Support NeoGAF

[Lead]

Same with all of these. It will quiet some arguments and that's about it

You'd have to be downright ideologically opposed to civilian firearms ownership at its core to think these bills are reasonable what so ever.

They do absolutely jack shit for crime, none of these bills would have prevented any of the massacres I can think about in recent time.

The only thing these bills do is make life hard to law abiding citizens, that's it. Nothing more.

 

[AbsolutBro]

Ammunition owner database is interesting.

First step to serials on all bullets

I would love to know what a serial number on a hollow point round is going to do, given the bullet will fragment the moment it hits something.

 

[Afrikan]

Well, it won't be the ammo buying convenience they had before...

sorry, I'm ignorant to guns and the whole purchasing process.

but is/was that ^ real?

 

[diehard]

i changed my mind.

No i don't think that pic is real

 

[Bear Force One]

More bullshit laws that will affect no one but law abiding citizens.

So tired of this cop out.

 

[GaimeGuy]

Your "counter argument" doesn't make any sense and is in no way comparable to what I posted earlier.

How so?

All it does is squeeze lawful gun owners even tighter.

That's just another way of saying "But criminals won't care about these laws!"

You are arguing that laws are pointless, not that gun control doesn't work.

Edit: Exhibit A:

More bullshit laws that will affect no one but law abiding citizens.

 

[Mammoth Jones]

Well, it won't be the ammo buying convenience they had before...

Pretty sure that's either just for display or one particular shop doing that. That's typically not how ammunition is sold anywhere in the states.

That pic does make me wanna go get some AK rounds soon. I'll go next weekend, it'll be a madhouse on the 4th.

 

[jason10mm]

It is probably a real pic. I doubt it dispenses .22 consistently, but you can certainly fill a candy machine with it.

States can't even afford to maintain the ballistic databases (where every gun sold has a shell casing to be put into inventory so it can be matched with shell casings found at a crime scene), how could they possibly maintain serial numbers on ammunition? You can reload that stuff!

Some of you guys are so ignorant on the basics of this issue. Gun rights supporters can introduce bills that would have an ACTUAL effect on gun crime but gets shouted down by gun banners. Then the gun banners introduce nonsense bills that would have no effect and they wonder why gun rights supporters laugh at them.

 

[kame-sennin]

Bills the governor signed will:

— Require an ID and background check to purchase ammunition and create a new state database of ammunition owners

— Ban possession of ammunition magazines that hold more than 10 bullets.

— Restrict the loaning of guns without background checks to close family members.

Bills the governor vetoed would have:

— Put an initiative on the November ballot to clarify that theft of a firearm is grand theft and is punishable as a felony.

— Require those who make guns at home to register them with the state and get a serial number so the weapons can be tracked.

— Required stolen or lost guns to be reported within five days.

— Limited Californians to the purchase of one rifle or shotgun per month

On the latter bill, Brown wrote: “While well-intentioned, I believe this bill would have the effect of burdening lawful citizens who wish to sell certain firearms that they no longer need,” Brown said.

Brown acted on the gun bills just before he left for a European vacation expected to last a few weeks.

On the whole, this is a lot smarter than the garbage Andrew Cuomo rushed through in New York.

 

[GaimeGuy]

More bullshit laws that will affect no one but law abiding citizens.

It is probably a real pic. I doubt it dispenses .22 consistently, but you can certainly fill a candy machine with it.

States can't even afford to maintain the ballistic databases (where every gun sold has a shell casing to be put into inventory so it can be matched with shell casings found at a crime scene), how could they possibly maintain serial numbers on ammunition? You can reload that stuff!

Some of you guys are so ignorant on the basics of this issue. Gun rights supporters can introduce bills that would have an ACTUAL effect on gun crime but gets shouted down by gun banners. Then the gun banners introduce nonsense bills that would have no effect and they wonder why gun rights supporters laugh at them.

explain to me why universal background checks and registrations get blocked all the time, then.

Those allow for a trail for officials to use to clamp down on illegal trafficking since you can identify where guns fall off the trail and trace them to common sources.

 

[eyeball_kid]

You'd have to be downright ideologically opposed to civilian firearms ownership at its core to think these bills are reasonable what so ever.

They do absolutely jack shit for crime, none of these bills would have prevented any of the massacres I can think about in recent time.

Prevented any of the massacres? Who can even make that argument? All we can do is try to reduce the severity of these attacks.

So what I see as the lowest-hanging fruit on these mass killings is reducing the amount of ammo someone can fire in a short period, and extending the length of time they have to reload. The first would help reduce the number of deaths, and the second would give more opportunity for security or other people to disarm the shooter while they reload their weapon.

"Brown approved bills that would ban the sale of semiautomatic rifles equipped with bullet buttons allowing the ammunition magazines to be easily detached and replaced." This sounds like something that would help increase reload time. That's a good thing.

"Ban possession of ammunition magazines that hold more than 10 bullets." The more bullets a shooter has in the magazine, the more damage they can do quickly. So this is a good bill. There's no defensible reason someone needs more than 10 bullets in a magazine.

 

[Mammoth Jones]

You'd have to be downright ideologically opposed to civilian firearms ownership at its core to think these bills are reasonable what so ever.

They do absolutely jack shit for crime, none of these bills would have prevented any of the massacres I can think about in recent time.

The only thing these bills do is make life hard to law abiding citizens, that's it. Nothing more.

I mean, you hit the nail on the head with the first sentence.

 

[kunonabi]

On the whole, this is a lot smarter than the garbage Andrew Cuomo rushed through in New York.

I like the stuff he vetoed other than the 1 rifle limitation.

 

[FyreWulff]

You'd have to be downright ideologically opposed to civilian firearms ownership at its core to think these bills are reasonable what so ever.

They do absolutely jack shit for crime, none of these bills would have prevented any of the massacres I can think about in recent time.

The only thing these bills do is make life hard to law abiding citizens, that's it. Nothing more.

We should get rid of other laws too, only law abiding citizens can't stab people, why leave that to criminals only? My grandfather stabbed people, I should be able to.

 

[Lead]

We should get rid of other laws too, only law abiding citizens can't stab people, why leave that to criminals only? My grandfather stabbed people, I should be able to.

That's a strawman, and a really bad one at that.

Can we agree that the goal of gun control law is to decrease the amount of people killed by firearms?

Good, then I'm going to throw out this idea that if you actually want that, you're going to need gun control laws that actually would remotely have an affect. Now here's the kicker, you can't take away handguns from people, because of the 2nd amendment, so what you're doing here with these laws is not preventing deaths, but being a bully to your population that merely exercise their rights.

A lot of this stuff is probably not even constitutional at all, but these jerks know it'll take years in court to get settled, and in the mean time they'll have their little anti-gun circle jerk knowing they made life harder for some law abiding citizen.

TLDR: These laws are not going to prevent shit, the 2nd amendment needs to go away, and then handguns needs to go away to even make a dent here.

 

[GaimeGuy]

A lot of this stuff is probably not even constitutional at all, but these jerks know it'll take years in court to get settled, and in the mean time they'll have their little anti-gun circle jerk knowing they made life harder for some law abiding citizen.

You honestly think this is just some kind of bullying power grab?

 

[FyreWulff]

That's a strawman, and a really bad one at that.

Can we agree that the goal of gun control law is to decrease the amount of people killed by firearms?

Good, then I'm going to throw out this idea that if you actually want that, you're going to need gun control laws that actually would remotely have an affect. Now here's the kicker, you can't take away handguns from people, because of the 2nd amendment, so what you're doing here with these laws is not preventing deaths, but being a bully to your population that merely exercise their rights.

A lot of this stuff is probably not even constitutional at all, but these jerks know it'll take years in court to get settled, and in the mean time they'll have their little anti-gun circle jerk knowing they made life harder for some law abiding citizen.

TLDR: These laws are not going to prevent shit, the 2nd amendment needs to go away, and then handguns needs to go away to even make a dent here.

Passing gun control leaves guns in the hands of people that should have them and turns the river of arms flowing around the country into a small stream, making it easier to spot who's running out into the middle of the now-dry riverbed and grabbing guns out of this stream. I know exactly how it works and I'm perfectly fine with it. I can legally own guns under any of these restrictions. Not a problem for me.

The current interpretation of the 2nd is a recent invention by gun manufacturer lobbyists that hijacked the NRA in 1977.

 

[Lead]

Passing gun control leaves guns in the hands of people that should have them and turns the river of arms flowing around the country into a small stream, making it easier to spot who's running out into the middle of the now-dry riverbed and grabbing guns out of this stream. I know exactly how it works and I'm perfectly fine with it. I can legally own guns under any of these restrictions. Not a problem for me.

The current interpretation of the 2nd is a recent invention by gun manufacturer lobbyists that hijacked the NRA in 1977.

I live in Europe, handguns are rather heavily restricted.

I could go online right now and order a handgun to my doorstep with full anonymity and full deniability.

Or I could go through the trouble as I had to obtain my license and purchase my firearms legally.

Point is, these laws do jack shit, the Federal Assault Weapons ban of 1994 had so little data to go on that it was inconclusive and they had to drop it and not keep it going.

These are feel good legislation (to gun grabbing liberals) that in all practicality is only hurting the law abiding citizen exercising his or her 2nd amendment rights.

Scum like Jerry Brown knows this crap is unconstitutional but do it anyway because they know full and well this will take years to settle in court, in the meantime they can freely fuck up their citizens constitutional rights as they please.

People need to get it into their heads that the 2nd amendment isn't about hunting or shooting for recreation, in the context of self-defense (for ones self or country) and having the ability to exercise this right it's absolutely needed to have normal capacity magazines for long guns and not this reduced to 10 rounds crap they keep shitting on the citizens.

Firearms like the AR-15 represent the idea of the minutemen and local militia a whole lot more than handguns does, yet they're always salivating over any opportunity to get them off the streets, despite the fact that all empirical evidence shows they only account for the tiniest of fractions of death.

 

[FyreWulff]

People need to get it into their heads that the 2nd amendment isn't about hunting or shooting for recreation, in the context of self-defense (for ones self or country) and having the ability to exercise this right it's absolutely needed to have normal capacity magazines for long guns and not this reduced to 10 rounds crap they keep shitting on the citizens.

From 1790ish to 1977, it was. The NRA was even pro gun control, and was a sportsmen club, meaning they were about hunting, conservation, and stewardship of wildlands.

In fact, the NRA was about to move to Colorado - because they felt they were becoming a lobbyist org rather than a sportsmen club. In 1977, they were hijacked by a rogue group during their Columbus meeting who used the club's voting rules to cancel the move to Colorado, and made the official agenda of the NRA to be "guns for everyone" and expanded their HQ in DC and outright became a lobbyist org. They started getting more and more pro-gun manufacturer laws passed by Congress. The current interpretation of the 2nd amendment is barely older than the video game industry.

http://www.salon.com/2013/01/14/the_nra_once_supported_gun_control/

 

[spazchicken]

Even tighter, like they are getting "squeezed" at all, lol.

And good. Squeeze the shit out of em.

There's no such thing as "law-abiding gun owners." Just guns that haven't been used in a murder yet. Everyone's "responsible" till the day they aren't.

This is so ridiculous. What you're saying very illogical.