But Criminals Don't Follow Laws!

[Racket_Man]

AND in my post above I mentioned the GF purchased the weapon LEGALLY.

But then again we all know that criminals get most of their firepower on the black market and could care less about 3 day waiting periods, background checks, limited purchasing of ammo, small capacity ammo clips and the like.

Heck some of the gangs are just as well equipped as the armed forces. HELL the armed forces actually TRAINED some of them. NOt exactly RPGs (yet) 100mm Howizers (again yet) APCs (not yet) etc.

Given enough cash resources you can by ANYTHING on the black market these days.

[wolfie]

the infamous "did someone put anything in your luggage without your knowledge" question,

Infamous and stupid. What would happen to someone who gave the only logical answer to that question, namely "If they had, from the definition of without my knowledge I wouldn't know that it had happened, and therefore wouldn't be able to tell you about it"?

[Nekojin]

Accessory to Murder still carries a pretty stiff penalty.

[Andara Bledin]

It's highly likely that she'll be charged as an accessory. Possibly higher, but I doubt that she can be hit with murder directly.

^-.-^

[bara]

BUT how did this guy obtain this weapon???? HMMMM he was a convicted felon, so in theory he should have NOT been in possession of this weapon.

WELL his girlfirend was arrested a couple of days later for making a STRAW purchase and GIVING him the weapon so he could rampage to his little hearts content.

She should be charged with the murders too.

[fireheart17]

I agree with you. Look at what happened after 9/11. I can understand that people were freaking out. I mean, we just had 4 planed hijacked and several *thousand* of our citizens murdered. I flew to/from Albany the week after, and I was not happy about it. Long lines for "security" at the airports, being searched multiple times, the infamous "did someone put anything in your luggage without your knowledge" question, to name a few things. Plus, I couldn't even get a *plastic* knife in the airport cafe to cut my sandwich. Seriously?
.

We had a similar knee jerk reaction when schapelle Corby was found with marijuana in her boogie board bag. More of the putting items in your bag without knowledge question though.

[protege]

We also seem to run into the problem that when ever an atrocity happens our culture as a whole has a knee jerk reaction to remove the item that was used and not the person. Not to sound trite, but it was the guy who snapped and pulled the trigger not the gun. Maybe if the people in the schools that have had this happen to them actually had a weapon to use back on these asses we wouldn’t keep seeing death tolls going into double digits.

I agree with you. Look at what happened after 9/11. I can understand that people were freaking out. I mean, we just had 4 planed hijacked and several *thousand* of our citizens murdered. I flew to/from Albany the week after, and I was not happy about it. Long lines for "security" at the airports, being searched multiple times, the infamous "did someone put anything in your luggage without your knowledge" question, to name a few things. Plus, I couldn't even get a *plastic* knife in the airport cafe to cut my sandwich. Seriously?

All that security for a domestic flight. Yet, before and after 9/11 (and the current TSA stupidity), I can go into any train station in the country...and easily get onto the platforms or in the train itself without any such checks. There aren't any metal detectors at the doors, nor is luggage scanned.

Anyway, cars kill and injure far more people each year than guns do. Yet, we don't see more strict laws for them. A gun, like a car, is just a tool. By itself, it doesn't do anything. It does, whatever the operator tells it to do.

[KitterCat]

crashhelmet

Simply put, Military Grade weapon is deemed Military grade because it is manufactured for the distinct purpose of being used for military reasons, aka combat.

Any weapon manufactured is made for combat of some kind. Wither it be to shoot a deer, or defend your home or in the military kill an enemy. All a military grade weapon designates is that its used by the military. While there are plenty of weapons that only military personal can have, these weapons are already have laws about them. I have no problem with that. The military should have the newest most advanced weaponry available to them. Some of this weaponry becomes demilitarized and then made available to the public.

crashhelmet

Your average cop doesn't carry a rifle. They carry a handgun and some carry a shotgun in their squad car. The only civilian police forces that use military grade weaponry are the advanced forces, like SWAT (Special Weapons and Tactics) teams. They're specifically trained on the weapon and many are former military themselves.

In more recent years more and more officers are being issued M-16s or M-15s. Depending on how there used it could be a good thing or bad thing. Rifles are far more accurate than a shotgun and have as a general rule a smaller recoil/kickback.

crashhelmet

This isn't about liking or not liking firearms. It's about the gun culture of our society that has existed for hundreds of years. Americans have always settled disputes with guns. Arguments went from being settled by individual men with single shot pistols (Hamilton vs Burr), to groups of men with multi-shot pistols and rifles (Goingsnake Massacre), to gangland drive by shootings

I think your overstating it a bit about Americans always settling disputes with guns. I do agree with you that there are problems with our society in regards to guns. I don’t think regulating what is currently available in terms of assault weapons or semi automatics would work. It was tried for 10 years and all it did was cause prices to the pre-banned guns to go up or for manufactures to find loopholes for the production of new guns.

crashhelmet

Our society is not mature, stable, or trained enough to allow anyone and everyone to have firearms. Let alone military grade weaponry.

We don’t let just anyone go in a buy a firearm. There are background checks. There are wait periods. All of this is already legislated. We already have laws on all of this. I’ll give you I don’t think that every person who owns a gun should have them. Some of them aren’t mature, but our legal system also goes based on age what you've done. If you’re an adult you can make dumb ass decisions that will land your backside in jail. Some of them also aren’t stable, and I’m for fixing the state to state definition of mentally instable so that its reported to the NICS. I’m also for education more people on firearms and weaponry in general. I think too few people in my generation understand the complexities to using a gun. Most thankfully dont, but they should still have to learn the basics. From learning to shoot, types of ammo to use depending on where you are, to understanding that it is now a moral responsibility as to when or if you even decide when to use it.

Please understand I’m not saying that there aren’t problems, but removal of various types of guns simply isn’t possible in this country or the problem. Our crime rate has actully been going down the past 20 years. As it is there are simply to many and it is too ingrained in the culture.

We also seem to run into the problem that when ever an atrocity happens our culture as a whole has a knee jerk reaction to remove the item that was used and not the person. Not to sound trite, but it was the guy who snapped and pulled the trigger not the gun. Maybe if the people in the schools that have had this happen to them actually had a weapon to use back on these asses we wouldn’t keep seeing death tolls going into double digits.





I do apologize that it takes me this long to respond back. I’m usually watching my kids so internet time for me is pretty curtailed.

[crashhelmet]

I would love for someone to tell me why only the military or law enforcement should receive these weapons. So long as I haven’t broken any laws why shouldn’t I be allowed to purchase weapons? It should not be up to someone who doesn’t like firearms to decide that another person cant have them just because their uncomfortable around them.

Simply put, Military Grade weapon is deemed Military grade because it is manufactured for the distinct purpose of being used for military reasons, aka combat.

Your average cop doesn't carry a rifle. They carry a handgun and some carry a shotgun in their squad car. The only civilian police forces that use military grade weaponry are the advanced forces, like SWAT (Special Weapons and Tactics) teams. They're specifically trained on the weapon and many are former military themselves.

This isn't about liking or not liking firearms. It's about the gun culture of our society that has existed for hundreds of years. Americans have always settled disputes with guns. Arguments went from being settled by individual men with single shot pistols (Hamilton vs Burr), to groups of men with multi-shot pistols and rifles (Goingsnake Massacre), to gangland drive by shootings.

Our society is not mature, stable, or trained enough to allow anyone and everyone to have firearms. Let alone military grade weaponry.

[KitterCat]

Aethian:
When I was casing mail this morning I had to stop a second because on a hunting magazine they were talking about semi automatics. I instantly became scared at what those guns would be used for hunting cause last I knew...the fallout games are still games.

Per federal code 18 USCS § 921(28)- The term "semiautomatic rifle" means any repeating rifle which utilizes a portion of the energy of a firing cartridge to extract the fired cartridge case and chamber the next round, and which requires a separate pull of the trigger to fire each cartridge.


I have a very common marlin model 60 rifle .22caliber rifle. It is a semiautomatic or commonly know as a self-loading rifle or auto-loading rifle. Most modern rifles and handguns are semiautomatic. Unless your looking at going back to black power and having to reload every shoot, your probably going to want semiautomatics to stay around. For hunters they are a boon. One can shoot at an animal and if it is only wounded you can get closer and shoot it far faster and make a cleaner kill than if you had to reload like a black power.

I think your getting the term semiautomatic and semiautomatic assault weapons mixed up. Personally I don’t have any problems with either one. An SAW can for the most part be changed into a SA with a few technical parts changed out. Heck a lot of SA’s can do more damage. Take a Mosin Nagant with steal core ammo and it will go trough a manhole cover. They still make wonderful hunting rifles so long as you use the proper ammo.

Nyoibo: I want someone to try and justify why anyone needs to have a semi-automatic or automatic rilfe with a large capacity magazine in any circumstance outside of military or possibly law enforcement.

I would love for someone to tell me why only the military or law enforcement should receive these weapons. So long as I haven’t broken any laws why shouldn’t I be allowed to purchase weapons? It should not be up to someone who doesn’t like firearms to decide that another person cant have them just because their uncomfortable around them.

Automatic weapons are not legal for one to just walk in to a store and purchase. You are looking at a very extensive background check and multiple fees even before you can think about buying the firearm. I’ll give you a three round burst system are a military only weapon because a burst system gives you more control than an automatic. Semi-autos are much easier to use both for home defense and hunting. The High Capacity Ammunition Feeding Device Act would ban the sale or transfer of ammunition magazines holding more than 10 rounds. Which manufactures got around back in 94-04 by only selling ones that had already been made prior to the ban, look at my Marlin it holds 14 and would be on the current attempted ban list. All a ban is, is feel good legislation that will do nothing to stop criminals.

[Aethian]

I want someone to try and justify why anyone needs to have a semi-automatic or automatic rilfe with a large capacity magazine in any circumstance outside of military or possibly law enforcement.

When I was casing mail this morning I had to stop a second because on a hunting magazine they were talking about semi automatics. I instantly became scared at what those guns would be used for hunting cause last I knew...the fallout games are still games.

[Nyoibo]

You know, because all Aussie women have huge.......................................



tracts of land.

I don't believe I have a single female friend below a C-cup.

I want someone to try and justify why anyone needs to have a semi-automatic or automatic rilfe with a large capacity magazine in any circumstance outside of military or possibly law enforcement.

[Racket_Man]

About a week or so ago there was a situation where a guy deliberately set fire to his OWN house. when police and fire arrived he started shooting at them. He killed 3 or 4 fire/police while 7 other houses burned down. He then killed himself BUT he did say this (paraphrasing) "I am doing what I LOVE to do and that is KILLING people."

Now the gun he used was the SAME kind of gun used at Sandy Hook, a Bushmaster semi-auto. BUT how did this guy obtain this weapon???? HMMMM he was a convicted felon, so in theory he should have NOT been in possession of this weapon.

WELL his girlfirend was arrested a couple of days later for making a STRAW purchase and GIVING him the weapon so he could rampage to his little hearts content.

[TheHuckster]

Neighbor knocks on your door. You open it. He shoots you.

How does having a gun locked away in your safe change this?

It doesn't change that, but what's your point? There are many scenarios where no matter how prepared one is they will face an unescapable problem that will trump that preparedness. However, that doesn't automatically make that preparedness moot. There are just as many scenarios where a weapon used for defense does save the victim's life.

[fireheart17]

It wont do a lot of good to increase education until we can figure out how to get people to care enough to make sure the kids are doing homework. I am however a huge supporter of education. Just pointing out another underlying problem.

My mentor teacher had a very clever idea that she used to prevent multiple kids leaving the classroom during lesson times, as well as ensuring that they got their homework done (which was to do 15-30 minutes of reading every night, these kids were in a Year 3/4 class. On top of that, they also had an online thing they had to do called LearnLog).

Classroom: unless it was for drinks or your parents had spoken to the teacher, if you had to go to the toilet during lesson times, you owed the teacher 5 minutes at recess or lunch time. For the less frequent students who went to the toilet, they earned their time back by helping me. (one of the kids who needed to go drink and pee frequently was diabetic, so I waived the drink requirements for him under the provision that he remember to bring in a drink bottle -.-)

Homework: every Friday afternoon, my teacher had reward time. You could only go however, if your spelling for the week was done and marked (by your peers) and you had done at least 1-2 hours reading for the week. There were no rules on what you could read, as long as it was a book or magazine. If you didn't do your reading for the week, you made up that time while everyone else was having reward time.

We'd probably have less resistance to education in general if the fucktards in one ring of our political circus would stop pushing anti-intellectualism as an ideal. >_<

^-.-^

This. Oh holy this. And it's just as bad in Australia.

The media constantly bleats about NAPLAN (federal standardized test, which kids in Years 3, 5, 7 and 9 sit, which covers Reading, Writing and Maths. You can either be exempted from it on philosophical grounds or medical grounds, however those kids who are exempted on disability grounds affect your school's overall score). Which of course, leads to teachers "teaching the test".

Then you have the media publishing the opinions of experts. Every time the expert opinion comes on board, people knock the expert's beliefs and chide him/her for daring to think in that way, arguing they've lost touch with the rest of society and so on and so forth. (example: an expert reveals that eating red meat increases your cancer risk. typical comment: "Well I eat red meat every day and my doctor says I'm fine!") In other words, if you bother to go on to further education and continue to stay in the field of tertiary study, then you're an incompetent imbecile who lost grip with the rest of the world.

Pfft, you think there's vast tracts of nothing over there? Try driving around Australia.

You know, because all Aussie women have huge.......................................
























tracts of land.