The Non-Jazz NBA Thread in the Jazz Section

[Rubashov]

Most of these shootings are taking place within 50 feet. At that point the improvement in accuracy is negligible.

Moving target with a pistol at 50 feet is some pretty good shooting, kids these days...

 

[fishonjazz]

This.

AR does not stand for "assault rifle". It stands for "armalite rifle". People get it in their heads that the "AR" is simply fully automatic death unequaled by any firearm known to man. It just isn't like that. They choose it because it makes them feel like a "soldier" carrying out an important mission. But a pistol would be every bit as effective.

Agreed. Yet you just explained the reason that AR type guns should have different regulations. It makes them feel like a soldier. It looks like a call of duty gun.


Sent from my iPad using JazzFanz mobile app

 

[fishonjazz]

Wholesale gun rights reform would require either a constitutional amendment or a supreme court that has a different view of the 2nd amendment than our current supreme court has.

While you can find polls where a majority of people support "reasonable" regulation, that's only true so long as you don't specify what you mean by "reasonable" because the second you start to define it your majority support fractures into oblivion.

A significant portion of democrats do not support significant gun reform. There is no path to significant reforms right now. That's the facts.

And it doesnt really matter if a significant portion of democrats or republicans did support significant reforms.
Politicians still gonna get paid by gun supporting lobbyists and still wouldnt do anything.


Sent from my iPad using JazzFanz mobile app

 

[LogGrad98]

Agreed. Yet you just explained the reason that AR type guns should have different regulations. It makes them feel like a soldier. It looks like a call of duty gun.


Sent from my iPad using JazzFanz mobile app

The point is we chase the Boogeyman of guns and then they just switch to the sport version of the same rifle or load up on pistols and nothing changes. But we sure did spend billions to regulate "assault rifles" to virtually zero effect.

 

[One Brow]

The point is we chase the Boogeyman of guns and then they just switch to the sport version of the same rifle or load up on pistols and nothing changes. But we sure did spend billions to regulate "assault rifles" to virtually zero effect.

Do they? While people with gun expertise and no ego to prop up understand there is little difference, how many of these mass shooters does that describe? How many will think it's just not dramatic enough if they can't use a semi-auto rifle? I honestly don't know. but if the semi-auto rifle is the overwhelming choice, it seems like a question to ask.

 

[LogGrad98]

Do they? While people with gun expertise and no ego to prop up understand there is little difference, how many of these mass shooters does that describe? How many will think it's just not dramatic enough if they can't use a semi-auto rifle? I honestly don't know. but if the semi-auto rifle is the overwhelming choice, it seems like a question to ask.

This implies choice of weapon determines follow-through. I find that inaccurate. I doubt there are many people out there thinking "I want to shoot up my school but if i can't get an AR then forget it". It's just the weapon they would prefer. My bet is anything available would suffice. Weapon of choice does not to me mean that if i can't get the weapon i want then forget it. It's a psychological state, an itch that is going to be scratched. If they have to use a different scratcher the itch is still there. It might be that if you eliminate AR-style guns the school shootings will just go away, but my gut tells me that's a heavy oversimplification.

Maybe if we had some evidence of one of these guys going store to store to find the exact weapon they wanted it might carry more weight. Even more if it could ever be shown that it even delayed or discouraged a shooter significantly. Many of them have been known to take plenty of time collecting their weapons so it seems delays aren't significant mitigating factors. Although it could be we would have a lot more if there were even fewer delays. Almost no way to know this. The Columbine shooters spent more than a year planning and accumulating weapons and for them the weapon of choice was actually a pistol, even though one was using a version of an AR-Style rifle.

My point was that we could better use the time and money chasing this one gun to hopefully enact more meaningful control that would have broader effect than one gun.

But you better believe the gun lobby would love to have everyone zero in on one gun they could fight interminably before finally "giving up" the point, all while plenty of other fully serviceable weapons are left off the table.

 

[One Brow]

If they have to use a different scratcher the itch is still there. It might be that if you eliminate AR-style guns the school shootings will just go away, but my gut tells me that's a heavy oversimplification.

Not go away, but perhaps reduce. I don't know enough about the psychology of these people, but it would not surprise me if some of them were looking to kill with "flair". It might be a coincidence, but school shooting did rise after the "assault weapons" ban was let expire.

But you better believe the gun lobby would love to have everyone zero in on one gun they could fight interminably before finally "giving up" the point, all while plenty of other fully serviceable weapons are left off the table.

Perhaps, although lately they have not been the compromising sort.

 

[fishonjazz]

This implies choice of weapon determines follow-through. I find that inaccurate. I doubt there are many people out there thinking "I want to shoot up my school but if i can't get an AR then forget it". It's just the weapon they would prefer. My bet is anything available would suffice.

Lets find out if your bet is correct. Never know unless we try.



Sent from my iPad using JazzFanz mobile app

 

[Gameface]

Lets find out if your bet is correct. Never know unless we try.



Sent from my iPad using JazzFanz mobile app

What would you base an AR-15 ban on? Just the name? Functional capability? Appearance? By model number?

When they release the all new RA-51 the day after the ban that slips through the new regulations while doing pretty much the same thing how do you stop it?

 

[One Brow]

What would you base an AR-15 ban on? Just the name? Functional capability? Appearance? By model number?

When they release the all new RA-51 the day after the ban that slips through the new regulations while doing pretty much the same thing how do you stop it?

Length of barrel and semi-automatic status? Would that impact hunting weapons?

 

[Gameface]

Length of barrel and semi-automatic status? Would that impact hunting weapons?

AR-15s are hunting weapons for many people. So it would impact those. It's not a preferable deer hunting rifle, but I've known people who use them for coyote hunting and varmint hunting.

There are already minimums on barrel length of a rifle.

I think overall minimum length, semi-automatic, detachable magazine would be a place to start as far as regulating current AR-15 and similar weapons, but then a day later there is a model that meets the min length, has a large internal magazine, and wouldn't you know it the gun industry has designed a weapon that doesn't classify as semi-automatic yet can be fired almost as fast.

Look to the last AWB and the way the industry and customers found ways around the regulations.

Let's keep in mind these are semi-automatic rifles with detachable magazines that are relatively short.

The one on the bottom shoots .22 cal rounds that are on the very low end as far as "power" is concerned, even compared to moat handguns. There is almost no way you could ban AR-15s and not ban that Ruger 10/22.

 

[LogGrad98]

Lets find out if your bet is correct. Never know unless we try.



Sent from my iPad using JazzFanz mobile app

Well not every mass shooting involves an AR.

Redirect Notice

I think just betting on eliminating one gun rather than focusing on the bigger problems is short-sighted and a waste of resources.

Edit: what's kind of interesting is I've made that last point in almost every post I've made on this subject and it keeps getting left out of all responses. No one cares to address that part. They just want to stick to the "AR Bad" mantra and not get into what it will take and where else we can focus our efforts. I'm not defending gun ownership, but acknowledging the fact that there is limited resources and support for gun reform and focusing the lions share of the effort on a single method is shortsighted.