guns
 

this is what i think about guns

basically i think guns are cool and you can kill people with them and they make loud noises and **** and you look gangster when you're holding one. so i think guns should be allowed.

but since it's a society, i feel you need to have rules. and since it's a highly complex, high-tech society, i feel you need to basically have a pretty robust surveillance state. so i honestly think that guns should be tracked more accurately. i think the major problems with guns in america could be clamped down on if there were simply more accountability for owning a gun.

my thought is... they should make a database so that any time anyone buys a gun. their name and info goes into this database and is linked with the serial number of that weapon. and they should do a basic ballistics fingerprint on each gun sold so that if someone turns up shot, they can look at the fingerprint and search the database for the gun that matches that fingerprint. then the database can link that gun to its legal owner.

now, i know there's some registration involved in purchasing guns in america but i don't think there's a national database, cause i think the NRA rallies against that idea pretty heavily. i could be wrong. correct me if i am.

but i think that if you had it set up so there was a single national entity that was responsible for monitoring the distribution of arms in the country, and this entity managed that database, it could work something like this.

when a store buys a gun from a manufacturer, it enters the system as a registered weapon. then the store is responsible for maintaining that weapon in the system until it is purchased by someone else. then, the gun is updated in the system under the customer's name. the owner of the gun is then obligated to check in with the registry office every few years or so, with the physical weapon in hand, to verify they still maintain ownership of it and the serial number still matches etc.

if the gun is stolen/lost, they have the legal responsibility to report that to the registry office as soon as possible. multiple instances of lost/stolen weapons from one individual would raise a red flag and trigger the security state to start investigating that person.

the reason i say all this is cause to my understanding, the main issue is illegal guns which leak from the legal market to the illegal market and then get sold to criminals. if you had a system where someone was always held accountable for maintaining possession of a weapon from the point of manufacturing it to its destruction... it's kind of hard to imagine how criminals would get around this system to get guns without a) smuggling them in from other countries or b) manufacturing them illegally. so yea.. you'd still the police to fight against these means of criminals obtaining weapons... but you'd at least significantly reduce their task of managing illegal weapons since you at least narrowed down the inflow of new illegal weapons to these two sources.


thoughts....? 是否有任何身体护理？

I don't think holding innocent people accountable will make it any harder for criminals and people who shouldn't own guns to get them. Would have helped if that was done when guns first started being distributed, it's wayyy to late now. That has about as much of a chance of working as the war on drugs.

Wow, a gun discussion on the internet. You've been incredibly inventive lately, JWB.

well drugs are mostly smuggled/manufactured illegally

where as guns are mostly manufactured legally and then leaked onto the black market due to **** laws. i think there's a good reason for that. namely, the easiest way to make money right now in the illegal gun racket is to exploit the lax gun laws of the united states. which is why guns that are manufactured legally here in the united states actually end up getting smuggled out of the country to mexico for the cartels to use.

so i think that by definition would make it harder for criminals because it removes their major source of access.

we can't all be innovators like you, frownland. now go record yourself playing with some bamboo sticks and slap a goofy title on it and call it your new album, dedicated in my honor.

Like anything that can potentially kill you or another person, have respect for it and be a responsible adult. I don't have problems with people owning guns. I have problems with assh*les/lunatics/scumbags/idiots owning guns. Unfortunately the amount of guns in this country has lead to our now new and shiny police state. If you think that the police in this country are out of control for just drug and racial reasons, your opinion is wrong. Guns are a huge issue for police officers because they're basically trained to suspect that every single person should be handled as if they have a gun until you're 100% certain they don't. That's a problem. That's how people get shot for reaching for their ID.

I think if you want to own guns, you should be able too. I also think that the process of getting a gun should have a lot more depth and requirements. Get the illegal guns off the streets and get the legal ones in the hands of responsible people.

How did you know I picked up bamboo stalks recently for my music? Seriously.

because i'm god

If it were up to me the only guns people would have would be for hunting. You don't need a handgun for fun or self protection. I also don't think they are cool and I have no interest in them, so of course my opinion is heavily biased. I don't like it therefore no one should have it. I'm generally open to people doing things I don't like or even agree with but guns are just stupid to me, I'd be fine with forcing everyone to only hunt with bows. Bows are awesome.

nah.. i bet it's awesome to shoot a gun

This is how it works in California. But all you have is the bullet. Without the gun it's impossible to trace other than the caliber.

Biggest problem is that long ago the decision was made to let each state decide individually on their own gun laws. The wild wild west states would never agree to a national registry at this point. Any politician from those states running on that idea would lose by a landslide.

So much this.

It is.

what about maintaining proof of possession of that gun periodically... the way i said?

and if that's what they do as well then where's the security weak point in this system which allows legally purchased guns to nonetheless be leaked onto the black market. or does that not happen in california?

i thought each gun has a unique ballistics fingerprint... i admittedly don't know much about it but yea... somebody with forensics/ballistics knowledge feel free to weigh in

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ballistic_fingerprinting

alright well for the moment let's set aside what is politically feasible and focus more on what is logistically feasible, if you don't mind.

i'm aware of the limited political potential for such a program to actually be adopted. but what i'm more interested in discussing whether such an idea, if implemented in the way i've explained, would work to address the problem of illegal arms and to what extent.

and if not, then i'd like it if people would give some reasoning and explain how they would circumvent the system, and then maybe i could try to think of ways to stop them from circumventing it, etc

basically i'm more concerned with the logistical issues than with the campaign to sway public opinion.. tbh i'd be fine with a more autocratic state that just implemented such a system without vying for public consent... but that's a different topic for the last 3 democracy threads that nobody ever seems interested in responding to :laughing:

can somebody explain why though? cause just saying "won't work" is not much fun

i bet... when i get more disposable income i'll probably get one... something old school and gangster like a revolver. i mostly just want to shoot inanimate objects... not that concerned about fighting off criminals or whatever.

i bet this is even more fun though

But they sure help. I'd rather not to tell people how they can and can't do things if I don't have to.

I agree which is why I don't protest guns or anything. If people want them then whatever, I just think they cause more harm then good, and most people shouldn't have them. I still recognize their right to do things I don't like, and I don't ever complain about it. Similar to how I think most people shouldn't have pets or kids.

Also, I don't think they help unless unnecessary death is a good thing. Someone's life is worth more than your possessions, sorry.

It's a great idea in concept but it wouldn't fly. So the date comes around and the gun owner doesn't show up. What happens then? Police go knocking on peoples doors and arresting them? Or forcibly taking their guns away? The huge klaxon horn at the NRA headquarters just started blaring.

Ok, I get what you are saying now. Suppose this could work.

Logistics and the fact there's already billions of unregistered guns out there. And again, this simply would never see the light of day in the US.

Nah, go with a semi-automatic pistol that can hold upwards of 15 rounds.

In CA we can only use 10 round mags. Really cool to quickly blow off a large number of shots and it's really quick to swap out mags. Barrel guns hold either 5 or 6 rounds and are a bit of a pain to reload relatively speaking.

Get a glock and one of these:

I own several fire arms and I would personally rather teach my kid firearm responsibility rather then "No! Those are bad!". I go hunting with a .50 caliber black powder. Do you REALLY think that is used for protection? Naw. And I will tell you for sure, if you break into my house, I will point a gun at you and threaten to shoot you. But that's how I am and how I was raised and the culture I was raised in. Btw, JWB, there's already a database.

yea if you don't reregister your gun then after a while someone will come and ask about it. like i said, can't we just talk about what could logistically work without dragging in "oh the NRA won't allow it"

let's say hypothetically the NRA has no choice and this is an autocratic sort of set up

the unregistered guns are admittedly still going to pose a problem... but this system is aimed at stopping the flow of new illegal weapons. so that's outside the scope of what i'm talking about.

can you expand on 'logistics'? cause when i say logistics i'm referring to whether it would be something that is sorta physically possible... rather than whether or not our current political process would allow for it, which i'm fine with conceding that it wouldn't.



yea i guess but they look cooler to me

a national database?

Having a gun discussion without including the NRA and politics is pretty pointless IMO.

And semi-auto guns can be cool as hell too.

Sig P226

https://s-media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com...6cbf43a273.jpg

i don't think it's pointless... really i've heard people bitch about the NRA and **** time and time again... it's not like i dismiss whatever grievances you have with them, but i just can't maintain interest in people complaining about political opposition again and again and again. to me there's really not much potential to say anything there that hasn't been said a thousand times before.

but a lot of those NRA people challenge the actual potential efficacy of any gun control program.. which is what i'm more interested in. so saying 'it doesn't have political support' is actually what's pointless to me. cause i feel that it's up in the air as to whether there is actually an effective strategy to control guns... which is what we really should figure out before we get into arguing about whether or not we should implement said strategy.

Yup. The FBI maintains NICS. It's a national registry for guns and explosives/materials. Guns are required by law to be registered. I can sit in my cruiser and look up for instance your name/SS# and pull all of the fire arms registered to your name, and your permits. I can also pull up a fire arm's serial number and back trace it that way if a paper trail has been left. All guns have a serial number from the factory, which the factory registers who they sold it to (ex. Dick's Sporting Goods) who then registers who they sold it to (the customer).

Registering firearms doesn't prevent criminals from getting guns.

so how does the gun get from the legal owner to the criminal, specifically?

see... this is the kind of **** that i'd come across that gave me the impression there is no national database..

Fact Check: The Gun Registry Red Herring | TIME.com

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2013/0...l-Gun-Registry

http://fee.org/freeman/detail/nation...oad-to-tyranny

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/0...n_3101204.html

http://www.beaufortobserver.net/Arti...l-be-used.html

if such a registry already exists... why do both sides of the debate seem to be unaware of it?

Most common is theft. For instance criminal breaks into a home and steals a gun. You should always report a stolen gun, but it's probably not going to show up until it's used in a crime or a cop happens to find it on a traffic stop/drug raid/warrant/etc. Less common is family member dies and leaves the firearm to a nephew, nephew then robs a store with said gun. Criminal could fake ID/paperwork and "legally"* buy it or have someone do so for him/her*+.


*Both of these are in fact illegal because the firearm was not obtained in a fair and honest manner
+Buying a firearm for someone else is illegal

what about this?

frontline: hot guns: "How Criminals Get Guns" | PBS

Straw purchase sale which is what I said. That's when you have someone else purchase the weapon for you.

yea but they say that is the most common way

so i feel like there should be a way to make people accountable for the maintaining proof of possession of the weapons they purchase

rather than the current system where after the purchase is made, it can be sold to the criminal with the serial scratched off and discarded later, with no accountability for the person who initially purchased the gun

not to say purchasing a gun and 'losing' it or having it 'stolen' should immediately get you charged with a crime... but i would think if this becomes a repeated thing then some red flags would be raised.

Yup it does in which the ATF investigates the "misplaced" firearms. And to be honest, I don't give a **** what the ATF says. Because every criminal I've found with a gun when I ask them where'd you get it I'm told that they stole it. I speak from experience, not statistics.

you mean to tell me most criminals don't rat out their friends/gun connects?

that's crazy lol

Probably because illegally purchasing a firearm for someone/having someone purchase one for you is a higher charge and would get your buddy in trouble too. And snitching is frowned upon in the criminal community. The way most criminals think is that you're going down for the possession of the weapon, why get your buddy in trouble too because that'll probably get you stabbed. Also criminal possession of a firearm is generally considered a misdemeanor (not always) whilst criminal purchasing of a firearm is a felony.

yea i was being facetious

Yeah, I know, sarcasm. Statistically the ATF probably hits the nail on the head. Experience wise? I've never encountered someone who had acquired a fire arm in that manner.

So what do you propose we do?

Bad logic.

https://yourlogicalfallacyis.com/anecdotal


I don't have a lot of stock in the debate, though, so I'm out.

i have to go to bed... work in a few hours.. but i'm saying basically i think the emphasis should be on trying to make it more difficult for people to possess a weapon that doesn't somehow have their name attached to it... criminal or not. i don't think it's unreasonable to expect people to have to maintain some sort of proof of possession of the weapon for as long as it is in their custody. i don't want to take away the right to own them, i just think we should try harder to manage it better.

i will brainstorm some more tomorrow and post some more **** maybe... for tonight i think i'm done though. appreciate the info though, haven't ever heard of that fbi database before... will have to learn more about how it works to see where improvements could potentially be made

What about firearms that do not have a serial number (ex. "ancient" firearms) or firearms such as black powder weapons which are not generally considered a modern firearm and thusly don't have to be registered?

I say, let the Bloods and Crips have unregistered muskets. They can line up in formation like Napoleonic soldiers and just unload salvos into each other. Gangsta.

I would seriously laugh my ass off at that! They can BARELY hit what they're aiming at with modern weapons (I think sheer volume v. accuracy comes into play here). I can only IMAGINE their efficienty with a weapon that is barely accurate at 50yds.

lol... yea not really worried about those tbh. people can keep their unregistered muskets for all i care

the majority of homicides are carried out with (relatively) modern pistols iirc

so that'd be where the main emphasis would be to me

Okay but a criminal can legally go buy a black powder weapon and then go shot somebody with said weapon and it will kill. I have a .44 BP pistol and .50 cal BP rifle. I go bear hunting with the .50. How hard would it be to turn it on someone and shot them?

do you realistically see this becoming a big problem?

tbh if this policy forces criminals to revert to ****ing muskets for their gangland crimes then i'd consider it a resounding success :laughing: