Gun Control…do you support it?

Since I know we have some left leaning friends on here (and God bless you guys) I thought I’d try and start up a provocative debate (my favorite kind) on something near and dear to my heart….gun control.

Given the upcoming Presidential election in which Obama is an avowed gun control guy (though he’s been largely quiet on it legislatively) and the recent scandal with Fast and Furious…I thought this was appropriate

Rather than just throwing this out there willy nilly I thought I’d try and focus the comments by asking some questions on it.

1.) Do you believe the 2nd amendment applies to the private ownership of firearms?

2.) Do you believe cities and states should be allowed to pass their own laws on this matter as they see fit?

3.) Do you believe that the private ownership of firearms should be limited to sporting purposes only or should firearms be allowed to be owned for purposes of self defense?

4.) Do you believe that what the media terms “assault rifles” should be allowed for private ownership (semi-automatic) AK47s, AR15s, M1A, Mini 14s, Galils, etc.

5.) Do you believe availability of guns have a direct correlation on violent crimes and homicide rates and if so…how?

6.) Finally, do you own any firearms and/or shoot? Have you ever fired a fire arm?

My stance on gun control? I support it...you should always hit what you're aiming at

 

1.) Do you believe the 2nd amendment applies to the private ownership of firearms? - Yes. You have to twist logic and reason a bit to reach any other conclusion.

2.) Do you believe cities and states should be allowed to pass their own laws on this matter as they see fit? Yes.

3.) Do you believe that the private ownership of firearms should be limited to sporting purposes only or should firearms be allowed to be owned for purposes of self defense? The evidence is overwhelming that firearms can be used to succesfully defend the home and family. Sport, self defense, I think they are all valid for gun ownership.

4.) Do you believe that what the media terms “assault rifles” should be allowed for private ownership (semi-automatic) AK47s, AR15s, M1A, Mini 14s, Galils, etc. Yes. The media are utterly stupid and clueless when it comes to firearms.

5.) Do you believe availability of guns have a direct correlation on violent crimes and homicide rates and if so…how? I'd have to look at more scholarship to make an informed opinion. My guess is more guns for private owners would mean less violent crime. Look at this past year and a half with the mobs of NAM's attacking white people in various areas of the country. Not many happened in gun friendly areas. There have been more deaths this past 4 months in the OWS movements than there have been all year at guns shows and gun rights activist meetings.

6.) Finally, do you own any firearms and/or shoot? Have you ever fired a fire arm? I own two firearms. A Ruger 10/22 rifle and a Walther P22 pistol. I shoot both regularly with my two older boys. Ages 11 and 7. They have each been shooting since they were five. As a former Machinegunner in the Marine Corps I have fired everything from the 9MM Beretta to an M16/M4, M249 SAW, M249G, MK-19 and the .50 Cal (and the .50cal sniper rifle).

This discussion will not end well. So, I will put up my favorite post against people who favor gun control.

The author nails it, especially the last sentence which I bolded.

The Anti-Gun Male" by Julia Gorin

LET'S be honest. He's scared of the thing. That's understandable -- so am I. But as a girl I have the luxury of being able to admit it. I don't have to masquerade squeamishness as grand principle-in the interest of mankind, no less.

A man does. He has to say things like "One Taniqua Hall is one too many," as a New York radio talk show host did in referring to the 9-year old New York girl who was accidentally shot last year by her 12-year old cousin playing with his uncle's gun. But the truth is he desperately needs Taniqua Hall, just like he needs as many Columbines and Santees as can be mustered, until they spell an end to the Second Amendment. And not for the benefit of the masses, but for the benefit of his self-esteem.

He often accuses men with guns of "compensating for something." The truth is quite the reverse. After all, how is he supposed to feel knowing there are men out there who aren't intimidated by the big bad inanimate villain? How is he to feel in the face of adolescent boys who have used the family gun effectively in defending the family from an armed intruder? So if he can't touch a gun, he doesn't want other men to be able to either. And to achieve his ends, he'll use the only weapon he knows how to manipulate: the law.

Of course, sexual and psychological insecurities don't account for ALL men against guns. Certainly there must be some whose motives are pure, who perhaps do care so much as to tirelessly look for policy solutions to teenage void and aggressiveness, and to parent and teacher negligence. But for a potentially large underlying contributor, psycho-sexual inadequacy has gone unexplored and unacknowledged. It's one thing to not be comfortable with a firearm and therefore opt to not keep or bear one. But it's another to impose the same handicap onto others.

People are suspicious of what they do not know -- and not only does this man not know how to use a gun, he doesn't know the men who do, or the number of people who have successfully used one to defend themselves from injury or death. But he is better left in the dark; his life is hard enough knowing there are men out there who don't sit cross-legged. That they're able to handle a firearm instead of being handled by it would be too much to bear.

Such a man is also best kept huddled in urban centers, where he feels safer than he might if thrown out on his own into a rural setting, in an isolated house on a quiet street where he would feel naked and helpless. Lacking the confidence that would permit him to be sequestered in sparseness, and lacking a gun, he finds comfort in the cloister of crowds.

The very ownership of a gun for defense of home and family implies some assertiveness and certain self-reliance. But if our man kept a gun in the house, and an intruder broke in and started attacking his wife in front of him, he wouldn't be able to later say, "He had a knife -- there was nothing I could do!" Passively watching in horror while already trying to make peace with the violent act, scheduling a therapy session and forgiving the perpetrator before the attack is even finished wouldn't be the option it otherwise is.

No. Better to emasculate all men. Because let's face it: He's a lover, not a fighter. And he doesn't want to get shot in case he has an affair with your wife.

Of course, it wouldn't be completely honest not to admit that owning a firearm carries with it some risk to unintended targets. That's the trade off with a gun: The right to defend one's life and way of life isn't without peril to oneself. And the last thing this man wants to do is risk his life -- if even to save it. For he is guided by a dread fear for his life, and has more confidence in almost anyone else's ability to protect him than his own, preferring to place himself at the mercy of the villain or in the sporadically competent hands of authorities (his line of defense consisting of locks, alarm systems, reasoning with the attacker, calling the police or, should fighting back occur to him, thrashing a heavy vase).

In short, he is a man begging for subjugation. He longs for its promise of equality in helplessness. Because only when that strange, independent alpha breed of male is helpless along with him will he feel adequate. Indeed, his freedom lies in this other man's containment."

 

I definitely want to learn to control my gun.:lol:

 

1.) Do you believe the 2nd amendment applies to the private ownership of firearms?
Yes, but I don't think this was at the heart of the intent of the 2nd amendment. The amendment specifically invokes the need for a militia as the basis for right, but the text does explicitly state that the right to bear arms shall not be infringed. I would therefore say that it does apply, even if the original intent was in the context of a militia.

2.) Do you believe cities and states should be allowed to pass their own laws on this matter as they see fit?

No. They are restricted by the 2nd Amendment. I think they are free to regulate possession as long as it does not materially infringe the right to bear arms.

3.) Do you believe that the private ownership of firearms should be limited to sporting purposes only or should firearms be allowed to be owned for purposes of self defense?

If guns are permitted, they should be allowed for self-defense along with sporting purposes. I think this is implied in the 2nd Amendment (militias weren't for hunting, you know!).

4.) Do you believe that what the media terms “assault rifles” should be allowed for private ownership (semi-automatic) AK47s, AR15s, M1A, Mini 14s, Galils, etc.

IMO, I don't think it is an infringement of the 2nd Amendment to ban automatic and some semi-automatic weapons. The 2nd Amendment provision was enacted in a time of simple sidearms and muskets, and I think it is wise not to permit guns other than non-automatic rifles, sidearms, and shotguns.

5.) Do you believe availability of guns have a direct correlation on violent crimes and homicide rates and if so…how?

I'm not perfectly familiar with the literature, but I do not think that having guns all around necessarily makes anyone safer. It's a bit like the Mutually Assured Destruction theory of nuclear weapons. It works until you get someone crazy. And criminals in general aren't known for their sanity.

6.) Finally, do you own any firearms and/or shoot? Have you ever fired a fire arm?

I do not own any guns. I have fired guns before.

 

1.) Do you believe the 2nd amendment applies to the private ownership of firearms?

I believe that the 2nd amendment applied to the right to bear arms privately for the purpose of having a well-prepared militia. The amendment is outdated as the federal government has since fielded a well-regimented military. The argument as to whether or not people should be allowed to own firearms in the United States needs to be held while taking the 2nd amendment out of the discussion. It's a herring.

2.) Do you believe cities and states should be allowed to pass their own laws on this matter as they see fit?

They already do. Local Police Chiefs can refuse to sign firearms ID cards and licenses as they see fit. The state of Massachusetts disallows certain firearms made by certain manufacturers in certain year ranges. Meanwhile I can go down to Texas or Arizona and buy an AS50 long-range interdiction system.

3.) Do you believe that the private ownership of firearms should be limited to sporting purposes only or should firearms be allowed to be owned for purposes of self defense?

Guns that are owned for sporting purposes still fire when aimed at an assailant. Again, a silly premise pushed by litigators and the NRA.

4.) Do you believe that what the media terms “assault rifles” should be allowed for private ownership (semi-automatic) AK47s, AR15s, M1A, Mini 14s, Galils, etc.

Does it matter if I'm shot by a 9mm, 7.62mm or a 5.67mm round? If I'm shot once in the face does it matter if I'm shot three times in the face? How about full auto? Sure there's an escalation of risk in collateral damage and multiple targets, but 10 lives are not more valuable than one life.

Now I realize there's tactical considerations in terms of how LEOs are equipped and the risk to the patrol officer is increased when an automatic weapon is suddenly in play. However, I'm not too sold on police officers only being equipped with a sidearm either. When I was rolling jumpers I routinely carried a shotgun or AR

5.) Do you believe availability of guns have a direct correlation on violent crimes and homicide rates and if so…how?

I think that guns exist to kill. I think that killing has been happening since the dawn of time. If I carry any sort of weapon the risk of fatal injury given an altercation sky rockets. I'd love to see a comparative study between people with guns killing people vs. people with spears killing people and do the regression. I'd be willing to bet that people with spears sticking them in fatal places kill people at the same rate as people with guns pointing them in fatal places.

No one threatens you with a weapon in a non-lethal way.


6.) Finally, do you own any firearms and/or shoot? Have you ever fired a fire arm?

Yes, often and more than a few different types. Most of the cool stuff has been done in Texas or Arizona, though the SIG range in Epping is becoming a personal favorite.

My stance on gun control? I support it...you should always hit what you're aiming at

My stance is that if you're going to allow firearms to the population, there should be some sort of mandatory military service for those that choose to own, whether that's actual military, LEO, federal service or some other service for the common good of the city or town you live in. Especially if the 2nd amendment is going to be bandied around like a french whore every time the topic comes up.

Standard firearms safety courses are great and the range instructors teaching them are fantastic, but with the current law you do more work to get a learners permit and drivers license than you do to get a FID and buy a gun.

 

1.) Do you believe the 2nd amendment applies to the private ownership of firearms?

Absolutely. No one has ever managed to explain to me why the other 9 Amendments in the Bill of Rights apply to the citizens, but just the 2nd applies to the government.

2.) Do you believe cities and states should be allowed to pass their own laws on this matter as they see fit?

I think they can (and should) pass reasonable laws concerning gun permits; if you're 21+, no extensive criminal record or felony convictions, no history of mental illness or drug abuse, you get issued a concealed carry permit, no questions asked.

3.) Do you believe that the private ownership of firearms should be limited to sporting purposes only or should firearms be allowed to be owned for purposes of self defense?

Both; as the traditional saying goes, the 2nd Amendment isn't about duck hunting.

4.) Do you believe that what the media terms “assault rifles” should be allowed for private ownership (semi-automatic) AK47s, AR15s, M1A, Mini 14s, Galils, etc.

Absolutely. One of the 2nd Amendment safeguards is the right of the citizens to rebel against a tyrannical government, and you don't do that with bolt-action rifles. Some try the cutesy argument of "Well, when the 2nd Amendment was written, everyone had flintlock muzzle-loaders, so that's all the people should be able to have under the Amendment". My response to that is, "Fine, as long as the media can only use hand-cranked printing presses; no telephones, Internet, or fax machines, because those weren't around when the 1st Amendment was written".

5.) Do you believe availability of guns have a direct correlation on violent crimes and homicide rates and if so…how?

Yes....in EVERY state that has adopted "shall issue" gun permits (see my criteria in Question 2), violent crime has dropped dramatically. Read this excellent article from the Journal of Criminal Justice and Criminology;

Armed Resistance to Crime: The Prevalence and Nature of Self-Defense with a Gun

6.) Finally, do you own any firearms and/or shoot? Have you ever fired a fire arm?

Well, I would hope so! :cool2:

I'm not a collector, and every gun I own serves a purpose; in addition to my issued SIG-Sauer P-220 .45 pistol, I have a Glock 26 9mm for off-duty carry, a S&W Model 10 .38 Special revolver that was my first issued police gun (and is now my wife's "house gun" that she is a very good shot with), a S&W Model 29 .44 Magnum revolver for hunting, a Ruger Model 77 .30-06 bolt-action for hunting, a Winchester Model 70 .270 Winchester bolt-action for hunting, a Colt AR-15 that I bought the day before the federal assault weapons ban (as an EFF YOU to Congress), and a Romanian AK-47 I bought the day before the Massachusetts assault weapons ban (as an EFF YOU to the Legislature).

Penn & Teller did a great episode on gun control that sums up my feelings nicely;

http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=ec7_1251312990

 

I was going to post a lengthy response.....but Bruce pretty much stole my thunder. Bruce I didn't know there where any guys like you left in Massachusetts!

The only exception I would have is under question #2. The amendment states "the right to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed". To me this makes that right the supreme law of the land and overrides State and Local interpretation. At the same time I do understand the regulations intended to keep weapons out of the hands of the mentally unstable. But I find that to be a rather slippery slope as well. I suppose I am somewhat conflicted on the topic.

Also #6 would be different for me. I have quite a few firearms. Probably enough to arm a good portion of the forum members if FEMA tries to inter us in those camps!!!

 

@Cory…wow, Julia Gorin has a low opinion of anti-gun males that borderlines psychosis that is unless this was written somewhat sarcastically (which I assume it was). Great stuff.

@Stefan and @ITJD, the 2nd Amendment does specifically invoke the need for a militia. I do not want to assume you were born in the United States (I wasn’t) and are a citizen (though I am that) but when I turned 18 I remember being told I had to register with the Selective Service in the case of a draft. I also remember picking up the form at the Post Office, filling it out and mailing it in. That my friend made me a part of the U.S. militia as at that point I became one of “…whole body of able-bodied male citizens declared by law as being subject to call to military service…” (Mirriam-Webster). If I were drafted and did not show up they’d send the military police to arrest me as I would fall under their jurisdiction at that time. So the 2nd Amendment is very applicable in this instance . Now whether women should be required to register for the Selective Service, that’s debatable I suppose. A discussion on firearms ownership without discussing the 2nd Amendment implies that the government has granted that right and therefore stands to remove it any time they see fit, which is not part of our social contract with our government.

Also @ITJD, firearms for sporting purposes are still permissible in gun controlled nations like the UK. These are heavily regulated and are NOT to be used for the purposes of self-defense. For example a 28 inch barrel 28 gauge with bird shot is not necessarily up to the job of defending one’s home though it can be marshaled for that purpose if no other alternative exists. There has been case law however where amnesty was granted to a burglar if he would testify against a home owner for murder charges because the home owner shot and killed his partner in crime. So we’re really not simply discussing the applicability of the weapon but in how the law views and reacts to its use for self-defense.

Also @ITJD, most police departments I know of now issue long guns 12ga. AR15, etc. I’m not sure how it is on the East Coast like in New York City but even federal agencies get long guns. For example my department had AR15s, MP5s and Remington 870 12ga’s to select from in addition to our side arms. If nothing else the police should be able to supply their own.

 

We're very much in the minority, believe me, but our numbers are growing;

Gun Owners' Action League - GOAL.org - "Protecting Your Freedom Begins Here"

I think there has to be reasonable restrictions on firearms purchases; I don't think the criteria I outlined in my original response are too out of line, and are pretty much standard for all of the "shall issue" states. As long as you meet that very basic criteria, the discretion of the licensing authority (police chief, sheriff, etc.) should be removed from the equation.

Many people seem to forget that by definition, "law-abiding citizens" (those who will comply with licensing requirements) obey the law. I believe the exact statistic is in the Kleck & Gertz article I cited above, but after Florida instituted "shall issue" legislation, something like 1/10th of 1% of all gun permits issued were later revoked for alleged criminal activity. I'm in my 24th year as a police officer, and of all the guns I've seized over the years, I've taken exactly 2 licensed gun owners into custody. Notice I said "into custody", because I didn't arrest them in the criminal sense, but placed them into "protective custody" because they were drunk while carrying a gun; after they slept it off in a cell, they were released with no criminal charges;

General Laws: CHAPTER 111B, Section 8

I simply don't have the time or space to have a large collection. The Massachusetts law concerning secured firearms (which will eventually be invalidated by the D.C. vs. Heller decision) makes it a real pain in the ass; my secured area for guns is filled to the brim, otherwise I would add to my collection as I could afford it.

Our cruisers are equipped with short-barreled (15-inch) Mossberg 590 .12 gauge shotguns, loaded with slugs, mounted above the head rests. We have Army-surplus M16-A1 rifles available, but only for those who are "certified", and there's no OT money to certify anyone else right now.

So, someone who went through a 4-hour orientation/qualification with the M16 is certified to carry one, while I am not, even though I literally slept with one for years and qualified countless times in the United States Army/National Guard.

 

Gun control sounds good in theory, but it doesn't work. It's similar to merit pay for teachers: it sounds good in theory, but when it's applied, it doesn't work.

 

I can't believe they have you guys using surplus weaons...WTF? And M16A1s at that? They couldn't even spring for the decidedly better A2 design? With a 20 inch barrel those things would be a PIA in a building search anyway so they might actually be doing you a favor. Surplus ARs and M16s tend to be cobbled together with leftover parts by a bored 19 year old armorer.

Anyhow you would think logically anyone with military experience would be allowed to carry one but urban rifle techniques being what they are and lawsuits being what they are...I guess I could see the CYA logic behind it. Even still they should get you guys some 14 or 16 inch barrel M4s or AR15s to say the least. Sheesh.

 

We got them totally free, we just had to send people down to Fort Dix to pick them up, which was very attractive to our pathologically penny-pinching chief at the time (he regularly returned millions of unspent dollars to the city treasury every year). Apparently, the military would rather donate them to law enforcement agencies than have to destroy them, since as Class III weapons, they're not eligible for civilian sale.

I looked some of them over (even though I can't carry one on-duty ), and they're all late production A1's in pretty decent condition. We also haven't had any stoppages or failure to fire incidents in any of the orientation/qualification sessions.

 

That's good to hear. I know my agency melted down hundreds of .38 revolvers and some of the most beautiful short barreled (20 inch) Remington 1100 automatics you've ever seen and a pile of original Tommy Guns. It was heart breaking really. Our Chicago office managed to save 3 Tommy Guns and they still shoot them. Talk about a riot.

I'm surprised the M16s were still in good shape after seeing some of the rat trap weapons issued to some of the active duty Air Force guys. Maybe the Army just gets the better goodies. As for your chief returning millions back to the city and not providing patrol carbines...well my mother said I shouldn't say anything if I can't say anything nice. Suffice to say that's a bit irresponsible of the guy, especially if you guys have your standing SWAT team (assuming you have one) using surplus rifles.

 

We trade-in our handguns, which are turned over every 10 years. We've had SIG-Sauers since transitioning from revolvers, and they always give a generous trade-in allowance, since they can re-sell them for a very nice price. We have the option of buying them ourselves, but I already have my first police gun (the Model 10 revolver), so I never have.

We also had Tommy guns for years, and we even had a Lewis machine gun in the armory forever, since no one knew what to do with it (I think it was eventually donated to a museum).

The Air Force has always lagged behind in weapon usage, considering they don't have any front-line ground combat units, and they used M16's (the original version, with the 3-prong flash suppressor and no forward assist) for many years, and may still use them.

We don't have a "SWAT" team (bad, mean, offensive word!!), we have a "response team", all of whom are certified on the rifles. I told the PTB that I would supply my own ammunition and get certified on my own time, but I'm not in the Cool Guy Club, so that was a no-go.

 

I'm not sure about the rest of the AF, but in my little Air Guard unit we have the A2. They are not issued to us we only check one out from the armory when it is time to qualify (every three years or so).

I'd like to shoot a tommy gun though.

 

Sounds about right, since the AF always seems to be a step behind the Army (which issues the M4 and M16A3 now) as far as shoulder weapons.

It's VERY sweet.....the entire receiver is a single block of milled steel, which weighs a ton, but that results in almost no recoil whatsoever. You can empty an entire 50-round drum into a target with no muzzle climb.

 

No kidding, a Tommy Gun with a 100 round drum must weigh 50 lbs. There's no way those were carried in an instrument case unless that handle was seriously reinforced.

 

Yes.

I own a 38 S&W, and I think I should master how to use it while learning the safety precautions associated with it. After all, it is a lethal weapon is it not?

Abner

 

Yes it is...you should take a basic handgunning class, it's money well spent if you do.

 

Oh yeah, I carried my S&W Model 10 for 5 years in the housing projects of Boston and never felt like I was outgunned.

The most effective .38 Special round for self-defense is the 158 grain +P lead hollow point;

66333 - Ammo .38 Special +P Remington Express Lead Hollow Point 158 Grain 890 fps 50 Round Box