odd how often you hear that one considering it's not been true for 70 years.)

But I don't think I said "Ban it! Ban it!"

The constitution though? It's a good bit of writing, but hardly sacred. I confuses me when people reference the constitution in arguments in place of logic. (Not exactly accusing you of that in this case, it's just something I see a lot of americans doing)

Da Boss wrote:

The constitution though? It's a good bit of writing, but hardly sacred. I confuses me when people reference the constitution in arguments in place of logic. (Not exactly accusing you of that in this case, it's just something I see a lot of americans doing)

Sorry but you don't have a clue Irish. Lots of men died for that bit of writing. It IS very sacred to many of us, and codifies in a succinct and clear manner, many of the rights and protections we live under.

Reds8n you're right, although all 9 year olds are indeed idiots. But as you say thats normal. The parents and whoever else-they are the real idiots and should no longer be permitted to breed.

The father was let off on the grounds that since he knew nothing about guns, he relied on the supposedly but not in truth qualified instructor guide his choice of weapon.

Lots of men died for lots of things. Men have died for good things, bad things and indifferent things. It doesn't mean we should abandon logic.
And yeah, it is a great document, I have a lot of respect for it and how it works. I'm specifically only saying that it should never replace logic in an argument.
This sort of situation is something I've seen a fair bit in online arguments:
Poster A: X is pretty terrible. The best solution to X is action Y.
Poster B: But the constitution says action Y can't happen!
Poster A: Uh, so?

Your constitution can be changed and modernised, and has been many times. That's fantastic. I think if those guys died for anything, it was for that- the ability to have a system of laws that can be changed for the good of the population, democratically, instead of abiding by a rigid code set down by someone else.

Kilkrazy wrote:The father was let off on the grounds that since he knew nothing about guns, he relied on the supposedly but not in truth qualified instructor guide his choice of weapon.

Pardon me but thats a load of . By bringing the rug rat to the show he signed the death warrant. Unless it was a boat show that had a spontaneous gun range open up, he's at fault. Again, at minimum this guy's not fit to breed any further. The species must survive.

Your constitution can be changed and modernised, and has been many times. That's fantastic. I think if those guys died for anything, it was for that- the ability to have a system of laws that can be changed for the good of the population, democratically, instead of abiding by a rigid code set down by someone else.

You are incorrect.

Frazzled wrote:

Kilkrazy wrote:The father was let off on the grounds that since he knew nothing about guns, he relied on the supposedly but not in truth qualified instructor guide his choice of weapon.

Pardon me but thats a load of . By bringing the rug rat to the show he signed the death warrant. Unless it was a boat show that had a spontaneous gun range open up, he's at fault. Again, at minimum this guy's not fit to breed any further. The species must survive.

I'm only saying what the news report said.

You can't legislate for people to have common sense.

Okay, I obviously have a lot of american studies homework to do.

A lot of times in America, the answer isn't new regulation, but enforcing the regulations already on the books.

That's the problem with Congress. It doesn't look good if they don't 'do' anything. So they meet and debate and attempt to pass laws. What they need to do is figure out how to help the executive arm enforce what is on the books.

Frazzled wrote:Fully automatic weapons have been illegal in the US since the 1930s.

Except they aren't. You need to pay an NFA tax stamp from a Class III licensed dealer. Usually the cost of previous stamps are added on to each subsequent purchase as well as the items being very expensive to begin with so the prices are to firearms what forgeworld is to GW. Also expect visits from the BFTA to check up on you. This includes silencers as well. To learn more you can go here.

Frazzled wrote:

Da Boss wrote:

The constitution though? It's a good bit of writing, but hardly sacred. I confuses me when people reference the constitution in arguments in place of logic. (Not exactly accusing you of that in this case, it's just something I see a lot of americans doing)

Sorry but you don't have a clue Irish. Lots of men died for that bit of writing. It IS very sacred to many of us, and codifies in a succinct and clear manner, many of the rights and protections we live under.

I'm glad many people see it as sacred Frazz but I have a problem with our government not seeing it as such.

Frazzled wrote:

Your constitution can be changed and modernised, and has been many times. That's fantastic. I think if those guys died for anything, it was for that- the ability to have a system of laws that can be changed for the good of the population, democratically, instead of abiding by a rigid code set down by someone else.

You are incorrect.

I think he is correct Frazz, we've ratified it a number of times. That kind of malleability is what makes this nation great. I know you might think I'm just talking about the malleability to curtail freedom, but I'm talking about the ability to give more freedoms to people as time goes on.

dietrich wrote:A lot of times in America, the answer isn't new regulation, but enforcing the regulations already on the books.

In fairness, that problem is hardly unique to America.

Ahtman wrote:

Frazzled wrote:Fully automatic weapons have been illegal in the US since the 1930s.

Except they aren't. You need to pay an NFA tax stamp from a Class III licensed dealer. Usually the cost of previous stamps are added on to each subsequent purchase as well as the items being very expensive to begin with so the prices are to firearms what forgeworld is to GW. Also expect visits from the BFTA to check up on you. This includes silencers as well. To learn more you can go here.

Try getting a class III license Ahtman. Its nearly impossible unless you're government or Hollywood. Further, the governent indeed takes notice of its few Class III guys.


EDIT:
Yes it has been modified. Howerver, take out the first ten amendments that went in when the document came into being, the ones about booze, and the ones about the VP, then the changes have been few and far between-usually the result of great turmoil and effort to get them there. When we think of the Constitution, we think of the separation of powers, of the Radioactive Level awesomeness of the Bill of Rights. We don't think - gee it can be changed isn't that great? (state constitutions are often like that-changeable with the wind-who cares?).

Killkrazy not snarking at you-comment about the BS that that was about the parent. No gun owning parent would buy that BS.

Just one more reason for the right to arm bears...

the kid was just being a kid. come on, what kid DOSENT want to shoot a gun.
the dad who was reaching for the video cammera is the idiot. im sure the 15 year old can be factored somewhere into the idiotness as well.

Frazzled wrote:

Ahtman wrote:

Frazzled wrote:Fully automatic weapons have been illegal in the US since the 1930s.

Except they aren't. You need to pay an NFA tax stamp from a Class III licensed dealer. Usually the cost of previous stamps are added on to each subsequent purchase as well as the items being very expensive to begin with so the prices are to firearms what forgeworld is to GW. Also expect visits from the BFTA to check up on you. This includes silencers as well. To learn more you can go here.

Try getting a class III license Ahtman. Its nearly impossible unless you're government or Hollywood. Further, the governent indeed takes notice of its few Class III guys.

Read it again, you don't get a Class III, you need to get the NFA Tax Stamp. A Class III license is for dealers. I never said it was easy, but it is legal.

No, you and I cannot own an automatic firearm without a special license Ahtman.

Frazzled wrote:No, you and I cannot own an automatic firearm without a special license Ahtman.

You can't own almost any firearm without some form of licensing, just ask Plaxico Buress. Being unusual doesn't make it verbotten. You have to get a license to drive legally but that doesn't make all driving illegal. Your statement wasn't that owning a fully automatic weapon was illegal without meeting conditions, it was that it was just illegal w/o any conditions, which isn't true. There are conditions in which it is perfectly legal (though not necessarily sane) to own fully automatic weapons. In fact there is a festical in Kentucky every year for owners of such weapons.

You're right its technically legal. However, getting said license is makes it defacto illegal for most Americans.

Its technically legal for me to own uranium...I just need to be licensed...

EDIT: Gach I wish I could type without putting effort into like learning how to type.

It really isn't that difficult to get, it is just the cost that makes it prohibitive. With a little patience and $4,000 you to can have a chain cannon in home for personal protection.

I also remembered the name of the place in Kentucky that gathering takes place and found a few videos. It is in Knob Creek and this is a pretty awesome night firing video.