Anonymous
Post 06/14/2016 15:02     Subject: Please gun supporters - explain to me once and for all why you need an automatic weapon
"To cite just two examples: background checks, training requirement, and criminal liability for negligent sale/transfer could have stopped Orlando shooter from getting a gun."

How?

"Similarly, threat of criminal liability could have prevented Sandy Hook mom from providing firearms to her crazy son."

No way. There's no way she imagined that he would have done what he did.
Anonymous
Post 06/14/2016 14:59     Subject: Please gun supporters - explain to me once and for all why you need an automatic weapon
Anonymous wrote:Gun supporters - - Why do you need to buy semi-automatics? Why????


That's what we've been trying to discuss since the original post. In summation, the answer seems to be because "it's their right".
Anonymous
Post 06/14/2016 14:57     Subject: Please gun supporters - explain to me once and for all why you need an automatic weapon
Gun supporters - - Why do you need to buy semi-automatics? Why????
Anonymous
Post 06/14/2016 14:57     Subject: Please gun supporters - explain to me once and for all why you need an automatic weapon
Anonymous wrote:Okay people. Since the gun proponents on here keep hashing out semantics, I've taken the time to research guns. I understand now that the AR-15 is not fully automatic, but semi automatic, and that it can fire between 45 and 60 rounds per minute depending on the skill of the operator. This rate of fire is comparable to other semi-automatic firearms, but pales in comparison to fully automatic assault rifles, some of which can fire more than 1,000 rounds per minute.

Everyone happy? I get it. And I still think it, along with any other semi-automatic weapon should be illegal.


I am.
Anonymous
Post 06/14/2016 14:56     Subject: Please gun supporters - explain to me once and for all why you need an automatic weapon
Okay people. Since the gun proponents on here keep hashing out semantics, I've taken the time to research guns. I understand now that the AR-15 is not fully automatic, but semi automatic, and that it can fire between 45 and 60 rounds per minute depending on the skill of the operator. This rate of fire is comparable to other semi-automatic firearms, but pales in comparison to fully automatic assault rifles, some of which can fire more than 1,000 rounds per minute.

Everyone happy? I get it. And I still think it, along with any other semi-automatic weapon should be illegal.
Anonymous
Post 06/14/2016 14:50     Subject: Please gun supporters - explain to me once and for all why you need an automatic weapon
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:Hey gun experts ... care to enlighten us about the effective firing range of an AR15 in comparison to something like a Beretta? Then tell us some more about which is more appropriate for "home defense" or "self defense" against "bad guys."


I think most people would be totally fine with taking away AR-15s. The only point people are TRYING to make is that this wouldn't have a huge impact.


+1. It wouldn't have any meaningful impact whatsoever. Orlando shooter would still have killed many, many people if armed with semi-auto pistols.

People focusing on the type of gun used are hindering discussion of meaningful solutions (and adding counterproductive snark to the conversation).



Can you offer a meaningful solution? How are you hoping to help?


Can you offer a meaningful solution? How are you hoping to help?


There have been quite a few offered above. To summarize, I'd argue as others have that the focus should be on controlling access to firearms:

1. Universal background checks
2. Mandatory training (another poster's suggestion)
3. Federal licensing (another poster's suggestion)
4. Criminal liability for negligent storage of firearms
5. Criminal liability for negligent or reckless sale/transfer of firearms to third party

If effectively enforced, these could help tremendously.


These sound like a good start to me.

How about fingerprint-type technology to limit who can use guns? I haven't understood why manufacturers are against this. I can program my iPhone for several people to use it, so why shouldn't we do that for guns? No more dead 3 year olds, no more stolen guns used in crimes, the list goes on.
Anonymous
Post 06/14/2016 14:49     Subject: Please gun supporters - explain to me once and for all why you need an automatic weapon
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:So a ban on semi-automatics aaide, why do so many of you have problems with banning large capacity magazines?


Because law-abiding shooters who use their guns to shoot at targets at a gun range don't want to spend all their range time reloading magazines when they could be shooting. It's the same concept as getting a big bucket of balls at the declining range instead of the three that come in the box.

It's not nearly as nefarious as gun control advocates make it sound.


*driving range


I am completely, 100% ok with law-abiding shooters using their guns at a gun range having to spend a little extra time reloading. I think we should only sell magazines with individual bullets, frankly.


I am completely, 100% ok with women having to get transvaginal ultrasounds and permission from the baby's father before undergoing an abortion. Actually, I'll trade you the second amendment for the 14th. Does that work for you?


Sure. Those are the same. If you're insane.


I thought we were trying to save lives.
Anonymous
Post 06/14/2016 14:48     Subject: Please gun supporters - explain to me once and for all why you need an automatic weapon
If you support guns, would you feel differently if it was your child gunned down? Would you still feel it was your right?
Or would you do more victim blaming and say "This wouldn't have happened if someone else in the club had a gun and defended themselves"? (Like I've been hearing people say)

For shame.
Anonymous
Post 06/14/2016 14:48     Subject: Please gun supporters - explain to me once and for all why you need an automatic weapon
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:Hey gun experts ... care to enlighten us about the effective firing range of an AR15 in comparison to something like a Beretta? Then tell us some more about which is more appropriate for "home defense" or "self defense" against "bad guys."


I think most people would be totally fine with taking away AR-15s. The only point people are TRYING to make is that this wouldn't have a huge impact.


+1. It wouldn't have any meaningful impact whatsoever. Orlando shooter would still have killed many, many people if armed with semi-auto pistols.

People focusing on the type of gun used are hindering discussion of meaningful solutions (and adding counterproductive snark to the conversation).



Can you offer a meaningful solution? How are you hoping to help?


Can you offer a meaningful solution? How are you hoping to help?


There have been quite a few offered above. To summarize, I'd argue as others have that the focus should be on controlling access to firearms:

1. Universal background checks
2. Mandatory training (another poster's suggestion)
3. Federal licensing (another poster's suggestion)
4. Criminal liability for negligent storage of firearms
5. Criminal liability for negligent or reckless sale/transfer of firearms to third party

If effectively enforced, these could help tremendously.


np. They could certainly help against the many tragic cases of three-year-olds shooting themselves or others. But none of them would have stopped any of the famous mass shootings we've endured.

(Republican, gun-control moderate, don't own any guns)



I respectfully disagree. To cite just two examples: background checks, training requirement, and criminal liability for negligent sale/transfer could have stopped Orlando shooter from getting a gun. Similarly, threat of criminal liability could have prevented Sandy Hook mom from providing firearms to her crazy son.

Transfer restrictions/liability are particularly important--sellers (including individuals) would have to be VERY careful about providing weapons to any third party.
Anonymous
Post 06/14/2016 14:43     Subject: Please gun supporters - explain to me once and for all why you need an automatic weapon
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:You realize that an AR-15 is not a full auto weapon, right?


I'm not sure the 49 dead in Orlando appreciate the difference between full and semi-auto.


I think the 250 that lived would.
Anonymous
Post 06/14/2016 14:41     Subject: Please gun supporters - explain to me once and for all why you need an automatic weapon
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:Hey gun experts ... care to enlighten us about the effective firing range of an AR15 in comparison to something like a Beretta? Then tell us some more about which is more appropriate for "home defense" or "self defense" against "bad guys."


I think most people would be totally fine with taking away AR-15s. The only point people are TRYING to make is that this wouldn't have a huge impact.


+1. It wouldn't have any meaningful impact whatsoever. Orlando shooter would still have killed many, many people if armed with semi-auto pistols.

People focusing on the type of gun used are hindering discussion of meaningful solutions (and adding counterproductive snark to the conversation).



I think the point is then to get rid of any gun that has the capacity to shoot numerous bullets without reloading. It's not rocket science. Many Americans dot want guns that have this capacity on the streets. Problem is how to enforce it? Turn in guns? What happens and how is it enforced?


The problem is that such a regulation would bar weapons that have legitimate uses--revolvers, hunting rifles, etc., many shotguns, etc.

Politically and perhaps constitutionally, this proposal is not viable (in addition to the practical difficulties that you point out).

It's time to look for other ways to address the problem--for better or worse, this simply stands no chance of being enacted.
Anonymous
Post 06/14/2016 14:39     Subject: Please gun supporters - explain to me once and for all why you need an automatic weapon
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:Hey gun experts ... care to enlighten us about the effective firing range of an AR15 in comparison to something like a Beretta? Then tell us some more about which is more appropriate for "home defense" or "self defense" against "bad guys."


I think most people would be totally fine with taking away AR-15s. The only point people are TRYING to make is that this wouldn't have a huge impact.


+1. It wouldn't have any meaningful impact whatsoever. Orlando shooter would still have killed many, many people if armed with semi-auto pistols.

People focusing on the type of gun used are hindering discussion of meaningful solutions (and adding counterproductive snark to the conversation).



Can you offer a meaningful solution? How are you hoping to help?


Can you offer a meaningful solution? How are you hoping to help?


There have been quite a few offered above. To summarize, I'd argue as others have that the focus should be on controlling access to firearms:

1. Universal background checks
2. Mandatory training (another poster's suggestion)
3. Federal licensing (another poster's suggestion)
4. Criminal liability for negligent storage of firearms
5. Criminal liability for negligent or reckless sale/transfer of firearms to third party

If effectively enforced, these could help tremendously.


np. They could certainly help against the many tragic cases of three-year-olds shooting themselves or others. But none of them would have stopped any of the famous mass shootings we've endured.

(Republican, gun-control moderate, don't own any guns)
Anonymous
Post 06/14/2016 14:36     Subject: Please gun supporters - explain to me once and for all why you need an automatic weapon
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:Hey gun experts ... care to enlighten us about the effective firing range of an AR15 in comparison to something like a Beretta? Then tell us some more about which is more appropriate for "home defense" or "self defense" against "bad guys."


I think most people would be totally fine with taking away AR-15s. The only point people are TRYING to make is that this wouldn't have a huge impact.


+1. It wouldn't have any meaningful impact whatsoever. Orlando shooter would still have killed many, many people if armed with semi-auto pistols.

People focusing on the type of gun used are hindering discussion of meaningful solutions (and adding counterproductive snark to the conversation).



Can you offer a meaningful solution? How are you hoping to help?


Can you offer a meaningful solution? How are you hoping to help?


There have been quite a few offered above. To summarize, I'd argue as others have that the focus should be on controlling access to firearms:

1. Universal background checks
2. Mandatory training (another poster's suggestion)
3. Federal licensing (another poster's suggestion)
4. Criminal liability for negligent storage of firearms
5. Criminal liability for negligent or reckless sale/transfer of firearms to third party

If effectively enforced, these could help tremendously.
Anonymous
Post 06/14/2016 14:30     Subject: Please gun supporters - explain to me once and for all why you need an automatic weapon
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:Hey gun experts ... care to enlighten us about the effective firing range of an AR15 in comparison to something like a Beretta? Then tell us some more about which is more appropriate for "home defense" or "self defense" against "bad guys."


I think most people would be totally fine with taking away AR-15s. The only point people are TRYING to make is that this wouldn't have a huge impact.


+1. It wouldn't have any meaningful impact whatsoever. Orlando shooter would still have killed many, many people if armed with semi-auto pistols.

People focusing on the type of gun used are hindering discussion of meaningful solutions (and adding counterproductive snark to the conversation).



I think the point is then to get rid of any gun that has the capacity to shoot numerous bullets without reloading. It's not rocket science. Many Americans dot want guns that have this capacity on the streets. Problem is how to enforce it? Turn in guns? What happens and how is it enforced?
Anonymous
Post 06/14/2016 14:27     Subject: Please gun supporters - explain to me once and for all why you need an automatic weapon
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:Hey gun experts ... care to enlighten us about the effective firing range of an AR15 in comparison to something like a Beretta? Then tell us some more about which is more appropriate for "home defense" or "self defense" against "bad guys."


I think most people would be totally fine with taking away AR-15s. The only point people are TRYING to make is that this wouldn't have a huge impact.


+1. It wouldn't have any meaningful impact whatsoever. Orlando shooter would still have killed many, many people if armed with semi-auto pistols.

People focusing on the type of gun used are hindering discussion of meaningful solutions (and adding counterproductive snark to the conversation).



Can you offer a meaningful solution? How are you hoping to help?