So your argument is we will all be safe if we outlaw weapons like the AR-15?

 

How many State & Federal Laws did Lanza break during his atrocity? You think creating more laws will somehow prevent this? Like the ones on the books were not enough already? And one more law outlawing these weapons from future purchase somehow puts the genie back in the bottle?

 

 

We have a lot of gun laws its true, but many of them have deliberate loopholes poked in them over the years with the express purpose of making them toothless. Connecticut law, which is supposed to be the 5th strictest according to the Brady foundation still allows for semiautomatic weapons with a grenade launcher, for instance. Almost laughably, the law then goes on to clarify that if you do opt for a grenade launcher, you cant have a bayonet or a flash suppressor or a pistol grip as well.

 

Any one of those is ok, but not more than one. (okee dokee, me wants grenade launcher)

 

Similarly, fully automatic weapons are illegal in the US but luckily, you can purchase the kit to make a semiautomatic one fully automatic and its perfectly legal; you just cant purchase them together. (Wink Wink, nudge nudge)

 

And of course if you owned a fully automatic weapon prior to when the law against them went to effect, why then they're grandfathered in and you can then (not being a licensed dealer) sell them to anyone you want with no restrictions. No background checks, no waiting periods..... nothing.

 

Maybe it doesn't matter. Poor state record keeping and lack of submission of relevant records means that federal the database used to perform checks is riddled with holes. Even so, the NRA is challenging background check requirements......

 

Us gun law is a mess of swiss cheese riddled with loopholes. It would be excellent if the laws actively being enforced consistently were not also constantly under attack, but whatever. As soon as some real enforcement teeth are put into many of those laws I will be on board right away and ready to concede.

 

Would you support removing loopholes and strengthening the overall effectiveness of existing gun law in exchange for no new laws?

 

Edit: lol!!! I just posted this and turned on the news and some stations are making the exact same point. I could have saved myself the effort!

You can not purchase any kit to make a fully automatic weapon nor can you purchase a grenade launcher of any kind, any where legally. The only people that can possess a a fully automatic rifle are FFL holders and only one produced before 1986. It's these silly things that drive me nuts.

You can not purchase any kit to make a fully automatic weapon nor can you purchase a grenade launcher of any kind, any where legally. The only people that can possess a a fully automatic rifle are FFL holders and only one produced before 1986. It's these silly things that drive me nuts.

 

That was kind of a circular statement, and I am not going to link to any sites (much as I am tempted to) since like our gun laws, legality seems situational. I will just say that I believe the possibility exists.

You can not purchase, own, possess, obtain any kind of grenade launcher unless you're buying from criminals. You can not modify your rifle to be fully automatic unless you're an FFL owner, gunsmith with a very specific skill set or once again dealing with criminals. None of these items are legal in any state in the US. You can link to whatever you want. The fact is none of the above is legal any where in the country for the average citizen.

Would you support removing loopholes and strengthening the overall effectiveness of existing gun law in exchange for no new laws?

 

I would support you understanding current gun law (at least federal) first...

 

you can purchase the kit to make a semiautomatic one fully automatic and its perfectly legal

 

That is incorrect.

 

if you owned a fully automatic weapon prior to when the law against them went to effect, why then they're grandfathered in and you can then (not being a licensed dealer) sell them to anyone you want with no restrictions.

 

That is incorrect.

 

according to the Brady foundation still allows for semiautomatic weapons with a grenade launcher

 

Great that you are looking for mis-information...

 

You can not modify your rifle to be fully automatic unless you're an FFL owner, gunsmith

 

No Randy... you're going to need something like a class 3 manufacturer's license to do something like that...

Yes. The first step is an FFL, then on to a Class 3 BATF license. Further nothing may be possessed that was manufactured after 1986 and the Firearms Owners Profection Act. Was keeping it relatively simple. I have supressors on all my AR's to hunt hogs at night and to get those was extremely complicated. The notion of machine guns with grenade launchers makes me either sad that people believe it or laugh.

but many of them have deliberate loopholes poked in them over the years with the express purpose of making them toothless

 

Is this more nonsense from the Brady foundation?

 

My understanding this lanza "attempted to purchase a single “long gun” rifle from a local gun store but was turned away because he did not want to wait for the required 14-day background check, according to two federal law enforcement officials."

 

Suspect in massacre tried to buy rifle days before, sources say

 

So he stole what he needed.

 

I have supressors on all my AR's to hunt hogs at night and to get those was extremely complicated.

 

yeah you got to jump thru some hoops... pay the transfer tax on each on top of the price of the suppressor (what $200?). And I think you meant manf. after '86.

 

The notion of machine guns with grenade launchers makes me either sad that people believe it or laugh.

 

Is nuts... but people believe so much distortion put out by "news" agencies.

 

Like it's the "roaring 20s" or something.

 

deliberate loopholes

 

The "deliberate loopholes" is the inability to enforce what is already on the books. Let's keep this simple. Criminals are criminals because they don't obey the law.

and I am not going to link to any sites (much as I am tempted to) since like our gun laws, legality seems situational

 

I believe I know what you are referring to... there's a youtube vid. That thing does not fit the definition of full-auto (to my knowledge) and it is a rather goofy mod to begin with (for a number of reasons).

 

I'll say this... the ATF does not like you screwing with (messing around / skirting) their gun laws.

 

As far as "legality seems situational"... This is true. Federal laws are strict. Some States (like Illinois) laws are even more strict. But it never works in reverse (state laws relaxing federal law). I say never and someone going to point out marijuana in Washington state and Colorado but this a bizarre little oddity.

 

If this man's story is accurate... a little bright light where there is immense darkness:

 

http://video.foxnews.../2043823745001/

I would support you understanding current gun law (at least federal) first...

 

I will take that as a "No"

 

That is incorrect.

 

It seems you are right, the conversion kits may be a result of confusion about the number of bullets per trigger press and controllability. The conversion of a weapon still appears not to be nearly as difficult in some instances as it is usually presented.

 

That is incorrect.

 

The case I was looking at was a fully automatic Korean war weapon registered in the 60s then handed down to a relative when the owner passed away. Several sites had contradictory information as to the legality of selling under the law depending on where and when the sale occurred and to whom. But it does appear that there would be expensive permits involved.

 

Great that you are looking for mis-information...

 

Yet they created important legislation and got it passed. (and probably will be involved in anything new that comes of this)

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brady_Handgun_Violence_Prevention_Act For those from other countries not familiar with the reference.

I will take that as a "No"

 

You should take it as... I do not appreciate debating something where the one I am debating with is putting out mis-information and/or not very well educated on the subject.

 

Of course I would be for anything that would decrease the likelihood of another tragedy - like what happened at Sandy Hook.

 

So what loopholes you want closed and laws strengthened that would make this sort of event unlikely?

So what loopholes you want closed and laws strengthened that would make this sort of event unlikely?

 

We could start here. The CT killer (according to the linked article) was stopped by a background check, and was forced to steal a legal weapon. That cannot really be stopped, but he also could have looked for an illegal gun, which are much easier to obtain than they need to be because of things like this:

 

 

In his remarks at Newtown on Sunday the President said:

 

“No single law — no set of laws can eliminate evil from the world, or prevent every senseless act of violence in our society. But that can’t be an excuse for inaction. Surely, we can do better than this.”

 

I tend to agree. We can start with the administrations shelved plan to expand the background check system, and move on from there. http://www.nytimes.c...abase.html?_r=0

"It is far from certain, however, that the White House would be willing to wage a fight against the powerful gun-rights lobby or take attention from competing concerns, like negotiations over the looming fiscal deadline."

 

This is why we need a leader not a paper tiger and not someone mouthing platitudes...

 

A leader delegates... absolutely no reason in my mind the DOJ could not tighten up background checks (as there have been problems there). A leader would say "get it done... now".

 

Wrt guns shows... I am not sure what harm there is in the seller & buyer having to fill out an ATF 4473.

 

Before you go criticizing guns shows too much... go look at what kind of guns are being used in the commission of a crime. This (Sandy Hook) was a rare case (I know, I know... not rare enough). Not many walking in to gun shows to purchase a $1000+ Bushmaster. Or the prices for those other weapons shown. Not like you can walk in with a $100 and walk out with a Smith Model 19 .357.

 

And I wonder where that 30% figure comes from... you might be interested in this: The Facts about Gun Shows from The CATO Institute.

 

I just wonder what the excuse for inaction re: the above will be this time.

In Canada there was the École Polytechnique massacre in Montreal back in 1989, a school shooting with 15 victims and 14 wounded. Following this incident the Canadian Government made a move to tighten gun controls.

 

They proposed a bill in 1993 and passed into law a long-gun registry. This registry was estimated to cost the Canadian tax payer $2 million dollars and over the years ended up really costing over $2 billion dollars, This law never changed anything.

 

Just recently the current Canadian Government scrapped the long-gun registry due to excessive costs and proven ineffective.

 

I predict the USA will do a similar move in proposing various bills, passing some laws, and over time they will have no impact and will cost the tax payers billions. If the Canadian Long Gun Registry costed $2 billion the you bet in the USA Similar laws would be considerably more expensive.

I suspect the numbers came at least partially from this and partially by the state of New Yorks later investigation showing that of something like 9000 illegal weapons seized in the state, only about 1500 came from New York

 

http://www.mayorsaga...he_Gun 2000.pdf

 

I predict the USA will do a similar move in proposing various bills, passing some laws, and over time they will have no impact and will cost the tax payers billions. If the Canadian Long Gun Registry costed $2 billion the you bet in the USA Similar laws would be considerably more expensive.

 

In the US implementation and compliance of the Brady laws has apparently been so spotty and inconsistent from state to state that studies on effectiveness are full of caveats. In both directions.

Gun control is an issue generated by the communist left in this country. It's our Constitutional right to own and lawfully use them. The Second Amendment was installed by the founders to protect the people from its government, which may be usurped by the communist left. My 7th grade algebra teacher had a pistol locked in his desk drawer. He showed it to me. I'm sure he wasn't the only one. Any goth-like, mental misfit would not have gotten very far in that school. Isn't it interesting that the shooter in this tragedy only stopped shooting and killed himself when he had a gun pointed back at him?

In your country tighter gun control seems to be supported by liberals, and they are not communists, not at all as they believe in free market, so why all this talk about communists that are very small minority in the US?

 

I feel bad for every single innocent soul that has to suffer because people with serious problems can get powerful weapons so very easily.

 

Evil exists. Evil has always existed. Evil will always exist.

 

There are usually severe mental problems behind this kind of tragedies, not any kind of natural born evil that nobody could do anything to. Better healthcare and also people people starting to care about each other more would help, but I guess western societies all around the world are mostly going just the opposite way.