Now is not the time to talk about gun control (1 Viewer)

[brandon]

T&P

Redirect Notice

 

[BullSheetBuddha]

But you don’t need a high capacity magazine for bears. You just don’t.

Of course not.

Having a need for a firearm as a civilian doesn't include, IMO, a need for an assault rifle period, let alone with a high-capacity magazine. There are lots of firearms out there that aren't military style weapons but will protect you from four legged predators.

For example:
"Designed as a practical and easy-to-carry gun for self-defense against large predators, the Ruger Super Redhawk Alaskan is a great choice as a bear-defense gun. Available in .44 Magnum, .454 Casull, and .480 Ruger, the Super Redhawk Alaskan packs a lot of power into a small package."

https://www.wideopenspaces.com/10-best-bear-defense-guns-pics/

 

[MT15]

They left a 2-yo, who was found wandering around alone and will be raised by grandparents.

 

[zztop]

this girl is 18 and has already been through a lot

Look at My Face and Tell Me We Don’t Need Gun Control

A bullet from an assault-rifle hit me in the face at the Highland Park parade. When will it stop?

www.thedailybeast.com

Here is the thing: I am just 18 but this is not the first time I have been close to a mass shooting. In 2016, when a shooter killed 49 people at the Pulse nightclub in Orlando with a semiautomatic rifle, I was 10 minutes away, visiting my dad. In 2017, he was living in Las Vegas when a sniper armed with multiple assault rifles shot up the Route 91 Harvest Festival, killing 60 people; my dad being extremely nearby.

 

[BullSheetBuddha]

I was a bit stunned when MT15 responded to a post of mine with, "But you don’t need a high capacity magazine for bears. You just don’t."

I guess that there have been so many shootings with these ARs, and other military style weapons with high capacity magazines we don't think about all the other firearms that are available.

We do NOT need military style weapons with high capacity magazines. They serve NO civilian purpose. There are plenty of firearms that don't fall into that category that can work in any situation that a civilian finds himself in. So, why the hell can't we just stop selling those military style firearms? Geezus.

 

[DaveXA]

I was a bit stunned when MT15 responded to a post of mine with, "But you don’t need a high capacity magazine for bears. You just don’t."

I guess that there have been so many shootings with these ARs, and other military style weapons with high capacity magazines we don't think about all the other firearms that are available.

We do NOT need military style weapons with high capacity magazines. They serve NO civilian purpose. There are plenty of firearms that don't fall into that category that can work in any situation that a civilian finds himself in. So, why the hell can't we just stop selling those military style firearms? Geezus.

I don't know. But, a lot, I mean, a LOT of people have those type of rifles. I don't know how you get all of that out of circulation, but I'm skeptical it's even possible. I mean, I have family members and good friends who have them, including a few liberal friends who you wouldn't think would have them. Some people buy/sell guns as an investment, particularly older, rarer guns, and some are speculating like they would any other commodity. It's not something I'm really interested in doing, and I've never owned a gun, but the people I know who have guns would not give them up willingly.

 

[Taurus]

But you don’t need a high capacity magazine for bears. You just don’t.

You do for feral pigs, though.
They're about the only prey I can think of where an AR-style rifle is necessary.
Low recoil, long range, high capacity and serious stopping power.
If you need to chew through 20 or more hogs as quickly as possible, an AR is the way to go.
If we're planning to take that option away from farmers and ranchers who truly suffer from this invasive species, we need to give them an equivalent tool.

 

[Nolaswede]

You do for feral pigs, though.
They're about the only prey I can think of where an AR-style rifle is necessary.
Low recoil, long range, high capacity and serious stopping power.
If you need to chew through 20 or more hogs as quickly as possible, an AR is the way to go.
If we're planning to take that option away from farmers and ranchers who truly suffer from this invasive species, we need to give them an equivalent tool.

Or, if you are a farmer etc, you can apply for a special licence etc! IMO, we are just making it way too difficult (to keep our citizens safe)!

 

[BullSheetBuddha]

I don't know. But, a lot, I mean, a LOT of people have those type of rifles. I don't know how you get all of that out of circulation, but I'm skeptical it's even possible. I mean, I have family members and good friends who have them, including a few liberal friends who you wouldn't think would have them. Some people buy/sell guns as an investment, particularly older, rarer guns, and some are speculating like they would any other commodity. It's not something I'm really interested in doing, and I've never owned a gun, but the people I know who have guns would not give them up willingly.

"a LOT of people have those type of rifles."

That's the problem. People buy them up like candy.

First you stop selling them commercially. Then you move from there. If people don't want to do anything about this then it's on them. I'm liberal and I've had AR15s, and M1As(civilian version of the M14). I don't have them anymore. What good are we if we can't find a way out of this? What kind of country are we if we aren't willing to sacrifice for the greater good? Lots of things cost us money. Look at the price of gas now. People still drive, so people can take a loss on their "assault" weapons in one way or another.

 

[BullSheetBuddha]

...............................................
If we're planning to take that option away from farmers and ranchers who truly suffer from this invasive species, we need to give them an equivalent tool.

We can find a way to take care of farmers and ranchers if they truly need high capacity semi-automatics for feral pigs. Special license maybe?

Farmers, ranchers, and those living in brown bear country need firearms of some kind IMO but by and large, they don't need assault weapons.

 

[Taurus]

Or, if you are a farmer etc, you can apply for a special licence etc! IMO, we are just making it way too difficult (to keep our citizens safe)!

Unfortunately that's the exact thing SCOTUS just struck down.
There's no longer any 'why' attached to gun ownership. (I actually feel that this is a good thing. Cities and states just need to come up with a different basis for regulation.)

 

[SFIDC3]

But you don’t need a high capacity magazine for bears. You just don’t.

I’ve done a lot of research on bears as I’ve been fishing a lot in what I call their world….MT, Yellowstone, et al…..every bear book and every single ranger I’ve talked to says the same thing….Guns are generally not effective against them (browns/grizzlies specifically), a perfect kill shot is rare and if you injure the bear it will no longer be a bluff charge….Bear spray is way more effective….

I’ve never heard a good argument that AR’s are necessary for anything….

 

[DaveXA]

I’ve done a lot of research on bears as I’ve been fishing a lot in what I call their world….MT, Yellowstone, et al…..every bear book and every single ranger I’ve talked to says the same thing….Guns are generally not effective against them (browns/grizzlies specifically), a perfect kill shot is rare and if you injure the bear it will no longer be a bluff charge….Bear spray is way more effective….

I’ve never heard a good argument that AR’s are necessary for anything….

You do for feral pigs, though.
They're about the only prey I can think of where an AR-style rifle is necessary.
Low recoil, long range, high capacity and serious stopping power.
If you need to chew through 20 or more hogs as quickly as possible, an AR is the way to go.
If we're planning to take that option away from farmers and ranchers who truly suffer from this invasive species, we need to give them an equivalent tool.

I do agree there can be special exemptions for those farmers and limit them elsewhere. But as mentioned, SCOTUS has changed the landscape when it comes to 2A and guns. So need to change Congress and SCOTUS if we're gonna see a sea change in gun laws.

Guns have always been a loser election topic though. I don't know how you get around that.

 

[BullSheetBuddha]

I’ve done a lot of research on bears as I’ve been fishing a lot in what I call their world….MT, Yellowstone, et al…..every bear book and every single ranger I’ve talked to says the same thing….Guns are generally not effective against them (browns/grizzlies specifically), a perfect kill shot is rare and if you injure the bear it will no longer be a bluff charge….Bear spray is way more effective….

I’ve never heard a good argument that AR’s are necessary for anything….

There's a lot of truth to what you're saying but I wouldn't eliminate the ability to carry a weapon in brown bear country. And I don't mean for hunting. I would, like you, recommend bear spray above all else.

BTW, I'm not talking about black bears. We have those here in New England and I don't know anyone, outside of some Maine Guides, that carry for protection against them.

 

[NoPartyMike]

If I have this correct, the shooter had a suicide threat in 2019 and threatened to kill everyone in his house in 2020, with both reported to the police. I suppose the immediate question is, how did he then pass 5 background checks in the next 2 years to purchase 5 firearms? In the short term, that is definitely something legislators need to work on. Not sure if the new federal red flag law addresses that.

 

[Optimus Prime]

If I have this correct, the shooter had a suicide threat in 2019 and threatened to kill everyone in his house in 2020, with both reported to the police. I suppose the immediate question is, how did he then pass 5 background checks in the next 2 years to purchase 5 firearms? In the short term, that is definitely something legislators need to work on. Not sure if the new federal red flag law addresses that.

makes you wonder what it would take to fail the background check doesn't it?

 

[NoPartyMike]

makes you wonder what it would take to fail the background check doesn't it?

Yes. Checking into the recently passed legislation, it does enhance background checks, but only for those between the ages of 18-21. And, only incentivises states to implement red flag laws. This would've worked, but not if this shooter purchased at age 22. It's extremely concerning that his issues from just 2-3 years prior did not translate to a failed background check.

Per NY Times article:

Enhanced background checks for younger gun buyers​

Juvenile records, including those regarding mental health, would for the first time be required in criminal background checks for prospective gun buyers under the age of 21, and authorities would have more time to conduct the checks — 10 days, up from the current three.

Under the legislation, federal authorities would have to check with local law enforcement and review state records to determine if a prospective buyer has a juvenile criminal or mental health history that would disqualify them from purchasing a gun. If they found such a record, they would turn it over to the F.B.I. for further investigation.

 

[insidejob]

makes you wonder what it would take to fail the background check doesn't it?

Having a simple possession arrest without conviction failed the background check for me when I was 21.

 

[Optimus Prime]

Having a simple possession arrest without conviction failed the background check for me when I was 21.

Maybe you should have threatened to kill everyone

That doesn’t seem to set off any alarms