33 replies to this topic

[jugoso]

Jake Meyers, an employee at Rocky Mountain Guns and Ammo, told the Post July 23 was "probably the busiest Monday all year."
The Colorado Bureau of Investigation says that between Friday and Sunday, it approved background checks for 2,887 people wanting to purchase a firearm.

Indeed, polls show that support for stricter gun control has steadily declined in the U.S. over the last two decades.
A 1991 Gallup poll found that 78 per cent of Americans favoured stricter laws on the sale of firearms, 17 per cent wanted the laws kept the same, and just two per cent saying they should be less strict.
By 2011 the numbers had steadily shifted. While the number saying they wanted stricter gun control had fallen to 43 per cent, 44 per cent favoured the status quo and 11 per cent wanted less strict gun control.
That Gallup poll also found that 45 per cent of Americans say they have a gun in their home.
http://www.cbc.ca/ne...trol-polls.html

[OverSword]

That really makes a clear statement for the politicians who are supposed to enforce the will of the people.  The people obviously don't want thier 2nd amendment rights infringed upon based on the actions of a few isolated lunatics.  I'm pretty sure the vast vast vast majority of gun owners will never shoot another person.

I tend to agree personally.  I don't own a gun.  I don't plan on buying a gun.  I want to have the right to do so should I so choose.

[Hilander]

It seems like every time something like this happens there is a surge in gun sales.  Why because some politicians start beating the drums of stricter gun laws than people get afraid they won't be able to buy one in the future so they run out and get one now.  The problem is if they do decide to make the gun laws so strict you can't get one I bet the criminals will still have access to them.

[and then]

Hilander, on 24 July 2012 - 05:59 PM, said:

It seems like every time something like this happens there is a surge in gun sales.  Why because some politicians start beating the drums of stricter gun laws than people get afraid they won't be able to buy one in the future so they run out and get one now.  The problem is if they do decide to make the gun laws so strict you can't get one I bet the criminals will still have access to them.

So true, Hilander.  They would just steal what they couldn't buy.  There has to be a middle ground but outlawing guns just won't work.

[Clyde the Glyde]

Hilander, on 24 July 2012 - 05:59 PM, said:

It seems like every time something like this happens there is a surge in gun sales.  Why because some politicians start beating the drums of stricter gun laws than people get afraid they won't be able to buy one in the future so they run out and get one now.  The problem is if they do decide to make the gun laws so strict you can't get one I bet the criminals will still have access to them.

That's the reason. It's mainly panic buying.  The same thing happened after the Gabby Gifford shooting with Hi-cap Glock Mags. ( The 33 rounders )  They went flying off the shelves and their prices skyrocketed.  People were all afraid that they were going to ban them.

[OverSword]

The real problem that the tragedy in Denver should bring attention to is the rampant mental health problems and lack of resources to address them.  In both the Denver and recent Seattle shootings when relatives of the perps were contacted by police, the mother of the guy in Denver said "Yes, you have the right guy"  The father of the guy in Seattle said "This is no surprise we've been expecting something like this".  OK, so what's the answer?  How do we make a better way to intervene on people who are going through extreme mental difficulties?

[Hilander]

We have plenty of gun laws in place, we don't need the Brady Bill or anything like it.  That is something I get tired of, the rush to introduce bills named after someone that was shot or attacked in other ways.  I feel for the victim but what the perpertrator did was already illegal, more laws won't help the problem.  Which if someone is really determined to hurt a bunch of people they will find other ways.

Looks like to me they would of become alarmed over the large amount of ammo he was buying.  Your average person just doesn't buy that much ammo.

[Hilander]

The mental condition of someone really determines what extremes they will go to.  A mental evaluation probably would of went a long way on keeping the guns out of these peoples hands.  What do you do though make everyone see a shrink before buying a gun.  I don't know how well some are hiding mental illness.


EDIT:  I had another thought, probably a stupid one.  Anyplace you have groups of people maybe you should have a sharp shooter up high in the corner in a position he could get a good shot at anyone trying to kill people.  This was done in the old west as a deterrent to bank robbers.

Edited by Hilander, 24 July 2012 - 06:45 PM.

[questionmark]

Hilander, on 24 July 2012 - 06:35 PM, said:

We have plenty of gun laws in place, we don't need the Brady Bill or anything like it.  That is something I get tired of, the rush to introduce bills named after someone that was shot or attacked in other ways.  I feel for the victim but what the perpertrator did was already illegal, more laws won't help the problem.  Which if someone is really determined to hurt a bunch of people they will find other ways.

Looks like to me they would of become alarmed over the large amount of ammo he was buying.  Your average person just doesn't buy that much ammo.

Yeh, like the NRA will allow a centralized register to trace the amount of ammunition somebody bought...  All you have to do is order it over the internet or stop by at every gun shop/supermarket in your county and you will have enough to start a minor war without anybody getting wise on you.
\

[OverSword]

questionmark, on 24 July 2012 - 06:43 PM, said:

Yeh, like the NRA will allow a centralized register to trace the amount of ammunition somebody bought...  All you have to do is order it over the internet or stop by at every gun shop/supermarket in your county and you will have enough to start a minor war without anybody getting wise on you.
\

Might I add that I know people who load thier own ammo so how much you buy isn't nesecarily an indicator.

[questionmark]

OverSword, on 24 July 2012 - 06:55 PM, said:

Might I add that I know people who load thier own ammo so how much you buy isn't nesecarily an indicator.

Well, we are kind of lucky that most of these nutcases are not home mechanics types or that they don't really know how things are done... else one of these days we are going to see one with a howitzer mounted on his pickup truck.

[HerNibs]

Hmmm...I wonder what the sales were in 2011 and 2010.  I'm asking because hunting season in Colorado is right around the corner.  I know of at least three people who bought guns in the past two weeks for hunting season.  Not because of the shootings.

Just a thought.

Nibs

[jugoso]

jugoso, on 24 July 2012 - 05:19 PM, said:

The Colorado Bureau of Investigation says that between Friday and Sunday, it approved background checks for 2,887 people wanting to purchase a firearm.

This number seems rather high to me. Can anyone tell me what is involved in these "background" checks?? Perhaps this is a part of the problem.

http://www.cbc.ca/ne...s-colorado.html

Edited by jugoso, 25 July 2012 - 04:01 PM.

[Charlie Prime]

Good.

More guns equals less crime.

[questionmark]

Charlie Prime, on 25 July 2012 - 06:44 PM, said:

Good.

More guns equals less crime.

Then the good ol' US of A should not need any prisons.