While y'all are bickering about guns...

[mike]

No one, outside a "well regulated militia," should have a gun. Simple.

The term militia (pron.: /mɨˈlɪʃə/),[1] or irregular army, is commonly used today to refer to a military force composed of ordinary citizens[2] to provide defense, emergency law enforcement, or paramilitary service, in times of emergency without being paid a regular salary or committed to a fixed term of service. It is a polyseme with multiple distinct but related meanings. Legal and historical meanings of militia include:

Defense activity or service, to protect a community, its territory, property, and laws.[3]
The entire able-bodied population of a community, town, county, or state, available to be called to arms.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Militia

Seems like a militia is composed of ordinary citizens. Now what?

What part of "well regulated" do you not get?

[DooHickey]

If a frog had wings, he wouldn't bust his ass every time he hopped.

Maybe one day we'll colonize the moon and all the non-gunners or the gun advocates will be moved there so they won't have to mingle. Then the advocates can shoot 'til their hearts contented, and the non-gunners can sit around singing kum-ba-yah while wrapped in their rainbow colored blankets.

Since there's bickering about guns, what's the answer here?

There are 4 other threads discussing it.

If you want to call them 'discussions'; but thanks, I'll check them out anyway. Blame this one on k9nanny!

That's right DooHickey. Blame it on me.

I was referring to your being the one who started the thread, since the overseer filled me in on the number of gun threads.
Did your neighbors disappoint you?

[DooHickey]

I filled you in on the fact that the specific question you asked has already been discussed at length, and you've chosen not to participate. k9nanny chose to start a thread about the firefighters and you've ducked that topic as well. Don't blame us for your inability to engage.

Take two aspirins and call me in the morning. Nobody is blaming 'us' for anything. I was yanking k9's chain; so let go.

[DooHickey]

That came later. You asked a question, I merely told you where you could go to agree or disagree with the arguments about it, you became a child as you always do. No biggie to me, it's your question and we can all see now that you really just wanted to troll rather than discuss it.

Damn! Busted!

[Stinger]

I wonder if Mad American approves of armed groups like Koresh's Branch Davidian "well-organized militia" under the Second Amendment.

[k9nanny]

I was referring to your being the one who started the thread, since the overseer filled me in on the number of gun threads.
Did your neighbors disappoint you?

The neighbors had a jolly time. If only they would hit a power line... They were down there playing with their toys the day after Sandy Hook, which I thought was rather insensitive.
In case you missed it, my point was that all this craziness is going to continue no matter what. The discussions about gun control and absolute security are a diversion. Let's puff up and act as if we're doing something, even though we're powerless to do much of anything.

[billy.pilgrim]

do you reckon Spengler's victims are related to other killings in vietnam - his note sure sounds like something the 62 year old didn't do here

[DooHickey]

Let's puff up and act as if we're doing something, even though we're powerless to do much of anything.

Yep, it appears that old sneaky 2nd. Amendment thingy has that gun thingy securely locked in place. In the meantime, the big-boy-toy crowd is rushing to stock up on their big-boy-toys before the Big Boy tries to take them away....oh wait, that's another thread.

[O Really]

Let's puff up and act as if we're doing something, even though we're powerless to do much of anything.

Yep, it appears that old sneaky 2nd. Amendment thingy has that gun thingy securely locked in place. In the meantime, the big-boy-toy crowd is rushing to stock up on their big-boy-toys before the Big Boy tries to take them away....oh wait, that's another thread.

That's been pretty much my point all along. There really isn't any way around the Second. Nobody is going to "take away our guns" although even Scalia thinks some types of firearms could be limited or prohibited. I'll stick with my same prediction over this latest of many more to come school/public shootings, that there will be much harummphing, little or no action. NRA wins again.

[DooHickey]

That's been pretty much my point all along. There really isn't any way around the Second. Nobody is going to "take away our guns" although even Scalia thinks some types of firearms could be limited or prohibited. I'll stick with my same prediction over this latest of many more to come school/public shootings, that there will be much harummphing, little or no action. NRA wins again.

I too believe that certain types of firearms should be limited or prohibited. I like to hunt, but I'm not taking to the woods with an AK47 or a Bushmaster when a 30-30 or slightly larger gun is sufficient. Hell, I want something left to take home, not scatter an animals corpse all over Hell and half of Georgia. Anything over hunting capabilities should be banned because their only purpose is mass killing. A single shot .22 rifle or pistol will kill another human, but because of it's limitations, it's not likely to be used in a robbery or killing spree.

[Mad American]

I too believe that certain types of firearms should be limited or prohibited. I like to hunt, but I'm not taking to the woods with an AK47 or a Bushmaster when a 30-30 or slightly larger gun is sufficient. Hell, I want something left to take home, not scatter an animals corpse all over Hell and half of Georgia. Anything over hunting capabilities should be banned because their only purpose is mass killing. A single shot .22 rifle or pistol will kill another human, but because of it's limitations, it's not likely to be used in a robbery or killing spree.

You do realize that a 30-30 is LARGER than the .223, which is a standard chambering in the Bushmaster, and that the 7.62 used in an AK-47 is very close to equal. How do you define what is for "hunting capabilities" and what is not? A properly loaded .223 is VERY capable of taking a whitetail deer so why the need to be so over gunned with the 30-30? Likewise your 30-30 would not be very effective against larger game where the 300 Win Mag would be. So again, how do you define "hunting capability" unless the ONLY parameter is capacity????

[rstrong]

Apparently gun shops are doing brisk business in the wake of the shooting in Sandy Hook, Connecticut. The Tampa Bay Times reports:

The Hyatt Gun Shop in Charlotte, N.C., racked up more than $1 million in sales Tuesday for the best single-day performance since the store opened in 1959, according to Justin Anderson, director of online sales. Topping the list was the Bushmaster AR-15, the model used at Newtown that sells for as much as $4,000 and had almost sold out, he said.

Revenue at the shop, one of the largest U.S. gun stores, surpassed even the spike just after Obama was elected president in 2008, Anderson said.

[...]

"It's kind of the perfect storm for the gun industry," he said. "When these things happen, even though it's sad, it does pick up sales."

The New York Times reports that gun stores all over the country can't keep up with the increased demand for firearms.

At Bud’s Gun Shop in Maryland, a message on the Web site said that customer service was “completely overwhelmed” and it discouraged customers from calling or e-mailing.

And on GunBroker.com, an Oracle .223 that normally retails for around $650 had been bid up to $1,175 with three days left in the auction.

Meanwhile, this gun buying boom is happening just as Mayors Against Illegal Guns, an advocacy group headed by Michael Bloomberg, found that millions of mental health records are missing from the national database that gun dealers use to run background checks on their buyers.

States were first required to submit these records to the database in the 1990's. But in 1997, the Supreme Court ruled that adding cases to the information bank was optional. 19 states had fewer than 100 records filed.

[rstrong]

American Gun Deaths to Exceed Traffic Fatalities by 2015
Seatbelt use can be legislated and enforced. But background checks at gun shows or adding mental health records to the national database that gun dealers use to run background checks on their buyers? That's crazy talk!

[Mad American]

American Gun Deaths to Exceed Traffic Fatalities by 2015
Seatbelt use can be legislated and enforced. But background checks at gun shows or adding mental health records to the national database that gun dealers use to run background checks on their buyers? That's crazy talk!

I doubt the validity of the 2015 projection but it is possible. However, I have no problem with adding mental health records to the NICS system. In addition licensed dealers still have to fill out the form 4473 at shows and I think they then go back at the end of the day, make the call to NICS, and run checks. I do know that the 4473 is filled out at shows, I'm just not sure how it is handled after that but I also have no problem with requiring said checks be mandatory at shows. I am curious though how you would address the sale of guns between private citizens.

[rstrong]

American Gun Deaths to Exceed Traffic Fatalities by 2015
Seatbelt use can be legislated and enforced. But background checks at gun shows or adding mental health records to the national database that gun dealers use to run background checks on their buyers? That's crazy talk!

I doubt the validity of the 2015 projection but it is possible.

So maybe it'll happen in 2016 or 2017 instead. And...?

However, I have no problem with adding mental health records to the NICS system.

Well sure. Of course the NRA has been fighting this idea all along. Both at the national level and in individual states.

(Those three links are just from the first page of a quick Google search. Do doubt a more robust search would turn up far more.)

I do know that the 4473 is filled out at shows,

The problem is, it usually isn't, nor is it required. Use of the "Gun Show Loophole" has even been advocated by terrorists. (Same link)

I am curious though how you would address the sale of guns between private citizens.

If you sell your guns, it should be mandatory to do the same background check as gun stores. Responsible gun ownership includes taking some responsibility when you sell the gun. The government should make such checks freely available on the internet and through local law enforcement offices.

[Mad American]

You miss my point. What I am saying, is that required or not, the 4473 IS being filled out at the shows that I attend in NC. Not to mention that, according to your wikipedia link, a background check is REQUIRED for handgun sales at shows.

So you want the government to control the sale of privately owned goods between private citizens? OK, seems logical enough...BUT, how will that then be tracked and what will the ramifications be if it is not adhered to? See a LICENSED dealer is subject to lose his/her license if they do not follow the law. So what would happen to a private citizen with no license to lose?

[rstrong]

You miss my point. What I am saying, is that required or not, the 4473 IS being filled out at the shows that I attend in NC.

In many gun shows, it is NOT. That's why it's called the "Gun Show Loophole"

Colin Goddard, a Virginia Tech survivor shot four times, did his own investigation. His undercover footage of gun shows shows how easy it is to buy a gun from a unlicensed seller without a criminal background check. The Columbine high school massacre was carried out with with guns bought at a gun show.

Not to mention that, according to your wikipedia link, a background check is REQUIRED for handgun sales at shows.

That requirement is only for businesses. Individuals "not engaged in the business" of dealing firearms, or who only make "occasional" sales within their state of residence, are under no requirement to conduct background checks on purchasers or maintain records of sale.

Some of those "individuals not engaged in the business" make a great many "occasional" sales at each show.

So you want the government to control the sale of privately owned goods between private citizens?

We're talking about guns, not toasters.

BUT, how will that then be tracked and what will the ramifications be if it is not adhered to? See a LICENSED dealer is subject to lose his/her license if they do not follow the law. So what would happen to a private citizen with no license to lose?

You track it in a database. You have penalties, just like in any other crime. You think that speeders have their speeding license taken away? Or that they're not in a database used by police and insurors?

[Mad American]

You miss my point. What I am saying, is that required or not, the 4473 IS being filled out at the shows that I attend in NC.

In many gun shows, it is NOT. That's why it's called the "Gun Show Loophole"

Colin Goddard, a Virginia Tech survivor shot four times, did his own investigation. His undercover footage of gun shows shows how easy it is to buy a gun from a unlicensed seller without a criminal background check. The Columbine high school massacre was carried out with with guns bought at a gun show.

Again, you have proven my point. People with NO LICENSE are not subject to the same laws as a licensed dealer. The gun show issue is an easy fix.....only licensed dealers may sell guns there, ammo and other components are open to sale by anyone.

So how does a private citizen wind up in this "data base" that you are proposing? We are talking about two private citizens with no criminal record engaged in a private sale. Just how does the government regulate that? By your logic we should be able to create a data base and stop drug trafficking, an act which is already illegal but government intervention has yet to be able to stop.

[billy.pilgrim]

You miss my point. What I am saying, is that required or not, the 4473 IS being filled out at the shows that I attend in NC.

In many gun shows, it is NOT. That's why it's called the "Gun Show Loophole"

Colin Goddard, a Virginia Tech survivor shot four times, did his own investigation. His undercover footage of gun shows shows how easy it is to buy a gun from a unlicensed seller without a criminal background check. The Columbine high school massacre was carried out with with guns bought at a gun show.

Again, you have proven my point. People with NO LICENSE are not subject to the same laws as a licensed dealer. ...only licensed dealers may sell guns there, ammo and other components are open to sale by anyone.The gun show issue is an easy fix..

So how does a private citizen wind up in this "data base" that you are proposing? We are talking about two private citizens with no criminal record engaged in a private sale. Just how does the government regulate that? By your logic we should be able to create a data base and stop drug trafficking, an act which is already illegal but government intervention has yet to be able to stop.

easy fix?

then why won't the gun lobby make the easy fix?

[rstrong]

You miss my point. What I am saying, is that required or not, the 4473 IS being filled out at the shows that I attend in NC.

In many gun shows, it is NOT. That's why it's called the "Gun Show Loophole"

Colin Goddard, a Virginia Tech survivor shot four times, did his own investigation. His undercover footage of gun shows shows how easy it is to buy a gun from a unlicensed seller without a criminal background check. The Columbine high school massacre was carried out with with guns bought at a gun show.

Again, you have proven my point. People with NO LICENSE are not subject to the same laws as a licensed dealer.

One more time:

If you sell your guns, it should be mandatory to do the same background check as gun stores. Responsible gun ownership includes taking some responsibility when you sell the gun. The government should make such checks freely available on the internet and through local law enforcement offices.

So how does a private citizen wind up in this "data base" that you are proposing?

It's the same NCIS database that you already mentioned. But you close some of the loopholes that the NRA has fought for. When selling a gun, you do a background check on the buyer and register who you sold it to.

Eventually you get a paper trail on the ownership of most guns. When an unregistered gun turns up, or a gun turns up in the hands of a felon or mental defective, you trace it back to the last registered owner for responsibility.

That owner is fully protected by a "clean" buyer background check and registration, or a police report if the gun is stolen.

Just how does the government regulate that? By your logic we should be able to create a data base and stop drug trafficking, an act which is already illegal but government intervention has yet to be able to stop.

That would be like any other crime, from speeding to murder. That neither have been stamped out entirely, doesn't mean that the laws and enforcement do not work. Unlike the opium in all the opium dens that, er, still exist, guns have serial numbers and can be individually tracked from manufacture to end user.

Reverse your arguement: Saddam's Iraq was a totalitarian regime, despite its citizens owning a whole lot of guns. Does that invalidate the 2nd Amendment?