The Gun debate sandbox

Search
Go

Discussion Topic

Return to Forum List
Post a Reply
Messages 5421 - 5440 of total 5973 in this topic << First  |  < Previous  |  Show All  |  Next >  |  Last >>
madbolter1

Big Wall climber
Denver, CO
Jul 16, 2014 - 12:55pm PT
Thank you, couchmaster, and I also entirely agree with the "backstop" idea.

Of course, that gets Americans at most gun OWNERSHIP. It cannot ground the right of carry in public. On that note, this sentiment is very well-founded!

I too worry about the abstract threat of a government takeover more than the day to day reality if gun violence.

Dirtbag rightly notes that the right of ownership as "backstop" doesn't motivate the right of carry, which in the minds of many is synonymous with the "epidemic of gun violence."

Only the inalienable right of self defense (which government neither grants nor can take away) can ground the right of carry.

However, as with all rights, the government IS within ITS rights to regulate that right in such a way as to balance the inalienable right with the public welfare.

As I've argued repeatedly, I don't believe that there IS any "epidemic of gun violence" that needs huge steps and federal laws to "balance."

However, that said, I DO think that getting a carry license should be harder than it is. To whit....

My wife and I are finishing our CCW course tonight. Last night we spent hours listening to a state-licensed instructor, and I've been struck thus far by several things:

1) On the law, she is pretty clueless, which is shocking. I had hoped to gain far more knowledge than my own research has granted me. Not only does she not know as much as several of us in the class, on several important points she is outright wrong. So, she's of no legal help, and the laws MATTER!

2) This is a "basic pistol safety course" by name. It is indeed BASIC! It's virtually at the level of, "This is the muzzle, which is the end the bullet comes out of." And so on. Tonight we'll do our range test, which amounts to: "You'll need to get 80% of your shots on the paper at 15 yards." REALLY? On the paper, huh? You mean the man-sized paper?

Look, if you can't do FAR better than that, you have NO business carrying a gun in public!!! At 25 yards I can get 80% of my shots within a six-inch group, and I don't think of myself as AT ALL "good." My wife can do as well at 15 yards, and she's shot our gun during TWO sessions so far. ON THE PAPER?!??? Whaaaaatttt???

Seeing "the bar" one must get over to get a CCW in Colorado, I'm pretty appalled. Here's what it SHOULD be:

* You must have a CCW license to CARRY: open or concealed. Then your choice is tactical rather than simply that you open-carry because you can't or won't qualify for the CCW.

* The CCW should be pretty hard to get. You should be able to shoot AT LEAST as well as my wife can, and the course should include LOTS of law and tactical scenarios under the law. And the test should NOT be multiple choice with a caveat like this: "If you pass the test, it doesn't mean we'll sign off on your certificate, and if you fail the test, it doesn't mean we won't sign off on your certificate." The former should be true, but not the latter, and you SHOULD have to get at least 75% on a test like this!

* People that would moan about how this unduly raises the bar or that it will be too expensive for the "poor" to get would leave me cold. This is a DEADLY WEAPON, and you have to get over a higher bar than I've described to get a drivers license! And if you can't prioritize the time/expense to get GOOD with your gun and pay for such a certification process, you clearly are not financially responsible enough to be carrying in the first place.

* There should be mandatory insurance, such as auto insurance. When you carry, your risks of lawsuit and the need of criminal defense skyrocket! No standard policies, including "umbrella" policies cover these risks. If you are going to be a responsible carrier, you MUST be financially responsible as well.

* Finally, if the CCW bar was higher, at least like I'm describing, the cops could instantly know (as could the public) that the person they see with a gun is both COMMITTED and COMPETENT. As it stands, pretty much any goofball (and there are a couple in our class!) can get a CCW. In a "shall issue" state, the competency and responsibility bar should be MUCH higher!

Under such a model, the criminal element would already be at a legal disadvantage, which is precisely what we want to see.

So, yes, CARRY... but with competency, responsibility, and commitment. The right of self-defense CAN be balanced with the public welfare. And making such a license be "shall issue" but coupled with a quite high bar would go far toward achieving this balance.
madbolter1

Big Wall climber
Denver, CO
Jul 16, 2014 - 01:27pm PT
Yeah, well, that's why I'm not posting on the "what is mind" thread. It's impossible to have a serious, rigorous discussion without "length." And that means that the thread-attention-span is a deal-killer.

Oh well. It's there for anybody that has an attention span.
Ron Anderson

Trad climber
Relic MilkEye and grandpoobah of HBRKRNH
Jul 16, 2014 - 01:46pm PT
Back to actual gun debates:


Contrary to old Korean War complaints about the .30 cal M 1 Carbine, they are a VERY NICE shooting rifle with good ballistics. A 300 yard gun as well. The Auto ordinance model , like all others is subject to a magazine problem as many after market knock offs are flooding the market. Older GI issue used ones are getting rare as they are bought. All of my failures to feed have been due to the magazines, not the gun.

As far as mine, it will hit anything you accurately aim at - which through the flip style peep site may seem a bit inaccurate at first thought, however, IT ISNT, much to my surprise. A clay pigeon at 100 yards is EASY off hand.


All three of my brothers had training and qualifications with that gun as well as the m-16 when it came out. They all loved those .30 calibers .

110 grain bullets typically have 1900 to 1990 FPS at the muzzle while the 90 grain hollow points have a 2400 + fps at the muzzle- entering the "hot rod" categories.


The M1 carbine, still being produced today. Still with the original look , parts, and finishes. More were produced for WW11 than any other gun, including the M1 Garande .


And meanwhile, S Korea for instance is setting on warehouses full of them- made here in America, that are now banned by the feds to import back to us, and we are still making them here in the USA..


The cost of an original 1940's model can run on the beater side of 2000.00, to the cherry side of 6500.00 and upwards.


Ive never shot an animal at 300 yards let alone farther, so i do plan to get an antelope or deer with that lil rifle.


Auto Ordinance M 1 Carbine, 30.cal, 1942 version  Made in Mass. USA.
Auto Ordinance M 1 Carbine, 30.cal, 1942 version Made in Mass. USA.
Credit: Ron Anderson
Dingus Milktoast

Gym climber
Maestro, Ecosystem Ministry, Fatcrackistan
Jul 16, 2014 - 02:28pm PT
Yeah, well, that's why I'm not posting on the "what is mind" thread. It's impossible to have a serious, rigorous discussion without "length." And that means that the thread-attention-span is a deal-killer.

Thank goodness!

DMT
madbolter1

Big Wall climber
Denver, CO
Jul 16, 2014 - 02:49pm PT
You know, I don't think I've ever met you. I wonder if you'd be such an ass to my face.

Internet shots are cheap and easy. Appears to be your level.
Braunini

Big Wall climber
cupertino
Jul 16, 2014 - 02:53pm PT
ass to my face


well put
Dingus Milktoast

Gym climber
Maestro, Ecosystem Ministry, Fatcrackistan
Jul 16, 2014 - 03:19pm PT
Probably not doc, but I'm guessing you wouldn't try to lecture me in your long winded fashion either. I certainly wouldn't listen if you did.

DMT
madbolter1

Big Wall climber
Denver, CO
Jul 16, 2014 - 03:37pm PT
Nobody forces you to be on this thread or read my posts. You don't like it: move along. No need to be an ass.

And I would think that the gun-control folks would like what I wrote. LOL... I'm coming more and more to their side. Now I'm for more regulations!

Sheesh, I thought the CCW class was going to be something of a "filter." It's not.
Dingus Milktoast

Gym climber
Maestro, Ecosystem Ministry, Fatcrackistan
Jul 16, 2014 - 03:50pm PT
Ironically I am not much opposed some of your points.

But you have this 'game, set, match' attitude about your arguments that rubs the wrong way. I'm not the only ass in these parts.

Particularly with the cap letters of the words. I think you pride yourself on your debating skills. Would you pull that CAP BULLSH#T in a face to face debate?

We are not at university. We're not here to lecture and we're not here to be lectured. I'm happy to talk with you.

Anyway, I really don't care if you carry a pistol or not. I know you're not going to shoot me nor would I ever give you reason to ;)

Cheers
DMT
TradEddie

Trad climber
Philadelphia, PA
Jul 16, 2014 - 06:16pm PT
I couldn't agree more with your suggestions for carrying any gun in public, except to require regular re-certification and that the punishment for unlicensed carry must be severe. In PA, assuming you're not otherwise prohibited from owning a gun, unlicensed carry is a merely a misdemeanor.

This is something that can readily and more effectively be done a state level, since administrative structures are so varied and it does not impact other states. Despite becoming a convert to the potential benefits of the "laboratory" philosophy of state regulation, I continue to believe that Universal Background Checks cannot be left for the states to decide because even one non complying state (except Hawaii) would replace all the others as a ready source of diverted guns. It could be a Federal mandate left to states to implement. Perhaps the Feds could simply prohibit importing to, or exporting guns from non compliant states. That would soon fix it.

TE



johnboy

Trad climber
Can't get here from there
Jul 16, 2014 - 06:40pm PT
And I would think that the gun-control folks would like what I wrote. LOL... I'm coming more and more to their side. Now I'm for more regulations!

This would be a bait and switch when compared with your many previous posts you have constantly argued against any new laws since either
1. There is some way around any new laws thereby nullifying such law, or
2. Enforce the laws we already have.

I will agree that the laws we have are not being enforced and is one avenue worth uniting on. So if that is one of your tenents, why aren't you and many of the no more gun law owners up in arms (no humor intended) at all the city, county, state and federal law enforcement agencies not prosecuting to the full extent the laws we already have? It would appear that this is just a facade being propagated by those that are complacent with the status quo knowing enforcement is a joke. If there were a true fever pitch as you and most gun owners proclaim to this tenent, it appears to be a viable slam dunk. I'm afraid this hollow angle will fall on its face if it were to ever gain traction due to the "careful what you ask for" factor. We'd soon see the true heart of those calling for enforcment.
crankster

Trad climber
Jul 16, 2014 - 08:14pm PT
Have no idea where the 357 rounds are going,, post office maybe? Irs?

Oh man. Wow.

Ron, c'mon. Use your brain. Please.

http://www.outdoorlife.com/blogs/gun-shots/2014/03/ammo-shortage-not-conspiracy

madbolter1

Big Wall climber
Denver, CO
Jul 16, 2014 - 11:02pm PT
This would be a bait and switch when compared with your many previous posts

Bait and switch? Are you kidding?

So, by your lights a person is not entitled to further nuance their position once in possession of additional evidence or a new perspective? Really?

And I'm really not "switching" anything. If you think I've argued against ALL regulations at any point, you have not read and contextualized what I've said.

TE: I LIKE the idea of a federal law regarding interstate transport. And I also agree that penalties should be severe!

I'd like to see DUI penalties made horrendous, AND gun violation penalties also be horrendous. Both cars and guns are deadly weapons, and both are abused by negligent and criminal elements to the great detriment of society.

Seeing how trivial is the CCW standard in Colorado, I stand amazed!
johnboy

Trad climber
Can't get here from there
Jul 17, 2014 - 09:02am PT
The point you fail to get hold of is that the laws (on any front) don't work

Yes, we shouldn't have more laws when the enforcement of the present (and what should be adequate) laws has already proven to be ineffectual

These are direct quotes from you. You have also built many other walls such as, no new federal laws and laws that all can agree on. Both of these are nonstarters and you continually position yourself as totally entrenched on these and other fronts.

Now you want me to believe that there are some laws that don't match your criteria from your other posts that you'd agree to? Bait with your supposed new enlightened views, then switch back to your prior position. Been there, seen that.
Ron Anderson

Trad climber
Relic MilkEye and grandpoobah of HBRKRNH
Jul 17, 2014 - 09:47am PT
Credit: Ron Anderson



The Smith&Wesson MP series. Available in 9mm and 40 caliber, comes with two mags, and two alternate grip backings to adjust a more custom fit in the palm. You can also get it with an additional thumb safety as well.

The slide spring and action are softer than sigs thus they feed just about any ammo without issue. The M&P shield it its little brother- a more compact design.



Either is a good choice for personal defense weapons- reliable and does not have a trigger twitch at the end of the pull- but as with all striker fires the pull is still long.
Gary

Social climber
Desolation Basin, Calif.
Jul 17, 2014 - 09:54am PT
Either is a good choice for personal defense weapons

Not really. Sometimes these scenarios backfire.
madbolter1

Big Wall climber
Denver, CO
Jul 17, 2014 - 01:48pm PT
These are direct quotes from you.

As I said, lacking context.

I've been very clear and consistent that I'm talking about new federal laws. I've used examples like the fact that the FEDS supposedly lock down military weapons, yet I could trivially get full-auto weapons and even claymores. I've talked about FEDERAL "war on..." fails. I've talked about gun control being a states' rights issue. I'm not sure how I could be more clear! And I still hold to the principles that ground that position.

I think that TE came up with a really clever compromise that makes illegal interstate transfer a federal matter, but leaves the first line of defense of that law in the hands of the states. It's a great idea to have state and local law enforcement decide or not to arrest someone on such a federal charge and then pass prosecution up to the federal courts. And on that model, there's no need of a federal gun registry or federal agents running around enforcing that sort of law. Brilliant! So, I'm happy to "compromise" on that sort of thing.

And I remain opposed to entirely symbolic, useless gun control laws at the state level, such as magazine-size limits.

Beyond that, I think that Colorado has NAILED it regarding background checks, and I'd like to see every state take the same approach.

No "bait and switch" anywhere.
madbolter1

Big Wall climber
Denver, CO
Jul 17, 2014 - 01:54pm PT
The Smith&Wesson MP series.

My wife and I just looked at one of those at the range last night. Sweet gun! That's a very real possibility.

Wow, last night my wife was spot on in the range test for the CCW certificate! She put me to shame. The instructors were all gathered around in awe, calling her a rock star! She was shooting as well as the marine next to her, and with our .40, while he was shooting a 9mm that he had put thousands of rounds through. My wife has shot exactly three times in her life so far.

She put 40+ rounds through a 1-inch (yes 1-INCH) hole at 15 yards. One stray shot was four inches off. But EVERY other round went through the same 1-inch hole she had created! Frigging amazing! We were all just astounded. My three-inch grouping looked scattered and pathetic next to hers (better than everybody else but her and the marine, fortunately). ONE hole--40+ rounds. CRAZY!

She IS a rock star.
johnboy

Trad climber
Can't get here from there
Jul 17, 2014 - 06:31pm PT

As I said, lacking context.

I've been very clear and consistent that I'm talking about new federal laws. I've used examples like the fact that the FEDS supposedly lock down military weapons, yet I could trivially get full-auto weapons and even claymores. I've talked about FEDERAL "war on..." fails. I've talked about gun control being a states' rights issue. I'm not sure how I could be more clear! And I still hold to the principles that ground that position.

I think that TE came up with a really clever compromise that makes illegal interstate transfer a federal matter, but leaves the first line of defense of that law in the hands of the states. It's a great idea to have state and local law enforcement decide or not to arrest someone on such a federal charge and then pass prosecution up to the federal courts. And on that model, there's no need of a federal gun registry or federal agents running around enforcing that sort of law. Brilliant! So, I'm happy to "compromises" on that sort of thing.

And I remain opposed to entirely symbolic, useless gun control laws at the state level, such as magazine-size limits.

Beyond that, I think that Colorado has NAILED it regarding background checks, and I'd like to see every state take the same approach.

No "bait and switch" anywhere


The context is in the quote, go back and read them, they're all of 2 or 3 pages back. You won't be able to nuance them to anything else as they're at face value as is.

The rest of you above are nothing more then anything new must fall within your guidelines. While you restate that your against magazine limits, many of your arguments against them don't hold much water and there is a tide much larger than you for them. Not that that matters when your door is closed. Thats just one front you refuse to budge, your totally ensconced on many other workable amd sensible laws. Please read any of your other hundreds of posts as proof.

Again, I'm not against guns, but you've got to be dense if you don't acknowledge there is a change a coming. If we don't get a grip on mass slayings of children there will be laws that even I wouldn't want. Get flexible or you can stand your ground while at first the rest of the country moves around you, only to find your soon entombed by your own convictions.
scrubbing bubbles

Social climber
Uranus
Jul 17, 2014 - 06:47pm PT
Someday in the future it will be the Gun Fetishists against the US Federal Govt, in an armed struggle. Fetishists, prepare yourselves! You will need sandbags, lots of em, trapdoors, fortified bunkers....hi-capacity mags are irrelevant to the grim struggle that lies ahead, fetishists !!
Messages 5421 - 5440 of total 5973 in this topic << First  |  < Previous  |  Show All  |  Next >  |  Last >>
Return to Forum List
Post a Reply
 
Our Guidebooks
Check 'em out!
SuperTopo Guidebooks


Try a free sample topo!

 
SuperTopo on the Web

Review Categories
Recent Route Beta
Recent Gear Reviews