Active shooter thread

[workswithseed 2036]

4 minutes ago, Sawbonz said:

Do you have a link to number fatalities broken down by caliber? 
 

You have a much greater chance of surviving a gsw from a .22 a larger caliber

This is what I could find.

https://www.americanfirearms.org/statistics/

The top ten guns & calibers used in crime

The top ten guns used in crime, as reported by the ATF in 1993, included,

1. Smith & Wesson .38 Special
2. Smith & Wesson .357 revolver
3. Raven Arms .25 caliber
4. Davis P-380 .380 caliber
5. Ruger .22 caliber
6. Lorcin L-380 .380 caliber
7. Smith & Wesson semi-automatic handguns;
8. Mossberg 12 gauge shotgun
9. Remington 12 gauge shotgun
10. Tec DC-9L

[Foosters 17732]

 

[GRHorn 105]

8 minutes ago, Sawbonz said:

How so

Using financial means to impede the ability of people to exercise their rights. 

[Sawbonz 27429]

Just now, workswithseed said:

This is what I could find.

https://www.americanfirearms.org/statistics/

The top ten guns & calibers used in crime

The top ten guns used in crime, as reported by the ATF in 1993, included,

1. Smith & Wesson .38 Special
2. Smith & Wesson .357 revolver
3. Raven Arms .25 caliber
4. Davis P-380 .380 caliber
5. Ruger .22 caliber
6. Lorcin L-380 .380 caliber
7. Smith & Wesson semi-automatic handguns;
8. Mossberg 12 gauge shotgun
9. Remington 12 gauge shotgun
10. Tec DC-9L

So a study >25 years ago that doesn’t mention fatalities. Not really bolstering your assertion. 
 

Interesting they did quote an article I was going to link from JAMA from the last decade looking at gun fatalities in Boston:

 

Gun death statistics by caliber

Based on research done on the 221 gun homicides in Boston between 2010 and 2015, there appears to be a correlation between the likely fatality of a gunshot wound and the caliber of the firearm used. In short – larger caliber weapons are more deadly. By a lot.

[Hugo Stiglitz 23356]

22 minutes ago, Sawbonz said:

How about this:

 

$100 a year per gun federal firearm license 

One gun per > 21 yo per household is exempt

failure to pay fee = forfeiture. If not brought current after 6 months forfeiture becomes permanent 

 

25% tax on all ammo except birdshot and .22 

 

all proceeds go to gun violence prevention and mental health initiatives 

Your heart is in the right place but this is not a great idea.  First, the enforcement mechanism would either be a joke or police state insane.  Second, you’re taxing poor people more for owning multiple guns. The consequences on the gun market would likely be bad for people with lots of money tied up in guns. 
 

Alternative plan:  make the AR-15 type weapons class III firearms, limit magazine capacity to 10 rounds. Run a generous voluntary buy back program for all firearms. 
 

 

[Sawbonz 27429]

12 minutes ago, Anastasis said:

Yeah, that's ridiculous. 

We still aren't getting to the root cause issues here.  Taxing gun collectors and people putting holes in paper isn't going to solve the real problem. 

So lower the amounts. That would be a shitload of money toward mental health

[DonkeyCigars 144]

59 minutes ago, Sawbonz said:

Know how I know you’ve never lived with or cared for a paranoid schizophrenic?

True, but I’ve had my share of first hand,  lose family experiences. Just never had to be responsible for one.

[Bookman 4610]

4 hours ago, atomheartbevo said:

The problem for legal gun owners, and @Bookman and @Judge Roybeanbag touch on this, is that Republicans are playing a prevent defense, and we all know how that goes.  By refusing to be a part of any legislation to address the nutcases, Republicans are completely cutting themselves, and law-abiding gun owners, out of having a hand in how future legislation is crafted.

Republicans may be ahead on the gun issue by a field goal, but every one of these mass murders gives the the anti-gun another first down and takes a little more time off the clock, and eventually the anti-gun folks are going to run it in for a touchdown with no time left on the clock.

 

This doesn't just apply to gun control. For years now we've seen Republicans refuse to acknowledge real issues in this country. They really should change their mascot to an ostrich.

[Sawbonz 27429]

10 minutes ago, Hugo Stiglitz said:

Second, you’re taxing poor people more for owning multiple guns.

Incentivizing people with limited resources to make better spending choices is a bad thing?

 

11 minutes ago, Hugo Stiglitz said:

The consequences on the gun market would likely be bad for people with lots of money tied up in guns. 

I’m not really concerned if a wealthy person loses money on their firearm investments. 

[GRHorn 105]

2 minutes ago, Sawbonz said:

Incentivizing people with limited resources to make better spending choices is a bad thing?

 

I’m not really concerned if a wealthy person loses money on their firearm investments. 

It’s a financial impediment to exercising your rights. Pretty simple. 

[Sawbonz 27429]

2 minutes ago, GRHorn said:

It’s a financial impediment to exercising your rights. Pretty simple. 

So you’re against laws requiring voter IDs and restricting absentee voting?

[Anastasis 23395]

16 minutes ago, Sawbonz said:

So lower the amounts. That would be a shitload of money toward mental health

If the objective is to fund mental healthcare let's just do that without comingling the issue with gun taxes that target the individuals least likely to actually be involved in gun violence. 

[Sawbonz 27429]

1 minute ago, Anastasis said:

If the objective is to fund mental healthcare let's just do that without comingling the issue with gun taxes that target the individuals least likely to actually be involved in gun violence. 

I’m pretty sure non gun owners are the individuals least likely to be involved in gun violence 

[Hugo Stiglitz 23356]

8 minutes ago, Sawbonz said:

Incentivizing people with limited resources to make better spending choices is a bad thing?

When you do it with a tax, you’re not exactly incentivizing anything.  If you gave people a tax credit for not owning firearms, that would be an incentive. 

[Anastasis 23395]

Just now, Sawbonz said:

I’m pretty sure non gun owners are the individuals least likely to be involved in gun violence 

Your tax proposal targets gun collectors and straight up paper killers. And legal law abiding gun owners.

Funding mental healthcare is the right approach.  Doing so under a screen of punishing law abiding gun owners is wrong headed. 

[Anastasis 23395]

1 minute ago, Hugo Stiglitz said:

If you gave people a tax credit for not owning firearms, that would be an incentive. 

I have argued this position previously, but I think that there should be tax credits for gun safes.

[Sawbonz 27429]

7 minutes ago, Hugo Stiglitz said:

When you do it with a tax, you’re not exactly incentivizing anything.  If you gave people a tax credit for not owning firearms, that would be an incentive. 

Do carbon taxes incentivize certain behaviors?

[Handcruser 2805]

So lower the amounts. That would be a shitload of money toward mental health

Why don’t we throw a huge tax on gender reassignment surgeries? Let the money come from there.

[cactusflinthead 27594]

6 minutes ago, Anastasis said:

If the objective is to fund mental healthcare let's just do that without comingling the issue with gun taxes that target the individuals least likely to actually be involved in gun violence. 

Make it cheap. How much do you pay a year for a hunting and fishing license?

Super combo is 68. Bubba has to get one every year. Make it ten bucks a pop. Bubba can find 200 a year if he has 20. Make it different rates for various kinds and calibers. You want one of these bad boys? That's 50 bucks a year. That little old Remington .22 you got from granddad? 5 bucks.

We do it all the time for a variety of licenses. 

Make us get CEUs. Add on some sales tax here and there. There are a multitude of ways to regulate shit without being onerous. But, some stuff is going to cost you to keep. 

[GRHorn 105]

16 minutes ago, Sawbonz said:

So you’re against laws requiring voter IDs and restricting absentee voting?

Sure. Are we rolling back gun related while we’re at it?

1 minute ago, cactusflinthead said:

Make it cheap. How much do you pay a year for a hunting and fishing license?

Super combo is 68. Bubba has to get one every year. Make it ten bucks a pop. Bubba can find 200 a year if he has 20. Make it different rates for various kinds and calibers. You want one of these bad boys? That's 50 bucks a year. That little old Remington .22 you got from granddad? 5 bucks.

We do it all the time for a variety of licenses. 

Make us get CEUs. Add on some sales tax here and there. There are a multitude of ways to regulate shit without being onerous. But, some stuff is going to cost you to keep. 

Your right to hunt or fish isn’t in the constitution. The second amendment is however. 

[Anastasis 23395]

Maybe somebody can come up with a solution that doesn't just involve taxation as the stick. 

[Hugo Stiglitz 23356]

7 minutes ago, Anastasis said:

10 minutes ago, Sawbonz said:

 

Your tax proposal targets gun collectors and straight up paper killers. And legal law abiding gun owners.

Yes, this is why it’s bad.  Rural farmer Bill that makes 20k a year but has 20 guns he’s inherited from his pappy will either have to fork over $1900 in taxes every year or sell off his family arsenal in a gun market that would be flooded with people in his situation thus driving down the prices and robbing Bill of his assets.  That’s not an incentive. It’s horrible. 

[Satchel 6908]

1 hour ago, JimmyJames said:

I rarely see it as well.

The problem with open carry though is some dude can walk around downtown with a machine gun and nobody knows whether or not he’s about to kill a bunch of people or he just has a really tiny dick, or both. It’s beyond stupid and is just an example of how unserious our state “leaders” are about the gun issue or really any issue in general. They are a complete joke incapable of solving anything.

I agree. I’ve often wondered what would happen if a gun worshipper stood on the sidewalk outside of Dealey Plaza with a big ass gun strapped across his chest. 

[Sawbonz 27429]

2 minutes ago, GRHorn said:

Sure

[Hugo Stiglitz 23356]

6 minutes ago, Sawbonz said:

Do carbon taxes incentivize certain behaviors?

I don’t know many poor people that pay carbon taxes. 

[workswithseed 2036]

4 minutes ago, Anastasis said:

Maybe somebody can come up with a solution that doesn't just involve taxation as the stick. 

Reduce spending on military? I don't think it's the only thing that needs to be scaled down, but it's one that could easily be done.

 

46 minutes ago, Sawbonz said:

So a study >25 years ago that doesn’t mention fatalities. Not really bolstering your assertion. 
 

Interesting they did quote an article I was going to link from JAMA from the last decade looking at gun fatalities in Boston:

 

Gun death statistics by caliber

Based on research done on the 221 gun homicides in Boston between 2010 and 2015, there appears to be a correlation between the likely fatality of a gunshot wound and the caliber of the firearm used. In short – larger caliber weapons are more deadly. By a lot.

Looks like it's a lot of hearsay, the closes thing I saw was this. I clicked the link to the pdf and it's not there.

http://ag.ca.gov/publications/index.php#firearms

Edited March 25, 2021 by workswithseed

[Anastasis 23395]

1 minute ago, workswithseed said:

Reduce spending on military and direct funds to 

#bothsides. 

[Sawbonz 27429]

2 minutes ago, Hugo Stiglitz said:

I don’t know many poor people that pay carbon taxes. 

You didn’t answer my question 

[Hugo Stiglitz 23356]

1 minute ago, Sawbonz said:

You didn’t answer my question

Carbon taxes incentivize polluting less. What that has to with taxing gun owners? I don’t know. 

[cactusflinthead 27594]

12 minutes ago, GRHorn said:

Sure. Are we rolling back gun related while we’re at it?

Your right to hunt or fish isn’t in the constitution. The second amendment is however. 

So we're supposed to enjoy the amendments without economic effect?

Then you're going to be terribly disappointed if you say some off color shit that costs you a job.

[Hugo Stiglitz 23356]

24 minutes ago, Anastasis said:

but I think that there should be tax credits for gun safes.

I once claimed a gun safe purchase as a home office expense, back when you could do shit like that before Trump fucked up the tax code. 

[Sawbonz 27429]

7 minutes ago, Hugo Stiglitz said:

Carbon taxes incentivize polluting less. What that has to with taxing gun owners? I don’t know. 

Don’t be obtuse

[Hugo Stiglitz 23356]

1 minute ago, Sawbonz said:

Don’t be obtuse

Honestly, a cigarette tax would have been a better analogy.  Do cigarette taxes help poor people make better economic decisions?  I’d say it’s debatable 

[fattyflattie 4636]

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.forbes.com/sites/nicksibilla/2021/03/23/biden-administration-urges-supreme-court-to-let-cops-enter-homes-and-seize-guns-without-a-warrant/amp/

[Sawbonz 27429]

12 minutes ago, Hugo Stiglitz said:

Honestly, a cigarette tax would have been a better analogy.  Do cigarette taxes help poor people make better economic decisions?  I’d say it’s debatable 

Negative incentives are still incentives.  

[GRHorn 105]

12 minutes ago, fattyflattie said:

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.forbes.com/sites/nicksibilla/2021/03/23/biden-administration-urges-supreme-court-to-let-cops-enter-homes-and-seize-guns-without-a-warrant/amp/

Not a lawyer but sounds like some bullshit here.

I think I remember from the Kavanaugh fever dream that he was weak on the 4th amendment. 

[ndawg 1242]

2 hours ago, Anastasis said:

We can start with the post 9/11 examples this century. 

But again, to focus on the topic at hand, what specific short term restrictions of gun rights do you see as necessary, and what would be the specific plan and timing for removing those restrictions.  What safeguards do you propose to ensure that the restriction of Constitutional rights does not fall victim to longer term political inertia.  I am all ears on this one if someone can articulate the what's and how's of it.   

Oh I wasn't necessarily agreeing with the notion that we need to take away gun freedoms. In fact, when I first read your reply, my initial reaction was nodding in agreement with your assertion that freedoms, once taken, don't tend to come back. But I stopped and asked myself, "is that actually true, or is it just something we all accept as true without questioning it?" I scanned my memory bank for the first example I could think of where a major freedom was taken away, and alcohol prohibition was the first one that came up. I was fairly certain you had concrete examples in mind, and was genuinely curious about what they were. I wasn't trying to lay some kind of stupid rhetorical trap or anything.

To answer your question, though, I think that the premise of people having a absolute right to arm themselves is already out of the question, and has been for a long time, but nobody sees it that way, because the problem has been framed for them. Americans today don't have the freedom to bear arms if those arms include a bazooka. So, today, it's fairly undeniable that Americans only have the freedom to bear arms within reason, just like we also only have freedom of speech within reason. Ultimately, this is therefore a discussion about where to draw a line. Now, because the debate has been allowed to be framed by the right, determining where to draw that line is called "gun control" when it's anywhere other than where the gun lobbies want it to be, and it's called "our inalienable second Amendment rights" when it's drawn to their satisfaction.

So, my proposal isn't "safeguards," it's for us to stop framing the problem in clumsy, binary terms.

Edited March 25, 2021 by ndawg

[washparkhorn 9935]

The current policy encourages potential murderers to avoid seeking help when in crisis out of a fear it will go on their permanent records. 

Going in for mental hygiene check-ups and tune-ups is a net positive (for society and the economy) and should be treated accordingly by public policy.  If anything, we should be incentivizing that behavior.

 

[fattyflattie 4636]

2 hours ago, workswithseed said:

More people are killed by .22 than any other round.

Did it say .22 caliber, or specifically .22lr?  
 

I know this board always balks when you get specific with regards to guns. But that distinction is pretty fucking important as there are a bunch of mass shooting victims that have died from a .224 caliber bullet.  Fired from an AR15, of course. 

[TwiceHorn 31272]

11 hours ago, fattyflattie said:

My point is, while not as deadly as an AR 15 (although its killed many  many more people), the .30 carbine was basically the precursor.  Even more confusing, it was one of the few sa rifles that was "OK" in Feinsteins bill; that doesn't make sense to me but whatever. 

Careful.  Don't want to end up on a red flag list for some dumb joke on the internet. 

Well, to be fair, ain't nobody can get an M1 Carbine.

[Bozo_Casanova 26279]

AR’s are dumb but I may buy one this weekend to flip. 

[TwiceHorn 31272]

1 hour ago, GRHorn said:

Not a lawyer but sounds like some bullshit here.

I think I remember from the Kavanaugh fever dream that he was weak on the 4th amendment. 

Woof.  That's a bad case, and not because it involves seizing guns.

The Biden Administration should be ashamed of itself.

I'm speaking here in terms of what seems to be a gross incursion on the 4th Amendment.  Perhaps it could be excused on the ground that it is not seeking evidence for use in a criminal case.

Edited March 25, 2021 by TwiceHorn

[TwiceHorn 31272]

3 minutes ago, Bozo_Casanova said:

AR’s are dumb but I may buy one this weekend to flip. 

Personally, I very much prefer the aesthetic of wooden stocks and thus have never really wanted an AR. I'm also way too cheap to plink with a centerfire.

I can see the attraction for some, though.

[atomheartbevo 89429]

6 hours ago, henrygandorf said:

this right here.

republican politicians don't want to appease people - gun nuts or not.  they want to do nothing, because they want the issue.  as long as they have the issue, it will help win them elections.

i said this back in 2017 and was proven ~wrong, that trump didn't want the wall, he wanted the issue.  if the wall got built, he wouldn't have anything to talk about.  so for 2 years he yelled and screamed, and then the shutdown happened, and then money got diverted, then he built a few feet or whatever.  a smart politician would've left it unbuilt for at least 4 years and campaigned on it in 2020.

trump was not a smart politician, but there are some over there who know exactly what they're doing.  they know that with every mass shooting, they can fundraise off the reaction.  you can't pass good faith common sense gun laws when one side has zero interest in good faith or common sense.

1234.

Just like abortion - Republicans say they want a reduction in abortions.

Do they push for things that could actually reduce abortions, like sex education, contraception, etc.?

Nope, they'd rather have the status quo, because they can campaign on that.

[fattyflattie 4636]

36 minutes ago, TwiceHorn said:

Well, to be fair, ain't nobody can get an M1 Carbine.

You aren't looking in the right places.  Much cheaper than a quality AR right now, too.  Finding something to feed it on the other hand, much much more difficult.  

[Hank Kingsley 20697]

To every dumbfuck on here that talks about how responsible they are with their own guns:

IT'S NOT ABOUT YOU. 

 

 

[Hank Kingsley 20697]

We fucking outlawed BOOZE for 14 years in this country. Our government passed a fucking CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT to do so. But the idea of gun control, simply limiting the type of firearm or limiting who is allowed to legally carry, is considered unconscionable by some people. Get the fuck out of here. 

[Anastasis 23395]

35 minutes ago, Bozo_Casanova said:

AR’s are dumb but I may buy one this weekend to flip. 

ARs are great. Assholes that use them to shoot innocent people are dumb. We need more focus on the latter. But yeah, you can make some coin during these irrational run ups if you are so inclined. Too much brain damage involved at this point but margins on the right parts rather than the fully functional firearms are where it is at imo. 

[Anastasis 23395]

2 minutes ago, Hank Kingsley said:

We fucking outlawed BOOZE for 14 years in this country. Our government passed a fucking CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT to do so. But the idea of gun control, simply limiting the type of firearm or limiting who is allowed to legally carry, is considered unconscionable by some people. Get the fuck out of here. 

Pass a constitutional amendment then if that is the precedent. 

[Anastasis 23395]

12 minutes ago, fattyflattie said:

You aren't looking in the right places.  Much cheaper than a quality AR right now, too.  Finding something to feed it on the other hand, much much more difficult.  

Haven’t looked at ammonorices in a while but that shit is crazy.