Las Vegas shooting thread moved to polyass

[Buster Highmen]

I'm wondering why there aren't more societal demands for surgical attachments of arms.

[ill-advised strategy]

I fail to see how I am obligated to defend against your disingenuous bullshit

Last year my supervisor became enraged and threw me out of his office because I used the word disingenuous in our discussion. He didn't know the word, and insisted that I was trying to "use big words" to "sound smarter than him" and also insisted that I really didn't know what disingenuous meant. I offered to google it on my phone for him and he lost his shit, got literally beet red in the face and screamed Get The Fuck Out of My Office.

Just warning you, Pro Tip in case everything in your life goes to hell and you end up in Michigan driving a bus for a living.

[hatchgreenchile]

I would be fine passing education classes, training,

I always found it interesting that one needs to show proof of a hunters safety course to get a tag, but no course is necessary to own the firearm you’ll need to hunt.

I’d be in favor of both of these as a requirement for any firearm purchase.

Hopefully such a course would put a dent into the accidental death statistics as well

[Conundrum]

How do you feel about banning handguns?

I personally carry a small 5 shot revolver while bowing hunting because I hunt in an area with a lot of wolves and have had a few run ins. I'd rather scare a pack off with gun fire than spreading a cloud of bear spray around me. I also take it on multi-day raft trips where there are wolves and mountain lions. I feel I have a hunting purpose for this sidearm and disagree with banning it.

I also have some semi auto handguns. Highest mag capacity of 8. If the law required me to turn them in with fair compensation or register them, I would.

I also have taken a concealed carry class, hunter's safety and keep them locked in my household. I have never concealed carry nor will I.

I think there's a compromise though. NRA will never let it happen. Why don't we require a certain level of training to own and operate had guns? Yeah, criminals will be criminals. But we could prevent a lot of unnecessary carnage if people could own and operate hand guns safely. And in my gun world, you have an "accidental" discharge that hurts someone, you're done owning hand guns.

There are no accidental discharges. There are negligent discharges and we need to stop using the term accident. You follow the four rules of gun safety, nobody gets hurt unless you intend someone to get hurt.

[Conundrum]

I always found it interesting that one needs to show proof of a hunters safety course to get a tag, but no course is necessary to own the firearm you’ll need to hunt.

I’d be in favor of both of these as a requirement for any firearm purchase.

Hopefully such a course would put a dent into the accidental death statistics as well

Want to make it weirder? I can rifle or pistol hunt in Idaho by passing hunter's ed and buying a tag. No tag or education requirements for those firearms. If I want to hunt with a bow or a muzzleloader, I have to take additional courses and buy an archery or muzzleloader stamp. I realize that those two classes are more for the ethical kill and recovery of the animal but it has always sat a little funny with me.

As for the dent in accidental deaths-absolutely! I don't know the answer to someone whose going to commit a crime because they'll illegally obtain the gun and the cows are already out of the barn. Maybe the gov could limit the sale of new firearms but 300+ million in circulation, there will be firearms available to criminals. It would be nice to cut the accidents though.

I grew up in a small, rural farm town and every kid was required to take hunter's ed at the age of 13 during school hours unless your parent signed that they didn't want you to. I don't know of any accidental shootings in that town in 30 years.

[ill-advised strategy]

There's a ready-made argument against the vehicular-style approach: you just have to go drive around a lot and see what insanity takes place with vehicles operated by supposedly educated, licensed, and insured operators. If that's the approach, expect problems to continue. You could have a whole, extensive discussion about the differences in motor vehicle craziness between the U.S. and, say, Germany; and likely end up with some of the exact same social-fabric kinds of things. Driving is insane in Central and South America, so is gun violence. Driving is orderly in Western Europe, and gun violence is minimal.

I think the regulatory environment is secondary and the social environment is primary in these things. We have to decide if we want it to be free and sketchy, with all that comes with it, or if we want it to be less free and more safe. Cars, guns, healthcare, food....all of it.
In Canada people would routinely shout at me on my bicycle "where's your helmet?"....my response is typical 'merican: mind your own fucking business. But in Canada, some other person's health is your business....and it took me a bit to realize that. People see one another smoking or riding motorcycles there and think "that dude's costing us money"...there are societal costs to bear when we take control over danger. We have this hudge divide in visions of what kind of society we're going to be: the place where you can do whatever you want: the bonfire and fireworks and monster trucks on the beach society, or the urbane, civil, modern society where we behave ourselves and things are under control.
The grass is always greener...in Taos when there's a wasted local galloping around downtown on a horse shooting his pistol in the air yelling spanish insults at white people you long for a little more order. In Victoria when strangers are shouting at you to put your bike helmet on you long for a little more freedom.
It's pretty tough to have both.

[Conundrum]

Imagine if there was no auto training or requirements and cars were handled like firearms. What would that look like?

It's not the end all solution but it's a step in a better direction than the free for all we have going right now with the NRA driving the bus. Maybe someone needs to take out Wayne La Pierre and see where the conversation goes. I'm of course not advocating this but it would certainly change the conversation. How many of you know that someone was shot and injured at NRA headquarters this year in a firearms safety training course. Didn't seem to change the conversation because it was an "accident" and apparently "accidents" are okay in the NRA's opinion.

[MontuckyFried]

I have never concealed carry nor will I.

Sounds like you're in rural Idaho? Definitely different situation than those in dangerous urban areas. I used to conceal carry when I lived in rougher places where the likelyhood of needing to defend myself was dramatically higher. However, since I've lived in Montana I haven't carried once. I feel much safer overall. However, if/when I end up living in a major city again, I will have to reassess that.

Growing up, I remember carjackings being a pretty frequent occurrence on the news. Almost every night I'd see something. Seemed that once CHL laws were passed, carjackings became practically a thing of the past in my town. Sure, they still happen occasionally, but it seems far more rare. That despite the fact the city's more than doubled in size since. Lots more contributing factors I'm sure, but it seemed to make sense that carjackers weren't quite as bold as they used to be after a few of them got their faces blasted off by a defender.

Anyway, my main point being that rural Idaho/Montana or other BFE location is a far cry from urban locales. I don't believe we should take away people's right to defend themselves from would-be carjackers/burglars/murderers. I used to live on a street where literally every home had been robbed at some point. Would be scary to be tied up and gagged. Typically all it takes to scare someone off is just the noise of a shotgun being cycled. Take that right away and all we do is embolden criminals.

[ill-advised strategy]

It never, ever gets old

[Conundrum]

Sounds like you're in rural Idaho? Definitely different situation than those in dangerous urban areas. I used to conceal carry when I lived in rougher places where the likelyhood of needing to defend myself was dramatically higher. However, since I've lived in Montana I haven't carried once. I feel much safer overall. However, if/when I end up living in a major city again, I will have to reassess that.

Growing up, I remember carjackings being a pretty frequent occurrence on the news. Almost every night I'd see something. Seemed that once CHL laws were passed, carjackings became practically a thing of the past in my town. Sure, they still happen occasionally, but it seems far more rare. That despite the fact the city's more than doubled in size since. Lots more contributing factors I'm sure, but it seemed to make sense that carjackers weren't quite as bold as they used to be after a few of them got their faces blasted off by a defender.

Anyway, my main point being that rural Idaho/Montana or other BFE location is a far cry from urban locales. I don't believe we should take away people's right to defend themselves from would-be carjackers/burglars/murderers. I used to live on a street where literally every home had been robbed at some point. Would be scary to be tied up and gagged. Typically all it takes to scare someone off is just the noise of a shotgun being cycled. Take that right away and all we do is embolden criminals.

I don't live in rural Idaho but I do live in Idaho. I did grow up in rural Idaho. But, our biggest metro area is 600k. I don't have a big city perspective and hopefully never will. I can only give my opinion. Others give theirs and then a compromise might be made. But I doubt it. And I'm not for banning hand guns. I'm for more regulations regarding them. If a majority calls for an all out ban, give me what I paid for them and I'll show up at the collection site to turn them in. I don't feel the same way for my hunting rifles-but they are bolt actions.

[ill-advised strategy]

Imagine if there was no auto training or requirements and cars were handled like firearms. What would that look like?

I think you can surmise a good bit of the answer from various locales where that's the case. A lot depends on the population density involved and the culture. There were no traffic police where I spent summers as a kid, so most kids there would drive at age 12 or 13 or thereabouts. I was driving at 13. The education came from my mom, with the goal of not wrecking our vehicle (or causing injury). I think you can sort of imply the same kind of logic with unregulated gun markets, where youngsters are using guns and being given education from their parents with the goal of not fucking up the valuables (or causing injury).
I don't imagine this is relevant to a discussion of current issues, or even historical issues in the urban context.

I do really see validity when conservatives doubt in a legislative approach, because if parents are doing their job the govt shouldn't need to step in....and if they're not doing their job we're all ratfucked well-beyond the guns and cars stuff anyway.

[neufox47]

When I moved from Taos to Salt Lake, I had this 78 F250 that was kind of loose, with a chattery clutch and brakes that weren't the best. I used it for 3 trips back and forth with all my stuff, 12 hours each way, on that desert drive with no radio. The first time in Sandy with my old truck, having never lived in the city, I was overwhelmed with driving the old truck on the 85mph freeway and in the stop and go with the chattering clutch and trying to stop when these people jam their brakes...
So I got on ebay motors and found a guy who would trade the F250 for a subaru, in Jackson Mississippi. So on the last of those 24 hour round trips, as I was getting sick from lack of sleep, I went past Taos and kept driving all the way to Mississippi.

I followed mapquest directions to the place, but I got there late at night, and I was a kind of fried that defies a written description. There was a motel across the street, and I could not drive anymore whatsoever, so I went and got a room. It was seedy, Jackson is sketchy (apparently, who knew?). All night there were sirens and gunshots and yelling, I didn't get a lot of sleep.

Next day I go over to this shady used car lot with the subaru and meet this big fat pasty gross southern fuck running the place.
I need to look the car over and he needs to look the truck over, I take the car for a short drive and it immediately overheats. Nice.

So he calls somebody and some sketchy looking hillbillies come and tow the car off, and I spend all day there absorbing life at a ghetto Jackson MS used car lot. The old fat fuck was a lifer in the used car biz, the young fat fuck had just come from finishing law school and had started putting cars on ebay motors, which was relatively new at the time. They were amazed by me, a mountain-town longhair.

Anyway, when the subaru was "done", we took junior's mustang and drove over there. It all looked the same to me, but you'd cross this imaginary line and all of a sudden it was all white people, or another line and all black people...every time we'd get into black people zone this sweating obese fuck would start driving crazy and put his chrome pistol on his lap and lock the doors. I guess he was just itching to shoot somebody, scared to death of black people?

That baby huey guy was really excited that I'd forgotten that I had my 22 rifle behind the seat of the old ford, it was more or less just part of the truck at that point, and I just let him have it with the truck.

That was a weird trip, once I got the subaru I went over to Meridian MS to meet my girlfriend's dad, who was one of the founders of the Flying Burrito Brothers and toured with Willie Nelson for a long time. He had zero money and was sleeping on the couch of his 90 something year old mom's house. His Lincoln towncar was literally on blocks, and he was mostly happy to see me so he could get a ride to take his royalty checks to the casino and the liquor store. Almost unfathomably, he did the same thing as that fat fuck....scrambling to have a pistol ready and doors locked every time we crossed the stupid imaginary line into somewhere with black people. I felt like an alien in those places. No sleep, running a fever, strange things going on at every turn, guns and paranoia.

Subaru broke down in Shreveport, and I spent a week there absorbing life at a dealership in Shreveport...thank God there was a service writer there from Grand Rapids Michigan who made a special case of getting my car going so I could GTFO and on my way to a new life in Utah.

Was in Jackson recently and it hasn't changed much.

[Conundrum]

I think you can surmise a good bit of the answer from various locales where that's the case. A lot depends on the population density involved and the culture. There were no traffic police where I spent summers as a kid, so most kids there would drive at age 12 or 13 or thereabouts. I was driving at 13. The education came from my mom, with the goal of not wrecking our vehicle (or causing injury). I think you can sort of imply the same kind of logic with unregulated gun markets, where youngsters are using guns and being given education from their parents with the goal of not fucking up the valuables (or causing injury).
I don't imagine this is relevant to a discussion of current issues, or even historical issues in the urban context.

I do really see validity when conservatives doubt in a legislative approach, because if parents are doing their job the govt shouldn't need to step in....and if they're not doing their job we're all ratfucked well-beyond the guns and cars stuff anyway.

I drove at 12 and 13 with my dad. Still the case in my hometown. What about all of America? No liability insurance, no formal education requirements, you can operate any vehicle you want with no concern over safety features, no traffic regulations, etc. Similar to the gun industry.

Parents doing their jobs now...ha! Society is changing man. You should say are the children's electronics doing their jobs but that's probably another thread.

[Buster Highmen]

. I don't believe we should take away people's right to defend themselves from would-be carjackers/burglars/murderers. I used to live on a street where literally every home had been robbed at some point. Would be scary to be tied up and gagged. Typically all it takes to scare someone off is just the noise of a shotgun being cycled. Take that right away and all we do is embolden criminals.

OK.

I am confused about where the concern for "take away <guns>" comes from.

I can't find anywhere in this thread at least where someone is advocating that. And even in the national discourse, those advocating a total gun ban are way beyond the fringe.

I started in a rural area (I'm a little shy of using the term "grow up") and moved into urban Milwaukee during the race riots with lots of sniper fire and police fire. I've lived in a lot of sketchy areas, been held up and threatened with guns. But I don't want one and from what I've read, the domestic gun statistics indicate I'm safer without one.

[Cono Este]

Why would it be wrong to mimic Australia's approach?

Because we need gun reform, not reform fantasy.

If we blow this opportunity to ban assault weapons, it's partly because we scared away millions of people who own basic pistols and shotguns with the threat of over reaching.

Right now we should focus on the guns and gear in that hotel room. Back ground checks, fire arms licenses etc would not have prevented any of this (not that we don't need to stiffen those too, we do). But getting rid of 100rd mags, bump stocks, and assault weapons would have saved 90% of the lives.

We have to focus on this example, if we can't, then We will never get anywhere.


Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums

[GeezerSteve]

I am confused about where the concern for "take away <guns>" comes from.

It's an imaginary boogie man created and maintained per NRA's fearmongering strategy

[garyfromterrace]

I just got a call from my brother. I remembered he was going to vegas, but haven't seen him for a month and didn't remember when he was going to be there. Turns out he was not only in vegas but he was at the concert selling cigars. He saw at least 30 people cut down by fire.

So this just became very close to home. He said that if the gunman would have shifted his fire 20 or 30 metres in one direction he'd have been hit. Some of his crew had seen combat before and helped with first aid.

So beer drinker et al who feel that there is no problem, or that they (and the general population down there) have a right to as many weapons as they like; that feel that significant reform is not needed now - fuck you. My brother almost got hit there.

[Bunion 2020]

Right now we should focus on the guns and gear in that hotel room. Back ground checks, fire arms licenses etc would not have prevented any of this (not that we don't need to stiffen those too, we do). But getting rid of 100rd mags, bump stocks, and assault weapons would have saved 90% of the lives.

Yep, baby steps and not letting the fantasy of "prefect" get in the way of "hey, that actually makes sense"

[wooley12]

It's an imaginary boogie man created and maintained per NRA's fearmongering strategy

They call it "Marketing". Really.

[GeezerSteve]

They call it "Marketing". Really.

NRA's fearmongering strategy is indeed one of the most successful marketing campaigns of all time. It's a fucking shame. When I was a kid the NRA was all about long arms training and safety.

[PNWbrit]

I just got a call from my brother. I remembered he was going to vegas, but haven't seen him for a month and didn't remember when he was going to be there. Turns out he was not only in vegas but he was at the concert selling cigars. He saw at least 30 people cut down by fire.

So this just became very close to home. He said that if the gunman would have shifted his fire 20 or 30 metres in one direction he'd have been hit. Some of his crew had seen combat before and helped with first aid.

So beer drinker et al who feel that there is no problem, or that they (and the general population down there) have a right to as many weapons as they like; that feel that significant reform is not needed now - fuck you. My brother almost got hit there.

Fuck. The brother I met at Scottie's place?

Glad he's ok mate.

And yeah.. fuck 'em.

[Adolf Allerbush]

I'm sorry that you feel that way. Conundrum in the posts' above has done a good job addressing the comparison of guns with cars... I don't know, it seems like a reasonable topic of discussion, not disingenuous at all.

I didn't get why it was a disingenuous question to begin with seeing as how Summit compared the two to one another. Honestly trying to understand the equivalency between the two that makes it a good comparison. Is it just that a car can be used to kill people just like a gun can be used to kill people?

[MontuckyFried]

I am confused about where the concern for "take away <guns>" comes from.

I can't find anywhere in this thread at least where someone is advocating that. And even in the national discourse, those advocating a total gun ban are way beyond the fringe.

How about all of the folks pointing to Australia's model? There are many who may not necessarily be FOR an outright ban, but would be ok with it if it came to that, a la Conundrum.

One of the things that concerns pro-2A people about a national registration of all firearms and owners is that in the theoretical situation that a ban comes about, the government would know exactly who to talk to. It's not as tinfoil as it seems. It's exactly what could happen.

Now one thing that all of us seem to agree on (even the NRA themselves!), is that we should be working on common sense stuff like banning bump stocks and other such mechanisms. I have no use for those whatsoever, especially since bump firing is wildly inaccurate. Those gigantic capacity magazines are also pretty worthless since they're notorious for being unreliable and often can't feed worth a crap. We already have some good laws on the table like making all out automatic weapons pretty damn tough to acquire. There are already laws about felons. There are already laws about mental illness. Etc. etc. etc. We could make some improvements about implementations of such laws, sure. But I believe many pro-2A see the end game of what many anti-2A people would like to see, thus the huge divide in what to do. Tough to sort it out with both sides spewing all sorts of misinformation and misleading stats.

[GeezerSteve]

The suggestion that driver license standards and licensing for some subset of firearms would be the same is a false equivalency and just another NRA-esque diversionary tactic. Of course, the licensing for cars and certain types of guns would be very different. Duh. For example, there is no law against the object of a domestic violence restraining order getting a driver license, but it makes perfectly good sense that the law should place obstacles on an adjudicated wife beater acquiring a handgun and ammo.

[Conundrum]

How about all of the folks pointing to Australia's model? There are many who may not necessarily be FOR an outright ban, but would be ok with it if it came to that, a la Conundrum.

Please don't twist my words. I'm not for an all out firearm ban. I would be okay with a ban on certain firearms. Hi cap mags, bump stocks, semi autos without a proveable hunting purpose. Not sure exactly what I would be okay with but I think it all merits discussion at this point. The US gun culture is too loose in my opinion.