With the exception of hunting accidents, 100% of all other gun accidents result from not obeying the first most basic rule of gun safety- always assume a gun is loaded. Locking up ammo in an underground bunker in your backyard won't protect people from accidents who don't follow that rule.
The idea by separating ammo from the gun is to allow a little cool down as to avoid someone grabbing the gun and using it during a heated dispute. It also allows the other party in the dispute a head start to get away when they see the person grab the gun...nothing wrong with the law. Americans need to change their mentality...
It s a pretty dumb arguement. I live in a 2500 sq foot house and it literally takes about 15 seconds to walk from the second floor all the way to the opposite end of the house in the basement. How much cooling off are you doing in that amount of time? It s another one of those feel good laws that aren’t really effective. I see zero issues with ammo and guns being stored in a properly secured safe. Shit I add trigger locks and /or take out bolts and firing pins to some of my firearms.
With the exception of hunting accidents, 100% of all other gun accidents result from not obeying the first most basic rule of gun safety- always assume a gun is loaded. Locking up ammo in an underground bunker in your backyard won't protect people from accidents who don't follow that rule.
The idea by separating ammo from the gun is to allow a little cool down as to avoid someone grabbing the gun and using it during a heated dispute. It also allows the other party in the dispute a head start to get away when they see the person grab the gun...nothing wrong with the law. Americans need to change their mentality...
It s a pretty dumb arguement. I live in a 2500 sq foot house and it literally takes about 15 seconds to walk from the second floor all the way to the opposite end of the house in the basement. How much cooling off are you doing in that amount of time? It s another one of those feel good laws that aren’t really effective. I see zero issues with ammo and guns being stored in a properly secured safe. Shit I add trigger locks and /or take out bolts and firing pins to some of my firearms.
I get that it makes sense in some cases. There are some very weak and flimsy gun cabinets out there that could be easily broken into. But for me, I have a safe that is extremely difficult to break in to, I would say nearly impossible for a teenager and younger. I do not have the room or money to have a separate one just for ammo. So my two options are to store them together in a place that would require a professional to break into, with a lot of time and power tools, or store the ammo separately in a less secure location.
And the counter argument to that, of course, is if gun safety is really a priority then that comes first. No one should purchase guns and then claim not to have the money or the room to safely store them. You get the safe storage options in place first, or you don't get the guns.
And I do, as do most. But when your most secure safe spot is the gun safe it just makes sense to me to also store and lock up the ammo there as well. If we passed a law tomorrow that forced me to lock up ammo separately, I would buy something much smaller and less durable than my gun safe. I know my guns are safe, and short of some professional spending hours in my home they are not getting into the gun safe. The end result would be my guns are still safe but easier access to my ammo.
I don't buy the whole cooling down scenario offered up earlier, that the time it takes to get into 2 different rooms to get ammo allows you to cool down. My safe is in my basement and I store my key on the second floor. And my type of lock takes about 2 minutes to open even with the key. If I have a neighbor following me around in my house while i get the key upstairs, open the safe in the basement, open a box of ammo, load the gun and shoot, well there isn't much I can say about that and I doubt if I stored the ammo separately would have helped much.
I honestly don't see the point. I mean, if I have a big safe for guns, why not store ammo there too? Why put it in a place that is easier to get than some place secure enough for guns?
I think the point is that if a kid finds one or the other (yes, kids will figure out ways to get into locked things sometimes), everything's fine - no harm done. But if they are stored together, the chances of something bad happening go way up.
A good safe, not a cabinet, a safe, has an additional lock box for ammo.
A good safe also has a combination that your kid doesn't need to know.
I believe in Canada ammo cannot even be in the same room as the gun. The idea behind that is to hopefully allow a person who is grabbing his gun in anger a few minutes to cool down and hopefully think before acting. Only a fool sleeps in a house with a loaded weapon and ammo nearby. I'm sure most of us have lost their cool, maybe got in a heated argument with a neighbour...well in Canada we generally never need to worry about a gun being involved...I'll takes that any day over a shooting incident because of someone blowing snow on someone's yard.
That's why America will always have gun violence. You resist common sense solutions. Where the fuck does most of you live that you need a gun in your nightstand? Fuck I go to bed most nights with my door unlocked...
And anyone who enjoys hunting is not being denied the opportunity. We are making it hard for people who would not normally commit gun violence from acting based on emotions. The guns laws work in Canada, I worked with plenty of hunters...none I talked to worried about the gun laws...we just have a different mentality than Americans.
I have no problem locking up a gun in a safe, right next to the ammo.
Nothing wrong with that.
Locking up ammo in another room? Silly.
Not so silly when you compare gun violence and accident statistics.
Yes it is. Locked in a safe =safe.
Not locked in a safe=problems.
A locked up gun is hard pressed to cause violence or accidents.
Forgive me if I don't feel inclined to really listen to Americans when it comes to effective gun laws.
Forgive me if I don't listen to gun safety from someone who doesn't own one...
I honestly don't see the point. I mean, if I have a big safe for guns, why not store ammo there too? Why put it in a place that is easier to get than some place secure enough for guns?
I think the point is that if a kid finds one or the other (yes, kids will figure out ways to get into locked things sometimes), everything's fine - no harm done. But if they are stored together, the chances of something bad happening go way up.
A good safe, not a cabinet, a safe, has an additional lock box for ammo.
A good safe also has a combination that your kid doesn't need to know.
I believe in Canada ammo cannot even be in the same room as the gun. The idea behind that is to hopefully allow a person who is grabbing his gun in anger a few minutes to cool down and hopefully think before acting. Only a fool sleeps in a house with a loaded weapon and ammo nearby. I'm sure most of us have lost their cool, maybe got in a heated argument with a neighbour...well in Canada we generally never need to worry about a gun being involved...I'll takes that any day over a shooting incident because of someone blowing snow on someone's yard.
That's why America will always have gun violence. You resist common sense solutions. Where the fuck does most of you live that you need a gun in your nightstand? Fuck I go to bed most nights with my door unlocked...
And anyone who enjoys hunting is not being denied the opportunity. We are making it hard for people who would not normally commit gun violence from acting based on emotions. The guns laws work in Canada, I worked with plenty of hunters...none I talked to worried about the gun laws...we just have a different mentality than Americans.
I have no problem locking up a gun in a safe, right next to the ammo.
Nothing wrong with that.
Locking up ammo in another room? Silly.
Not so silly when you compare gun violence and accident statistics.
Yes it is. Locked in a safe =safe.
Not locked in a safe=problems.
A locked up gun is hard pressed to cause violence or accidents.
Forgive me if I don't feel inclined to really listen to Americans when it comes to effective gun laws.
Forgive me if I don't listen to gun safety from someone who doesn't own one...
You're not. I'm not lecturing you on gun safety. I'm explaining the reasoning behind the gun laws in Canada, which do seem to work better than what America has going on. But FWIW, people who don't own guns are capable of knowing shit. You act as though only people who own guns should have anything to say.
Post edited by PJ_Soul on
With all its sham, drudgery, and broken dreams, it is still a beautiful world. Be careful. Strive to be happy. ~ Desiderata
I get that it makes sense in some cases. There are some very weak and flimsy gun cabinets out there that could be easily broken into. But for me, I have a safe that is extremely difficult to break in to, I would say nearly impossible for a teenager and younger. I do not have the room or money to have a separate one just for ammo. So my two options are to store them together in a place that would require a professional to break into, with a lot of time and power tools, or store the ammo separately in a less secure location.
And the counter argument to that, of course, is if gun safety is really a priority then that comes first. No one should purchase guns and then claim not to have the money or the room to safely store them. You get the safe storage options in place first, or you don't get the guns.
And I do, as do most. But when your most secure safe spot is the gun safe it just makes sense to me to also store and lock up the ammo there as well. If we passed a law tomorrow that forced me to lock up ammo separately, I would buy something much smaller and less durable than my gun safe. I know my guns are safe, and short of some professional spending hours in my home they are not getting into the gun safe. The end result would be my guns are still safe but easier access to my ammo.
I don't buy the whole cooling down scenario offered up earlier, that the time it takes to get into 2 different rooms to get ammo allows you to cool down. My safe is in my basement and I store my key on the second floor. And my type of lock takes about 2 minutes to open even with the key. If I have a neighbor following me around in my house while i get the key upstairs, open the safe in the basement, open a box of ammo, load the gun and shoot, well there isn't much I can say about that and I doubt if I stored the ammo separately would have helped much.
Or you could buy something just as secure, but separated from the guns, to make it harder for a thief or someone else with no business getting their hands on them.
my small self... like a book amongst the many on a shelf
The problem with many of the laws people propose are suggest are like McGruff said, the "feel good" laws but don;t do anything. We could eliminate every assault rifle in the country, prevent every accident, eliminate 100% of the shootings resulting from a heated argument and that would just place a small dent in the data. Laws never seem to target the root of the problem. We don't want to address gang problems are even admit a connection between family status and violence. Reporters have gotten fired for suggesting that. We want to start with what causes 1% of the problem and turn a blind eye to the 99%. We should do it the other way around.
With the exception of hunting accidents, 100% of all other gun accidents result from not obeying the first most basic rule of gun safety- always assume a gun is loaded. Locking up ammo in an underground bunker in your backyard won't protect people from accidents who don't follow that rule.
The idea by separating ammo from the gun is to allow a little cool down as to avoid someone grabbing the gun and using it during a heated dispute. It also allows the other party in the dispute a head start to get away when they see the person grab the gun...nothing wrong with the law. Americans need to change their mentality...
It s a pretty dumb arguement. I live in a 2500 sq foot house and it literally takes about 15 seconds to walk from the second floor all the way to the opposite end of the house in the basement. How much cooling off are you doing in that amount of time? It s another one of those feel good laws that aren’t really effective. I see zero issues with ammo and guns being stored in a properly secured safe. Shit I add trigger locks and /or take out bolts and firing pins to some of my firearms.
And those 15 seconds turn into minutes when the partner in a domestic dispute leaves the house for safety. Change your attitudes or continue down the path you are going down...I have no problem with gun ownership, I just see no problem with reducing the risk of a normally good person grabbing his gun and uses, because of emotion.
I honestly don't see the point. I mean, if I have a big safe for guns, why not store ammo there too? Why put it in a place that is easier to get than some place secure enough for guns?
I think the point is that if a kid finds one or the other (yes, kids will figure out ways to get into locked things sometimes), everything's fine - no harm done. But if they are stored together, the chances of something bad happening go way up.
A good safe, not a cabinet, a safe, has an additional lock box for ammo.
A good safe also has a combination that your kid doesn't need to know.
I believe in Canada ammo cannot even be in the same room as the gun. The idea behind that is to hopefully allow a person who is grabbing his gun in anger a few minutes to cool down and hopefully think before acting. Only a fool sleeps in a house with a loaded weapon and ammo nearby. I'm sure most of us have lost their cool, maybe got in a heated argument with a neighbour...well in Canada we generally never need to worry about a gun being involved...I'll takes that any day over a shooting incident because of someone blowing snow on someone's yard.
That's why America will always have gun violence. You resist common sense solutions. Where the fuck does most of you live that you need a gun in your nightstand? Fuck I go to bed most nights with my door unlocked...
And anyone who enjoys hunting is not being denied the opportunity. We are making it hard for people who would not normally commit gun violence from acting based on emotions. The guns laws work in Canada, I worked with plenty of hunters...none I talked to worried about the gun laws...we just have a different mentality than Americans.
I have no problem locking up a gun in a safe, right next to the ammo.
Nothing wrong with that.
Locking up ammo in another room? Silly.
Not so silly when you compare gun violence and accident statistics.
Yes it is. Locked in a safe =safe.
Not locked in a safe=problems.
A locked up gun is hard pressed to cause violence or accidents.
Forgive me if I don't feel inclined to really listen to Americans when it comes to effective gun laws.
Forgive me if I don't listen to gun safety from someone who doesn't own one...
You're not. I'm not lecturing you on gun safety. I'm explaining the reasoning behind the gun laws in Canada, which do seem to work better than what America has going on. But FWIW, people who don't own guns are capable of knowing shit. You act as though only people who own guns should have anything to say.
Your country has the population of California. I would hope that you don't have the problems we do...
It does give me heartburn when people whom have never had, fired, seen a firearm care to tell others what is best. I admit that does bother me.
With the exception of hunting accidents, 100% of all other gun accidents result from not obeying the first most basic rule of gun safety- always assume a gun is loaded. Locking up ammo in an underground bunker in your backyard won't protect people from accidents who don't follow that rule.
The idea by separating ammo from the gun is to allow a little cool down as to avoid someone grabbing the gun and using it during a heated dispute. It also allows the other party in the dispute a head start to get away when they see the person grab the gun...nothing wrong with the law. Americans need to change their mentality...
It s a pretty dumb arguement. I live in a 2500 sq foot house and it literally takes about 15 seconds to walk from the second floor all the way to the opposite end of the house in the basement. How much cooling off are you doing in that amount of time? It s another one of those feel good laws that aren’t really effective. I see zero issues with ammo and guns being stored in a properly secured safe. Shit I add trigger locks and /or take out bolts and firing pins to some of my firearms.
And those 15 seconds turn into minutes when the partner in a domestic dispute leaves the house for safety. Change your attitudes or continue down the path you are going down...I have no problem with gun ownership, I just see no problem with reducing the risk of a normally good person grabbing his gun and uses, because of emotion.
Or those fifteen seconds turn into eternity if a bad guy enters my house and I need to protect my family.
I honestly don't see the point. I mean, if I have a big safe for guns, why not store ammo there too? Why put it in a place that is easier to get than some place secure enough for guns?
I think the point is that if a kid finds one or the other (yes, kids will figure out ways to get into locked things sometimes), everything's fine - no harm done. But if they are stored together, the chances of something bad happening go way up.
A good safe, not a cabinet, a safe, has an additional lock box for ammo.
A good safe also has a combination that your kid doesn't need to know.
I believe in Canada ammo cannot even be in the same room as the gun. The idea behind that is to hopefully allow a person who is grabbing his gun in anger a few minutes to cool down and hopefully think before acting. Only a fool sleeps in a house with a loaded weapon and ammo nearby. I'm sure most of us have lost their cool, maybe got in a heated argument with a neighbour...well in Canada we generally never need to worry about a gun being involved...I'll takes that any day over a shooting incident because of someone blowing snow on someone's yard.
That's why America will always have gun violence. You resist common sense solutions. Where the fuck does most of you live that you need a gun in your nightstand? Fuck I go to bed most nights with my door unlocked...
And anyone who enjoys hunting is not being denied the opportunity. We are making it hard for people who would not normally commit gun violence from acting based on emotions. The guns laws work in Canada, I worked with plenty of hunters...none I talked to worried about the gun laws...we just have a different mentality than Americans.
I have no problem locking up a gun in a safe, right next to the ammo.
Nothing wrong with that.
Locking up ammo in another room? Silly.
Not so silly when you compare gun violence and accident statistics.
Yes it is. Locked in a safe =safe.
Not locked in a safe=problems.
A locked up gun is hard pressed to cause violence or accidents.
Forgive me if I don't feel inclined to really listen to Americans when it comes to effective gun laws.
Forgive me if I don't listen to gun safety from someone who doesn't own one...
We don't need to own guns for anything other than hunting. Now some people do own restricted weapons for target shooting. But most of. us Canucks are happy go lucky people who just want to watch hockey, drink our Molson, smoke our weed, go to timmys, eat our poutine and back bacon, take care of our pet moose and just live peacefully in our igloos without the worry of getting shot. Seems reasonable.
All we really need for a weapon is a hockey stick. We Canadians really know how to do some damage involving carving with a stick around the eyes. You all have been warned. /s
I honestly don't see the point. I mean, if I have a big safe for guns, why not store ammo there too? Why put it in a place that is easier to get than some place secure enough for guns?
I think the point is that if a kid finds one or the other (yes, kids will figure out ways to get into locked things sometimes), everything's fine - no harm done. But if they are stored together, the chances of something bad happening go way up.
A good safe, not a cabinet, a safe, has an additional lock box for ammo.
A good safe also has a combination that your kid doesn't need to know.
I believe in Canada ammo cannot even be in the same room as the gun. The idea behind that is to hopefully allow a person who is grabbing his gun in anger a few minutes to cool down and hopefully think before acting. Only a fool sleeps in a house with a loaded weapon and ammo nearby. I'm sure most of us have lost their cool, maybe got in a heated argument with a neighbour...well in Canada we generally never need to worry about a gun being involved...I'll takes that any day over a shooting incident because of someone blowing snow on someone's yard.
That's why America will always have gun violence. You resist common sense solutions. Where the fuck does most of you live that you need a gun in your nightstand? Fuck I go to bed most nights with my door unlocked...
And anyone who enjoys hunting is not being denied the opportunity. We are making it hard for people who would not normally commit gun violence from acting based on emotions. The guns laws work in Canada, I worked with plenty of hunters...none I talked to worried about the gun laws...we just have a different mentality than Americans.
I have no problem locking up a gun in a safe, right next to the ammo.
Nothing wrong with that.
Locking up ammo in another room? Silly.
Not so silly when you compare gun violence and accident statistics.
Yes it is. Locked in a safe =safe.
Not locked in a safe=problems.
A locked up gun is hard pressed to cause violence or accidents.
Forgive me if I don't feel inclined to really listen to Americans when it comes to effective gun laws.
Forgive me if I don't listen to gun safety from someone who doesn't own one...
You're not. I'm not lecturing you on gun safety. I'm explaining the reasoning behind the gun laws in Canada, which do seem to work better than what America has going on. But FWIW, people who don't own guns are capable of knowing shit. You act as though only people who own guns should have anything to say.
Your country has the population of California. I would hope that you don't have the problems we do...
It does give me heartburn when people whom have never had, fired, seen a firearm care to tell others what is best. I admit that does bother me.
We have cities that are just as densely populated. These stats are based per capita and on population density, not overall populations.
I have seen a firearm. Some crazy drunk almost shot me with one once.
With all its sham, drudgery, and broken dreams, it is still a beautiful world. Be careful. Strive to be happy. ~ Desiderata
With the exception of hunting accidents, 100% of all other gun accidents result from not obeying the first most basic rule of gun safety- always assume a gun is loaded. Locking up ammo in an underground bunker in your backyard won't protect people from accidents who don't follow that rule.
The idea by separating ammo from the gun is to allow a little cool down as to avoid someone grabbing the gun and using it during a heated dispute. It also allows the other party in the dispute a head start to get away when they see the person grab the gun...nothing wrong with the law. Americans need to change their mentality...
It s a pretty dumb arguement. I live in a 2500 sq foot house and it literally takes about 15 seconds to walk from the second floor all the way to the opposite end of the house in the basement. How much cooling off are you doing in that amount of time? It s another one of those feel good laws that aren’t really effective. I see zero issues with ammo and guns being stored in a properly secured safe. Shit I add trigger locks and /or take out bolts and firing pins to some of my firearms.
And those 15 seconds turn into minutes when the partner in a domestic dispute leaves the house for safety. Change your attitudes or continue down the path you are going down...I have no problem with gun ownership, I just see no problem with reducing the risk of a normally good person grabbing his gun and uses, because of emotion.
I've seen very few oppose all forms of gun restriction. Its the ones that don't make any sense. I'm for background checks, safety courses and registration. I see zero impact on storing ammo separately if you have a strong gun safe. Instead of requiring ammo locked up separately for the scenario you described, why not support domestic violence victims better? My understanding is very rarely does someone shoot a parnter as the first sign of abuse.Lets find ways to solve that before it gets there.
I honestly don't see the point. I mean, if I have a big safe for guns, why not store ammo there too? Why put it in a place that is easier to get than some place secure enough for guns?
I think the point is that if a kid finds one or the other (yes, kids will figure out ways to get into locked things sometimes), everything's fine - no harm done. But if they are stored together, the chances of something bad happening go way up.
A good safe, not a cabinet, a safe, has an additional lock box for ammo.
A good safe also has a combination that your kid doesn't need to know.
I believe in Canada ammo cannot even be in the same room as the gun. The idea behind that is to hopefully allow a person who is grabbing his gun in anger a few minutes to cool down and hopefully think before acting. Only a fool sleeps in a house with a loaded weapon and ammo nearby. I'm sure most of us have lost their cool, maybe got in a heated argument with a neighbour...well in Canada we generally never need to worry about a gun being involved...I'll takes that any day over a shooting incident because of someone blowing snow on someone's yard.
That's why America will always have gun violence. You resist common sense solutions. Where the fuck does most of you live that you need a gun in your nightstand? Fuck I go to bed most nights with my door unlocked...
And anyone who enjoys hunting is not being denied the opportunity. We are making it hard for people who would not normally commit gun violence from acting based on emotions. The guns laws work in Canada, I worked with plenty of hunters...none I talked to worried about the gun laws...we just have a different mentality than Americans.
I have no problem locking up a gun in a safe, right next to the ammo.
Nothing wrong with that.
Locking up ammo in another room? Silly.
Not so silly when you compare gun violence and accident statistics.
Yes it is. Locked in a safe =safe.
Not locked in a safe=problems.
A locked up gun is hard pressed to cause violence or accidents.
Forgive me if I don't feel inclined to really listen to Americans when it comes to effective gun laws.
Forgive me if I don't listen to gun safety from someone who doesn't own one...
You're not. I'm not lecturing you on gun safety. I'm explaining the reasoning behind the gun laws in Canada, which do seem to work better than what America has going on. But FWIW, people who don't own guns are capable of knowing shit. You act as though only people who own guns should have anything to say.
Your country has the population of California. I would hope that you don't have the problems we do...
It does give me heartburn when people whom have never had, fired, seen a firearm care to tell others what is best. I admit that does bother me.
We have cities that are just as densely populated. These stats are based per capita and on population density, not overall populations.
I have seen a firearm. Some crazy drunk almost shot me with one once.
Could you imagine if we had 350 million people like the US? Canada is an incredibly large country, but most people want to be as south as possible because of the cold...
This is getting a bit silly. People say that no one needs quick access to a firearm and say that it is “fear” driving them to think someone will break into their house (some say they don’t even lock their doors). And then in the same breath people are “afraid” of a criminal breaking into someone’s house and stealing their guns and ammo that are stored together in a secure vault? Lol. Do we fear people breaking in or not???
The problem with many of the laws people propose are suggest are like McGruff said, the "feel good" laws but don;t do anything. We could eliminate every assault rifle in the country, prevent every accident, eliminate 100% of the shootings resulting from a heated argument and that would just place a small dent in the data. Laws never seem to target the root of the problem. We don't want to address gang problems are even admit a connection between family status and violence. Reporters have gotten fired for suggesting that. We want to start with what causes 1% of the problem and turn a blind eye to the 99%. We should do it the other way around.
How many thus far this year are due to "gang activity?" A "small dent" in the data is a start and worth aiming for. But maybe not.
The American mentality is a big part of it. As soon as you say "gun laws" or "gun reform" or "assault weapons ban" about 200 million mouth breathers all shout "DER CANT TAYK AWR GUNZ, S'MY CONSTATOOSHNAL RYYTE!" instead of actually listening to proprosals, offering constructive input, or even understanding why we want/need reform. People want to pretend that just because it's in the constitution, it's untouchable. TImes changes, purposes change, meanings change, function & availability change. Everything fucking changes. The reasons the 2nd Amendment were originally written are (mostly) irrelevant & unnecessary today. I invite everyone who doesn't want change in gun laws... next time you all go to the doctor, have surgery, etc, please make sure to ask your doctor to give you medical advice or perform procedures from the 18th fucking century. Instead of reaching for some Tylenol when you have a headache, call your doctor and schedule a lobotomy instead. You wouldn't. And rightfully so, because it's completely fucking archaic. Just like the 2nd fucking Amendment. So stop hiding behind that god damn skirt (and I'm not saying anyone here in particular is, just talking in general) and do something so our elementary schools, movie theaters, churches, mosques, shopping centers, etc, etc, etc don't get shot the fuck up on a god damn daily basis.
What really is the American fascination with guns anyway? We NEED to get away from that. (And before anyone retorts, yes, we really do.) And "it's my right" isn't a valid answer. It's your right to protest, right to vote, but I don't see hundreds of million Americans so vehemently expressing how awesome it is do those things nor fighting to keep them. No we do just the exact polar fucking opposite of those; we try to suppress them. I want to know exactly what is the mentality, what is the desire, the amazement, what is at the CORE of wanting to many god damn guns? What makes people feel so threatened if suddenly guns didn't exist?
The American mentality is a big part of it. As soon as you say "gun laws" or "gun reform" or "assault weapons ban" about 200 million mouth breathers all shout "DER CANT TAYK AWR GUNZ, S'MY CONSTATOOSHNAL RYYTE!" instead of actually listening to proprosals, offering constructive input, or even understanding why we want/need reform. People want to pretend that just because it's in the constitution, it's untouchable. TImes changes, purposes change, meanings change, function & availability change. Everything fucking changes. The reasons the 2nd Amendment were originally written are (mostly) irrelevant & unnecessary today. I invite everyone who doesn't want change in gun laws... next time you all go to the doctor, have surgery, etc, please make sure to ask your doctor to give you medical advice or perform procedures from the 18th fucking century. Instead of reaching for some Tylenol when you have a headache, call your doctor and schedule a lobotomy instead. You wouldn't. And rightfully so, because it's completely fucking archaic. Just like the 2nd fucking Amendment. So stop hiding behind that god damn skirt (and I'm not saying anyone here in particular is, just talking in general) and do something so our elementary schools, movie theaters, churches, mosques, shopping centers, etc, etc, etc don't get shot the fuck up on a god damn daily basis.
What really is the American fascination with guns anyway? We NEED to get away from that. (And before anyone retorts, yes, we really do.) And "it's my right" isn't a valid answer. It's your right to protest, right to vote, but I don't see hundreds of million Americans so vehemently expressing how awesome it is do those things nor fighting to keep them. No we do just the exact polar fucking opposite of those; we try to suppress them. I want to know exactly what is the mentality, what is the desire, the amazement, what is at the CORE of wanting to many god damn guns? What makes people feel so threatened if suddenly guns didn't exist?
The founders thought owning firearms was so important that it was the sixth right they listed (behind the first five in the first amendment). Training? Sounds good. Registration? Zero problems with it. Background checks? Giddy up. Banning something, yeah no thanks. Because after you ban something then the question becomes, what is next? Oh yeah, senators from Hawaii: https://www.cnsnews.com/news/article/susan-jones/hawaii-democrats-want-us-congress-consider-repeal-second-amendment
Hawaii Democrats Want U.S. Congress to Consider Repeal of Second Amendment
A resolution introduced in the Hawaii Senate this week urges the U.S. Congress to "consider and discuss whether the Second Amendment of the United States Constitution should be repealed or amended to clarify that the right to bear arms is a collective, rather than individual, constitutional right."
The resolution also urges Congress to adopt a proposed constitutional amendment "to clarify the constitutional right to bear arms."
The U.S. Supreme Court ruled in June 2008 that the Second Amendment "protects an individual right to possess a firearm unconnected with service in a militia, and to use that arm for traditionally lawful purposes, such as self-defense within the home."
The problem with many of the laws people propose are suggest are like McGruff said, the "feel good" laws but don;t do anything. We could eliminate every assault rifle in the country, prevent every accident, eliminate 100% of the shootings resulting from a heated argument and that would just place a small dent in the data. Laws never seem to target the root of the problem. We don't want to address gang problems are even admit a connection between family status and violence. Reporters have gotten fired for suggesting that. We want to start with what causes 1% of the problem and turn a blind eye to the 99%. We should do it the other way around.
A small dent?
No, reducing the opportunity for access to a loaded firearm within a few seconds when an argument heats up, whether "domestic" or otherwise, would not be a small dent, it would be a large chunk. Gang-related gun homicides are estimated to be between 15-30% of gun homicides; they are not the majority. And preventing gun suicides by making it harder to access guns in the home is much more significant.
my small self... like a book amongst the many on a shelf
With 19 words, Hawaii state Sen. Stanley Chang has rattled the nation’s gun lobby. “This body believes that it is necessary to repeal or amend the Second Amendment of the United States Constitution.”
Chang has introduced two identical measures to address gun rights: SCR42, a concurrent resolution that would have to pass both Senate and House; and SR29, which only needs to pass the Senate.
Both are nonbinding resolutions that challenge what they term the “individual right theory,” or the interpretation that the U.S. Constitution restricts legislative bodies from prohibiting firearm possession.
With 19 words, Hawaii state Sen. Stanley Chang has rattled the nation’s gun lobby. “This body believes that it is necessary to repeal or amend the Second Amendment of the United States Constitution.”
Chang has introduced two identical measures to address gun rights: SCR42, a concurrent resolution that would have to pass both Senate and House; and SR29, which only needs to pass the Senate.
Both are nonbinding resolutions that challenge what they term the “individual right theory,” or the interpretation that the U.S. Constitution restricts legislative bodies from prohibiting firearm possession.
Are you arguing against the right of redress of grievances?
With 19 words, Hawaii state Sen. Stanley Chang has rattled the nation’s gun lobby. “This body believes that it is necessary to repeal or amend the Second Amendment of the United States Constitution.”
Chang has introduced two identical measures to address gun rights: SCR42, a concurrent resolution that would have to pass both Senate and House; and SR29, which only needs to pass the Senate.
Both are nonbinding resolutions that challenge what they term the “individual right theory,” or the interpretation that the U.S. Constitution restricts legislative bodies from prohibiting firearm possession.
Are you arguing against the right of redress of grievances?
Not at all. Just because I don't agree with what they are saying doesn't mean I am against the first amendment.
The problem with many of the laws people propose are suggest are like McGruff said, the "feel good" laws but don;t do anything. We could eliminate every assault rifle in the country, prevent every accident, eliminate 100% of the shootings resulting from a heated argument and that would just place a small dent in the data. Laws never seem to target the root of the problem. We don't want to address gang problems are even admit a connection between family status and violence. Reporters have gotten fired for suggesting that. We want to start with what causes 1% of the problem and turn a blind eye to the 99%. We should do it the other way around.
How many thus far this year are due to "gang activity?" A "small dent" in the data is a start and worth aiming for. But maybe not.
The problem with many of the laws people propose are suggest are like McGruff said, the "feel good" laws but don;t do anything. We could eliminate every assault rifle in the country, prevent every accident, eliminate 100% of the shootings resulting from a heated argument and that would just place a small dent in the data. Laws never seem to target the root of the problem. We don't want to address gang problems are even admit a connection between family status and violence. Reporters have gotten fired for suggesting that. We want to start with what causes 1% of the problem and turn a blind eye to the 99%. We should do it the other way around.
A small dent?
No, reducing the opportunity for access to a loaded firearm within a few seconds when an argument heats up, whether "domestic" or otherwise, would not be a small dent, it would be a large chunk. Gang-related gun homicides are estimated to be between 15-30% of gun homicides; they are not the majority. And preventing gun suicides by making it harder to access guns in the home is much more significant.
Wait, 15-30% could also be considered a “large chunk”, right? And I am not sure making guns harder to access in the home (aka storing guns and ammo separate) would do anything but marginally prevent a very small portion of suicides...so you may be overstating the significance.
The American mentality is a big part of it. As soon as you say "gun laws" or "gun reform" or "assault weapons ban" about 200 million mouth breathers all shout "DER CANT TAYK AWR GUNZ, S'MY CONSTATOOSHNAL RYYTE!" instead of actually listening to proprosals, offering constructive input, or even understanding why we want/need reform. People want to pretend that just because it's in the constitution, it's untouchable. TImes changes, purposes change, meanings change, function & availability change. Everything fucking changes. The reasons the 2nd Amendment were originally written are (mostly) irrelevant & unnecessary today. I invite everyone who doesn't want change in gun laws... next time you all go to the doctor, have surgery, etc, please make sure to ask your doctor to give you medical advice or perform procedures from the 18th fucking century. Instead of reaching for some Tylenol when you have a headache, call your doctor and schedule a lobotomy instead. You wouldn't. And rightfully so, because it's completely fucking archaic. Just like the 2nd fucking Amendment. So stop hiding behind that god damn skirt (and I'm not saying anyone here in particular is, just talking in general) and do something so our elementary schools, movie theaters, churches, mosques, shopping centers, etc, etc, etc don't get shot the fuck up on a god damn daily basis.
What really is the American fascination with guns anyway? We NEED to get away from that. (And before anyone retorts, yes, we really do.) And "it's my right" isn't a valid answer. It's your right to protest, right to vote, but I don't see hundreds of million Americans so vehemently expressing how awesome it is do those things nor fighting to keep them. No we do just the exact polar fucking opposite of those; we try to suppress them. I want to know exactly what is the mentality, what is the desire, the amazement, what is at the CORE of wanting to many god damn guns? What makes people feel so threatened if suddenly guns didn't exist?
The founders thought owning firearms was so important that it was the sixth right they listed (behind the first five in the first amendment). Training? Sounds good. Registration? Zero problems with it. Background checks? Giddy up. Banning something, yeah no thanks. Because after you ban something then the question becomes, what is next? Oh yeah, senators from Hawaii: https://www.cnsnews.com/news/article/susan-jones/hawaii-democrats-want-us-congress-consider-repeal-second-amendment
Hawaii Democrats Want U.S. Congress to Consider Repeal of Second Amendment
A resolution introduced in the Hawaii Senate this week urges the U.S. Congress to "consider and discuss whether the Second Amendment of the United States Constitution should be repealed or amended to clarify that the right to bear arms is a collective, rather than individual, constitutional right."
The resolution also urges Congress to adopt a proposed constitutional amendment "to clarify the constitutional right to bear arms."
The U.S. Supreme Court ruled in June 2008 that the Second Amendment "protects an individual right to possess a firearm unconnected with service in a militia, and to use that arm for traditionally lawful purposes, such as self-defense within the home."
The problem with many of the laws people propose are suggest are like McGruff said, the "feel good" laws but don;t do anything. We could eliminate every assault rifle in the country, prevent every accident, eliminate 100% of the shootings resulting from a heated argument and that would just place a small dent in the data. Laws never seem to target the root of the problem. We don't want to address gang problems are even admit a connection between family status and violence. Reporters have gotten fired for suggesting that. We want to start with what causes 1% of the problem and turn a blind eye to the 99%. We should do it the other way around.
How many thus far this year are due to "gang activity?" A "small dent" in the data is a start and worth aiming for. But maybe not.
The problem with many of the laws people propose are suggest are like McGruff said, the "feel good" laws but don;t do anything. We could eliminate every assault rifle in the country, prevent every accident, eliminate 100% of the shootings resulting from a heated argument and that would just place a small dent in the data. Laws never seem to target the root of the problem. We don't want to address gang problems are even admit a connection between family status and violence. Reporters have gotten fired for suggesting that. We want to start with what causes 1% of the problem and turn a blind eye to the 99%. We should do it the other way around.
A small dent?
No, reducing the opportunity for access to a loaded firearm within a few seconds when an argument heats up, whether "domestic" or otherwise, would not be a small dent, it would be a large chunk. Gang-related gun homicides are estimated to be between 15-30% of gun homicides; they are not the majority. And preventing gun suicides by making it harder to access guns in the home is much more significant.
Wait, 15-30% could also be considered a “large chunk”, right?
The American mentality is a big part of it. As soon as you say "gun laws" or "gun reform" or "assault weapons ban" about 200 million mouth breathers all shout "DER CANT TAYK AWR GUNZ, S'MY CONSTATOOSHNAL RYYTE!" instead of actually listening to proprosals, offering constructive input, or even understanding why we want/need reform. People want to pretend that just because it's in the constitution, it's untouchable. TImes changes, purposes change, meanings change, function & availability change. Everything fucking changes. The reasons the 2nd Amendment were originally written are (mostly) irrelevant & unnecessary today. I invite everyone who doesn't want change in gun laws... next time you all go to the doctor, have surgery, etc, please make sure to ask your doctor to give you medical advice or perform procedures from the 18th fucking century. Instead of reaching for some Tylenol when you have a headache, call your doctor and schedule a lobotomy instead. You wouldn't. And rightfully so, because it's completely fucking archaic. Just like the 2nd fucking Amendment. So stop hiding behind that god damn skirt (and I'm not saying anyone here in particular is, just talking in general) and do something so our elementary schools, movie theaters, churches, mosques, shopping centers, etc, etc, etc don't get shot the fuck up on a god damn daily basis.
What really is the American fascination with guns anyway? We NEED to get away from that. (And before anyone retorts, yes, we really do.) And "it's my right" isn't a valid answer. It's your right to protest, right to vote, but I don't see hundreds of million Americans so vehemently expressing how awesome it is do those things nor fighting to keep them. No we do just the exact polar fucking opposite of those; we try to suppress them. I want to know exactly what is the mentality, what is the desire, the amazement, what is at the CORE of wanting to many god damn guns? What makes people feel so threatened if suddenly guns didn't exist?
Because you think that gun owners are this dumb is a good thing. Keep thinking they are all country bumpkins and uneducated hicks.
That'll go far in conversations of "gun control", oh wait, no it won't because you think people are too stupid to do that...
The problem with many of the laws people propose are suggest are like McGruff said, the "feel good" laws but don;t do anything. We could eliminate every assault rifle in the country, prevent every accident, eliminate 100% of the shootings resulting from a heated argument and that would just place a small dent in the data. Laws never seem to target the root of the problem. We don't want to address gang problems are even admit a connection between family status and violence. Reporters have gotten fired for suggesting that. We want to start with what causes 1% of the problem and turn a blind eye to the 99%. We should do it the other way around.
How many thus far this year are due to "gang activity?" A "small dent" in the data is a start and worth aiming for. But maybe not.
The problem with many of the laws people propose are suggest are like McGruff said, the "feel good" laws but don;t do anything. We could eliminate every assault rifle in the country, prevent every accident, eliminate 100% of the shootings resulting from a heated argument and that would just place a small dent in the data. Laws never seem to target the root of the problem. We don't want to address gang problems are even admit a connection between family status and violence. Reporters have gotten fired for suggesting that. We want to start with what causes 1% of the problem and turn a blind eye to the 99%. We should do it the other way around.
How many thus far this year are due to "gang activity?" A "small dent" in the data is a start and worth aiming for. But maybe not.
You actually read any of these? A domestic murder/suicide is counted as a mass murder?
They are facts but a little misconstrued.
They footnote their definitions. And isn't the term "mass shooting?"
GVA uses a purely statistical threshold to define mass shooting based ONLY on the numeric value of 4 or more shot or killed, not including the shooter. GVA does not parse the definition to remove any subcategory of shooting. To that end we don’t exclude, set apart, caveat, or differentiate victims based upon the circumstances in which they were shot.
GVA believes that equal importance is given to the counting of those injured as well as killed in a mass shooting incident.
In that, the criteria are simple…if four or more people are shot or killed in a single incident, not involving the shooter, that incident is categorized as a mass shooting based purely on that numerical threshold.
Comments
I don't buy the whole cooling down scenario offered up earlier, that the time it takes to get into 2 different rooms to get ammo allows you to cool down. My safe is in my basement and I store my key on the second floor. And my type of lock takes about 2 minutes to open even with the key. If I have a neighbor following me around in my house while i get the key upstairs, open the safe in the basement, open a box of ammo, load the gun and shoot, well there isn't much I can say about that and I doubt if I stored the ammo separately would have helped much.
Or you could buy something just as secure, but separated from the guns, to make it harder for a thief or someone else with no business getting their hands on them.
Laws never seem to target the root of the problem. We don't want to address gang problems are even admit a connection between family status and violence. Reporters have gotten fired for suggesting that. We want to start with what causes 1% of the problem and turn a blind eye to the 99%. We should do it the other way around.
It does give me heartburn when people whom have never had, fired, seen a firearm care to tell others what is best. I admit that does bother me.
All we really need for a weapon is a hockey stick. We Canadians really know how to do some damage involving carving with a stick around the eyes. You all have been warned. /s
Instead of requiring ammo locked up separately for the scenario you described, why not support domestic violence victims better? My understanding is very rarely does someone shoot a parnter as the first sign of abuse.Lets find ways to solve that before it gets there.
How many thus far this year are due to "gang activity?" A "small dent" in the data is a start and worth aiming for. But maybe not.
https://www.gunviolencearchive.org/
https://www.gunviolencearchive.org/children-killed
https://www.gunviolencearchive.org/accidental-deaths
https://www.gunviolencearchive.org/teens-killed
https://www.gunviolencearchive.org/reports/mass-shooting?year=2019
'Murica, Woot!
Libtardaplorable©. And proud of it.
Brilliantati©
https://www.cnsnews.com/news/article/susan-jones/hawaii-democrats-want-us-congress-consider-repeal-second-amendment
Hawaii Democrats Want U.S. Congress to Consider Repeal of Second Amendment
A resolution introduced in the Hawaii Senate this week urges the U.S. Congress to "consider and discuss whether the Second Amendment of the United States Constitution should be repealed or amended to clarify that the right to bear arms is a collective, rather than individual, constitutional right."
The resolution also urges Congress to adopt a proposed constitutional amendment "to clarify the constitutional right to bear arms."
The U.S. Supreme Court ruled in June 2008 that the Second Amendment "protects an individual right to possess a firearm unconnected with service in a militia, and to use that arm for traditionally lawful purposes, such as self-defense within the home."
The 5-4 ruling in District of Columbia v. Heller also stated, "Like most rights, the Second Amendment right is not unlimited."
The article continues on the web page I referenced.A small dent?
No, reducing the opportunity for access to a loaded firearm within a few seconds when an argument heats up, whether "domestic" or otherwise, would not be a small dent, it would be a large chunk. Gang-related gun homicides are estimated to be between 15-30% of gun homicides; they are not the majority. And preventing gun suicides by making it harder to access guns in the home is much more significant.
https://www.civilbeat.org/2019/03/danny-de-gracia-hawaii-is-way-out-there-on-gun-control/
With 19 words, Hawaii state Sen. Stanley Chang has rattled the nation’s gun lobby. “This body believes that it is necessary to repeal or amend the Second Amendment of the United States Constitution.”
Chang has introduced two identical measures to address gun rights: SCR42, a concurrent resolution that would have to pass both Senate and House; and SR29, which only needs to pass the Senate.
Both are nonbinding resolutions that challenge what they term the “individual right theory,” or the interpretation that the U.S. Constitution restricts legislative bodies from prohibiting firearm possession.
Are you arguing against the right of redress of grievances?
Libtardaplorable©. And proud of it.
Brilliantati©
They are facts but a little misconstrued.
They footnote their definitions. And isn't the term "mass shooting?"
Libtardaplorable©. And proud of it.
Brilliantati©
That'll go far in conversations of "gun control", oh wait, no it won't because you think people are too stupid to do that...
Man, i need to get off this thread...
GVA uses a purely statistical threshold to define mass shooting based ONLY on the numeric value of 4 or more shot or killed, not including the shooter. GVA does not parse the definition to remove any subcategory of shooting. To that end we don’t exclude, set apart, caveat, or differentiate victims based upon the circumstances in which they were shot.
GVA believes that equal importance is given to the counting of those injured as well as killed in a mass shooting incident.
In that, the criteria are simple…if four or more people are shot or killed in a single incident, not involving the shooter, that incident is categorized as a mass shooting based purely on that numerical threshold.
Libtardaplorable©. And proud of it.
Brilliantati©