S&W, Ruger to stop selling semi automatic handguns in California
-
I understand what you're saying, and it makes sense, but if you're pulling a kid out of high school because his special needs are not being properly monitored and you KNOW that something is very very wrong with him, probably the best bet is bot to arm him to the teeth. Nancy Lanza paid for het utter stupidity with her life but when you weigh her life vs all those children that her son murdered the scales are not balanced. Not even a little bit. I'm almost glad for her that she's dead. She doesn't have to live with the guilt that her idiotic choices killed 20 innocent helpless children. That she might have prevented that with better parenting and common sense. Do we know that Lanza wouldn't have been able to break into somebody else's gun safe and get what he wanted? No we don't know that, but knowing what we do know about this kid it seems unlikely. We'll never know because the guns he used were made easily available to him. That's just a poor choice that had terrible consequences that might have been avoided if one gun owner had taken a few precautions. That's all.
-
I think we agree on most of it... but back to the OP (kind of) I just think the micro-stamping tech, and punishment for victims of burglary open a pandora's box, that cause 99.9% of the population to forfeit their privacy for no reason other than the false guise of "safely protecting" the populace from the .1%.
Edit: Yeah the 20 kindergartner thing hurts (my kids are that age-ish) but there are >20 kindergartners all over the world being murdered, starved, tortured, sold. So, I guess, perspective?
Leave a gun on a counter or bedside table with no evidence of a safe in the house and have doors unlocked etc., and it's used in a crime?? Then yeah, justifiable culpability.
Your safe is broken into, after your front door is kicked in, and your gun is stolen and used in a crime? Sorry, no culpability. (except maybe on the part of the Newspaper editor that posted your address)
side note (back to OP): criminals won't be purchasing the new "micro-stamped" firing pin containing guns. and if they did, some 200 grit sand paper solves that. The firing pins are parts that are replaced as they wear out with age/usage. Guns also aren't perfect machines. A firing pin doesn't always strike with the precision required to stamp a vin number in a primer yet can still make the primer go "boom"
Those are enough reasons for me to not support "micro-stamping" without going into all of the gov't conspiracy theory crap too...
-
The stamping technology seems pointless to me because how is that going to help prevent crime, especially with a stolen firearm? The smart gun technology makes a lot more sense to me, and seems a lot less invasive. You wear the ring, the gun fires. You don't wear it? You're out of luck. It might prevent a lot of stolen firearms from killing people as well unless you're home and they get the ring too.
-
Maybe add a pin or something in case you forget the ring or just don't have it at that time. Just a more elaborate safety.
-
Nothing is infallible we know that. Might some smart criminal with access to the right machines be able to fabricate a magnetic ring? Maybe, but I'd imagine your average criminal is not all that smart or resourceful. also they probably wouldn't have access to the material or the machines necessary to falsify a triggering device. It just seems like a much more efficient protection mechanism especially if they can show it doesn't impair the gun's ability to fire when necessary, I.e. it doesn't take any extra time to fire.
-
Until James Bond's palm-print gun becomes a viable option - ie, not crazy expensive - I'm not sure there's any way to make 100% certain that the only person that can fire a gun is the rightful owner. Until then, you've got to lock it up as best you can. But then, it's not exactly handy for confronting a break in...
-
The only benefit to the stamping technology is the possibility of pinning a robbery charge on a murderer, if you can place him in the vicinity of the robbery at the time it happened. It won't prevent the robbery or the murder and thus seems rather pointless.
-
Until James Bond's palm-print gun becomes a viable option - ie, not crazy expensive - I'm not sure there's any way to make 100% certain that the only person that can fire a gun is the rightful owner. Until then, you've got to lock it up as best you can. But then, it's not exactly handy for confronting a break in...
Until James Bond's palm-print gun becomes a viable option - ie, not crazy expensive - I'm not sure there's any way to make 100% certain that the only person that can fire a gun is the rightful owner. Until then, you've got to lock it up as best you can. But then, it's not exactly handy for confronting a break in...
It is a double edged sword but the ring is a mechanical process vs an electronics based one and thus seems more reliable in my mind. If it could be developed you could leave your gun lying on your nightstand of you desired. It would be exactly as dangerous as a brick at that point.
-
Cysko-
-
Gun education isn't emphasized because it doesn't fit the agenda.
-
It is a double edged sword but the ring is a mechanical process vs an electronics based one and thus seems more reliable in my mind. If it could be developed you could leave your gun lying on your nightstand of you desired. It would be exactly as dangerous as a brick at that point. Cysko
*************************************
Actually, not even that is correct - the gun won't fire, but curious children could get the bullets out of
the gun, and who knows what could happen with those bullets alone.
I have an HR 8 shot .22 revolver. Trouble is, it has a lock w/key at the bottom of the grip.
Which is cool, and safe. Trouble is? It locks itself. I don't know how. But I went out a couple of times,
to teach a friend to shoot, and it was locked, and I had to go find the key. The ammo is well hidden away,
but the gun can't be depended on when apparently, vibrations cause it to lock itself.
And fingerprint controlled? you don't think that stolen guns would cause a loss of owners fingers?
Hey, I saw that on TV already....@@
20/20 had a good show about children and guns. It was actually fair treatment, even. There were people who
had saved their family's lives by driving off intruders... and a police officer, award winning, and his wife, who tragically
lost their young son, who happened to get high enough to explore the chest of drawers. The officer had kept
a loaded gun there. Also showed studies where children who swore never to touch a gun....did so anyways.
The anti-gun crowd, instead of honoring our 2nd Amendment, and working with gun owners and the NRA,
and gun manufactureres, to work on education programs, and strict laws about accidental access to unauthorized guns,
especially access by children, to solve the problem - has done the opposite. Instead, the left has waged political hostility against
gun owners, gun manufacturers, and our 2nd Amendment. Meanwhile, innocent children and adults are getting killed
and murdered and maimed. The left doesn't seem to care about those deaths, anymore than they care about our
soldiers dying overseas now that the pres has been a democrat for the last six years. The left sees political
advantage through the eyes of arrogance, and vicious political expedience.
Too tragic to believe.
-
Cysko-
Cysko-
I stopped watching after this douche tried to correlate drowning in the lake to being murdered with a handgun. As long as you continue to try and make that argument expect people to treat you like a stupid fuckin' Retard. You can't murder 20 children with the lake before somebody stops you. Don't be a moron
-
Horrific tragic death is horrific tragic death. Preventing these tragedies should be the main focus,
not political expediency.
Seems there's no political expediency involved with noting that children drown.
But there IS with guns and conservatives. How sad, how pitifully freakin sad.
See any lib wanting to outlaw swimming pools? Not one, yes?
Example:
Tragic Tally: More Than 200 Reported Child Drownings In Pools and Spas This SummerSEPTEMBER 5, 2013 Release Number: 13-276WASHINGTON, DC – From Memorial Day through Labor Day 2013, at least 202 children between the ages of 1 and 14 drowned in a swimming pool or spa in the United States, according to media reports compiled by the USA Swimming Foundation. Of those, 143 of the victims were children younger than age 5.The latest media-reported figures are consistent with the U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission’s (CPSC) annual Submersion Report, and show that young children and toddlers are especially vulnerable to drowning. Drowning is the leading cause of unintentional death among children 1 to 4 years of age and it is the second leading cause of death for children from 5 to 14 years old.“The time is now to turn the tide on child drownings,” said CPSC Chairman Inez Tenenbaum. “In warm weather states and indoor swim parks, pools are still open. Let’s work together to prevent drownings by putting up barriers and having eyes-on supervision of children in and around the water.”CPSC’s national Pool Safely campaign reinforces important safety steps: fence all pools, stay close to children in the water, be alert, and teach children how to swim.Media-reported drownings show that during the summer of 2013, the following states suffered the largest number of pool and spa drownings involving children younger than 15 (figures may not account for all fatalities):1. Texas (28) 7. Pennsylvania (9)2. Flordia (24) 8. Tennessee (8)3. California (23) 9. North Carolina (8)4. Ohio (11) 10. Louisiana (7)5. New York (11) 11. Illinois (7)6. Arizona (10) -
"CPSC’s national Pool Safely campaign reinforces important safety steps: fence all pools, stay close to children in the water, be alert, and teach children how to swim."
"NRA's national gun safety campaign reinforces important safety steps: secure all guns, store ammo in secret, unaccessable place away from empty guns, stay CLOSE to children around guns, be alert, and teach children how tragedies can happen, and how to avoid guns unsupervised"
Not that different. But libs do the wrong things about guns, and don't care about children drowning.
No lefty political advantage to be gained. Which is exactly why libs stopped "caring so much about our soldiers in Iraq and Afghanistan".
Very sad.
-
Case in point. Cal, continue to expect me to treat you like a stupid fucking moron.
-
Cysko-
I stopped watching after this douche tried to correlate drowning in the lake to being murdered with a handgun. As long as you continue to try and make that argument expect people to treat you like a stupid fuckin' Retard. You can't murder 20 children with the lake before somebody stops you. Don't be a moron
I stopped watching after this douche tried to correlate drowning in the lake to being murdered with a handgun. As long as you continue to try and make that argument expect people to treat you like a stupid fuckin' Retard. You can't murder 20 children with the lake before somebody stops you. Don't be a moron
Holy fuck you're hopeless.
It's a 5 minute video - watch it.
He's not correlating lakes and guns. Hes worried about reactions to children's deaths.. Which I thought you were concerned with. Clearly, you'd rather surrender rights than have a single intelligent thought pass through your head. Well done. You're the reason, Obama, Pelosi, Rubio, Christie, and other god damned fucking fools are elected to positions in our government. The moment you drag your head out of your ass, please post a picture - I'd love to have a conversation with you.
-
Look bub. Kids can drown. Kids can fall down a well or off a slide and break their necks. It sucks its tragic. It's not the same as a psycho murdering them with a gun because its easy and simple to get. Get a fuckin argument before you start in with that same old inane bullshit. I'd expect that from cal. There is no fucking circumstance where you can defend gun rights by saying "but but but a kid might drown"
Also anything branded NRA might as well be branded Al-Qaeda as far as I'm concerned. If gun owners need something to stand behind they ought to find something else. The NRA has sullied their name.
-
Cysko = woody kind of stupid-ass. But woody does it nearly all the time, and he can't help it...
Cysko - you're being a hypocrite, and the board's stupid sheethead. The NRA has safety programs
nationally. Truth is, you are all bent and whining and bitching because you're one of those who thrive
on looking at the upper part of your own colon.
All NRA members are terrorists? Dumbass, you just defended Muslims in the other thread, but now, because
you think you can win some ignorant ass political score, you bash all gun owners/members of the NRA?
Hypocrite. And I pay attention to most everybody, even woody. At least woody TRIES to make sense once in a while,
you... just take off on your favorite little bitchy points and make a fool of yourself.
-
Look bub. Kids can drown. Kids can fall down a well or off a slide and break their necks. It sucks its tragic. It's not the same as a psycho murdering them with a gun because its easy and simple to get. Get a fuckin argument before you start in with that same old inane bullshit. I'd expect that from cal. There is no fucking circumstance where you can defend gun rights by saying "but but but a kid might drown"
Also anything branded NRA might as well be branded Al-Qaeda as far as I'm concerned. If gun owners need something to stand behind they ought to find something else. The NRA has sullied their name.
Also anything branded NRA might as well be branded Al-Qaeda as far as I'm concerned. If gun owners need something to stand behind they ought to find something else. The NRA has sullied their name.
Wowza. You ever trip on your gown, drama queen?
-
Look bub. Kids can drown. Kids can fall down a well or off a slide and break their necks. It sucks its tragic. It's not the same as a psycho murdering them with a gun because its easy and simple to get. Get a fuckin argument before you start in with that same old inane bullshit. I'd expect that from cal. There is no fucking circumstance where you can defend gun rights by saying "but but but a kid might drown"
Also anything branded NRA might as well be branded Al-Qaeda as far as I'm concerned. If gun owners need something to stand behind they ought to find something else. The NRA has sullied their name.
Look bub. Kids can drown. Kids can fall down a well or off a slide and break their necks. It sucks its tragic. It's not the same as a psycho murdering them with a gun because its easy and simple to get. Get a fuckin argument before you start in with that same old inane bullshit. I'd expect that from cal. There is no fucking circumstance where you can defend gun rights by saying "but but but a kid might drown"
Also anything branded NRA might as well be branded Al-Qaeda as far as I'm concerned. If gun owners need something to stand behind they ought to find something else. The NRA has sullied their name.
Look at the data, you simpleton. 62 accidental gun deaths in 2010. 726 accidental drownings in 2010. Both figures use kids from the same age group.
By the data, it looks like it's "easier" to drown, than be killed by a big bad gun.
Stop trying to qualify data because it doesn't fit your cry-baby "guns are scary" narrative. 62 innocent children dying IS NOT WORSE than 726 innocent children dying.
And yes, B. Johnson is a member of the NRA, he's also a member of the ACLU. *Mind asplode!!*
Hello! It looks like you're interested in this conversation, but you don't have an account yet.
Getting fed up of having to scroll through the same posts each visit? When you register for an account, you'll always come back to exactly where you were before, and choose to be notified of new replies (either via email, or push notification). You'll also be able to save bookmarks and upvote posts to show your appreciation to other community members.
With your input, this post could be even better đź’—
Register Login