Gun sales up since the electionFollow

Everybody wants a mulligan.

I think the larger and more relevant aspect of this is that none of those things prevent someone from coming into your house and robbing or killing you.

The constitution also guarantees the right to our life, liberty, and property not being taken away without due process (twice in fact!). While that certainly includes the assumption of police to protect us an enforce the laws, it also implies that the government should not take away reasonable means the citizens could use to protect themselves.

And that's without even mentioning that pesky 2nd amendment...

Pouff

Modern audio technology has now deciphered the Whale's final words:

"Don't Tase me *****!"

RedPhoenixxx, you're kind of incorrect about bans. If a ban is put in place and is similiar to the Clinton AWB, then owning auto's and the like will be fine, but purchasing them will be illegal. I know many people are looking for AR-15 magazines thinking there will be a California-style ban on those (10-round max capacity magazines).

Gun control is a joke. No effective way to keep guns out of criminal hands without forcing everyone to give them up while keeping tabs on everyone. Criminals don't care about licensing, 5 day waiting periods, unique serial number stampings on casings (ineffective, btw), or any other measure thought up to try and curb gun violence. Criminals don't follow the rules, while citizens try to follow the laws. Putting a burden on all citizens only applies it to those who wish to stay legal.

Obama has said he would like to enact stricter gun control methods, but they are certainly not the priorities. People are worried because he has historically been gun unfriendly. Illinois is a very firearms unfriendly state. CCW does not exist and open carry is generally prohibited. Firearms must be registered, there is a 72hrs waiting period for handguns (24 for long guns), and you must have a firearms license. Some cities prohibit handguns, most notably Chicago.

It is obvious from looking at Chicago, that gun control measures work. Chicago is one of the safest cities in the nation. It is not uncommon to see grandmothers and toddlers going for walks around the city of Chicago late into the evening, where the still night air is only punctuated by laughter. CPD only requested military style rifles to look tacti-cool. There would be no reason to use them as even the gangs are guns free.

As far as I'm concerned, I'm not too worried about handguns, shotguns, and "hunting rifles" (I mean traditional ones, not the "I'm hunting with an AR-15.") Battle rifles and higher capacity (more than 10 rounds) magazines may be banned. There is no reason to truely have a battle rifle, except they are very fun to use. Plus, if the zombies, or LA, decide to riot, they may be useful.

Edited, Nov 14th 2008 6:57pm by SaitohTheNinja

Um... What do you think the laws almost always are?

1994 assault weapons "ban"



Here's a better link if you don't like the wiki version:




Maybe the folks running out to buy firearms right now know a bit more about this issue than you do? Could be because they've already seen it happen and know it'll happen again if the Dems get half a chance.

We can debate why someone should need certain weapons, but if someone does want one, it's not unreasonable for them to think that buying it before Obama takes office isn't a bad idea...



He hasn't said he'd veto a gun ban, and has historically supported increased gun control (when he was actually voting as opposed to when he was campaigning). The last time Democrats controlled Congress and the Presidency, they passed a gun control measure. It's not silly to expect that they'll do it again. Even if it's not on Obama's agenda doesn't mean it's not on the Congressional Democrats'. Obama's unlikely to veto any such bill, while a Republican almost certainly would have.

So yeah. Obama taking office with a Dem controlled congress almost certainly equals some kind of increased gun control.

Maybe it was all just a coincidence and this year the hunters wanted new guns for the opening day of Deer season?

Defense is stretching it. It was likely someone on a cellphone not paying attention to their speed. Or perhaps someone who had one too many, or, maybe someone thought your tire was low and was trying to get your attention, or maybe someone needed assistance, or maybe it was just a stupid driver. Are there lots of highway robberies on these rural roads you travel?

But why take chances right?






Edited, Nov 17th 2008 4:29pm by Elinda

Then I should have shot them instead of just showing the weapon.

Someone who goes out of their way to tailgate me at highway speeds with their brights on is not a "fellow traveler."

I doubt you really believe any of your supposed alternate explanations, with the exception of driving drunk, which is the one alternative I implied when I said "fun."

Obviously not. It needs to be brandished!

I grew up in the "county" with, at the time, the highest per capita murder rate in the country, Orleans Parish in Louisiana, which is entirely made up of the City of New Orleans and was, at the time, well known for police corruption and police brutality while trying to maintain order. I was on my way there that night.

Requirements for transporting weapons vary by state. In Texas, you'd be mostly right, unless one has a permit to carry a concealed weapon. Law specifies those kind of restrictions on transporting a firearm. But Texas, like 30 other states from Maine and Florida to Oregon and Georgia, now has a non-discretionary (right-to-carry) permit process for carrying concealed weapons.

In Vermont, there are very few restrictions. Citizens can carry a firearm, including a concealed firearm, without getting permission . . . without paying a fee . . . and without going through any kind of government-imposed waiting period. Instead, Vermont has prohibitions on specific behaviors and carrying in certain places specified by statute, and require citizens who come into contact with police to inform them they are carrying a concealed weapon and follow any directions of the police officer to secure the weapon for the duration of that contact.

In Louisiana there are no restrictions on transporting firearms. Once, I was stopped for speeding outside of New Orleans. The police officer looked at the 9mm handgun on the passenger side floor. He asked if it was mine. I said yes and told him I thought it was legal to have it in the car, to which he responded, "unless your a convicted felon." He went back to his car, wrote me the speeding ticket (obviously the check he called in on the police records came up empty), and that was it. He later dropped the ticket when it turned out he was related to a friend of mine.

I no longer usually have a weapon in my car when traveling, for various reasons. It gets complicated to be sure you're not breaking the law if you're crossing multiple state lines on your trip. If I felt a need I wouldn't hesistate.

I didn't think of that at the time. Actually that probably would have been better (their mothers would probably disagree). I was young and I'm human (my wife might disagree) -- I chose option number two.

However, interesting:

From the book More Guns, Less Crime by Professor John Lott, Jr., a (now) senior research scholar at Yale University's School of Law:

15 national polls by the LA Times, Gallup, and Peter Hart Research Associates suggest that there are 760,000 defensive handgun uses, and 3.6 million defensive uses of any type of gun per year.

"Since in many defensive cases a handgun is simply brandished, and no one is harmed, many defensive uses are never even reported to the police. I believe this underreporting of defensive gun use is large, and this belief has been confirmed by the many stories I received from people across the country after the publicity broke on my original study." ... "For instance, on a Philadelphia radio station, a New Jersey woman told how two men simultaneously tried to open both front doors of the car she was in. When she brandished her gun and yelled, the men backed away and fled. Given the stringent gun-control laws in New jersey, the woman said she never thought seriously of reporting the attempted attack to the police."

"If a national survey I conducted is correct, 98 percent of the time that people use guns defensively, they merely have to brandish the weapon to break off an attack. Such stories are not hard to find: pizza deliverymen defend themselves against robbers, carjackings are thwarted, robberies at automatic teller machines are prevented, and numerous armed robberies on the streets and in stores are foiled, though these do not receive the national coverage of other gun crimes." Footnotes cite the specific newspaper stories.

The work is well documented and if you're really interested in the facts, this book is an eye opener. Also particularly interesting is his story of the political backlash and the lies told about it when he published it, after offering people on both sides of the table a chance to critique his methodology and receiving no response.