Notice From My Cold Dead Hands...... (1 Viewer)

Welcome to our community

Be a part of something great, join today!

Register Log in
Phatguysrule said:
You are welcome to keep trying to limit the access to 400 million items. That will take hundreds of years.

1 per minute, every day, 24hrs per day is 760 years.
Click to expand...
You are outlining the removal of 400m weapons. The rest of us are talking about restricting access, making it more difficult, creating harsher penalties, and so on. Taxing, penalizing, requiring better safeguarding and so on. I have yet to read a single person say we need to go get 400m guns and melt them.
 
  • Like
Reactions: RR7
SlyPokerDog said:
A kid who just turned 18yrs old and only worked part-time at a Wendy's was able to purchase 2 AR-15s, 60 magazines, and over 1000 rounds of ammunition.

It was too easy and too cheap for a kid to be able to buy that much of an arsenal.
Click to expand...
He spent over $1000 on that. Likely closer to $2000. This kid was stupid.

If guns get much more expensive we're going to start seeing black market homemade guns far more often. And it's much easier to make a fully automatic gun than a semi-automatic. And they sell for a lot more.

targeting a specific model or feature, or magazine size, is a big mistake, IMO.
 
Phatguysrule said:
I didn't say it shouldn't be discussed. I've encouraged the discussion. I appreciate it.

My point is that we should put the bulk of our efforts behind the changes that could be most easily attained and have the greatest impact.
Click to expand...
To any response, you quickly say it's not gonna happen. That's not encouraging discussion, IMO.
Asking for 200 billion to renovate every school seems less likely. We can't get places to have clean drinking water. We can't fix crumbling bridges. We can't fund universal Healthcare. We seem to only have $$ for weapons of different varieties.
 
I agree with Phats, way too hard to get rid of all the guns.

And we should improve school safety.

So $1000 "school safety improvement fee" for handguns and long guns, $5000 "school safety improvement fee" for AR-15 type weapons. $100 "school safety improvement fee" per box of ammo.

If gun owners don't want regulations then they can pay for the needed safety improvements.
 
  • Like
Reactions: RR7
Phatguysrule said:
He spent over $1000 on that. Likely closer to $2000. This kid was stupid.

If guns get much more expensive we're going to start seeing black market homemade guns far more often. And it's much easier to make a fully automatic gun than a semi-automatic. And they sell for a lot more.

targeting a specific model or feature, or magazine size, is a big mistake, IMO.
Click to expand...
If they sell for a lot more, it's going to be far more difficult to get. Win! If someone has to find someone with a 3d printer and know how versus just walking in to a Walmart, that makes getting a gun far more difficult. Also a win.
 
calvin natt said:
You are outlining the removal of 400m weapons. The rest of us are talking about restricting access, making it more difficult, creating harsher penalties, and so on. Taxing, penalizing, requiring better safeguarding and so on. I have yet to read a single person say we need to go get 400m guns and melt them.
Click to expand...
Okay, okay. I'll say it. We need to go get 400 million guns and melt them. Desperate times call for desperate measures.
 
calvin natt said:
You are outlining the removal of 400m weapons. The rest of us are talking about restricting access, making it more difficult, creating harsher penalties, and so on. Taxing, penalizing, requiring better safeguarding and so on. I have yet to read a single person say we need to go get 400m guns and melt them.
Click to expand...
Absolutely, people have said ban all guns in this thread. Didn't find it with a quick search, but it has certainly been said.

And this kid spent $2k on this arsenals that he didn't even use 10% of. Make them much more expensive than that and you are just encouraging a black market.

If you don't remove most of the guns you simply haven't restricted access to them. People will still need guns to defend themselves criminals with guns. So keeping them in a locked safe at all times is not an option and will never happen.

I fully support raising the age of buying firearms. Have said so several times in this very thread. I've actually proposed this as well.

I fully support preventing dangerous people from buying firearms. Have also said so many times in this thread.

Universal background checks will never happen, even if we can get the republicans to allow a bill to go up for vote in the senate, and it somehow passes, MAGA states will not enforce it, as we've seen over and over. They will undermine gun control until it's not successful and it will be sunsetted or voted out.

I am advocating that we spend our time and effort on stuff that could actually make a difference.
 


Republicans: Thank God she wasn’t white

Easier access to guns is their answer.
 
RR7 said:
If they sell for a lot more, it's going to be far more difficult to get. Win! If someone has to find someone with a 3d printer and know how versus just walking in to a Walmart, that makes getting a gun far more difficult. Also a win.
Click to expand...
Fully automatic sell for more than semiautomatics because there is more demand for them, they are just illegal, and it's easy to get semi-auto, so there aren't as many. If the price of ARs got high enough to encourage a black market you'd just have fully automatics for cheaper than you could legally buy a semi-automatic. That's the wrong direction to go... This kid could certainly buy a black market fully automatic weapon for what he spent on his arsenal.

But the reality is that they just won't use an AR if they get that expensive. They'll use a hunting rifle or a handgun, which would be far more deadly.
 
Phatguysrule said:
Absolutely, people have said ban all guns in this thread. Didn't find it with a quick search, but it has certainly been said.

And this kid spent $2k on this arsenals that he didn't even use 10% of. Make them much more expensive than that and you are just encouraging a black market.

If you don't remove most of the guns you simply haven't restricted access to them. People will still need guns to defend themselves criminals with guns. So keeping them in a locked safe at all times is not an option and will never happen.

I fully support raising the age of buying firearms. Have said so several times in this very thread. I've actually proposed this as well.

I fully support preventing dangerous people from buying firearms. Have also said so many times in this thread.

Universal background checks will never happen, even if we can get the republicans to allow a bill to go up for vote in the senate, and it somehow passes, MAGA states will not enforce it, as we've seen over and over. They will undermine gun control until it's not successful and it will be sunsetted or voted out.

I am advocating that we spend our time and effort on stuff that could actually make a difference.
Click to expand...
Did you see Steve Kerr's response to the tragedy in Uvalde? 95% of Americans feel this way.
 
SlyPokerDog said:
I agree with Phats, way too hard to get rid of all the guns.

And we should improve school safety.

So $1000 "school safety improvement fee" for handguns and long guns, $5000 "school safety improvement fee" for AR-15 type weapons. $100 "school safety improvement fee" per box of ammo.

If gun owners don't want regulations then they can pay for the needed safety improvements.
Click to expand...
Sure, that's an option. But there are already so many I don't think it will make a difference. A semi-automatic hunting rifle would be so much worse than an AR... So much worse...
 
Lanny said:
Did you see Steve Kerr's response to the tragedy in Uvalde? 95% of Americans feel this way.
Click to expand...
I did. I believe I know the answer to his question "Why?". The answer is politics. Neither side is willing to admit what the real problems are, or are willing to discuss feasible solutions to address them.
 
Last edited:
Phatguysrule said:
Sure, that's an option. But there are already so many I don't think it will make a difference. A semi-automatic hunting rifle would be so much worse than an AR... So much worse...
Click to expand...

I'm just trying to find a way for gun rights supporters to fund the safety improvements they say will work. Isn't that fair?
 
SlyPokerDog said:
I'm just trying to find a way for gun rights supporters to fund the safety improvements they say will work. Isn't that fair?
Click to expand...
Sure it's fair. But it will certainly not encourage them to bring their best offer to the table. Honestly, I don't think it would ever make it to a vote.

And if it somehow did, it might actually make things worse than they already are...
 
calvin natt said:
You are outlining the removal of 400m weapons. The rest of us are talking about restricting access, making it more difficult, creating harsher penalties, and so on. Taxing, penalizing, requiring better safeguarding and so on. I have yet to read a single person say we need to go get 400m guns and melt them.
Click to expand...

UncleCliffy'sDaddy said:
Nope. 100% gun confiscation. Period. Amen. And when that has been accomplished, severely restrict police access to firearms, as they should rarely be required. Time for a 180 degree approach to a problem that is only getting worse. With everything else the right wants to take away from us, why wouldn't they get behind this?? The time for so called "rational" discussion is long past. Prayers and platitudes are proven ineffective time and time again. Maybe it's time this country grew up and moved away from 18th century thinking........
Click to expand...

So, again... this would take hundreds of years. 760 years at 1 gun per minute, every day, all day.
 
Phatguysrule said:
Sure it's fair. But it will certainly not encourage them to bring their best offer to the table. Honestly, I don't think it would ever make it to a vote.

And if it somehow did, it might actually make things worse than they already are...
Click to expand...

I didn't say tax, I said admin fee, which can be done by executive order.
 
SfawsKr.png
 
Phatguysrule said:
Well regulated has been addressed. In the 18th century it meant capable, or well functioning.
Click to expand...

Certainly the current 'militia' isn't well-regulated in that sense. Millions of people out there have guns and have little idea how to use them capably. And they certainly wouldn't function well as a militia in the 1791 sense.

barfo
 
SlyPokerDog said:
I didn't say tax, I said admin fee, which can be done by executive order.
Click to expand...
Very smart! If it's effective it should be good evidence. If it doesn't eliminate shootings by the time the next republican president wins he'll just get rid of it.
So now we'll have a robust black market with very high margins of fully automatic and untraceable guns.

Good times.
 
barfo said:
Certainly the current 'militia' isn't well-regulated in that sense. Millions of people out there have guns and have little idea how to use them capably. And they certainly wouldn't function well as a militia in the 1791 sense.

barfo
Click to expand...
They are far better with them than if they didn't own guns. Like, they know how to aim, and use the safety... load them... clean them...
No, we are definitely a far more formidable force than if we didn't have access to firearms. No question about that.
 
Phatguysrule said:
You honestly don't think we're a more capable force than if we didn't have guns? Really?
Click to expand...
We spend 800 billion dollars a year on our defense budget. If that isn't enough, the "capable force" of militia men isn't going to make a difference.
 
SFIMZBo.jpg


One of the kids took her teacher's cell phone from their cold dead hands, called 911, and pleaded for the police to help them.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 2 (members: 0, guests: 2)

Featured content

Back
Top