Welcome login | signup
Language en es fr
OccupyForum

Forum Post: SCOTUS approves very strict machine gun restrictions - consistant with the 2nd amendment

Posted 1 year ago on Feb. 10, 2013, 10:12 a.m. EST by mideast (506)
This content is user submitted and not an official statement


by validating the constitutionality of military weapons restraints in the National Firearms Act of 1934

9 Comments

9 Comments


Read the Rules
[-] 1 points by Narley (294) 1 year ago

I understand this is just a political cartoon. But just in case you didn’t know it. Private citizens can legally own machine guns. Anything from a 1930 Tommy gun up to a tripod mounted, belt fed, .50 caliber machine gun. There are probably a few million of them in private hands right now. Some gun dealers specialize in full-auto guns.

However, machine guns are damned expensive, starting around $10K for an M16 up to $50K for a .50 caliber. To buy one you have to submit the proper paperwork, pay a fee, wait several months for the paperwork to be processed, pass a tougher than usual background check and register the weapon. The government knows where every one of these guns are located.

I recently watched Piers Morgan fire a M16 and a .50 caliber machine guns on TV at a gun store in Houston. The store owner said most people buy full-auto weapons as an investment and really don’t fire them much. Not only are the guns expensive, you could shoot up $1000 worth of ammo in a few minutes.

I think I’ll pass.

[-] 1 points by mideast (506) 1 year ago

Yes - I know - but more info for others is always helpful.
Specifically , this proves - via SCOTUS - the the government does legally have the right to set limits. IMHO- all guns should be registered all owners should be tested & checked & licensed

[-] 0 points by Narley (294) 1 year ago

I respect your opinion, and I’m not going to get all bent out of shape because we disagree on gun registration and licensing. Seems like 99% of gun discussions end up as a name calling hate fest. Because of that I normally avoid discussing guns with people who want more gun laws.

However, your tone seems more civil, so I’ll give my opinion and we can agree to disagree; or maybe we could find a middle ground. You never can tell.

I own guns, several of them. But guns aren’t my reason for living. I’m not an NRA member. I don’t own an AR or AK (anymore). I’m just not that interested in those type weapons. My guns are for self defense, an occasional day of shooting at the gun range, and an investment in a couple of collectable weapons.

My opinion on guns is to look at what could actually reduce gun violence, not just knee jerk reactions. I don’t think anything in Obama’s or Feinstein’s bills will have any effect on gun crime nor reduce the shooting spree’s. No point in rehashing the same argument again, but nothing in these bill will work.

ABC news today has statistics on gun crimes. One thing that stood out to me was in 2010 (latest figures available) there were more suicide by gun than homicide by gun. However, I think if you were to factor in non-fatal shooting the numbers would change.

So, this is my proposals.

Implements universal background checks. I don’t really think it’ll make a difference, but I’ll concede it so we can move forward.

Require stringent training requirements for gun ownership and ability to carry a gun. I could spend a lot of time discussing this because I think training is the missing link in the gun discussions. I submit that tens of millions of gun owners have so poor knowledge of gun use they are more a danger to themselves and other innocent people than any bad guy. I mean simple basic stuff like don’t wave a gun around, keep your finger off the trigger, always check to make sure a gun is unloaded when you pick it up. Personally I’d like to see a required two week course involving gun safety, defensive shooting strategies, in depth review of all applicable gun laws with case studies, and so on. I know I’d feel a lot better knowing people were more knowledgably.

Make an attempt to identify people who, for whatever reason, are mentally unfit to own a gun. This is more difficult than it sounds. At some point you cross the line and become the thought police. To deny someone the ability to own a gun because they fit some type profile is wrong.

Mount a major law enforcement effort to go into the gang infested areas and clean out the guns. This would have to be a sustained effort, but this step will probably have the biggest impact on reducing gun crime.

That’s it. No registration, no licensing and no bans. Just make sure gun owners are trained and we get guns away from the bad guys.

[-] 1 points by mideast (506) 1 year ago

Thanx for the very civil reply
Would you advocate background check for gun OWNERS?
The enforcement effort to round up guns would be legally impossible.
A Virginia smuggler who buys 500 guns and brings them into DC to keep in his home to sell CANNOT be searched unless there is a warrant which requires evidence.
I am do not advocate bans - but I do favor register & license & insurance - just like cars. The second amendment does not stop any of these.

We had 11,000 gun deaths per year. England had 35.

[-] 2 points by Narley (294) 1 year ago

I wouldn’t like it, but I would grudgingly agree to background checks of existing gun owners. Same thing for background checks on ALL gun sales and transfers. I’d rather not do it, but would if I had to. Not sure how you’d practically get it done. I’ve read there are about 80 million gun owners in America. I think a lot of them are suspicious of anything the government does with guns. I think it’s reached the level of true paranoia. I share some of their feelings.

Straw buyers should get the death penalty. Well, maybe not death, but serious prison time. Most states have rules about how many guns a person can buy or sell without having a gun dealer license. I really, really dislike straw buyers. They are the ones supplying the gangs. And the gangs do most of the drug crime.

I guess we’ll have to agree to disagree on registration, license and insurance. Putting aside the fact few gun owners would register their weapons, none of that would reduce gun crime or suicide. That seems to be the part most folks don’t want to recognize. The answer is go after criminals with guns, illegal guns and straw buyers. Also require extensive training in gun safety. If I were king that’s what I’d do.

As for the numbers you provided. Here’s a copy and paste from a NBC news story yesterday using 2010 stats. Seems to me we should be focusing on suicide.

“That year, the CDC counted 19,392 gun deaths by suicide, 11,078 homicides with firearms, 606 deaths by accidental shootings and 596 with other or undetermined cause”
[-] 1 points by MattLHolck (16833) from San Diego, CA 1 year ago

I believe many argument against gun control are pushed by the weapons industry

destruction cannot be profitable

it only destroys goods, properties and people

war is used to take from others

it produces nothing on it's own



building bombs 'til bunkers boil

getting paid for shell filled toil

if I am to work tomorrow

lobe the load on foreign soil


yep US only pays 41% of the total world military budget

World Military budget in Billions (percent total) by Nation

  • 1,630 World Total
  • 711 United States 41%
  • 143 China 8.2%
  • 71.9 Russia 4.1%
  • 62.7 United Kingdom 3.6 %
  • 62.5 France 3.6%
  • 54.5 Japan 3.3&
  • 48.2 Saudi Arabia 2.8%
  • 46.8 India 2.5%
  • 46.7 Germany 2.8%
  • 37.0 Italy 2.3%

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_military_expenditures


Global Arms Sales By Supplier Nations

39% United States

18% Russia

8% France

7% United Kingdom

5% Germany

3% China

3% Italy

11% Other European

5% Others

http://www.globalissues.org/article/74/the-arms-trade-is-big-business#GlobalArmsSalesBySupplierNations


TOP 10 Arms Produces

Notes: An S denotes a subsidiary company. A dash (–) indicates that the company did not rank among the SIPRI Top 100 for 2009

  • Lockheed Martin USA 35,730 33,430 78
  • BAE Systems UK 32,880 32,540 95
  • Boeing USA 31,360 32,300 49
  • Northrop Grumman USA 28,150 27,000 81
  • General Dynamics USA 23,940 23,380 74
  • Raytheon USA 22,980 23,080 91
  • BAE Systems Inc. (BAE Systems, UK) USA 17,900 19,280 100
  • EADS Trans-European 16,360 15,930 27
  • Finmeccanica Italy 14,410 13,280 58
  • L-3 Communications USA 13,070 13,010 83
  • United Technologies USA

http://www.guardian.co.uk/news/datablog/2012/mar/02/arms-sales-top-100-producers


Widow Winchester's riffle wealth warped her house.

Stairs to ceilings. Windows to walls.

Always slept in a new room,

hiding from shot souls

[-] 1 points by Narley (294) 1 year ago

I think I understand where you’re coming from. But I’m focusing more on reducing gun crime, and not implementing measures that don’t work. Weapons manufactures and profits is whole different argument. I won’t argue your stats. Just don’t think they’re reverent to this specific topic.

[-] 1 points by MattLHolck (16833) from San Diego, CA 1 year ago

these are the people most interested in distributing guns

[Removed]