Gun Legislation

[O Really]

Yeah, that's one of the best arguments against the "good guy with a gun" myth. In addition to the "good guy" harming bystanders, trying to be the "good guy" can mess up your own life. I don't know that he would have been in the clear even if he had hit only the shoplifters and only while they were still in side the store. A store open to the public isn't like a private home, and shoplifting doesn't normally present a threat of danger to persons.

[Ulysses]

I don't think it's at all fair to equate the current LNF with CPF.

For one thing, as I understand it, the current top admin on LNF used to be a regular user here. He has ensured the content there represents both sides of the political spectrum, which I applaud. Although I will admit I've had to block a number of extreme right wingers there.

CPF, on the other hand, is run by hard-right cons who will ban someone in a heartbeat if they don't agree with the current right wing dogma.

On the flip side, the moderation here on BRD seems to be the political reverse of that on CPF. While members are not banned at the slightest disagreement here, the current moderation here leaves a lot to be desired. Yeah, GCG, I'm thinking of you.

[neoplacebo]

Please disregard the above statements. They are a veritable cesspool of claptrap and a scum tub of incoherent gibberish. The whole goddamn thing should be held up as an example of what not to type in a thread about gun legislation.

But never mind that wild detour to stomp gibberish. I thought the other day that maybe the nutjobs could be somewhat curtailed if ammunition was harder to get. Nothing in the Constitution about ammunition. Force them to make their own bullets; some are bound to be defective, especially the ones that nutjobs will inevitably pack three or four times the amount of gunpowder into, It would be sort of a self regulating situation.

[O Really]

That would be a good approach. Nagonnahappen. They can't even manage to pass restrictions limiting size of magazine or higher taxes on ammunition.

[Ulysses]

That would be a good approach. Nagonnahappen. They can't even manage to pass restrictions limiting size of magazine or higher taxes on ammunition.

What's the limit on magazine size in California, again?

[Ulysses]

Please disregard the above statements. They are a veritable cesspool of claptrap and a scum tub of incoherent gibberish. The whole goddamn thing should be held up as an example of what not to type in a thread about gun legislation.

Who died and made you pseudomod?

Come to think of it, you'd actually be an improvement.

Crazy has its advantages.

[neoplacebo]

And here we have another example of how extremely high IQ subjects veer off at the speed of light into random directions at any fucking time. You just can't deal with these people. Best thing is to grin and nod a sort of ambivalent concurrence.

[Vrede too]

I don't Facebook very much, besides friends stuff I get puppies not politics.

Part of the reason I visit CPF or LNF is to see what the loonies are saying and where they get their information from.

And oftentimes after visiting those sites I feel the need for a shower.

I don't think it's at all fair to equate the current LNF with CPF.

For one thing, as I understand it, the current top admin on LNF used to be a regular user here. He has ensured the content there represents both sides of the political spectrum, which I applaud. Although I will admit I've had to block a number of extreme right wingers there.

CPF, on the other hand, is run by hard-right cons who will ban someone in a heartbeat if they don't agree with the current right wing dogma....

You fail comprehension, again. GoCubsGo did not "equate the current LNF with CPF." Rather, he accurately states something you even admit in this post - one can find RW loonies on both sites. Get a 4th grader to explain it to you.

(signature: obsessed butthurt )

Awww. , Useless. So much for "Ignored". You fail again. Plus, Useless, you've been busted too many times for anyone to believe you're not reading my posts, anyhow. It's just your excuse for cowering. Awww.

[O Really]

That would be a good approach. Nagonnahappen. They can't even manage to pass restrictions limiting size of magazine or higher taxes on ammunition.

What's the limit on magazine size in California, again?

Currently 10 rounds. And that's a good thing. But state and city regs can only go so far without a national law. If you're a gun nut and you want a high capacity magazine, you've got lots of choices in places to buy them. Like every state in the country except here and Colorado, Connecticut, Maryland, Massachusetts, New Jersey, New York, and Vermont.

[Vrede too]

That would be a good approach. Nagonnahappen. They can't even manage to pass restrictions limiting size of magazine or higher taxes on ammunition.

What's the limit on magazine size in California, again?

Currently 10 rounds. And that's a good thing. But state and city regs can only go so far without a national law. If you're a gun nut and you want a high capacity magazine, you've got lots of choices in places to buy them. Like every state in the country except here and Colorado, Connecticut, Maryland, Massachusetts, New Jersey, New York, and Vermont.

Wait, do you mean:

Even neighboring AZ, OR and NV?
That the OBVIOUS intent of your first post went sailing over Useless' head?
That Useless' snooty provincial desperation to brag about California made him clueless, again?
That one can but a high-capacity magazine in Reno in the morning and bloody the streets of NoCal's Sacramento in the evening?
Third suspect identified in Sacramento shooting that left six dead

Opps, what's the limit on Useless stupidity again?

[O Really]

The value of restrictions on magazines, bump stocks, certain types of firearms, etc. is that when they're caught with that, you have a felony to charge them with that may be easier to prove than whatever it was they did with the piece. I like that. But it's not going to make much difference in violence rate until they find some way to reduce the number and availability of guns overall. Which ainagonnahappen.

[Vrede too]

The value of restrictions on magazines, bump stocks, certain types of firearms, etc. is that when they're caught with that, you have a felony to charge them with that may be easier to prove than whatever it was they did with the piece. I like that. But it's not going to make much difference in violence rate until they find some way to reduce the number and availability of guns overall. Which ainagonnahappen.

The restrictions do help, even at just the state level.

The Effect of Large-Capacity Magazine Bans on High-Fatality Mass Shootings, 1990–2017

... Results. Between 1990 and 2017, there were 69 high-fatality mass shootings. Attacks involving LCMs resulted in a 62% higher mean average death toll. The incidence of high-fatality mass shootings in non–LCM ban states was more than double the rate in LCM ban states; the annual number of deaths was more than 3 times higher. In multivariate analyses, states without an LCM ban experienced significantly more high-fatality mass shootings and a higher death rate from such incidents.

Conclusions. LCM bans appear to reduce both the incidence of, and number of people killed in, high-fatality mass shootings....

We can safely infer that national limits would have a huge effect.

[Ulysses]

Well, I remember about 27 years or more ago I found a handgun on the street, a few blocks from my rental home in another town. I kept it for a few months. It was a 9 mm semi. I hung onto it long enough to check out what it was (an "Astra" as I recall). The mag was empty. Finally I took it to the local police station, told them where and when I found it. Never heard a word from them about it. It seemed like a usable enough piece but I didn't want to get connected with any potential liabilities/history.

Later on a friend sold me his "dad's" handgun. It's a funky chrome plated thing. I registered it, got some ammo, and took it to a local shooting range, enough to figure it jammed readily. Still have it. Along with a far more reliable seven shot 38 special revolver I bought at a local gun shop. Taurus, as I recall. Never have had a reason to need either, but if there was a need I'd pull out the 38 before the 9. Keep both in a locked safe. And both are registered in my name. Hope I never have to use either one.

Also found a somewhat unique rifle here as I was cleaning out the garage. Forget the name at the moment. Wait, found it. It takes 6.5x54 mm ammo. Breda 1903. Commonly known as the Greek Army Rifle. Apparently some big game hunter used one to hunt elephants. Head/heart shots only. Also tested it at a local range; it's LOUD. The name Mannlicher-Schoenauer comes to mind. Have no daily need that that one either, but it probably would be useful for deer hunting.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mannliche ... C3%B6nauer

American writer Ernest Hemingway frequently used the rifle, and mentions it in some of his writings, most notably The Short Happy Life of Francis Macomber. WDM "Karamojo" Bell, a prominent elephant (ivory) hunter in Africa in the early 20th century, also used the rifle in its original 6.5×54 chambering with considerable success. The ability of the diminutive 6.5×54 cartridge to take the largest and most dangerous of the big game species, such as African elephant and Cape Buffalo, was due in the main to the high sectional density of the 6.5mm projectiles used in the rifle, although precise placing of the shot was imperative. Because the original factory loads for the 6.5×54 projectiles were long and heavy (10 g or 160 gr) relative to their diameter, they proved capable (in solid form) of very deep penetration through muscle and bone. This, coupled with the relatively low recoil of the cartridge, facilitated accurate shot placement into vital organs such as the heart or brain.

I can confirm that the recoil of the rifle is fairly low.

[O Really]

The value of restrictions on magazines, bump stocks, certain types of firearms, etc. is that when they're caught with that, you have a felony to charge them with that may be easier to prove than whatever it was they did with the piece. I like that. But it's not going to make much difference in violence rate until they find some way to reduce the number and availability of guns overall. Which ainagonnahappen.

The restrictions do help, even at just the state level.

The Effect of Large-Capacity Magazine Bans on High-Fatality Mass Shootings, 1990–2017

... Results. Between 1990 and 2017, there were 69 high-fatality mass shootings. Attacks involving LCMs resulted in a 62% higher mean average death toll. The incidence of high-fatality mass shootings in non–LCM ban states was more than double the rate in LCM ban states; the annual number of deaths was more than 3 times higher. In multivariate analyses, states without an LCM ban experienced significantly more high-fatality mass shootings and a higher death rate from such incidents.

Conclusions. LCM bans appear to reduce both the incidence of, and number of people killed in, high-fatality mass shootings....

We can safely infer that national limits would have a huge effect.

Without doubt, national limits would have a huge effect. Nogonnahappen.

[Vrede too]

Without doubt, national limits would have a huge effect. Nogonnahappen.

They already have happened with bump stocks. "The U.S. Justice Department banned them at the federal level in December 2018", after the Vegas massacre. Idk about the practical effect. I could MAYBE see a national large-capacity magazine ban, but share your pessimism re other necessary measures.

[O Really]

Without doubt, national limits would have a huge effect. Nogonnahappen.

They already have happened with bump stocks. "The U.S. Justice Department banned them at the federal level in December 2018", after the Vegas massacre. Idk about the practical effect. I could MAYBE see a national large-capacity magazine ban, but share your pessimism re other necessary measures.

Bump stocks are a fairly obscure bit of equipment that could maybe ride on the coattails of machine gun ban. And gave people a little sense of "doing something." Limiting ammunition or magazines is way different, IMNVHO, and even with a weakened NRA there aren't enough balls among the Congress critters to do anything meaningful.

[neoplacebo]

Seems like it would be easy to make your own bump stock....all you need is a replica of the end of the rifle that is maybe 1/8" larger in all dimensions than the butt of the rifle and the right springs to mount into the bump stock. The recoil of the rifle forces the stock backward into the bumper and then the springs force the stock forward almost instantly which will, with your finger kept on the trigger, result in the rifle rapidly firing until the magazine is empty. I have no doubt that there are dozens of guys around here who could carve such a thing from wood.

[Vrede too]

Seems like it would be easy to make your own bump stock....all you need is a replica of the end of the rifle that is maybe 1/8" larger in all dimensions than the butt of the rifle and the right springs to mount into the bump stock. The recoil of the rifle forces the stock backward into the bumper and then the springs force the stock forward almost instantly which will, with your finger kept on the trigger, result in the rifle rapidly firing until the magazine is empty. I have no doubt that there are dozens of guys around here who could carve such a thing from wood.

I'm pretty sure that you're correct. However, thanks to Trump they have now been classified as "machineguns" and mere possession is a felony that is "punishable by 10 years imprisonment and a $250,000 fine."

[GoCubsGo]

Holy shit.



It's bring your guns to school day

[Vrede too]

Holy shit.

It's bring your guns to school day

Fake news?

What group of kids would keep this secret?
What school would tolerate this?
Which kids would go on camera and risk getting IDed?