Mass shootings

[Vas Deferens]

(02-20-2018, 08:34 PM)BmorePat87 Wrote: The new conspiracy theory making the conservative media rounds and being promoted by Donny Jr on Twitter is that one of the kids from the school who has appeared on TV is a media plant because his dad is a former FBI agent. Just the lame stream media trying to defend the corrupt FBI.

What was that whole thing about leaving Baron alone?

[Belsnickel]

(02-20-2018, 09:16 PM)BmorePat87 Wrote: I imagine anyone who thought that the executive creating immigration enforcement policy unilaterally was bad is beyond upset with a proposal for the executive to ban a device used on a firearm. 

Even though I am a bureaucrat, I always err on the side of legislative solutions. Elected representatives crafting policy with the help and guidance of bureaucratic experts is an ideal. Policy needs to be crafted in a way that bureaucrats can do our jobs without having to do a ton of interpreting on our own. When we have to interpret, we are making the jump from policy actors to policy makers, and that is not how our government is supposed to be working.

[Belsnickel]

(02-20-2018, 09:31 PM)bfine32 Wrote: Perhaps it's just me, but it seems some folks are trying too hard to not view this as something they have advocated for in the past simply because of the messenger. 

That's a conservative publication, so I'm guessing that they said the same things about DACA and other overreaches of executive authority. I personally didn't like that DACA was done in the executive branch, though I don't know of the legality of it. I do know that officials in the Obama administration said they had the authority to do it. I also know that officials in both the Obama and Trump administrations have said they don't have the authority to act alone on bump stocks. I'm also someone that has been saying for years that the executive has usurped too much authority.

[BmorePat87]

(02-20-2018, 09:39 PM)Vas Deferens Wrote: What was that whole thing about leaving Baron alone?

Not sure what that is. If you're referring to the fact that he got his own secret service car to the airport, I'm not sure what the official reasoning for any of that is. 

[Sociopathicsteelerfan]

(02-20-2018, 09:09 PM)Belsnickel Wrote: Here is a good read on the bump stock thing. https://www.nationalreview.com/blog/corner/trump-directs-justice-department-to-ban-bump-stocks/

Bump stocks were invented to assist the handicapped to be able to shoot a standard semi-auto.  For your normal firearms aficionado they are a range toy at best, they turn accuracy to shit.  My concern is when law makers, who have no idea what they're talking about, attempt to outlaw (as was done after Vegas) "any device that can increase a firearm's rate of fire".  As a good replacement trigger (the first, and often only, upgrade that any serious shooter should get) will absolutely do exactly that, will all my Geissele triggers be retroactively outlawed?

[BmorePat87]

(02-20-2018, 09:35 PM)bfine32 Wrote: Did Trump pass an EO that I missed or did he ask for a proposal of regulation? 

He signed a presidential memo, which functions the same as an executive order. They're both executive actions.

The main difference is a Presidential Memo is usually used when you're directing a subordinate to enact the new policy. 

[Vas Deferens]

(02-20-2018, 09:52 PM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: Bump stocks were invented to assist the handicapped to be able to shoot a standard semi-auto.  For your normal firearms aficionado they are a range toy at best, they turn accuracy to shit.  My concern is when law makers, who have no idea what they're talking about, attempt to outlaw (as was done after Vegas) "any device that can increase a firearm's rate of fire".  As a good replacement trigger (the first, and often only, upgrade that any serious shooter should get) will absolutely do exactly that, will all my Geissele triggers be retroactively outlawed?

ok.  i'll jump on the grenade for all the lefty's around here and go ahead and say I don't think the handicapped need to be shooting semi-auto's.  

As for your triggers...  which ONES!

No really though.  Can an upgraded trigger increase the rate of fire to the same extent as a bump stock?  Maybe they just need to put definitive numbers behind all of this.

[GMDino]

How do we know that all of the elected officials don't know anything about this subject?  Maybe they have a couple reasonable people that can weigh in or consult some experts outside of their offices.

Or we can stick with "government never does anything right".  Whatever....

[*bfine32*]

(02-20-2018, 10:03 PM)Vas Deferens Wrote: ok.  i'll jump on the grenade for all the lefty's around here and go ahead and say I don't think the handicapped need to be shooting semi-auto's.  

As for your triggers...  which ONES!

No really though.  Can an upgraded trigger increase the rate of fire to the same extent as a bump stock?  Maybe they just need to put definitive numbers behind all of this.

Although I get what you are saying in the first sentence; I don't think it is worded well. If the "need" to shoot it should ever arise I would like the handicapped be able to shoot as well.

I fall a lot more to the left on this issue than many lefties. I feel ownership of a long rifle for home protection should be the "right" of anyone; however, when we start talking about taking guns outside of the home there should be a huge level of regulation. 

I agree that any device that modifies the function of the weapon should be outlawed; unless a "need" can be established. 

[StLucieBengal]

(02-20-2018, 12:01 PM)oncemoreuntothejimbreech Wrote: Yeah, 17 students and teachers are shot to death and we need to protect the survivors of the shooting spree from . . . attention.

Not surprisingly you make a ridiculous comment. Go read up on the grief process for children. And then add in a high trauma situation that they just went through.

Children already have an extremely hard enough time getting through grief or trauma. Mix them together and you are setting the stage for some suicides or young adults who need to be over medicated to get by on life because of this situation.

But we all know you don’t care about that..... you only care about posting about me. Which is fine you can have your infatuation with me.

[Sociopathicsteelerfan]

(02-20-2018, 10:03 PM)Vas Deferens Wrote: ok.  i'll jump on the grenade for all the lefty's around here and go ahead and say I don't think the handicapped need to be shooting semi-auto's.  

As for your triggers...  which ONES!

No really though.  Can an upgraded trigger increase the rate of fire to the same extent as a bump stock?  Maybe they just need to put definitive numbers behind all of this.

Bfine already covered the first bit below.  Bump stocks were created to aid a handicapped person's ability to defend themselves.  As to you trigger question, any trigger upgrade that lowers the foot pounds required to "break" the trigger (i.e. release the hammer), if well made, will enable you to shoot faster and more accurately.  Some stock triggers feel like you're arm wrestling Hercules before the trigger breaks.  My stock PPKS is a great example (it's from the 60's and says made in West Germany on it, I'm not modifying a thing on it).  It's double action feels like pulling a sled through a gravel pit with a fat dude sitting on it.  You're first shot is going to be garbage with such a tight trigger pull.  Now, will it mimic full auto fire like a bump stock?  No, but it does increase the rate of fire, accurate fire no less.  As an aside, a shoelace or a belt loop can achieve the same full auto mimicry as a bump stock.





Maybe I shouldn't have posted that.  Belt loops will be outlawed soon.

(02-20-2018, 10:16 PM)bfine32 Wrote: Although I get what you are saying in the first sentence; I don't think it is worded well. If the "need" to shoot it should ever arise I would like the handicapped be able to shoot as well.

Agreed.

Quote:I fall a lot more to the left on this issue than many lefties. I feel ownership of a long rifle for home protection should be the "right" of anyone; however, when we start talking about taking guns outside of the home there should be a huge level of regulation. 

You all know my thoughts on open carry of any gun, much less long guns.  

Quote:I agree that any device that modifies the function of the weapon should be outlawed; unless a "need" can be established. 

Here you are way off base.  OEM (original equipment manufacturer to all who don't know) parts are not always made with high quality in mind.  For the same reason that "mil-spec" is not synonymous with high end quality, companies exist to maximize profit, hopefully while producing the highest quality product possible at that price point.  There will always be companies willing to fill the niche desired by those who want to replace OEM parts with high quality replacements.  For those who are familiar, think of cars and all the after market parts that increase, sometimes dramatically, a car's performance.  Why didn't the manufacturer include those high end parts in the first place?  Easy, cost.

For a firearm, the one upgrade that has the most impact on accurate shooting is the trigger group.  The difference between a high end trigger group and a factory standard can be as significant as the difference between a 911 twin turbo and a Yugo.  Rereading your initial point, I realize I may be mistaken as to your intent.  If it is to imply that turning a semi-auto into a full auto is wrong, then I'd agree and kindly discount my earlier objection to your point.

[Sociopathicsteelerfan]

(02-20-2018, 10:03 PM)Vas Deferens Wrote: ok.  i'll jump on the grenade for all the lefty's around here and go ahead and say I don't think the handicapped need to be shooting semi-auto's.  

As a quick follow up to this point, which I know you aren't personally making, the disabled are far more likely to be the victims of crime.

https://qz.com/1029694/people-with-disabilities-in-the-us-are-three-times-as-likely-to-be-victims-of-serious-violent-crimes/

I could post numerous other sources, but I trust everyone will get the point.  Criminals looks for easy targets, ones that are less likely to fight back, or are completely incapable of doing so.  What easier mark is their than the handicapped?  It sounds cold, because it is, but this is exactly how criminals think.  This is why telling a dude outside a liquor store at 11 PM who asks what time it is to eff right off actually saves you from being a victim, it tells them you're not going to be an easy mark.

[GMDino]

http://thehill.com/homenews/state-watch/374724-florida-lawmakers-reject-motion-to-consider-bill-that-would-ban-assault

Quote:Florida lawmakers reject motion to consider bill that would ban assault rifles


Florida lawmakers have reportedly rejected an attempt to consider a bill that would ban assault rifles, less than a week after the shooting at a Parkland, Fla., high school.

The Florida House on Tuesday voted 36-71 against a motion to consider a bill to ban assault rifles and large capacity magazines, according to The Associated Press.

The vote, which effectively kills the bill for the legislative session ending on March 9, comes amid a major push for gun control reform in the wake of the Florida shooting.

Lawmakers, gun control advocates and student survivors of the Parkland shooting in recent days have urged Congress and the administration to implement tougher gun measures.

Seventeen people were killed and others injured in the shooting at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School last week. The suspected shooter, Nikolas Cruz, allegedly used an AR-15 assault rifle that he had purchased legally.

Students from the school were present in the gallery and looked on as the House voted against considering the bill, according to Local10 News.

The bill was assigned to three committees but was not scheduled for a hearing, according to the AP. Because of Tuesday’s vote not to remove the bill from committee and let it be considered by the full House, the bill is essentially dead for this session, since the committees will not meet again before March 9.

President Trump on Tuesday directed the Justice Department to review the regulation of bump stocks, devices that modify semi-automatic weapons to shoot hundreds of rounds per minute. The devices were used in the Las Vegas shooting in October.

Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.) announced last week that she would introduce legislation in the Senate to raise the minimum purchasing age for assault rifles to 21.

[*bfine32*]

(02-20-2018, 11:44 PM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: Here you are way off base.  OEM (original equipment manufacturer to all who don't know) parts are not always made with high quality in mind.  For the same reason that "mil-spec" is not synonymous with high end quality, companies exist to maximize profit, hopefully while producing the highest quality product possible at that price point.  There will always be companies willing to fill the niche desired by those who want to replace OEM parts with high quality replacements.  For those who are familiar, think of cars and all the after market parts that increase, sometimes dramatically, a car's performance.  Why didn't the manufacturer include those high end parts in the first place?  Easy, cost.

For a firearm, the one upgrade that has the most impact on accurate shooting is the trigger group.  The difference between a high end trigger group and a factory standard can be as significant as the difference between a 911 twin turbo and a Yugo.  Rereading your initial point, I realize I may be mistaken as to your intent.  If it is to imply that turning a semi-auto into a full auto is wrong, then I'd agree and kindly discount my earlier objection to your point.

I have no problem admitting that I didn't present my point eloquently. The best analogy I can use is steroids. For example folks that have had transplants need steroids to function "normally", yet the guy that can lift 500 pounds does not need the steroids to lift 600 pounds. I have no issue with folks modifying weapons to make it more efficient within its designed function,  but when they add modifications to make it function outside of its scope; I take issue. 

[GMDino]

Photo of Trump signing the Executive Order that repealed Obama Era gun checks for people with mental illnesses that made it harder for them to purchase guns. This is the anniversary of that repeal.
Photo - Courtesy NPR) pic.twitter.com/dpEESaADgm

— G. Guerci (@gladmeister) February 21, 2018

[Sociopathicsteelerfan]

(02-20-2018, 11:55 PM)GMDino Wrote: http://thehill.com/homenews/state-watch/374724-florida-lawmakers-reject-motion-to-consider-bill-that-would-ban-assault

Good.  


What is an "assault rifle" btw?

[GMDino]

(02-21-2018, 12:18 AM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: Good.  


What is an "assault rifle" btw?

Without seeing the legislation I don't know if its the same as the former federal ban.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Federal_Assault_Weapons_Ban#Criteria_of_an_assault_weapon

Quote:Criteria of an assault weapon[edit]

Under the Assault Weapons Ban of 1994 the definition of "semiautomatic assault weapon" included specific semi-automatic firearm models by name, and other semi-automatic firearms that possessed two or more from a set certain features:[13]

[/url]
A semi-automatic Yugoslavian M70AB2 rifle.

An Intratec TEC-DC9 with 32-round magazine; a semi-automatic pistol formerly classified as an assault weapon under federal law.

Semi-automatic rifles able to accept detachable magazines and two or more of the following:

• Folding or telescoping stock
• Pistol grip
• Bayonet mount
• Flash suppressor, or threaded barrel designed to accommodate one
• Grenade launcher
  

Semi-automatic pistols with detachable magazines and two or more of the following:

• Magazine that attaches outside the pistol grip
• Threaded barrel to attach barrel extender, flash suppressor, handgrip, or suppressor
• Barrel shroud safety feature that prevents burns to the operator
• Unloaded weight of 50 oz (1.4 kg) or more
• A semi-automatic version of a fully automatic firearm.
  

Semi-automatic shotguns with two or more of the following:

• Folding or telescoping stock
• Pistol grip
• Detachable magazine.
  

The ban defined the following semi-automatic firearms, as well as any copies or duplicates of them in any caliber, as assault weapons:

Name of firearm
Preban federal legal status
[url=https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Norinco]Norinco, Mitchell, and Poly Technologies Avtomat Kalashnikovs (AKs) (all models)
Imports banned in 1989*

Action Arms Israeli Military Industries UZI and Galil
Imports banned in 1989*

Beretta AR-70 (SC-70)
Imports banned in 1989*

Colt AR-15
Legal

Fabrique National FN/FAL, FN-LAR, FNC
Imports banned in 1989*

SWD (MAC type) M-10, M-11, M11/9, M12
Legal

Steyr AUG
Imports banned in 1989*

INTRATEC TEC-9, TEC-DC9, TEC-22
Legal

Revolving cylinder shotguns such as (or similar to) the Street Sweeper and Striker 12
Legal

[Sociopathicsteelerfan]

(02-21-2018, 12:21 AM)GMDino Wrote: Without seeing the legislation I don't know if its the same as the former federal ban.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Federal_Assault_Weapons_Ban#Criteria_of_an_assault_weapon

I honestly appreciate your not pretending to know and using a source.  Please allow me to demonstrate how arbitrary such a ban is and how disconnected it is from a firearm's actual lethality.

Quote:Criteria of an assault weapon[edit]


Under the Assault Weapons Ban of 1994 the definition of "semiautomatic assault weapon" included specific semi-automatic firearm models by name, and other semi-automatic firearms that possessed two or more from a set certain features:[13]

Right off the bat you get the "features" argument.  I'll let you in on a secret, "features" mean eff-all in regards to a firearm's effectiveness.


[/url]

Quote:Semi-automatic rifles able to accept detachable magazines and two or more of the following:

So your M1 Garand is not an "assault rifle".  I sure as shit don't want to get shot with one though.

Quote:Folding or telescoping stock

Because of concealibility, this actually makes some sense.  Not sure what makes it "assaulty" though.

Quote:Pistol grip

An utterly meaningless criteria.  Changes nothing in regards to the firearm's function.

Quote:Bayonet mount

Another meaningless and pointless criteria.  How many shooters have bayoneted someone?

Quote:Flash suppressor, or threaded barrel designed to accommodate one

Another meaningless criteria.  What makes a flash suppressor equipped long gun more lethal than one with a compensator?  The answer is nothing at all.

Quote:Grenade launcher

The dumbest criteria of them all.  Grenade launchers are categorized as destructive devices by the ATF.


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



They are generally illegal on their own.  No long gun, not specifically designed as a grenade launcher (e.g. M79) comes with an integral grenade launcher.  Your M203 is an attachment, already banned by law.  Hence its inclusion here is meaningless.

Quote:Semi-automatic pistols with detachable magazines and two or more of the following:

• Magazine that attaches outside the pistol grip
• Threaded barrel to attach barrel extender, flash suppressor, handgrip, or suppressor
• Barrel shroud safety feature that prevents burns to the operator
• Unloaded weight of 50 oz (1.4 kg) or more
• A semi-automatic version of a fully automatic firearm.
  

How do any of these criteria affect the lethality of the firearm in question?  If your issue is with threaded barrels as they can equip a suppressor, then fine, include them under a suppressor ban.  The last criteria is especially stupid.

Quote:Semi-automatic shotguns with two or more of the following:

• Folding or telescoping stock
• Pistol grip
• Detachable magazine.
  

Again, a telescoping stock can aid in concealment, to a small degree.  Again, the pistol grip is a meaningless feature.  A detachable magazine for a shotgun, outside your aa12, is only going to hold ten rounds.  I thought ten rounds was the left wing appeasement point for magazine capacity?

Quote:The ban defined the following semi-automatic firearms, as well as any copies or duplicates of them in any caliber, as assault weapons:

Quote:
Name of firearm
Preban federal legal status
[url=https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Norinco]Norinco, Mitchell, and Poly Technologies Avtomat Kalashnikovs (AKs) (all models)
Imports banned in 1989*

Action Arms Israeli Military Industries UZI and Galil
Imports banned in 1989*

Beretta AR-70 (SC-70)
Imports banned in 1989*

Colt AR-15
Legal

Fabrique National FN/FAL, FN-LAR, FNC
Imports banned in 1989*

SWD (MAC type) M-10, M-11, M11/9, M12
Legal

Steyr AUG
Imports banned in 1989*

INTRATEC TEC-9, TEC-DC9, TEC-22
Legal

Revolving cylinder shotguns such as (or similar to) the Street Sweeper and Striker 12
Legal

Notice a common thread in the banned weapons?  They're all foreign.  This is protectionism, having nothing to do with the features or lethality of the firearms in question.  The "assault weapons" bill was a bullshit bill designed to make people feel good about the illusion of action.  You can sprinkle shit on a turd, it doesn't make it a donut.

[oncemoreuntothejimbreech]

(02-20-2018, 10:50 PM)StLucieBengal Wrote: Not surprisingly you make a ridiculous comment. Go read up on the grief process for children. And then add in a high trauma situation that they just went through.

Children already have an extremely hard enough time getting through grief or trauma. Mix them together and you are setting the stage for some suicides or young adults who need to be over medicated to get by on life because of this situation.

But we all know you don’t care about that..... you only care about posting about me. Which is fine you can have your infatuation with me.

I would be very interested in reading any source with any objective data that suggests children need to be protected from "attention" during the grieving process due to an act of violence. Can you cite one?

[BmorePat87]

(02-21-2018, 02:02 AM)oncemoreuntothejimbreech Wrote: I would be very interested in reading any source with any objective data that suggests children need to be protected from "attention" during the grieving process due to an act of violence. Can you cite one?

I want to see the objective data that bullying is always good.