Go Back   CruiseMates Cruise Community and Forums > People > Open Debate
Register Forgot Password?

Open Debate The only forum to discuss politics and religion. Please keep it civil.

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
  #1 (permalink)  
Old July 23rd, 2012, 07:07 PM
Senior Member
Cruise Maniac
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: Fremont CA
Posts: 203
Default Aurora CO - Right to Bear Arms?

The big question is how do you weed out nutjobs?

This is something I have to do on a regular basis. I sell guns for a living. I get to weed out the crazies ( no relation to the cruisers) on a regular basis.
__________________




Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
  #2 (permalink)  
Old July 25th, 2012, 05:50 PM
AR AR is online now
Senior Member
Admiral
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Posts: 2,476
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by BigMac View Post
The big question is how do you weed out nutjobs?

This is something I have to do on a regular basis. I sell guns for a living. I get to weed out the crazies ( no relation to the cruisers) on a regular basis.
So since you're in the business, a serious question:

If somebody comes in and asks for 3,000 bullets for a Glock, 3,000 bullets for an AR-15, and 350 shotgun shells, does this automatically trigger the "nutjob alarm" or not?

I'm trying to get an idea of what passes for normal in that world.
__________________
The single biggest problem in communication is the illusion that it has taken place. -- George Bernard Shaw
Reply With Quote
  #3 (permalink)  
Old July 25th, 2012, 06:39 PM
Senior Member
Cruise Maniac
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: Fremont CA
Posts: 203
Default

That would really depend on the person.

If a 'new' shooter wanted to stockpile, I'd inquire why. Some people will 'stockpile' ammunition because there are times when it becomes unavailable for long periods of time. I have seen months where I couldn't buy 22long rifle ammunition. Just asking why will often seperate the nutjobs. A nutjob will get irritated and feel challenged when I ask why. I shooter will grin ear to ear and tell me he shoots ALOT.

My compatition shooters buy ammo 2 or more cases at a time. I personally burn 2-5 thousand rounds a year in practice with my AR alone. I am a low volume shooter. I have some clients that manufacture their own and only buy components.

For a mail order ammo dealer those amounts won't attract any attention. They would simply confirm their ID and ship it.

At my gun counter every new customer gets sized up. If we think your crazy or a gangbanger, no sale for you. I have no problem at all providing the angry person with the ATF # to complain We will and have called every shop in 30 miles to warn them when a nut shows up.
__________________




Reply With Quote
  #4 (permalink)  
Old July 25th, 2012, 07:00 PM
blueliner's Avatar
Senior Member
Admiral
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Northern Illinois
Posts: 1,176
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by AR View Post
So since you're in the business, a serious question:

If somebody comes in and asks for 3,000 bullets for a Glock, 3,000 bullets for an AR-15, and 350 shotgun shells, does this automatically trigger the "nutjob alarm" or not?

I'm trying to get an idea of what passes for normal in that world.
I'm a fairly high volume shooter, and I stockpile my ammo when the prices are right. I do lots of competition shooting with my handguns and my AR-15. I probably go through anywhere from 500 - 1000 rounds every month. I don't have the time to reload, so when certain kinds of ammo goes on sale, I usually grab up a few cases at a time.
__________________
Scott

Majesty of the Seas - 10/03 & 02/07 & 11/08
Enchantment of the Seas - 10/04 & 10/11
Mariner of the Seas - 10/05
Vision of the Seas - 10/06 & 09/07
Carnival Liberty - 10/07
Adventure of the Seas - 9/08
Ruby Princess - 12/09
Voyager of the Seas - 9/10
Carnival Spirit - 11/10
Oasis of the Seas - 9/13
Reply With Quote
  #5 (permalink)  
Old July 25th, 2012, 07:26 PM
Senior Member
Captain
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Posts: 566
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by blueliner View Post
I'm a fairly high volume shooter, and I stockpile my ammo when the prices are right. I do lots of competition shooting with my handguns and my AR-15. I probably go through anywhere from 500 - 1000 rounds every month. I don't have the time to reload, so when certain kinds of ammo goes on sale, I usually grab up a few cases at a time.
There you go, and given blueliner's hobby and logic, perhaps individuals should be allowed to stockpile U-235, under the premise that they are physics hobbyists and need it for experiments.

Or perhaps the authorities should be able to regulate some things, given that as a matter of historical fact, psychos tend to murder dozens of people at a time using automatic weapons, over and over and over.
Reply With Quote
  #6 (permalink)  
Old July 25th, 2012, 08:35 PM
blueliner's Avatar
Senior Member
Admiral
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Northern Illinois
Posts: 1,176
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Aidan View Post
There you go, and given blueliner's hobby and logic, perhaps individuals should be allowed to stockpile U-235, under the premise that they are physics hobbyists and need it for experiments.

Or perhaps the authorities should be able to regulate some things, given that as a matter of historical fact, psychos tend to murder dozens of people at a time using automatic weapons, over and over and over.
There you go, the typical response from those that oppose our 2nd Amendment rights. You compare it to something totally outrageous and couldn't really happen, like stockpiling uranium. As if we who believe in the 2nd Amendment would also want an A-bomb? Get real!

By the way, the shooter didn't use any automatic weapons. Automatic weapons are regulated under the National Firearms Act of 1933. The term "assault weapon" was made up by the anti-gun crowd to scare people, there really is no such thing as an "assault weapon". A so-called "assault weapon" is not a machine gun or automatic gun. And psyco's choose many different ways to murder, bombs are there most favorite, not guns.
__________________
Scott

Majesty of the Seas - 10/03 & 02/07 & 11/08
Enchantment of the Seas - 10/04 & 10/11
Mariner of the Seas - 10/05
Vision of the Seas - 10/06 & 09/07
Carnival Liberty - 10/07
Adventure of the Seas - 9/08
Ruby Princess - 12/09
Voyager of the Seas - 9/10
Carnival Spirit - 11/10
Oasis of the Seas - 9/13
Reply With Quote
  #7 (permalink)  
Old July 25th, 2012, 09:32 PM
Senior Member
Cruise Maniac
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: Fremont CA
Posts: 203
Default

I thought bluliner made perfect sence. But bluliner wasn't talking about something stupid.

This person was crazy. He was planning on getting himself on the news for a long time. This was going to be accomplished with firearms or bombs or airplanes...whatever it took. He had boobie traps and improvised grenades for crying out loud.
I have a gun collection that would make the news media faint. I don't have boobie traps or grenades.

I feel terrible for the poor families of this idiots victims.
__________________




Reply With Quote
  #8 (permalink)  
Old July 25th, 2012, 11:17 PM
AR AR is online now
Senior Member
Admiral
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Posts: 2,476
Default

Right, I also think Aidan's analogy isn't even close to being apt.

As you guys realized, my question was quite serious, and I appreciate the answers. I had a hunch that while that much ammunition seems like enough to blow up a medium-sized city to those of us who never go near guns, it's probably a ho-hum amount to those of you who spend a lot of time shooting at whatever you shoot at.

I know next to nothing about guns. I did take a riflery course in college and had fun firing beautifully maintained match Winchesters at very tiny targets from every position imaginable. That was a lot of years ago. These were bolt action weapons, and although they could accommodate clips, we were required to insert the shells one-at-a-time, close the bolt and shoot. It worked fine. Beyond that, I do know the difference between automatic and semi-automatic, but that's about it.

I am OK with responsible gun ownership, but I believe much more should be required of those who buy them in terms of training, testing, and periodic retesting. I am against the semi-automatic rifles that are commonly referred to as assault weapons, because it seems evident that shooting at targets or animals does not require them. I am against large clips and magazines for the same reasons. I'm fully aware that banning them will not immediately end the problems, but I am of the opinion that over time some good can be done at minimum inconvenience to affecionados.

There needs to be compromise and just as with so many other things, we don't need people who stand in the corners and shout. We need people who come together and talk.

Today, just a few miles from here, a four-year old wandered out of his house and entered an unlocked car at the curb. Inside the car was a handgun. The child started playing with it and blew his head off.

This upsets me.

Aurora upsets me.

Maybe there's nothing we can do. But maybe there is. We must try. I think the Second Amendment is a relic of another age, and I think it admits this in its opening clause. Yet I know it will not be repealed in my lifetime. I accept that. Can others accept some reasonable regulation in the face of this carnage?

Or is it just collateral damage?
__________________
The single biggest problem in communication is the illusion that it has taken place. -- George Bernard Shaw
Reply With Quote
  #9 (permalink)  
Old July 25th, 2012, 11:27 PM
Senior Member
Admiral
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Texas
Posts: 11,518
Send a message via Yahoo to Luanne Russo
Default

Mr. Orange hair didn't need guns that day. It was reported today that 10 gallons of gas was found in his apartment, with homemade hand grandes.

He could have gone out to his car during the movie, got the gas, came back in, and just walked up the center of the theater, and then lit the match. Many more would have been killed.

My point is that someone so evil will do what they have to do to kill.

I received three different e-mails after Joe was killed, asking me to join the anti gun cause. I told them all, that punishing good people because of what a bad person did, would not change the future.

The guns are out there. Take away the guns from good people is one thing, but what about all the bad guys? Which is better, letting the good guys keep their guns, and hope that next time you are in a public place, and someone pulls out a gun, you are sitting next to a person who has a gun, and can save your life, or take their guns away, and sit and wait to die?

Orange hair picked a building that didn't allow guns inside.

Texas use to be that way too, until Luby's. People that had guns, left them in the car, and watched their loved ones die. The law was changed, and to my knowledge there have been no more events like that one in Texas.

How long would have orange hair lived if he had picked a Texas business to shoot up?

I HATE GUNS They cause good families to cry, and grieve but you can bet your little white butt that if someone came in here tonight uninvited, they would not leave.

FYI A gun did not kill Joe, a bad man with a gun did.
__________________
Ecstasy 2005
Conquest 2005
Elation 2005
Conquest 2006
Conquest 2007
Ecstasy 2008
Valor B2B 2008

Conquest Virtual Cruise Topic Link
Reply With Quote
  #10 (permalink)  
Old July 26th, 2012, 12:42 AM
blueliner's Avatar
Senior Member
Admiral
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Northern Illinois
Posts: 1,176
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by AR View Post
I am OK with responsible gun ownership, but I believe much more should be required of those who buy them in terms of training, testing, and periodic retesting. I am against the semi-automatic rifles that are commonly referred to as assault weapons, because it seems evident that shooting at targets or animals does not require them. I am against large clips and magazines for the same reasons. I'm fully aware that banning them will not immediately end the problems, but I am of the opinion that over time some good can be done at minimum inconvenience to affecionados.

There needs to be compromise and just as with so many other things, we don't need people who stand in the corners and shout. We need people who come together and talk.

Maybe there's nothing we can do. But maybe there is. We must try. I think the Second Amendment is a relic of another age, and I think it admits this in its opening clause. Yet I know it will not be repealed in my lifetime. I accept that. Can others accept some reasonable regulation in the face of this carnage?

Or is it just collateral damage?
While I understand where you are coming from, with all due respect, the 2nd Amendment is not a relic. Gun ownership is a right in the US, not a privilege. As with other rights, it cannot be subject to government approval to exercise. Would we stand for getting approval from the government to speak freely or practice our religion? With that in mind, we recognize we need to keep guns out of the hands of bad people (felons, violent criminals and those mentally ill).

The US Supreme Court in 2 recent decisions (Heller v DC and McDonald v. Chicago) said what we have been saying for many years, the 2nd Amendment isn't about hunting, sporting or need, it is about a right to self defense, whether that be from a criminal or a tyranical government. I get a kick out of people that say we don't "need" our AR-15s to hunt deer or shoot targets. Since when do we have to prove "need" to excercise a Constitutional right? I don't "need" to drive to work in a BMW or Jag, I can get there in a beat up ford escort, but it's my choice. This does not mean we advocate tanks and bazookas for everyone. We recognize the NFA of 1933 and the regulation of certain types of weapons, but the so called "assault weapons" are not the problem. All of the guns people will put in that catagory are there because of cosmetics, not because they are more lethal. The average hunting rifle is WAY more powerful than an AR-15. (BTW-the AR is AR-15 stands for Armalite, the original company that Eugene Stoner who invented the gun in the 1950s worked for, not for "Assault Rifle" like many of the idiots on Cable TV this week thinks it does)

I understand where people who don't understand guns or haven't been exposed to guns in a positive way and their only exposure is from watching gangbangers shoot eachother on TV or on the nightly news have fear. But the truth is, guns also save lives and protect people every day in the US. On the day "orange hair" committed his horrific act, there were over 65 million law abiding gun owners in the US with semi-automatics, pistols, shot guns, hunting rifles and many other types of guns who didn't kill anyone that day.

Aurora upsets me too, but I am not going to compromise on any of my other Constitutional rights, why would I compromise on my 2nd Amendment rights?
__________________
Scott

Majesty of the Seas - 10/03 & 02/07 & 11/08
Enchantment of the Seas - 10/04 & 10/11
Mariner of the Seas - 10/05
Vision of the Seas - 10/06 & 09/07
Carnival Liberty - 10/07
Adventure of the Seas - 9/08
Ruby Princess - 12/09
Voyager of the Seas - 9/10
Carnival Spirit - 11/10
Oasis of the Seas - 9/13
Reply With Quote
  #11 (permalink)  
Old July 26th, 2012, 09:04 AM
Senior Member
Admiral
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Palm Coast, Florida
Posts: 19,653
Default

I don't know how to fix the problem. I am not blaming gun owners or anybody else in prticular, but I do find it very sad that we have so much violence in our society.

TM
__________________
CRUISES
Century 4/1998
Mercury 4/2000+4/2006+7/2007
Sensation 4/2002
Infinity 4/2003
Summit 4/2004+4/2005
Carnival Liberty New Year's Eve 2007
Liberty of the Seas 5/2008+11/2009
Solstice 4/2009
Oasis 4/2010+4/13/2013
Allure 1/16/ 2011
Equinox 4/11/2011
Independence of the Seas 12/29/2013
Booked Allure of the Seas....12/27/2015
Reply With Quote
  #12 (permalink)  
Old July 29th, 2012, 11:14 PM
AR AR is online now
Senior Member
Admiral
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Posts: 2,476
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Luanne Russo View Post
Mr. Orange hair didn't need guns that day. It was reported today that 10 gallons of gas was found in his apartment, with homemade hand grandes.

He could have gone out to his car during the movie, got the gas, came back in, and just walked up the center of the theater, and then lit the match. Many more would have been killed.
Maybe he could have, but he didn't. He chose guns because they are the easiest, most versatile, most convenient and most readily available way to kill people. Orange Hair was a trained scientist. Do you really think the average gang banger could go through the planning necessary to booby-trap an apartment the way he did? Answer: No. That's why you don't hear about drive-by knifings, drive-by crossbow murders, drivey-by poisionings. You hear about drive-by shootings because they're easy to do and any moron can do it with or without pre-planning.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Luanne Russo View Post
I received three different e-mails after Joe was killed, asking me to join the anti gun cause. I told them all, that punishing good people because of what a bad person did, would not change the future.
It's interesting that you feel that limitations on large clips and magazines along with semi-automatic rifles is "punishment." I feel it is reasonable accommodation. As I said before, it isn't about "pro" and "anti," even though that's how you and many others prefer to frame it. It's about meeting in the middle of the room with subdued voices instead of shouting from the corners.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Luanne Russo View Post
The guns are out there. Take away the guns from good people is one thing, but what about all the bad guys? Which is better, letting the good guys keep their guns, and hope that next time you are in a public place, and someone pulls out a gun, you are sitting next to a person who has a gun, and can save your life, or take their guns away, and sit and wait to die?
Once again, you frame the issue as taking guns away from good people. I am not proposing that, and neither are most people. You are creating a straw man, just as the NRA does every day (and rather successfully, too).

Quote:
Originally Posted by Luanne Russo View Post
Orange hair picked a building that didn't allow guns inside. Texas use to be that way too, until Luby's. People that had guns, left them in the car, and watched their loved ones die. The law was changed, and to my knowledge there have been no more events like that one in Texas.
Then of course there's the case of Gabby Giffords in Phoenix. I still remember that the man--the hero--who disarmed the bad guy was almost blown away by a fine, solid citizen with a gun. All he saw was a guy with a gun in his hand and took aim. It was only because of another bystander who had seen the whole thing that he was prevented from shooting the innocent, heroic guy. That's one reason to scale things back rather than arm everyone. And remember, not all of us want to be armed.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Luanne Russo View Post
How long would have orange hair lived if he had picked a Texas business to shoot up?
Nobody knows. Depends on the skill and training of the Texas business.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Luanne Russo View Post
I HATE GUNS They cause good families to cry, and grieve but you can bet your little white butt that if someone came in here tonight uninvited, they would not leave.
I'm sure we'll all keep that in mind. Forewarned is, well, forewarned.
__________________
The single biggest problem in communication is the illusion that it has taken place. -- George Bernard Shaw
Reply With Quote
  #13 (permalink)  
Old July 29th, 2012, 11:32 PM
Aerogirl's Avatar
Senior Member
Admiral
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: A little south of insanity
Posts: 4,040
Default

The only people who should have assault weapons are the military and police period. People should have the right to bear arms but assault weapons donít even belong in that category. When is enough enough already!
The old saying goes "Give them an inch and they take a mile"
__________________
You can shake the sand from you shoes but it will never leave your soul

Home is where you park your flip flops

~Robin~


Need some cruise help?


Carnival - Fantasy 1998
RCCL - Majesty of the Sea 2000
Carnival - Inspiration 2009
Carnival - Freedom 2011
Carnival - Liberty 2013
Carnival- Breeze 2014
Reply With Quote
  #14 (permalink)  
Old July 30th, 2012, 09:55 AM
AR AR is online now
Senior Member
Admiral
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Posts: 2,476
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by blueliner View Post
While I understand where you are coming from, with all due respect, the 2nd Amendment is not a relic. Gun ownership is a right in the US, not a privilege. As with other rights, it cannot be subject to government approval to exercise. Would we stand for getting approval from the government to speak freely or practice our religion? With that in mind, we recognize we need to keep guns out of the hands of bad people (felons, violent criminals and those mentally ill).
It is interesting that you draw an analogy to the First Amendment. I've always believed in the First Amendment as much as you've believed in the Second. Nevertheless, there are limits on the five freedoms enumerated in the First, and rightly so. While we have freedom of speech, we don't have freedom to slander, to defame, to violate national security. While we have freedom of assembly, we can't block traffic, we can't impede commerce. While we have freedom of religion (which the courts have always said includes freedom from religion for those who desire it), there have always been those who would impose their religious beliefs as a national norm. Whether the First Amendment allows the Ten Commandments to be posted in City Hall is--one way or another--always being argued.

You imply that the First Amendment is a slam dunk, black-letter law with no controversy, and nothing could be farther from the truth. It isn't a question of needing government approval to exercise the right; it is a question of where the rights should be sensibly limited in deference to the common good and common sense.

Is the Second Amendment a relic? Well, it's one of the only places in the Constitution or its Amendments where you find a "because" clause. And when the "because" goes away you can make a case that the premise is a relic. We no longer have civilian militias (unless you count neighborhood watches--who, ironically are not supposed to be armed). We have police forces, national guards, that sort of thing. But you're right: no court will ever abrogate it, so it is up to us to amend it or repeal it. It will not happen in my lifetime, but I think it will eventually.

Quote:
Originally Posted by blueliner View Post
Since when do we have to prove "need" to excercise a Constitutional right? I don't "need" to drive to work in a BMW or Jag, I can get there in a beat up ford escort, but it's my choice. This does not mean we advocate tanks and bazookas for everyone.
While I'm relieved that you draw the line at tanks, I still consider your position to be a selfish one. And to compare this issue to brands of cars is, frankly, absolutely ridiculous. Brands of cars differ in panache, cost, luxury and snob appeal. They do not differ in function; they all just get you where you're going. And if you argue that more expensive cars go faster, I simply point out that there are speed limits and other traffic laws apply to all.

That's not the case with guns. Semi-automatic weapons and large magazines are created to function at an entirely different level than more traditional weapons, and the fundamental differences between them involve features that appeal most to the worst among us. It isn't a matter of your macho and inflexible demand to exercise your right. It is a matter of your demonstrating a grace note, of your being willing to sacrifice something for the good of all. And again, I never say that you should sacrifice guns. Keep your arsenals. Just forego the semi-automatic rifles and large clips. Again, just as a grace note.

Quote:
Originally Posted by blueliner View Post
The so called "assault weapons" are not the problem. All of the guns people will put in that catagory are there because of cosmetics, not because they are more lethal. The average hunting rifle is WAY more powerful than an AR-15.
Oh, come on. The "power" of the gun isn't the issue here, and you know it. We're not talking about bringing down elephants, just us lowly human beings. Doesn't take much "power' to do that. The thing that matters for the purpose of this discussion is how many bullets can you fire how quickly. The AR-15 wins that race hands down.

Quote:
Originally Posted by blueliner View Post
Aurora upsets me too, but I am not going to compromise on any of my other Constitutional rights, why would I compromise on my 2nd Amendment rights?
I think I've addressed that. First, you DO compromise your other rights every day for the common good, and you should be willing to make reasonable accommodation on this issue because you are a thoughtful, gracious person who is willing to strike a balance. I believe that one of the most destructive phrases in our nation today is "I am not going to compromise."
__________________
The single biggest problem in communication is the illusion that it has taken place. -- George Bernard Shaw
Reply With Quote
  #15 (permalink)  
Old July 30th, 2012, 11:42 AM
blueliner's Avatar
Senior Member
Admiral
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Northern Illinois
Posts: 1,176
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by AR View Post
You imply that the First Amendment is a slam dunk, black-letter law with no controversy, and nothing could be farther from the truth. It isn't a question of needing government approval to exercise the right; it is a question of where the rights should be sensibly limited in deference to the common good and common sense.
You misunderstand what I said. I recognize limits to rights for the common good, even those imposed by the Court on Speech, like slander and inciting a riot. However, free speech is still a right. Nothing is absolute, but at the same time you cannot regulate something so much that you destroy the basic underlying right. There are some limits to the 2nd Amendment rights we recognize, like keeping felons, violent criminals and the mentally ill from getting guns, background checks to make sure of that, and the regulation of fully automatic weapons through the NFA of 1933. But the silly regulations that the politicians keep coming up with will do nothing. Waiting periods, limiting size of magazines, weapons bans, gun free zones.....all are feel good regulations proposed by politicians looking to pander for votes from scared people who don't really understand guns.

Quote:
Originally Posted by AR View Post
Is the Second Amendment a relic? Well, it's one of the only places in the Constitution or its Amendments where you find a "because" clause. And when the "because" goes away you can make a case that the premise is a relic. We no longer have civilian militias (unless you count neighborhood watches--who, ironically are not supposed to be armed). We have police forces, national guards, that sort of thing. But you're right: no court will ever abrogate it, so it is up to us to amend it or repeal it. It will not happen in my lifetime, but I think it will eventually.
I refer you to the recent US Supreme Court decision in DC v. Heller. The Court said the right is an "individual" right, not a "collective" or "peoples" right. The Court said the core of the 2nd Amendment right was NOT to form civilian miltias, but to ensure the people had a right to self-defense, whether that be from a tyranical government, animals or criminals.


Quote:
Originally Posted by AR View Post
While I'm relieved that you draw the line at tanks, I still consider your position to be a selfish one. And to compare this issue to brands of cars is, frankly, absolutely ridiculous. Brands of cars differ in panache, cost, luxury and snob appeal. They do not differ in function; they all just get you where you're going. And if you argue that more expensive cars go faster, I simply point out that there are speed limits and other traffic laws apply to all.
The exercise of any right is essentually a selfish one. And essentually every gun does not differ in function in that function is sending a bullet downrange, but they also differ in panache, cost, luxury and snob appeal.

Quote:
Originally Posted by AR View Post
Semi-automatic weapons and large magazines are created to function at an entirely different level than more traditional weapons, and the fundamental differences between them involve features that appeal most to the worst among us.
I couldn't disagree more. My semi-automatic guns appeal to the best in me, and that is what I believe is a fundamental basic human right to self-defense. I think you say that because by your own statements you don't understand guns, their functions, how they really operate and their uses. You, like many others, watch the news or read the New York Times and let their misinformation campaigns scare you and give you the belief that a semi-auto has no place but to kill people, which couldn't be further from the truth.


Quote:
Originally Posted by AR View Post
And again, I never say that you should sacrifice guns. Keep your arsenals. Just forego the semi-automatic rifles and large clips. Again, just as a grace note.
But sacrifice my guns is exactly what you are saying! By saying "forego the semi-automatic rifles" you are asking me to sacrifice my guns, which I won't do. I've never killed anyone or committed any crime, why should I have to sacrifice them? If I thought for one minute more gun laws would save lives, then OK, but it doesn't work that way. We had an "assault weapons" ban for 10 years in this country, it was allowed to expire because it didn't work! Just as Manuel said in another post, it's about the violence in our society. Tim McVeigh and the 9/11 hijackers killed thousands of people in sensless acts of violence, not a single gun was used.
__________________
Scott

Majesty of the Seas - 10/03 & 02/07 & 11/08
Enchantment of the Seas - 10/04 & 10/11
Mariner of the Seas - 10/05
Vision of the Seas - 10/06 & 09/07
Carnival Liberty - 10/07
Adventure of the Seas - 9/08
Ruby Princess - 12/09
Voyager of the Seas - 9/10
Carnival Spirit - 11/10
Oasis of the Seas - 9/13
Reply With Quote
  #16 (permalink)  
Old July 31st, 2012, 05:45 PM
Senior Member
Captain
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Posts: 566
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by blueliner View Post
My semi-automatic guns appeal to the best in me, and that is what I believe is a fundamental basic human right to self-defense.
Every American citizen has the right to bear arms. That is codified.

Your "fundamental basic human right to self-defense" doesn't allow you to use any weapon you want.

Additionally, Congress has the authority to define "arms", and just as no citizen is allowed to bear nuclear weapons (arms), one day semi-automatic weapons may also be legally banned.

Ain't democracy grand?

Last edited by Aidan; July 31st, 2012 at 05:53 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #17 (permalink)  
Old August 1st, 2012, 02:00 PM
blueliner's Avatar
Senior Member
Admiral
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Northern Illinois
Posts: 1,176
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Aidan View Post
Every American citizen has the right to bear arms. That is codified.
Glad to hear you admit that. That's good progress!

Quote:
Originally Posted by Aidan View Post
Your "fundamental basic human right to self-defense" doesn't allow you to use any weapon you want.
No, but according to the US Supreme Court in the "Heller" decision, Congress or the states can "regulate" to "time, manner and place", but outright bans of weapons are unconstitutional that are "commonplace to the populace at the time" (I am paraphrasing that last one).

Quote:
Originally Posted by Aidan View Post
Additionally, Congress has the authority to define "arms", and just as no citizen is allowed to bear nuclear weapons (arms), one day semi-automatic weapons may also be legally banned.
Once again, they can be regulated as to "time. place and manner", but not outright banned. That is the US Supreme Court ruling.

Ain't a Constitutional Republic with codified rights that a majority cannot just vote away just grand!?
__________________
Scott

Majesty of the Seas - 10/03 & 02/07 & 11/08
Enchantment of the Seas - 10/04 & 10/11
Mariner of the Seas - 10/05
Vision of the Seas - 10/06 & 09/07
Carnival Liberty - 10/07
Adventure of the Seas - 9/08
Ruby Princess - 12/09
Voyager of the Seas - 9/10
Carnival Spirit - 11/10
Oasis of the Seas - 9/13
Reply With Quote
  #18 (permalink)  
Old August 1st, 2012, 03:38 PM
Senior Member
Captain
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Posts: 566
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by blueliner View Post
Once again, they can be regulated as to "time. place and manner", but not outright banned. That is the US Supreme Court ruling.
Semantics. Bazookas aren't "banned", just regulated as to "time, place and manner". Same with tanks. And nuclear weapons. Dude, they are banned.

Quote:
Originally Posted by blueliner View Post
Ain't a Constitutional Republic with codified rights that a majority cannot just vote away just grand!?
Indeed, but of course in our Republic a current Court can overrule any precedent. In the United States, "Negroes" are no longer 3/5 of a citizen, even though the United States Supreme Court once ruled so.

Based on Justice Scalia's (!) recent comments, there is more than faint hope that automatic weapons and cop-killer bullets will ultimately be "regulated as to time, place, and manner" ...
Reply With Quote
  #19 (permalink)  
Old August 1st, 2012, 10:26 PM
blueliner's Avatar
Senior Member
Admiral
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Northern Illinois
Posts: 1,176
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Aidan View Post
Semantics. Bazookas aren't "banned", just regulated as to "time, place and manner". Same with tanks. And nuclear weapons. Dude, they are banned.
Once again, you are drawing outrageous comparisons. A "Time, place and manner" regulation is completely different than an outright ban.



Quote:
Originally Posted by Aidan View Post
Indeed, but of course in our Republic a current Court can overrule any precedent. In the United States, "Negroes" are no longer 3/5 of a citizen, even though the United States Supreme Court once ruled so..
The Supreme Court did not rule this, this was part of of the original Article 1 of the US Constitution. It was amended out of the Constitution by the 14th Amendment shortly after the Civil War. While Supreme Court rulings have been overturned, the "Heller" decision is not likely to be overturned any time soon. And there is NO chance of repeling the 2nd Amendment.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Aidan View Post
Based on Justice Scalia's (!) recent comments, there is more than faint hope that automatic weapons and cop-killer bullets will ultimately be "regulated as to time, place, and manner" ...
Justice Scalia didn;t say anything he didn't already say in his 2 majority opinions confirming the 2nd Amendment is in fact an individual right to keep and bear arms. For your info, automatic weapons have been regulated by the National Firearms Act since 1933. They are not banned, but regulated as to who may own them and the proceedure to obtain them. Once again, "time, place and manner", not an outright ban. The so called "Assault weapons" that everyone is hot to ban now are semi-automatic, not fully automatic. That's the problem with the anti-gun crowd, when it comes to guns, they really don't know what they are talking about because they know so little about guns. By the way, there are no more "cop killer bullets", technology in body armour and bullets have made that argument obsolete.
__________________
Scott

Majesty of the Seas - 10/03 & 02/07 & 11/08
Enchantment of the Seas - 10/04 & 10/11
Mariner of the Seas - 10/05
Vision of the Seas - 10/06 & 09/07
Carnival Liberty - 10/07
Adventure of the Seas - 9/08
Ruby Princess - 12/09
Voyager of the Seas - 9/10
Carnival Spirit - 11/10
Oasis of the Seas - 9/13
Reply With Quote
  #20 (permalink)  
Old August 2nd, 2012, 09:57 AM
AR AR is online now
Senior Member
Admiral
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Posts: 2,476
Default

Aidan--

He's going to have the last word, no matter how many posts others put up.

This is just an obscure board in cyberspace. Better to just let it be, and if possible, work to bring together those who are willing to talk.

He's on the winning side right now, and as such sees no reason to give an inch. The fact that guns seem to be his livelihood certainly adds to his entrenched position. He'll hold his breath and shake his head until he turns blue, if necessary.

What the rest of us must remember is that pendulums swing. Sometimes far too slowly, and sometimes at great cost. But they do swing. Anything we can to to push them along will pay dividends, perhaps not for us, but for those who follow.
__________________
The single biggest problem in communication is the illusion that it has taken place. -- George Bernard Shaw
Reply With Quote
  #21 (permalink)  
Old August 3rd, 2012, 01:51 AM
Senior Member
Admiral
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Greeneville, Tennessee
Posts: 4,524
Default

I was a police firearms instructor. When it comes to the law, I can tell you just about anything you want when it comes to New York State, containing of the more if not most regulated major cities in the country.

NYC has probably the most restrictive hand gun law in the United States. It's supposed to be "automatic." You get caught carrying a gun illegally (I don't care if it's a single shot 22 or a 45 auto), you're supposed to go to jail for one year. Yet is that commonly applied. No it isn't and to be honest with you, I can't tell you personally the last time it was. So regardless of the law, if it's not enforced then it's useless.

Most law enforcement officers don't want people carrying high powered weapons but they also understand it's still going to happen.

I remember when Columbine happened. There of course weapons of several basic stripes and calibers were utilized. Most people believe it was the worst case of school killing in the history of the US. Wasn't even close. The worst case occurred when a degranged school board member spent either weeks or months wiring up an entire High School with dynamite. Thank God a lot of it didn't detonate for whatever reason. The event occurred in the thirties in Indiana. As it is today, it was illegal for the average citizen to possess dynamite yet this guy garnered unbelievable amounts of the stuff.

I see both sides of the equation but the most important thing is that no law is going to make any difference if it's not enforced. Hell, I once sat in on a class conducted by a young very attractive ADA who was so screwed up on the law if it weren't so sad, it was laughable.

As for semi auto, etc. there's enough of an arguement out there that both sides have good points. It's remains, however, more important to enforce the laws you already have before you enact new ones. Most people (espcially legislators) don't understand that when an entity passess new laws (even simple traffic laws) they have no idea that they quite often automatically gut other laws, even those one would consider basic common sense; the whole point being, before you pass new laws, enforce the ones already there. I think you'll find on whatever side of the fence you sit on this particular issue, that unless laws are uniformly enforced, there's not realistically a lot more that can be done. An excellent example not involving firearms is prohibition. You can have any law you wish, but if you don't enforce them, then the creation of still more can almost be considered a joke.

I am not a gun "nut." Never have been, never will be. Do I enjoy shooting firearms? Absolutely. Just as millions of Americans enjoy fireworks even though the "heavies" to which millions literally gravitate are illegal. As another point I can use a common everyday hunting weapon, the shotgun, in devastating ways you could never believe and that includes many firearms instructors. Does that mean we should make bird hunting illegal? Are calibers (size of rounds) too large? I've no idea although I shall say that the most dangerous basic round probably hasn't changed in over 20 years (actually even longer than that) yet there are those on these boards (yes, including those who are "pro gun") who don't know that.

You change culture, you change behavior and to change culture is certainly no simple thing to do.

Are changes warranted. They most certainly are. The problem lies with people though, not with firearms themselves.

There are many who will disagree with what I've just written but I assure you, I can back up my statements with provable examples. Why can I? Because while certainly no attorney, I am to this day considered an expert witness.

While I'm at it, being a professional instructor makes me bring up this point as ridiculous as many would consider it to be....maybe even properly. Very few weapons today use "clips." Right off the bat about the only gun that readily come to mind that uses a "clip" is a Garand rifle from WWII. I would be very surprised if even a fraction of you knew the difference. When people say "clip" they actually mean a box type magazine. A stupid immaterial thing to bring up? Probably but it still illustrates something that isn't stupid and that is ignorance.
__________________
Todd
_______________
NCL Epic 2012, Eastern Caribbean
Explorer of the Seas 2009, Eastern Caribbean
Explorer of the Seas 2007, Eastern Caribbean
Explorer of the Seas 2006, Eastern Caribbean

Last edited by ToddDH; August 3rd, 2012 at 01:56 AM.
Reply With Quote
  #22 (permalink)  
Old August 3rd, 2012, 09:11 AM
AR AR is online now
Senior Member
Admiral
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Posts: 2,476
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by ToddDH View Post
While I'm at it, being a professional instructor makes me bring up this point as ridiculous as many would consider it to be....maybe even properly. Very few weapons today use "clips." Right off the bat about the only gun that readily come to mind that uses a "clip" is a Garand rifle from WWII. I would be very surprised if even a fraction of you knew the difference. When people say "clip" they actually mean a box type magazine. A stupid immaterial thing to bring up? Probably but it still illustrates something that isn't stupid and that is ignorance.
Yeah, my career was as a professional film and video producer, and it used to annoy me when people couldn't tell the difference between stuff shot on film and stuff shot on tape. I could tell the difference by glancing at a screen (still can), and it got under my skin. Then I realized that it doesn't matter a bit to the viewer. It's still a picture on a screen no matter what you call it. Just like it doesn't matter what you call the thing that you stick in the bloody gun to provide a supply of ammunition to the firing mechanism--as long as people get the concept, which generally they do.

The managements of many cop shops are in favor of regulation of quick-fire assault rifles and the larger versions of those bullet holders on the simple grounds that they don't care for the idea of their officers being routinely outgunned. At least that's what they say.

Todd, do you at least support closing the gun show loophole?
__________________
The single biggest problem in communication is the illusion that it has taken place. -- George Bernard Shaw
Reply With Quote
  #23 (permalink)  
Old August 3rd, 2012, 10:30 AM
Senior Member
Admiral
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Greeneville, Tennessee
Posts: 4,524
Default

AR,

In a nutshell.....absolutely for handguns. As far as long guns go, there are so many variables involved that I won't even go there. Some I'm sure with which you would agree, others probably not but inasmuch as you're a reasonable person, we'd probably agree more often than not even on that subject.

When it comes to "loopholes," having never personally visited but one or two gun shows, I am not qualified to truly render an opinion simply because I don't know what all the loopholes are involving long guns. As a for instance, I see no need for people, even reasonable (the operative word being reasonable) people who don't like guns or gun possession of any type may agree with this and that is the sale of what the average American would consider a hunting rifle or shotgun for instance.

Additionally, one of the best home defense weapons I recommend is a shotgun with at least an 18" barrel (which is a Fderal minimum standard).

Now that I've PO'd both sides, how is your day going? :-)
__________________
Todd
_______________
NCL Epic 2012, Eastern Caribbean
Explorer of the Seas 2009, Eastern Caribbean
Explorer of the Seas 2007, Eastern Caribbean
Explorer of the Seas 2006, Eastern Caribbean

Last edited by ToddDH; August 3rd, 2012 at 10:40 AM.
Reply With Quote
  #24 (permalink)  
Old August 3rd, 2012, 10:53 AM
AR AR is online now
Senior Member
Admiral
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Posts: 2,476
Default

Todd--

As I understand it, in a nutshell the gun show loophole allows guns to be sold to people without the rigor of background checks, waiting periods, etc. that are required in gun shops. Fundamentally it apparently amounts to a double standard: one set of rules in gun shops, another set at gun shows. So the actual question is: should there be a single set of rules that qualify you to buy, no matter where you do it?

My day's going OK, considering I had to speak at the funeral of a good friend on Wednesday, and I'm still feeling quite "mortal." But then you know about that far more than the rest of us. Expect to perk up today; we're headed for our annual weekend at a great folk music festival in the Shenandoah Valley--good friends, good tailgating, good music.

Hang in there. Yes, we would agree on more things than we disagree on. Plus we'd each learn from each other (well, we've done a lot of that here). That's what coming together in the middle of the room and talking is all about. But again, you know that.
__________________
The single biggest problem in communication is the illusion that it has taken place. -- George Bernard Shaw
Reply With Quote
  #25 (permalink)  
Old August 3rd, 2012, 11:08 AM
ship2shore's Avatar
Senior Member
Captain
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 923
Default

I agree. It WOULD be hard to miss in an enclosed space with a sawed-off (or not) shotgun. You only get two tries, however.
Reply With Quote
  #26 (permalink)  
Old August 3rd, 2012, 02:09 PM
Senior Member
Admiral
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Greeneville, Tennessee
Posts: 4,524
Default

Shiptoshore,

Ahhh, you're forgetting something when it comes to home defense. What if your Shotgun is a Remington 12 ga. slide action 870 or a Mossberg 500?

If you maintain one in the chamber and four rounds in the magazine that's not two but five tries. If that's not enough, my strong suggestion is that you have a great pair of track shoes.
__________________
Todd
_______________
NCL Epic 2012, Eastern Caribbean
Explorer of the Seas 2009, Eastern Caribbean
Explorer of the Seas 2007, Eastern Caribbean
Explorer of the Seas 2006, Eastern Caribbean
Reply With Quote
  #27 (permalink)  
Old August 3rd, 2012, 02:23 PM
Senior Member
Admiral
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Greeneville, Tennessee
Posts: 4,524
Default

AR,

Based upon what you said (again I've only been to two gun shows and they were years ago), the requirements normally required in the area in which one lives (they vary state to state), should apply to the sales of ALL firearms.

I also have always said that in MHO, any handgun sale should only be allowed to one who has proven they know how to not only use but properly and safely handle a firearm (course completioncertificate, etc.).

Hate to say this but some of the most egregious safety violations I've ever seen were committed by employees of firearms retailers. I personally took the time to properly train the employees in the safe and proper handling of the sale of firearms belonging to a relative who owns a very large gun store.
__________________
Todd
_______________
NCL Epic 2012, Eastern Caribbean
Explorer of the Seas 2009, Eastern Caribbean
Explorer of the Seas 2007, Eastern Caribbean
Explorer of the Seas 2006, Eastern Caribbean
Reply With Quote
  #28 (permalink)  
Old August 3rd, 2012, 04:13 PM
blueliner's Avatar
Senior Member
Admiral
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Northern Illinois
Posts: 1,176
Default

Well, I don't make my living from guns, that was Big-Mac I believe. I am just an avid gun enthusiast. I compete in both pistol and rifle competitions.

Todd is correct, firearms sales must conform to the local laws. There really is no "gun-show" loophole. However, 1 thing I will agree with is that anyone who buys a gun should be subject to the national insta-check system. I attend many gun shows, and here in Illinois, if a private sale is going to be made, they must engage a FFL (Federal Firearms Lisc.) holder to do the transfer. So in that matter, I would agree with AR that everyone should be background checked. I do NOT, however, believe that anyone should have to be subject to any certificate program or mandatory class to get any kind of gun.

I am sure neither of us is going to change each others minds here. That is because I see guns as merely inanimate objects, just what they are, hunks of metal, wood, and/or plastic. It is the hands they are in that matters. The great Charlton Heston once said: "Here's my credo. There are no good guns, There are no bad guns. A gun in the hands of a bad man is a bad thing. Any gun in the hands of a good man is no threat to anyone, except bad people."

You may see an semi-auto AR-15 as a bad gun, but it's just a gun, not a bad gun or a good gun, just a gun. As I have said before, all those other regulations will do nothing to stop mass killings. Waiting periods, bans on certain magazines or gun types, gunfree zones, registration, limits on ammo sales......don't do a thing. Just feel good measures by ignorant poiticians pandering to get votes from constituents that don't know any better.

I believe gun ownership is a right, you think it is a privilege. A privilege that can be monitired or banned by the government. Something I have to prove need for. Except a majority of Americans believe as I do, it is a right. The 1st 10 Amendments to the Constitution are called the "Bill of Rights", not the "Bill of Needs".

As strongly as I believe in the 2nd Amendment, I also believe in the 1st Amendment as well. I will defend forever your right to your opinion and your right to make your opinions known. If that is your position, then you have every right to say so and advocate for it.
__________________
Scott

Majesty of the Seas - 10/03 & 02/07 & 11/08
Enchantment of the Seas - 10/04 & 10/11
Mariner of the Seas - 10/05
Vision of the Seas - 10/06 & 09/07
Carnival Liberty - 10/07
Adventure of the Seas - 9/08
Ruby Princess - 12/09
Voyager of the Seas - 9/10
Carnival Spirit - 11/10
Oasis of the Seas - 9/13
Reply With Quote
  #29 (permalink)  
Old August 4th, 2012, 12:11 AM
ship2shore's Avatar
Senior Member
Captain
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 923
Default

quote ToddDH "Ahhh, you're forgetting something when it comes to home defense. What if your Shotgun is a Remington 12 ga. slide action 870 or a Mossberg 500?"

No, I wasn't referring to "Assault Shotguns"....
Reply With Quote
  #30 (permalink)  
Old August 4th, 2012, 01:24 AM
Senior Member
Admiral
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Greeneville, Tennessee
Posts: 4,524
Default

Neither could ever remotely be "confused" with an "Assault Shotgun" such as a Remington Mdl. 1100 with a 12' barrel and a Pachmyer pistol grip (for law enforcement purposes only) but I assure you there are shotguns out there i personally classify as an "assault shotgun" because they have little if any sporting use whatsoever.

Now I happen to have probably the most dangerous "Assault' weapon out there. I call it a"TheFelix" and it weighs about 12 pounds and has claws that are like razors. Anyone crazy enough to come into this house and mess with "The Felis" is definitely going to rue the day he/she was ever born. Of course I'm well protected because "The Felix" sleeps alongside of me every night!
__________________
Todd
_______________
NCL Epic 2012, Eastern Caribbean
Explorer of the Seas 2009, Eastern Caribbean
Explorer of the Seas 2007, Eastern Caribbean
Explorer of the Seas 2006, Eastern Caribbean
Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Aurora AR Chit - Chat for Cruisers 7 September 2nd, 2012 04:12 PM
Good Bear vs Bad Bear WiltonDramaDrive Gay / Lesbian Cruising 0 May 29th, 2008 05:25 PM
Waving arms .. poof Y2C Chit - Chat for Cruisers 1 July 15th, 2004 07:23 AM
Can you see the Aurora? Try this! Shar Alaska 2 April 16th, 2001 11:42 AM


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On


 

All times are GMT -4. The time now is 10:50 AM.
design by: Themes by Design

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Search Engine Friendly URLs by vBSEO 3.6.1