Orlando mass shooting

[bknight]

So . . . you would argue, based on your experience with one population that even you admit might not be universal?

All I was trying to suggest, communication is my Achilles heal, That those ED individuals are far more likely to commit violent crimes than any other group when considering disabled individuals or those not diagnosed with disabilities.

Oh, I know exactly what you were trying to suggest.  I'm saying you don't have a valid statistical sample to do so.

Then the statistics you quoted are even a smaller group, so those are more questionable than the mine.

EDIT: And this was the type of argument that I didn't want to be involved with.  Statistics can be used to "show" many sides of an argument.  I have a saying, Figures never lie but liars always figure.  Note that I am not calling you a liar, as you are posting information gathered from other sources.

[Ranb]

Ok, fair point and I concede it. How about this: Is there a reason that you would need mag capacity beyond, say, 5 rounds before reloading? Maybe just for specialized competition?

That would be it.  I also enjoy 30 round mags for plinking.

Would it be reasonable to have specialized licensing for those firearms so that you could enjoy them responsibly while keeping them away from guys like the Orlando shooter? In light of his and other victims, is there any rational argument against such a minor measure?

You understand that every firearm with a detachable magazine can accept a high capacity magazine.  If you can't buy one, then anyone who can operate a hacksaw and a roll of tape can make one.  What you propose is a license to own just about any semi-auto firearm.  No thanks.

Would this be a "shall issue" or a "may issue" license?  Current federal regulations require that any individual who wants to buy or make an NFA firearm obtain the signature of their local sheriff on the application.  The sheriff can discriminate in any fashion he or she wants and no one has been able to successfully sue when unable to obtain the signature.  When I lived in Hawaii it was said that one had to be a friend of the Honolulu police chief to obtain a carry permit as it was "may issue", but rarely done.

Uhhh...maybe for him to not have the option of picking up a modified military weapon on his freaking lunch break with nothing but a driver's license? You sound like the classic perfectly responsible owner, do you really think some yahoo off the street should be able to easily get his hands on hardware like that? After all, what could go wrong?

I'm one of those yahoos off the street.  I buy guns by showing a state issued ID card and a NICS check.  Making a silencer is even easier but more time consuming.  I send in an application along with a copy of my trust document. 

I live in a state where even shotguns have to be plugged to hold no more than three shells. I found it reasonable and no horrific burden. What reason could some knucklehead off the street have to reasonably need that kind of capacity, short of a firefight?

Does "even shotguns" mean other firearms are limited to 3 rounds?  Was the 3 round limit put in place due to a crime problem?  Where are they doing this?

Ranb

[Ranb]

In terms of possessing the necessary equipment, you are nevertheless prepared

So are over a million other Americans of which the vast majority don't consider murdering people.

Ranb

[revmic]

1. You understand that every firearm with a detachable magazine can accept a high capacity magazine. What you propose is a license to own just about any semi-auto firearm.

2 Would this be a "shall issue" or a "may issue" license?

3. I'm one of those yahoos off the street.

4. Does "even shotguns" mean other firearms are limited to 3 rounds?  Was the 3 round limit put in place due to a crime problem?  Where are they doing this?

1. Yes, I know, and yes, that is what I am proposing. Semis are the weapon of choice for mass shooters, and I think extra measures to keep them in the hands of responsible users are entirely reasonable steps, posing minimal burden on responsible users.

2. 'Shall issue' after demonstrating proficiency in safe handling and familiarity with local firearm laws. Again, in the interests of safety to the general public, not a huge burden.

3. No, I don't think you are. I think you are a responsible gun enthusiast, not some nitwit who buys a gun he saw in Call of Duty and cleans it with WD-40.

4. Other firearms not permitted for hunting in my state, except a short black powder muzzle-loader season with special permit. Not even .22lr for small game/varmints. No open or concealed carry of handguns without an almost impossible to get Judge's order based on your life being in danger. The three shell plug was law in the 1980's when I got my Long Gun card, don't know the reasoning behind it. Welcome to the gun owners paradise of New Jersey, USA. Shotgun only for hunting because the state is flat and densely populated. NFA guns not even up for discussion, if I am remembering correctly what they are (shotguns with barrels under 18" and such, right? Not gonna see 'em here babe).

This is why I don't get why this Mickey Mouse level of regulation we are talking about in this thread is such an issue in other states. You really think the piddly measures we are talking about here are so draconian? If a few nuisance regulations can prevent a lot of body bags and grieving families, I think it's something we can all live with.

[ka9q]

That is demonstrably not a fact, the Orlando shooter could have inflicted carnage in an incalculable number of ways. He chose the easiest, but McVeigh showed pretty clearly that there are other ways to wreak havoc.

Not so fast. McVeigh and his buddy Nichols had to invest a lot of time and effort. They first had to learn how such large bombs are made. Then they had to obtain and store the necessary materials, which was much more than just a lot of ammonium nitrate fertilizer. Rather than mix the AN with the usual diesel oil, they used nitromethane, purchased over time through racing suppliers.

Then they needed a way to detonate it. ANFO is so insensitive that you need a "booster" explosive; a mere blasting cap won't set it off. (ANNM is more sensitive but I still think it needs a booster.) So they arranged to burgle large amounts of booster explosive, detonation cords, fuses and blasting caps from a mining operation. That was a major operation in itself that obviously carried a major risk of compromising the whole operation. So was their robbery of a nearby gun owner to fund the operation.

IIRC, they conducted some small-scale test explosions, which obviously also carried considerable risk.

Finally they had to rent the truck, mix and assemble the bomb (when they were almost detected) and drive it to Oklahoma City.

All this was far more difficult than merely buying an AR-15 and a lot of ammo and driving to a nightclub. Fortunately.

[VQ]

He had a bkgd check; what else do you want?

Uhhh...maybe for him to not have the option of picking up a modified military weapon on his freaking lunch break with nothing but a driver's license? You sound like the classic perfectly responsible owner, do you really think some yahoo off the street should be able to easily get his hands on hardware like that? After all, what could go wrong?

I live in a state where even shotguns have to be plugged to hold no more than three shells. I found it reasonable and no horrific burden. What reason could some knucklehead off the street have to reasonably need that kind of capacity, short of a firefight?

He also had a concealed carry license and a security permit. On paper (FBI suspicions notwithstanding) he looked better-vetted than your average citizen. Mebbe the whole "nothing on the background check despite terrorism suspicion" angle should be pursued rather than limiting everyone else?

[VQ]

BTW, I am also curious: why do people need an assault rifle? I can understand a collector or dealer would want to be able to own one but why an ordinary person?

My assault rifle do you mean "military looking" semi-auto rifle? What makes one special compared to a differently-packaged semi-auto?

[mako88sb]

my daughter looked up the definition of a mass shooting and found this article that is pretty disturbing. Of all the people who were wounded, how many of them have had their quality of life seriously degraded?

http://www.theguardian.com/us-news/ng-interactive/2015/oct/02/mass-shootings-america-gun-violence

[bknight]

That is demonstrably not a fact, the Orlando shooter could have inflicted carnage in an incalculable number of ways. He chose the easiest, but McVeigh showed pretty clearly that there are other ways to wreak havoc.

Not so fast. McVeigh and his buddy Nichols had to invest a lot of time and effort. They first had to learn how such large bombs are made. Then they had to obtain and store the necessary materials, which was much more than just a lot of ammonium nitrate fertilizer. Rather than mix the AN with the usual diesel oil, they used nitromethane, purchased over time through racing suppliers.

Then they needed a way to detonate it. ANFO is so insensitive that you need a "booster" explosive; a mere blasting cap won't set it off. (ANNM is more sensitive but I still think it needs a booster.) So they arranged to burgle large amounts of booster explosive, detonation cords, fuses and blasting caps from a mining operation. That was a major operation in itself that obviously carried a major risk of compromising the whole operation. So was their robbery of a nearby gun owner to fund the operation.

IIRC, they conducted some small-scale test explosions, which obviously also carried considerable risk.

Finally they had to rent the truck, mix and assemble the bomb (when they were almost detected) and drive it to Oklahoma City.

All this was far more difficult than merely buying an AR-15 and a lot of ammo and driving to a nightclub. Fortunately.

And with all this planning, they forgot to have/put a license on their vehicle, carried a unlicensed hidden hand gun and got picked up by a officer, who luckily spotted the vehicle. 
http://www.latimes.com/nation/la-na-oklahoma-city-bombing-20150419-story.html

[Peter B]

That is demonstrably not a fact, the Orlando shooter could have inflicted carnage in an incalculable number of ways. He chose the easiest, but McVeigh showed pretty clearly that there are other ways to wreak havoc.

Not so fast. McVeigh and his buddy Nichols had to invest a lot of time and effort. They first had to learn how such large bombs are made. Then they had to obtain and store the necessary materials, which was much more than just a lot of ammonium nitrate fertilizer. Rather than mix the AN with the usual diesel oil, they used nitromethane, purchased over time through racing suppliers.

Then they needed a way to detonate it. ANFO is so insensitive that you need a "booster" explosive; a mere blasting cap won't set it off. (ANNM is more sensitive but I still think it needs a booster.) So they arranged to burgle large amounts of booster explosive, detonation cords, fuses and blasting caps from a mining operation. That was a major operation in itself that obviously carried a major risk of compromising the whole operation. So was their robbery of a nearby gun owner to fund the operation.

IIRC, they conducted some small-scale test explosions, which obviously also carried considerable risk.

Finally they had to rent the truck, mix and assemble the bomb (when they were almost detected) and drive it to Oklahoma City.

All this was far more difficult than merely buying an AR-15 and a lot of ammo and driving to a nightclub. Fortunately.

Yeah, that was Revmic you were quoting, not me.

[Peter B]

In terms of possessing the necessary equipment, you are nevertheless prepared

So are over a million other Americans of which the vast majority don't consider murdering people.

Ranb

I suppose my concern lies in the direction that, while I agree all those people aren't considering murdering people, those of us without firearms don't know whether the next person walking down the street openly carrying a firearm is one of that vast majority of sensible law-abiding citizens or someone about to unsling their weapon and start shooting, especially considering it takes only a few seconds to extract the weapon and start firing.

[Ranb]

I suppose my concern lies in the direction that, while I agree all those people aren't considering murdering people, those of us without firearms don't know whether the next person walking down the street openly carrying a firearm is one of that vast majority of sensible law-abiding citizens or someone about to unsling their weapon and start shooting, especially considering it takes only a few seconds to extract the weapon and start firing.

What makes you think that those of us with firearms feel any different?  If I was this paranoid I wouldn't be able to leave my house at all. 

Based on what I've read about the typical person with a concealed carry permit or those who carry openly, I've got little to fear from them at all.  It is the Zimmerman's who get a huge amount of press, but the guy or gal who carries without incident is ignored until someone comes along to tell me how worried they are that an inanimate object is going to turn the armed person into a monster.

Ranb

[Ranb]

This is why I don't get why this Mickey Mouse level of regulation we are talking about in this thread is such an issue in other states. You really think the piddly measures we are talking about here are so draconian? If a few nuisance regulations can prevent a lot of body bags and grieving families, I think it's something we can all live with.

Can you identify any gun control measures that have led to less body bags?  Other than laws that prohibit gun possession by criminals, most gun control laws are directly aimed at law abiding persons.  In San Francisco they tried to prohibit handgun possession; criminals were among those who were exempt from the proposed ordinance.  http://mccullagh.org/sf/handgun-ban/

The latest ideas consist of using lists of persons who will not be allowed to buy guns.  The due process is minimal (mickey mouse?) as far as I know and some people who are guilty of nothing other than their name being known to the US government are going to find their civil rights curtailed.

1. Yes, I know, and yes, that is what I am proposing. Semis are the weapon of choice for mass shooters, and I think extra measures to keep them in the hands of responsible users are entirely reasonable steps, posing minimal burden on responsible users.

I wasn't speaking of only semi-auto firearms, but anything with a detachable magazine including bolt action guns.  I have a Savage 10 FCM chambered in 338 whisper with a 20 round magazine.  A hacksaw and duck tape was all that was required to assemble it from the original mag and an aftermarket M-14 mag.  When it worked I welded the two pieces of sheet metal together.  http://i171.photobucket.com/albums/u320/ranb40/firearms/338whisper.jpg

Ranb

[gwiz]

Can you identify any gun control measures that have led to less body bags?

Well, you could just look how the number of gun deaths per capita in the USA compares with other western democracies, and then compare gun control measures in the US and those other countries.

[Zakalwe]

This is why I don't get why this Mickey Mouse level of regulation we are talking about in this thread is such an issue in other states. You really think the piddly measures we are talking about here are so draconian? If a few nuisance regulations can prevent a lot of body bags and grieving families, I think it's something we can all live with.

Can you identify any gun control measures that have led to less body bags?  Other than laws that prohibit gun possession by criminals, most gun control laws are directly aimed at law abiding persons.  In San Francisco they tried to prohibit handgun possession; criminals were among those who were exempt from the proposed ordinance.  http://mccullagh.org/sf/handgun-ban/

Easy.
Australia had a mass shooting when a rich kid went full Tonto and murdered 35 people with an AR15. The Aussie government then banned all semis, pump action shotguns and introduced tight firearm controls. Guess how many mass shootings since then? 4. In 20 years. America has more than that in a week.

Also in 1996 a pervert named Thomas Hamilton walked into a school in Scotland and slaughtered 16 kiddies under the age of 6 and their teacher. He then shot himself. Following that the UK government introduced two gun control laws that pretty much banned most handguns and rifles. Guess how many mass shootings since then? One. In 20 years.

Other countries can make gun legislation that works and forces gun users to take up another hobby. Neither of  those countries are cowering under oppressive governments,  as is frequently portrayed by the gun lobbies and Conservatives in the US.