Assault Weapons Ban Introduced in Delaware; NJ's tough gun laws toughened more
116 replies, posted
If not banning guns, what is the facepunch opinion on what should be done? I don't care for politics but I'm curious where the forums stance lies.
Unfairly punishing over a third of the country for the irresponsible and criminal actions of less than a few thousand is never the right way to go about things.
Yes, when I get home I will find the article of the case but there was legally nothing at the time the police could do iirc.
License-based weaponry. Have each gun be registered, with its serial number, at an agency. Treat it like you'd treat the second-hand sale of a car, contact the agency with the serial number of your weapon and register the sale. If you fail to do this it's a criminal offense. Done.
I think handguns should be heavily regulated as well. No open/closed carry allowed, and they should be locked in safes when not in use, with the magazine & ammo unloaded in a separate locker.
Proving my point.
If drunk driving wasn't illegal, you can bet your ass a lot more people would be drunk-driving. Sure, people have morals and understand the dangers themselves, but you'd be surprised how many people would happily get in a car and drive when plastered if it wasn't against the law to do so because "It's okay, I haven't had that much!". This isn't about eliminating the number, because that isn't going to happen. But being this adamant on not wanting to do EVERYTHING to even lower the numbers just a little bit is really sinister and frankly stupid.
Murder is illegal too, so I'm not sure what point you're trying to make. Doing everything possible to address a problem as varied as gun crime is stupid. The Clinton administration instituted a nationwide assault weapons ban in 1994 and it was expired in 2004 with no renewal because it didn't work. In fact, during that 10 year period, only 4.82% of the firearms used in gun crime met the "Assault Weapons" criteria.
I know you're going to say "but why not try to solve that 4.82% anyway!" And that's just disingenuous. I'm not saying we shouldn't stop gun crime. I'm just saying we've been down this road again and again and it doesn't work. Something needs to change. Implementing the same stupid laws won't help in the long run. I want to come to a long-term solution, but it's hard to do so when everyone is running an emotion-fueled short-term argument.
The fuck are you talking about you can't buy guns on craigslist.
Hell even looking on craigslist in Texas all you find are staple guns and gun safes.
Murder is illegal, and while I know Louis CK has been going through a bit of a scandal I'd say this is pretty valid anyway. You bet your ass if it wasn't for the jailtime, people would be murdering eachother a lot - and we've kind of got thousands of years of history to prove that.
Sorry, but all I'm seeing you say here is "Doing anything to have less dead people is stupid".
Sorry that I value the lives of those 4.82%? But that just brings me back to what I said originally. You think that's "statistically insignificant", which to me means you think those people and the lives they lost are insignificant. Which is pretty damn dark and horrible.
You're putting words in my mouth, as evidence by the fact that you conveniently left off the rest of that entire paragraph.
I am merely saying that these things you're suggesting have been suggested and implemented before to little or no effect. Your justification is that "if it saves a life, it was worth it." At no point have I said I don't also want to save those lives. My point is that we all need to take a step back and really get the big picture so that we can finally start working towards effective long-term gun control.
Part of that is getting people like you to understand that the same well-exhausted pro gun control arguments simply do not work.
Going back through it, I see 2-3 things that might actually do some good, if only they put that much thought into banning
Their ToS states pretty clear who is at fault in that event anyway.
"
I am 18 years of age or older.
I understand that ARMSLIST DOES NOT become involved in
transactions between parties and does not certify, investigate, or in
any way guarantee the legal capacity of any party to transact.
I am responsible for obeying all applicable enforcement
mechanisms, including, but not limited to federal, state, municipal, and
tribal statutes, rules, regulations, ordinances, and judicial
decisions, any applicable Presidential Executive Orders, including
compliance with all applicable licensing requirements.
I will not use Armslist.com for any illegal purpose.
If I am at all unsure about firearm sales or transfers, I will
contact the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosive at
1-800-ATF-GUNS and visit the ATF website at http://www.atf.gov.
I will help to ensure the overall openness and accessibility of
the site to all users through a peer-review process. I understand that
failure to adhere to proper internet protocol and etiquette may result
in removal of my listings or more severe corrective action.
ARMSLIST may edit or remove information, including my listings, from the site without notice.
If I violate these terms, ARMSLIST may permanently remove me
from the site or, depending on the nature and severity of the violation,
avail itself of such remedies as are prescribed by law. Whilst
ARMSLIST ABSOLUTELY BELIEVES AND CHAMPIONS "the right of the people to
keep and bear Arms," ARMSLIST will comply with federal, state,
municipal, and tribal law enforcement entities pursuant to the
Constitution of the United States and Due Process of Law.
I agree to abide by the spam and listing policies. I may only
have one account and may only list an item once, in the correct
category, and in my physical location.
I understand that the sale or trade of animals on Armslist is prohibited.
I take responsibility for my actions whilst using Armslist.com.
I also take responsibility for any and all of my actions related to, or
resulting from, my use of Armslist.com. Further, I am solely
responsible for any and all consequences of such my actions.
I indemnify and hold harmless ARMSLIST and all of its owners,
directors, officers, employees, and agents for any and all loss, harm,
damage, costs, liability, and expense caused to them, whether
intentionally or unintentionally, by my use of Armslist.com, including
but not limited to direct or indirect results of violations of any and
all applicable laws.
ARMSLIST may make changes to these terms at any time without
notifying me. As a user, I am solely responsible for reading the most
current version of the terms and conditions.
By clicking "I agree," I electronically represent ("sign") that I
agree to the above terms and further certify that I have read, and
completely agree, to be legally bound by the ARMSLIST Terms of Use"
How does a TOS stop someone from purchasing a firearm "legally" and then using it in a crime?
It doesn't, it just legally removes responsibility from the site because it's not the sites fault if you break the law in your specific state relating to selling of a firearm.
In some states, you can sell a gun like it's no problem, others require a third party Federal Firearms License holder to be the middle man in the gun sale, and depending on what state you live in, you could be committing a felony by selling a person a gun through private sale. They explicitly state to follow all local, state, and federal laws when it comes to the use of their site, so if someone abuses it can you really blame armslist? It would be on you and the other individual.
"Little effect" is better than doing nothing at all.
It clearly works for the rest of the world, though. So maybe your're just not doing it right.
I think some people suggested a bunch of things in the past like increasing funding and resources for law enforcement and the ATF to go after straw purchasers and unscrupulous firearms dealers since straw purchasers are one of the biggest sources illegally acquired firearms. The other I think was adding incentives like tax breaks/refunds for people who buy gun safes for safer storage since theft is the #2 source of illegally acquired firearms.
Also making some form of standardized program with the same training and requirements across all states for concealed carry permits to reduce accidents/negligent weapons discharges.
Fixing the NICS background check system so that people who are already barred from possessing firearms don’t somehow pass the check due to sheer incompetence and dumb luck like the church shooter did. Also making the NICS system accessible to civilians who want to do their own background checks for a private sale or transfer.
Not entirely gun related but investing in education reform and rebuilding broken communities/reducing the amount of areas with abject poverty would go a long way in reducing gun violence as well.
There's probably a bunch more I’m missing but Catbarf and Grenadiac are able to explain it a bit better than me.
"Little effect" is what will be felt if guns got banned, because there will still be the societal issues that plague this country, and you're not going to get rid of peoples want to kill one another if you don't solve the issues of poverty, racism, and education now.
No, it's not. At all. I've explained this like three times. Pushing objectively ineffectual gun control measures only serves to punish legitimate gun owners and make pro-gun rights people dig their heels in further, making it harder and harder to enact effective legislation. If you don't understand this then you're only going to be contributing to the same cycle of gun control arguments.
Does it? You mean that long-gun registry they had in Canada? The one where the firearm homicide rates actually dropped at a faster rate in the U.S. than they did in Canada during its lifetime? Gun registries which had a 2009 study that shows that there is insufficient evidence to support their effectiveness?
Do I need to show stats on why assault weapons bans don't work because they target cosmetic features of guns and not functional features?
What about in Switzerland where they also have a high gun ownership per capita statistic? They have low gun crime relative to their proportion of gun ownership, so what can we learn from them? I think we can learn a lot from Switzerland.
I agree that we aren't doing it right. But there is a right way and a wrong way to approach this. Don't approach it the wrong way.
I can praise the "Ineffectual gun control now as a stepping stone to ban more guns later" for it's honesty but I'm not sure about it's practicality, effectiveness, or possibility of convincing anyone that doesn't already agree with you.
The fact you rated this "Big Woop" when I'm pointing out the problems that need to be addressed so that deaths from guns go down while you're riding that "BAN ALL THE GUNS" bandwagon just shows how much you actually fucking care about my country.
Fucking hell man.
So we need to ban all firearms, drugs, and alcohol. With no guns, there is no shooting. With no drugs, there is no narcotic related violent crime. With no alcohol, there is no drunk driving.
If you highlight a letter, word, or line then hit reply it only replies to that specific part highlighted.
I think out points are different. I just mean that for someone to get around the "justifiable cause" clause, you only need to hop on a website for private sales, buy a gun from the owner in cash, and just not tell the government about it.
Basically my point is that law is worthless without more control over private sales, like there are with private car sales.
That 4.82% of gun homicides were caused by an "assault weapon" doesn't mean that if you ban "assault weapons" they wouldn't be caused by a shotgun, or a handgun, or any other weapon.
Glad all those resources are going towards something that wont really solve the problem at all.
only if your point was "I have no idea what I'm talking about"
Considering my ex-roommate (whom I've already provided multiple examples of their irresponsiblity with fire-arms alone so I won't repeat them here) was seriously considering buying one, so good call... If he lived anywhere near Delaware...
And if he did he'd get to pay out the ass for it, do NFA paperwork with all the fun that entails with that, then get to spend $200 along with it's own NFA paperwork for anything that he would like to shoot through it that isn't a flare (which includes the chalk filled training rounds, which were deemed destructive devices).
Or he could have just been referring to a flare launcher and you don't know what you're talking about.
Your statement was pretty much "I have no idea what I"m talking about so let's not try to correct me"
I am not surprised at all in NJ's case.
I don't get the impression many people are much more thrilled with this Democratic governor
I don't think anyone in this state has ever been thrilled about any governor we've had so far.
The most emotion we feel here in NJ is only disappointment in that Chris Christie left office without breaking a leg.
Pennsylvania also has one of these monstrosities on the floor, I can only hope it fails just like it did in 2013.
I read it, damn thing is basically a copy+paste of the 1994 version with the dates changed and a registry for existing AWB noncompliant firearms which the state police are supposed to manage.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.