What does "gun control" mean at this point?

What does gun control mean to the kids who are going to march on Washington?
What is it that everyone wants? This discussion usually ends before it starts, as with anything gun related.

I am genuinely interested in what people are thinking here.

originally posted by: network dude
What does "gun control" mean at this point?

Not letting it jump around in you're hands while your firing at the target.

a reply to: AugustusMasonicus

that sure was an easy question to answer.

a reply to: network dude


Damn skippy.

Oh, and remember to have proper breath control and don't pull the trigger, squeeze.

the people who yell about gun control this and ban ar that.. are usually the ones who have the least to ZERO amount of knowledge about firearms, and current gun laws in general...

that is why they arent taken seriously

What is it that everyone wants?

Good question.

I made that point to a friend over the weekend: everybody keeps saying "DO SOMETHING!!11!!" and "we're tired of politicians just talking and not doing anything!" yet, don't seem to have any actual ideas what to do.

Other than "background checks" which we already have. And banning the AR-15 platform. Those are the only two I've heard specifically mentioned.

Yea to me it always mean hitting what you aim for and keeping that finger off the trigger before its in use. I guess holstering and drawing without a fumble could be included as well. Safeties are redundant as proper gun control makes them obsolete...all hail the S&W M&P

originally posted by: AugustusMasonicus

originally posted by: network dude
What does "gun control" mean at this point?

Not letting it jump around in you're hands while your firing at the target.

I would not worry too much guys. Broward county has been solidly Democrat for nearly 40 years. They also cannot ban specific firearms in their jurisdiction like the City of Chicago or New York City because State of Florida has preemption in the second amendment.

These kids just need to blow out steam because the sick, disgusting, America hating politicians are taking advantage of their rage and fear in an attempt to , as usual, try and destroy America and everything it stands for. The kids will get lost in their prescription pills and underage drinking like the other average Floridian teenager in a couple more weeks and the traitors to America will be SMH'ing at yet another failed attempt to desecrate the constitution.

I'd honestly start with a huge, unified buy back program, in conjunction with an international contest to create sculptures using the melted gunmetal. Generate money, include community on deciding which sculptures will grace the city. Small step but a start.

Less guns in circulation=less chance of an accident.

Positive from negative, creative action. Focus on creating and unity.

a reply to: AugustusMasonicus
do you have one eye open or both?

originally posted by: Shamrock6

What is it that everyone wants?

Good question.

I made that point to a friend over the weekend: everybody keeps saying "DO SOMETHING!!11!!" and "we're tired of politicians just talking and not doing anything!" yet, don't seem to have any actual ideas what to do.

Other than "background checks" which we already have. And banning the AR-15 platform. Those are the only two I've heard specifically mentioned.

I honestly think it's time to have a deep discussion on this, and have everyone involved LISTEN to each other. If something related to removing some firearm (whatever) is deemed appropriate, and it will save lives, I'm all for it. I don't want some stupid law that will just appease some, but make no difference. We did that with the Brady bill. All it did was make AR's expensive.

The current talk is very abstract. We need to know what people are thinking and why. And if education is the issue, share the knowledge.

a reply to: network dude

I love guns! They're awesome and I'm glad to live in a country where we are free to enjoy them.

That being said, I think there are plenty of people who have access to them who shouldn't.

I wouldn't mind more stringent background checks... As it stands it's way easier to get a gun than a car.

originally posted by: zosimov
I'd honestly start with a huge, unified buy back program, in conjunction with an international contest to create sculptures using the melted gunmetal. Generate money, include community on deciding which sculptures will grace the city. Small step but a start.

Less guns in circulation=less chance of an accident.

Positive from negative, creative action. Focus on creating and unity.

not saying it's a bad idea, but other than reducing the number of guns by voluntary methods, what would this solve?

a reply to: CriticalStinker

would that make criminals not get guns as easy as they do now? Remember, the guy who does his paperwork correctly, and waits his time, usually, isn't the guy who kills folks.

We need to do something that reduces shootings and saves more kids from such an action.

a reply to: network dude

The listening part is where it fails.

People get far too emotional, far too quickly, on both sides of the issue for the conversation to ever seem to get very far. One side immediately wades in with snide comments about guns being phallic extensions and the other side immediately snaps back with "you want all the guns" and then it devolves into shouting and screaming.

Then the majority sits in the middle, checking their Instagram feed while the two extremes throw chairs at each other.

a reply to: network dude

I think that the reduction alone is a goal, but more importantly a redirection of energy from the negative cycle of pro and con into a unified creative endeavor. No, the psycho killers will not relinquish their arms. But the person who has a weapon they are not quite comfortable with, or are unable to store safely might!

I really appreciate the thoughtful discourse and your genuine question about solutions.

ETA: Talking to an interesting professor in Iceland made me think. He mentioned that the very idea of buying a gun for "self-defense" (read, might use this against a human being some day) is foriegn to him. He has 4 hunting rifles which are kept locked up other than for hunting.

The process to obtain a weapon in Iceland is very complex and involves going to the store, picking up paperwork which the police must approve, returning to the store with the initial ok, providing adequate storage at your home for the weapons, getting a visit from the police to approve of the storage, and finally picking up your weapon.

I'm NOT saying ours should be so draconian. I don't think it should be... but perhaps there is a middle ground.

What about enacting a law, that if you are on video shooting someone, you get the electric chair within 5 hours of being arrested and no publicity will be allowed, your name will never be known to the public?

This would take away the need to be "famous" for doing something horrific. And the proof would be in the video.

originally posted by: zosimov
I'd honestly start with a huge, unified buy back program, in conjunction with an international contest to create sculptures using the melted gunmetal. Generate money, include community on deciding which sculptures will grace the city. Small step but a start.

Less guns in circulation=less chance of an accident.

Positive from negative, creative action. Focus on creating and unity.

Accidents happen , And probably should not be thought of in this context.
NO MASS SHOOTING IS DONE BY ACCIDENT. That's why no body wants ban cars because of accidents.

1)Background checks for private sales.
What good is stopping a violent felon from buying a gun at Walmart when they could just walk out and buy one from their neighbor.

2)Ban bump stocks and high capacity magazines