Another Mass Shooting: It's Those Darn Video Games!

[RaceBoarder]

Anecdote alert: when I worked at a different company, we were bringing over a bunch of British engineers from a partner company. Most of them could come over on a "tourist" (non-)visa and start working right away while the paperwork for their proper work visas went through the system. But not the one assigned to my team. He had to sit at home in the UK until his actual visa came through. Why? Because he had a firearm conviction on his record. His offense: he had a 1700's-era musket over his mantel that had been in his family for generations. It hadn't been fired in, probably literally, more than a century. When he redecorated his house, it didn't really go with the new decor, so he gave it to a friend of his. That friend got into a scrape with police (drugs, IIRC), so when they canvassed his house and asked where he got the gun, he fingered my friend, and so my engineer friend was convicted of transferring ownership of a firearm without proper documentation.

*That* is how gun laws should work.

I get that there will be issues with people that are just blatantly unaware like your co-worker. But a firearm is a firearm and needs to be treated as such. For the record, there is already procedure in place here in the us for guns made before a certain year (1899 or 1901 seems right, but off the top of my head). The sales are much more lax in these cases as many pieces are used as show pieces vs as an actual firearm.

It sucks for honest people, but they are 1 case of prosecution for a law that will likely prevent 100's of much more shady deals...

 

[LynahFan]

I get that there will be issues with people that are just blatantly unaware like your co-worker. But a firearm is a firearm and needs to be treated as such. For the record, there is already procedure in place here in the us for guns made before a certain year (1899 or 1901 seems right, but off the top of my head). The sales are much more lax in these cases as many pieces are used as show pieces vs as an actual firearm.

It sucks for honest people, but they are 1 case of prosecution for a law that will likely prevent 100's of much more shady deals...

Just to be clear: I 100% *agree* with the law that ensnared my co-worker. Laws regarding transfer of gun ownership need to be that stringent and that strictly enforced in order to filter out the shady transactions, exactly as you say.

My co-worker's conviction was a feature, not a bug.

 

[RaceBoarder]

Just to be clear: I 100% *agree* with the law that ensnared my co-worker. Laws regarding transfer of gun ownership need to be that stringent and that strictly enforced in order to filter out the shady transactions, exactly as you say.

My co-worker's conviction was a feature, not a bug.

Ok. Thats kind of what I figured, but wasn't 100% sure how to read it. We're in agreement on the deal =)

 

[dxmnkd316]

Why not?

The moderate voice, 1855: "I don’t personally own a slave and never will, but I’m not going to tell others they can’t."

Because you lose people like when you start talking insanity. And it's not even remotely similar to owning a slave. That's about as intellectually lazy as I've ever seen you.

 

[dxmnkd316]

Just to be clear: I 100% *agree* with the law that ensnared my co-worker. Laws regarding transfer of gun ownership need to be that stringent and that strictly enforced in order to filter out the shady transactions, exactly as you say.

My co-worker's conviction was a feature, not a bug.

I'm not sure that's the way I would want them to work. 100% on board for all semiautomatic guns. 100% on board for all guns manufactured after 1900. Not sure about situations like that.

 

[Handyman]

I'm not sure that's the way I would want them to work. 100% on board for all semiautomatic guns. 100% on board for all guns manufactured after 1900. Not sure about situations like that.

I would rather it work like that than what we have now.

 

[dxmnkd316]

I would rather it work like that than what we have now.

I could go either way. I'd rather they not work that way. If we go that route, I'd want 100% registration requirement regardless of whether it could fire. That should come with mandatory training annually. No refresher courses, only full re-certs. Because I don't think a person should have a permanent international mark on their record for situations like that.

I can already hear every one of you saying "I'm not seeing the problem."

 

[MichVandal]

Why should every be allowed to have a gun?

Honestly, that's a real question now.

A gun has ONE purpose, and that's to kill whatever you are shooting at. There are no other reasons that guns even exist.

I can see giving an allowance for people to go out and harvest meat. One shot at a time, bolt action, and that's it. If you need more than one shot to harvest your meat, you need to learn how to do it better.

If you need a sidearm to keep yourself safe from animals- I'll grant you that, too- but with the same concept of restriction- if you need more than one shot, maybe you should not be going out in bear country.

But to be able to shoot other people??? Why do we need that?

And don't try to present the BS crap about millitia and fighting governments- if you are, then we should immediately implement the same voting restrictions on guns. And if you want to go the Millitia route, then you must serve for two full weeks a year in the NG. No way around that.

Even then, is there an actual reason we have guns that can shoot more than 6 rounds in 30 seconds?

Over time, it's pretty clear that the gun groups have not been able to keep people safe, as they constantly claim they will- both from being able to shoot people and to prevent baddies from getting guns. That has not played out once, ever.

So why do we even need guns?

 

[LynahFan]

I could go either way. I'd rather they not work that way. If we go that route, I'd want 100% registration requirement regardless of whether it could fire. That should come with mandatory training annually. No refresher courses, only full re-certs. Because I don't think a person should have a permanent international mark on their record for situations like that.

I can already hear every one of you saying "I'm not seeing the problem."

I'm not seeing the problem. Gun ownership is a big responsibility. Filling out a couple of forms would add *very* little to the total time that a responsible gun owner should devote to care, safety, storage, and training with their firearms.

And, don't forget - felons get to vote in our fantasy world, too, so the mark would sting a bit less.

 

[dxmnkd316]

I'm not seeing the problem. Gun ownership is a big responsibility. Filling out a couple of forms would add *very* little to the total time that a responsible gun owner should devote to care, safety, storage, and training with their firearms.

And, don't forget - felons get to vote in our fantasy world, too, so the mark would sting a bit less.

Like most on the board, I think we agree in principle. It's the details that need to be worked out.

 

[Kepler]

As red staters move into suburbs the final leg of the guns, god, gays idiocy will start to fail.

By my grandchildren's time this may be an okay place to live.

 

[RaceBoarder]

Why should every be allowed to have a gun?

Honestly, that's a real question now.

A gun has ONE purpose, and that's to kill whatever you are shooting at. There are no other reasons that guns even exist.

I can see giving an allowance for people to go out and harvest meat. One shot at a time, bolt action, and that's it. If you need more than one shot to harvest your meat, you need to learn how to do it better.

If you need a sidearm to keep yourself safe from animals- I'll grant you that, too- but with the same concept of restriction- if you need more than one shot, maybe you should not be going out in bear country.

But to be able to shoot other people??? Why do we need that?

And don't try to present the BS crap about millitia and fighting governments- if you are, then we should immediately implement the same voting restrictions on guns. And if you want to go the Millitia route, then you must serve for two full weeks a year in the NG. No way around that.

Even then, is there an actual reason we have guns that can shoot more than 6 rounds in 30 seconds?

Over time, it's pretty clear that the gun groups have not been able to keep people safe, as they constantly claim they will- both from being able to shoot people and to prevent baddies from getting guns. That has not played out once, ever.

So why do we even need guns?

You realize that waterfowl hunting normally requires 3-5 shot bursts. Upland birds and small game 2-3. Same thing with a side arm for BEAR. You better be damn sure you have more than 1 shot if you are relying on a .44 or something like that because that is quite literally the last line of defense.

When you speak like this, you sound like you've never set foot further outdoors than the camping area at a Meijer store. I expect this kind of ignorance from the right, but it's downright sad to see it on the left.

 

[dxmnkd316]

Why should every be allowed to have a gun?

Honestly, that's a real question now.

A gun has ONE purpose, and that's to kill whatever you are shooting at. There are no other reasons that guns even exist.

I can see giving an allowance for people to go out and harvest meat. One shot at a time, bolt action, and that's it. If you need more than one shot to harvest your meat, you need to learn how to do it better.

If you need a sidearm to keep yourself safe from animals- I'll grant you that, too- but with the same concept of restriction- if you need more than one shot, maybe you should not be going out in bear country.

But to be able to shoot other people??? Why do we need that?

And don't try to present the BS crap about millitia and fighting governments- if you are, then we should immediately implement the same voting restrictions on guns. And if you want to go the Millitia route, then you must serve for two full weeks a year in the NG. No way around that.

Even then, is there an actual reason we have guns that can shoot more than 6 rounds in 30 seconds?

Over time, it's pretty clear that the gun groups have not been able to keep people safe, as they constantly claim they will- both from being able to shoot people and to prevent baddies from getting guns. That has not played out once, ever.

So why do we even need guns?

Trap shooting one of the largest high school sports in MN at 13k (in 2018). Only T&F (B 17k, G 16k), baseball/softball (B 14k, G 13k), basketball (B 14k, G 12k), football (25k), cross country (9k, 7k), volleyball (16k) were higher. Even hockey lagged at 9k combined. 80% of schools offer it as a sport now. More than hockey, golf, cross country, soccer, wrestling, tennis, cheerleading, nordic, lacrosse, or dance team.

MN also has laws on the books protecting trap ranges from being developed or having anything around them developed. So it's not like it's a mystery.

 

[dxmnkd316]

You realize that waterfowl hunting normally requires 3-5 shot bursts. Upland birds and small game 2-3. Same thing with a side arm for BEAR. You better be damn sure you have more than 1 shot if you are relying on a .44 or something like that because that is quite literally the last line of defense.

When you speak like this, you sound like you've never set foot further outdoors than the camping area at a Meijer store. I expect this kind of ignorance from the right, but it's downright sad to see it on the left.

Yeah, more than 10% of Minnesotans participate in the firearm deer season on average. Every year.

Plants in Europe plan around holidays in August, we plan our project installs around deer opener. It's astonishing how many people are on vacation for that weekend. I imagine the numbers are similar across our neighboring states.

Point is, if you have a hard time getting blue/purple states like MN, WI, IA, and MI on board, you're going to fall very short of the necessary votes. That doesn't mean we can't find ways to properly regulate it. The average gunowner in MN is almost certainly in favor of more restrictive gun laws. The obvious ones like background checks and registration are even silly to ask on surveys because they are so overwhelmingly supported.

 

[RaceBoarder]

Yeah, more than 10% of Minnesotans participate in the firearm deer season on average. Every year.

Plants in Europe plan around holidays in August, we plan our project installs around deer opener. It's astonishing how many people are on vacation for that weekend. I imagine the numbers are similar across our neighboring states.

Point is, if you have a hard time getting blue/purple states like MN, WI, IA, and MI on board, you're going to fall very short of the necessary votes. That doesn't mean we can't find ways to properly regulate it. The average gunowner in MN is almost certainly in favor of more restrictive gun laws. The obvious ones like background checks and registration are even silly to ask on surveys because they are so overwhelmingly supported.

Oh, I'm not saying that we need open laws. Far from it. But if you alienate the sport shooting/hunting crowd, it's a lost cause. Sure, some in that crowd are like Ted Nugent that want to prepare for war. But most of them, they likely own 1-3 firearms, all of which will likely be long guns. Don't paint what they use as "evil".

It just bugs me when some of the most vocal proponents of something know absolutely nothing about it. Gun Control on the left mirrors much of what we see on the right. Lefties know its bad so they adopt a "no half measures" approach to it. It's really the mirror image of the DERP used on the other side.

 

[dxmnkd316]

Oh, I'm not saying that we need open laws. Far from it. But if you alienate the sport shooting/hunting crowd, it's a lost cause. Sure, some in that crowd are like Ted Nugent that want to prepare for war. But most of them, they likely own 1-3 firearms, all of which will likely be long guns. Don't paint what they use as "evil".

It just bugs me when some of the most vocal proponents of something know absolutely nothing about it. Gun Control on the left mirrors much of what we see on the right. Lefties know its bad so they adopt a "no half measures" approach to it. It's really the mirror image of the DERP used on the other side.

Gotcha. Didn't mean to imply that.

And yeah, I think you're pretty spot on. Though, if I had to guess, the number is higher than 1-3. I'm pretty rare in that I own a trap gun and that's it. I don't even like to enter the raffles at the trap banquet because I wouldn't know what to do with a second gun.

I don't think what I'm doing is evil. (Certainly none of the other people I shoot with think that either. Worth noting that almost none of them use hunt either.) My wife and I will probably inherit the hunting rifles and shotguns from our dads as well. I don't lock my trap gun, but we also have no shells in the house and don't have kids. The second* we see the two pink lines is when we get a safe.

*Ok, it probably won't be that second. But my wife and I both agreed that's when we get one.

 

[MichVandal]

You realize that waterfowl hunting normally requires 3-5 shot bursts. Upland birds and small game 2-3. Same thing with a side arm for BEAR. You better be damn sure you have more than 1 shot if you are relying on a .44 or something like that because that is quite literally the last line of defense.

When you speak like this, you sound like you've never set foot further outdoors than the camping area at a Meijer store. I expect this kind of ignorance from the right, but it's downright sad to see it on the left.

I went hunting as a kid- not for flying things, thought. And it's fair as long as it's a pump action. In the old days, shotguns could shoot twice at most.

At some point, we need to stop using hunting as an excuse to have guns that can put out 30 rounds in less than 30 seconds. I'm fine with making specific corrections, but when do we actually realize how many weapons out there are not for target shooting or hunting????

 

[MichVandal]

Yeah, more than 10% of Minnesotans participate in the firearm deer season on average. Every year.

Plants in Europe plan around holidays in August, we plan our project installs around deer opener. It's astonishing how many people are on vacation for that weekend. I imagine the numbers are similar across our neighboring states.

Point is, if you have a hard time getting blue/purple states like MN, WI, IA, and MI on board, you're going to fall very short of the necessary votes. That doesn't mean we can't find ways to properly regulate it. The average gunowner in MN is almost certainly in favor of more restrictive gun laws. The obvious ones like background checks and registration are even silly to ask on surveys because they are so overwhelmingly supported.

Of all of that hunting or target shooting, what of that needs more than 5 rounds at once? Why in the world do we insist that a 30 round magazine is worthwhile for hunting??? Hunting people, perhaps. But that's ALL they are good for.

We've been sold a bill of goods where the gun lobby tells us that they can keep us safe, and we are all waiting for that time. One of the bigger lies in my lifetime, if I do say so.

And to keep historic 6 shooters in play, we do NOT need more than 6 rounds in a magazine at once. We should regulate firing rate, and we should get rid of the easily replaceable magazine. They are 100% pointless unless the goal is to kill a lot of something in a short time period- and the last time I checked, that only happens with humans.

 

[MichVandal]

Oh, I'm not saying that we need open laws. Far from it. But if you alienate the sport shooting/hunting crowd, it's a lost cause. Sure, some in that crowd are like Ted Nugent that want to prepare for war. But most of them, they likely own 1-3 firearms, all of which will likely be long guns. Don't paint what they use as "evil".

It just bugs me when some of the most vocal proponents of something know absolutely nothing about it. Gun Control on the left mirrors much of what we see on the right. Lefties know its bad so they adopt a "no half measures" approach to it. It's really the mirror image of the DERP used on the other side.

It bugs me that the hunters who own 1-3 firearms do nothing in the face of these mass shootings. Nothing, nada, sit back and have a beer, not even sympathy for the dead.

Propose something that will actually prevent mass shootings. Then you won't be labeled as evil.

Just like all of those "good cops" we keep hearing about- where are all of the "good gun owners"??? If you are not going to come to the table, then why should I care about your opinion? Or is this just like dumpy's ACA replacement or infrastructure week?

 

[burd]

It bugs me that the hunters who own 1-3 firearms do nothing in the face of these mass shootings. Nothing, nada, sit back and have a beer, not even sympathy for the dead.

Not very persuasive when you make loaded comments like that.

No, I don't own any guns.