This is a difficult issue for this country. I do believe change is coming and restrictions will be implemented. I'm one that doesn't really worry and am not afraid of some reasonable restrictions, including mag capacity and certain "style" restrictions. I'm probably an outlier on this, but.

With ya Dave. I have said all along that if the gun side...and that is my side....stands and says its all or nothing they need to be ready for nothing. There are reasonable restrictions that I can live with.

Gents there are already 30000 plus gun laws on the books..
As former dealer i can tell you the system is flawed! In fact and its a joke ..i testified about the first hand experiences. I had in a sub committee ..ill post more on this latter.... its guns and mags that are not the problem, ..

Gun, I agree that they are not the sole problem and maybe not even the main problem, but I believe the mags can and do contribute to higher casualties in certain situations than would likely occur if they were not available. Of course, they will always be available to a reasonably large degree because of the existing inventory in the hands of the public, but, something needs to limit the continuing retail availability.

Pot is illegal ... the war on drugs didnt work.
The problem is two fold..
First is a secular culture and a do whatever you want attitude
.kids dont matter and are left to raise themselves. Simplistic i know but true. Therethe is no time for a family unit nor the moral fortitude to even try to make it happen.
Second is the very flawed system introduced by the brady bunch that was flawed from the start... its not the guns or mags. . It never has been.. its been proven time and time again..
When im on a real key board ill have more to say

As a good law abiding, tax paying citizen, I take the "Shall not be infringed" statement pretty serious. If a reasonable amount of restrictions would appease them, and they would leave it at that I could live with it. My gut feeling is that is not the case. If it becomes an "all or nothing stance", compromise would be better in my opinion.

Oddly...I agree with everything that was just said in all the posts. HMMM maybe we are all closer to being together than the NRA would have us believe.

Ill post facts and options after christmas from a real computer ... a vald and worthy debate ... base it on facts.. emotion driven arguments got us here to begin with.. factual data will get us through the it.... im done with a phone tonight

Basic root cause analysis tells us the problem...and its not the guns or mags.

Our govt should be introduced to a fishbone or a 5-why sometime.

Agreed, to a degree. But, I believe mag capacity can and does contribute to higher casualties, and this too is part of the overall concern.

I don't think that there is any appreciable difference in lethality between a 30 round mag and 3 10 round mags in these attacks on unarmed people. How long does it take you to change mags? I think that is a talking point that is without substance and a way to start concessions from our side that leads us to a slippery slope, which ends in things you DO care about disappearing.

Good point, HB.

It takes seconds to change a mag and if you had to change a mag three or four times to get 30 rounds off, that could lead to a number of times that a defender could get the upper hand while the intruder was incapable of responding. Sure, it's not much. But let me ask you this. If you were the teacher and had the ability to respond, who you prefer to face the guy with 30 continuous rounds or someone who had to take the time to reach into his coat, grab another mag (three different times) and reload. My guess is this. If that defender was defending your child, you'd prefer the latter.

Personally when i think of "ASSAULT WEAPONS" I think of Class III (NFA) Suppressors, Machine Guns SBS/SBRs etc as "ASSAULT WEAPONS".......not sure where the media got there definition at

How long does it take to change mags?...longer than it takes not to.

No appreciable difference...guessing some people who have faced this type of tragedy would disagree.

An asualt rifle is any rifle being shot at you!


So much to say about this... and i will.

Emotionally driven b.s. is driving this train with zero supporting data

I agree with Keith... it's not about guns or mags... and will toss in my .02's worth... the discussion should be about mental illness.

Every one of the mass shootings that has taken place in the past decade has involved a shooter who was mentally unstable.

Ever since the legal standard for involuntary commitment was tightened back in the Reagan era (OMB Dave Stockman wanted to reduce medicaid spending for in-patient services and so had HHS change the threshold for qualifying for commitment) to the "danger to him/herself or others" and subsequent move away from in-patient care to out-patient pharmaceutical management, there have been ever increasing numbers of the mentally ill present among us. A recent study by the NIMH estimated that 13% of the US population had some form of clinical mental illness (depression, anxiety, etc.) and nearly 4-5% had a serious mental condition (psychosis, paranoid schizophrenia, dementia, etc.), yet the vast majority of these people never got treatment.

To me, it's not rocket science that we need to get away from a legal/medical standard for commitment which basically argues that we must wait for the mentally ill person to have a "severe episode" in which actual harm comes to them or those around them in order to qualify for detention or treatment. Furthermore, as the Newtown and similar cases clearly shows, gun owners who have a family member who is seriously mentally ill need to first, secure their **** guns, and second, get the person prompt and meaningful treatment.

To me, arguing with someone over number of rounds in a magazine or whether a rifle has a pistol grip or "looks" like an M-16 is buying into their argument that the issue is about guns. It's not. Period. The issue is about mental illness and the need for mental health reform, and that's where the discussion in the media and with friends should move, IMO...

Thank you, jkd.

Keith, emotions is driving the current national discussion, but logic should encompass all aspects of the situation which, in my opinion, would include mental illness, violence in video games and move industry, additional security in schools and the use of accessories that create high casualty opportunities with a single action or pull of a trigger. To discuss all of those issue is responsible in my opinion because the outcome is likely driven by a contribution of all those put together.

Delaney..you are spot on. Each of these emotional issues is only a part of the problem that must be addressed and it will be a generation before we see any "appreciable" difference.

I heard Eric Holder today say that "Pesident Obama is considering making changes to existing laws before Congress can take it up".

Does that one sentence frighten anyone? A President who is willing to stomp on an ammendment breaking law himself. Executive order....

When american citizens take responsibility for a "armed citizen militia" let people freely carry guns in schools, businesses , attitudes of those who will do harm will change. We trust our children with teachers and school administrators for 8 hours a day, but we can't have an adult in a school armed? Prinipal and a teacher both lost their lives defending the children with what, a sharp pencil and a ruler? No match for any weapon or magazine size.

I have a semi auto .22 that holds 15 or 17 rounds, is that soon to be illegal? I once thought that we could find common ground on gun control we didn't need armor piercing bullets and such. Today I want and will have the tools to protect my family and those around me. For years I have had a concealed carry permit, really just so I could say I had it. In the last year I "carried" one time, I had my grandson and his friend fishing along white river in Indianapolis. From now on, I'm armed! If a business asks me to leave because they notice a fire arm so be it, I just wont do businesss there any longer.

We have to look at the Israeli model. Citizens are all armed and trained. When we all are equal, this crap will end.

Bingo joe!
Im glad you have seen the light!

Im a fiscal conservitive but i must ask...
Why do we have armed security at every airport shopping mall justice building ball game county fair on and on and on..
Why do we not have it in every school? Do the kids not matter? 5billion to cover every school in the land... a drop in the bucket when you look at all the money we spend on other stupid crap... raise my taxes for a worthy cause not for fruit fly research and such.
I hope the NRA. Does engage the debate from a common sense logical approach ...

inanimate objects are NOT the problem.

I had to go to the courthouse that Friday, I had not yet heard the awfull news. I was greeted at the door with not one but two county officers manning the metal detector, emptied my pockets and had to take my fingernail clippers out to my truck before I could enter.We did a great job that day providing protection for our judges, but our children do not deserve the same protection? My son,age three at the time, unable to protect himself from evil and harm will be going to school at his home if teachers and staff are not allowed to protect him while in their custody.

The problem with armed guards in schools, is that we will be creating a whole new layer of paid government jobs we neither need, nor can afford to pay for. How about parents take care of their kids for once? If we feel this is so necessary, then then a concerned parents group can pay for the security, or man security posts themselves.

My school system has paid crossing guards. When we were kids, we kids, volunteer parents and the teachers did this job for free. Somebody several years back decided we better hire these positions, and now we have an expense we will never get rid of. Paid security would be the same way, only ten times more costly.

Also, I think the metal detectors and guards at the courthouse are ridiculous and uneeded, and feel a bit insulted getting shook down just to go see the assesor.

People need to take care of themselves and their kids and quit expecting the government to do it. These screwed up shooters at Sandy Hook and Columbine are prime examples of kids that had no decent parental oversight.

Couldn't agree more with you..

Thats the world we lived in and how we raised our kids..
But if you think values and common semse will prevail here i think you are in for a rude awakening ... sad isnt it?

Not asking for the gov. to take care of my kids, wouldn't want them to if they would, exactly why I'm talking homeschool.Just bringing up the fact that we feel the need to put two paid officers in my county courthouse to shoot the bull while we leave school unprotected.

You can't protect everyone from everything (including themselves).

We can spend billions of dollars on metal detectors and guards and turn every school in the nation into a small prison but does that guarantee the kids safety? The guards didn't work @ VA Tech or Columbine.

What's to keep a nut job from shooting kids on a playground (like in California) or leaving a car bomb in front of the building (like Tim McVeigh)?

Are we going to put stone walls or 8 foot tall fences w/razor wire around every school next?

The reality is we can't protect everyone from everything. We just can't.

I don’t think of suppressors as assault weapons... Machine Guns yes.

Mag capacity is not an issue. If I am a teacher (my wife is one) I am currently defenseless against a 10 round mag or a 30 round mag or a 100 round drum. What kind of action is an un-armed person going to take in the 2 seconds it takes to change a mag. You really think that limiting the size of a mag is going to stop or change anything? I would love to hear some examples of times when there was a mass shooting that would have been prevented or limited by having regulations in place for mag capacity.
Explain to me how the “style” of gun makes a difference. I have several semi-auto rifles, shotguns and hand guns. Not sure that my semi-auto .223 Ruger is any less lethal then my AR-15 “style” rifle. Both have taken down many coyotes all of them just as dead as the next. So again I would love to hear how the “style” contributes to the number of casualties in a mass shooting.

We are only taking guns and mags out of the hands of law abiding citizens. Criminals will always be able to get anything they want legal or not. I would much rather defend my self and family with a 30 round mag when the criminal who is breaking into my house has a 30 round mag. These shootings are taking place in so called “gun fee” zones.

I am a hunter, shooter but above all I am an American. The 2nd amendment gives me the right to keep and bare arms. None of the proposed regulations will make any difference in stopping the mass shootings. We are looking at this the wrong way. We need to look at how we treat our mentally disturbed citizens and how we are desensitizing our youth with video games and movies.
IMO

Knock at the door.

“Sir, we are here to confiscate your private weapons”.

“What do you mean my weapons officer?, I lost all of them in a tragic boating accident years ago. They are at the bottom of Lake Michigan, you are free to go and look for yourself.”

the problem i snt the guns, its psych meds these mass murderers are on.

http://www.hoosierhunting.com/ubb/ultimatebb.php?/topic/20/2187.html

Date: Wed, 9 Jan 2013 11:14:40 -0800From: Dudley.Brown@nationalgunrights.orgTo: rufussimpson71@msn.comSubject: Joe Biden's anti-gun guarantee


Dear Rufus,

“I guarantee you, we’ll get [gun control] done by the end of January.”

That’s what Vice President Joe Biden told Bloomberg pal and Mayors Against Guns co-founder Thomas Menino during their phone conversation last week . . .

With anti-gun fervor raging in the national media, gun-grabbers are determined to strike while the iron is hot.

You know what’s at stake.

The Feinstein Gun Ban and bans on magazines holding more than ten rounds are two radical measures anti-gun propagandists constantly tout.

Those are bad enough.

But now the Washington Post says President Obama isn’t stopping there and instead will pursue a “broad gun control agenda” with the help of big business.

Already, bailout recipient Bank of America -- just months after loaning President Obama’s reelection campaign $15 million in cash -- has frozen one law-abiding gun maker’s account!

The Obama administration is playing hardball and they’ll use any means necessary to get their way.

So if you and I are serious about protecting our Second Amendment rights, we’re going to have to stand toe-to-toe with the gun-grabbers and fight back with everything we have.

Sadly, I’m not sure the establishment gun lobby is up for the fight.

Rufus, the NRA went silent on Facebook after the tragedy in Newtown, Connecticut.

Like many folks, watching a supposed ally run from a fight is bad enough. But watching them cozy up to the enemy is even worse.

The fact is, Politico is now reporting the NRA has accepted a meeting with Biden -- the very man President Obama has tasked with ramming his gun control schemes into law!

Rumors of another “deal” where pro-freedom, pro-gun Americans get sold down the river are getting louder in Washington, D.C.

I hope this isn’t what’s in the works. But you and I have seen it before.

Testifying before Congress in 1999, the NRA’s Executive Vice President said, “We think it’s reasonable to support the federal Gun-Free Zones Act.”

It was this bill -- and anti-gun thinking just like this -- that left the innocents in Newtown, Connecticut unprotected and helpless.

“Gun Free Zone” stickers and tin signs do NOT stop madmen’s bullets.

And if pro-gun Americans won’t stand up to the gun-grabbers and unashamedly shout the truth, who will?

No one. And our Second Amendment rights will get flushed down the toilet.

I don’t know about you, but I’m not about to stand by while that happens.

But the NRA has already said they’d cave on a new “mental health database.”

If passed, this bill could leave anyone who has ever gone to counseling -- including military veterans who’ve admitted stress upon returning from war -- stripped of their Second Amendment rights.

Will they continue to auction off our gun rights behind closed-door meetings with Joe Biden?

What else will their new “deal” include?

An “assault weapons ban” with some “reasonable improvements” over the Feinstein Gun Ban?

A ban on magazines holding over ten rounds?

The outright elimination of private sales and transfers -- banning fathers from passing down guns to their sons?

Expanded federal background checks and databases of gun owners?

I hope none of this happens.

But as the NRA’s phony friendships get exposed for what they are, I expect things to get worse.

After all, they gave Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid nearly $5,000 of their members’ cash to go along with an “A” rating in 2010.

Now he’s twisting the arms of U.S. Senators to stay in line for Obama’s anti-gun schemes.

Democrats Mark Warner, Bob Casey and Joe Manchin all received high marks from the NRA, and are now also jumping off the bandwagon, as well.

None of these Democrats were ever pro-gun to begin with.

Campaign cash and inflated ratings might buy you fair-weather friends in Washington, D.C.

And the Obama administration will gladly sit down with you right before they stab you in the back.

But that’s not going to get the job done.

I’m not interested in making friends.

I’m not interested in wining and dining anti-gun politicians with your money just because they say “I support the Second Amendment, but . . . ”

You know what "but . . . " means.

I’m interested in mobilizing gun owners across the country into an iron fist President Obama and his anti-gun pals FEAR because you and I are more than willing to inflict political pain when necessary.

You and I can do that by simply telling the truth about our elected officials.

When politicians’ anti-gun views and records are exposed before the American people -– not some whitewashed version -- they go down in flames as the ballot box.

And that’s something politicians fear more than anything else.

But Rufus, the stakes are higher than ever for our gun rights.

The fights are coming fast.

They should all meet and read the constitution and the bill or rights, have a nice lunch and call it a day.

I’ve seen other examples of this in the past. In this case it’s not forced.
From the article:
"If we can prevent just one child, one innocent bystander, from being the victim of a random accident or the target of an unstable person, it will be well worth our time and effort," added Constantine.
This sounds like a noble idea – afterall who could argue with such a wonderful sounding sentiment?

For most in the gun control lobby, however, they are ALWAYS so short sighted and almost never consider the consequences. They fail to realize that crime increases in other ways when regular people aren’t allowed to defend themselves. I would argue the opposite: If the freedom to responsibly posses and carry firearms saves the life of just one potential victim, it will be worth it.

From the hardened liberals’ viewpoint, they do consider the consequences and are not concerned with new crime afterward. Their goal is to disarm the population to control them.

Yawn...
Glad i dont own any... i dont any hammers or sharp pencils. Either!!!

I know a guy whos son was murdered with a bowling ball!!! True story.. glad i dont own one of those

let's say I have this cake. It is a very nice cake, with "GUN RIGHTS" written across the top in lovely floral icing. I received it from the 2nd amendment and the Dick act of 1902.

Along you come and say, "Give me that cake." I say, "No, it's my cake." You say, "Let's compromise. Give me half." I respond by asking what I get out of this compromise, and you reply that I get to keep half of my cake.

Okay, we compromise. Let us call this compromise The National Firearms Act of 1934.
...
There I am with my half of the cake, and you walk back up and say, "Give me that cake."

I say, "No, it's my cake."

You say, "Let's compromise." What do I get out of this compromise? Why, I get to keep half of what's left of the cake I already own.

So, we have your compromise -- let us call this one the Gun Control Act of 1968 -- and I'm left holding what is now just a quarter of my cake.

And I'm sitting in the corner with my quarter piece of cake, and here you come again. You want my cake. Again.

You say, "Let's compromise once more." What do I get out of this compromise? I get to keep one eighth of what's left of the cake I already own?

So, we have your compromise -- let us call this one the Machine gun ban of 1986 -- and I'm left holding what is now just an eighth of my cake.

I sit back in the corner with just my eighth of cake that I once owned outright and completely, I glance up and here you come once more.

You say nothing and just grab my cake; This time you take several bites -- we'll call this compromise the Clinton Executive Orders -- and I'm left with about a tenth of what has always been MY **** CAKE and you've got nine-tenths of it.

Then we compromised with the Lautenberg Act (nibble, nibble), the HUD/Smith and Wesson agreement (nibble, nibble), the Brady Law (NOM NOM NOM), the School Safety and Law Enforcement Improvement Act (sweet tap-dancing Freyja, my finger!)

I'm left holding crumbs of what was once a large and satisfying cake, and you're standing there with most of MY CAKE, making anime eyes and whining about being "reasonable", and wondering "why we won't compromise".

I'm done with being reasonable, and I'm done with compromise. Nothing about gun control in this country has ever been "reasonable" nor a genuine "compromise".

I Knew a Guy who Knew a Guy who had a bowling ball cannon.....

I sold it.. wish i didnt.. that thing was fun!!
Filling it full of golf balls waa a little scary...

Vice President Biden was wrapping up a week of meetings Friday as he prepares to finalize his plan to curb gun violence -- but the National Rifle Association claims the meetings are just a show, while the administration presses ahead with new gun-control measures.
The NRA, which sat down with Biden's task force alongside other gun-owner groups Thursday, said it was "disappointed" with "how much it had to do with an agenda to attack the Second Amendment."
While the administration has said the task force will look at a range of issues to address gun violence in the wake of the Connecticut school shooting -- from mental health to the entertainment industry -- the NRA said Thursday's discussion focused "on proposed restrictions on lawful firearms owners -- honest, taxpaying, hardworking Americans."
Separately, NRA President David Keene in an interview said Biden was just "checking a box."
Biden was rounding out the week Friday afternoon by meeting representatives from the video-game industry. The NRA and other groups, pushing back against calls for new firearms restrictions, have urged Washington to take a close look at violent video games and the role they might play in violence among adolescents.
The night before, Biden met with representatives from the entertainment industry. Those groups released a statement late Thursday, without saying whether any legislative proposals had been discussed.
"The entertainment community appreciates being included in the dialogue around the administration's efforts to confront the complex challenge of gun violence in America," said the statement from the Motion Picture Association of America and several other groups. "This industry has a longstanding commitment to provide parents the tools necessary to make the right viewing decisions for their families. We welcome the opportunity to share that history and look forward to doing our part to seek meaningful solutions."
Biden says he plans to have a set of proposals on President Obama's desk by Tuesday.
He gave a glimpse into what was being considered this week, and the list included "universal" background checks for gun purchases. He said this would include not just closing the so-called gun show loophole but imposing background checks for all transactions, including private sales.
He also said, "I've never heard quite as much about the need to do something about high-capacity magazines as I've heard spontaneously from every group that we've met with so far."
Obama and other Democratic lawmakers are already pushing for a renewed assault-weapons ban, but Biden suggested there could be growing support for at least a ban on high-capacity magazines.
At the same time, the White House has dismissed calls by the NRA to draft a national school security plan to install armed officers at every school in the country. The White House has suggested that plan would not be effective.
But the NRA and other firearms group say the same about proposed restrictions on certain weapons types, noting that assault weapons are not often used in the commission of violent crimes -- handguns are more common.
Biden also drew complaints from Republican lawmakers when he suggested Wednesday, while meeting with gun control groups, that the administration might go around Congress to implement some provisions.
"There are executive orders, executive action that can be taken," Biden said. He also said separate legislative action would be "required."
"Vice President Biden would do well to read the 2nd Amendment and revisit the meaning of the phrase 'shall not be infringed,'" Rep. Steve Scalise, R-La., said in a statement. "Bypassing Congress to implement radical policies is never acceptable."

The way I see it is this.... Biden can have the all the "meetings" in the world about gun violence if he wants but if he thinks for one second that the gaming or motion picture industry is going sit back and let their profits get hurt by this then he has another thing coming...

They will be suing so fast claiming First Amendment rights are being violated it won't be funny and they will win in court while we lose our 2nd Amendment rights... But I think this nothing more then a circus act just to sell the gun control aspect of this or they would have went after the gaming and motion picture industry years ago...

Wow ! Tried to go to the big Indy 1500 gun show yesterday, got there right at 2PM when they opened and there was a half mile line of people three or four abreast lined up to get into the place and cars still flooding into the parking lots. We drove right by.

Went to south side to Bradis gun shop on Hwy 67 and they have almost no inventory lefy, I'd guess maybe 75% of their stuff is gone, and very limited ammmo supply.

This president and the discussions regarding gun control really have people spooked.

As a former gun dealer i say good for them..its a cash cow and they are cashing in on it. You would too..

Prices will go down in a couple of months im bettin

Well went to the Indy1500 and waited for an hour to get in... Heard Friday that the Fire Marshall shut the doors and wouldn't let anymore people in due to it being filled to capacity...

Today was the biggest showing in history of the Indy1500 show... Over 10,000 people expected to go today alone when on average they have 10,000 for the whole three days!!!

Folks, Obama doesn't have to ban guns with the prices I saw today.... Most people would be priced out because of him...

On average:
AR15's = $1500 to $2500
AK's = $1000 and up
SKS's = $800 and up
M1 Garand's = $1000 and up
Hi-Point 9mm Carbine rifle = Over $500 bucks

AR 30rd mags = $10 (for plastic) to $50 (metal, new) I bought a used 30 rd one for $25
AK 30rd mags = $20 to $40
AK 40rd mags = $40 and up
AR drums = $180 and up
AK drums = $180 and up (could have bought a broken one for $40)

Don't even get me started on how much ammo was.... OMG was it way over priced.... The cheapest I saw 1000 rounds of 7.62x39 go for was $400...

Folks, whatever you spent on your gun collection, you could easily get double or triple return on your investment.

$50 for 525 rounds of. 22LR!!

Was $18 a month ago!

Wait a couple months...things will be back to normal. I hope... :rolleyes: