Gun politics thread

[LeVeL]

To kick things off...

School says deaf boy's name sign looks too much like a gun
8/28/2012
Brace yourselves, because this is the dumbest thing you'll hear all day. The Grand Island (Neb.) school district is forcing a 3-year-old deaf boy to change the way he signs his name, because they say his gestures violate their weapons policy. Preschooler Hunter Spanjer's personalized name sign is a registered sign with Signing Exact English -- a modified form of American Sign Language -- and involves extended index fingers that the district says resembles a gun. (And that sound you just heard was our heads exploding from all the stupid.) "We are working with the parents to come to the best solution we can for the child," a school spokesperson said. Um, how about letting him keep his own name?

Source.

 

[LeVeL]

And the award for the most biased, blind, selfish, tyrannical, ignorant, corrupt politicians goes to... CALIFORNIA! They are now going to require background checks for ammo purchases/sales. They are also banning most semi-auto rifles now.

gunssavelives.net/blog/gun-laws/breaking-ca-senate-votes-to-require-background-checks-for-ammo-and-bans-semi-auto-rifles/

 

[ScarFace88]

I can't wait until the USSC hears about the semiauto rifle ban. That's pretty much a guaranteed Heller/Macdonald precedent violation.

 

[SpitfireMK461]

I can't wait until the USSC hears about the semiauto rifle ban. That's pretty much a guaranteed Heller/Macdonald precedent violation.

I would agree. There is no way the SC (as it is now) would uphold a law like that, and even the 9th Circuit Court would have a hard time ignoring such a blunt decision.

@LeVeL, your opening post is not the best way to start a gun politics thread, I think. Yes that story is somewhat related to guns, but it's more related to idiots and no guns or gun legislation is involved.

 

[LeVeL]

@LeVeL, your opening post is not the best way to start a gun politics thread, I think. Yes that story is somewhat related to guns, but it's more related to idiots and no guns or gun legislation is involved.

People complained when I posted such articles elsewhere and told me to make a separate thread

 

[prizrak]

I would agree. There is no way the SC (as it is now) would uphold a law like that, and even the 9th Circuit Court would have a hard time ignoring such a blunt decision.

@LeVeL, your opening post is not the best way to start a gun politics thread, I think. Yes that story is somewhat related to guns, but it's more related to idiots and no guns or gun legislation is involved.

Actually I think it illustrates the issue with the "anti-gun" mindset of seeing threats where there are none.

On the topifc of Commiefornia and ammo bans, this is the dumbest thing in the world, AZ is literally right there and doesn't have those laws, this is beyond non-enforceable.

 

[SpitfireMK461]

Actually I think it illustrates the issue with the "anti-gun" mindset of seeing threats where there are none.

I disagree. You can't even label it as seeing a threat where there isn't one. It's a 3 year old signing his name. He probably barely has an understanding of the concept of a gun. It's just an idiot administrator being just that, an idiot.

 

[LeVeL]

I disagree. You can't even label it as seeing a threat where there isn't one. It's a 3 year old signing his name. He probably barely has an understanding of the concept of a gun. It's just an idiot administrator being just that, an idiot.

The problem is that there have been a lot of such idiots lately. Kids getting in trouble over cap guns, lego guns, pop-tarts eaten into the shape of a gun, etc. These stories are an indicator of the mass-hysteria over "evil gunz!" and highlights the general public's level of ignorance when it comes to firearms.

 

[GerFix]

<snip> highlights the general public's level of ignorance when it comes to firearms.

LOL .... If the general public is ignorant of firearms, shouldn't their access to firearms be restricted?

 

[LeVeL]

LOL .... If the general public is ignorant of firearms, shouldn't their access to firearms be restricted?

a) It already is restricted. Severely.
b) No, they should be educated. Back in the day people thought the Earth was flat; should their access to books have been restricted?
c) Most people don't have guns.
d) People are trying to ban "assault weapons" without having the slightest clue as to what they are. That is not right.

 

[GerFix]

^I don't think you guys have any idea about restriction means when it comes to firearms. You live in a sea of guns and gun worship that blinds you to depth of the problem. In the other thread Spectre seems to think that semi-automatic weapons are normal ........... normal in the USA (maybe), but no where else in the civilized world.

 

[ScarFace88]

As far as I know, most other countries other than Australia and the UK treat semiautomatic rifles the same as any other rifle. Canada's standard firearm license allows the acquisition of semiautomatic rifles, the same is true of Switzerland and New Zealand.

 

[prizrak]

^I don't think you guys have any idea about restriction means when it comes to firearms. You live in a sea of guns and gun worship that blinds you to depth of the problem. In the other thread Spectre seems to think that semi-automatic weapons are normal ........... normal in the USA (maybe), but no where else in the civilized world.

A cursory Google search for "man shot in Brooklyn" aka the city that bans has extremely strict gun laws (basically you can't have one for the most part) https://www.google.com/search?q=man...53,d.dmg&fp=796b32de36f42640&biw=1680&bih=929

 

[LeVeL]

^I don't think you guys have any idea about restriction means when it comes to firearms.

Just because the likes of Australia and Britain decided to lay down and get their rights bulldozed over, doesn't mean that we will.

You live in a sea of guns and gun worship that blinds you to depth of the problem. In the other thread Spectre seems to think that semi-automatic weapons are normal ........... normal in the USA (maybe), but no where else in the civilized world.

I guess the "civilized world" still hasn't realized that once in a while you might need to defend yourself because no one else will do it for you.
Also, you have to realize that "semi-automatic" describes the vast majority of guns - from AR15s to revolvers. So yes, weapons that fire a single round every time you pull the trigger are basically the norm.

 

[prizrak]

^I don't think you guys have any idea about restriction means when it comes to firearms. You live in a sea of guns and gun worship that blinds you to depth of the problem. In the other thread Spectre seems to think that semi-automatic weapons are normal ........... normal in the USA (maybe), but no where else in the civilized world.

You do realize that semi-auto tech is over a 100 years old right? Basically any double-action revolver fits the description of a semi-auto and those have been around since what late 1800s?

Since you like to bring up "civilized" world in what seems to be a synonym for "non-violent", what is the problem of having a "civilized" person own a firearm?

 

[LeVeL]

Student suspended for ten days for saying the word "gun." Because fuck the first amendment, as well as the second! I also love how the sheriff wanted to perform an illegal search - because fuck the fourth amendment while we're at it!

 

[Spectre]

LOL .... If the general public is ignorant of firearms, shouldn't their access to firearms be restricted?

The general public is ignorant of public speaking, politics and proper sexual conduct too. We should severely restrict their access to free speech venues, voting and intercourse too, right? Same logic.

- - - Updated - - -

^I don't think you guys have any idea about restriction means when it comes to firearms. You live in a sea of guns and gun worship that blinds you to depth of the problem. In the other thread Spectre seems to think that semi-automatic weapons are normal ........... normal in the USA (maybe), but no where else in the civilized world.

DC had a total gun ban. No guns for anyone not in the police.
Chicago had a total gun ban. No guns for anyone not in the police or connected to politicians.
NYC still has a de facto gun ban. No guns for anyone not in the police or connected.

None of these three allowed *any* firearms for the general public. Not revolvers, not pump shotguns, not bolt actions, not break-open over/under shotguns or single shot rifles. NOTHING.

I think *you* are the one who has no idea on what firearms restriction means.

 

[amxeno]

I just want to post my own experiences with this. I think the gun issue at its basic form is a rights issue. My issue is not being denied the opportunity to own have a gun but the opportunity to protect my family when threatened. I recently had an issue with a family member who did a number of things that threatened the safety of my family. All at gunpoint. Until then I had never desired to own a gun and never wanted one. I was really on the fence between the issues at that point. You may have self defense training but most people don't fully understand. I definitely didn't. It took a drunk family member with an illegally obtained weapon to realize what is at stake.The world is not a stable place. It is not civilized even in civilized countries. Saying a country is civilized does not mean it's citizens are. It is ignorant to think that no guns means safety. The idealism of a utopia without guns will not prevent people from obtaining them. It might make it difficult and it may change the consequences for owning them but that isn't enough for me anymore.

On with my experience. Someone called the cops and he ran when he heard the sirens. The cops arrived and didn't even attempt to pursue him citing there "was no way they could find him at the moment." After charges were pressed they refused to confiscate his collection of guns or even investigate the issue. We were told to stop pursuing the issue. When the cops finally (persistence won) decided it was necessary to seize his weapons they only found illegal drugs, paraphernalia, and thousands of rounds of bullets. They also found empty heavy duty gun safes. At which point they didn't do anything. They let him off free without sentence because he has a child and because he has no weapons registered. They refuse to believe he owns any. What evidence do they have if they can't find an illegal weapon? What evidence do they have if there are no records? So that he could care for his child they gave him community service. Community service because he had drugs. They ignored his previous jail time, his multiple DUI convictions and his previous assault charges.

Anyway, my family had to move because of his continued threats and violence. I do not and cannot continue to believe that others will protect me or help me. Even with all the training in the world one can only do so much against those who don't follow the rules of the "civilized world." Or even one will hold your family hostage with an assault rifle. I am not saying everyone will have this experience but it opened my eyes. When my wife and I were looking to purchase a sidearm for our bedroom we were denied because I did counseling when I was a minor. 16. We were told that I should not participate in defense training anymore as it could potentially land me in jail. Because of this issue I have been told that I can no longer learn to protect myself or provide means to protect my family. Even though courts have sided with us against my homicidal brother in-law.

From a personal perspective I feel there is a lot more to this gun issue. I don't think crazy people should be allowed to have guns (and maybe the world thinks I'm crazy). But I do believe that even if I am judged to be incapable of defending myself... I can help prevent this from happening to others by defending their right to self defense.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Woo_Bum-kon

 

[LeVeL]

Source.

California School Holds Toy Gun Buyback, Principal Says 6th Graders May Want To Use Them To ?Fake Out Someone?

Strobridge Elementary School in Hayward, California will hosted a toy gun buyback Saturday. Children who turn in their toy guns will be entered for a chance to win a bicycle.

Charles Hill, the school?s principal, explained, ?Playing with toys guns, saying ?I?m going to shoot you,? desensitizes them, so as they get older, it?s easier for them to use a real gun.?

The event, dubbed Strobridge Elementary Safety Day, will feature a Hayward police officer talking about gun and bicycle safety.

?Some of the guns I?ve confiscated, if they?re stuck down in a waistband, the average person would think it?s a real gun,? Hill said. ?I could easily see one of our sixth-graders wanting to fake out someone at a 7-Eleven by walking in there. They would think it?s funny, but it could turn into tragedy.?

?Having a group of children playing cops and robbers or cowboys and Indians is a normal part of growing up,? said Yih-Chau Chang of the pro-gun group Responsible Citizens of California. ?While the intentions are obviously good on the part of the school administration, this doesn?t really educate children about guns or gun safety. Guns are used in crimes, but they are more often used in defensive ways which prevent violent crime from occurring in the first place.?

James Allen at Townhall writes: ?? the toy gun buyback program clearly reveals another example of public education going above and beyond its job description, while failing to educate children on how to read the labels on their toy guns or learning to count their pretend bullets,they are once again melding in childish affairs.The toy gun buyback program is not about gun education but control.?

 

[Quiky]

A 6th grader is really going to put this in their waistband and fake people out in a 7-11?