ISF Logo   IS Forum
Forum Index Register Members List Events Mark Forums Read Help

Go Back   International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » Social Issues & Current Events
 


Welcome to the International Skeptics Forum, where we discuss skepticism, critical thinking, the paranormal and science in a friendly but lively way. You are currently viewing the forum as a guest, which means you are missing out on discussing matters that are of interest to you. Please consider registering so you can gain full use of the forum features and interact with other Members. Registration is simple, fast and free! Click here to register today.
Reply
Old 20th March 2018, 06:30 AM   #41
LTC8K6
Penultimate Amazing
 
LTC8K6's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Directly under a deadly chemtrail
Posts: 19,912
I can buy a machine gun here in NC as long as I fill out the forms, pass the checks, and have the money.
__________________
What a fool believes, no wise man has the power to reason away. What seems to be, is always better than nothing.

2 prints, same midtarsal crock..., I mean break?
LTC8K6 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 20th March 2018, 06:39 AM   #42
LTC8K6
Penultimate Amazing
 
LTC8K6's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Directly under a deadly chemtrail
Posts: 19,912
Originally Posted by Nessie View Post
I just mean that there is now a type of firearm which it is illegal for any civilian to possess.

The question is, how do you remove those guns from civilian hands?
In America?

You can't, unless they volunteer to turn them over.

They can't be seized offhand.

You can't search people or property without probable cause.

The police would have to have a credible report to get a warrant.

I suppose someone could get mad at you and claim you have an illegal firearm and then the police could get a warrant to search.

Overall, I think the police would have to find them over time in the normal course of business, and confiscate them when they find them.

Even with a law banning them and an affirmation by the supreme court after court challenges, you aren't just going to march around and seize them.
__________________
What a fool believes, no wise man has the power to reason away. What seems to be, is always better than nothing.

2 prints, same midtarsal crock..., I mean break?
LTC8K6 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 20th March 2018, 06:44 AM   #43
theprestige
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 26,620
Originally Posted by Nessie View Post
That is a start. Do you send the police round to those houses to get the guns?
How did Australia do it?

The scenario you envision has actually played out in a western nation in recent memory. Why do you act like it's such a conundrum?

Last edited by theprestige; 20th March 2018 at 06:45 AM.
theprestige is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 20th March 2018, 07:16 AM   #44
MikeG
Now. Do it now.
 
MikeG's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: UK
Posts: 23,167
Originally Posted by theprestige View Post
........The scenario you envision has actually played out in a western nation in recent memory. Why do you act like it's such a conundrum?
I think the evidence of this and other related threads shows Nessie being invested in the failure of any or all gun control in the USA. I haven't the first idea why.
__________________
"The Conservatives want to keep wogs out and march boldly back to the 1950s when Britain still had an Empire and blacks, women, poofs and Irish knew their place." The Don That's what we've sunk to here.
MikeG is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 20th March 2018, 08:26 AM   #45
catsmate
No longer the 1
 
catsmate's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 19,242
Originally Posted by Nessie View Post
It has been decided that automatic weapons in civilian hands is not a good idea. Laws have been passed such that the state and federal governments all over the USA have agreed, no automatic weapons in civilian hands. What next?

No one has any idea how many automatic weapons are in the USA.
No one has much of an idea who has them.
Gangs are unlikely to cooperate and disarm voluntarily.
Militias are definitely not going to cooperate and disarm voluntarily.
Actually, lots of people are going to fight to keep their guns. Others may just hide them and play dumb.
The police are not going to be happy about the battles they face as they try and seize guns.
The manufacturers I presume can still make such guns, but only for the military and police and to sell abroad.
What about smuggling, as all the guns that went to Mexico start to head back to the USA?

Does anyone think that it would be possible to remove automatic weapons from civilian hands? If so, how?
In the US fully automatic weapons ('machine guns') are heavily controlled through the acts of 1934, 1968 and 1986. About 120,000 are in private hands.
Such weapons have been used in the commission of three crimes of violence.
__________________
As human right is always something given, it always in reality reduces to the right which men give, "concede," to each other. If the right to existence is conceded to new-born children, then they have the right; if it is not conceded to them, as was the case among the Spartans and ancient Romans, then they do not have it. For only society can give or concede it to them; they themselves cannot take it, or give it to themselves.
catsmate is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 20th March 2018, 07:50 PM   #46
BStrong
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: San Francisco
Posts: 11,173
Originally Posted by theprestige View Post
How did Australia do it?

The scenario you envision has actually played out in a western nation in recent memory. Why do you act like it's such a conundrum?
An Australian shooter friend had a joke back at the time they had the semi-auto surrender program:

Why do Aussies oil their gardens?

They don't want their guns to rust.

I strongly suspect that Aussie's may not be much different than their American cousins.

At the of the time of original California assault weapon law in 1989-1990, the law that was passed required registration of existing firearms listed by name in the new law.

The estimated number of firearms covered by the new law in civilian hands at that time was approximately 300,000, M/L

http://www-bcf.usc.edu/~usclrev/pdf/075104.pdf

In California, only assault weapon owners and personal handgun
importers are required to register their weapons.214 Many strongly oppose
any sort of registration system. Some gun owners fervently believe that
registration is a precursor to firearms confiscation.215 They also fear that
permitting registration will allow the government to assume the role of “big
brother.”216 Some individuals so strongly opposed registration that they
purposefully do not register their weapons and play the odds that, given the
number of guns in California, they will not be caught.217 Nearly ninety
percent of the approximately 300,000 assault weapon owners in California
have not registered their weapons.218


Here's a breakdown by county for assault weapons registered pursuant to that statute:

http://ag.ca.gov/firearms/forms/pdf/AWregstats.pdf

130,338 weapons registered w/ the state, less than half of the low-end estimate used by Jacobs and Potter. California has a second assault weapons law that encompassed firearms deemed to be assault weapons by features. The state Bureau of Firearms has not disclosed how many firearms were registered pursuant to that statute, and we're now in a third registration period for the new law that was enacted to address "bullet button" assault rifles - no numbers released on that either.

Could well be that Australians didn't comply with their surrender law and aren't criminally inclined towards violence so they don't come to the attention of the authorities.
__________________
"When a man who is honestly mistaken, hears the truth, he will either cease being mistaken or cease being honest." - Anonymous

"Dulce bellum inexpertīs." - Erasmus
BStrong is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 21st March 2018, 11:14 AM   #47
theprestige
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 26,620
Originally Posted by BStrong View Post
An Australian shooter friend had a joke back at the time they had the semi-auto surrender program:

Why do Aussies oil their gardens?

They don't want their guns to rust.

I strongly suspect that Aussie's may not be much different than their American cousins.

At the of the time of original California assault weapon law in 1989-1990, the law that was passed required registration of existing firearms listed by name in the new law.

The estimated number of firearms covered by the new law in civilian hands at that time was approximately 300,000, M/L

http://www-bcf.usc.edu/~usclrev/pdf/075104.pdf

In California, only assault weapon owners and personal handgun
importers are required to register their weapons.214 Many strongly oppose
any sort of registration system. Some gun owners fervently believe that
registration is a precursor to firearms confiscation.215 They also fear that
permitting registration will allow the government to assume the role of “big
brother.”216 Some individuals so strongly opposed registration that they
purposefully do not register their weapons and play the odds that, given the
number of guns in California, they will not be caught.217 Nearly ninety
percent of the approximately 300,000 assault weapon owners in California
have not registered their weapons.218


Here's a breakdown by county for assault weapons registered pursuant to that statute:

http://ag.ca.gov/firearms/forms/pdf/AWregstats.pdf

130,338 weapons registered w/ the state, less than half of the low-end estimate used by Jacobs and Potter. California has a second assault weapons law that encompassed firearms deemed to be assault weapons by features. The state Bureau of Firearms has not disclosed how many firearms were registered pursuant to that statute, and we're now in a third registration period for the new law that was enacted to address "bullet button" assault rifles - no numbers released on that either.

Could well be that Australians didn't comply with their surrender law and aren't criminally inclined towards violence so they don't come to the attention of the authorities.
Seems reasonable to me.

Nessie, you now have two practical, real-world examples of the kind of policy you're talking about: Australia and California. Do these examples answer your questions about implementation and enforcement? I hope they do; after all they are real-world examples, not hypothetical ones.
theprestige is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 22nd March 2018, 03:16 AM   #48
Nessie
Penultimate Amazing
 
Nessie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 10,745
Originally Posted by theprestige View Post
How did Australia do it?

The scenario you envision has actually played out in a western nation in recent memory. Why do you act like it's such a conundrum?
In Australia they knew who had the guns, how many there are, where to go and get them and those who had the guns are law abiding citizens.

In the USA they have no idea who has the guns, how many there are, where they are and many with the guns are not law abiding citizens, they are criminals, militia members, people who fear government tyranny.

How do you not see the huge difference?
__________________
Audiophile/biker/sceptic
Nessie is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 22nd March 2018, 03:19 AM   #49
Nessie
Penultimate Amazing
 
Nessie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 10,745
Originally Posted by MikeG View Post
I think the evidence of this and other related threads shows Nessie being invested in the failure of any or all gun control in the USA. I haven't the first idea why.
I am following the evidence as to what can and cannot be done. That the conclusion is awful, is not something I take any pleasure in.
__________________
Audiophile/biker/sceptic
Nessie is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 22nd March 2018, 03:33 AM   #50
Nessie
Penultimate Amazing
 
Nessie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 10,745
Originally Posted by theprestige View Post
Seems reasonable to me.

Nessie, you now have two practical, real-world examples of the kind of policy you're talking about: Australia and California. Do these examples answer your questions about implementation and enforcement? I hope they do; after all they are real-world examples, not hypothetical ones.
The answer is because in no case in those real world examples, did the police have to figure out who had the guns, how many there were and face people who would not likely give up without a fight.

Why do think it is exactly the same for the police to call on and recover the now illegal firearm from;

- a person who has passed background checks and has never broken the law, for the firearm they know he has.

- a person who may or may not have that type of gun, with a criminal background, who lives with other gang members or in a militia compound, who has professed great opposition to the government.

- a 16 year old who is known to have a relevant gun, but hates the world, has mental heath problems, fantasises over Columbine and has suicidal tendencies.

- a Texan member of the NRA, who may have a relevant firearm, who has already shot and killed someone in self defence resulting in no charges against themself and who regards the 2nd Amendment as the prime safeguard of all his rights.

If you are going to rely on people handing over their guns voluntarily, which of the above will do so and which will not?
__________________
Audiophile/biker/sceptic
Nessie is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 22nd March 2018, 03:34 AM   #51
Nessie
Penultimate Amazing
 
Nessie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 10,745
Originally Posted by catsmate View Post
In the US fully automatic weapons ('machine guns') are heavily controlled through the acts of 1934, 1968 and 1986. About 120,000 are in private hands.
Such weapons have been used in the commission of three crimes of violence.
OK, use the AR-15 as an example of what I mean. How do you get them if they are made illegal?
__________________
Audiophile/biker/sceptic
Nessie is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 22nd March 2018, 03:45 AM   #52
LTC8K6
Penultimate Amazing
 
LTC8K6's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Directly under a deadly chemtrail
Posts: 19,912
Originally Posted by Nessie View Post
OK, use the AR-15 as an example of what I mean. How do you get them if they are made illegal?
Offer a free pickup truck for each one turned in?

Our government has never shied away from printing money.
__________________
What a fool believes, no wise man has the power to reason away. What seems to be, is always better than nothing.

2 prints, same midtarsal crock..., I mean break?
LTC8K6 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 22nd March 2018, 07:46 AM   #53
theprestige
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 26,620
Originally Posted by Nessie View Post
The answer is because in no case in those real world examples, did the police have to figure out who had the guns, how many there were and face people who would not likely give up without a fight.

Why do think it is exactly the same for the police to call on and recover the now illegal firearm from;

- a person who has passed background checks and has never broken the law, for the firearm they know he has.

- a person who may or may not have that type of gun, with a criminal background, who lives with other gang members or in a militia compound, who has professed great opposition to the government.

- a 16 year old who is known to have a relevant gun, but hates the world, has mental heath problems, fantasises over Columbine and has suicidal tendencies.

- a Texan member of the NRA, who may have a relevant firearm, who has already shot and killed someone in self defence resulting in no charges against themself and who regards the 2nd Amendment as the prime safeguard of all his rights.

If you are going to rely on people handing over their guns voluntarily, which of the above will do so and which will not?
I don't see what the problem is. You're the one who thinks that banning guns requires going house to house and rounding them up. There are other approaches.

Also, you've mentioned people who own guns illegally today, under the current laws. Banning those guns doesn't make the confiscation problem any harder, for those people. If we don't need to go house to house rounding up all the illegal guns in the country today, I don't see why we would need to do it tomorrow after passing your ban.

Really, your proposal seems pretty unworkable on its face, for all sorts of reasons. Several people have suggested a much more practical approach, which you keep ignoring:

Amnesty period, compensation, and confiscating any guns discovered in the normal course of police duties thereafter.
theprestige is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 22nd March 2018, 07:47 AM   #54
theprestige
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 26,620
Originally Posted by Nessie View Post
OK, use the AR-15 as an example of what I mean. How do you get them if they are made illegal?
They're illegal for many people today already. How do you get them today?
theprestige is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 22nd March 2018, 07:49 AM   #55
phiwum
Philosopher
 
phiwum's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 9,734
Originally Posted by LTC8K6 View Post
Offer a free pickup truck for each one turned in?

Our government has never shied away from printing money.
My brother has two AR-15 style rifles. He doesn't like them much. I wouldn't mind acquiring one of them in exchange for a truck. I'm in favor of your plan.
phiwum is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 22nd March 2018, 07:58 AM   #56
theprestige
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 26,620
Another comparison: Cocaine. Presumably it's illegal in the UK. And of course none of the dealers and users are registered with the police. How does the UK go about getting all the cocaine that people illegally possess?
theprestige is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 22nd March 2018, 08:11 AM   #57
phiwum
Philosopher
 
phiwum's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 9,734
Originally Posted by theprestige View Post
Another comparison: Cocaine. Presumably it's illegal in the UK. And of course none of the dealers and users are registered with the police. How does the UK go about getting all the cocaine that people illegally possess?
I can't tell whether the analogy is accurate. Cocaine is manufactured elsewhere and used up when it's applied. Small amounts can be smuggled in easily.

I'd think that guns are somewhat harder to smuggle, but they last for a long time and there are many AR-15s already here. So the analogy doesn't seem to work too well, since the situations are quite different. Some differences suggest that banning guns is easier than banning cocaine, while others suggest the opposite.
phiwum is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 22nd March 2018, 08:29 AM   #58
theprestige
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 26,620
Originally Posted by phiwum View Post
I can't tell whether the analogy is accurate. Cocaine is manufactured elsewhere and used up when it's applied. Small amounts can be smuggled in easily.

I'd think that guns are somewhat harder to smuggle, but they last for a long time and there are many AR-15s already here. So the analogy doesn't seem to work too well, since the situations are quite different. Some differences suggest that banning guns is easier than banning cocaine, while others suggest the opposite.
Fair point. We can stick with gun examples.
theprestige is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 22nd March 2018, 01:00 PM   #59
Nessie
Penultimate Amazing
 
Nessie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 10,745
Originally Posted by theprestige View Post
I don't see what the problem is. You're the one who thinks that banning guns requires going house to house and rounding them up. There are other approaches.

Also, you've mentioned people who own guns illegally today, under the current laws. Banning those guns doesn't make the confiscation problem any harder, for those people. If we don't need to go house to house rounding up all the illegal guns in the country today, I don't see why we would need to do it tomorrow after passing your ban.

Really, your proposal seems pretty unworkable on its face, for all sorts of reasons. Several people have suggested a much more practical approach, which you keep ignoring:

Amnesty period, compensation, and confiscating any guns discovered in the normal course of police duties thereafter.
The proposal I have made is that seizure will not work. I agree that incentives to hand over guns is a less risky way, but again how many gangs, unhappy youths and die hard members of the NRA will hand over their guns, even for compensation?

Are illegally held guns not already confiscated when found during a normal course of police duty? I think they are and that is not having any effect.
__________________
Audiophile/biker/sceptic
Nessie is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 22nd March 2018, 01:25 PM   #60
MikeG
Now. Do it now.
 
MikeG's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: UK
Posts: 23,167
Originally Posted by theprestige View Post
I don't see what the problem is. You're the one who thinks that banning guns requires going house to house and rounding them up. There are other approaches.......
Nessie has an agenda. As a result of that agenda, ignoring the simple message .........buy-back, amnesty period, then confiscation of those guns found during the course of normal police work.......becomes a necessity. S/he will doubtless carry on pretending no-one has suggested it, or will straw-man it with variations no-one has suggested as in your quote. Were it to happen (our way) and prove successful, Nessie would be gutted.
__________________
"The Conservatives want to keep wogs out and march boldly back to the 1950s when Britain still had an Empire and blacks, women, poofs and Irish knew their place." The Don That's what we've sunk to here.

Last edited by MikeG; 22nd March 2018 at 01:26 PM.
MikeG is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 22nd March 2018, 01:41 PM   #61
arthwollipot
Observer of Phenomena
 
arthwollipot's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Location, Location
Posts: 56,925
Originally Posted by Nessie View Post
The proposal I have made is that seizure will not work. I agree that incentives to hand over guns is a less risky way, but again how many gangs, unhappy youths and die hard members of the NRA will hand over their guns, even for compensation?
Speaking as a genuine Australian citizen, I'm going to say that you have to get people to want to turn in their guns. Here, it took only one massacre to do that.
__________________
"This quote was taken out of context."
- Randall Munroe
arthwollipot is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 23rd March 2018, 03:18 AM   #62
Nessie
Penultimate Amazing
 
Nessie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 10,745
Originally Posted by MikeG View Post
Nessie has an agenda. As a result of that agenda, ignoring the simple message .........buy-back, amnesty period, then confiscation of those guns found during the course of normal police work.......becomes a necessity. S/he will doubtless carry on pretending no-one has suggested it, or will straw-man it with variations no-one has suggested as in your quote. Were it to happen (our way) and prove successful, Nessie would be gutted.
You are wrong. I have seen the suggestion of buy back etc. I wanted this discussion to be about how it would actually happen and how successful it would be.

People can make all the suggestions they want, suggestions then have to implemented and acted upon. You keep on dodging that issue.

I say that the evidence is there, that confiscation would not be possible.

I also doubt that enough people would sell back or hand in now illegal weapons to make much of a difference.

I would be delighted if a combined scheme as you suggest did work. I am suspicious that your refusal to show how it would actually work is because even you lack confidence in it.
__________________
Audiophile/biker/sceptic
Nessie is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 23rd March 2018, 03:21 AM   #63
Nessie
Penultimate Amazing
 
Nessie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 10,745
Originally Posted by arthwollipot View Post
Speaking as a genuine Australian citizen, I'm going to say that you have to get people to want to turn in their guns. Here, it took only one massacre to do that.
Which is why I am very pessimistic about any scheme being successful. Even after all the massacres, there is no sign that those who cause the most problems with guns, in particular the gang members and angry youths, let alone decent law abiding citizens are prepared to turn in their guns.
__________________
Audiophile/biker/sceptic
Nessie is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 23rd March 2018, 05:55 PM   #64
BStrong
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: San Francisco
Posts: 11,173
Originally Posted by arthwollipot View Post
Speaking as a genuine Australian citizen, I'm going to say that you have to get people to want to turn in their guns. Here, it took only one massacre to do that.
You're definitely not speaking for all Australian gun owners.

To the extent it was legally possible, certain Australian firearms migrated to the United States.

Here's one account, involving a shooter from NSW that gave a particular pump action shotgun to the man who was and had been the largest licensed NFA weapon dealer in the US:

http://www.smallarmsreview.com/displ...idarticles=484

Ian Scott, a gun collector from New South Wales, Australia, provides further insight. “Curt phoned me up in 1998 and more or less summoned me over to see him. He was making up his will and told me he wanted to include me in it. About two weeks later I flew to Boise to stay with him for a little more than a week. He was on his own and after a few days I realized he was a lonely old man in this great big house full of guns that collectors would give their front teeth for and few family or friends would come near him.

Their friendship was cemented after Australia banned the ownership of most guns in the wake of a 1996 shooting at a Port Arthur tourist spot. Ian could have received “fair market value” for his guns, but chose instead to ship one of his best guns, a Winchester Model 1897 trench gun, to Curtis as an outright gift. Curtis would later point to this gun on his wall in his display area and reveal that no one had ever done such an act of generosity before. It deeply touched him, maybe because it was so uncharacteristic of him, at least up until the time near his death.

Ian Scott was far from being the only Aussie that sent firearms here instead of surrendering them for destruction.
__________________
"When a man who is honestly mistaken, hears the truth, he will either cease being mistaken or cease being honest." - Anonymous

"Dulce bellum inexpertīs." - Erasmus
BStrong is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 23rd March 2018, 06:03 PM   #65
Yeggster
Illuminator
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Canada
Posts: 3,016
Fully automatic machine guns are legal in Canada .. they ARE classed and "Prohibited Weapons" but all that means is you need a prohibited weapons permit to buy and sell them.

I have been on full auto shoots a couple times in Ontario.

new permits are not being issued at this time however
Yeggster is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 23rd March 2018, 06:26 PM   #66
BStrong
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: San Francisco
Posts: 11,173
Originally Posted by Yeggster View Post
Fully automatic machine guns are legal in Canada .. they ARE classed and "Prohibited Weapons" but all that means is you need a prohibited weapons permit to buy and sell them.

I have been on full auto shoots a couple times in Ontario.

new permits are not being issued at this time however
Are you acquainted with Pete from Ontario Gun and Tackle?
__________________
"When a man who is honestly mistaken, hears the truth, he will either cease being mistaken or cease being honest." - Anonymous

"Dulce bellum inexpertīs." - Erasmus
BStrong is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 23rd March 2018, 07:09 PM   #67
Yeggster
Illuminator
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Canada
Posts: 3,016
Originally Posted by BStrong View Post
Are you acquainted with Pete from Ontario Gun and Tackle?
I've never been there ... but have heard of it
Yeggster is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 23rd March 2018, 08:17 PM   #68
BStrong
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: San Francisco
Posts: 11,173
Originally Posted by Yeggster View Post
I've never been there ... but have heard of it
He was my #1 source for FAL/L1A1 parts back in the 70's-'80's.

Amazing the differences between US and Canadian gun laws and attitudes.

The US regulated machineguns etc in 1934, up north they didn't feel the need to do so until the 1950's..

Firearms that were completely unavailable in the US in any form were legal for civilian sale in Canada w/o restrictions other than barrel length and overall length - Semi-auto only BAR's and FAL's and original Dutch manufactured AR-10's were a dime a dozen then.
__________________
"When a man who is honestly mistaken, hears the truth, he will either cease being mistaken or cease being honest." - Anonymous

"Dulce bellum inexpertīs." - Erasmus
BStrong is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 24th March 2018, 05:23 AM   #69
arthwollipot
Observer of Phenomena
 
arthwollipot's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Location, Location
Posts: 56,925
Originally Posted by BStrong View Post
You're definitely not speaking for all Australian gun owners.

To the extent it was legally possible, certain Australian firearms migrated to the United States.
Are you trying to say that this was a good thing??
__________________
"This quote was taken out of context."
- Randall Munroe
arthwollipot is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 24th March 2018, 09:00 AM   #70
Nessie
Penultimate Amazing
 
Nessie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 10,745
Gun buy back schemes in the USA;

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gun_bu...#United_States

"What is believed to have been the first gun buyback program was in Baltimore in 1974. Gun homicides and assaults actually rose during the two-month program, and it was deemed a failure, though no reason for the crime rate increase was given.[8] Similar programs followed in other cities, including some cities that repeated their programs. However, no evaluation of such programs were published until 1994, after three researchers analyzed a 1992 buyback in Seattle, Washington. The study found that the "effect on decreasing violent crime and reducing firearm mortality is unknown."


"While the program, could be considered a success, collecting more than 700 guns, handing out almost $70,000 in gift cards and even netting a Stinger missile launcher tube (minus the missile),[23] the program also had a widely unanticipated effect from the local gun buying community. Hundreds of gun buyers showed up to the event seeking to offer cash for valuable antiques or functioning second hand firearms. The lack of any need for background check in transactions involving private firearms sales turned the city sponsored event into an open air gun bazaar."

The sheer volume of guns still in circulation and being manufactured and sold means buy backs are unlikely to have any effect.
__________________
Audiophile/biker/sceptic
Nessie is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 24th March 2018, 05:44 PM   #71
arthwollipot
Observer of Phenomena
 
arthwollipot's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Location, Location
Posts: 56,925
It would work if anything was capable of convincing American gun enthusiasts that their passion for guns was unhealthy for society. Unfortunately it looks like no amount of murder and bloodshed will do that. I wonder if there is anything else that might.
__________________
"This quote was taken out of context."
- Randall Munroe
arthwollipot is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 24th March 2018, 07:08 PM   #72
BStrong
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: San Francisco
Posts: 11,173
Originally Posted by arthwollipot View Post
Are you trying to say that this was a good thing??
The surrender of lawfully possessed firearms or the export of those same firearms legally?
__________________
"When a man who is honestly mistaken, hears the truth, he will either cease being mistaken or cease being honest." - Anonymous

"Dulce bellum inexpertīs." - Erasmus
BStrong is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 24th March 2018, 07:29 PM   #73
Polaris
Penultimate Amazing
 
Polaris's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Posts: 11,217
Originally Posted by cullennz View Post
You must own an interesting dictionary
You have no idea.

Originally Posted by uke2se View Post
You send a letter explaining that their property has been retroactively banned and offerring a small compensation for them voluntarily turning it in. Once you have a list of people who won't abide by the law, you send the cops.
**** that. If I purchased something legally and have never used it to harm any person or property, if it's to be seized by the government (punishing me for something someone else did, mind you) they better compensate me for every red cent I paid for it, or adjusted for inflation. Anything less is frankly robbery.
__________________
"There's vastly more truth to be found in rocks than in holy books. Rocks are far superior, in fact, because you can DEMONSTRATE the truth found in rocks. Plus, they're pretty. Holy books are just heavy." - Dinwar

"Let your ears hear this beautiful song that's hiding underneath the sound," Ed Kowalczyk.
Polaris is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 24th March 2018, 07:56 PM   #74
Crossbow
Seeking Honesty and Sanity
 
Crossbow's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Charleston, WV
Posts: 11,757
Originally Posted by Nessie View Post
OK, use the AR-15 as an example of what I mean. How do you get them if they are made illegal?
Sorry but I don't know what it is that you are so terribly confused about.

If certain types of firearms are actually made illegal then the authorities would be empowered to arrest those who are in possession of such firearms and the authorities would also be able to physically seize such firearms.

Just like the authorities currently do with things such as illegal drugs or child porngraphy.
__________________
08 JAN 2018 > Trump says that he is "Like, Really Smart" and that he is "a Very Stable Genius".
11 JAN 2018 > During an Oval Office meeting, Trump asks "“Why are we having all these people from ****hole countries come here?”"

A man's best friend is his dogma.
Crossbow is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 24th March 2018, 08:33 PM   #75
theprestige
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 26,620
Originally Posted by Crossbow View Post
Sorry but I don't know what it is that you are so terribly confused about.

If certain types of firearms are actually made illegal then the authorities would be empowered to arrest those who are in possession of such firearms and the authorities would also be able to physically seize such firearms.

Just like the authorities currently do with things such as illegal drugs or child porngraphy.
This. Nessie, what problem are you trying to solve, by starting this thread?
theprestige is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 24th March 2018, 10:23 PM   #76
Metullus
Forum ¾-Wit Pro Tem
 
Metullus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 5,011
Originally Posted by Crossbow View Post
Sorry but I don't know what it is that you are so terribly confused about.

If certain types of firearms are actually made illegal then the authorities would be empowered to arrest those who are in possession of such firearms and the authorities would also be able to physically seize such firearms.

Just like the authorities currently do with things such as illegal drugs or child porngraphy.
And illegally possessed automatic weapons...
__________________
I have met Tim at TAM. He is of sufficient height to piss on your leg. - Doubt 10/7/2005 - I'll miss Tim.

Aristotle taught that the brain exists merely to cool the blood and is not involved in the process of thinking. This is true only of certain persons. - Will Cuppy
Metullus is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 24th March 2018, 11:47 PM   #77
Lambchops
Scholar
 
Join Date: Mar 2018
Location: Norvegr
Posts: 107
We should just stop making laws. People are gonna break them anyway, so what's the point, right?

You want to marry an eight year old and make a living selling meth to her classmates? Sure, go right ahead. Laws are for leftist weaklings.

Last edited by Lambchops; 25th March 2018 at 12:19 AM.
Lambchops is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 25th March 2018, 12:13 AM   #78
SezMe
post-pre-born
 
SezMe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Santa Barbara, CA
Posts: 22,600
Originally Posted by theprestige View Post
ETA: And really, the terminology issue is a textbook example of how gun grabbers needlessly give up what little credibility they have. You can't change my mind if you make it so absolutely clear that you don't give a **** what I think.
Similarly, I'm sure that phrase will provide an incentive to engage with you on the part of those "gun grabbers".
SezMe is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 25th March 2018, 12:21 AM   #79
Lambchops
Scholar
 
Join Date: Mar 2018
Location: Norvegr
Posts: 107
Originally Posted by SezMe View Post
Similarly, I'm sure that phrase will provide an incentive to engage with you on the part of those "gun grabbers".
In his next post, he should use "crisis actors".
Lambchops is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 25th March 2018, 12:41 AM   #80
MikeG
Now. Do it now.
 
MikeG's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: UK
Posts: 23,167
Originally Posted by Polaris View Post
......... If I purchased something legally and have never used it to harm any person or property, if it's to be seized by the government (punishing me for something someone else did, mind you) they better compensate me for every red cent I paid for it.....
Yep, that'd be fair (although age, damage, wear and tear, depreciation etc could be factored in). Is anyone suggesting anything else?
__________________
"The Conservatives want to keep wogs out and march boldly back to the 1950s when Britain still had an Empire and blacks, women, poofs and Irish knew their place." The Don That's what we've sunk to here.
MikeG is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Reply

International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » Social Issues & Current Events

Bookmarks

Thread Tools

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
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 12:11 PM.
Powered by vBulletin. Copyright ©2000 - 2018, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

This forum began as part of the James Randi Education Foundation (JREF). However, the forum now exists as
an independent entity with no affiliation with or endorsement by the JREF, including the section in reference to "JREF" topics.

Disclaimer: Messages posted in the Forum are solely the opinion of their authors.