Summary of Feinstein's Gun Bill coming in January (user search)
       |           

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
June 01, 2024, 04:34:53 AM
News: Election Simulator 2.0 Released. Senate/Gubernatorial maps, proportional electoral votes, and more - Read more

  Talk Elections
  General Politics
  U.S. General Discussion (Moderators: The Dowager Mod, Chancellor Tanterterg)
  Summary of Feinstein's Gun Bill coming in January (search mode)
Pages: [1]
Author Topic: Summary of Feinstein's Gun Bill coming in January  (Read 2943 times)
Beet
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 29,015


« on: December 31, 2012, 11:44:05 AM »

I support this bill, but it'll need the House Republicans' support to pass.
Logged
Beet
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 29,015


« Reply #1 on: December 31, 2012, 01:38:02 PM »

Which aspect of it do you think will lead to a reduction in crime?

All aspects. The harder it is to procure a powerful gun, the less likely that it will be used to commit a crime. For instance, if a mass killer is forced to stop and reload after 10 rounds, they can be taken down while they are reloading, or this may allow time for more people to get away.

As I've said before though, the assault weapons ban would not be the first place I'd go, for both practical and political reasons. There are a lot of things that can be done first. For instance, (1) appoint a director to ATF, (2) close the gun show loophole, (3) improve state level background check databases, (4) Restore gun funding to the National Center for Injury Prevention and Control, (5) allow doctors to survey patients' gun practices during wellness checks, (6) allow Florida pediatricians to offer gun safety tips, and so on. But I do support it (the ban).

Quote
You must be logged in to read this quote.

Soda machines kill, because they are bad for your health. That's why they were removed from many schools. That said, the joys of tasty soda are widely appreciated and undisputed. The reasons why people buy assault weapons are not clear at all.
Logged
Beet
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 29,015


« Reply #2 on: December 31, 2012, 01:52:17 PM »

Another thing is, someone who is tampering with a soda machine or trying to treat a horse, or driving a car for that matter, is taking some positive action to put themselves in danger. People who have never come close to a gun can still be killed with one. That's part of what makes it a public health issue, and not just the concern of those who have them.
Logged
Beet
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 29,015


« Reply #3 on: December 31, 2012, 02:09:36 PM »

Which aspect of it do you think will lead to a reduction in crime?

All aspects. The harder it is to procure a powerful gun, the less likely that it will be used to commit a crime.
Do you know how many people in Maryland were murdered by someone using one of these "powerful guns"?  2.  That is, two.  Do you know how many were murdered with hands and feet? 17 ALMOST NINE TIMES AS MANY!  How about knives? 75!

By this logic, I shouldn't care about those in Sandy Hook because they don't live in Maryland (?). I'm not under the illusion that something that can happen in Arizona, Oregon, California, Virginia, Connecticut, and Colorado can't happen in Maryland.

Quote
You must be logged in to read this quote.
Then why not make it 8? or 3? Do you know how long it takes to reload a magazine?  Not very.  Do you know how many people are killed by that 11th and 12th round in 12 round magazines?  I don't, but I bet it's pretty freaking small.[/quote]

It's not small if you're one of those people. Yes, 10 is an arbitrary number somewhat, but it's better than infinity.

Quote
You must be logged in to read this quote.

But it'll help. And yes, we've got to do something.
Logged
Beet
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 29,015


« Reply #4 on: December 31, 2012, 02:23:39 PM »

By this logic, I shouldn't care about those in Sandy Hook because they don't live in Maryland (?). I'm not under the illusion that something that can happen in Arizona, Oregon, California, Virginia, Connecticut, and Colorado can't happen in Maryland.
Except the numbers concerning the "powerful guns" are the same in all these places.  Very very few people are murdered by rifles, period.  Banning rifles of any stripe is going to restrict millions of regular Americans for the benefit of almost nothing.  It was stupid last time and it's stupid this time.

Not one American flying has been killed by a person who put a bomb in their shoe, yet millions of of regular Americans have to take off our shoes.
Logged
Beet
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 29,015


« Reply #5 on: December 31, 2012, 02:54:08 PM »
« Edited: December 31, 2012, 02:56:08 PM by Beet »

Another thing is, someone who is tampering with a soda machine or trying to treat a horse, or driving a car for that matter, is taking some positive action to put themselves in danger. People who have never come close to a gun can still be killed with one. That's part of what makes it a public health issue, and not just the concern of those who have them.

'kay, how about smoking, then?

What about it? Secondhand smoke is taken quite seriously, even though breathing in secondhand smoke is preferable to even a 0.5% chance of getting shot. Smoking, in general, is taken quite seriously. Every year new smoking bans go into effect. Btw, this thread reminds me that I live in Virginia now.
Logged
Pages: [1]  
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length

Terms of Service - DMCA Agent and Policy - Privacy Policy and Cookies

Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines

Page created in 0.03 seconds with 10 queries.