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.

 SilverMK2 wrote:

 d-usa wrote:
they better have a warrant before they come on in.

What's to stop the police being able to obtain a warrent to check on the storage of guns anyway? Certainly I would imagine that if the law states that police can check on gun storage, the police being able to get warrents for this will be more or less a given.

Because you can only get a warrant for criminal activity.

Any law or governing system can easily be overturned provided the overturner has support of their army and no other country sticks their nose in anywhere.

America could turn around tomorrow, announce Martial Law, prohibit anyone entering or leaving Berlin Wall style, declare Obama the new Emperor of the American Empire and tell all the world to shut the feth up or be nuked. Provided the army supports them and will follow blindly.

 djones520 wrote:

Sorry, I shouldn't have qouted him, I should have qouted Kanluwen.

I wasn't trying to insult you Silver, I have no more expectation about you having knowledge of the in's and out's of our governmental system then you have of myself knowing yours.

Not really. The entire predication of the situation that was put forward was nonsensical--as is the usual position of those who espouse "We need guns to stop the government".

I'm quite aware of how the government works. That's why I put forward a circumstance which should have blatantly been obvious as nonsense, because really the government as it stands is elected on the populace's behalf (even when it's quite obvious elements of the government do not really give a flying feth about the citizens they are elected to represent).

 Frazzled wrote:

 SilverMK2 wrote:

 d-usa wrote:
they better have a warrant before they come on in.

What's to stop the police being able to obtain a warrent to check on the storage of guns anyway? Certainly I would imagine that if the law states that police can check on gun storage, the police being able to get warrents for this will be more or less a given.

Because you can only get a warrant for criminal activity.

... and if improper gun storage is a crime...and you are known to own guns but not a gun safe?

 Kilkrazy wrote:

 Seaward wrote:

 Kilkrazy wrote:
A lot fewer people had weapons back then, and they weren't military style.

The obsession with "assault weapons" on both sides of the gun debate is an indicator of the change in the psychological drives for weapon ownership.

Does the cosmetic style of a firearm affect the lethality of the round it fires?

No.

There is more than a cosmetic difference between a double-barrelled shotgun and a SPAS-12.

That apart, if the difference was no more than cosmetic, why would anyone care about it?

But there's not effective difference between a SPAS (wow old school) and a simple turkey gun, except turkey guns run in fear!

 SilverMK2 wrote:

 Frazzled wrote:

 SilverMK2 wrote:

 d-usa wrote:
they better have a warrant before they come on in.

What's to stop the police being able to obtain a warrent to check on the storage of guns anyway? Certainly I would imagine that if the law states that police can check on gun storage, the police being able to get warrents for this will be more or less a given.

Because you can only get a warrant for criminal activity.

... and if improper gun storage is a crime...and you are known to own guns but not a gun safe?

And how would they know? Are we going to be required to register gun safes now? Create whole new levels of beuracracy? Spend how many millions more on this?

Please, this idea just keeps getting better and better.

 djones520 wrote:

 SilverMK2 wrote:

 Frazzled wrote:

 SilverMK2 wrote:

 d-usa wrote:
they better have a warrant before they come on in.

What's to stop the police being able to obtain a warrent to check on the storage of guns anyway? Certainly I would imagine that if the law states that police can check on gun storage, the police being able to get warrents for this will be more or less a given.

Because you can only get a warrant for criminal activity.

... and if improper gun storage is a crime...and you are known to own guns but not a gun safe?

And how would they know? Are we going to be required to register gun safes now? Create whole new levels of beuracracy? Spend how many millions more on this?

Please, this idea just keeps getting better and better.

Certain kinds of safes actually require you to register with your local fire department.
All it would take is adding gun safes to the list of required safes.

Or, you know, allow a non-government agency, such as certified gun-safe-fitters inspect and certify your gun storage, same as certified gas fitters certify your gas boiler is safe, etc.

What are you talking about? No one comes in my house without my permission unless they want the hell of wiener dog death!

 Easy E wrote:

 KingCracker wrote:

Quick thinking, and nicely averted! It is sad that our country says 'meh' to violence, but don't show dem boobies!!

Yeah, we should be indulging in both!

That was my quote! Don't give credit for my stuff to others! Lol

 hotsauceman1 wrote:

 KingCracker wrote:
This really comes down to parenting IMO.


I have an 8 year old son, he has NEVER played a Grand Theft Auto game in his life. Ever. When I had it I wouldnt even let him watch me play it, because its definitely not meant for a child to see, specially at that age.
I have firearms in my home, locked up and no chance for either of my children to get to them.

Recently My cousin and her kids where at my house. So im a loner so I tayed in my room with thee door open playing Farcry 3. The second oldest boyy kept coming in and trying to watch. Now I do not want them watching me play video games, for various reason, mainly violence. His mother comes in and says it it fine(This kid is in first grade) she doesnt care about violence. But I do. So i have to lie and tell her "It has sex in it" and she stops. For some reason violence doesn't upset us. We think of it as everyday stuff.

Heh, funny thing. FC3 does, in fact, have sex in it.

But yeah, I find it strange what the attitude towards sex is. It's a bit strange.

 Kanluwen wrote:

 Frazzled wrote:

 Kanluwen wrote:

 Frazzled wrote:

Kanluwen wrote:Oh, you mean the one about a "well-regulated militia"?

I always get nervous when the government starts talking about militias. bad things happen.

The point actually was that the interpretation of the 2nd Amendment has been changed over time while still allowing for the ownership of firearms.

So why all this nonsense about Gestapo and Stasi? All it does is make you look like an idiot in a discussion about firearms regulations.

Er..it hasn't actually.
The Stazi reference is to that whole: well if there've been some accidents then the government should have unfettered access to search you house at any time on its whim.
Best muzzle your dogs too. We'll shoot 'em.

The Stazi reference is a nonsensical reference typical to your "If I can't debate them, I'll try to discredit them" approach.

Again, you want the option to warrantlessly search a house. The government monitors every transmission you make, and via gps knows where you are, where you drive, how much you make, and who you communicate with (and what you're saying).
Again, is it the uniforms? Dental plan, it has to be the dental plan right?


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 SilverMK2 wrote:

 Frazzled wrote:
The Constitution is not a mere law boyo.

Is it also the name of a popular breakfast cereal?

And its the best cereal because when you open the box it shouts out AMERKA HURR!!!

 Kanluwen wrote:
Certain kinds of safes actually require you to register with your local fire department.
All it would take is adding gun safes to the list of required safes.

For what benefit, again?

 Frazzled wrote:
But there's not effective difference between a SPAS (wow old school) and a simple turkey gun, except turkey guns run in fear!

Well, a SPAS 12 is a semi-automatic shotgun with a magazine to hold a reasonable number of shells, while a double barreled shotgun is a double barrelled shotgun with only two shells able to be fired within a short period of time before reloading, while the SPAS 12 can have 6-9-etc shots within the same period of time without reloading. To me that sounds as if the SPAS 12 is quite a lot more capable of being dangerous than a DB shotgun.

 SilverMK2 wrote:

 Frazzled wrote:

 SilverMK2 wrote:

 d-usa wrote:
they better have a warrant before they come on in.

What's to stop the police being able to obtain a warrent to check on the storage of guns anyway? Certainly I would imagine that if the law states that police can check on gun storage, the police being able to get warrents for this will be more or less a given.

Because you can only get a warrant for criminal activity.

... and if improper gun storage is a crime...and you are known to own guns but not a gun safe?

thats what we call a fishing expedition. Nope.

 Frazzled wrote:

 SilverMK2 wrote:

 Frazzled wrote:

 SilverMK2 wrote:

 d-usa wrote:
they better have a warrant before they come on in.

What's to stop the police being able to obtain a warrent to check on the storage of guns anyway? Certainly I would imagine that if the law states that police can check on gun storage, the police being able to get warrents for this will be more or less a given.

Because you can only get a warrant for criminal activity.

... and if improper gun storage is a crime...and you are known to own guns but not a gun safe?

thats what we call a fishing expedition. Nope.

For a lawyer, you just completely described a "fishing expedition" warrant wrong.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Gentleman_Jellyfish wrote:

 Kanluwen wrote:
Certain kinds of safes actually require you to register with your local fire department.
All it would take is adding gun safes to the list of required safes.

For what benefit, again?

Preventing the stupidity of one protected by the Constitution from causing harm to another?

 Frazzled wrote:
And its the best cereal because when you open the box it shouts out AMERKA HURR!!!

I'm only interested if it turns the milk red, white and blue

EDIT:This post was made irrelevant by the massive amount of people who posted since I started typing.

I'll think up a snappy one liner or something.

 SilverMK2 wrote:

 Frazzled wrote:
But there's not effective difference between a SPAS (wow old school) and a simple turkey gun, except turkey guns run in fear!

Well, a SPAS 12 is a semi-automatic shotgun with a magazine to hold a reasonable number of shells, while a double barreled shotgun is a double barrelled shotgun with only two shells able to be fired within a short period of time before reloading, while the SPAS 12 can have 6-9-etc shots within the same period of time without reloading. To me that sounds as if the SPAS 12 is quite a lot more capable of being dangerous than a DB shotgun.

And a good Remington 1100 is a semiautmoatic shotgun with a reasonable number of shells, and can fire 6-9 etc. shots within the same period of time. Plus its more accurate.

Unless its a side by side coach gun. Man those things are epically cool. Frazzled wants!

 SilverMK2 wrote:

 Frazzled wrote:
But there's not effective difference between a SPAS (wow old school) and a simple turkey gun, except turkey guns run in fear!

Well, a SPAS 12 is a semi-automatic shotgun with a magazine to hold a reasonable number of shells, while a double barreled shotgun is a double barrelled shotgun with only two shells able to be fired within a short period of time before reloading, while the SPAS 12 can have 6-9-etc shots within the same period of time without reloading. To me that sounds as if the SPAS 12 is quite a lot more capable of being dangerous than a DB shotgun.

A double barrelled shotgun can actually be fired and reloaded at an equivallent rate as that SPAS, if not faster, because the SPAS takes a lot longer to reload. My old 20 gauge single shot break action, I could fire and at a quicker rate then my 12 gauge pump, because the reloading is much much simpler.

 xole wrote:
Not to mention the assault weapons thing is entirely about the appearance.

And gun safes are very expensive.

You have the money for a gun, you can suck it up and put out the money for a gun safe.

People always talk about how "expensive" competition shooting is or range time is; just deal with it.

 xole wrote:
Not to mention the assault weapons thing is entirely about the appearance.

And gun safes are very expensive.

I have a gun cabinet for the pistols. Its was I think $100. The only annoying thing was that I had to put it together. Curse you some assembly required!

 djones520 wrote:

 SilverMK2 wrote:

 Frazzled wrote:
But there's not effective difference between a SPAS (wow old school) and a simple turkey gun, except turkey guns run in fear!

Well, a SPAS 12 is a semi-automatic shotgun with a magazine to hold a reasonable number of shells, while a double barreled shotgun is a double barrelled shotgun with only two shells able to be fired within a short period of time before reloading, while the SPAS 12 can have 6-9-etc shots within the same period of time without reloading. To me that sounds as if the SPAS 12 is quite a lot more capable of being dangerous than a DB shotgun.

A double barrelled shotgun can actually be fired and reloaded at an equivallent rate as that SPAS, if not faster, because the SPAS takes a lot longer to reload.

How much of that comes down to familiarity and practice though?

 Frazzled wrote:

 SilverMK2 wrote:

 Frazzled wrote:
But there's not effective difference between a SPAS (wow old school) and a simple turkey gun, except turkey guns run in fear!

Well, a SPAS 12 is a semi-automatic shotgun with a magazine to hold a reasonable number of shells, while a double barreled shotgun is a double barrelled shotgun with only two shells able to be fired within a short period of time before reloading, while the SPAS 12 can have 6-9-etc shots within the same period of time without reloading. To me that sounds as if the SPAS 12 is quite a lot more capable of being dangerous than a DB shotgun.

And a good Remington 1100 is a semiautmoatic shotgun with a reasonable number of shells, and can fire 6-9 etc. shots within the same period of time. Plus its more accurate.

Unless its a side by side coach gun. Man those things are epically cool. Frazzled wants!

A Remington 1100 also isn't a double barrelled shotgun... which is what was being compared to a SPAS 12...

 Kanluwen wrote:

 djones520 wrote:

 SilverMK2 wrote:

 Frazzled wrote:
But there's not effective difference between a SPAS (wow old school) and a simple turkey gun, except turkey guns run in fear!

Well, a SPAS 12 is a semi-automatic shotgun with a magazine to hold a reasonable number of shells, while a double barreled shotgun is a double barrelled shotgun with only two shells able to be fired within a short period of time before reloading, while the SPAS 12 can have 6-9-etc shots within the same period of time without reloading. To me that sounds as if the SPAS 12 is quite a lot more capable of being dangerous than a DB shotgun.

A double barrelled shotgun can actually be fired and reloaded at an equivallent rate as that SPAS, if not faster, because the SPAS takes a lot longer to reload.

How much of that comes down to familiarity and practice though?

Someone unfamiliar with that semi-auto will probably be even worse with it then someone unfamiliar with a break action.

Kanluwen For a lawyer, you just completely described a "fishing expedition" warrant wrong.

Generic search warrants are not constitutional. But I know thats just an inconvienience in your eyes.

 Kanluwen wrote:

 xole wrote:
Not to mention the assault weapons thing is entirely about the appearance.

And gun safes are very expensive.

You have the money for a gun, you can suck it up and put out the money for a gun safe.

People always talk about how "expensive" competition shooting is or range time is; just deal with it.

- reads that I have voting rights

- must get valid state ID to vote to exercise my voting rights

- gets ridiculed that valid state ID is a "poll tax" in order to vote.

fast forward

- reads that American enjoys 2nd Amendment Rights

- also reads that SC reaffirmed the right to bear arms via Heller case

- some are advocating that in order to possess guns, we must have a gun safe.

- is the gun safe, not a "tax" in order to express my 2nd Amendment right?

 Kanluwen wrote:

 xole wrote:
Not to mention the assault weapons thing is entirely about the appearance.

And gun safes are very expensive.

You have the money for a gun, you can suck it up and put out the money for a gun safe.

I do have to agree with this.

 whembly wrote:

 Kanluwen wrote:

 xole wrote:
Not to mention the assault weapons thing is entirely about the appearance.

And gun safes are very expensive.

You have the money for a gun, you can suck it up and put out the money for a gun safe.

People always talk about how "expensive" competition shooting is or range time is; just deal with it.

- reads that I have voting rights

- must get valid state ID to vote to exercise my voting rights

- gets ridiculed that valid state ID is a "poll tax" in order to vote.

fast forward

- reads that American enjoys 2nd Amendment Rights

- also reads that SC reaffirmed the right to bear arms via Heller case

- some are advocating that in order to posses guns, we must have a gun safe.

- is the gun safe, not a "tax" in order to express my 2nd Amendment right?

Apparently our rights aren't equal in some folks eyes. I had to pay a tax to simply possess guns in the State of Illinois, but you don't see people crying about that.

 SilverMK2 wrote:

 Frazzled wrote:

 SilverMK2 wrote:

 Frazzled wrote:
But there's not effective difference between a SPAS (wow old school) and a simple turkey gun, except turkey guns run in fear!

Well, a SPAS 12 is a semi-automatic shotgun with a magazine to hold a reasonable number of shells, while a double barreled shotgun is a double barrelled shotgun with only two shells able to be fired within a short period of time before reloading, while the SPAS 12 can have 6-9-etc shots within the same period of time without reloading. To me that sounds as if the SPAS 12 is quite a lot more capable of being dangerous than a DB shotgun.

And a good Remington 1100 is a semiautmoatic shotgun with a reasonable number of shells, and can fire 6-9 etc. shots within the same period of time. Plus its more accurate.

Unless its a side by side coach gun. Man those things are epically cool. Frazzled wants!

A Remington 1100 also isn't a double barrelled shotgun... which is what was being compared to a SPAS 12...

I compared a turkey gun.
OT but do SPAS's even exist any more. As an American (Hurr!) I am forced to buy Mossberg, or alternatively Browning. Anyone seen the new KelTec? Oh my.

or a nice Turkish gat...

 SilverMK2 wrote:

 Frazzled wrote:
But there's not effective difference between a SPAS (wow old school) and a simple turkey gun, except turkey guns run in fear!

Well, a SPAS 12 is a semi-automatic shotgun with a magazine to hold a reasonable number of shells, while a double barreled shotgun is a double barrelled shotgun with only two shells able to be fired within a short period of time before reloading, while the SPAS 12 can have 6-9-etc shots within the same period of time without reloading. To me that sounds as if the SPAS 12 is quite a lot more capable of being dangerous than a DB shotgun.

Pretty much yeah. Certain DBs can fire 2 shells simultaneously but their RoF per minute is nothing compared to a SPAS 12, and when you crank the SPAS to semi auto rather than pump action you increase it even more. SPAS can also take "military" style attachments such as suppressors, sights, extended clips and other gizmos. I've yet to see a DB that sports anything more than its firing pin and safety.

Also bear in mind the average side by side DB pulls slightly to the left or right deoending on which barrel is used. Under-Overs don't of course but the Side by side has greater inaccuracy to the untrained user, which the SPAS doesn't as it shoors straight. Of course this only matters if the user isn't trained or competant. Anyone who's used a side by side before won't have a problem, or anyone using an Under-Over.

Anyway, just a little extra reason why a SPAS is more dangerous than a DB.