Roger Hicks
Veteran
To anyone who is not an apologist for such things, an acceptable definition of 'rapid fire' and 'large magazines' should not be hard to establish: acceptable, that is, to both gun experts and those who are not gun experts. To those who are determined to take refuge in semantics, and their own definitions of 'nonsense', an LMG such as a Bren (30 round magazine, but ideally don't load more than 28) doesn't fire as fast as a Gatling and belt-feed isn't a magazine.
And, as others have pointed out, there's no one single wave of a magic wand that will reduce gun violence overnight. It's going to be a package of measures, working over years or even decades.
Would you like to see gun crime decline? What measures do YOU propose to reduce it? Hand wringing over what won't work is not a very constructive contribution to the debate, and unless those who want to retain their guns can put forward constructive answers, it'll be those who know nothing at all who drive the agenda.
Cheers,
R.
I'm asking a legitimate question of what YOU define rapid-fire to be. Please spare us the apologist distraction-speak.
The reason I ask, is because many people equate 'rapidfire' to mean 'pull the trigger and hold it, and lots of bullets come out.' This is not the same as semi-automatic, as you well know, but not everyone does. This is relevant as your post referrred to 'large magazine rapid fire semi-automatics.' Therefore perhaps a more appropriate description would have been simply 'large magazine semi-auto rifles.'
Such as? So far, I've not seen posted any package of measures that would do anything, immediately or over the course of time.
That's rather obvious from my posts.
No one is 'hand wringing.' I have simply shared the researched facts.
I've asked for law proposals that would have prevented Sandy Hook. So far, there has been nothing submitted. 'Maybe' this would have done something, or 'maybe' that would have reduced the body count. All just guesswork. But as far as prevention? Nothing.
Are there any?
paulfish4570
Veteran
the use of so-called assault rifles in crimes in the usa is less than 3 percent, last i looked.
sevo
Fokutorendaburando
Seize all firearms, bows and knives longer than 2cm, make baseball bats, axes and frying pans from some limp or fragile material. Install cameras everywhere, wired up to permanently alerted stations manned with teams of SWAT policewomen. Jail all men (so far, no massacres have been committed by women, and their contribution to the homicide statistics are extremely modest and mostly domestic). Perhaps universal castration would already do...
That is, no, there are no practicable and popular immediate solutions, now that the cat is out of the bag. But that does not mean that it is advisable to pull ever more and bigger cats from the same bag...
I think that's the percentage for all rifles.
Soeren
Well-known
The ability to go and kill a lot of people fast depends on having the appropiate tools for that task. A Bushmaster or similar allows you to press the trigger repeatedly and at high rate still being able to aim fairly good 30 to 40 times before having to change mag giving your victims a chance to either enitiate a counterattack or seek better cover though they only have a few seconds to do it. Big mags for handguns holds 15+ rounds having two such guns gives about the same firepower considering the close range but with less acuracy. You still have to "holster" one handgun while changing mag, it takes longer and the less capacity you mags have the more breaks victims will have,the less amo you will carry, the longe itll take to kill a certain amount and the fewer will end up getting killed before the bloodrush wears out or the police enters the scene.
Bans and restrictions aint quick fixes thats true but theyll still work in the long run providing lawenforcement go after the guns. Offcource ther will be a great number of guns around for years to com but in the long run numbers will decline and control will be better.
Best regards
Bans and restrictions aint quick fixes thats true but theyll still work in the long run providing lawenforcement go after the guns. Offcource ther will be a great number of guns around for years to com but in the long run numbers will decline and control will be better.
Best regards
Sparrow
Veteran
Do you see that as a good thing Michael?
... personally I've concluded that constables in stab proof vests and with this quasi-military kit simply worries the general public.
Sparrow
Veteran
.. perhaps digitalintrigue missed this post?
For those that aren't familiar with the differences in rifles, and what differentiates a true 'assault rifle' from a regular semi-automatic, check out this video.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ysf8x477c30
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ysf8x477c30
Soeren
Well-known
IIRC. you can't buy a gun here unless you are a member of a shooting association and have been active for a longer period showing your stability, responsibility and dedication. Then you are controlled by the police your mental state reviewed and you are allowed to by a.............. 0.22 caliber handgun or rifle. You can move up a after a period shooting larger calibers and the same reviews you can apply for and get a permit for a larger caliber handgun or rifle also semiautomatic but that takes years. If you get a hunting license you can buy shotguns and if you want to shoot deer using a rifle you can apply for that licence. for hunting 2 round capacity is the limit (IIRC)
Roger Hicks
Veteran
Well, let's try an entire 30-round magazine in 15 seconds. My understanding is that the semi-auto version of an AR-15 will jam if you do this for too long, but then, as the full-auto is 800 rounds/minute, I suspect that even in semi-auto mode it's easy to reach 2-3 rounds a second.
A good rifleman is only about half as fast with a bolt-action gun -- and it also requires a modicum of coolness and coordination in operating the rifle.
Have you ever considered why semi-auto rifles displaced bolt action rifles for military use? It's so soldiers who aren't marksmen (and most aren't) can kill more people, faster, even when they're dog-tired, uncoordinated and possibly scared you-know-whatless.
Cheers,
R.
Sparrow
Veteran
I propose we use Self Loading Rifle (SLR) for the rifles in question ... to accommodate these sensibilities
rhl-oregon
Cameras Guitars Wonders
Let me commend the members of RFF for, at least, not trying to open a thread titled "Guns and Coffee."
More specifically, I commend Roger for his level-headed willingness to take the pro side of the question of gun control despite his evident affection for guns he has used and loved.
And Stewart for his levity and gentle mockery. And the larger group of RFFers from outside the US who keep posing rational questions about 2nd Amendment privileges, offering rational models from other countries, and keeping the pro-control side of the debate moral and rational.
I wish, however, that every participant in this discussion would commit to an hour of prayer and meditation on the violent deaths of children, or an hour in service at a shelter for the runaway children of abusive parents, for every post s/he makes to this thread. Call it a Christmas wish.
Robert
More specifically, I commend Roger for his level-headed willingness to take the pro side of the question of gun control despite his evident affection for guns he has used and loved.
And Stewart for his levity and gentle mockery. And the larger group of RFFers from outside the US who keep posing rational questions about 2nd Amendment privileges, offering rational models from other countries, and keeping the pro-control side of the debate moral and rational.
I wish, however, that every participant in this discussion would commit to an hour of prayer and meditation on the violent deaths of children, or an hour in service at a shelter for the runaway children of abusive parents, for every post s/he makes to this thread. Call it a Christmas wish.
Robert
Sparrow
Veteran
Please do not misunderstand any levity on my part as a lack of respect for the children shot to death here, in Dunblane, Beslan or wherever, I respect the dead and admire those that went to their aid weather armed or not.
There is a photograph somewhere of a half dressed soldier standing on a car roof covering the children's evacuation of the school at Beslan, with his automatic rifle in full view of the enemy, a brave man .... I am glad he was there and armed as he was
hteasley
Pupil
There are no guarantees of any specific law preventing any specific event. You're asking for a logical impossibility.
However, gun controls more similar to the rest of the industrialized world are probably causally linked to the much lower number of gun-related deaths in the rest of the industrialized world. When Japan has half our population size and gun deaths in the single digits annually, you have to think there's something to the idea that fewer guns means fewer gun deaths.
There are practical arguments against getting to be like Japan. 250 million guns in circulation present a significant roadblock. But I think the data around the world shows that fewer guns correlates to fewer gun deaths, with very little contradiction. That suggests that there is a marginal benefit to a marginal decrease in the number of guns.
Laws don't have to absolutely solve the problem, so it's not a fair burden to set the standard at 100% efficacy. If halving the number of guns can halve the number of gun-related deaths, and the data shows that can well be the case, then restrictions that help lower the number of guns would be something we should all applaud.
So how many guns are there in Japan?
How do you propose to halve the number of guns that already exist?
How do you propose to halve the number of guns that already exist?
hteasley
Pupil
There are almost no guns in Japan. See, fewer guns means fewer gun-related deaths. That's my point.
I would advocate some sort of buy-back program for guns, to get some out of circulation directly. I would advocate stronger regulation of guns sales, including used guns and private sales, so that gun transfers and ownership can begin to be tracked. I keep hearing about bad actors in the FFL community, so I'd work to weed those folks out, if possible. I'd have national limits on gun purchases, so places like Florida are no longer conduits for guns to other states that have tougher limits. I'd adovcate stiff penalties for straw purchasers.
If none of that made an appreciable difference, I'd consider something like having in place a licensing system whereby gun owners are licensed per gun, and must present their guns for relicensing, to help track ownership.
I would think that over some reasonable period of time, something along those lines would diminish the number of guns in circulation. Note that none of that stops anyone from buying a gun, and doesn't really do anything to regulate guns that we don't do for, say, cars. Responsible gun owners should, I think, be able to live with a system like that, and it would constrict much about the illegal trade in guns.
That such regulation sounds crazy in the US just makes the US sound crazy to me.
Jubb Jubb
Well-known
here here. it does make the US sound crazy.
Sparrow
Veteran
How about;
All weapons held by private citizens shall henceforth be finished in pink
.. perhaps digitalintrigue missed this post?
Jubb Jubb
Well-known
E__WOK, you have completely missed any point I have made.
Yes the person shooting the gun is responsible, but if he didn't have a gun to use in the first place, there wouldn't be all this horrible death.
So many people here have said, oh then he uses a different weapon to mass murder. It is a lot easier to stop OR run away from someone coming at you with a knife, baseball bat, frying pan or whatever object you guys have mentioned than a gun. The arguement over a car being used to murder or even mass murder isn't even an arguement. As others have mentioned there are tighter restrictions on getting a car license and purchasing one than there is on a gun.
The laws here in Australia are probably the strictest in the world for guns. State laws govern the possession and use of firearms in Australia. Anyone wishing to possess or use a firearm must have a Firearms Licence and, with some exceptions, be over the age of 18. Owners must have secure storage for their firearms. Before someone can buy a firearm, he or she must obtain a Permit To Acquire. The first permit has a mandatory 28-day delay before it is first issued. In some states (e.g., Queensland, Victoria, and New South Wales), this is waived for second and subsequent firearms of the same class. For each firearm a "Genuine Reason" must be given, relating to pest control, hunting, target shooting, or collecting. Self-defence is not accepted as a reason for issuing a license, even though it may be legal under certain circumstances to use a legally held firearm for self-defence.
Each firearm in Australia must be registered to the owner by serial number. Some states allow an owner to store or borrow another person's registered firearm of the same category.
Yes the US has a lot of weapons, but if you don't act now, what will this number grow to in the future. It is a large problem, but that isn't an excuse. Small steps to banning guns will get you somewhere.
- Status
- Not open for further replies.