Should the 2nd amendment (Right to Bear Arms) be Abolished?

[verslibre]

The four guns that I have , and that is not even considered a collection, Have a retail value of about $20K. fake assault weapons start ant about 600$ and go up from there, My uncles Browning semi-auto shotgun was over $3000 when he bought in in the 70's, there is not chance in hell they are going to buy t guns back at any price that doesn't translate to theft.

"Hello. Mister...can I see your ID? Kerr. Okay. Oh, nice one. Browning? Thanks for turning this in. (This will look nice in my trunk.) Here's a $50 gas card. Pardon? A collectible? Antique? You want how much? Who do you think we are, eBay? Hahahahahahaha!!!"

[verslibre]

It funny since they paid pennies on the dollar, but not laughably funny

Everything fifth person got a choice of one DVD from the Mad Max trilogy.

[mikekerrIII]

I imagine the arc of fire on that is somewhat less that someone firing 30 rounds is as many seconds, no?

Look Mike, all I'm trying to do is offer up suggestions to how some simple restrictions could potentially limit the body count in these spree killings. Your the weapons expert, how about throwing some solutions out yourself for a change rather than playing the guy stood in the corner shooting (excuse the pun) everything down?

I don't see any soltions w that will have much effect, and the propsed soltions of controling guns provide mostly eyewash solutions with the prevous and proposed assault rifle bans being so idiotically worded that trivialities having little or nothing to do with the lethality. For example a three shot hunting rifle withe aq thumb-hole stock is called an assuage weapon and banned under the new proposed law.

1. It would be better if you had the discussion without the loons involved from Bloomberg to the NRA, If you want top ban weapons features ban features that make the weapon significantly more dangerous and ignore the things that just scare people who haven't a clue about firearms. every-time Feinstein opens here mother she hurts the cause of getting rid of weapons since after the first idiocy or lie people who know better shut her off.
Foe exqmple from her webpage:

Certain other semiautomatic rifles, handguns, shotguns that can accept a detachable magazine and have one or more military characteristics; and
Semiautomatic rifles and handguns with a fixed magazine that can accept more than 10 rounds.

That bans most handguns sold in the US

2, Fund buy-backs with enough money to get something else than junk weapons,stolen weapons and rocket launchers that could never launch a rocket, IOW give something approaching market value

3. Prosecute more that the fraction of one percent of people that try to get though the existing background check that they currently prosecute

4. Prosecute people illegally having a gun federally, every damned time if they have violated a federal law.

Those and improvements in the mental-health system would do a lot of good

[Prisoner 6655321]

I am extremely progressive in most regards but "gun control" isn't one of them. While I am deeply saddened when people get killed guns also protect people. I have a family member who was in the not so distant past forced to defend himself in a home invasion he was shot twice and shot back causing them to flee. His gun was owned legally, the potential robbers not so much. I am 100% sure he would be dead if he didn't happen to have a semi-automatic handgun at hand (because defending yourself against two armed men might require more than one bullet) . I get that this sort of thing is uncommon but no more so than any of the current tragedies of the week (and I mean no disrespect to those who have lost the lives of loved ones) involving guns and as much of a tragedy might have been adverted if we had different gun laws, I know of at least one life saved because we don't.

[Walsh06]

I am extremely progressive in most regards but "gun control" isn't one of them. While I am appropriately saddened when people get killed guns also protect people. I have a family member who was in the not so distant past forced to defend himself in a home invasion he was shot twice and shot back causing them to flee. His gun was owned legally, the potential robbers not so much. I am 100% sure he would be dead if he didn't happen to have a semi-automatic handgun at hand (because defending yourself against two armed men might require more than one bullet) . I get that this sort of thing is uncommon but no more so than any of the current tragedies of the week (and I mean no disrespect to those who have lost the lives of loved ones) involving guns and as much of a tragedy might have been adverted if we had different gun laws, I know of at least one life saved because we don't.

To be honest this is a common thing with society in general these days. A lot of people see things as "Well its not directly affecting me". Its a pity but it is true. I do it myself sure.

[Dreadstar]

Because ten to fifteen round magazines are pretty standard for some of the most common firearms on the market.

Why is that though? For what purpose?

There's actually a logistical and logical answer for that:

That's just the way the weapon is constructed. Let me explain. The rifle has a box-like hollow construction under the receiver and in front of the trigger into which you insert the magazine This construct is usually about 3 inches long, give or take. Now, you don't want the magazine to slip ALL THE WAY into that part of the rifle, you want at least an inch (give or take) hanging out, so it can be grasped and so it can contain the latching mechanism. So, if the magazine fits the rifle properly, it is pretty much AUTOMATICALLY large enough to hold 10 cartridges. In fact, you would have to put artificial plugs or extra dead space in a magazine to make it fit the rifle and come up at less cartridges than that.

So it's not so much holding to a minimum of firepower as much as it is holding to a natural point of logistics. However, that being said, a standard magazine hangs well below the bottom of the receiver area. The "low capacity" magazines that fit more flush to the receiver area aren't standard.

EDIT: A photo for reference. This is an AR15 with a the smallest low-capacity magazine that will fit it. I'm pretty certain that that will hold 10. I could be wrong, unfamiliar territory and all.

[Puma]

I know for my pump shotgun, if I went hunting, I am limited to three shells and for any other time, five shells. There is a wooden dowel acting as the plug.

and in California the limit capacity for AR-15s is 10.

[1984]

Yes, definitely yes, surely everyone can see that, civilian owned guns are the worst idea I can possibly imagine, I even detest the idea of the police force being armed except in extreme circumstances. Surely the only reason ANYONE can think they are a good idea is to protect against people that have guns, it's a horribly ridiculous viscious circle, unfortunately I don't see how you can break that circle, but I honestly think it is the biggest thing that Americans have got massively wrong. I realise it's not only Americans that can own guns and am not directing critisism soley towards them, but as an economically advancd power I think it is up to them to lead by example.

Sorry, I'm not saying any of this to p=£s people off, but I don't understand how people can disagree.

[Richard Bishop]

Yes, definitely yes, surely everyone can see that, civilian owned guns are the worst idea I can possibly imagine, I even detest the idea of the police force being armed except in extreme circumstances. Surely the only reason ANYONE can think they are a good idea is to protect against people that have guns, it's a horribly ridiculous viscious circle, unfortunately I don't see how you can break that circle, but I honestly think it is the biggest thing that Americans have got massively wrong. I realise it's not only Americans that can own guns and am not directing critisism soley towards them, but as an economically advancd power I think it is up to them to lead by example.

Sorry, I'm not saying any of this to p=£s people off, but I don't understand how people can disagree.

People will disagree with you because while you may be able to confiscate the guns from those individuals who legally own them, safely store them, and use them for their intended purposes (hunting, sport shooting), good luck getting the guns off of the street thugs and criminals. All you wind up doing is making the law-abiding portion of the populace vulnerable to the non-law-abiding portion, like dropping a rabbit into a cage full of Rotweilers.

[Nico Olvia]

People will disagree with you because while you may be able to confiscate the guns from those individuals who legally own them, safely store them, and use them for their intended purposes (hunting, sport shooting), good luck getting the guns off of the street thugs and criminals. All you wind up doing is making the law-abiding portion of the populace vulnerable to the non-law-abiding portion, like dropping a rabbit into a cage full of Rotweilers.

Except that it's not how it is in most countries with strict laws concerning guns. Hell, where i live lot of cops don't even have real gun anymore. And you know what ? There is no chaos, no more crimes than before and yes, the law-abiding population is just as safe.

Guns create way more problem than they solve.

[Vibranium]

Except that it's not how it is in most countries with strict laws concerning guns. Hell, where i live lot of cops don't even have real gun anymore. And you know what ? There is no chaos, no more crimes than before and yes, the law-abiding population is just as safe.

Guns create way more problem than they solve.

right, because no one is armed

did you miss the whole first part of the post?...a number of criminals have either illegal weapons that have been stolen or smuggled into the US so unless you can fix that part of the problem, all youve done is take guns away from people who have legally purchased them

[Nico Olvia]

right, because no one is armed

Ah please, are you serious with that ? Of course criminals are armed.

Do you people think that only in the states criminals can find weapons ? Really ?

[Vibranium]

Ah please, are you serious with that ? Of course criminals are armed.

Do you people think that only in the states criminals can find weapons ? Really ?

Nope...but the plethora of weaponry is a lot more here

and I know these are only single cases, but here in CT there have been two or three big drug arrests in the past year....police have recovered large amounts of marijuana, cocaine, and ectasy that were headed into NYC...along with those busts were a large number of weapons...everything from pistols to assault rifles to some explosives (grenades and C4)

[Richard Bishop]

Except that it's not how it is in most countries with strict laws concerning guns. Hell, where i live lot of cops don't even have real gun anymore. And you know what ? There is no chaos, no more crimes than before and yes, the law-abiding population is just as safe.

Questions:
1. What countries with strict gun laws are you referring to?
2. Where do you live that the police don't have real guns?
3. How is it that the law-abiding population is just as safe under the circumstances that you describe?

I'm asking these honestly, because I would love a solution to the continuing gun violence problem in the United States, and if there are other countries that, by your own admission, have plenty of criminals with guns but yet somehow are safer than the United States, I think it would be beneficial to understand how that is accomplished. I'm not a gun person myself, never having owned, fired, or even held one, so I have no vested interest in perpetuating a "gun culture" here in the US, but I find your claims, without additional information, to be hard to believe.

[Nico Olvia]

How is it that the law-abiding population is just as safe under the circumstances that you describe?

Currently i'm living in France. Police here use mostly those flash ball things (that's how they call it here, don't know if it's the same for you), tasers and close combat. But even when they do have guns cops don't really use them cause you have to understand that laws concerning self defense here and particularly when you have the right or no to use a gun against someone are EXTREMELY severe. Before a cop shoot on someone, he better be freaking sure what he's doing.

Interesting fact about french by the way, they don't trust one bit or even like the police. They see them the same kind of way Americans seem to see their government. There is a real and deep hostility.

Now, how do we survive in this crazy country ? Well, i guess that cops are doing a great job. Cause yeah, criminals here are freaking armed too. Believe me. Worst than that, there is locally some "independence" movement as in Corsica (situation is complex) for example and there is people there who have military type armament.