Forums > General Discussion   Shooting the breeze...

Gun laws in the USA.

Reply
Created by doggie > 9 months ago, 24 Jul 2012
log man
VIC, 8289 posts
1 Aug 2012 12:39PM
Thumbs Up

Yeah I love you too Mark!

lachlan3556
VIC, 1066 posts
1 Aug 2012 1:19PM
Thumbs Up

evlPanda said...

Mark _australia said...


...and a nutter would still take a pump action to the school / shops etc and go for it. That is because the person is the problem, not the tool.


It sounds like it would be a good idea to both

A) Attend to/fix the nutter
B) Restrict access to pump action shotguns because we can't completely do A)

This is reasonable.



Trouble is any firearm can be used to kill, it wouldn't be hard for some dickh$$d to knock off a dozen people with a bolt action .22lr if they got the idea.


I agree that public shouldn't have access to fully automatic weapons, or rocket launchers, explosives, armored vehicles. I'll also entertain the idea of restricting high cap centrefires in some way, but not banning them as they did here as it infringes on 2nd ammend (Which personally, I think is an important tool to mantain freedom for generations to come in the USA).
You should be required to have a firearms licence to buy a firearm from a gunshop only (whether bought or transfered, no buying directly from another person) and you should have the documentation to prove you did this and you own it legally.

Trouble is this whole topic is reliant on personal opinions, they are never going to all be the same or in agreement. I respect everyones opinion here, but I have my own.

Mark _australia
WA, 22412 posts
1 Aug 2012 5:30PM
Thumbs Up

Vote1: Panda and Loggy for forum mods.



Doggie, I kinda also agree that firearms for personal protection is a bad move. But OTOH one has to take into account that every dictator ever has disarmed the population quick smart to avoid resistance. That is a bit of a historical warning sign for us lucky ones who have never been subject to such things.

Plus the fact that it is entrenched in common law and statutes that a person can use like force to defend themselves (and rightly so). When gun use by crooks is becoming more common (like the NSW examples of late) at what point does Australia rethink things?
But like I said - first step is to adequately penalise those with illegal guns, not necessarily go for open slather like the USA has had

log man
VIC, 8289 posts
1 Aug 2012 11:56PM
Thumbs Up

lachlan3556 said...

evlPanda said...

Mark _australia said...


...and a nutter would still take a pump action to the school / shops etc and go for it. That is because the person is the problem, not the tool.


It sounds like it would be a good idea to both

A) Attend to/fix the nutter
B) Restrict access to pump action shotguns because we can't completely do A)

This is reasonable.



Trouble is any firearm can be used to kill, it wouldn't be hard for some dickh$$d to knock off a dozen people with a bolt action .22lr if they got the idea.


I agree that public shouldn't have access to fully automatic weapons, or rocket launchers, explosives, armored vehicles. I'll also entertain the idea of restricting high cap centrefires in some way, but not banning them as they did here as it infringes on 2nd ammend (Which personally, I think is an important tool to mantain freedom for generations to come in the USA).
You should be required to have a firearms licence to buy a firearm from a gunshop only (whether bought or transfered, no buying directly from another person) and you should have the documentation to prove you did this and you own it legally.

Trouble is this whole topic is reliant on personal opinions, they are never going to all be the same or in agreement. I respect everyones opinion here, but I have my own.


That's just gun-nut talk. The second ammendment is always brought up by Americans who think their own government is after them. It's clearly nonsense, and a red herring. If people thought that their own government were going to wage war on them surely they'd prefer some types of missiles or tanks or something a little bit stronger that a pissy gun.

If Americans think that by having a machine gun in they're pick-ups somehow makes them more "free" then that's plain delusional. If you want to live your life in some faux fear of the UN or the return of the British Empire then go ahead, dig your hole, stock it with canned food, count your ammo,read that all important 2nd ammendment an do some whittlin. No-ones interested.

doggie
WA, 15849 posts
2 Aug 2012 8:39AM
Thumbs Up

log man said...

lachlan3556 said...

evlPanda said...

Mark _australia said...


...and a nutter would still take a pump action to the school / shops etc and go for it. That is because the person is the problem, not the tool.


It sounds like it would be a good idea to both

A) Attend to/fix the nutter
B) Restrict access to pump action shotguns because we can't completely do A)

This is reasonable.



Trouble is any firearm can be used to kill, it wouldn't be hard for some dickh$$d to knock off a dozen people with a bolt action .22lr if they got the idea.


I agree that public shouldn't have access to fully automatic weapons, or rocket launchers, explosives, armored vehicles. I'll also entertain the idea of restricting high cap centrefires in some way, but not banning them as they did here as it infringes on 2nd ammend (Which personally, I think is an important tool to mantain freedom for generations to come in the USA).
You should be required to have a firearms licence to buy a firearm from a gunshop only (whether bought or transfered, no buying directly from another person) and you should have the documentation to prove you did this and you own it legally.

Trouble is this whole topic is reliant on personal opinions, they are never going to all be the same or in agreement. I respect everyones opinion here, but I have my own.


That's just gun-nut talk. The second ammendment is always brought up by Americans who think their own government is after them. It's clearly nonsense, and a red herring. If people thought that their own government were going to wage war on them surely they'd prefer some types of missiles or tanks or something a little bit stronger that a pissy gun.

If Americans think that by having a machine gun in they're pick-ups somehow makes them more "free" then that's plain delusional. If you want to live your life in some faux fear of the UN or the return of the British Empire then go ahead, dig your hole, stock it with canned food, count your ammo,read that all important 2nd ammendment an do some whittlin. No-ones interested.



Agree with log man as thats what I was trying to put across, man I cant wait for the weekend

evlPanda
NSW, 9202 posts
2 Aug 2012 2:16PM
Thumbs Up

log man said...
That's just gun-nut talk. The second ammendment is always brought up by Americans who think their own government is after them.


It's always the same gun-nuts that pledge allegiance to a flag, chant "U-S-A!", and hold hand to hearts while they sing the national anthem. The only other places with that level of nationalism are Nazi Germany, Soviet Russia and North Korea. It's the gun-nuts themselves that will be the foot soldiers of any dictator. And they are arming themselves to the teeth.

The irony is quite scary.



Poida
WA, 1916 posts
2 Aug 2012 2:38PM
Thumbs Up

the logic of "right to bear arms" seems all screwed up imho

Beaglebuddy
1595 posts
2 Aug 2012 5:33PM
Thumbs Up

I find it rather interesting how ya all are experts on life in America and American gun laws.
I was not aware that Australians spent so much time in America, well you learn something new every day.

Beaglebuddy
1595 posts
2 Aug 2012 5:37PM
Thumbs Up

SP said...

Beaglebuddy said...

SP said...

Beaglebuddy said...

Sad really how the far left always has to resort to name calling and cries of racism when losing an argument.


Far left? Who?
Name calling, Racist where? Get out of dreamland buddy, you are just making **** up. Sad you can't manage to hold a decent debate with people with fairly moderate views, I'd hardly call doggie and extremist. Your views are much further from the centre than Doggies or mine.

And are you a counter insurgency expert? Or do you just watch chuck norris movies while polishing your cap gun till you go pop?


Are you able to see Doggie calling people idiots?
That is an unwarranted personal attack.
And earlier he tries to bait an argument claiming American hate Obama because he is black.




Idiot.... .?.?

Seriously..??

Grow a set and get some tissues princess, I can come braid your hair if you need.



Oh I can take it but I'm just trying to promote a civil discourse here, what is gained by namecalling? Also I believe it defies the rules of this forum.

Beaglebuddy
1595 posts
2 Aug 2012 5:42PM
Thumbs Up

The Seabreeze forum rules state " No abuse, insults or personal attacks"

Scotty88
4214 posts
2 Aug 2012 5:48PM
Thumbs Up

Beaglebuddy said...

The Seabreeze forum rules state " No abuse, insults or personal attacks"


J-walking is illegal too but wgaf ?

Mark _australia
WA, 22412 posts
2 Aug 2012 7:41PM
Thumbs Up

Beaglebuddy said...

The Seabreeze forum rules state " No abuse, insults or personal attacks"


Cancel the kite forum.

Beaglebuddy
1595 posts
2 Aug 2012 8:37PM
Thumbs Up

OK if everyone is fine with it put on your flame proof underwear

pierrec45
NSW, 2005 posts
2 Aug 2012 11:05PM
Thumbs Up

Beaglebuddy said...

I find it rather interesting how ya all are experts on life in America and American gun laws.
I was not aware that Australians spent so much time in America, well you learn something new every day.

Actually I do (for work). Was in Dallas and others just recently, again.
Yes, lotsa nuts cases, as stated.

Basically in this thread we're dealing with a few people who have the very same interest (guns & weapons) as the recent spree killer, as well as Eric Harris, Brejvik and others.

doggie
WA, 15849 posts
2 Aug 2012 9:44PM
Thumbs Up

Beaglebuddy said...

SP said...

Beaglebuddy said...

SP said...

Beaglebuddy said...

Sad really how the far left always has to resort to name calling and cries of racism when losing an argument.


Far left? Who?
Name calling, Racist where? Get out of dreamland buddy, you are just making **** up. Sad you can't manage to hold a decent debate with people with fairly moderate views, I'd hardly call doggie and extremist. Your views are much further from the centre than Doggies or mine.

And are you a counter insurgency expert? Or do you just watch chuck norris movies while polishing your cap gun till you go pop?


Are you able to see Doggie calling people idiots?
That is an unwarranted personal attack.
And earlier he tries to bait an argument claiming American hate Obama because he is black.




Idiot.... .?.?

Seriously..??

Grow a set and get some tissues princess, I can come braid your hair if you need.



Oh I can take it but I'm just trying to promote a civil discourse here, what is gained by namecalling? Also I believe it defies the rules of this forum.



Hey BB your village called, they want their idiot back

Mark _australia
WA, 22412 posts
2 Aug 2012 10:05PM
Thumbs Up

pierrec45 said...

Beaglebuddy said...

I find it rather interesting how ya all are experts on life in America and American gun laws.
I was not aware that Australians spent so much time in America, well you learn something new every day.

Actually I do (for work). Was in Dallas and others just recently, again.
Yes, lotsa nuts cases, as stated.

Basically in this thread we're dealing with a few people who have the very same interest (guns & weapons) as the recent spree killer, as well as Eric Harris, Brejvik and others.



Yep I enjoy shooting and have an interest in guns the same way as some fellas get off on the mechanical marvels of cars and engines.

What's ya point?

SP
10979 posts
2 Aug 2012 11:42PM
Thumbs Up

Beaglebuddy said...

The Seabreeze forum rules state " No abuse, insults or personal attacks"


Neck up ya parrot ........

DUDE
NSW, 1132 posts
3 Aug 2012 1:51AM
Thumbs Up

Beaglebuddy said...

The Seabreeze forum rules state " No abuse, insults or personal attacks"


Don't upset the seppo, he has easier access to firearms than we do.........

pierrec45
NSW, 2005 posts
3 Aug 2012 6:32AM
Thumbs Up

DUDE said...

Beaglebuddy said...

The Seabreeze forum rules state " No abuse, insults or personal attacks"


Don't upset the seppo, he has easier access to firearms than we do.........


Plus technically you're attacking him so he has a 'right' to use any weapon off his considerable arsenal to shoot you. In his view, he'd be defending himself...

Beaglebuddy
1595 posts
3 Aug 2012 5:43AM
Thumbs Up

pierrec45 said...

DUDE said...

Beaglebuddy said...

The Seabreeze forum rules state " No abuse, insults or personal attacks"


Don't upset the seppo, he has easier access to firearms than we do.........


Plus technically you're attacking him so he has a 'right' to use any weapon off his considerable arsenal to shoot you. In his view, he'd be defending himself...


That's not right, for instance when you are a concealed carry permit holder you never initiate, you always step back and retreat if possible, using lethal force as a last resort, standing your ground if you are in your own house is permissible.
An example is the Travon Martin/neighborhood watch incident in Florida, the shooter followed the perp, just because you have a gun does not mean you are the new sheriff.
Armed citizens do make for a polite society, road rage incidents and random violence from macho idiots are greatly reduced.

lachlan3556
VIC, 1066 posts
3 Aug 2012 10:21AM
Thumbs Up

pierrec45 said...

Beaglebuddy said...

I find it rather interesting how ya all are experts on life in America and American gun laws.
I was not aware that Australians spent so much time in America, well you learn something new every day.

Actually I do (for work). Was in Dallas and others just recently, again.
Yes, lotsa nuts cases, as stated.

Basically in this thread we're dealing with a few people who have the very same interest (guns & weapons) as the recent spree killer, as well as Eric Harris, Brejvik and others.



Nice summary there, now how about you admit that what you are insinuating is complete c##p! If it weren't Im accurate in saying you are just like the terrorists who crash/blow up airliners, as you've both used aircraft? Or that the majority of the people on this forum are idiots/killers because we use cars, and thats what drunk drivers kill people with?

lachlan3556
VIC, 1066 posts
3 Aug 2012 10:29AM
Thumbs Up

So in group A opinion: 2nd ammendment = gun nut excuse, and basically no real argument for the posession of firearms.

Group B opinion: 2nd ammendment is valid = reason to own, reason to possess firearms.

There's two lines of thought (among others) that the discussion has brought up. Why the name calling and ridicule? Are you trying to tell people how they should think on a discussion forum? Its also akin to racism what is occuring, some are generalising and insulting a large group of people purely on their belief/lifestyle.

Also, if you want to discuss productively; why not discuss any forms of USA law that doesn't begin with outright weapon bans (licencing, registration, sales, criminal penalties, etc)?

Try to keep it civil, its still a public forum with a few ground rules

Beersy
TAS, 753 posts
3 Aug 2012 11:05AM
Thumbs Up

Beaglebuddy said...

pierrec45 said...

DUDE said...

Beaglebuddy said...

The Seabreeze forum rules state " No abuse, insults or personal attacks"


Don't upset the seppo, he has easier access to firearms than we do.........


Plus technically you're attacking him so he has a 'right' to use any weapon off his considerable arsenal to shoot you. In his view, he'd be defending himself...


That's not right, for instance when you are a concealed carry permit holder you never initiate, you always step back and retreat if possible, using lethal force as a last resort, standing your ground if you are in your own house is permissible.
An example is the Travon Martin/neighborhood watch incident in Florida, the shooter followed the perp, just because you have a gun does not mean you are the new sheriff.
Armed citizens do make for a polite society, road rage incidents and random violence from macho idiots are greatly reduced.



No more sarcasm guys, after spending 6 months travelling Canada and USA, I can tell you Beagle will not understand it

GreenPat
QLD, 4083 posts
3 Aug 2012 11:17AM
Thumbs Up

i.chzbgr.com/maxW500/6436150784

stamp
QLD, 2770 posts
3 Aug 2012 11:57AM
Thumbs Up

when was 'amendment' amended to 'ammendment'?

evlPanda
NSW, 9202 posts
3 Aug 2012 12:24PM
Thumbs Up

Beaglebuddy said...

pierrec45 said...

DUDE said...

Beaglebuddy said...

The Seabreeze forum rules state " No abuse, insults or personal attacks"


Don't upset the seppo, he has easier access to firearms than we do.........


Plus technically you're attacking him so he has a 'right' to use any weapon off his considerable arsenal to shoot you. In his view, he'd be defending himself...


That's not right, for instance when you are a concealed carry permit holder you never initiate, you always step back and retreat if possible, using lethal force as a last resort, standing your ground if you are in your own house is permissible.
An example is the Travon Martin/neighborhood watch incident in Florida, the shooter followed the perp, just because you have a gun does not mean you are the new sheriff.
Armed citizens do make for a polite society, road rage incidents and random violence from macho idiots are greatly reduced.






STAY ON TARGET! STAY ON TARGET!

We are talking about how it is legal for people (...for people that just LOOK like the guy below FFS) to purchase some serious firepower.


On May 22, 2012, Holmes purchased his first weapon, a .40-caliber Glock pistol, at a Gander Mountain shop in Aurora, and six days later a Remington Model 870 shotgun at a Bass Pro Shops in Denver. On June 7, just hours after failing his oral exam at the university, he purchased a Smith & Wesson M&P15 semi-automatic rifle, with a second .40-caliber Glock pistol following on July 6.

All the weapons were bought legally.

In the four months prior to the shooting, Holmes also bought 3000 rounds of ammunition for the pistols, 3000 rounds for the M&P15, and 350 shells for the shotgun over the internet. On July 2, he placed an order for a Blackhawk Urban Assault Vest, two magazine holders and a knife at an online retailer.


So, staying on topic do we all agree gun laws need to change in the U.S.?

doggie
WA, 15849 posts
3 Aug 2012 10:33AM
Thumbs Up

Yes.

evlPanda
NSW, 9202 posts
3 Aug 2012 12:47PM
Thumbs Up

lachlan3556
VIC, 1066 posts
3 Aug 2012 1:06PM
Thumbs Up

I would also agree further regulation in some states might be a good thing.





Sorry, my spelling error; Amendment not Ammendment. im pretty sure you all knew what I mean't

EDIT: The d%%khead above did dye his hair just before the crime, he didn't look like that beforehand.

doggie
WA, 15849 posts
3 Aug 2012 3:54PM
Thumbs Up

lachlan3556 said...

I would also agree further regulation in some states might be a good thing.





Sorry, my spelling error; Amendment not Ammendment. im pretty sure you all knew what I mean't

EDIT: The d%%khead above did dye his hair just before the crime, he didn't look like that beforehand.


An elderly jewellery shop owner in California has foiled a robbery, taking out her handgun and firing at the five perpetrators as they made a frantic dash for the exit.

The 65-year-old woman, who has not been identified, was in the back of the store when a white car pulled up out the front and five men exited the vehicle with guns drawn, Los Angeles Times reports.

The men rushed into the store and threatened customers demanding they place their valuable possessions in pillow cases they were carrying.

They got a shock when less than a minute into the heist an elderly woman burst into the room, firing two shots at the would-be thieves who crashed into each other in their frenzied efforts to flee.

The woman then chased the men out of the store as their getaway car made off without them.

The men caught up a block later and they all escaped.

Police Lt. Jeff Nightengale said the woman was trying to protect the people in her store.

"She felt that these suspects were possibly going to injure the employees or the customer, so she fired two rounds from her handgun towards the suspects, which caused them to flee the store," he said.

Nothing was stolen in the bungled robbery and no one was injured.

http://news.ninemsn.com.au/world/8510407/elderly-shop-owner-fires-at-gang-of-thieves



Subscribe
Reply

Forums > General Discussion   Shooting the breeze...


"Gun laws in the USA." started by doggie