IHOPSkins Posted June 13, 2016 Share Posted June 13, 2016 (edited) ...... what is the point of a watch list if we cannot factor that in to things like firearm purchases?...... Word But the mechanics need to be transparent.....and correctable/updatable without an act of Congress If the IRS can Bias approval for conservative groups.....so can any other government organization can bias vs Your Gun rights Edited June 13, 2016 by IHOPSkins 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Renegade7 Posted June 13, 2016 Share Posted June 13, 2016 (edited) So train them. Who said not to train them? Not the NRA. I don't advocate anyone being handed a gun without training. My mom used to work in DC Public schools and had to bring her own school supplies with her own money to fill gaps. You will not get me to support allocating resources to giving SWAT training to school employees with the current state of our public school system. Get more cops / private security in schools, and stop asking people to do things they should not have to be doing. Edited June 13, 2016 by Renegade7 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Commander PK Posted June 13, 2016 Share Posted June 13, 2016 Peter I'm on my phone so it's hard to quote, but here is my general response to that last post. For me it's not too hard to figure out that somebody who wants to kill a bunch of people with an AR-15 would go a place where the likelihood of armed opposition is slim to none, and a uniformed cop with a .40 or 9mm is no match for that kind of weaponry unless he gets the drop on the perp. I still know I'd take my chances with the gun over without the gun. And I'm not Rambo Renegade, but I can hold my own. You would want me on your side in a gun fight. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheGreatBuzz Posted June 13, 2016 Share Posted June 13, 2016 How exactly would we track ammo? I'm interested in the proposed logistics of this. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Renegade7 Posted June 13, 2016 Share Posted June 13, 2016 Word But the mechanics need to be transparent.....and correctable/updatable without an act of Congress If the IRS can Bias approval for conservative groups.....so can any other government organization can bias vs Your Gun rights I agree with transparency and allowing an agency to do what they gotta do. Somebody has to be able to look at what the DoJ is doing and making sure it isn't going too far. Again, I'm not sure where swearing allegiance to terrorist groups fall under 1st amendment, but they should not be able to get a firearm if DoJ is reviewing it, or especially if its confirmed. Our focus on protecting people's rights is a double-edge sword all day. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
twa Posted June 13, 2016 Share Posted June 13, 2016 I side with Renegade on ammo limits and registration being a more productive track than the guns themselves. Why does a civilian need enough ammo for his AR-15 to take down 100 people? ask Sisko, I think he said he buys 1,000's of rounds ....you can easily go thru 500 at the range ect how will you track it?....require them to turn in used brass? or simply limit amount of each purchase?(which is easily bypassed) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bacon Posted June 13, 2016 Share Posted June 13, 2016 (edited) How exactly would we track ammo? I'm interested in the proposed logistics of this.California actually tried to pass this and it fell through. Here's a very brief look into it:http://abc7.com/news/city-council-votes-to-track-ammo-sales-electronically/411410/ There are some major holes in this, but it's what was proposed. Edited June 13, 2016 by Bacon Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PeterMP Posted June 13, 2016 Share Posted June 13, 2016 (edited) So train them. Who said not to train them? Not the NRA. I don't advocate anyone being handed a gun without training. The NRA has a history of supporting laws, like the gun show loop hole that prevents states from making sure people have a training to use a gun when they buy one. Edited June 13, 2016 by PeterMP Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Commander PK Posted June 13, 2016 Share Posted June 13, 2016 (edited) How exactly would we track ammo? I'm interested in the proposed logistics of this.I don't know that this would actually stop anything, unless you start restricting the sales of ammunition...which is something I could not get behind.To what end would you track ammo? This guy with no criminal record just bought 1000 rounds of .223. We now need to "watch" him closer? With what resources? Edited June 13, 2016 by Painkiller Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Renegade7 Posted June 13, 2016 Share Posted June 13, 2016 I still know I'd take my chances with the gun over without the gun. And I'm not Rambo Renegade, but I can hold my own. You would want me on your side in a gun fight. I will keep that in mind, and emphasize that you are one person in a country of over 300 million. That is not a solution. When you get a chance, check out my response you your idea of training teachers. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PeterMP Posted June 13, 2016 Share Posted June 13, 2016 Peter I'm on my phone so it's hard to quote, but here is my general response to that last post. For me it's not too hard to figure out that somebody who wants to kill a bunch of people with an AR-15 would go a place where the likelihood of armed opposition is slim to none, and a uniformed cop with a .40 or 9mm is no match for that kind of weaponry unless he gets the drop on the perp. I still know I'd take my chances with the gun over without the gun. And I'm not Rambo Renegade, but I can hold my own. You would want me on your side in a gun fight. It sounds like his over riding concern was he wanted to kill gay people. The over riding concern of the Columbine shooters was that they wanted kill their classmates. I believe the over riding concern of the Oregon college shooter was he wanted to kill his teacher. The number one issue is that you think rationally, killers don't. You've also gone from an armed security guard to enough armed security guards to kill somebody with an AR-15 or an equal weapon. Where does it end? The problem becomes everybody figuring out who is on whose side in a situation where multiple people have guns, especially if laws don't require good training. You're in a night club with your gun and a shooting starts. You're well trained, but is the person 10 ft behind you with their gun well trained too? 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Captain Wiggles Posted June 13, 2016 Share Posted June 13, 2016 nobody has a gun inside a club. Depends on what sate you live in. Here in NC if you have a Conceal permit you can bring your gun into bars, clubs, and restaurants as long as the owner/leasee approves. So unless there's a sign saying no guns allowed your good. Even if a sign is present just ask the owner, they say yes, your good. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Commander PK Posted June 13, 2016 Share Posted June 13, 2016 Guns and alcohol don't mix. I think the solution is more armed security with access to heavier weaponry if needed. 3 or 4 cops watching access points with relatively quick access to shotguns and rifles if needed. You won't save everyone but you could prevent a Orlando style massacre. For the record not only is it restricted...but I never carry when I know I will be drinking. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheGreatBuzz Posted June 13, 2016 Share Posted June 13, 2016 nobody has a gun inside a club. Plaxico and Talib say hi! For the record not only is it restricted...but I never carry when I know I will be drinking. Me either. That's just stupid. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PeterMP Posted June 13, 2016 Share Posted June 13, 2016 Guns and alcohol don't mix. I think the solution is more armed security with access to heavier weaponry if needed. 3 or 4 cops watching access points with relatively quick access to shotguns and rifles if needed. You won't save everyone but you could prevent a Orlando style massacre. For the record not only is it restricted...but I never carry when I know I will be drinking. For every nightclub in the US? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Captain Wiggles Posted June 13, 2016 Share Posted June 13, 2016 Guns and alcohol don't mix. I think the solution is more armed security with access to heavier weaponry if needed. 3 or 4 cops watching access points with relatively quick access to shotguns and rifles if needed. You won't save everyone but you could prevent a Orlando style massacre. For the record not only is it restricted...but I never carry when I know I will be drinking. Who's paying for this armed security force? The club owner? City of Greensboro last year tried to pass a law that required club owners to have armed security at establishments that had a recent history of violence. Take a guess how that went? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Renegade7 Posted June 13, 2016 Share Posted June 13, 2016 California actually tried to pass this and it fell through. Here's a very brief look into it: http://abc7.com/news/city-council-votes-to-track-ammo-sales-electronically/411410/ There are some major holes in this, but it's what was proposed. I don't like DC's either, but one bullet sounds like preventing someone from buying ammo for a firearm they don't have registered under their name. I like that one. http://smartgunlaws.org/ammunition-regulation-in-washington-d-c/ Looking around it seem impractical to actually mark the bullets themselves. New York has pretty decent rules in place for keeping track of ammo sold between dealers (including serial numbers for each pack of bullets): http://smartgunlaws.org/ammunition-regulation-in-new-york/ Establishing that information as not being public record is something I like as well. It should be up to each state to be able to see dynamically guns and ammo being purchased then compare to warning signs and watch lists from other states and jurisdictions. Its a start, because it doesn't feel like anyone is talking to anyone about what anyone is doing right now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Commander PK Posted June 13, 2016 Share Posted June 13, 2016 For every nightclub in the US? that would be up to the nightclub. I think if you are concerned your patrons could be targets of a deranged person...paying a few off duty cops to watch the access points of your business would provide reasonable piece of mind. Who's paying for this armed security force? The club owner? City of Greensboro last year tried to pass a law that required club owners to have armed security at establishments that had a recent history of violence. Take a guess how that went? Well the consumer has a decision to make at that point. Attend the club with no security, or the one with enhanced security, OR don't go out at all and drink at home. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Captain Wiggles Posted June 13, 2016 Share Posted June 13, 2016 that would be up to the nightclub. If that's the case their not going to do it. It's just to expensive to hire that much security for every event. Especially in todays market were most club owners are already struggling to make a profit. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Commander PK Posted June 13, 2016 Share Posted June 13, 2016 If that's the case their not going to do it. It's just to expensive to hire that much security for every event. Especially in todays market were most club owners are already struggling to make a profit. Well...it's like I said then. The consumer has a decision to make. If people care enough about their safety the market will sort out this problem. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Captain Wiggles Posted June 13, 2016 Share Posted June 13, 2016 Well the consumer has a decision to make at that point. Attend the club with no security, or the one with enhanced security, OR don't go out at all and drink at home. You mean to tell me men and women won't go to a establishment were they don't feel safe? Say it ain't so Captain Obvious? Like I said it's a problem of cost not of desire to protect your customers and establishment. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Commander PK Posted June 13, 2016 Share Posted June 13, 2016 Put simply, if people are concerned about going to a club where security is lax...they won't go. If enough people don't go...the club goes out of business. So the point is "too expensive" isn't going to fly if patrons stop showing up. The owner may have to reevaluate how he allocates his funds or find another business to get involved in. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Renegade7 Posted June 13, 2016 Share Posted June 13, 2016 You mean to tell me men and women won't go to a establishment were they don't feel safe? Say it ain't so Captain Obvious? Like I said it's a problem of cost not of desire to protect your customers and establishment. That's a tough one that needs a middle ground. I can see the government wanting that as a requirement, and the club owner trying to make ends meet. Part of me wants to say if a club is making so little money they cannot afford armed security to protect their patrons, they should be out of business anyway. I know, that sounds harsh as hell, and would want the government to help out some way when they can, like the ability to write that off on taxes or something. Hell, make it a tax incentive to have armed personnel at your establishment. "Normal" has changed, gotta adjust. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Captain Wiggles Posted June 13, 2016 Share Posted June 13, 2016 That's a tough one that needs a middle ground. I can see the government wanting that as a requirement, and the club owner trying to make ends meet. Part of me wants to say if a club is making so little money they cannot afford armed security to protect their patrons, they should be out of business anyway. I know, that sounds harsh as hell, and would want the government to help out some way when they can, like the ability to write that off on taxes or something. Hell, make it a tax incentive to have armed personnel at your establishment. "Normal" has changed, gotta adjust. Subsidies for club owners? I'm sure that will go over well. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Commander PK Posted June 13, 2016 Share Posted June 13, 2016 Subsidies for club owners? I'm sure that will go over well. Well if this is not a good reasonable solution what is? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts