Proud of our Youth !

[Aquarian Sports Cards]

Even the NRA wasn't always anti gun-control. In most of our lifetimes the NRA advocated FOR gun control.

In the 1930s, the NRA helped pass bills that regulated submachine guns and sawed-off shotguns, banned some gun buyers and made gun dealers register with the government. Its cooperation continued following the political and racial assassinations of the 1960s.

In the 1970s, the NRA’s public image began to change after a law-breaking member was killed by an ATF agent. In 1977, it adopted a policy opposing all forms of gun control. Despite this, after the attempt on NRA member President Ronald Reagan’s life, the NRA reluctantly supported the 1994 Brady Bill, which required a waiting period and background checks for handgun purchases. The bill included a 10-year ban on assault weapons. When the ban expired in 2004, the NRA had gained enough political clout to prevent its renewal.

Do a search on the worst mass shootings in US history. Take note of how many occurred after those key dates. Namely 1977 and 2004 the results might or might not shock you.

The NRA being bought and paid for by big business, which is in turn buying and paying for our politicians is the problem, and frankly I don't see that as a political opinion, but maybe I'm being naive.

I'll leave you with this thought, from a former president of the NRA Karl T. Frederick, a 1920 Olympic gold-medal winner for marksmanship:

“I have never believed in the general practice of carrying weapons. I do not believe in the general promiscuous toting of guns. I think it should be sharply restricted and only under licenses.”

So where does the modern NRA attitude come from???

Probably a dumb post to make for someone in business, and my intent isn't to piss off one side or please the other. Merely to call attention to the fact that games are being played and our children are apparently the expendable pawns on the board.

[vintagetoppsguy]

I don’t understand what the NRA has to do with any of this? Until the REAL problem is addressed, these mass shootings – at schools, at movie theaters, at malls, wherever – will continue to happen.

The REAL problem is the individuals involved – not the guns. Reasonable gun owners like myself have been saying for a long time that you don’t need to have an assault rifle to carry out these types of horrific tragedies. The kid yesterday didn’t have an assault rifle. He had a shotgun (just like Kenny has, just like I have) and a .38 revolver (the SAME gun my 89 year old grandmother has for home defense - seriously).

Drunk drivers kill way more people than mass shooters. But when we hear about a drunk driver killing an entire family, we don’t blame the alcohol, we blame the driver. We don’t try and put restrictions on the alcohol, we make the DWI penalties more strict to try and prevent it.

So what’s next? Ban shotguns and .38 revolvers too? Blame the NRA some more? Like I said, these things will keep happening and we’ll all send our thoughts and prayers to the victims and their families over and over and over again. Flags will be lowered to half staff for a few days and then people will forget about it until the next time. Nothing will change. The change will only come when we stop trying to blame the guns and start blaming the individuals who commit these tragedies

Y’all can just keep making your same old talking points, blame the NRA, ban this or that and one day you may even get your way. But that doesn’t get rid of the 300 million guns that are already out there. People who want to commit these types of tragedies will find a way. Again, until the REAL problem is addressed, nothing will change no matter what guns laws are imposed.

Deal with the ones that have mental health issues. They're the REAL problem. When the cops are called to a house 30+ times, there is a mental health issue there. When some kid posts a “Born to Kill” t-shirt on Facebook (the kid yesterday), there is a mental health issue there. These people aren’t hard to spot. They’re quite easy. The problem is nobody wants to do anything about it because we’re too afraid we'll infringe on their rights. Bull crap! Find the ones with mental health issues – no treatment facilities – just lock them up until the day the die.

[Kenny Cole]

David,

I don't disagree with much of what you said, but I sure disagree with some of it. I disagree about the NRA not having anything to do with what's going on. It has a lot to do with it IMO. The NRA leads the charge against closing the gun show loophole, which is the exception that swallows the rule. You go to the right gun dealer at a gun show and you can be a felon, convicted of murder or any other heinous crime, and walk away with a gun THAT DAY. You can be crazy as a run over dog and get a gun that day too. And, of course, anytime that someone who is viewed as a "liberal" gets elected, gun sales go up because the NRA and the gun dealers do their best to exploit what I view as the irrational fear that the government is going to come take all the guns away. None of that makes any sense at all to me.

If you allow your underage kid and his friends to drink at your house and one of those drunk kids leaves your house and kills a family on the way home, its your ass. And it should be. However, if you leave your guns accessible to your kids or their friends, even if you know that they may have mental heath issues, its OK. You are good to go. The NRA is instrumental in letting negligent gun owners get off without repercussions. Legislation can't get passed because the NRA gets it killed. Nothing happens. That doesn't make sense to me either.

I agree that mental illness is a huge problem. Its a problem that we as a society have never addressed very well. In nearly every state, the mental health agencies are among the most underfunded. They don't have the resources or the capacity to address the problem. Here, the "solution" is to dump them out on the street in some city other than the one they came from and let someone else deal with them. That isn't much of a solution.

I disagree that those with a mental illness are always easy to spot. The shooter yesterday had no past history that would put him on the radar screen of either mental health professionals or law enforcement He was part of a church dance group for goodness sake. Sometimes you can spot someone with a problem, but not always. Even the friends of yesterday's shooter didn't see the signs. And if the government overtly starts monitoring everyone's social media posts (which I suspect it already does covertly) and then tries to take action against those who it deems problematic, you have very big First Amendment and Second Amendment issue. Do you or should you lose your right to own a gun because you make disturbing social media posts?

I don't have the answers. But something has to be done. We have to do better by our kids. They shouldn't have to worry about dying when they go to school. The very fact that our kids now have to go through active shooter drills at school is nearly beyond my ability to comprehend.

We can't outlaw cars because they are necessary in nearly every facet of life. But we regulate them. If you speed and get caught you get a ticket. If you don't belt up and get caught, you get a ticket. If you drive drunk and get caught you go to jail. In fact, unlike years past, there is now a great emphasis on publicizing and preventing drunk driving precisely because we, as a society, finally got to the point where we said enough is enough. Do those regulations infringe on my rights? Maybe. But they also make a lot of sense. They hopefully remind not to be a dumbass when I drive and help protect both me and the other drivers on the road. I'm OK with that.

I'm not advocating outlawing guns. Never have, never would. But for God's sake, there is no reason I can think of why we shouldn't at least try to do a better job of regulating both them and the people who own them. Just like voting, I have always thought that gun ownership was both a right AND a responsibility. Particularly now, I feel like the argument about the right to own guns far outweighs the responsibility part. In my estimation, it should be the other way around.

[vintagetoppsguy]

I'm at work today, but I wanted to make some quick comments.

Originally Posted by Kenny Cole

You go to the right gun dealer at a gun show and you can be a felon, convicted of murder or any other heinous crime, and walk away with a gun THAT DAY..

As far as the gun show loophole, I've honestly never heard of what you're describing. A licensed gun dealer isn't going to risk losing their license for a few dollars under the table. On the other hand, a felon (or anybody) can go into a gun show and buy a gun from an individual attending the show without any paperwork. If that's what you meant instead, then I agree that needs to be stopped.

Originally Posted by Kenny Cole

The shooter yesterday had no past history that would put him on the radar screen of either mental health professionals or law enforcement.

As I already stated, this guy posted a pic of a t-shirt (I don't know if he was wearing the shirt or not) on his Facebook page that said "Born to Kill". That is a red flag. He was known for wearing a trench coat. A trench coat in the Texas summer? It was hot as hell here yesterday! That's not a red flag too? Guess who else wore trench coats in the summertime? Sure, he had no past history, but do we wait for them to have a "history" to do something about them?

Originally Posted by Kenny Cole

Do you or should you lose your right to own a gun because you make disturbing social media posts?

YES!

[KMayUSA6060]

*Cracks knuckles in preparation to type... a lot*

Originally Posted by Kenny Cole

I want the gun show loophole to be closed. I don't think anyone should be able to walk in to a gun show, buy a gun, and walk out with it right then without any scrutiny. That is ridiculous in my opinion So are bump stocks and banana clips. That isn't for self-defense and it isn't for hunting. That's just for killing folks. There is no other reason than to shoot faster and with more bullets.

But people with guns can kill other people far more quickly and far more effectively. Therein lies the problem.

Just like every constitutional provision, the 2nd amendment doesn't guarantee you absolute right to own any weapon you want. Why do you need an AR? I have hunted all my life and have never owned, used, or felt I needed, an AR. Obviously I'm missing something.

I don't think anyone is suggesting that the 2nd Amendment be repealed, although if you look at the historical basis for its passage, it seems pretty clear that the primary reason it was passed no longer exists . Be that as it may, I'm certainly not advocating that. I am advocating that we do stuff, like serious background checks, getting rid of the gun show loophole, and that we restrict bump stocks and huge clips. Unlike the NRA, I don't think that's unreasonable. I just want my kids to be safe.

- Most if not all firearms dealers at gun shows are licensed, meaning to purchase a firearm, you have to fill out a 4473, go through the NICS background check process, etc. Also, what mass shooting has been carried out using a gun legally purchased at a gun show? And what is a "serious" background check, compared to the very thorough background check system that is currently in place? What is a banana clip? Do you mean an AR magazine? Would banning those "banana clips" (AR magazines) have prevented Santa Fe? Bump stocks aren't a problem, either. They're incredibly inaccurate, can destroy the guns they're attached to, and can be mimicked very easily using your thumb or household items.

- Yeah, just like an assault buggy (I mean vehicle) plowing through a crowd, or a knife attack against defenseless people, or a bomb attack using an assault pot (I mean a pressure cooker), or a plane using an assault bird (I mean plane). Boston Bombings, 9/11, NYC Home Depot Truck, London's knife attack problem & vehicular terrorism problem, etc.

- What's so bad about an AR15? Mine has never killed a single living thing. I must have gotten lucky and purchased an already-well-trained AR15. In all seriousness, would banning AR15s have prevented Santa Fe? What about the AR15's mechanical components and functionality differs it from any other semi-automatic weapons? You have the freedom to choose not to on an AR15, and I will not advocate to take that freedom away from you. But why, in return, do people advocate to take my RIGHT to own an AR15? Heck, I actually want an AR10 here soon. Helluva lot of fun to shoot, and WAY more powerful than an AR15. Then again, I'm a lawful individual, and would only ever shoot someone or a living thing in self defense with it (unless I take it hunting, but I prefer a classic bolt action for hunting; just a personal preference).

- Actually, you're wrong. There have been several political figures and celebrities who have come out against the 2nd Amendment altogether, pushing for its repeal. The primary purpose of the 2nd Amendment was to protect its citizens against a tyrannical government. That is a timeless purpose, proven true over and over again by people like Hitler, Mao, Kim Jung Un, Stalin, Castro, etc. And please don't bring the NRA into this. Not one single individual that has committed a mass shooting has been a NRA member. The background check system that's currently in place was proposed by the NRA.

Originally Posted by Aquarian Sports Cards

Even the NRA wasn't always anti gun-control. In most of our lifetimes the NRA advocated FOR gun control.

In the 1930s, the NRA helped pass bills that regulated submachine guns and sawed-off shotguns, banned some gun buyers and made gun dealers register with the government. Its cooperation continued following the political and racial assassinations of the 1960s.

In the 1970s, the NRA’s public image began to change after a law-breaking member was killed by an ATF agent. In 1977, it adopted a policy opposing all forms of gun control. Despite this, after the attempt on NRA member President Ronald Reagan’s life, the NRA reluctantly supported the 1994 Brady Bill, which required a waiting period and background checks for handgun purchases. The bill included a 10-year ban on assault weapons. When the ban expired in 2004, the NRA had gained enough political clout to prevent its renewal.

Do a search on the worst mass shootings in US history. Take note of how many occurred after those key dates. Namely 1977 and 2004 the results might or might not shock you.

The NRA being bought and paid for by big business, which is in turn buying and paying for our politicians is the problem, and frankly I don't see that as a political opinion, but maybe I'm being naive.

I'll leave you with this thought, from a former president of the NRA Karl T. Frederick, a 1920 Olympic gold-medal winner for marksmanship:

“I have never believed in the general practice of carrying weapons. I do not believe in the general promiscuous toting of guns. I think it should be sharply restricted and only under licenses.”

So where does the modern NRA attitude come from???

Probably a dumb post to make for someone in business, and my intent isn't to piss off one side or please the other. Merely to call attention to the fact that games are being played and our children are apparently the expendable pawns on the board.

- Proof that they can be reasonable. Sawed-off shotguns are somewhat legal now, with variations being used as home protection weapons. You still have to be 21 to purchase one, though.

- Interestingly enough, the Department of Education was formed in 1979. Mass/School shootings have increased since, if I'm not mistaken. Coincidence?

- The NRA has donated $200M to politicians in the last 20 years. For comparison, unions donated (mostly to Democrats) $1.7B in 2016 ALONE. Planned Parenthood said they are committing, what, $30M to political campaigns this fall ALONE?

- You're right, games are being played, but it isn't by the NRA. None of the proposals spewed by the pro-gun control crowd would have prevented any school shootings. In fact, the proposals by the pro-2A crowd HAVE proven to be effective and preventative - more armed security and the overall hardening of soft targets. Look at the school shooting that occurred in Illinois last week or so. Oh wait, there wasn't one, because an armed resource officer confronted the would-be-school-shooter.

Originally Posted by Kenny Cole

David,

I disagree about the NRA not having anything to do with what's going on. It has a lot to do with it IMO.

I agree that mental illness is a huge problem. Its a problem that we as a society have never addressed very well. In nearly every state, the mental health agencies are among the most underfunded. They don't have the resources or the capacity to address the problem. Here, the "solution" is to dump them out on the street in some city other than the one they came from and let someone else deal with them. That isn't much of a solution.

The very fact that our kids now have to go through active shooter drills at school is nearly beyond my ability to comprehend.

I'm not advocating outlawing guns. Never have, never would. But for God's sake, there is no reason I can think of why we shouldn't at least try to do a better job of regulating both them and the people who own them. Just like voting, I have always thought that gun ownership was both a right AND a responsibility. Particularly now, I feel like the argument about the right to own guns far outweighs the responsibility part. In my estimation, it should be the other way around.

- The NRA has nothing to do with any of these shootings. Nothing. Zip. Zero. Nada. None of the shooters are NRA members, and every single one of the shooters is unlawful, when the NRA advocates for lawful and responsible gun ownership.

- Mental health is a massive problem, but why now? What has changed in society to cause so many kids/people to be diagnosed with mental disorders? My theory is there's a breakdown in our education system. What is taught in schools is detrimental to society. Actual skills such as Home Economics and Woodshop have been scrapped to shove testing subjects down the throats of our youth in order to "beat China". Life lessons and morals have been removed from our schools, with the PC culture taking over. American patriotism is frowned upon. Kids aren't taught to think for themselves, and what's worse, some of the subjects are taught incorrectly to begin with. Some of these kids come from broken families, a problem that stems from failures in government policy (shocker). The cycle is perpetuated over and over again. Not to mention the drug epidemic in this country, which enhances the problem. I believe most if not all the mass/school shooters have been on some sort of anti-depressent/anti-anxiety medicine. Our healthcare system blows (government ran), and is very prescription-happy.

- This is a bit off-topic, but kids back in the day went through nuclear bomb drills. I understand fully that our kids shouldn't have to go through either, but multiple generations have gone through some sort of attack preparation. It never hurts to be prepared. The issue is, action isn't taken to harden the schools in the process nowadays.

Originally Posted by Kenny Cole

22 school shootings in 20 weeks.

- Also, this is false. Did you get this number from CNN?

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Look, blaming the NRA or guns isn't going to prevent the next school shooter. That's a fact. These criminals, by definition, do not follow the laws on the books. The only way to stop a bad guy with a gun is a good guy with a gun, and that is first and foremost what needs to be done - putting more good guys with guns in our schools.

After that, the next step is to look at where the breakdown is in our society that is causing the mental issues. I stated the basics of my opinions above, and will refrain from going into anymore detail as I've already probably exhausted Leon's patience enough.

There are 300+ million guns in this country. If they were the problem, we'd know. Blaming them only takes time away from working on actual, effective solutions to protect our kids.

[Runscott]

I was out at the shooting range today and got to thinking "I wonder how many others in my various hobbies enjoy shooting?" I was just curious. I searched on 'firearms' and this was the most interesting thread I found. I am pretty much only interested in antique .357's that are shooters, so I look for rare collectible guns and then enjoy using them. I'm the same way with pool cues, old Stetsons, etc. - I just like collecting old stuff, and old guns fit in with old baseball equipment, etc., the difference being that I can use the guns.

Also, I love the above post. I would love to add comments to some of the other posts in this thread, but I've had every argument you can imagine regarding guns, and none of them were fun or interesting (my gf hates guns )

[bnorth]

Originally Posted by Runscott

I was out at the shooting range today and got to thinking "I wonder how many others in my various hobbies enjoy shooting?" I was just curious. I searched on 'firearms' and this was the most interesting thread I found. I am pretty much only interested in antique .357's that are shooters, so I look for rare collectible guns and then enjoy using them. I'm the same way with pool cues, old Stetsons, etc. - I just like collecting old stuff, and old guns fit in with old baseball equipment, etc., the difference being that I can use the guns.

Also, I love the above post. I would love to add comments to some of the other posts in this thread, but I've had every argument you can imagine regarding guns, and none of them were fun or interesting (my gf hates guns )

I have not shot them in years but I have a 1954 Beretta 32 ACP and a 1972 Walther PPK/S. I have the original box for the Walther along with the original target they used to test fire the gun at the factory with the guns serial # on it.