General Discussion

CTyankee

(67,693 posts)

272. well, would state laws regulating the manner in which the gun is transported be

Fri May 17, 2013, 04:30 PM

May 2013

automatically assumed in violation of the 2nd A. I ask this because there is a law in Norway that regulates transportation of guns and it must be in the interest of public safety.

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

307 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Help me understand , why is semi automatic in a rifle so important to gun owners here? [View all] newmember May 2013 OP

Because it's the next best thing to a machine gun. onehandle May 2013 #1

I think there are mods to somewhat easily make it fully automatic DrDan May 2013 #205

nope Duckhunter935 May 2013 #206

so what do you think about the following response about making an AR15 fully automatic? DrDan May 2013 #226

Yeah TnDem May 2013 #227

The correct lower receiver being an AR-15 made before, I believe, 1986 premium May 2013 #230

Not even true, premium May 2013 #210

slippery slope booley May 2013 #2

slippery slope to a safer country. JaneyVee May 2013 #4

slippery slope that leads to fewer gun deaths. samsingh May 2013 #7

How about choosing a better slope? appal_jack May 2013 #16

how does gun control erode gun rights? samsingh May 2013 #111

I don't know, ask the guy that was arrested in New York for having two extra bullets in a magazine. SlimJimmy May 2013 #146

how about the rights of the student that was shot by a security guard? samsingh May 2013 #158

What does that have to do with shooting rabbits with a semi-auto shotgun? SlimJimmy May 2013 #160

but you have your guns while the student has bullets shot into his body samsingh May 2013 #195

My right to own and use that shotgun in a lawful manner has no connection SlimJimmy May 2013 #198

but others who own guns are hurting innocent people who are not enjoying samsingh May 2013 #208

So let's remove that right from the 99.99% who are not hurting people with guns. SlimJimmy May 2013 #233

wouldn't you want to examine approaches that could save innocent victims? samsingh May 2013 #299

I'm not willing to examine an approach that removes a right from 99.99% of those that have SlimJimmy May 2013 #300

its quite a circular argument i'm reading samsingh May 2013 #302

What effect would those initiatives have on the 99.99% that do not commit gun crimes? SlimJimmy May 2013 #303

i don't think you have an argument but your statement echo the circular samsingh May 2013 #304

Typical response. Oh, you are sooooo right, I can't think for myself or have an opinion. I SlimJimmy May 2013 #305

i would love to c the empirical evidence to support the 99.99% claim.btw i think you mean .01 above samsingh May 2013 #306

There are approximatey 52 million households with firearms in the US, and approximately SlimJimmy May 2013 #307

aw, two tiny little bullets...why,they wouldn't hurt a flea... CTyankee May 2013 #209

If you think those that would use a firearm in an illegal manner would follow this limit on SlimJimmy May 2013 #234

We should, as a nation, be able to solve the gun violence calamity that grips our country. CTyankee May 2013 #248

We don't have a national emergency of gun violence, premium May 2013 #251

I agree with everything you say you favor. CTyankee May 2013 #257

That's a fair point. premium May 2013 #259

I'd like to get back to the point you made earlier about having a more just society, clean CTyankee May 2013 #260

Much different cultures. premium May 2013 #261

That doesn't explain Norway, even if it does explain France or Germany. CTyankee May 2013 #262

There's this group. premium May 2013 #263

That sounds liike a good group and very badly needed! CTyankee May 2013 #264

Thank you, premium May 2013 #265

I like Premium's answer, so let me piggyback a bit on it. Curbing gun violence is not a SlimJimmy May 2013 #253

Some problems with your owning that semi-automatic. What happens if that gun is stolen CTyankee May 2013 #258

You, clearly, have never been out hunting rabbits. A rabbit is a moving target and may take SlimJimmy May 2013 #266

I wasn't arguing about your rabbit hunting. You are right, I know nothing about hunting CTyankee May 2013 #267

There is no legal culpability if the gun owner is obeying all appropriate laws hack89 May 2013 #269

OK, do you think that state laws prohibiting a gun owner from transporting his gun, fully CTyankee May 2013 #270

What would be the point of such a law? hack89 May 2013 #271

well, would state laws regulating the manner in which the gun is transported be CTyankee May 2013 #272

Of course not. hack89 May 2013 #273

In any states more than others (as far as you know, of course)? CTyankee May 2013 #274

I am not sure. hack89 May 2013 #275

It appears that there is a "time, place and manner" restriction of some sort on the CTyankee May 2013 #278

Heller tells you what the limits are right now. hack89 May 2013 #280

No, I don't think so. CTyankee May 2013 #283

Does the will of the people always rule supreme? hack89 May 2013 #285

Even Scalia said in Heller that there could be regulations on guns. CTyankee May 2013 #286

I have consistently said that there are limits on the 2A hack89 May 2013 #287

well, no. If it were that simple we wouldn't have the federal courts, esp. the Supreme Court, tell CTyankee May 2013 #290

No shit. Who else but the courts determines what is Constitutional? hack89 May 2013 #291

so my point is that there are lots of gun control laws that we can have but we don't. CTyankee May 2013 #292

No kidding - what do you think my original point was? hack89 May 2013 #293

two points: I don't consider going back to the law before Heller radical and CTyankee May 2013 #294

There was no real law prior to Heller hack89 May 2013 #295

Sure it did change things significantly. That was the whole point. CTyankee May 2013 #296

If the gun owner had his weapons in his home, laying outl, or in a safe, or in his vehicle for SlimJimmy May 2013 #279

actually, I was drawing that distinction between the gun owner who loses possession of CTyankee May 2013 #282

Fair enough. SlimJimmy May 2013 #288

But we wouldn't be , they could still own every other type newmember May 2013 #6

OK, how about you can keep speaking freely, but... appal_jack May 2013 #18

Clearly that's a good analogy , high rate of fire weapons versus typewriters newmember May 2013 #31

See: the Rwandan genocide. appal_jack May 2013 #38

So you want to limit speech since it can be dangerous? but not limit guns that are dangerous newmember May 2013 #43

Nope. Fail. appal_jack May 2013 #45

I was just posting in jest , I know you weren't advocating that. newmember May 2013 #47

Oh. Good! appal_jack May 2013 #55

How about you can keep speaking freely, but auburngrad82 May 2013 #151

I'm not petitioning the government for unfettered access to an RPG derby378 May 2013 #201

Just to clarify: the quote is "falsely" yell fire. CTyankee May 2013 #297

If you'd ever hunted rabbits, you'd quickly understand the value of a semi-automatic shotgun. SlimJimmy May 2013 #156

You called? SlipperySlope May 2013 #105

I don't get it either. JaneyVee May 2013 #3

I'm trying to understand it from all sides newmember May 2013 #22

If semi-autos are banned wercal May 2013 #48

My father has a Remington Model 8 semi-auto rifle Jenoch May 2013 #103

The semi-auto rifle in my safe was built in 1905. Eleanors38 May 2013 #132

I think it's more important to people who are afraid of guns than to gun owners, but that might... NYC_SKP May 2013 #5

Will I get dog piled in there? newmember May 2013 #8

I think half the tension would be gone if we could agree on some education. NYC_SKP May 2013 #9

I agree with your point on education. Jenoch May 2013 #104

Just who is it that are afraid of guns? I really upaloopa May 2013 #10

They are good family fun. What better way to spend quality time with the family Hoyt May 2013 #11

It can be good family fun... Pelican May 2013 #44

Well, you finally got something right, premium May 2013 #52

I grt it was good for you. Unfortunately, guns are not so good for others and society. Hoyt May 2013 #57

Only if they're used in a bad way or irresponsibly. nt. premium May 2013 #61

Which, of course, they routinely are. And thousands of innocents pay the price. Arugula Latte May 2013 #113

Rifles of ALL sorts account for <3% of ALL homicides. Eleanors38 May 2013 #129

Nope. We're talking about rifles Recursion May 2013 #177

Did you find semi-automatic rifles a necessary part of hunting? muriel_volestrangler May 2013 #118

When out hunting rabbits, squirrels, game birds with my .22, premium May 2013 #124

Would you be able to hunt with a restriction to, say, 3 rounds before reloading? muriel_volestrangler May 2013 #134

I don't hunt anymore, premium May 2013 #135

In areas where feral hogs are over-running the landscape, AR-15s are the choice Eleanors38 May 2013 #137

Anyone out to 'eradicate' an entire population of animals ought to have a special licence muriel_volestrangler May 2013 #145

I used "eradication" more as wishful thinking... Eleanors38 May 2013 #147

They only look "menacing" to those that don't know any better. N/T beevul May 2013 #84

And that's the reason folks who covet them are attracted. Hoyt May 2013 #90

You keep asserting it as if it were true... beevul May 2013 #91

You just said it in post above. Hoyt May 2013 #93

No hoyt, I did not. beevul May 2013 #98

I realize you are making an attempt at sarcasm. Jenoch May 2013 #106

Most unfortunately... sarisataka May 2013 #12

Wow. I have never known Jenoch May 2013 #108

Through trial and error sarisataka May 2013 #143

why is semi automatic in a rifle so important to gun owners? HeiressofBickworth May 2013 #13

My husband and I have fun shooting at the range. Mojorabbit May 2013 #80

Would your fun be diminshed by having to pause between shots? muriel_volestrangler May 2013 #119

Pretty obvious you don't know jack about gun owners. premium May 2013 #82

Finding courage in the wrong place: Junkdrawer May 2013 #14

Yeah, what's the big deal about any Constitutional rights?!1??11/!! appal_jack May 2013 #15

No where did I say your rifles would harm me. newmember May 2013 #17

If you are not afraid of harm, then why ban? n/t appal_jack May 2013 #20

for the good of our society ,future of our country newmember May 2013 #24

Not gonna happen. appal_jack May 2013 #28

It seems like you do... Pelican May 2013 #46

I do think the future of our country is our children and the state we leave it in . newmember May 2013 #49

It's hard to believe someone on DU would post thucythucy May 2013 #138

I think the Dems are sensitive to the gun issue because so many of our leaders have alfredo May 2013 #25

The passage of the 1968 Gun Control Act was due primarily to Eleanors38 May 2013 #141

I wonder what percentage of gun sales are because of the fear of Blacks? alfredo May 2013 #157

The present massive increase is more likely due to Eleanors38 May 2013 #159

There's always a surge in gun sales whenever a Dem takes office. I still haven't seen any real alfredo May 2013 #171

Actually, the big increase in gun sales has been going on Eleanors38 May 2013 #172

We know we are the targets. alfredo May 2013 #174

Who is "we," and who is doing the targeting? Eleanors38 May 2013 #179

That's up to the right wing media and the Tea Party. One week it is gays, next week it is Muslims. alfredo May 2013 #180

Well, they'd have a rude surprise when they discover premium May 2013 #182

True, I just don't want it to come to that. alfredo May 2013 #183

And neither do I. premium May 2013 #184

Anarchy only serves the powerful. alfredo May 2013 #186

You've got that right. nt. premium May 2013 #187

Keep safe. Try to stand up to 'em. Eleanors38 May 2013 #281

Here is Chris Rock's take on the Columbine shooting CTyankee May 2013 #298

Really, which of our leaders have been assassinated by RW gun toting nuts? hughee99 May 2013 #190

Sirhan Sirhan was a Christian nationalist angry over RFK's support alfredo May 2013 #197

I'm not sure he's a fit with what is considered RW nutbags these days, hughee99 May 2013 #199

When we see or hear of armed right wingers shooting Obama targets, or Hillary targets, alfredo May 2013 #204

What? Does the 3rd Amendment mean nothing to you? Tommy_Carcetti May 2013 #26

I am pleased with my current ability to exercise my 3rd Amendment rights. appal_jack May 2013 #36

I don't get the people who cite discrepancies in fire power between individuals and cops or military morningfog May 2013 #29

it's one of their paranoid fantasies, morningwood, er, fog Skittles May 2013 #33

One doesn't need to match the firepower of the state. Megalo_Man May 2013 #81

So, people who use this argument are suggesting that morningfog May 2013 #88

RE: Megalo_Man May 2013 #97

Then you are imagining some act of war morningfog May 2013 #120

Re-read what I said a few times. Megalo_Man May 2013 #122

You can't have it both ways. morningfog May 2013 #148

exactly what i've been thinking for a long time RedstDem May 2013 #35

What about that "explicit text" of the Second Amendment? markpkessinger May 2013 #40

Oh, I'd love to see an overhaul of our outdated, outmoded constitution to one of CTyankee May 2013 #216

If you'd just expand rights, we could work together. appal_jack May 2013 #247

Well, my right to work for election of my state legislature to pass stricter gun laws is CTyankee May 2013 #284

My SKS, BAR, and 10/22 are pretty nice also. ileus May 2013 #19

Guns - as discussed here - is/are hardly "progressive." Hoyt May 2013 #32

no. actually they are. the issue is more that you dont have galileoreloaded May 2013 #173

Sure I do. Some people care more about their guns than society. Hoyt May 2013 #178

It's true that some care more about their guns than society, premium May 2013 #185

Being popular ain't necessarily a good thing. I'm sure the majority of Tbaggers love them. Hoyt May 2013 #188

It's necessarily a good thing for those that do own them premium May 2013 #189

In this case it is, from a purely practical view NickB79 May 2013 #191

Clearly important to be "practical" and callous when selecting from your lethal weapon options. Hoyt May 2013 #194

Of course it's important to be practical. NickB79 May 2013 #211

The size of the magazine you use is completely inconsequential at this point derby378 May 2013 #213

This is not a war zone, or crime scene. You guys crack me up. Hoyt May 2013 #220

Just curious Hoyt, premium May 2013 #223

I've had yahoos pull guns on me. Again, this is not a war zone, even Hoyt May 2013 #224

Hoyt, as you know, premium May 2013 #225

I made the mistake of living where confederate flags and guns are considered normal. Hoyt May 2013 #237

I asked what did you do to have people pull guns on you? premium May 2013 #238

Which is why I don't own a weapon of war NickB79 May 2013 #231

You shouldn't feel out manned because a few folks have bigger guns than yours. Hoyt May 2013 #239

No WWII rifle killed millions, none. premium May 2013 #240

I agree on car, promoting guns, not so much. Did you check buyer's background? Hoyt May 2013 #219

Nothing callous about it, premium May 2013 #212

Wern't you a theif a few years ago Travis_0004 May 2013 #229

Maybe that's why he's had guns pulled on him. nt. premium May 2013 #236

In a shotgun it is helpful arely staircase May 2013 #21

so important? Crepuscular May 2013 #23

I'm curious where you are hunting Jenoch May 2013 #110

Indiana Crepuscular May 2013 #121

In Minnesota Jenoch May 2013 #128

gives them bigger boners Skittles May 2013 #27

We have a right to hard dicks! morningfog May 2013 #30

And so do people paralyzed/disabled by someone's irresponsible use of their guns. Hoyt May 2013 #37

Semi autos Half-Century Man May 2013 #34

There's your problem. Sadly, those that covet these abominations can't live without Hoyt May 2013 #41

Semi auto guns became pretty common in the early 1900s. Yo_Mama May 2013 #39

Why only semi-automatics? Why not ban bolt-action sniper rifles? AnotherMcIntosh May 2013 #42

I agree. Why do people practice to shoot others at 1000 yards. Hoyt May 2013 #51

That's the snipers creed, premium May 2013 #56

Pre, we aren't in a friggin war zone. I beg you understand that. Hoyt May 2013 #60

Hoy, I know that, premium May 2013 #64

They are marketed in this country to yahoos, many of whom look forward to fighting here. Hoyt May 2013 #68

They're marketed in this country to hunters. nt. premium May 2013 #71

Not the ads I've seen from manufacturers and lethal weapons traffickers. Hoyt May 2013 #74

Uh Huh. premium May 2013 #76

How many years ago was that? rdharma May 2013 #66

That picture was taken of a soldier in Vietnam. premium May 2013 #67

Very serious antiquated shtuff. rdharma May 2013 #70

Agreed, premium May 2013 #72

Against who? rdharma May 2013 #75

Against whoever the govt. determines premium May 2013 #78

The Kalashnikov rifle was designed ~20 years prior to that picture. appal_jack May 2013 #116

Huh? What are you talking about? rdharma May 2013 #130

That "modern stuff" we have today has been around for decades hack89 May 2013 #142

Well, then he didn't follow from my post #66 referring to that Rem. 700 in Vietnam. eom rdharma May 2013 #232

"Much better stuff today" hack89 May 2013 #242

To be fair, premium May 2013 #243

Exactly! eom rdharma May 2013 #245

It's all good. premium May 2013 #246

I don't want to "ban" anything. rdharma May 2013 #244

Sorry - I thought you supported the AWB. hack89 May 2013 #249

Are semi-automatics all assault weapons? nt Honeycombe8 May 2013 #50

I don't think I wrote assault weapon anywhere in my posts newmember May 2013 #58

You said AR 15. That's not an assault rifle? nt Honeycombe8 May 2013 #85

Nope Duckhunter935 May 2013 #94

Some say it is , some say it's not newmember May 2013 #96

Nope. riqster May 2013 #59

That was my understanding. I thought maybe I'd misunderstood semi-automatics. Honeycombe8 May 2013 #86

The term is confusing mostly because there is no clear definition of what an assault weapon is newmember May 2013 #102

No, not at all Mopar151 May 2013 #65

Thx. I was confused a bit about that. nt Honeycombe8 May 2013 #87

well REGULATED militia krawhitham May 2013 #53

The "Well regulated militia" crap died after the War of 1812. eom rdharma May 2013 #69

"crap"? truebluegreen May 2013 #131

I'm referring to the "militia" clause. The idea of "citizens militia" became obsolete ...... rdharma May 2013 #133

References to the 3rd are a straw man argument and off point. truebluegreen May 2013 #136

No. It just points out how irrelevant the "well regulated militia" clause is today..... eom rdharma May 2013 #139

Non-responsive. truebluegreen May 2013 #140

Why are you asking me? I never made that claim. rdharma May 2013 #144

I was asking you because you sounded like you knew. truebluegreen May 2013 #150

You want to issue cleaning kits, give out ammo, and instruct everyone Megalo_Man May 2013 #83

Actually, the "wild wild west" had less violent gun crime than we have in major cities today. SlimJimmy May 2013 #256

The spring's the thing riqster May 2013 #54

Because Oswald Only Got Three Shots Off jberryhill May 2013 #62

gas lawn mower vs push mower JohnnyBoots May 2013 #63

Could it be that Bushmaster is the largest producer of the AR15 and also the largest donor to the Monk06 May 2013 #73

Is Bushmaster both of those things? ManiacJoe May 2013 #115

Bushmaster doesn't really exist anymore. SlipperySlope May 2013 #153

They still do under another name newmember May 2013 #155

Common use for nearly a century and probably make up the majority of firearms owned. TheKentuckian May 2013 #77

Because you can't kill everyone in the room with a single shot weapon. mwrguy May 2013 #79

Because you might have to shoot more than once quickly. nt rrneck May 2013 #89

You could do that with a revolver , lever action , pump shotgun or even a pump action rifle newmember May 2013 #100

It's really a distinction without a difference. rrneck May 2013 #107

I might need to shoot Megalo_Man May 2013 #109

Are you military ? newmember May 2013 #112

rifles (semi auto or not) are only used in about 4% of gun murders in the U.S. rollin74 May 2013 #92

does not Duckhunter935 May 2013 #95

Yeah, I don't get it. Always made sense to me but then most things that do, don't for many others. raouldukelives May 2013 #117

"Worthless for hunting..." Jenoch May 2013 #127

Sure, done quite a bit of hunting. raouldukelives May 2013 #149

They are also carried extensively in areas of Alaska for self protection from SlimJimmy May 2013 #161

I read an account of a couple guys moose hunting in Alaska. Jenoch May 2013 #163

That happens more often than people realize. SlimJimmy May 2013 #164

Here is a link to the story I mentioned. Jenoch May 2013 #165

Excellent link. I skimmed it for now, but will go back and read it in its entirety later. SlimJimmy May 2013 #166

I prefer a semi-auto for self defense. aikoaiko May 2013 #99

I know , many gun owners say that. newmember May 2013 #101

And they are correct when they say it. SlimJimmy May 2013 #162

Why a semi-auto? ManiacJoe May 2013 #114

The AR15 is merely a rifle hack89 May 2013 #123

into which one can insert a 100-round dual drum mag... VOX May 2013 #200

So ban high capacity magazines. Problem solved. nt hack89 May 2013 #203

and probably jam Duckhunter935 May 2013 #207

Why is banning them so important? hack89 May 2013 #125

Then it's, well, this didn't work, premium May 2013 #126

Agree. That's the start of the slippery slope, isn't it? SlimJimmy May 2013 #167

You can put bullets into the bad guy faster. NT clarice May 2013 #152

Message auto-removed Name removed May 2013 #154

Because most of the gun nuts are "shooting blanks" if ya know what I mean.... gotta compensate. Erose999 May 2013 #168

Of course, premium May 2013 #170

why are anti-gun people so obsessed with penises? Recursion May 2013 #176

Why drive an automatic instead of a stick? NickB79 May 2013 #169

Nobody is talking about getting rid of them Recursion May 2013 #175

cuz they are all crazy cowboys who love to play with things that explode in their hands librechik May 2013 #181

Stop calling them gun owners and call them what they are: gun hobbyists JCMach1 May 2013 #192

Actually the term would be firearms owners. premium May 2013 #193

Someone posting 500 pro-gun posts a month online sure isn't just a hobbyist either. They're a NUT. Electric Monk May 2013 #214

Your opinion premium May 2013 #215

Guess I'm not going to get an answer from you about that movie. nt. premium May 2013 #218

imdb gave it a 6.1/10 but I think I'd give it a 7. nt Electric Monk May 2013 #221

Thanks. premium May 2013 #222

My car has a manual transmission. My rifle is a bolt action. MineralMan May 2013 #196

More efficient at putting bullets in six year old heads n\t Agnosticsherbet May 2013 #202

Because there are thousands, if not millions, dating back about 75 years Mopar151 May 2013 #217

There's a perfectly legitimate need... Hugabear May 2013 #228

I know it's a movie quote but what would make a gun owner buy newmember May 2013 #235

Same reason I write emails instead of letters kudzu22 May 2013 #241

Pretty soon, gun owners will all go out and buy this one!! Sancho May 2013 #250

Your average gun owner isn't going to go out and buy that system, premium May 2013 #252

I bought an Apple II for over $2000 about 30 years ago... Sancho May 2013 #254

Bullshit. premium May 2013 #255

I have a Remington 700..and you're wrong... Sancho May 2013 #268

I own one just to piss you off. Travis_0004 May 2013 #276

The AR-15 is a very easy rifle to modify to better suit the owner... spin May 2013 #277

Kewl story bro! Rex May 2013 #289

Because the government. Iggo May 2013 #301