Newtown, Conn

Quote: Face

Even if you could eradicate all 10+ round clips, even if you could prevent the further manufacturing of them, even if you could wave a magic wand and prevent anyone from owning more than one, ten round clip, is the slaughtering of 10, 5, or even 1 child acceptable?

Obviously not. No amount of stolen innocence should be tolerated. And to think we as a society can eliminate violence is delusional, I realize that. But, if we can take measures to reduce the opportunities for violence, then we have an obligation to our kids and each other do to so. I'm not for big govenment, if someone wants to fuck up their own lives, I say let them. I never understand why we throw tax money at issues that are really self inflicted. But when it comes to these weapons that create so much devestation for innocent people, we have to do better.

There isn't a magic wand or a magic answer, but we have to try. Throwing our hand up in the air and saying that we can't solve the issue because it's a fucked up world doesn't feel right. Gun control by itself doesn't address this complex issue by itself, but it's part of it IMO.

As far as how to limit these type of destructive weapons, some ideas off the top of my head are:

1) Prohibit new sales of weapons that can fire more than X rounds without re-loading
2) Put regulations in place to force gun manufactures create a more lengthy re-loading process
3) Govenment buy-backs on those type of weapons that are outside these guidelines (this would be difficult, as I'm sure the black market would certainly offer more)
4) Make more types of weapons illegal
5) We need to actually ENFORCE the laws we already have in place (like owning unregistered guns) and those that may come about as a result of new legisislation.
6) Create a more stringent compentency test (with background checks and mental evaluations) in order to purchase or own the more destructive weapons.

These are idea off the top of my head and some may not make sense, but I think it foolish to discard any idea at this point until it can be explored and it's proven that it wouldn't address the issue. Also, let me be clear, I'm not anti-gun, I'm anti-senseless violence and unfortunately, guns seem to be a common denominator in most of the mass murders we see in society anymore.

Quote: Ayecarumba

Drunk driving in the U.S. kills way more children every month, but you don't hear a call for banning cars.

Not even close to a good analogy. Automobiles are an essential and necessary part of today's society. Semi-automatic weapons are not.

Quote: MidwestAP

6) Create a more stringent compentency test (with background checks and mental evaluations) in order to purchase or own the more destructive weapons.

The testing thing is kind of interesting, because conceivably, any test requiring cognition can foil people in certain states of mental illness. It doesn't really matter what the test is about either. Proving that you're in a normal state of mind, and able to induce, deduce logical answers to simple questions would keep some of the people in semi-delusional states from at least purchasing a gun while unstable at least.

For instance, in some cases the same questions will be answered differently minutes later if they appear again. Such tests could be a red flag.

Quote: MidwestAP

... Automobiles are an essential and necessary part of today's society...

And so is alcohol? It is not the cars that are killing the children, it's the drunks.

It was a senseless tragedy for sure, and I am in no way trying to minimize the pain and suffering going on in Newton. But drone strikes in Pakistan and Yemen have claimed eight times as much young life as the Connecticut shooting.

If you're not enraged on a weekly or daily basis, you're not paying attention.

If Yemen or Pakistan let us use swat teams in their country, we could avoid that. Or they could just arrest them after we pointed out the wanted terrorist by their army base or police station.

Clearly, what we need is more guns. If those first graders were allowed to carry handguns to defend themselves, none of this would have happened! Another thing, we should immediately drop the ban on guns from airplanes and the halls of Congress.

What could possibly go wrong?

Quote: s2dbaker

drop the ban on guns from airplanes and the halls of Congress.

Suffice to say, for some people, a hail of bullets in Congresss would cause an improvement.

A hot topic issue with opposing viewpoints and nobody's calling each other names yet? I thought this was the internet? ;)

But seriously, it's nice. With that in mind, I'm going to pick at your solutions, not simply to argue, but to encourage further thinking on the matter.

Quote: MidwestAP

1) Prohibit new sales of weapons that can fire more than X rounds without re-loading
2) Put regulations in place to force gun manufactures create a more lengthy re-loading process
3) Govenment buy-backs on those type of weapons that are outside these guidelines (this would be difficult, as I'm sure the black market would certainly offer more)
4) Make more types of weapons illegal
5) We need to actually ENFORCE the laws we already have in place (like owning unregistered guns) and those that may come about as a result of new legisislation.
6) Create a more stringent compentency test (with background checks and mental evaluations) in order to purchase or own the more destructive weapons.

1&2) The time it would take for this to have an effect would be >100 years. I was just saying in "Firearms With Face" that there are plenty of WWI and WWII era guns still for sale to this very day at rock bottom prices. Stop production now and the effect wouldn't be noticed until well after our children are dead and gone.

3) If the Gov had the money to do this, they'd have to 1) buy at a price equal or greater to what someone could get in a P2P sale, and 2) have a willing public. With so many pro-gun'ers out there who would know what would happen to said guns, I don't think it'd have much support.

4) Very simple - Only the lawful obey laws. Additionally, banning certain types doesn't fix the problem. I'm not a criminal nor do I have criminal contacts. But I could, within two weeks, maybe a month at the most, turn my Del-Ton (a perfectly legal rifle) into a 30+ round, fully automatic, collapsable stocked, thread barreled, suppressed assault rifle shooting armor piercing rounds. All of the above features are currently illegal in NYS. Really crank down on the laws, and the only one I might have difficulty in getting is the AP rounds.

5) I own unregistered guns, all perfectly legal and in one of the least gun friendly states in the nation. My handguns must be registered, and if they weren't, I'd be in some seriously deep shit. No "turn a blind eye" on that. To enact such a law is something I would resist with all my will. Pros - ??? Cons - Increased blackmarket for "untracable" guns. Increased theft of legal guns. No prevention of atrocities would be gained. No increased apprehension, since damn near all of these incidents end with the shooter dying, either by his own gun or the police's. And the biggie, every single society whose government banned guns used these lists for confiscation.

6) Here may be something. I think education is the best start for a great number of our ills, and the courses required, even here in the "People's Republic", are completely laughable. My only issue with this is that this is the government we're talking about. I'm not entirely copmfortable giving them any more power whatsoever and worry that this will eventually be used not to make a bunch of serious, knowledgeable gun owners, but as another tool of restriction. Even if I could get passed that, this is the Government we're talking about. You know they'd find a way to screw it up.

I think I've come up with an idea.

As of 2015, all commericially available guns manufactured legally in the U.S. must have a gross bulk weight of not less than 80lbs or more. The weight must be evenly distributed through all the gun parts in all heavy metal or heavy alloy.

Have fun modifying those.