« Doh |
| No, really, stop »
Dec 19, 2012 at 01:43 PM | Permalink
TrackBack URL for this entry:http://www.typepad.com/services/trackback/6a00d8341cc33e53ef017d3ef78147970c
Listed below are links to weblogs that reference Guns and ammo:
You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.
well, that was informative. and not a bad place to start, as the author states.
we just need to be sure that dealers are held to a higher level of responsibility when selling, and the status of gun licenses are constantly being updates based on feedback on the licensee (after a stricter licensing process to begin with).
none of the above should worry any gun owner with good intent.
sean coon |
Dec 19, 2012 at 02:05 PM
Fairly accurate article.
I wonder if the M1 Garand rifle would be considered a military weapon.
Dec 19, 2012 at 02:46 PM
M1 is a military weapon but probably not classified as an assault weapon because of it's weight and length and its lack of a pistol grip.
Account Deleted |
Dec 19, 2012 at 02:52 PM
If you really want to go into the weeds as to what constitutes an assault rifle, here's your primer.
Dec 19, 2012 at 03:04 PM
The "primer" mentioned at the top actually starts out ok, but rapidly shows its bias. It then confuses some numbers, tosses around generalizations, and makes assumptions. It finishes with: here's what we should do.
That ain't a primer.
Dec 19, 2012 at 04:00 PM
Shocking, yes, to uncover bias in favor of gun-control in a piece at Daily Kos, much less one linked from a post that describes it as including "some thoughts on possible legislation."
But now that we've had a moment to recover...
Ed Cone |
Dec 19, 2012 at 04:14 PM
The suggestions at Kos seem rooted in common sense. They don't argue for banning all semi-automatic guns. They do argue for banning armor piercing ammunition. (Do deer wear bullet-proof armor?)
I'm curious about the legal environment gun manufacturers operate in? Are they required to report the number and model of weapons they make, and who they sold them to? If so, how is that requirement enforced and policed? Is it possible for a gun maker to say it made X guns in a year when it really made X-plus guns, with the additional products sold informally away from prying eyes?
There is such a demand for guns in this country, and such a fanaticism surrounding them, that any attempt to control their numbers will need to deal with sub rosa manufacturing and selling.
Dec 19, 2012 at 06:33 PM
Interesting questions Corbs. I'll bet area economists have a trove of stats available, but I found this for starters:
As of 2011, there are approximately 5,400 licensed firearms manufacturers and 950 licensed importers in the United States. A Federal firearms license is required to engage in the business of manufacturing, importing, or dealing in firearms. These businesses are required by law to maintain records of the production, exportation, importation, acquisition, and disposition of firearms.
Account Deleted |
Dec 19, 2012 at 07:09 PM
Or we could get less abstract:
"He'd fired an AK-47.
"'It was exactly like playing Duck Hunt. It didn't move, no kickback. It was this bizarre combination of being the deadliest thing I've ever held, and it also being the most similar to holding a plastic video game gun. It was easy to totally divorce myself from that gun; you can't do that with something like a shotgun. It requires too much physical interaction on your part.'"
Dec 19, 2012 at 07:17 PM
"These businesses are required by law to maintain records of the production, exportation, importation, acquisition, and disposition of firearms."
UNLESS the firearm is acquired at one of the thousands of gun shows through that notorious loophole, i.e.about 40% of all sales. Or UNLESS it's acquired through the Internet. And who knows how many now go through that route.
In both cases, we basically have NO idea who the end user is, only that this anonymous individual has suddenly become capable of a hideously effective assault on his fellow citizens should that notion sway his behavior for whatever "reason" or descent into madness.
TBill Yaner |
Dec 19, 2012 at 08:13 PM
"about 40% of all sales"
People die, guns don't.
Many are auctioned off wholesale in estates or between dealers.
Many are inherited.
I believe those looking to regulate may be facing a problem
much larger than currently perceived.
The military style semi automatics can be purchased in parts,
meaning a seller won't be selling a gun, but a stock or barrel etc...
The firearm may not be a firearm until assembled.
If some believe many dealers already don't do a significant portion of business
then they are mistaken.
Let's be cognizant of what the facts are
before proposals are forwarded that could cause unintended consequences.
The "War on Drugs" didn't work out very well.
How would a "War on Rednecks etc..." work out
considering the facts on the ground
not as we wished they were, but as they are?
One early first reaction would be a much larger and organized black market
than at present, by creating artificial scarcity
created by demand that may have been absent
before the defined threat of prohibition.
What are Canada and Mexico's laws
and how could that play out at the borders?
Dec 19, 2012 at 08:46 PM
"Wal-Mart Stores Sell Out Of Guns"
"by threatening to take away America's guns, the government is only exacerbating a problem that is steeped in 200+ years of history and is ingrained deep in American psychology."
Dec 19, 2012 at 09:09 PM
sal leone |
Dec 19, 2012 at 09:36 PM
So.......throw up our hands in futility. It's too hard, too political, too engrained in our history and culture.
Sorry next group of innocents, there is nothing we can do. Your blood must be shed, must be sacrificed on the altar of our freedoms and incapacities to do the right thing for you because it's so darned complicated you see.
TBill Yaner |
Dec 19, 2012 at 10:16 PM
if guns don't kill, then why aren't people using bats and knives more often to commit murder?
rhetorical unless proven otherwise.
sean coon |
Dec 19, 2012 at 11:40 PM
Asperger's Syndrome referenced in Wyoming college killing note
A bizarre, rambling suicide note left behind by a man who police say killed his father in front of a handful of students in a Wyoming community college classroom...
Christopher Krumm, 25...
...The two-page, closely-spaced suicide note was entitled, "Tired of Having Asperger Syndrome; America Should Look to China."
...One copy was found in the Casper College classroom where police say Krumm shot his father, computer science instructor James Krumm, 56, in the head with an arrow using a high-powered bow.
Authorities say he then stabbed his father and himself.
The students escaped unhurt and the campus was locked down for two hours.
Earlier that morning, police say, Christopher Krumm fatally stabbed his father's girlfriend, 42-year-old Casper College math instructor Heidi Arnold, at the home Arnold and James Krumm shared near campus.
Arnold's body was found in the street in front of the home.
An identical copy of the suicide note was found on the floor in the home's unfinished basement, Casper police Sgt. Deahn Amend said.
We live in a bizarre world.
Timothy McVeigh used chemicals and a Van.
9/11 was planes.
Many Islamic fundamentalists prefer exploding vests.
If you get enough crazy or indoctrinated,
one thing is substituted for another.
The mental health angle seems to be the best way to make change
in the short term.
Dec 20, 2012 at 08:18 AM
the US arms both sides in the ongoing Mexcican civil war with the most lethal light weapons available.
the US arms at least four sides in the Chaostan conflict with more destructive weapons.
the US recently gave France $600,000,000 to assist them in the genocide of North African Muslim/Animist tribes that tormented the French attempts at empire in Beau Geste.
if you believe that this regime of superparents can legislate a solution then it is not a rhetorical question. It simply lacks induction.
tk solomon |
Dec 20, 2012 at 08:25 AM
I posted this on a previous thread, but it fits this one better.
Rational Basis Analysis of "Assault Weapon" Prohibition
Dec 20, 2012 at 08:55 AM
Nothing is perfect.
If that step only makes it a little more difficult to pull off this kind of massacre, it is still our obligation to consider it.
Dec 20, 2012 at 09:31 AM
There is certainly a rational basis for restrictions.
All you would need are enough rational human beings.
Michele Bachmann etc... are elected officials.
Sara Palin was a vice presidential candidate.
Plenty of examples on both sides.
Getting something done would also have to involve
a relatively honest and truth reporting for profit press corps
which we obviously do not posses as a nation.
Most of our politicians are bought and paid for
by some other than their constituents.
What is one realistically doable step?
It's kind of like the movie Lincoln,
when Tommy Lee Jones wearing a wig chose to not say X
to get the 13th amendment passed.
What's realistically doable?
Dec 20, 2012 at 09:47 AM
The comments to this entry are closed.