If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(PJ Media)   Why gun microstamping won't work. But who cares about expensive regulations that lose jobs, jail innocent people, and can be thwarted with a $12 part, if we can look like we DID something   (pjmedia.com) divider line 322
    More: Obvious, semiautomatic firearms, PJM, shell casings, Remington Arms  
•       •       •

1964 clicks; posted to Politics » on 09 Oct 2012 at 11:35 AM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



322 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | » | Last | Show all
 
2012-10-09 12:22:21 PM

Fark It: LasersHurt: To assume that there's NO VALUE AT ALL to this is silly, as is assuming they would surely convict the owner with no other evidence.

What value does this fantasy idea have? How many gun crimes in the state of New York are committed with registered guns? Do you know how easy it is to alter a firing pin, to replace one? Do you know how long the stamp will last (how many rounds)?

Do you know anything?


Yes. That's why I am not wholesale denying the idea because there are a few issues with it. It might be feasible with a little tinkering, maybe not. Unlike you, I don't pretend to know all and live in absolutes.
 
2012-10-09 12:22:38 PM

Teufelaffe: Last range I went to would charge you extra if you didn't pick up your casings.


I don't know why: That could be a significant revenue stream for them. They could police up the brass after hours and either sell it to reloaders, or for scrap. Either way, they make money off it.
 
2012-10-09 12:22:52 PM
Gun Microstamping: Democrat Politicians' Ignorance Threatens Manufacturing Jobs 

There had to fix the article's headline.
 
2012-10-09 12:23:06 PM

redmid17: Coolfusis: Mrbogey: GAT_00: dittybopper: itsdan: GAT_00: I like how one currently existing gun where removing the firing pin is easy proves that engraving the firing pin on all FUTURE guns wouldn't work.

It's not one gun. The firing pin is a serviceable part.

This. *ALL* guns that I know of have a removable firing pin*, and generally, for most, removing that firing pin is part of normal cleaning procedure.


*Not including open-bolt submachine guns with a fixed firing pin, but none has been legally manufactured for sale to civilians in the US since 1986.

And I'm aware of that, and that they do need replaced as they can wear down. The fact that in one gun they can be removed by a ballpoint pen doesn't come close to proving why microstamping is bad.

Jackson Herring: GAT_00: Do people actually just leave shell casing everywhere when you go to a gun range?

Uh, yes?

That seems incredibly impolite. I mean, walking downrange is obviously out, but why would you not pick up shells at your feet?

why should your ideas on the issue be considered when you have a fundamental lack of gun knowledge?

He's right. Every range I've ever been to has a "police your brass" rule. Yes, many rifles discharge the casing quite a ways, but they'll generally all end up in the same area. Keep count and pick them up after you're done. I mean, this idea is really dumb, but not cleaning up after yourself is a dick move.

/no one really follows it
//we pick up what we fired +10, but the ground is still covered
///annoys the hell out of me

Indoor ranges generally prohibit any collection of casings that are in front of the firing line. The casings behind the line are generally picked up and put in a provided trash/"recycling" receptacle or something similar. I'm not a reloader, so I don't keep my used shotgun shells or rifle bullets. Either way, clean up or not, there is still going to be a pile of shells or casings that anyone can grab if they are so inclined.


I didn't think of that - never even been to an indoor range. Our local ranges have 55 gallon drums for people to throw casings in, but, as I mentioned earlier, no one does.

I get rather annoyed at it due to the outdoor ranges being great, low-hassle places. The few rules they have are either for safety or keeping the area clean, but people can't even follow those.
 
2012-10-09 12:24:53 PM
Also, if this were to pass, the values of pre-microstamp arms would increase. So if I were only concerned with money and cashing out my collection, I could be for this.

/follow the money
 
2012-10-09 12:25:04 PM
Which is why I will be committing all my gun violence with musketoons. Tremble in fear, all parties in a 150 degree field of view within 12 feet of me.
 
2012-10-09 12:25:08 PM

mrshowrules: More accurately then, people who are pro-gun, should come up with the strategy/rules to reduce gun violence.


This is my favorite version of "why don't the good Muslims stop the terrorists?"
 
2012-10-09 12:25:14 PM

MorePeasPlease: Coolfusis: He's right. Every range I've ever been to has a "police your brass" rule. Yes, many rifles discharge the casing quite a ways, but they'll generally all end up in the same area. Keep count and pick them up after you're done. I mean, this idea is really dumb, but not cleaning up after yourself is a dick move.

/no one really follows it
//we pick up what we fired +10, but the ground is still covered
///annoys the hell out of me


You don't sound like a reloader.


When I was a kid (1980s), I would go with my grandfather to a local range that was used a lot by the local FBI office, and the local PD. Those We always went home with a ton of .40 and .45 ACP brass, it made grandpa happy. I always had the job of removing the spent primers and running the tumbler.
 
2012-10-09 12:26:12 PM

LasersHurt: Yes. That's why I am not wholesale denying the idea because there are a few issues with it. It might be feasible with a little tinkering, maybe not. Unlike you, I don't pretend to know all and live in absolutes.


How would you tinker with it to make it work? I'm pretty damn familiar with guns, and outside of mandating that all new guns be made not user-serviceable (which would be a non-starter), I can't see how you could make this work. It would require quite a bit more than "tinkering".

Then too, it might just spur the development of caseless ammo, which would then have to be banned, of course.
 
2012-10-09 12:27:07 PM

mrshowrules: Consider guns as an elephant at a children's birthday party. Potentially dangerous but properly managed it will make one of the best birthday parties ever.

Now who has a greater obligation to come up with a strategy and steps to keep the children safe, the parent who didn't want the elephant there to begin with or the one who pushed for the idea of the elephant in fact made it a precondition of the party?


If you squeeze me, I make bad people go away!!

images2.wikia.nocookie.net
 
2012-10-09 12:29:07 PM
Seriously gun nuts? Now you want to be able to unrestrictedly mail each other guns too?
 
2012-10-09 12:29:14 PM

dittybopper: Teufelaffe: Last range I went to would charge you extra if you didn't pick up your casings.

I don't know why: That could be a significant revenue stream for them. They could police up the brass after hours and either sell it to reloaders, or for scrap. Either way, they make money off it.


Honestly I think it was because the guys who ran the place were some of the laziest humans I've ever met. Overheard one of them refuse to show someone a specific handgun because, "The key to that case is in the back and I don't feel like goin ta get it. Look at somethin else."
 
2012-10-09 12:32:01 PM

paygun: mrshowrules: More accurately then, people who are pro-gun, should come up with the strategy/rules to reduce gun violence.

This is my favorite version of "why don't the good Muslims stop the terrorists?"


Except that it's a sound strategy for firearm enthusiasts who want to ensure that poorly considered legislation negatively impacts their legal exercise of their rights. Unfortunately, the most well known and politically connected firearm association has taken the position that any regulation is to be opposed rather than working with law enforcement and government to craft regulations are are both effective and not burdensome to law abiding citizens.
 
2012-10-09 12:32:32 PM
outlaw murder?
does that do anything to stop murder?
outlaw theft?
does that prevent theft?
outlaw speeding?
does that keep the speeds down?
we can put gps trackers in all cars, and if the car exceeds the speed limit, the owner gets a ticket.
do that first, then I will microstamp my firearms...
 
2012-10-09 12:33:55 PM

mrshowrules: More accurately then, people who are pro-gun, should come up with the strategy/rules to reduce gun violence.


No.

You are still thinking from the wrong direction. What violence there is (and it's less than it's been for 45+ years) isn't a *GUN* problem, it's a *VIOLENCE* problem. Pro-gun people can't effectively address a problem that is outside of their expertise.

I can tell you why various gun control measures can't work, based upon the physical realities and characteristics of the firearms in question. What I can't do is effectively address the underlying causes of the violence that way, because the firearm is merely a tool being used to commit the violence, it doesn't cause the violence itself, and even if you were to magically make all guns disappear, you'd still have the violence problem.

*THAT* is why gun control, in all it's forms, is pretty much a fools game.

Even worse, it distracts us from looking at the real root causes of violence, so it's actually counter-productive, instead of just having zero effect.
 
2012-10-09 12:34:29 PM

LasersHurt: There's no possible way that knowing the owner of the gun could lead them to the person who used it? Because that's where I see that still being useful. "Oh god, my gun was used for "X"? Maybe "x" took it!"


Or "Random person Y picked up shell casings from the trash at a firing range."

The point people are making is that you actually don't even have any proof *that gun was used at all* to commit the crime.
 
2012-10-09 12:34:40 PM

Rashnu: Seriously gun nuts? Now you want to be able to unrestrictedly mail each other guns too?


If I chose to get my Curio and Relic FFL, I could sorta do that (some restrictions do apply: must be a weapon on the ATF list, must be between FFL's of some type, personal recording requirements)
 
2012-10-09 12:35:30 PM

Teufelaffe: Last range I went to would charge you extra if you didn't pick up your casings.


HUh. Last range I went to charged you extra if you DID pick up your casings (they want the scrap/reload money). Don't go there often.
 
2012-10-09 12:35:41 PM

Monkeyhouse Zendo: Except that it's a sound strategy for firearm enthusiasts who want to ensure that poorly considered legislation negatively impacts their legal exercise of their rights.


oh you're serious, let me laugh harder, etc.

Monkeyhouse Zendo: Unfortunately, the most well known and politically connected firearm association has taken the position that any regulation is to be opposed rather than working with law enforcement and government to craft regulations are are both effective and not burdensome to law abiding citizens.


They've taken the position that gun crimes are already illegal. Making them double dog top-secret illegal isn't going to accomplish anything *but* restricting rights of law abiding people.
 
2012-10-09 12:35:42 PM

GAT_00: And I'm aware of that, and that they do need replaced as they can wear down. The fact that in one gun they can be removed by a ballpoint pen doesn't come close to proving why microstamping is bad


By itself, no.

With the knowledge that it is a consumable part on every gun I know of, yes it does.
 
2012-10-09 12:36:05 PM

Monkeyhouse Zendo: Unfortunately, the most well known and politically connected firearm association has taken the position that any regulation is to be opposed rather than working with law enforcement and government to craft regulations are are both effective and not burdensome to law abiding citizens.


GOA has replaced the NRA? 'Cause that's what GOA does.
 
2012-10-09 12:36:19 PM

bullsballs: outlaw murder?
does that do anything to stop murder?
outlaw theft?
does that prevent theft?
outlaw speeding?
does that keep the speeds down?
we can put gps trackers in all cars, and if the car exceeds the speed limit, the owner gets a ticket.
do that first, then I will microstamp my firearms...


Who is telling you to do anything? They are required to come microstamped when you buy them. Why would you care about that unless you were going to murder dudes?
 
2012-10-09 12:36:44 PM

Rashnu: Seriously gun nuts? Now you want to be able to unrestrictedly mail each other guns too?


Already can. Called C&R FFL (curio and relic). Some restrictions on it, but perfectly doable.
 
2012-10-09 12:37:19 PM

Rashnu: Seriously gun nuts? Now you want to be able to unrestrictedly mail each other guns too?


Back in the 1950's, when homicide rates were under 5 per 100,000, just like they are today, you could do just that, and we didn't seem to be any the worse for wear.
 
2012-10-09 12:40:32 PM

CPennypacker: Who is telling you to do anything? They are required to come microstamped when you buy them. Why would you care about that unless you were going to murder dudes


Because it would make the guns cost more, because when you had to replace the firing pin it will cost more, becasue unless they then keep a database fo those serial numbers it is worthless, even if they dot hey expensive system can be defeated by switching firing pins before a murder, etc.
 
2012-10-09 12:40:53 PM
You'd think the military would be favoring something like microstamping. It would allow for quick post-incident scene reconstruction.

As far as crime goes, first you need to find the causes of criminality and work to reduce those. Controlling the tools of crime will, at best, change the prefered tools of crime.
 
2012-10-09 12:41:33 PM

liam76: Because it would make the guns cost more, because when you had to replace the firing pin it will cost more, becasue unless they then keep a database fo those serial numbers it is worthless, even if they dot hey expensive system can be defeated by switching firing pins before a murder, etc.


Making the exercise of a civil right expensive is no big deal. Just like voter ID!
 
2012-10-09 12:42:56 PM

paygun: liam76: Because it would make the guns cost more, because when you had to replace the firing pin it will cost more, becasue unless they then keep a database fo those serial numbers it is worthless, even if they dot hey expensive system can be defeated by switching firing pins before a murder, etc.

Making the exercise of a civil right expensive is no big deal. Just like voter ID!


You think gun ownership is a civil right?
 
2012-10-09 12:44:30 PM

wildcardjack: You'd think the military would be favoring something like microstamping. It would allow for quick post-incident scene reconstruction.


I fully support its use for police guns. It's a limited dataset, and it would make sorting out who fired what and where easier.
 
2012-10-09 12:46:05 PM

CPennypacker: paygun: liam76: Because it would make the guns cost more, because when you had to replace the firing pin it will cost more, becasue unless they then keep a database fo those serial numbers it is worthless, even if they dot hey expensive system can be defeated by switching firing pins before a murder, etc.

Making the exercise of a civil right expensive is no big deal. Just like voter ID!

You think gun ownership is a civil right?


It is. See: DC v. Heller (holding that the Second Amendment protects an individual right to own and use firearms for lawful purposes), and McDonald v. Chicago (incorporating that right against the states).
 
2012-10-09 12:46:23 PM

GAT_00: Fark It: Supporters of the technology say it will be a "game changer," allowing authorities to quickly identify the registered guns used in crimes.

I like how one currently existing gun where removing the firing pin is easy proves that engraving the firing pin on all FUTURE guns wouldn't work. That's some fantastic logic there.


psst, you can remove the firing pin on future guns too. You'd see the logic if you knew anything about firearms.
 
2012-10-09 12:46:50 PM

dittybopper: LasersHurt: Yes. That's why I am not wholesale denying the idea because there are a few issues with it. It might be feasible with a little tinkering, maybe not. Unlike you, I don't pretend to know all and live in absolutes.

How would you tinker with it to make it work? I'm pretty damn familiar with guns, and outside of mandating that all new guns be made not user-serviceable (which would be a non-starter), I can't see how you could make this work. It would require quite a bit more than "tinkering".

Then too, it might just spur the development of caseless ammo, which would then have to be banned, of course.


Caseless ammo isn't happening. It can be done, it has been done. The problem is that the extracted brass is also removing heat from the weapon. If you want your auto pistol to either need a radiator and coolant, or become too hot to touch at the end of your trip to the range, then caseless is the way to go. I suppose why this isn't such an issue with muzzleloaders is because of the very low rate of fire.
 
2012-10-09 12:47:29 PM

Holocaust Agnostic: mrshowrules: Fark It: mrshowrules: f you are going to go to the trouble of getting someones spent casings, why not steal their gun. Who things that far ahead honestly? We aren't all dealing with Bond super villains here.

Well, it's easier to report a gun stolen than it is to report spent brass stolen, for one. Number two, people don't discard their weapons at gun ranges and leave them there to be processed for scrap.

My position is that Conservatives should be proposing solutions to gun violence instead of Liberals. Their the ones that have a hard-on for guns.

Good thing I'm a liberal then.

More accurately then, people who are pro-gun, should come up with the strategy/rules to reduce gun violence.

Howzabout addressing poverty, bringing jobs back to the US and calling it quits on the drug war?


Slow down. Poverty bad and jobs good?
 
2012-10-09 12:47:57 PM

dittybopper: Generation_D: A well regulated militia would not mind if their guns had laser markings.

Well regulated in what sense? Do you mean regulated in the sense of subject to a multitude of regulations, or do you mean regulated in the sense of working properly?

Because I can see your point for case 1, but not case 2.


I can see it in case 2 (the case I happen to think is THE case, fwiw). Why would our military, or for that matter, a group of poorly connected farmers and landowners, care if their guns were marked with a laser? Or a stamp? Or a manufacturer, model and date of manufacture? Technically, as long as their equipment worked properly, and remained accessible, the markings would have no bearing whatsoever on their ability to muster.

The only question for me is a pragmatic one. Does it help solve crime and keep firearms out of the hands of crazy people and criminals? If so, does it do so at a cost that is lower than the current situation? If not, is this increase in cost worth the subsequent increase in crime prevention?

That's a lot of ifs, and the answer is probably not good for most of them, but I don't see this as a second amendment issue. Really, the only way I can imagine this being spun that way is if one were worried that these microstamp IDs would be used to track or retrieve your guns. Which would be nuts. IF they want your guns, an invisible stamp isn't going to help them at all. The tanks will probably come in a bit handier, really.
 
2012-10-09 12:49:02 PM

mrshowrules: More accurately then, people who are pro-gun, should come up with the strategy/rules to reduce gun violence.


Gun rights advocates have been arguing for better enforcement of existing laws for years.

Gun opponents like the guy up-thread who claims to have witnessed an illegal gun sale but did not report it are a big part of the problem.
 
2012-10-09 12:50:00 PM

CPennypacker: You think gun ownership is a civil right?


Me and those nuts on the supreme court, yes.
 
2012-10-09 12:50:07 PM

dittybopper: LasersHurt: Yes. That's why I am not wholesale denying the idea because there are a few issues with it. It might be feasible with a little tinkering, maybe not. Unlike you, I don't pretend to know all and live in absolutes.

How would you tinker with it to make it work? I'm pretty damn familiar with guns, and outside of mandating that all new guns be made not user-serviceable (which would be a non-starter), I can't see how you could make this work. It would require quite a bit more than "tinkering".

Then too, it might just spur the development of caseless ammo, which would then have to be banned, of course.


Felgraf: LasersHurt: There's no possible way that knowing the owner of the gun could lead them to the person who used it? Because that's where I see that still being useful. "Oh god, my gun was used for "X"? Maybe "x" took it!"

Or "Random person Y picked up shell casings from the trash at a firing range."

The point people are making is that you actually don't even have any proof *that gun was used at all* to commit the crime.


We know how to stop and spot forged coins, and cash, I don't see why we couldn't accomplish something similar here. I dunno - get all of the manufacturers of guns together and say "come up with a creative solution, boys." Get the people most knowledgable to do something about it.

I absolutely know there is a way you can start to make the problem better. I just wish the pro-gun lobby, gun manufacturers, etc. were actively seeking it. I think they throw some token gestures instead and sit on their laurels.

Again, as should be obvious by now, I am not claiming to be either a gun or stamping expert. What I do know, however, is that we can solve the problem if EVERYONE ACTUALLY TRIES. We can solve any problem. We're humans, we're good that way.
 
2012-10-09 12:51:40 PM

dittybopper: mrshowrules: More accurately then, people who are pro-gun, should come up with the strategy/rules to reduce gun violence.

No.

You are still thinking from the wrong direction. What violence there is (and it's less than it's been for 45+ years) isn't a *GUN* problem, it's a *VIOLENCE* problem. Pro-gun people can't effectively address a problem that is outside of their expertise.

I can tell you why various gun control measures can't work, based upon the physical realities and characteristics of the firearms in question. What I can't do is effectively address the underlying causes of the violence that way, because the firearm is merely a tool being used to commit the violence, it doesn't cause the violence itself, and even if you were to magically make all guns disappear, you'd still have the violence problem.

*THAT* is why gun control, in all it's forms, is pretty much a fools game.

Even worse, it distracts us from looking at the real root causes of violence, so it's actually counter-productive, instead of just having zero effect.


Without guns people would be running into public places and beating a dozen people to death? Listen, you don't even think guns in the hands of criminals and nut jobs is necessarily a problem that needs to be dealt with so you are inviting gun control laws. Nature abhors a vacuum. If you don't deal with it, it may be dealt with in a manner you don't like (e.g., microstamping).
 
2012-10-09 12:53:01 PM

GoldSpider: mrshowrules: More accurately then, people who are pro-gun, should come up with the strategy/rules to reduce gun violence.

Gun rights advocates have been arguing for better enforcement of existing laws for years.

Gun opponents like the guy up-thread who claims to have witnessed an illegal gun sale but did not report it are a big part of the problem.


Wanting better enforcement is one thing but you have to put money against it. Why not raise that revenue against the guns themselves.
 
2012-10-09 12:55:15 PM

paygun: mrshowrules: More accurately then, people who are pro-gun, should come up with the strategy/rules to reduce gun violence.

This is my favorite version of "why don't the good Muslims stop the terrorists?"


That is one of the dumbest things I've heard.

Side A: loves gun and hates gun controls
Side B: wants to reduce gun violence via gun controls

It is only logical that Side A should propose and advocate solutions other than gun controls.
 
2012-10-09 12:56:53 PM

paygun: Monkeyhouse Zendo: Unfortunately, the most well known and politically connected firearm association has taken the position that any regulation is to be opposed rather than working with law enforcement and government to craft regulations are are both effective and not burdensome to law abiding citizens.

They've taken the position that gun crimes are already illegal. Making them double dog top-secret illegal isn't going to accomplish anything *but* restricting rights of law abiding people.


I'm talking about regulation that will assist law enforcement in identifying criminals. The point is to identify methods that assist law enforcement while having a minimal impact on lawful exercise of your rights. At no point did I make the claim that regulation prevents crime, that's your straw man. I'm used to the idea that people are going to shoot each other and have no illusion that it can be prevented. I simply think it might be nice if we made it a little easier for law enforcement to identify those people. Firearm owners being part of that conversation would help ensure that your free exercise is minimally impacted.

Or you can stamp your foot like a child and say people are going to shoot each other so we may as well do nothing to assist law enforcement in identifying them.
 
2012-10-09 12:56:54 PM

mrshowrules: Wanting better enforcement is one thing but you have to put money against it. Why not raise that revenue against the guns themselves.


How much money would you need to make people report gun crime?
 
2012-10-09 12:57:54 PM

LasersHurt: dittybopper: LasersHurt: Yes. That's why I am not wholesale denying the idea because there are a few issues with it. It might be feasible with a little tinkering, maybe not. Unlike you, I don't pretend to know all and live in absolutes.

How would you tinker with it to make it work? I'm pretty damn familiar with guns, and outside of mandating that all new guns be made not user-serviceable (which would be a non-starter), I can't see how you could make this work. It would require quite a bit more than "tinkering".

Then too, it might just spur the development of caseless ammo, which would then have to be banned, of course.

Felgraf: LasersHurt: There's no possible way that knowing the owner of the gun could lead them to the person who used it? Because that's where I see that still being useful. "Oh god, my gun was used for "X"? Maybe "x" took it!"

Or "Random person Y picked up shell casings from the trash at a firing range."

The point people are making is that you actually don't even have any proof *that gun was used at all* to commit the crime.

We know how to stop and spot forged coins, and cash, I don't see why we couldn't accomplish something similar here. I dunno - get all of the manufacturers of guns together and say "come up with a creative solution, boys." Get the people most knowledgable to do something about it.

I absolutely know there is a way you can start to make the problem better. I just wish the pro-gun lobby, gun manufacturers, etc. were actively seeking it. I think they throw some token gestures instead and sit on their laurels.

Again, as should be obvious by now, I am not claiming to be either a gun or stamping expert. What I do know, however, is that we can solve the problem if EVERYONE ACTUALLY TRIES. We can solve any problem. We're humans, we're good that way.


Oh, come on. This isn't a forgery we're discussing, it's an actual, authentic item left as a red herring. Some things really can't be entirely solved in a manner that's satisfactory to enough people. You could make your computer entirely secure by replacing it with a brick. Short of that, there's always going to be some way for somebody to get into it and mess about.
 
2012-10-09 12:58:15 PM

CPennypacker: paygun: liam76: Because it would make the guns cost more, because when you had to replace the firing pin it will cost more, becasue unless they then keep a database fo those serial numbers it is worthless, even if they dot hey expensive system can be defeated by switching firing pins before a murder, etc.

Making the exercise of a civil right expensive is no big deal. Just like voter ID!

You think gun ownership is a civil right?


Jefferson and Mason thought so. I'd say that's relevant here.
 
2012-10-09 12:58:44 PM

Ricardo Klement: CPennypacker: paygun: liam76: Because it would make the guns cost more, because when you had to replace the firing pin it will cost more, becasue unless they then keep a database fo those serial numbers it is worthless, even if they dot hey expensive system can be defeated by switching firing pins before a murder, etc.

Making the exercise of a civil right expensive is no big deal. Just like voter ID!

You think gun ownership is a civil right?

Jefferson and Mason thought so. I'd say that's relevant here.


yawn
 
2012-10-09 12:58:49 PM

mrshowrules: It is only logical that Side A should propose and advocate solutions other than gun controls.


Law abiding gun owners aren't responsible for gun crime. Just like you're not responsible for someone driving drunk even if you own a car.
 
2012-10-09 12:58:49 PM

NowhereMon: All guns should have a function that automatically takes a picture of the shooter, the target and calls 911 every time the trigger is pulled. Why would any law abiding citizen object to this?


1. Money.
2. You don't know what sheriff will get elected next time.
3. You might not want to be blinded by the camera's flashes when you're in a situation which requires gunfire. (Of course such a camera would require lighting.)
4. You don't want to keep your gun in the cell phone charger, and paying another cell phone bill.
 
2012-10-09 12:59:04 PM

Ricardo Klement: There are effective ways to regulate guns, and then there's this.

I once saw an image that read, "People who can, teach. People who can't, pass laws about teaching." Well, the same certainly holds true for guns. "People who know guns go to the range. People who don't know guns pass laws regulating them."


So the solution (thank you Dusk You and Me) is that the people who under gun ownership and stewardship should be advocating solutions to reduce gun violence? Right?
 
2012-10-09 12:59:57 PM

paygun: mrshowrules: It is only logical that Side A should propose and advocate solutions other than gun controls.

Law abiding gun owners aren't responsible for gun crime. Just like you're not responsible for someone driving drunk even if you own a car.


cars have a primary purpose other than running people over
 
2012-10-09 01:00:23 PM

mrshowrules: Side B: wants to reduce gun violence via gun controls


Part of me believes that gun control isn't the means to an end, but rather the end in and of itself. If reducing gun violence was their goal, they would have abandoned gun control long ago.
 
Displayed 50 of 322 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report