Democrats begin filibuster for Universal Background Checks - Polidicks

[QUOTE='Poesidan [GAG];50528335'] [URL=http://www.cfr.org/society-and-culture/us-gun-policy-global-comparisons/p29735]Seriously[/URL]. I don't know why you thought that one word was an appropriate way to respond, but okay: I never meant to say that America was the only country with a problem like this. What I said was that no other country in the world has this problem as severe as we do[/QUOTE] You realize there are more countries than just the U.S., Norway, Canada, Australia, Israel, UK, and Japan right? when you say "No other country on Earth has mass shooting trends even close to being level with ours" when there's literally civil wars raging in other countries it's hard to take you seriously.

[QUOTE=CodeMonkey3;50528283]It's a slow day at work so far but I actually got to get out of my office and try to do something. But I'll say this: Go ahead and try to ban them. If you're feeling really lucky than go ahead and try to confiscate them. Regardless what legislation you pass at the end of the day if you try to ban them we will not comply and if try to confiscate them than we will resist. I don't want to sound like a crazy person. But it's basically a fact, gun owners will resist mass confiscation if it ever came to that.[/QUOTE] Except we don't want to confiscate guns? stop shoving words into my mouth. [editline]15th June 2016[/editline] [QUOTE=TheMrFailz;50528482]Friendly reminder, these were manufactured: [t]http://www.diecast.org/data/sac_cars/aa74006_11.jpg[/t] [t]http://olive-drab.com/images/id_mb_w_rocket_full.jpg[/t][/QUOTE] Except that you can't put those on a civvie jeep.

[QUOTE=Lord of Boxes;50528568]Except we don't want to confiscate guns? stop shoving words into my mouth. [editline]15th June 2016[/editline] Except that you can't put those on a civvie jeep.[/QUOTE] There's a difference between "Can't" and "Most People wouldn't be able to". If my shops lawyer can mount a full auto MG 42 in the back of his pickup it can be done. It's not like the mounts are made of unobtainium.

[QUOTE=Lord of Boxes;50528568]Except we don't want to confiscate guns? stop shoving words in my mouth.[/QUOTE] I wasn't talking to you it was a general statement in regards to the conversation we were having. I didn't even notice you until this last page after I made the statement because of the Overwatch avatar. I'm on my lunch now but I realized something. The AR rifle everyone is so afraid of and wants the AWB to restrict access too isn't a new technology. Before WWII you could get weapons that performed the same exact function. The spree killing thing is something we've only see become an issue in the last thirty years but these types of weapons have always been accessible to people (and in the past it was much easier to get them infact) It's clearly not a firearm issue its some sort of cultural shift that causes this behavior. You could buy the AR rifles back in the 1970's but only in the last twenty years have they suddenly become the poster child of active shooters.

[QUOTE=soulharvester;50528553]You realize there are more countries than just the U.S., Norway, Canada, Australia, Israel, UK, and Japan right? when you say "No other country on Earth has mass shooting trends even close to being level with ours" when there's literally civil wars raging in other countries it's hard to take you seriously.[/QUOTE] A civil war is a [B]WAR[/B] not a regular day with shooting in between.

[QUOTE=CodeMonkey3;50528283]It's a slow day at work so far but I actually got to get out of my office and try to do something. But I'll say this: Go ahead and try to ban them. If you're feeling really lucky than go ahead and try to confiscate them. Regardless what legislation you pass at the end of the day if you try to ban them we will not comply and if try to confiscate them than we will resist. I don't want to sound like a crazy person. But it's basically a fact, gun owners will resist mass confiscation if it ever came to that.[/QUOTE] [B]NOBODY IS CALLING FOR MASS CONFISCATION[/B] just wanted to get that out there. there's always some confusion on the issue.

And people are thinking this will even go through, even though some republican's (all in danger of losing their seat) support, when more than likely the NRA (Even with Trump's insisting) will block this.

[QUOTE=Sableye;50529217][B]NOBODY IS CALLING FOR MASS CONFISCATION[/B] just wanted to get that out there. there's always some confusion on the issue.[/QUOTE] That's what it always leads to and it's a trust issue now

[QUOTE=Grenadiac;50529237]That's what it always leads to and it's a trust issue now[/QUOTE] Examples in actual US law?

NYC

[QUOTE=Grenadiac;50529242]NYC[/QUOTE] was a ban, not a confiscation here is the [I]only[/I] source i can find quickly on the subject which should have exploded all over google [url]http://therighttobear.com/surprise-new-york-state-has-begun-gun-confiscation-video/[/url] so yes, if [I]therighttobear.com[/I] is an unbiased source then NYC took people's guns. there's a few weird sources claiming to have notices from the city telling people to turn in their guns, but i can't find if it was actually official or not. the other sites i look at all link back to the same website with a purported notice the [I]only[/I] unbiased source i found was this local fox news station [quote]The New York City Police Department is taking aim at owners of shotguns and rifles capable of holding more than five rounds, demanding such guns be surrendered,[B] altered or taken out of the city.[/B][/quote] [url]http://www.foxnews.com/us/2013/12/05/nypd-targets-owners-multi-clip-shotguns-rifles.html[/url] not confiscation in the slightest, and the notice was not compulsory, just advising them that such guns were not legal and they could run afoul if caught with them in any case it doesn't matter because the feds do not have such a database to track gun ownership as that is illegal

[QUOTE=Lord of Boxes;50528568]Except we don't want to confiscate guns? stop shoving words into my mouth. [editline]15th June 2016[/editline] Except that you can't put those on a civvie jeep.[/QUOTE] A man at the local car meet had a jeep with an M2 on the back. Did it all himself. Hell. I could mount an M2 in the trunk of my Volvo. It'd be my War Wagon.

[QUOTE=Lord of Boxes;50528568]Except we don't want to confiscate guns? stop shoving words into my mouth. [editline]15th June 2016[/editline] Except that you can't put those on a civvie jeep.[/QUOTE] You'll have to enlighten me on what a "civvie jeep" is. And there are these things called "technical" vehicles.

[QUOTE=ExplosiveCheese;50529357]You'll have to enlighten me on what a "civvie jeep" is. And there are these things called "technical" vehicles.[/QUOTE] its kind of a moot point anyways, RPGs and high explosives, as well as anti-armor weaponry are a lot harder to get a hold of in the US. Sure some syrians can toss together a technical from a hilux and a spare rocket pod but like they have a lot of munitions lying around over there, its just not the case here i know people like to fantasize about a mass insurgency 100x as bad as what those poorly equipped iraqis were able to do, but they had a flood of old surplus munitions, foreign backing, and lots of explosives, things that would be a lot harder to get in the US frankly

[QUOTE=Sableye;50529258]was a ban, not a confiscation[/QUOTE] New York banned assault weapons and magazines over 10 rounds. Owners were required by law to sell or turn them in, or face felony charges. Changing the law so that something previously legal is now illegal and must be given up fits the definition of confiscation, whether police are at your door for it or not.

[QUOTE=catbarf;50529633]New York banned assault weapons and magazines over 10 rounds. Owners were required by law to sell or turn them in, or face felony charges. Changing the law so that something previously legal is now illegal and must be given up fits the definition of confiscation, whether police are at your door for it or not.[/QUOTE] I posted exactly what the law required, you had the choice to either sell, modify or remove them from the city turning them in was also an option. The police waited almost 3 years to send out very poorly worded notices to 500 people they believed to not be in compliance. Again as pointed out by my previous post, the federal government does not and cannot have such a database in the first place because that is illegal so they can only grandfather and advertise the law change and arrest people who try to buy new ones illegally which is already a crime to sell a gun illegally

[QUOTE=Sableye;50530017]I posted exactly what the law required, you had the choice to either sell, modify or remove them from the city turning them in was also an option.[/QUOTE] I'm really failing to understand how you can look at a government saying 'you are not allowed to own this anymore and if you continue to own it we will send you to prison' and say that's not confiscation. What does confiscation mean to you, exactly?

[QUOTE=catbarf;50530118]I'm really failing to understand how you can look at a government saying 'you are not allowed to own this anymore and[B] if you continue to own it we will send you to prison' [/B]and say that's not confiscation. What does confiscation mean to you, exactly?[/QUOTE] because its not [I]fucking confiscation[/I] and they won't send you to prison for having it. Municipalities of all places should have the ability to control their local gun laws. what possible use can you have for a rifle in the middle of manhatten? they are saying you are no longer allowed to buy them [I]in the city[/I] and you are no longer allowed to keep them [I]in the city[/I]. additionally, and its painful how you're not getting this, the police in this case used a database they had to send the notices, on the federal level there is no such database as that is illegal for the 3rd goddamn time, so they can only say nobody can buy them now. The federal government did not confiscate suppressors when they banned them, they did not confiscate machine guns when they too were banned, you had plenty of time to reregister them to be grandfathered, modified, or deactivated in every case confiscation by the paranoid ramblings of pro-gun websites means going door to door using a federal database to target gun owners and forcibly remove their guns, before tossing them into a big shredder

[QUOTE=Grenadiac;50529237]That's what it always leads to and it's a trust issue now[/QUOTE] Fair enough then, I dont really have much faith in DC either these days.

[QUOTE=ilikecorn;50527907]That's because of how stupidly stable it is, and how difficult it is to set off. You'd need a high speed blasting cap to set it off properly, your shitty homemade blasting caps can't set it off because they don't hit the critical velocity.[/QUOTE]Lead picrate is painfully easy to make though, and there's always the option of using a gun detonator. [QUOTE=CrimsonChin;50527995]I really don't care what the constitution says.[/QUOTE]You and every other gun grabber out there.[QUOTE]Just because something is in the constitution doesn't mean it's something that should be followed or that it's right.[/QUOTE]Uh, that's precisely what it means. [QUOTE=CodeMonkey3;50528283]It's a slow day at work so far but I actually got to get out of my office and try to do something. But I'll say this: Go ahead and try to ban them. If you're feeling really lucky than go ahead and try to confiscate them. Regardless what legislation you pass at the end of the day if you try to ban them we will not comply and if try to confiscate them than we will resist. I don't want to sound like a crazy person. But it's basically a fact, gun owners will resist mass confiscation if it ever came to that.[/QUOTE]Adding on to this I will say that if any serious gun control measures are put out there I'm going to start distributing every document I can find regarding home manufacture of firearms to as many people as possible. I've already got quite a collection, I just haven't bothered with making it user friendly. There's nothing wrong with distributing reading material, but I imagine if the 2nd Amendment gets hit hard on a federal level the 1st won't be far behind.