Peak Oil News and Message Boards

You can own fully automatic weapons made before 1986 with the proper application to the federal government. Very expensive unless you like spending upwards of $20k from collectors. Thus, almost never used in a crime, since the cost pre-selects what sort of people can buy them.

As far as we know the shooter did not modify his guns with anything illegal to turn them into fully automatic rifles but used bump fire stocks to achieve the same practical result.

Imagine what an experienced rifleman could have done taking aimed shots a second apart with ten seconds allowed to change magazines? Ten minutes would give him 450 aimed shots.They can ban and confiscate all the bump stocks and trigger cranks they want and it will not lesson the danger to crowds of people in view of elevated positions.

Cog wrote:Not to mention a registry would in no ways be accurate. Most states do not require you keep any record of private sales and they don't have to go through a FFL. Although Illinois does require I keep a copy of private sales, as soon as I'm a Missouri resident, I'm going to burn them all.

Although there is not an explicit right to privacy in the Constitution, the Supreme Court has derived a generalized one through their reading of the Fourth, Fifth, and Fourteenth Amendments. The creation of a registry of this nature would immediately result in a court challenge to it.

Oh, so that's how big companies can violate your privacy every day! No chance, dude. You will not be able to argue against a registry by citing privacy. There has been no end of interpretation of legislation determining that your right to privacy doesn't exist. If it weren't so, that ex-Equifax CEO would be swinging. Karl Rove would be serving out a life term.

Harvey Weinstein, in the midst of his deep shame, may start it as a means to make good for all of the bad things he has done. Mark Zuckerberg may start it because he realized he has access to the information, and can't continue to look the other way. With such a dearth of accuracy inherent to those kinds of big data lists, for now at least, it will be your standard right wing gun owner who will want protection from winding up on it. Most gun owners don't own assault rifles. Most gun owners don't want a silencer. Most gun owners don't want a bump stock. They are either into hunting or protecting themselves during a foreseeable confrontation. Most gun owners wouldn't be on the list, if it was accurate.

vtsnowedin wrote:A gun nut registry?
Sure first it will be anyone with more then fifty guns. Can't have that, they might use all fifty of them at one time and kill some innocent people. Then there will be a person that losses it and kills a bunch of people even though he only owned twenty guns. He also used thirty round magazines so that must be the problem so we must go to no more then five guns and five round magazines.
Then we will have the person that had just two guns and used one of them to kill ten people one shot at a time but was judged to be mentally unstable.
Then you will have anybody that wants to own a gun to be judged to be mentally unstable because the idiot wants to own and use a gun.

Well, the idea isn't to turn human nature. The idea is to stop mass killing, while paying homage to the Second Amendment. Only the revelation of the knowledge of who is packing the most extreme kinds of weapons and weapon related accessories will do that. You need transparency regarding this within society, so that the people can make the decisions. The number of guns a person owns may be relevant as well, but it may be too problematic in terms of privacy. The list provider would have to get intrafamily transfer of guns correct. It would have to get past people's deliberate attempts at misdirection, by having others officially buy for them. It'd take a while to figure out those, and other, things. And you know, the number of guns considered acceptable, if it came to that, would probably be some average of what non-offensive weapons owners possess. This wouldn't have to be hand wrung over the way that the NRA comes crying to Congress because it wouldn't pose an infringement upon anyone's right to own anything on the list, so the average of whomever bothered to answer a survey might be all that is required. There is only the danger of your credit rating taking a hit if you are more interested in guns than the average gun owner. That is your choice. You weren't born that way.

Genius,

I know mass killings are a hot topic at the moment.

However the much bigger problem is that one ethnic i keep talking about. It's where the highest density of murders takes place.

If you eliminated all mass murders it would not make much difference in the stats. This is a really difficult problem.

It's also a good example of how we let the media grab our attention and lead us around by the nose.

If you considered the 64,000 opioid deaths last year murders committed by those who sold the drugs to the victims ,and I do, I think that is the problem we should be working on.

Newfie wrote:Genius,

I know mass killings are a hot topic at the moment.

However the much bigger problem is that one ethnic i keep talking about. It's where the highest density of murders takes place.

If you eliminated all mass murders it would not make much difference in the stats. This is a really difficult problem.

It's also a good example of how we let the media grab our attention and lead us around by the nose.

Oh, and you don't think that people pattern themselves after each other? Install a change in society, and watch what happens. I alluded to this when I brought up some of the other things that would occur if a gun nut registry were to happen, such as credit rating dings and at will firing of those who suddenly appear upon the registry. In some cases, those changes would prompt opposing action, like re-interpretation of the importance of credit ratings so that a bad credit rating doesn't torpedo a person's ability to prosper economically within society. That might also help that minority you speak of. Addressing how people can be turned down for a job, with no corresponding explanation, because of things like appearing on the registry might as well. Basically, the Right is the side that wants to believe in a dog eat dog world. They enforce the evolutionary paradigm far more than the Left. They do it in the name of religion, but they have perverted Christianity, transforming it from love thy neighbor to outwit or otherwise bamboozle them. Their religion is money. They magnify your fears and enjoy political and economic gain from your reaction. The Left does do it as well, or I couldn't have referenced Harvey Weinstein (predator) in an above post. Look how Hollywood seemingly characterizes every battle that ought to somehow be dramatized as an inner conflict as something that is winnable via Jiu Jitsu. But, for all that, they haven't done it in the classic manner that the NRA has used to keep gun laws from having any teeth.

Or even the hundreds of thousands who die of heart disease and diabetes because the food industry has convinced the masses that carbohydrates are good for you. Killings by so called assault weapons are barely a blip in causes of death. As Newfie has alluded to, but I did not want to bring up due to the shit storm it causes, a small group of inner city blacks waging a drug war with each other, vastly sway the gun death statistics. Solve that problem and our homicide and crime rate goes way down.

Cog wrote:Or even the hundreds of thousands who die of heart disease and diabetes because the food industry has convinced the masses that carbohydrates are good for you. Killings by so called assault weapons are barely a blip in causes of death. As Newfie has alluded to, but I did not want to bring up due to the shit storm it causes, a small group of inner city blacks waging a drug war with each other, vastly sway the gun death statistics. Solve that problem and our homicide and crime rate goes way down.

Don't forget domestic violence or the grand unmentionable, suicide.

]

Cog wrote: As Newfie has alluded to, but I did not want to bring up due to the shit storm it causes, a small group of inner city blacks waging a drug war with each other, vastly sway the gun death statistics. Solve that problem and our homicide and crime rate goes way down.

Or more likely inner city shootings deaths are about to go even higher

The carnage in the inner cities up till now is mainly done by small time drug dealers and regular folks armed with handguns

Just wait until some homie in Chicago figures out he get an ar15 and a bump stock and have a mchine gun.

vtsnowedin wrote:If you considered the 64,000 opioid deaths last year murders committed by those who sold the drugs to the victims ,and I do, I think that is the problem we should be working on.

Yup! Another lawless bunch.

You can look at all kinds of things, the situation in center cities, opine crisis, suicide, obesity etc. Then ask, is there something in common? I believe that their is.

Our society has become pretty sick. It's far too long to make a comprehensive post about all the ills. Many are display in the Political Divide thread.

Unfortunately I don't see any remedy. And that brings up all kinds of ethical and compassion based conundrums. Interesting times, chineese curse!

FWIW, I'm starting to in line towards believing the IS claims that the guy converted to Islam. Not a great theory, but there are few rivals that make any sense.

Did IS claim responsibility after Orlando or the school shooting?

Pretty sure ISIS claimed the Orlando shooter and he himself claimed he was part of ISIS. I don't know whether these self-radicalized guys are in actual communication with ISIS or not. Meaning, I don't believe that some ISIS group in Syria actually planned the attack with a domestic jihadist.

Since our FBI and the LVPD isn't saying boo about a motive, your guess is as good as anyone else's. I still believe this was political rather than personal.

I think it too much a coincidence the alleged connection with casinos. His girlfriend having worked in one and he having been heavily into gambling. So, this has the hallmarks of some personal motive

Or he staged this event in a place where he had the most intimate knowledge of his surroundings. If I were doing something like this, I would not do it in New York or LA since I'm not familiar with those areas. I would say most mass shooters commit their act fairly local to them. The Alexandria baseball field shooter being a recent exception.

evilgenius wrote:Oh, and you don't think that people pattern themselves after each other? Install a change in society, and watch what happens.

A 3 minute video to highlight this very important point

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4Q-bB-qywJ0