Gun Control & RKBA

benEzra

(12,148 posts)

171. That is laughable.

Mon Jul 25, 2016, 08:19 PM

Jul 2016

"Say a capacity of 3 rounds for long guns and 6 for pistols."

That is laughable. Rifles holding 15+ rounds have been mainstream on the civilian market since the 1860s. A 3-round limit would be like setting a 15 mph speed limit on the Interstates, or banning all abortions after 3 weeks. It's patently ridiculous.

As to efficacy, compliance with Sunnyvale's over-10-round confiscation law was zero. Compliance with the NY SAFE Act is estimated at 5%. Compliance with Australia's ban is estimated at 25%. All your proposed law would do would be to drive the legitimate market underground; you simply cannot lock up 100 million people.

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

183 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

How to stop gun proliferation in the US [View all] discntnt_irny_srcsm Jul 2016 OP

So just accept that 30,000 people will die from gun violence guillaumeb Jul 2016 #1

Thanks for responding discntnt_irny_srcsm Jul 2016 #2

If I got a brain tumor, I'd take some pretty goddamned agressive therapy... ret5hd Jul 2016 #4

yes, but the vast majority of them would gejohnston Jul 2016 #6

And a tumor or a murder is a problem discntnt_irny_srcsm Jul 2016 #13

Japan's suicides prefer rope and high places. And its rate is far greater than ours. Eleanors38 Jul 2016 #140

Hopefully we can cut that way down Duckhunter935 Jul 2016 #3

Both ideas would help immensely. Good ideas. eom guillaumeb Jul 2016 #10

ending the drug war will do wonders, gejohnston Jul 2016 #5

The so-called drug war IS a failure. guillaumeb Jul 2016 #11

why do so many gun owners feel this need to claim they have guns for personal protection? gejohnston Jul 2016 #38

I've noticed that gun control proponents TeddyR Jul 2016 #41

Two points: guillaumeb Jul 2016 #51

That sounds like a "Red Dawn" fantasy scenario. gejohnston Jul 2016 #74

First, your alternate reality scenario in Orlando guillaumeb Jul 2016 #99

no, it is based on local reports and what witnesses described. gejohnston Jul 2016 #149

"Red Dawn?" How about good sense dawning? Until police arrive, YOU ARE the first line of defense. Eleanors38 Jul 2016 #142

What I also said was.......... guillaumeb Jul 2016 #144

"Why no response to this?" beevul Jul 2016 #148

Can you link to the "NRA talking points" list Duckhunter935 Jul 2016 #151

Theres a whole lot of this going on... beevul Jul 2016 #152

Sorry, but you persist with your misunderstanding... Eleanors38 Jul 2016 #160

You state that, in your view, the chief reason for carrying is self defense. guillaumeb Jul 2016 #163

Error in this... Eleanors38 Jul 2016 #167

Great, we agree on one thing. Let us try for another. guillaumeb Jul 2016 #169

The same. Eleanors38 Jul 2016 #178

What methods would be used? guillaumeb Jul 2016 #179

Who knows? Fertilizer bombs, lack powder bombs, vehicles, arson w/ accelerant, machete... Eleanors38 Jul 2016 #180

People are creative discntnt_irny_srcsm Jul 2016 #181

My firearms are EXACTLY like that: The Green Manalishi Jul 2016 #121

Gandhi and MLK would agree. Eleanors38 Jul 2016 #143

Suicides and accidents aren't gun violence Press Virginia Jul 2016 #8

Is this an attempt to minimize the violence that is caused by guns? guillaumeb Jul 2016 #12

Only if you change the definition of the word violence Press Virginia Jul 2016 #14

And so, in the spirirt of your reply: guillaumeb Jul 2016 #15

So we're abandoning the actual English language now? Press Virginia Jul 2016 #17

You might be abandoning the language: guillaumeb Jul 2016 #21

Again with the WHO? I guess an actual dictionary Press Virginia Jul 2016 #23

Two citations to support my contention vs. none for you. guillaumeb Jul 2016 #25

Two citations from the WHO, which has redefined Press Virginia Jul 2016 #26

Your citations do not refute mine. guillaumeb Jul 2016 #33

Only if you believe the WHO to be an authority Press Virginia Jul 2016 #35

Do you think that suicides go away if guns are banned? TeddyR Jul 2016 #42

Blaming the guns is just a means to ignore the real problem Press Virginia Jul 2016 #49

Nice deflection. guillaumeb Jul 2016 #53

How does one use force or threat of force in an intentionally voluntary act? Press Virginia Jul 2016 #57

Here is what I said: guillaumeb Jul 2016 #59

Suicide is a voluntary intentional act. Violence is the use of force or threat of force Press Virginia Jul 2016 #61

Apparently you have convinced yourself. guillaumeb Jul 2016 #62

Actually the 300+yr old standard definition of the words, in the English language, convinced me Press Virginia Jul 2016 #63

Standard definition? guillaumeb Jul 2016 #64

Now look up suicide...see if you can figure out how you force a voluntary act Press Virginia Jul 2016 #65

Please reread the response. guillaumeb Jul 2016 #68

I don't see where you've provided the Oxford definition for suicide Press Virginia Jul 2016 #73

As I pointed out, I used the CDC definition. guillaumeb Jul 2016 #97

IOWs, you abandoned the 300 year old standard English definition to embrace Press Virginia Jul 2016 #98

No. What is happening here is that gun owners feel the need to minimize guillaumeb Jul 2016 #104

Because violence and suicide are completely different things Press Virginia Jul 2016 #106

How about asking whether the choice people may make to kill themselves with a gun jmg257 Jul 2016 #56

its their life and their choice. Calling it violence is a dishonest means to inflate Press Virginia Jul 2016 #60

Yep, done on purpose Duckhunter935 Jul 2016 #67

Is a hanging rope violence? Duckhunter935 Jul 2016 #27

According to the WHO it is Press Virginia Jul 2016 #29

Suicide is violence directed against the self. guillaumeb Jul 2016 #30

So hanging isn't violence? Press Virginia Jul 2016 #36

Thats the key question. beevul Jul 2016 #46

Maybe the World Health Organization should clear the matter up Press Virginia Jul 2016 #48

Who'd thunk the notion of violence was so goddam tactile & stylish? Eleanors38 Jul 2016 #145

Do guns really cause violence? ileus Jul 2016 #79

Of course they do discntnt_irny_srcsm Jul 2016 #87

My guns must all be defective Duckhunter935 Jul 2016 #88

All my guns are peace loving pacifist... ileus Jul 2016 #89

You could have just said "gun control or nothing". beevul Jul 2016 #16

I say "all of the above". guillaumeb Jul 2016 #18

Don't get me wrong... discntnt_irny_srcsm Jul 2016 #22

All true. But a gun does make violence easier. Especially mass killings. guillaumeb Jul 2016 #24

Rare for now Duckhunter935 Jul 2016 #28

And I repeat myself, at the risk of seeming rude: guillaumeb Jul 2016 #31

So why the big call to ban rifles? Duckhunter935 Jul 2016 #40

All rifles or certain types? guillaumeb Jul 2016 #54

Considering even experts miss Duckhunter935 Jul 2016 #66

When hunting ducks, if you miss the first shot, guillaumeb Jul 2016 #69

I do not hunt Duckhunter935 Jul 2016 #71

The "it can/will never happen" argument has been used guillaumeb Jul 2016 #95

So what is your big plan? You must have one then. Duckhunter935 Jul 2016 #110

Australia is not a police state. Neither is Canada. guillaumeb Jul 2016 #118

Those other countries did not have our numbers of weapons Duckhunter935 Jul 2016 #124

That is laughable. benEzra Jul 2016 #171

What is not laughable is 30,000 gun deaths each year. guillaumeb Jul 2016 #172

Less than 200 murders/year involve "assault weapons". Not 30,000. benEzra Jul 2016 #173

Off target/point. guillaumeb Jul 2016 #174

You were the one who proposed a ridiculous capacity limit benEzra Jul 2016 #182

I need the same number of bullets as any member of the President's security detail Press Virginia Jul 2016 #86

"...why would you need a rifle with a capacity of more than 2-3 bullets? " beevul Jul 2016 #77

No. It might speak to a gun owner's psychological desire, guillaumeb Jul 2016 #100

Thankfully, we live in a society where there is no 'department of needs'... beevul Jul 2016 #136

Is gun ownership a matter of desire? guillaumeb Jul 2016 #141

Its a choice. beevul Jul 2016 #147

But in choosing, are gun owners contributing, even unintentionally, guillaumeb Jul 2016 #153

As usual, thats the WRONG question. beevul Jul 2016 #154

No, the answer to the question is the problem for you. guillaumeb Jul 2016 #155

How about you stick to the topic that you set - gun OWNERSHIP. beevul Jul 2016 #156

As long as you mentioned it....... guillaumeb Jul 2016 #161

My pleasure. beevul Jul 2016 #183

Have you even been in the same location where someone was shooting a gun Press Virginia Jul 2016 #85

I have owned and shot guns. guillaumeb Jul 2016 #101

Absolutely. Which makes me wonder why you would think now more than 3 rounds Press Virginia Jul 2016 #102

If you need more than three rounds in a room guillaumeb Jul 2016 #105

Really, Dirty Harry? Press Virginia Jul 2016 #107

No need to be Dirty Harry with a shotgun. guillaumeb Jul 2016 #109

I see you've never heard of a home invasion or multi person burglaries Press Virginia Jul 2016 #113

Are you prepared for nuclear war? guillaumeb Jul 2016 #119

Has a nuclear war ever broken into a home or attempted to rape anyone? Press Virginia Jul 2016 #125

Shotguns, etc. Straw Man Jul 2016 #157

You're asking this of someone who likely favors the MA AG plan... discntnt_irny_srcsm Jul 2016 #158

How many are attacked by 4 or more...... guillaumeb Jul 2016 #162

How many attacked by 4 or more is enough? discntnt_irny_srcsm Jul 2016 #164

Your side brought up the "four or more" argument. guillaumeb Jul 2016 #165

re: "...the "four or more" argument." discntnt_irny_srcsm Jul 2016 #166

Three does seem to be a more common number. Straw Man Jul 2016 #168

More on home invasions: guillaumeb Jul 2016 #170

And even more. Straw Man Jul 2016 #175

Both types of occurences are extremely rare. guillaumeb Jul 2016 #176

Right. Straw Man Jul 2016 #177

IIRC I read where one person broke in... discntnt_irny_srcsm Jul 2016 #111

Oh commmme onnnn. Next you'll tell us this happens to trained professionals too Press Virginia Jul 2016 #114

Professionals???? No never! discntnt_irny_srcsm Jul 2016 #115

Ha Press Virginia Jul 2016 #116

After guns are banned... beevul Jul 2016 #45

What are the chances for any one person to be killed by a terrorist in the US? guillaumeb Jul 2016 #55

Explain to me how the answer is relevant... beevul Jul 2016 #72

Because this is your post that I responded to: guillaumeb Jul 2016 #96

Yes it is. And this is how you responded... beevul Jul 2016 #135

There is a more bad blood in the world than you can possibly imagine discntnt_irny_srcsm Jul 2016 #32

True, but a gun makes committing violence easier. guillaumeb Jul 2016 #34

"True, but..." discntnt_irny_srcsm Jul 2016 #37

I enjoy your posts TeddyR Jul 2016 #43

I second TeddyR's remarks. Eleanors38 Jul 2016 #146

Sure, YOU say it, but where is the focus of the gun control movement? beevul Jul 2016 #47

I have never stated that all, or most gun owners commit violence. guillaumeb Jul 2016 #58

So you must admit Duckhunter935 Jul 2016 #70

You stating it, was never necessary. beevul Jul 2016 #75

I don't consider suicide to be violence, which 2/3rd's of that 30,000 are. n/t Waldorf Jul 2016 #39

That is your personal opinion. guillaumeb Jul 2016 #52

About 42,000 people will die of pancreatic cancer... Jerry442 Jul 2016 #7

I wouldn't be gleeful about it either, my wife has cancer discntnt_irny_srcsm Jul 2016 #19

drug war: ban jonno99 Jul 2016 #9

bans no...help yes! discntnt_irny_srcsm Jul 2016 #20

Exactly! Jailing non-violent offenders is just nuts imho. Work programs, jonno99 Jul 2016 #44

"Its time to end the war on drugs and spend that money helping those with addiction problems." pablo_marmol Jul 2016 #50

So we just smile and accept murder and mayhem on an industrial scale. Agnosticsherbet Jul 2016 #76

OTOH pursuing useful solutions to violence might be an idea discntnt_irny_srcsm Jul 2016 #78

You could focus on non-gun methodology. beevul Jul 2016 #80

I am not anti-gun. Agnosticsherbet Jul 2016 #81

Did someone say they couldn't be? beevul Jul 2016 #82

guns are highly regulated gejohnston Jul 2016 #83

Dairy products are more regulated than cars, and both Agnosticsherbet Jul 2016 #93

So 20,000 plus state and federal laws mean what? discntnt_irny_srcsm Jul 2016 #94

The Brookings Institute Debunked Tha NRA claim in 2002. Agnosticsherbet Jul 2016 #128

"that work" being the operative words discntnt_irny_srcsm Jul 2016 #131

I fixed it, thanks, and the claim is still wrong. Agnosticsherbet Jul 2016 #132

I appreciate the correction discntnt_irny_srcsm Jul 2016 #133

complete bullshit gejohnston Jul 2016 #150

I appologize for mistaking you for an anti-gunner. beevul Jul 2016 #84

Be surprised if you get an answer Duckhunter935 Jul 2016 #90

Well, I also expect, any day now... discntnt_irny_srcsm Jul 2016 #91

There absolute illogical argument that registration is anti-gun Agnosticsherbet Jul 2016 #92

And how many on DU are calling for the oneshooter Jul 2016 #108

That has nolthing to do with this discussion. Agnosticsherbet Jul 2016 #122

Yes it does, you just do not like it Duckhunter935 Jul 2016 #127

Your aim is a straw man. DU members do not pass legislation Agnosticsherbet Jul 2016 #129

Not to be contrary but... discntnt_irny_srcsm Jul 2016 #112

Not without law. oneshooter Jul 2016 #117

Not with the law either discntnt_irny_srcsm Jul 2016 #120

I do not have to register my car to OWN it Duckhunter935 Jul 2016 #126

Thats like...your opinion man. beevul Jul 2016 #134

Do you still claim you aren't anti-gun? N/T beevul Jul 2016 #137

It is a fact nit a claim Agnosticsherbet Jul 2016 #138

No, its a claim, with lots of proof contradicting it. beevul Jul 2016 #139

In the end, everyone dies. JonathanRackham Jul 2016 #103

Maybe, but there are priorities discntnt_irny_srcsm Jul 2016 #123

!!! pablo_marmol Jul 2016 #130

make it a red shirt beergood Jul 2016 #159