Mommentum regarding ban on assault rifles

[Skyman]

Nice!! You are a privileged man sir!

[timmy]

This business about the "assault rifle ban" (which XL correctly points out, is not really an assault rifle that is being discussed) reminds me about a part from the Aamir Khan film "3 Idiots."

In the film, Khan's friends ask him how he stays so calm when an important test is coming. Khan tells them that, in his village, there was a night watchman who would cry out "All is well!" during the night. This caused everyone to sleep well, until it was found that the watchman was getting drunk and not checking anything at all. So, Khan would say "all izz well" to himself repeatedly, and that way, he felt good, despite whatever the situation was.

Similarly, we are told because this terrible event of multiple murders at the hands of a madman has occurred, gun ownership rights should be limited so that others can feel that "all izz well," whether or not anyone is actually safer.

It should be pointed out that, when the "Assault Weapons Ban" was in effect here in the USA, the Ban did not affect gun violence statistics. We have real life experience that this sort of tactic will not work, will not protect anyone, or will not make anybody safer, but so many feel they will sleep better if they can just hear those words, like Aamir's villagers.

One can note the senselessness and unrealistic attitudes expressed in that first Ban. One of its provisions was do eliminate bayonet lugs, as if banks were being robbed and massacres were being committed because people were affixing bayonets to their rifles and perpetrating murderous crimes. What is the point of such a regulation?

Again, the separate pistol grip was another outlawed feature. What sense does that make?

Indeed, if the appearance of a gun causes people to commit crimes with it, what shall we then say about movies and computer games -- tht the appearance of a gun incites crime, but movies, TV shows, and computer games depicting the goriest killings do not? I think that this notion about a gun's evil appearance and influence is preposterous.

Indeed, the newly elected senator from North Dakota was discussing gun legislation in connection with the Connecticut disaster and noted that North Dakota had more guns per capita than any other state, but the fewest gun-related crimes.

There have always been lots of guns here in the USA, but children did not carry them to school. The problem here has to do with a different mentality, culture, and set of values than used to exist.

Few people want to hear this sort of thing. They want a quick fix, a solution that can be explained to them in 30 seconds and which they can understand between several bites of their lunch sandwich. They also are not interested in hearing about responsibilities they may need to pay attention to.

For instance, the two teens that committed the Columbine massacre: how was it that they were going out in the woods and shooting, or possessing the guns they did? Frankly, I do not think that is appropriate for young men today. If kids are being raised in the country and working on the farm, then the whole issue would be different. However, in urban settings, there are too many influences. In those settings, parents need to keep guns secured in a safe and supervise the shooting activities of their children.

I am not saying that all of the activities of children are their parent's fault. I remember well the story of a boy who was in the youth group I led at our church. He began doing drugs and within six weeks he had killed his father and badly injured his mother with a baseball bat. So I do not care to point fingers at parents unduly, but there are things parents must pay attention to. Anyone can be subject to bizarre impulses, and we should be safe. When my boys were teens, I ALWAYS had my ammunition locked up, so that they could not shoot a gun without my supervision.

How much is this applicable to gun rights in India? Were I discussing gun rights with someone in India, I would say, "we are in India, not the USA. That is their culture, and their problems. Here in India, we have women getting raped shamelessly in public by herds of goons, without anyone to help them. We need to solve our problems, not the problems of the USA."

[andy_65_in]

this is an american problem which has got nothing to do with india

[winnie_the_pooh]

Like Tim says,lets worry about our problems and leave the Americans to solve theirs.Lots of people in other countries,including India, who feel that they know how the Americans should run their country. Lets first try to set our house in order. Poverty,exploding population numbers,housing,a collapsing urban infrastructure,a shoddy transportation system,corruption,health care,third rate public education system,a criminal justice system that is on the verge of collapse ...... and most importantly respect for women.

[Biren]

Very informative reply by XL and honesty it helped dispelling the myths associated about gun ownership particulary in US. For and against debate is part of discussion there will be ppl against and there will be ppl for and it an unending debate.

Here in India there are lots and lots myths associated with gun ownership and its the law abiding citizens who suffer at last. Long back ppl in my district which borders china, SSB use to camp in villages and train ppl in basic rifle handling. There used to be one hour class every day and after one month target practice session. Being a witness to such camps, i would say, it brought sense of dicipline as well strenghted bond between the force and common villagers.

Same is true with NCC, where students are made familiar with arms and a get glimpse to armed forces.

Only if police around the nation could start organising camps, have mandatory weapon handling courses before grant of arms license (it will go long way dispelling myths surrounding firearms and proper handling of weapon).Next time someone discharging gun in a marriage will know the consequences.

Why above becoz i have seen ppl walking to gun shops, holding freshly issued arm licence asking the gun shop owner as to how to load and sometimes even with barrel pointing towards someone.

Weapon is a weapon and has to be shown due respect. There will be ppl against fire arms except atlast who is in majority? for or against.

Thanks againd XL for clearing air about assault weapons as well procedure followed in US while granting fire arm licence.

Cheers,
Biren

[Moin.]

Thanks XL and Timmy for the enligtening posts and a very mature view on the subject. Read extensively yesterday on the links you posted and one of the clauses was back ground checks for criminal records and mental illness before the purchase of firearms in gun shows. Read because there would be some substance in someone like Obama supporting this inspite of the powerful NRA lobby in the US, and Barrack Obama's no George Bush...
Thanks for your respective posts..


Regards
Moin

[Hammerhead]

Solution anybody? To curb such incidents from taking place in the future.

Here goes more ........

With one shot, an off-duty sergeant took down a gunman who attempted to opened fire at a crowded movie theater lobby during a late night showing of “The Hobbit” in San Antonio,

http://www.theblaze.com/stories/man-att ... ne-bullet/

[xl_target]

Thanks XL and Timmy for the enligtening posts and a very mature view on the subject. Read extensively yesterday on the links you posted and one of the clauses was back ground checks for criminal records and mental illness before the purchase of firearms in gun shows. Read because there would be some substance in someone like Obama supporting this inspite of the powerful NRA lobby in the US, and Barrack Obama's no George Bush...
Thanks for your respective posts..


Regards
Moin

Ok, Lets talk about the supposed "gun show loophole". Once again, I am talking about specific Minnesota laws as I am most familiar with them. Most states have similar laws

What is a typical gun show? Usually a gun club or other gun related organization will rent a venue and hold a gun show. Tables are sold at these places and can be bought by anyone. Not all the tables sell guns. Some sell trinkets and collectibles like civil war memorabilia or war medals or military surplus items. Some sell accessories like clothes, magazines, ammunition, etc. The law says that an individual can sell guns from his personal collection. However if you make a regular habit of selling guns, you have to get a dealers license. So if you do more than move a few long guns now and then and don't have a license, expect a visit from a BATFE team. A conviction for breaking a gun law is usually a felony and you will lose the ability to possess firearms. Most firearms enthusiasts are not willing to risk that. The law also says that you can transfer a rifle or shotgun in a face to face transaction if you have knowledge that the purchaser doesn't intend to use the gun in any crime. Most people selling guns at these shows are dealers and have to follow the laws (which I outlined in an earlier post ) which means background checks and the whole works. They have phone lines at these guns shows so the dealers can hook up phone lines to use their credit card machines as well as call the FBI NICS hotline.

For pistols and EBR (evil black rifles), you have to follow specific regulations:

every person who agrees to transfer a pistol or semiautomatic military-style assault weapon shall report the following information in writing to the chief of police of the organized full-time police department of the municipality where the proposed transferee resides or to the appropriate county sheriff if there is no such local chief of police:
(1) the name, residence, telephone number, and driver's license number or nonqualification certificate number, if any, of the proposed transferee;
(2) the sex, date of birth, height, weight, and color of eyes, and distinguishing physical characteristics, if any, of the proposed transferee;
(3) a statement that the proposed transferee authorizes the release to the local police authority of commitment information about the proposed transferee maintained by the commissioner of human services, to the extent that the information relates to the proposed transferee's eligibility to possess a pistol or semiautomatic military-style assault weapon under section 624.713, subdivision 1;
(4) a statement by the proposed transferee that the transferee is not prohibited by section 624.713 from possessing a pistol or semiautomatic military-style assault weapon; and
(5) the address of the place of business of the transferor.

https://www.revisor.leg.state.mn.us/sta ... d=624.7132

Here is a brief synopsis of Minnesota's gun laws:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gun_laws_in_Minnesota

So, you tell me where the gun show loophole is?

However, anti-gun people whose only intention is to have more laws passed and all guns banned will continue to lie about the "gun show loophole" to further their agenda. You have to understand that some people in the US have a lot more leisure time and money than they know what to do with. Some of them will pick up a cause and will pursue it with everything they have. They believe they are "doing good". Pretty soon it becomes a like a religion and nothing you can say will change their mind. You can show them the law in writing and they won't believe you. Then there are the professional charlatans who prey on their fears and egg them on, usually making a lot of money in the process.

[Hammerhead]

Only 'A Good Guy With A Gun' Can Stop School Shootings, NRA Says

by Mark Memmott
December 21, 2012 10:45 AM

Saying that last week's mass shooting at an elementary school in Newtown, Conn., could have been prevented or stopped if there had been armed, trained security personnel on site, officials of the National Rifle Association on Friday called for Congress to appropriate funds to put police officers in every American school.

"The only thing that stops a bad guy with a gun is a good guy with a gun," said Wayne LaPierre, NRA's executive vice president.

The NRA also said it is launching a "National School Shield" training program to help — at no cost — schools train security personnel and develop security plans.

And, NRA officials blamed the news media for focusing on what they view as the wrong issue — guns — rather than violent video games and the nation's mental health care programs.

The event was briefly interrupted twice by individuals who stood up with banners and shouted that the NRA has "blood on its hands" and is "killing our kids."

It was the organization's first lengthy response to the attack that left 20 school children and six adults dead at Newtown's Sandy Hook Elementary School, which has reignited a national debate over whether gun laws need to be tightened. LaPierre and others who spoke gave no indication they favor any such actions.
w.w.npr.org/blogs/thetwo-way/2012/12/21/167785169/live-blog-nra-news-conference
We posted updates as the NRA's news conference in Washington happened. Scroll down to see the highlights.

____________________________

Full coverage but it's lenthy 13 page so I'm posting the link only.

[mundaire]

Arien73, I just noticed that for someone who is against semi-autos you have posted here about owning at least 2 semi-auto shotguns (one bought fairly recently). So are you going to be giving up your guns as well, you know... just so as not to sound like a hypocrite?

Anyhow, thanks for engendering a lively discussion...

Cheers!
Abhijeet

[shooter]

Note to self: write a detailed reply this weekend.

[Hammerhead]

Civilians do not need to have assault rifles.

Now what you think i am a criminals if i own this?? Stop me if you can to own this.

[ Image ]


Baljit

Baljit's rifle .....


And watch this ......
Quite old but they are not NRA members.
[youtube][/youtube]

[Moin.]

Thanks XL and Timmy for the enligtening posts and a very mature view on the subject. Read extensively yesterday on the links you posted and one of the clauses was back ground checks for criminal records and mental illness before the purchase of firearms in gun shows. Read because there would be some substance in someone like Obama supporting this inspite of the powerful NRA lobby in the US, and Barrack Obama's no George Bush...
Thanks for your respective posts..


Regards
Moin

Ok, Lets talk about the supposed "gun show loophole". Once again, I am talking about specific Minnesota laws as I am most familiar with them. Most states have similar laws

What is a typical gun show? Usually a gun club or other gun related organization will rent a venue and hold a gun show. Tables are sold at these places and can be bought by anyone. Not all the tables sell guns. Some sell trinkets and collectibles like civil war memorabilia or war medals or military surplus items. Some sell accessories like clothes, magazines, ammunition, etc. The law says that an individual can sell guns from his personal collection. However if you make a regular habit of selling guns, you have to get a dealers license. So if you do more than move a few long guns now and then and don't have a license, expect a visit from a BATFE team. A conviction for breaking a gun law is usually a felony and you will lose the ability to possess firearms. Most firearms enthusiasts are not willing to risk that. The law also says that you can transfer a rifle or shotgun in a face to face transaction if you have knowledge that the purchaser doesn't intend to use the gun in any crime. Most people selling guns at these shows are dealers and have to follow the laws (which I outlined in an earlier post ) which means background checks and the whole works. They have phone lines at these guns shows so the dealers can hook up phone lines to use their credit card machines as well as call the FBI NICS hotline.

For pistols and EBR (evil black rifles), you have to follow specific regulations:

every person who agrees to transfer a pistol or semiautomatic military-style assault weapon shall report the following information in writing to the chief of police of the organized full-time police department of the municipality where the proposed transferee resides or to the appropriate county sheriff if there is no such local chief of police:
(1) the name, residence, telephone number, and driver's license number or nonqualification certificate number, if any, of the proposed transferee;
(2) the sex, date of birth, height, weight, and color of eyes, and distinguishing physical characteristics, if any, of the proposed transferee;
(3) a statement that the proposed transferee authorizes the release to the local police authority of commitment information about the proposed transferee maintained by the commissioner of human services, to the extent that the information relates to the proposed transferee's eligibility to possess a pistol or semiautomatic military-style assault weapon under section 624.713, subdivision 1;
(4) a statement by the proposed transferee that the transferee is not prohibited by section 624.713 from possessing a pistol or semiautomatic military-style assault weapon; and
(5) the address of the place of business of the transferor.

https://www.revisor.leg.state.mn.us/sta ... d=624.7132

Here is a brief synopsis of Minnesota's gun laws:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gun_laws_in_Minnesota

So, you tell me where the gun show loophole is?

However, anti-gun people whose only intention is to have more laws passed and all guns banned will continue to lie about the "gun show loophole" to further their agenda. You have to understand that some people in the US have a lot more leisure time and money than they know what to do with. Some of them will pick up a cause and will pursue it with everything they have. They believe they are "doing good". Pretty soon it becomes a like a religion and nothing you can say will change their mind. You can show them the law in writing and they won't believe you. Then there are the professional charlatans who prey on their fears and egg them on, usually making a lot of money in the process.

Thanks Xl, really for the detailed post and the reading material. How come this is not mentioned on any CNN, BBC or Wiki for that matter. I had seen Bowling for Columbine by Micheal Moore and I admit lot of it did make sense. How can one not be moved when one hears of such ghastly acts and such innocents loosing their lives in such a manner. Again maybe it's a flawed law and order situation or an incorrect upbringing or irresponsible ownership of something that can be so deadly. Don't know and worng of me to judge. You people there know your situation and are the best judge of what is right and what is wrong. Others like me can only speculate after what is shown in the media and what is available to read on the internet. To each his own I guess.

Regards
Moin

[nagarifle]

i have been a short while on this planet and i have found one thing! it does not matter how much facts one gives to someone if they blindly refuse to believe them then one can not do any thing.

[timmy]

For Moin:

Moin, what exactly does Michael Moore say is the problem? And what does he say regarding solutions that can fix the problem?

For one thing, he notes that European countries watch the same violent movies that we do, but they don't have the violent crime that the USA does.

Well, North Dakota has more guns per capita than any other state in the USA, and has the lowest gun violence of any state.

So, if Moore is saying that movies don't incite gun violence, by the same logic, I can say that guns don't either, can't I?

Look, anyone can cite facts. to determine the cause of this sort of thing could take a thousand psychologists a hundred years, and it's likely that the results of such studies would still only be partial. So, is the answer to collect all the guns and then sort out the underlying causes? Even when we know that the previous 10 year ban on so called "assault rifles" didn't do one thing to lower gun violence?

Personally, having had the education and a tiny experience at a low rung of scientific research (yes, I am a published author), i want something scientifically established before I'm ready to agree to the curtailing of rights.

Look, as old as I am, I can still learn: After 9/11 here, I was mad as anyone and ready to lay waste to nations to punish those responsible. So for one thing, I have learned to be ashamed of that attitude. Then, We had a leader who swore on a stack of Bibles and had many of his people, some of who were respectable, supporting him, tell me that a certain leader had weapons of mass destruction and had to be "taken out." I believed my leader and supported his policy. Lesson Two: i'm sure ashamed of that decision of mine.

That whole experience of the last decade has made me very reluctant to jump off and follow any quickly thought-up proposal or dusted off political position as a wise course of action. Yes, I was and still am stunned about the Connecticut events. I very much don't want it to happen again. But I'm not going to rush off in judgment toward some ill considered utopia proposed by people with agendas. I want to see some real facts and data that pertain to this issue, and I want to hear people I respect discuss them -- not the parade of political hacks, spin doctors, loony actors, and other characters making a living by promoting the fears of others.

That's what I've learned.

So what does Moore propose to do, exactly? I haven't yet heard a credible response to this question, personally.

Nor has anyone been able to persuade me that we have an underlying cultural problem of violence in the USA. If I am right, eliminating this problem runs much deeper than collecting guns.

To many other here:

If some others had come in and espoused gun control measures, I might have had a different reaction. But Moin and Bowman are IFG brothers -- we all know them. Personally, I feel they have earned the right to speak their peace here.

Also, consider this: Isn't it normal that, after such a disaster, we would all have some reflection and go back to question our assumptions? I know I did. I thought, what should I believe, what do I know, and what makes sense? I needed some time to let the emotional reaction settle and think clearly about facts, and not be clouded by anger and revenge, both of which are very poor concepts upon which to base public policy. (Remember, RKBA is public policy -- that's why we are here!)

So, I'm not the least concerned that Moin and Bowman should have taken the views they did. Let's turn the mirror around and face it back at ourselves: If we cannot talk reasonably and civilly with our two IFG brothers, how on earth will we ever convince someone who is skeptical about gun rights, or even outright hostile?

No brothers, I realize that this is an emotional subject for all of us, both the issue of guns and the event in Connecticut. What do our posts in this thread say about us as RKBA supporters, and the likelihood that we can win the battle for hearts and minds of the public? Especially when we look at how we've handled the job with our own two members?

I do not mean this to sound harsh, to challenge any individual, or even say that anyone here was out of line. I do hope, however, that we can think about what we really want to happen regarding RKBA and reexamine if we are doing our best to bring what we want to pass.

And finally, to you Moin and Bowman, my respects to you. I appreciate the fact that you are willing to think and rethink your positions, and thus make the comments you have made. I cannot say that I share your positions, but this whole issue of so-called "assault weapons" seems a bit removed from the problem of getting a decent and affordable handgun into women's purses and businessmen's waistbands, along with enough ammo to practice with.

Or to put it another way, I don't agree with the Australian policy of banning private semiautomatic rifles for private citizens, but if I could wave a magic wand and bring the same rights Australians enjoy to Indians, that would be something to celebrate, not mourn.

(Then on the morning after, it would be time to begin the work to gain the rest of the rights! )