Notice From My Cold Dead Hands......

[crandc]

New Republican argument: gun free zones cause mass shootings.
And tobacco free zones cause lung cancer.

 

[Phatguysrule]

The only thing that is verifiable from this article is in the title. Don't care how many unregistered guns there are there and I am definitely not going on a limb to determine from this unfounded number that they somehow have more than the average continental US. What we do know for sure is that these additional restrictions seem to work and given that Hawaii actually has real penalties behind unregistered firearms - even if they exist but people do not want to use them mostly because of the penalties, it just another point in favor of increased restrictions and proper penalties.

Once we start putting "estimated" numbers without reference, we might as well resort to the following:

Ok, well I linked multiple local news sources... but here is the actual report they were referencing...

According to data from CPJAD, there were 449,411 new registrations of firearms in the State from the beginning of 2007 to the end of 2017.9 CPJAD (Criminal Prevention & Justice Assistance Division, Department of the Attorney General) staff cautiously estimated that “roughly” 2,000,000 privately-owned firearms are currently in the State

 

[Lanny]

New Republican argument: gun free zones cause mass shootings.
And tobacco free zones cause lung cancer.

Brilliant! I've long thought that no guns and no tobacco would cause more shooting with guns and more lung cancer. I've just gotta vote for this genius.

 

[Phatguysrule]

Hello,
I am not sure, But I would counter this with, why does not the military just go with hand guns when in urban combat?
I am pretty sure most any infantry unit would choose the AR over any hand gun almost every time, so I'm not sure of that opinion being the most accurate.
View attachment 47802View attachment 47800View attachment 47801

The guns the military enters with are far more lethal than an AR15. The military has actual assault rifles capable of full auto and burst fire. And they have backup. And every one of them is carrying a hand gun....

The rifle the military uses is a far more versatile weapon than either a hand gun or anything any American citizen can buy without a VERY expensive permit with a VERY extensive background check.

 

[Lanny]

The guns the military enters with are far more lethal than an AR15. The military has actual assault rifles capable of full auto and burst fire. And they have backup. And every one of them is carrying a hand gun....

The rifle the military uses is a far more versatile weapon than either a hand gun or anything any American citizen can buy without a VERY expensive permit with a VERY extensive background check.

We were taught not to use auto fire too often because pretty soon you run out of bullets when I was in the Army in combat. Therefor most shots were single fire.

 

[Phatguysrule]

We were taught not to use auto fire too often because pretty soon you run out of bullets when I was in the Army in combat. Therefor most shots were single fire.

But it's there in case you need it, just as handy as your safety switch. And it will clear a hallway better than anything else... aside from a grenade, or possibly a cabbage based lunch...

 

[Shaboid]

The guns the military enters with are far more lethal than an AR15. The military has actual assault rifles capable of full auto and burst fire. And they have backup. And every one of them is carrying a hand gun....

The rifle the military uses is a far more versatile weapon than either a hand gun or anything any American citizen can buy without a VERY expensive permit with a VERY extensive background check.

Or by modifying weapons themselves. But now that I say that I realize you will just go back to your "black market" argument, stating that people will modify whatever they want to achieve their goals. Idk, man. Its gotten pretty tiring. I know you have suggested solutions, it's just the "yeah, but" arguments you come back with make it seem like you don't want to stop these heinous acts... I can understand why people are frustrated with the discourse they have had with you in this thread.

 

[Lanny]

But it's there in case you need it, just as handy as your safety switch. And it will clear a hallway better than anything else... aside from a grenade, or possibly a cabbage based lunch...

Also us lower ranking slobs were never issued handguns. Those were mostly for officers.

 

[SharpeScooterShooter]

The guns the military enters with are far more lethal than an AR15. The military has actual assault rifles capable of full auto and burst fire. And they have backup. And every one of them is carrying a hand gun....

The rifle the military uses is a far more versatile weapon than either a hand gun or anything any American citizen can buy without a VERY expensive permit with a VERY extensive background check.

But is any of that relevant when a hand gun doesn't have any more versatility than a civilian AR 15?
Your statement/opinion was you would rather have a hand gun. Short burst option or not, Im still not sure any infantry would agree with you.
A hand gun in 5’ or less close combat? Possibly. Busting a door open and scanning a room with the barrel of a gun? I doubt it. I think they would prefer the civilian AR over the military issue handgun.
All infantry carry a handgun, as a backup. Not as their primary weapon in hand.
I am sorry, I am just not seeing what you Re seeing.

 

[Lanny]

But is any of that relevant when a hand gun doesn't have any more versatility than a civilian AR 15?
Your statement/opinion was you would rather have a hand gun. Short burst option or not, Im still not sure any infantry would agree with you.
A hand gun in 5’ or less close combat? Possibly. Busting a door open and scanning a room with the barrel of a gun? I doubt it. I think they would prefer the civilian AR over the military issue handgun.
All infantry carry a handgun, as a backup. Not as their primary weapon in hand.
I am sorry, I am just not seeing what you Re seeing.

The handgun carry by all infantry is new to me. Of course my experience goes back over fifty years.

 

[Phatguysrule]

Or by modifying weapons themselves. But now that I say that I realize you will just go back to your "black market" argument, stating that people will modify whatever they want to achieve their goals. Idk, man. Its gotten pretty tiring. I know you have suggested solutions, it's just the "yeah, but" arguments you come back with make it seem like you don't want to stop these heinous acts... I can understand why people are frustrated with the discourse they have had with you in this thread.

I get it. Having something you believe fervently brought into question with data is frustrating.

I think the reason it's frustrating is people have convinced themselves that it's this easy fix and they know the exact solution. Just get angry enough and it'll be fixed. But that's just not the case.

I have actually applauded new information that has been brought to the table. Like the Hawaii info. That was a great find. Like the link you posted. Great stuff. And I said so. And I researched it. Like the ammunition limits which were brought up. I researched the manufacture of ammunition to see if it would be possible to regulate and track the materials (it's not easy, at all, especially if the state doesn't support the restriction).

It's the rehashing ground we've already addressed and moved on from and backhanded insults that get a short response back from me.

Blatant personal attacks I just won't stand for.

 

[Lanny]

I get it. Having something you believe fervently brought into question with data is frustrating.

I think the reason it's frustrating is people have convinced themselves that it's this easy fix and they know the exact solution. Just get angry enough and it'll be fixed. But that's just not the case.

I have actually applauded new information that has been brought to the table. Like the Hawaii info. That was a great find. Like the link you posted. Great stuff. And I said so. And I researched it. Like the ammunition limits which were brought up. I researched the manufacture of ammunition to see if it would be possible to regulate and track the materials (it's not easy, at all, especially if the state doesn't support the restriction).

It's the rehashing ground we've already addressed and moved on from and backhanded insults that get a short response back from me.

Blatant personal attacks I just won't stand for.

Nothing else has worked.

 

[Phatguysrule]

But is any of that relevant when a hand gun doesn't have any more versatility than a civilian AR 15?
Your statement/opinion was you would rather have a hand gun. Short burst option or not, Im still not sure any infantry would agree with you.
A hand gun in 5’ or less close combat? Possibly. Busting a door open and scanning a room with the barrel of a gun? I doubt it. I think they would prefer the civilian AR over the military issue handgun.
All infantry carry a handgun, as a backup. Not as their primary weapon in hand.
I am sorry, I am just not seeing what you Re seeing.

I think a hand gun has huge advantages in close quarters. It's far more mobile and simpler to quickly and accurately aim in an enclosed area. You can more easily carry more ammunition... It's far easier to disarm (or at least disable) an attacker with a long gun than a handgun. Once you have gotten within a few feet a long gun is more useful as a club.

 

[riverman]

And every one of them is carrying a hand gun....

Not when I served from 71-73....lot of military personnel are not armed at all unless they are issued a weapon for being in a combat action zone. As Lanny said....I only remember officers carrying handguns ..and only in the bush...

 

[SharpeScooterShooter]

I think a hand gun has huge advantages in close quarters. It's far more mobile and simpler to quickly and accurately aim in an enclosed area. You can more easily carry more ammunition... It's far easier to disarm (or at least disable) an attacker with a long gun than a handgun. Once you have gotten within a few feet a long gun is more useful as a club.

I think the gray areas is the definition of close quarters. To me that means a bathroom, closet, inside a car, etc.

I do not consider a classroom close quarters. But that would certainly be my opinion.

 

[Shaboid]

I get it. Having something you believe fervently brought into question with data is frustrating.

I think the reason it's frustrating is people have convinced themselves that it's this easy fix and they know the exact solution. Just get angry enough and it'll be fixed. But that's just not the case.

I have actually applauded new information that has been brought to the table. Like the Hawaii info. That was a great find. Like the link you posted. Great stuff. And I said so. And I researched it. Like the ammunition limits which were brought up. I researched the manufacture of ammunition to see if it would be possible to regulate and track the materials (it's not easy, at all, especially if the state doesn't support the restriction).

It's the rehashing ground we've already addressed and moved on from and backhanded insults that get a short response back from me.

Blatant personal attacks I just won't stand for.

Condescension doesn't help either. Just saying.

 

[SlyPokerDog]

Democratic Rep. Don Beyer suggests bill adding a 1,000% TAX on AR-15s that would NOT require Republican votes

• 'We think that a 1,000% fee on assault weapons is just the kind of restrictive measure that creates enough fiscal impact to qualify for reconciliation,' he said
• If Democrats were to pass a bill by reconciliation they would not need to court 10 Republican votes to break a filibuster with 60 votes in the split Senate
• Reconciliation can only be used for tax and funding bills
• They would still need to get key moderate Sen. Joe Manchin, D-W.Va., on board. Manchin has expressed an openness to banning AR-15-style weapons
• The AR-15 is America's most popular semi-automatic weapon-- they account for one in five guns in the U.S.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...er-suggests-bill-adding-1-000-TAX-AR-15s.html

 

[Phatguysrule]

The handgun carry by all infantry is new to me. Of course my experience goes back over fifty years.

Yeah, I was more thinking special forces, on a mission to enter a building.

So they would gear up specifically for that situation. In which case most would want a sidearm in in case of close contact.

I said all, but I guess that was probably an overreach...

 

[Phatguysrule]

Condescension doesn't help either. Just saying.

It's tough to get as much as I have in this thread and not give it back.

But yeah, you're right, of course.

 

[Phatguysrule]

Democratic Rep. Don Beyer suggests bill adding a 1,000% TAX on AR-15s that would NOT require Republican votes

• 'We think that a 1,000% fee on assault weapons is just the kind of restrictive measure that creates enough fiscal impact to qualify for reconciliation,' he said
• If Democrats were to pass a bill by reconciliation they would not need to court 10 Republican votes to break a filibuster with 60 votes in the split Senate
• Reconciliation can only be used for tax and funding bills
• They would still need to get key moderate Sen. Joe Manchin, D-W.Va., on board. Manchin has expressed an openness to banning AR-15-style weapons
• The AR-15 is America's most popular semi-automatic weapon-- they account for one in five guns in the U.S.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...er-suggests-bill-adding-1-000-TAX-AR-15s.html

This is tough... This is what I foresee happening...

So you buy a kit which comes with everything except the lower. These things are not specific to an AR, and as such cannot be levied the tax.

If you spend $750 you are elligable for a 1 time purchase of any item for $1.

So you pay your $1 (plus $10 tax) for your lower (the only part that is serialized as a gun) and you have your complete AR for $761 plus shipping.

 

[Phatguysrule]

I think the gray areas is the definition of close quarters. To me that means a bathroom, closet, inside a car, etc.

I do not consider a classroom close quarters. But that would certainly be my opinion.

How about the hallway to get into that classroom? And I would suggest that it's still far easier to aim a handgun in a classroom than a long gun.

A 30-50ft room is the ideal range for a hangun, IMO.

*Edit* Obviously I'd be hunting terrorists and pedophiles in this situation.

 

[Lanny]

It's tough to get as much as I have in this thread and not give it back.

But yeah, you're right, of course.

I've never found you condescending.

 

[Phatguysrule]

I've never found you condescending.

I appreciate that Lanny.
Of course, you engage in thoughtful conversation which makes it easy for me to want to engage with you in the same manor.

I know I sometimes go too far in retaliation. Often times to my own detriment. I need to take a page out of your book (likely several pages).

 

[SharpeScooterShooter]

How about the hallway to get into that classroom? And I would suggest that it's still far easier to aim a handgun in a classroom than a long gun.

A 30-50ft room is the ideal range for a hangun, IMO.

*Edit* Obviously I'd be hunting terrorists and pedophiles in this situation.

Understood. We will have to agree to disagree. Ill take the AR15 over a handgun all day long in a classroom setting.
Ive watched many many domestic shootings in closed quarters with neither hitting their targets after expending several rounds with handguns. The longer the barrel the better the accuracy. Pretty much indisputable.
Or to put it another way, if i go target shooting from 30’, I wouldbet my life I'm more accurate with the AR vs a hand gun.
I think alot of it has to do with training and experience as well.
Regarding hallways? They are generally long (see the images i posted?)
I, personally, believe a group of trained shooters in a classroom with AR15’s beats a group of trained shooters with handguns. But without evidence, its just my opinion based on videos I've seen.

 

[SharpeScooterShooter]

How about the hallway to get into that classroom? And I would suggest that it's still far easier to aim a handgun in a classroom than a long gun.

A 30-50ft room is the ideal range for a hangun, IMO.

*Edit* Obviously I'd be hunting terrorists and pedophiles in this situation.

For the record, my opinion is very much the same as yours. Too many guns to get rid of.
Focus on family, health and education and most people will stop shooting other people without just cause.
However, that is not an easy task. I would venture to say not much easier than removing all the guns.

 

[Phatguysrule]

Understood. We will have to agree to disagree. Ill take the AR15 over a handgun all day long in a classroom setting.
Ive watched many many domestic shootings in closed quarters with neither hitting their targets acter expending several rounds. The longer the barrel the better the a curacy. Pretty much indisputable.
Or to put it a other way, if i go target shooting from 30’ ill bet my life I'm more accurate with the AR vs a hand gun.
I think alot of it has to do with training and experience as well.
Regarding hallways? They are generally long (see the images i posted?)
I, personally, believe a group of trained shooters in a classroom with AR15’s beats a group of trained shooters with handguns. But without evidence, its just my opinion based on videos I've seen.

Understood. I do completely agree that the training makes all the difference, regardless of which you select.

 

[Phatguysrule]

For the record, my opinion is very much the same as yours. Too many guns to get rid of.
Focus on family, health and education and most people will stop shooting other people without just cause.
However, that is not an easy task. I would venture to say not much easier than removing all the guns.

Agreed. It's not easy. There is no easy solution.

But what I keep coming back to is there isn't a constitutional right between us and offering better services and opportunities to our population. We've done it in the past.

 

[SharpeScooterShooter]

Agreed. It's not easy. There is no easy solution.

But what I keep coming back to is there isn't a constitutional right between us and offering better services and opportunities to our population. We've done it in the past.

Semantics but i would say there is. It has to be voted in by congress?

 

[Fairly-Hard]

Okay

 

[Phatguysrule]

Semantics but i would say there is. It has to be voted in by congress?

That's a lower bar than a constitutional convention. Congress can vote on whatever they want, it if the Supreme Court rules that it is against the 2nd ammendment it won't matter. It'll get thrown out.

But if congress votes to fund healthcare and mental health there is nothing to stop it. If they vote to put a shrink in every school, no problem. It'll happen.

There is no constitution to overcome.