Dutch01 Posted June 15, 2016 Report Share Posted June 15, 2016 Agreed. Hopefully sooner than later. Obama has about 6 months left, I think hes gonna be using this time wisely(I hope) Im not particularily a fan but if legislation needs to pass for resolve Id trust his hand moreso than Trump or Hillary. What an awful choice to face, Trump or Hillary. It's like being asked if you want to die by hanging or immolation.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dara Posted June 15, 2016 Report Share Posted June 15, 2016 Does anybody know the difference between a clip and a magazine? I know most news reporters don't know the difference between automatic and semi automatic Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dara Posted June 15, 2016 Report Share Posted June 15, 2016 I appreciate the answers guys. If we can find a way to sell reasonable background checks that would have prevented Mateen from getting his guns, while protecting the existing rights of law abiding citizens, then we'd have progress. I can only speak for myself, but I really think that's all anyone is trying to accomplish here. I almost think that he would have been able to legally purchase in Canada if he wanted to Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AKRISONER Posted June 15, 2016 Report Share Posted June 15, 2016 I almost think that he would have been able to legally purchase in Canada if he wanted to a semi auto with a 5 round magazine...big big difference. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
manitoubass2 Posted June 15, 2016 Report Share Posted June 15, 2016 What an awful choice to face, Trump or Hillary. It's like being asked if you want to die by hanging or immolation.... I dont see a bright future come 2017. The US is gonna be tackling some huge issues in the near future(as if they dont already have enough) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dara Posted June 15, 2016 Report Share Posted June 15, 2016 a semi auto with a 5 round magazine...big big difference. magazine size is the only difference, semi auto is semi auto whether it has a handle and pistol grip or not Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dutch01 Posted June 15, 2016 Report Share Posted June 15, 2016 (edited) I almost think that he would have been able to legally purchase in Canada if he wanted to Not likely. The PAL application asks if you have had a divorce or other significant breakup in the last X years (I forget the exact number). He's divorced, and they typically interview former spouses. She had said he was mentally ill, violent and abusive. That's not likely to get him a pass. Edited June 15, 2016 by Dutch01 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aplumma Posted June 15, 2016 Report Share Posted June 15, 2016 Despite Art's protestations to the contrary, sometimes a question really is "yes" or "no". My question is "Do you believe Omar Mateen should have been able to buy guns legally?" I'm addressing this question to the following members: Art Brian B Rick JoePa OVERCOAt dave524 BITEME.Esq (Sorry if I've missed anyone) If you answer yes, well I don't really know what to say to that. If your answer is no, ask yourself would you support changes to the background check system specifically designed to prevent an individual like Omar Mateen from having been able to buy those guns? Why or why not? You could decline to answer, but that is an answer in itself. A question to answer a question What law did he break that would prevent him from buying the gun? If I called the police and said you have been slapping your wife and they interviewed you and found that you did not break the law. You then went to apply for a career changing security clearance and was denied would you feel justice was done? You have the right to be innocent until proven guilty here. I by no means think that he should have gotten a gun but he should have the right to be innocent till he is convicted by a jury of his peers. Less government is still something I believe in. Art Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aplumma Posted June 15, 2016 Report Share Posted June 15, 2016 a semi auto with a 5 round magazine...big big difference. . The tactical way to shoot is to shoot all but the last bullet drop the mag with one in the chamber 5 or 35 you are already to rock and roll when your target is presented. I don't know about you but I can drop a 14 round 40 cal mag and have the next clip in in less time than it takes for you to shoot 2 bullets. As Lew says it is not the guns it IS the people. Since the guns are readily available already nolaw will correct this. Social help and better support and lines of communication are the only viable answer. Art Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aplumma Posted June 15, 2016 Report Share Posted June 15, 2016 What an awful choice to face, Trump or Hillary. It's like being asked if you want to die by hanging or immolation.... I would laugh but I am faced with the truth of that statement. The last 3 elections have been damned if I do and damned more if I don't. Art Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dutch01 Posted June 15, 2016 Report Share Posted June 15, 2016 A fair questionon. I do not believe the sole measure of competency to own a gun should be a lack of criminal record. we have to prove we are "fit to drive", why should we not also prove we are fit to own guns? In your case, as a law abiding citizen, the "fitness test" would be a minor inconvenience, but once passed you would still have all the Second Amendment rights you currently have. Mateen had made threats to co-workers. He had abused his wife according to her. That should be enough for a much deeper look (at a minimum), if not an outright no. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aplumma Posted June 15, 2016 Report Share Posted June 15, 2016 A fair questionon. I do not believe the sole measure of competency to own a gun should be a lack of criminal record. we have to prove we are "fit to drive", why should we not also prove we are fit to own guns? In your case, as a law abiding citizen, the "fitness test" would be a minor inconvenience, but once passed you would still have all the Second Amendment rights you currently have. Mateen had made threats to co-workers. He had abused his wife according to her. That should be enough for a much deeper look (at a minimum), if not an outright no. But those are not crimes how many times have you said I'm going to kick the driver who cut you offs ass? A meaning less statement said with no conviction. Now let your 5 year old hear it and tell her teacher my daddy's going to kick some guys ass and now you have to clear your name over a useless statement. Some of the most devious people with the darkest thoughts can appear normal history shows us that on almost all of the most horrible criminals. I have done risk assessments on people with a friend of mine who does risk assessment /body guarding and it takes an average of 3 hours to get enough information to start an interviewing process on them. The leg work can take days depending on how long and far the trail is. Sure we need a better system to check out people but 51% of us say no so it will not happen. Art Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dave524 Posted June 15, 2016 Report Share Posted June 15, 2016 Does anybody know the difference between a clip and a magazine? I know most news reporters don't know the difference between automatic and semi automatic Basically a clip is a speedloader device to charge a magazine, be it detachable magazine like a Lee Enfield or built in one like a Garand. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dara Posted June 15, 2016 Report Share Posted June 15, 2016 I was taught that in a clip the bullets are one on top of the other and in a magazine they are staggered. Either way, it holds ammo to be put through a barrel Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AKRISONER Posted June 15, 2016 Report Share Posted June 15, 2016 . The tactical way to shoot is to shoot all but the last bullet drop the mag with one in the chamber 5 or 35 you are already to rock and roll when your target is presented. I don't know about you but I can drop a 14 round 40 cal mag and have the next clip in in less time than it takes for you to shoot 2 bullets. As Lew says it is not the guns it IS the people. Since the guns are readily available already nolaw will correct this. Social help and better support and lines of communication are the only viable answer. Art You are gonna carry 20 magazines? cause at an absolute minimum, thats how many this idiot would have had to of carried...and i can pretty much guarantee he let loose more than 100 rounds. Just a thought. anyone here care to tell me what the definition of insanity is? lol Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dara Posted June 15, 2016 Report Share Posted June 15, 2016 Not likely. The PAL application asks if you have had a divorce or other significant breakup in the last X years (I forget the exact number). He's divorced, and they typically interview former spouses. She had said he was mentally ill, violent and abusive. That's not likely to get him a pass. They ask if you are divorced and they also ask if you have had any breakups lately. If you say yes to the divorce it rests on the ex to ban you from having guns. His wife says he was nuts now but would she have when he applied for a PAL, and they last 5 years, when was his divorce. There is no Doctor check, they can't ask for medical records. I actually think that in Canada it's easier to buy a gun...no waiting/cooling off period either. Once you have a PAL, you have it. My daughter just got her handgun license and they never called her Dad or Mom to ask about any problems, neither with the PAL Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jedimaster Posted June 15, 2016 Report Share Posted June 15, 2016 The part that everyone seems to be missing is this simple fact. There are lots of firearms banned in the US already. There are also restrictions placed on firearms here in Canada. Some more so and some less. Yes Canada allows some firearms that the US does not. Believe it or not. When civilians kill someone with as firearm its either pre meditated, planned, thought about, devised, locations, times equipment etc... or its just a person gone off there rocker in a knee jerk situation like a domestic, fight on the street for no apparent reason etc.. This incident clearly falls into the first category. He went shopping, scoped the place out, bought body armour etc etc.. Anyone that is hell bent on killing people weather or not they are banned from buying a firearm legally can still in ANY country buy one with enough cash. It doesn't matter if you want a pistol or semi automatic rifle you can buy one. However lets just suppose that this psycho couldn't buy one. Then what? He just gives up and calls it a day flips on the TV and watches re runs of Full House? No he is going to go on google and figure out how to make a few pipe bombs, or maybe steal a bull dozer, or a cube van full of fertilizer or who the heck knows what. It is such an ill thought knee jerk reaction after a shooting to say lets ban all the guns because that will prevent people from dying at the hands of a psycho. Yes there should better checks in place to prevent people that shouldn't have guns from getting them. But to ban them from people who go about there day legally without ever killing anyone is a bit retarded in my opinion. The things that should be focused on right now in my eyes are support for those that lost family, those still injured, the background checks should be reviewed, his WIFE put in the slammer for a long time and education and funding put into mental health. That's just my opinion though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hedfish Posted June 15, 2016 Report Share Posted June 15, 2016 All of you saying "no, he shouldn't have been able to buy a gun" do it armed with the post factum knowledge. No reasonable background check would have found anything wrong with the guy prior to the shooting. As far as I know, he was never charged with abuse, he was never admitted in a mental institution, he had no criminal record. "Was investigated in connection to..." sounds scary after the shooting, in reality it probably means that he was a friend of a friend of a relative of some guy suspected to be a terrorist. Probably a lot of people that migrated from Afghanistan, Syria, Iraq, etc. can be (and have been) investigated in connection to terrorists, it doesn't mean all of them should be banned from certain things. That's the problem with most of the shooters - they seem completely normal prior to shootings. I am not saying background checks are completely useless - at the very least they can catch the most obvious cases - but don't expect miracles. Canadian PAL procedures are a good example - they wouldn't catch this guy either. Any "real" background check would take so much time and resources, you would wait years for your PAL license. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dara Posted June 15, 2016 Report Share Posted June 15, 2016 Exactly. We should maybe be a bit better at turning in our friends when they seem to be going off but who can tell. How many people that know of a friend that commits suicide says..yeah, I saw that coming. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
manitoubass2 Posted June 15, 2016 Report Share Posted June 15, 2016 (edited) Exactly. We should maybe be a bit better at turning in our friends when they seem to be going off but who can tell. How many people that know of a friend that commits suicide says..yeah, I saw that coming. Been through it twice. Complete shock, never would have known Been through it with a shooting too and never ever would have expected my friend to murder his own parents Edited June 15, 2016 by manitoubass2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hedfish Posted June 15, 2016 Report Share Posted June 15, 2016 We should maybe be a bit better at turning in our friends when they seem to be going off but who can tell. This is just wishful thinking. For a lot of communities, government/police is an outsider and is considered an enemy. There is no way they would report "one of theirs". Another problem, do you think police doesn't get enough tips from nutjobs like "I think my neighbor is Osama Bin Laden"? Again, it's all about time and resources. There is no way to adequately investigate all leads, so asking for more is kind of pointless. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dutch01 Posted June 15, 2016 Report Share Posted June 15, 2016 All of you saying "no, he shouldn't have been able to buy a gun" do it armed with the post factum knowledge. You are correct. Now that we are armed with that knowledge, the prudent thing to do would be to use that knowledge try to prevent another occurrence. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dara Posted June 15, 2016 Report Share Posted June 15, 2016 You are correct. Now that we are armed with that knowledge, the prudent thing to do would be to use that knowledge try to prevent another occurrence. Can you please tell us how? Without restricting a law abiding persons freedom Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dutch01 Posted June 15, 2016 Report Share Posted June 15, 2016 (edited) Can you please tell us how? Without restricting a law abiding persons freedom First, we can't talk about how to achieve something without first agreeing we want to achieve it. So far, I don't hear any Republicans saying there's even a problem. Second, I am not an expert on gun control or public policy. I recognize this and defer to those with more experience. Perhaps an expanded background check system would help. Perhaps we need to go further. But we can't even discuss options because Republicans have their fingers in their ears while singing Mary had a little lamb. In my opinion doing nothing is not an option unless you actually want more massacres. And in my opinion, the rights of the 49 not to be murdered outweigh the rights of Mateen to have guns. So if you're going to err, I would suggest it's better to err on the side of the victims than the perp. Edited June 15, 2016 by Dutch01 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aplumma Posted June 15, 2016 Report Share Posted June 15, 2016 You are gonna carry 20 magazines? cause at an absolute minimum, thats how many this idiot would have had to of carried...and i can pretty much guarantee he let loose more than 100 rounds. Just a thought. anyone here care to tell me what the definition of insanity is? lol The definition of insanity is not being in touch with reality. It is thinking that things will change just because you think they should. It is when the masses and the odds of change are extremely slim however hard you continue to press the issues with no hope of results in the real world. I actually carry at least 20 mags to the range for my assorted pistols and rifles. This is a foreign and abstract thought to you because of your culture, I am glad of that. It took me awhile to get used to dropping a couple hundred bucks to make holes in paper and loud noises for practice. It however is the only way I have the confidence that I am a responsible gun owner and an excellent shot. To me a legally owned and maintained gun is a right that I am entitled to as much so as you feel you are entitled to drive a car. If you want to be frightened of something that is going to kill someone quicker than a gun you should see my collection of race bikes. lol Art Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now