FormulaZR
Lieutenant

Posts: 917
Likes: 606
Console: Xbox one
Date registered: Apr 20, 2016 18:49:42 GMT
|
Post by FormulaZR on Jul 8, 2016 15:07:24 GMT
Also - The ATF form (4473) you fill out hen you buy a firearm is a fucking joke. Security theater, if you will. Absolutely correct. About the only thing it does is (usually) prevent a convicted felon from purchasing a firearm from an FFL. Also - JesterUSMC - I didn't mean to be so short/abrupt in reference to my "assault rifle" comment. More that it's a discussion that cannot be quick (assuming two people of actual intelligence are discussing) - and too much to type that will inevitably be lost in translation. Are you LEO?
|
|
FormulaZR
Lieutenant

Posts: 917
Likes: 606
Console: Xbox one
Date registered: Apr 20, 2016 18:49:42 GMT
|
Post by FormulaZR on Jul 8, 2016 15:09:49 GMT
Also - The ATF form (4473) you fill out hen you buy a firearm is a fucking joke. Security theater, if you will. Is that one of these self certification deals?? Sort of "I promise Im not suffering from a debilitating mental illness" signed JesterUSMC Essentially, yes. The FFL does have to call in to NCIC to verify the information. They DO check your criminal background - they, however, have no way at this time to check your mental background (again, that HIPAA thing).
|
|
|
Post by JesterUSMC on Jul 8, 2016 15:10:42 GMT
Also - The ATF form (4473) you fill out hen you buy a firearm is a fucking joke. Security theater, if you will. Is that one of these self certification deals?? Sort of "I promise Im not suffering from a debilitating mental illness" signed JesterUSMC Pretty much. Even if you are denied and they find you lied on a government document, there's a very good chance not a fucking thing will be done to you.
|
|
|
Post by JesterUSMC on Jul 8, 2016 15:11:34 GMT
Also - The ATF form (4473) you fill out hen you buy a firearm is a fucking joke. Security theater, if you will. Absolutely correct. About the only thing it does is (usually) prevent a convicted felon from purchasing a firearm from an FFL. Also - JesterUSMC - I didn't mean to be so short/abrupt in reference to my "assault rifle" comment. More that it's a discussion that cannot be quick (assuming two people of actual intelligence are discussing) - and too much to type that will inevitably be lost in translation. Are you LEO? No worries, Formula. It's a heated topic and emotions can be high when discussing it. Yes, I am a LEO.
|
|
I AM The Scouting Authority.
Captain
 
Invicta Insomniac
Like a circle in a spiral, Like a wheel within a wheel
Posts: 1,683
Likes: 541
Console: Xbox
Preferred server: East
Clan tag: BNKR
Is R35T a Skreb?: Yes
Date registered: Feb 13, 2016 17:12:18 GMT
|
Post by I AM The Scouting Authority. on Jul 8, 2016 15:15:27 GMT
Is that one of these self certification deals?? Sort of "I promise Im not suffering from a debilitating mental illness" signed JesterUSMC Essentially, yes. The FFL does have to call in to NCIC to verify the information. They DO check your criminal background - they, however, have no way at this time to check your mental background (again, that HIPAA thing). So problems are avoided/created (delete as applicable) by having no criminal record and avoiding medical professionals your entire life??
|
|
|
Post by JesterUSMC on Jul 8, 2016 15:24:18 GMT
Essentially, yes. The FFL does have to call in to NCIC to verify the information. They DO check your criminal background - they, however, have no way at this time to check your mental background (again, that HIPAA thing). So problems are avoided/created (delete as applicable) by having no criminal record and avoiding medical professionals your entire life?? The problem that is created is that mental health becomes a stigma. People will avoid seeking help because it creates more problems for them. Look at PTSD in my brothers coming home from the wars in Iraq/Afghanistan. They are refusing to seek help because of what they'll be labeled as.
|
|
FormulaZR
Lieutenant

Posts: 917
Likes: 606
Console: Xbox one
Date registered: Apr 20, 2016 18:49:42 GMT
|
Post by FormulaZR on Jul 8, 2016 15:36:52 GMT
Essentially, yes. The FFL does have to call in to NCIC to verify the information. They DO check your criminal background - they, however, have no way at this time to check your mental background (again, that HIPAA thing). So problems are avoided/created (delete as applicable) by having no criminal record and avoiding medical professionals your entire life?? Nailed it. 100% nailed it. I believe that is the single largest contributing factor to the (publicized) shootings in the US when legally obtained firearms were used. Others have involved family members using legally obtained firearms.
|
|
FormulaZR
Lieutenant

Posts: 917
Likes: 606
Console: Xbox one
Date registered: Apr 20, 2016 18:49:42 GMT
|
Post by FormulaZR on Jul 8, 2016 15:38:26 GMT
So problems are avoided/created (delete as applicable) by having no criminal record and avoiding medical professionals your entire life?? The problem that is created is that mental health becomes a stigma. People will avoid seeking help because it creates more problems for them. Look at PTSD in my brothers coming home from the wars in Iraq/Afghanistan. They are refusing to seek help because of what they'll be labeled as. That is true - but to be painfully honest, some of the returning soldiers truly have no business owning a firearm with their current mental state. Note: that is not meant to bash vets in any way whatsoever, and I'm not saying that all vets should be denied firearms.
|
|
FormulaZR
Lieutenant

Posts: 917
Likes: 606
Console: Xbox one
Date registered: Apr 20, 2016 18:49:42 GMT
|
Post by FormulaZR on Jul 8, 2016 15:41:50 GMT
Absolutely correct. About the only thing it does is (usually) prevent a convicted felon from purchasing a firearm from an FFL. Also - JesterUSMC - I didn't mean to be so short/abrupt in reference to my "assault rifle" comment. More that it's a discussion that cannot be quick (assuming two people of actual intelligence are discussing) - and too much to type that will inevitably be lost in translation. Are you LEO? No worries, Formula. It's a heated topic and emotions can be high when discussing it. Yes, I am a LEO. I'd actually be very interested in discussing with you at some point. You know, if you ever come to DFW and are just bored out of your mind. Might even go to the range and have some fun (I expect my 6.5 Creedmoor back soon). Also, I think some NFA stuff is plain dumb. SBR and suppressor, to be specific. I can own a pistol, and I can own a rifle...but if I put a stock on a pistol, it's not illegal. Wat? Or I can own an AR pistol, or an AR rifle - but if I put a stock on said AR pistol or the pistol upper on rifle lower...again, instant illegal. And since suppressors don't work like they do in movies...I *really* don't get that one.
|
|
Vince Cable's Exotic Spresm
Captain
 
Faith, King, Empire President for Life
The cause of labour is the hope of the world
Posts: 1,974
Likes: 628
Console: Xbox 360 & One
Mini-Profile Background: https://ericgerlachdotcom.files.wordpress.com/2013/10/samuel-johnson-cant-believe-what-just.jpg
Date registered: Feb 13, 2016 17:06:06 GMT
|
Post by Vince Cable's Exotic Spresm on Jul 8, 2016 16:00:55 GMT
Here's my view for what it's worth, then: America's gun laws are backwards and stupid. But, and there is a but, no good will come of changing them. At this point, firearms are so numerous and widespread in America that outlawing them will do no good. In places like Britain, they've been banned since forever. So there aren't many of them in the country. Thus, it's harder to obtain them. A lot harder. But in America, if you outlaw them, they'll be very easy to obtain even then, because of just how many there are in America already. Frankly I see no viable solution to the, in my opinion, dire and retarded position America finds itself in. If, say, there was a theoretical way of outlawing certain types of firearms (assault rifles, sniper rifles, that sort of thing), and getting rid of all of them, that would be the solution. But that cannot and will not happen. Strict gun laws need to be enacted as early as possible for them to be viable, but in the US gun ownership is institutionalised and has been around and accepted since the creation of the country itself. At this point that's unchangeable, and I honestly cannot see a good way of sorting out the problem.
|
|
FormulaZR
Lieutenant

Posts: 917
Likes: 606
Console: Xbox one
Date registered: Apr 20, 2016 18:49:42 GMT
|
Post by FormulaZR on Jul 8, 2016 16:10:57 GMT
Assault rifles are one debate.
Regarding "sniper rifles" though - what constitutes a sniper rifle? (and realistically - how many crimes have they really been used in?) A gun with a scope? That's a hunting rifle! A gun with a scope that is super accurate? That is a competition rifle and/or a varmint rifle (which is actually a useful form of hunting).
I'm for mandatory breathalyzer ignition interlocks before more gun control (except the previously mentioned HIPAA/NCIC thing) - after all...drunk drivers kill more than guns.
|
|
Vince Cable's Exotic Spresm
Captain
 
Faith, King, Empire President for Life
The cause of labour is the hope of the world
Posts: 1,974
Likes: 628
Console: Xbox 360 & One
Mini-Profile Background: https://ericgerlachdotcom.files.wordpress.com/2013/10/samuel-johnson-cant-believe-what-just.jpg
Date registered: Feb 13, 2016 17:06:06 GMT
|
Post by Vince Cable's Exotic Spresm on Jul 8, 2016 16:21:13 GMT
Assault rifles are one debate. Regarding "sniper rifles" though - what constitutes a sniper rifle? (and realistically - how many crimes have they really been used in?) A gun with a scope? That's a hunting rifle! A gun with a scope that is super accurate? That is a competition rifle and/or a varmint rifle (which is actually a useful form of hunting). I'm for mandatory breathalyzer ignition interlocks before more gun control (except the previously mentioned HIPAA/NCIC thing) - after all...drunk drivers kill more than guns. Yeah, I thought that'd be a bit too vague a label to use. I mean the more military-grade stuff, with the big calibres and shit. Like the .50 and .308 stuff that's really just stupid to use for hunting and doesn't really serve much of a purpose that an ordinary person has. I still feel like I'm being too vague. I mean the sort of stuff that the military uses for killing people at long ranges. I feel horribly inadequate describing this. I just put it in there because "assault rifle" on its own sounded a bit shit. Hopefully you catch my drift.
|
|
|
Post by JesterUSMC on Jul 8, 2016 16:29:19 GMT
.308 is a standard round used in hunting larger game and competition shooting.
|
|
Snorelacks
Captain
 
Posts: 1,779
Likes: 1,255
Console: Xbox one
Clan tag: [BNKR]
Is R35T a Skreb?: No
Date registered: Feb 14, 2016 15:32:33 GMT
|
Post by Snorelacks on Jul 8, 2016 16:36:17 GMT
Here's my view for what it's worth, then: America's gun laws are backwards and stupid. But, and there is a but, no good will come of changing them. At this point, firearms are so numerous and widespread in America that outlawing them will do no good. In places like Britain, they've been banned since forever. So there aren't many of them in the country. Thus, it's harder to obtain them. A lot harder. But in America, if you outlaw them, they'll be very easy to obtain even then, because of just how many there are in America already. Frankly I see no viable solution to the, in my opinion, dire and retarded position America finds itself in. If, say, there was a theoretical way of outlawing certain types of firearms (assault rifles, sniper rifles, that sort of thing), and getting rid of all of them, that would be the solution. But that cannot and will not happen. Strict gun laws need to be enacted as early as possible for them to be viable, but in the US gun ownership is institutionalised and has been around and accepted since the creation of the country itself. At this point that's unchangeable, and I honestly cannot see a good way of sorting out the problem. SLB...You have some good perceptions regarding the numbers of firearms in the country...there are estimated to be over 300 million. They have been ingrained in our Constitution and are part of the fabric of this country (Switzerland actually has a higher per captia ratio of guns in their households, but has a miniscule gun violence rate- part of a larger discussion on culture and socioeconomic conditions such as poverty, drug use, single parent families, education, etc.).
There are many thoughts on how to reduce gun violence with people on the extreme ends of the spectrum on both sides of a very passionate debate.
I for one think that we should strictly enforce the laws that have been in effect for many years. It is well known that they are very seldom enforced. A good example using hard facts from the FBI is that in 2012 80,191 people tried to illegally purchase a firearm, yet only 44 (.00055%) were prosecuted. I believe that if we strictly enforced the laws on the books, and allowed real access to mental health records, it would then allow us to have a realistic debate regarding firearms in the US.
I get extremely defensive and fussy when talking heads and politicians stand up there and pontificate on the subject knowing full well there are significant mechanisms already in place that go virtually unused or unenforced.
|
|
Vince Cable's Exotic Spresm
Captain
 
Faith, King, Empire President for Life
The cause of labour is the hope of the world
Posts: 1,974
Likes: 628
Console: Xbox 360 & One
Mini-Profile Background: https://ericgerlachdotcom.files.wordpress.com/2013/10/samuel-johnson-cant-believe-what-just.jpg
Date registered: Feb 13, 2016 17:06:06 GMT
|
Post by Vince Cable's Exotic Spresm on Jul 8, 2016 16:38:37 GMT
.308 is a standard round used in hunting larger game and competition shooting. I thought I'd make a technical slip up. I suppose a more general thing would be to stop everyone from having what the armed forces use. Ordinary civilians do not require a weapon designed with maximum damage/killing in mind. I don't care that you want to protect yourself, by all means do that, but you really don't need a weapon designed to have the maximum effect to do that. You don't need a weapon that is designed to gouge out bits of people. Likewise you don't need a rifle designed to do that over two miles, because when you're shooting people from two miles away, you're probably not protecting yourself. That kind of shit's unnecessary. Suppressors/silencers, too. You don't need that.
|
|
Snorelacks
Captain
 
Posts: 1,779
Likes: 1,255
Console: Xbox one
Clan tag: [BNKR]
Is R35T a Skreb?: No
Date registered: Feb 14, 2016 15:32:33 GMT
|
Post by Snorelacks on Jul 8, 2016 16:42:07 GMT
.308 is a standard round used in hunting larger game and competition shooting. I thought I'd make a technical slip up. I suppose a more general thing would be to stop everyone from having what the armed forces use. Ordinary civilians do not require a weapon designed with maximum damage/killing in mind. I don't care that you want to protect yourself, by all means do that, but you really don't need a weapon designed to have the maximum effect to do that. You don't need a weapon that is designed to gouge out bits of people. Likewise you don't need a rifle designed to do that over two miles, because when you're shooting people from two miles away, you're probably not protecting yourself. That kind of shit's unnecessary. Suppressors/silencers, too. You don't need that. SLB...the ironic thing is that the military's primary battle rifle round is the 5.56mm NATO round. It's a round that is banned in my state for deer hunting because it's not very effective at ethically killing game due to it's poor kinetic energy and small bullet weight. One of the primary reasons it's used is because it is light and easy for foot soldiers to carry hundreds of rounds on them.
|
|
Vince Cable's Exotic Spresm
Captain
 
Faith, King, Empire President for Life
The cause of labour is the hope of the world
Posts: 1,974
Likes: 628
Console: Xbox 360 & One
Mini-Profile Background: https://ericgerlachdotcom.files.wordpress.com/2013/10/samuel-johnson-cant-believe-what-just.jpg
Date registered: Feb 13, 2016 17:06:06 GMT
|
Post by Vince Cable's Exotic Spresm on Jul 8, 2016 16:45:31 GMT
I thought I'd make a technical slip up. I suppose a more general thing would be to stop everyone from having what the armed forces use. Ordinary civilians do not require a weapon designed with maximum damage/killing in mind. I don't care that you want to protect yourself, by all means do that, but you really don't need a weapon designed to have the maximum effect to do that. You don't need a weapon that is designed to gouge out bits of people. Likewise you don't need a rifle designed to do that over two miles, because when you're shooting people from two miles away, you're probably not protecting yourself. That kind of shit's unnecessary. Suppressors/silencers, too. You don't need that. SLB...the ironic thing is that the military's primary battle rifle round is the 5.56mm NATO round. It's a round that is banned in my state for deer hunting because it's not very effective at ethically killing game due to it's poor kinetic energy and small bullet weight. One of the primary reasons it's used is because it is light and easy for foot soldiers to carry hundreds of rounds on them. Oh, I don't know then. The unnecessary shit. Silencers, laser sights, hollow point rounds, incendiary rounds, .50 weapons, dum-dum rounds, all the crap you really don't need for any reasonable purpose (I don't know about the legality of some of those in America, they're just general examples).
|
|
FormulaZR
Lieutenant

Posts: 917
Likes: 606
Console: Xbox one
Date registered: Apr 20, 2016 18:49:42 GMT
|
Post by FormulaZR on Jul 8, 2016 16:46:15 GMT
Assault rifles are one debate. Regarding "sniper rifles" though - what constitutes a sniper rifle? (and realistically - how many crimes have they really been used in?) A gun with a scope? That's a hunting rifle! A gun with a scope that is super accurate? That is a competition rifle and/or a varmint rifle (which is actually a useful form of hunting). I'm for mandatory breathalyzer ignition interlocks before more gun control (except the previously mentioned HIPAA/NCIC thing) - after all...drunk drivers kill more than guns. Yeah, I thought that'd be a bit too vague a label to use. I mean the more military-grade stuff, with the big calibres and shit. Like the .50 and .308 stuff that's really just stupid to use for hunting and doesn't really serve much of a purpose that an ordinary person has. I still feel like I'm being too vague. I mean the sort of stuff that the military uses for killing people at long ranges. I feel horribly inadequate describing this. I just put it in there because "assault rifle" on its own sounded a bit shit. Hopefully you catch my drift. Shooting a bear with something under .308 caliber is equally stupid. As for .50 BMG - I dare you to find a crime committed with one. Now when you do, compare it to the number of crimes committed with .22lr. It's awfully hard to carjack someone with a 50# rifle. Military also doesn't technically use 50 BMG against soft targets, it's for engaging equipment and vehicles only. (nevermind that the shot missed the AK-47 "equipment" and hit the soft target). Full disclosure - I know that was the 'rule' at one point, don't know if it still is. As for suppressors - they do NOT work like they show in the movies. It merely makes something like a .223/5.56 sound more like a .22lr instead of a loud boom (supersonic cracks still apply, though). They are realistically very effective to be able to shoot and not wear hearing protection. That has numerous advantages when hunting or at a shooting range. They also (typically) make a gun much longer and more unwieldy if you were trying to wave it around.
|
|
Vince Cable's Exotic Spresm
Captain
 
Faith, King, Empire President for Life
The cause of labour is the hope of the world
Posts: 1,974
Likes: 628
Console: Xbox 360 & One
Mini-Profile Background: https://ericgerlachdotcom.files.wordpress.com/2013/10/samuel-johnson-cant-believe-what-just.jpg
Date registered: Feb 13, 2016 17:06:06 GMT
|
Post by Vince Cable's Exotic Spresm on Jul 8, 2016 16:53:54 GMT
Yeah, I thought that'd be a bit too vague a label to use. I mean the more military-grade stuff, with the big calibres and shit. Like the .50 and .308 stuff that's really just stupid to use for hunting and doesn't really serve much of a purpose that an ordinary person has. I still feel like I'm being too vague. I mean the sort of stuff that the military uses for killing people at long ranges. I feel horribly inadequate describing this. I just put it in there because "assault rifle" on its own sounded a bit shit. Hopefully you catch my drift. Shooting a bear with something under .308 caliber is equally stupid. As for .50 BMG - I dare you to find a crime committed with one. Now when you do, compare it to the number of crimes committed with .22lr. It's awfully hard to carjack someone with a 50# rifle. Military also doesn't technically use 50 BMG against soft targets, it's for engaging equipment and vehicles only. (nevermind that the shot missed the AK-47 "equipment" and hit the soft target). Full disclosure - I know that was the 'rule' at one point, don't know if it still is. As for suppressors - they do NOT work like they show in the movies. It merely makes something like a .223/5.56 sound more like a .22lr instead of a loud boom (supersonic cracks still apply, though). They are realistically very effective to be able to shoot and not wear hearing protection. That has numerous advantages when hunting or at a shooting range. I'm not trying to say that .50 weapons shouldn't be allowed because a lot of crimes are committed with them, I just think they shouldn't be allowed because it's a completely unreasonable thing for a person to have. As for silencers, I can see your argument, but really I don't think they're necessary. A firearm is a normally loud thing, I don't see any reasonable reason to have a way to make them substantially quieter. A silencer has a job, to make a weapon quieter, it was created to make them harder for people to hear, not to make it quieter so you wouldn't have to wear ear defenders. Making a weapon harder to people to hear isn't something everyone ought to be able to do.
|
|
Snorelacks
Captain
 
Posts: 1,779
Likes: 1,255
Console: Xbox one
Clan tag: [BNKR]
Is R35T a Skreb?: No
Date registered: Feb 14, 2016 15:32:33 GMT
|
Post by Snorelacks on Jul 8, 2016 16:55:22 GMT
SLB...the ironic thing is that the military's primary battle rifle round is the 5.56mm NATO round. It's a round that is banned in my state for deer hunting because it's not very effective at ethically killing game due to it's poor kinetic energy and small bullet weight. One of the primary reasons it's used is because it is light and easy for foot soldiers to carry hundreds of rounds on them. Oh, I don't know then. The unnecessary shit. Silencers, laser sights, hollow point rounds, incendiary rounds, .50 weapons, dum-dum rounds, all the crap you really don't need for any reasonable purpose (I don't know about the legality of some of those in America, they're just general examples). I'm not trying to run you in circles, but I think you're getting the idea on how complex the issues are. silencers/suppressors are illegal in some states, but legal in others (my father in-law used to shoot 1000yd matches on the Marine Corps shooting team and has hearing loss. He still shoots at the range for a hobby and utilizes a suppressor to save his hearing). I have a laser sight on my handgun for accuracy and it's a very useful tool for home defense in the case that it's dark in your home along with hollow point rounds for self defense in my home defense handgun. Incendiary rounds are already highly illegal, and I'm not aware of any crime being committed in public with a .50cal at any time in our history.
|
|