Just what is "common sense gun control?" How about a few examples?

[Vonsalza]

Vonsalza:

I’m sorry you feel that way, but its a pretty basic law of economics that the more expensive something gets, the more scarce it becomes.

Are you sure about that? Have you actually thought this through? Have you considered that:

• Guns are durable goods. VERY durable goods. In civilian use they last for many generations – literally forever.
• An M1911 pistol designed in 1911 and the AR15 rifle in 1957 are still near fairly state-of-the-art. Obsolescence is a non-issue with these firearms.
• There are already ~350M firearms in the US. Even if all new guns sales stopped tomorrow the supply would never dray-up.
• Slapping a $750 fee/gun would accelerate clandestine manufacturing of guns in the US.
• Criminals don’t typically legally purchase their firearms. They steal them – or buy them from someone else who stole them.

Before talking about “a pretty basic law of economics”, make sure you understand the market conditions first.

Oh I never said that a permit would solve the issue completely and independent of other solutions. A voluntary buy-back is the go-to for sucking up loose guns.
What a permit does is decrease the additions to the current gun supply. As I’ve said before, the ones that are out there are already out there.

Guns are indeed durable goods, but they’re prone to the same slow fates as all mechanical durable goods.
Ithaca shotguns were THE shotgun when my dad was a kid. Now they’re getting difficult to find. While many of them are certainly tucked away in safes and cabinets, many others no longer exist as functioning shotguns.

I recall an old Savage .22 I left in an old truck we just used in the winter. By the time I remembered I left it (forgive me, I was 18 or 19 at the time), it was rusted to the point of uselessness. I just threw the thing out.

They are durable. Especially the older ones. The newer, plastic models? Less so.

---

And as an aside, if you own an extremely early AR, it’s far more valuable as a collectors item than as a shooter. In fact, they performed so poorly that I have a family member that was in armed services when they were first issued.

They were re-collected and he finished his tour with the M14. Substantial reliability issues.

 

[starshiptrooper]

Buy a gun from any licensed dealer anywhere in the US and you have to go through a background check. Your problem is straw purchases and a lack of border security. Of course the real issue is the fact that only law-abiding citizens are inconvenienced by these laws.

 

[Apache75]

Sorry, you are correct about buying it online. You still need to meet the person face to face after posting it online whether its new or used. Bad wording on my part.

 

[Bradskii]

I’ll check in again after the next mass shooting.

Well that didn’t take long, did it…

But as you were. No need for any knee jerk reactions calling for any restrictions on anyone’s rights. Maybe a few proposals for better mental health evaluations or making priests carry a loaded weapon at all times.

As I keep saying, it’s the mentality of the people in a society that reveres gun ownership which is the problem. This is not going to stop. It will be forever a regular occurrence and no-one will do anything about it. Your ‘freedom’ is more important than all these lives.

Those who live by the sword…

 

[Duesenberg]

Sorry, you are correct about buying it online. You still need to meet the person face to face after posting it online whether its new or used. Bad wording on my part.

That’s an alarm phrase because it makes some believe that guns can be mail-ordered. Other than some VERY limited situations, they cannot be.

 

[Apache75]

Only if you have an FFL can you receive it mail order if I’m correct. Before 9/11 writers from various gun magazines would be able to have one shipped to them for testing. Now not so much.

 

[Duesenberg]

Only if you have an FFL can you receive it mail order if I’m correct. Before 9/11 writers from various gun magazines would be able to have one shipped to them for testing. Now not so much.

If you ship a gun to a manufacturer for service, it can be shipped back to your house.

You can ship a gun to yourself. I do that on hunts. Ship them ahead to a hotel/lodge so I don’t have to drag them along on an airplane. Then mail them home.

You can (or at least you could) receive a firearm in the mail from the gov’t – the CMP.

 

[casslean]

So change the law in the US. Amend the Constitution. Take away the “right” to have guns.

I live in a country that does not have a so-called “right to bear arms” (the actual right to which is arguable in the US as well). If I wanted a gun, I could get one with reasonably little inconvenience. I don’t have one and I don’t want one. I am also a single woman living alone who never really feels unsafe despite the fact that I don’t have a gun. That might be because I live in a country which, over a five year period, had 977 gun deaths while the US had 56,000. Maybe that’s just because it’s really cold here, or maybe it’s because we’ve accepted we don’t have a right to obtain a deadly weapon without being regulated.

 

[Seeksadvice]

Some simple facts on “gun deaths”: remove the cities of Chicago, LA, New Orleans, NYC, DC, and Atlanta, and you’ll see a massive decrease in the number of “gun deaths” across the US. North Dakota passed a more-or-less universal concealed carry law with some restrictions on where weaponry can be carried. Guess what? North Dakotans haven’t been slaughtered in the streets. Since churches were allowed to let people carry weaponry into the building, I can’t think of a single act of violence that has occurred relating to church services, did have one incidence of a psychotic person show up with a hammer, but that was quickly dealt with.

As far as gun control goes, alas, I am a bit rusty. A bit too much trigger pressure it seems.

 

[Duesenberg]

So change the law in the US. Amend the Constitution. Take away the “right” to have guns.

That’s not going to happen, thanks be to God.

I live in a country that does not have a so-called “right to bear arms” (the actual right to which is arguable in the US as well). If I wanted a gun, I could get one with reasonably little inconvenience. I don’t have one and I don’t want one. I am also a single woman living alone who never really feels unsafe

So? I suspect you live in a relatively tiny county with a population smaller than the County of Los Angeles. Certainly smaller than the State of California. Probably with a highly homogeneous population too. You also don’t have ~350M LEGAL firearms that aren’t going anywhere – at least for criminals.

I love it when people try to compare “their country” to the US without ever even divulging where they live.

FYI, what does an empty wine bottle, a claw hammer, a baseball bat (or cricket paddle), a butcher’s knife, a pitchfork or a sheleilah have in common? Each one is potentially a “deadly weapon.” No countries that I know regulate these items…

 

[Bradskii]

If only members of the congregation were armed with empty wine bottles or baseball bats. Maybe they weren’t allowed to carry them because of domestic violence convictions. Which would be understandable. Who in their right mind would let someone who had been convicted of beating his wife and child wander about with something as dangerous as a baseball bat.

 

[MonteRCMS]

You can also ship “gun parts” … so just disassemble the gun and then ship the parts.

Started doing that in 1965, I think.

During the 1970’s, I used to purchase machetes at Marino’s Ferreteria in San Juan, Puerto Rico and carry them back home on the airplane.

After a few such trips, TSA said I had to surrender the machete and I said “OK” but, they gave it to a TSA agent who was 4’9"’ tall wearing 6" heels … I’m sure she was a karate expert … and she and I walked together to the gate … like a mini-date … and she handed it to the pilot who carried it in the cockpit who returned it to me when we landed. On later flights, they put it in the belly compartment and put a baggage tag on it. Eventually, it got to be such a hassle, I just gave up on it. They were too long to fit in my suitcase.

 

[MonteRCMS]

Another thing you can do is to remove and take down ALL “gun free zone” signs. All that does is indicate that it’s a target rich environment.

AND, you can post signs stating “concealed carry guns welcome here”.

 

[LeafByNiggle]

Another thing you can do is to remove and take down ALL “gun free zone” signs. All that does is indicate that it’s a target rich environment.

AND, you can post signs stating “concealed carry guns welcome here”.

It isn’t just a matter of changing out the signs. The signs are there to indicate a zone that falls under the provisions of a law. They indicate to those who might bring weapons into that zone that they might be in violation of that law. You can’t change the signs without changing the law they warn about.

As for indicating a target-rich environment, that is already apparent by the fact that schools are not very well hidden. Anyone can see they are schools.

 

[casslean]

So? I suspect you live in a relatively tiny county with a population smaller than the County of Los Angeles. Certainly smaller than the State of California. Probably with a highly homogeneous population too. You also don’t have ~350M LEGAL firearms that aren’t going anywhere – at least for criminals.

I live in Canada. And the reason we don’t have 350M firearms in the hands of criminals, or anyone else, is because we don’t consider gun ownership a right which means we don’t have a fit when the government tries to regulate it.

But you know what? Go ahead and keep doing nothing. Because that’s clearly working.

 

[MonteRCMS]

ONCE UPON A TIME, if a court found someone to be insane, they could be confined in a special medical facility and medicated.

Then the ACLU got involved and you do that anymore.

So now, you have criminally insane people wandering around, and buying guns, even if forbidden by law.

 

[Bradskii]

So answer me this: the shooter in San Antonio, from reports I’ve heard, because of his conviction for domestic violence, should not have been allowed to have a gun. That seems like an eminently reasonable rule.

Is it just a state law? If just state, then would anyone agree that is should be universally adopted?

 

[Duesenberg]

You can also ship “gun parts” … so just disassemble the gun and then ship the parts.

Wrong. The part (no matter how small it is) with the serial number, OR if no serial number, the gun’s receiver IS the gun.

 

[Duesenberg]

The signs are there to indicate a zone that falls under the provisions of a law.

Those politically-driven signs did nothing but create killing fields. SHAME on the politicians!

 

[Duesenberg]

I live in Canada. And the reason we don’t have 350M firearms in the hands of criminals, or anyone else, is because we don’t consider gun ownership a right which means we don’t have a fit when the government tries to regulate it.

Too bad for you. You also have a population less than 1/10 of the US.

But you know what? Go ahead and keep doing nothing. Because that’s clearly working.

You’re right, “gun control” does not work.