Ok lets talk guns.

Discussion in 'Politics and Religion' started by Dude, Jul 12, 2016.

  1. LVG

    LVG Your Friendly Neighborhood P&R Mod Contributor

    Posts:
    19,659
    Likes Received:
    3,276
    Joined:
    Oct 10, 2005
    Location:
    Vegas, baby, yeah!
    From a policy perspective, I think you will get significant non-compliance. That's why a mandatory ban coupled with a buyback addresses not only the short-term availability of weapons, but the long term supply of weapons as well.

    In broad brushstrokes, how it works is that in the short term you make semiautomatic rifles with detachable magazines that hold over 5 rounds of ammunition illegal, or at the very minimum, put them in the Class III category. The effect of that is that you'll sweep up those who will voluntarily comply. You couple that with civil penalties, and I think you'll get more voluntary compliance.

    As for long term - there will be a segment of gun owners who will not comply. You're absolutely right. So what happens is that we make the aforementioned rifles illegal from the legislation's effective date forward, along with certain accessories, to starve the market of new product. As people grow old, die, kids become aware of the rifles, etc., those rifles get turned in. And the ones that don't are effectively frozen in place to their current owners.

    The prospective mass shooters cannot get a rifle, because the market is generally frozen. Will illegal sales and transfers happen? Yes. Will certain people disregard the ban and keep what they own? Yes. But overall, I think you'd see that the firearms typically used in a mass shooting will no longer be used in mass shootings the farther we get from the legislation's enactment.

    One other thing: To my knowledge, there are no mandatory buybacks in any states. Please correct me if I am wrong, but the programs you speak of are voluntary buybacks.
     
    Ouchie-Z-Clown and UncleChris like this.
  2. Folster

    Folster The system doesn't work.

    Age:
    37
    Posts:
    7,182
    Likes Received:
    966
    Joined:
    Jun 23, 2005
    Thank you for the thoughtful response.

    4% compliance with the Safe Act (required registration)
    https://hudsonvalleyone.com/2016/07/07/massive-noncompliance-with-safe-act/

    3% compliance in CA
    http://www.capoliticalreview.com/ca...weapons-registered-them-after-latest-gun-law/
    http://www.capoliticalreview.com/ca...weapons-registered-them-after-latest-gun-law/

    0% in NJ
    https://reason.com/2018/12/20/new-jerseys-gun-owners-do-not-seem-eager/
     
  3. Folster

    Folster The system doesn't work.

    Age:
    37
    Posts:
    7,182
    Likes Received:
    966
    Joined:
    Jun 23, 2005
    In your opinion.
     
  4. AZCB34

    AZCB34 Registered User

    Age:
    51
    Posts:
    10,304
    Likes Received:
    1,535
    Joined:
    Sep 23, 2002
    Location:
    Mesa, AZ
    Not an opinion but my comment wasn't directed at you as much as it was a general musing.
     
  5. nidan

    nidan Oscar Contributor

    Posts:
    22,926
    Likes Received:
    550
    Joined:
    May 15, 2002
    Location:
    Lake Oswego, Oregon
    Ok I'll bite ....

    Excluding the reason stated "Because I can" what is a compelling reason ?
     
    ozzfloyd likes this.
  6. LVG

    LVG Your Friendly Neighborhood P&R Mod Contributor

    Posts:
    19,659
    Likes Received:
    3,276
    Joined:
    Oct 10, 2005
    Location:
    Vegas, baby, yeah!
    That's great information, thank you, and I stand corrected. I think that you would agree with me that we don't have to insult each other personally in order to have a reasoned debate.

    It's interesting to me that one of the sources in the CA article said that, in his opinion, the reason that there was a lower compliance is because the law was not widely known in the state. A PSA may assist in this. Furthermore, regarding NJ, that appears to be a statistic that the police departments do not track, not that people are failing to comply with the law. I also found it interesting that police departments in rural areas are loath to prosecute these state-law crimes.

    Assuming that the compliance rate is low, that is why you have to take replacement components off of the market. It is also why you have to restrict future purchases of those rifles; not because your average Johnny Smith is committing some mass shooting, but because mentally ill people get a wild hair up their rear end, have easy access to firearms, and then use those firearms to commit atrocities.

    That's why I'm against criminal penalties for those who choose not to register, unless they transfer their weapon to someone who has not registered for a Class III license. If someone owns these weapons and they are subsequently discovered, they can face a moderate civil penalty. That's it. I don't want them going to prison. Conversely, if they transfer their weapons to someone who hasn't been given a Class III license, I think they should have the book thrown at them.

    Moreover, a modest civil penalty will encourage law enforcement to ensure compliance, especially if some or all of those penalties collected go to the local law enforcement that enforces the law.

    Couple that upon a future shortage of replacement parts, and I think you have the building blocks of a solid gun control law, much as the NFA of 1934 effectively (and years later) removed fully automatic weapons from the vast majority of citizens.

    Now, if you have reasonable restrictions that should be placed on people that do not involve the mandatory buyback of firearms, I would be willing to entertain that idea. Most gun owners are not criminals. Most gun owners are responsible. Most gun owners care for and adequately secure their firearms. But these mass shootings have to stop.
     
    Ouchie-Z-Clown likes this.
  7. LVG

    LVG Your Friendly Neighborhood P&R Mod Contributor

    Posts:
    19,659
    Likes Received:
    3,276
    Joined:
    Oct 10, 2005
    Location:
    Vegas, baby, yeah!
    One other thing. This country faces a problem with its mass shootings. I don't have all the answers, and I don't claim to. I'm willing to try new ideas to reduce the problem. And I'm willing to sit down with anyone who wants to fix the problem as well. We have to extinguish the extremist voices on either side to reach a solution.
     
  8. Rivercard

    Rivercard Too much good stuff

    Posts:
    19,296
    Likes Received:
    2,884
    Joined:
    Jul 2, 2003
    Location:
    Is everything
    We would have to cut off the extremist voice pipelines of hate radio and Fox TV. But too much $ is made frothing up the gullible masses for that to ever happen.
     
  9. Rivercard

    Rivercard Too much good stuff

    Posts:
    19,296
    Likes Received:
    2,884
    Joined:
    Jul 2, 2003
    Location:
    Is everything
    Yep. Gotta bucket the "liberals" as crazed lunatics for wanting to do anything to mass shootings.
     
  10. Kel Varnsen

    Kel Varnsen Moderator Contributor

    Age:
    42
    Posts:
    30,105
    Likes Received:
    9,541
    Joined:
    Jun 28, 2003
    Location:
    Phoenix






     
  11. carrrnuttt

    carrrnuttt Didactic

    Posts:
    3,949
    Likes Received:
    2,015
    Joined:
    Feb 22, 2005
    Location:
    Phoenix, AZ
    That is a sad, SAD man.
     
  12. Kel Varnsen

    Kel Varnsen Moderator Contributor

    Age:
    42
    Posts:
    30,105
    Likes Received:
    9,541
    Joined:
    Jun 28, 2003
    Location:
    Phoenix
     
  13. Ouchie-Z-Clown

    Ouchie-Z-Clown I'm better than Mulli!

    Age:
    50
    Posts:
    23,468
    Likes Received:
    8,563
    Joined:
    Sep 16, 2002
    Location:
    SoCal
    And that doesn’t even point out the “train my sights on” language - more gun violence.
     
  14. Western Font

    Western Font Registered

    Age:
    43
    Posts:
    574
    Likes Received:
    356
    Joined:
    Jan 30, 2018
    Location:
    via Arizona
    He says any reasonably intelligent person, which he now assumes Kirkpatrick is not, would know ammunition is a “euphemism” for “monetary campaign contributions.”

    Because campaign donations are so delicate that you need a “euphemism”? Dumb guy trying to act smart. Not quite nailing the troll.
     
    UncleChris likes this.
  15. Kel Varnsen

    Kel Varnsen Moderator Contributor

    Age:
    42
    Posts:
    30,105
    Likes Received:
    9,541
    Joined:
    Jun 28, 2003
    Location:
    Phoenix
     

Share This Page