A little more about guns

[Mastametz]

Seal Team 6 didn't kill Bin Laden - Guns did.

[Bunnywabbit]

QUOTE (Camaro @ Jan 14 2013, 06:28 AM) I agree that these shootings are getting out of hand, but banning classes of firearms will do very little to solve that problem.

I just want to pop in and say you could also go the other route, and rather than banning certain classes, you allow the sale of specific models. Like how it works with cars: new models have to be approved before being allowed on the road.

Criteria could center around being difficult to adapt, have specific cartridge sizes that won't fit inside anything else, and have hard-to-forge magazine formats.

That way you'd promote the manufacture of guns that don't just comply with the letter of the law, but also with its intent.

As for guns 'built from scratch', after looking around on the web for a bit, I saw loads of instructions on how to assemble factory made parts; none on how to machine or cast those parts. Not 'from scratch' by a long shot. I suspect the latter is not so easy that 'anyone could do it' especially given that most people have trouble assembling an Ikea package.

Of course, this approach would cause your libertarian gonads to retract to somewhere in your collarbone's general area, but think of the bright side: horse riding would be much more comfortable.

[Broodwich]

QUOTE (Bunnywabbit @ Jan 14 2013, 01:03 AM) As for guns 'built from scratch', after looking around on the web for a bit, I saw loads of instructions on how to assemble factory made parts; none on how to machine or cast those parts. Not 'from scratch' by a long shot. I suspect the latter is not so easy that 'anyone could do it' especially given that most people have trouble assembling an Ikea package.

Of course, this approach would cause your libertarian gonads to retract to somewhere in your collarbone's general area, but think of the bright side: horse riding would be much more comfortable.

ah so true

[Vortrog]

QUOTE (Camaro @ Jan 14 2013, 09:14 AM) 7.62x39 is similar to the popular hunting round of the .30-30.

The 7.62x39 will never be a hunting round it is designed to incapacitate people. The30-30 is shamed by your statement.

You Are also drawing a long bow on bolt actions becoming semi-autos. It might be doable, but its pretty obvious what a gun is designed to do and even you know that.

Hi capacity mags mean jack @#(! when you have people rishing you to disarm you when you can only fire one shot at a time.

[Camaro]

QUOTE (Bunnywabbit @ Jan 13 2013, 11:03 PM) I just want to pop in and say you could also go the other route, and rather than banning certain classes, you allow the sale of specific models. Like how it works with cars: new models have to be approved before being allowed on the road.

Criteria could center around being difficult to adapt, have specific cartridge sizes that won't fit inside anything else, and have hard-to-forge magazine formats.

That way you'd promote the manufacture of guns that don't just comply with the letter of the law, but also with its intent.

As for guns 'built from scratch', after looking around on the web for a bit, I saw loads of instructions on how to assemble factory made parts; none on how to machine or cast those parts. Not 'from scratch' by a long shot. I suspect the latter is not so easy that 'anyone could do it' especially given that most people have trouble assembling an Ikea package.

Of course, this approach would cause your libertarian gonads to retract to somewhere in your collarbone's general area, but think of the bright side: horse riding would be much more comfortable.

Modifying the magazine so that it cannot accept normal magazines has already happened. Of course, it only takes minor modification to change that. Many of the rifles sold back during the Clinton era have been modified to accept standard capacity magazines after the Assault Weapons ban expired.

Most cartridges already won't chamber inside a firearm not designed for that round without being dangerous as hell if at all. Sometimes you can share magazines between calibers, but they tend to jam easily.

As for approving firearms... well we have that in California with handguns. All it leads to is an extremely arbitrary list (we have instances where if the model number is changed because the color is different, then that gun of another color isn't approved).

QUOTE (Vortrog @ Jan 13 2013, 11:32 PM) The 7.62x39 will never be a hunting round it is designed to incapacitate people. The30-30 is shamed by your statement.

You Are also drawing a long bow on bolt actions becoming semi-autos. It might be doable, but its pretty obvious what a gun is designed to do and even you know that.

Hi capacity mags mean jack @#(! when you have people rishing you to disarm you when you can only fire one shot at a time.

The 7.62x39 round has similar ballistics to the .30-30. You are correct in that MOST 7.62x39 rounds are FMJ rounds as designated by the Hauge Convention. Expanding soft point ammo is available, although not cheap. The round is certainly capable of taking on deer.

Also you need to be much more specific on the bolt actions. You are thinking of the bolt action where the bolt is unlocked, pulled back, pushed forward, then relocked. However... an AR-15 with a disabled gas system is also bolt-action. Its action consists of pulling back the bolt carrier and releasing. Since most gun manufactures presumably won't totally abandon their designs, this latter approach will be more common and only takes restoring the gas system to become semi-automatic once more. Which is far more trouble than it is worth for your typical person, but the black market would probably supply such things.

[Vortrog]

Like the ruger nylon 66 I would call the AR-15 a block action as the bolt in your teerminology is a block with firing pin and springs which slides up and down a track. Cocking is either by blowback or manual and this is the difference. Incapable of blowback and manual 4 position bolt movement to load asnd fire should be bolt action definition

[Elzam_]

Personally, I look forward to the day that we no longer need guns... in several billion years.

[Icky]

I've been trying to stay out of this. It is very personal to me, though, since I have two small boys and live in Sandy Hook, CT. Two of the victims' families live about 3 minutes from my house and I drive by them both every day on the way to work, so I think about this pretty much constantly.

Semantics about firearms and calibers aside, the resistance to sensible gun control in this country is beyond ridiculous.

America has several times the rate of gun ownership AND several times the rate of gun deaths of any other industrialized nation. A gun in your home is FORTY SIX TIMES (4,600%!) more likely to kill or injure someone in your family than it is to be used against an intruder or in self defense.

And yes, gun control DOES WORK. Australia is a perfect example. After a string of mass shootings through the eighties and early nineties, they enacted very strict gun control measures with needs-base permits (can you prove you NEED an AR-15 to hunt deer when a Winchester bolt action will work?) and special permits for active competition target shooters.

They have had no more mass shootings in 17 years. Their suicide rate dropped dramatically. There is still violent crime, and there always will be, but the scope has been drastically reduced.

Our current gun policies don't work because they are inconsistent. People (not in this thread) have been pointing to Chicago as an example of why it won't work. Gun control in Chicago doesn't work because you can drive 20 minutes outside the city and buy whatever you want, then take it back in. A national policy would be much more difficult to circumvent.

I have yet to hear a rational, logical argument from any gun-rights advocates on why stricter background checks and more restrictive gun control policies should not be enacted. Personally I think we should treat guns just like we do cars.

Both cars and guns have practical use but both can very easily be used to kill if handled improperly, and pose a public safety danger if they are used in the wrong hands.

You need a license to drive a car, not to shoot a gun.
You need to periodically renew that license for a car to make sure you meet health and other requirements to be safe on the road, but not for guns.
You need liability insurance to drive a car legally, but not to shoot a gun.
You have to have your car regularly inspected to make sure it meets safety requirements (i.e. no illegal modifications) but not a firearm.
You register your car with a state agency so the authorities know who owns every vehicle, but once a gun is bought there is no trail of ownership.

Can Cam or TA or any other gun advocates give me an explanation for this, beyond people like guns and think they are cool? And don't give me the argument about needing to defend against an oppressive government. That's a bull@#(! argument and at least half the people who make it know it is. The other half are kooks who have Y2K shelters and survival gear and are just waiting for the new world order.

[FIZ]

Thank you for sharing that Icky. I am sorry for what has happened in your community.

[Adept]

Well said Icky