should we be allowed semi-autos?

[Swoop]

One idea that has been raised in the past which seems not unreasonable is registration of firearms to owners, it doesn't seem like a terrible plan to keep track of what's out there in the world, whether it would prevent anything bad from happening is a different matter altogether.

An entirely useless idea which has been proven many times to be grossly over-expensive to the taxpayer, inefficient and an utter waste of time. The Canadin firearm registry debacle is the most recent system, which has now been done away with due to: not solving one single crime!, massively flawed, hideously expensive to establish and maintain and a drain on resources which could be better used elsewhere.

NZ used to have a registration system, but did away with it for the same reasons of not achieving anything for the efforts expended on it.

Name ONE offender that caused single or multiple deaths with the use of firearms (of any type) ... that was a LICENSED gun owner. Remember Aramoana ... ??? Tell me that (in your opinion) Grey was totally sane ...

Sadly, like a lot of shootings in the civilised world (outside of the usa) are preventable and the police failed to act. Aramoana and Dunblane are classic examples of a person whose actions had already brought them to the attention of the authorities.

[FJRider]

Certainly part of the 2A was to codify the individuals natural right to self defence, however The 2nd Amendment is also about giving the Populace the power to resist the Tyranny of the Government, borne out of the American experience of the War of Independence (at the hands of the British - Huzzah!).

It's premise is that a well-armed citizenry can act as a check and balance to the powers of the government, thus keeping the government from ever over-reaching it's mandate or from becoming despotic.

My Critique of this notion is that if the US was to turn despotic - the difference between the level of Firepower that the individual can acquire and the level that the US government has renders this original intent out of date.

The days where both sides had access to smoothbore blackpowder muskets and Kentucky rifles (thus having an equal playing field) are long since gone.

Questions ... Which side came out ahead in the Vietnam war .. ??? Did the "Level of firepower" The US provided ... really make a difference in the end result ... ???

[Berries]

that depends on your ignorance.

"automatic"= "full auto" - bullets come out until you run out or let go.

"semi automatic" = "self loading" - you do not need to manually cycle the weapon between trigger actuations.

Happy to admit that I am fully ignorant on the subject. I don't know what a manual cycle is when it comes to guns so they both sound the same, keep your finger on the trigger and it keeps firing.

I don't get you gun lovers. I have a Hunting and Fishing catalogue next to me right now. Thinking of getting a .22 to deal with rampant rabbits and stupid roosters in the back yard. If I fancied the idea of going off and shooting a deer, a moose, a moa or a Cantabrian I would get a licence and get some fancy rifle. What I can't work out is why you would need a rapid fire gun here in little old NZ. I would have thought deer fuck off quite quickly when they hear a gun shot, it is not like spraying a crowd in Las Vegas or downtown Damascus.

[HenryDorsetCase]

Certainly part of the 2A was to codify the individuals natural right to self defence, however The 2nd Amendment is also about giving the Populace the power to resist the Tyranny of the Government, borne out of the American experience of the War of Independence (at the hands of the British - Huzzah!).

It's premise is that a well-armed citizenry can act as a check and balance to the powers of the government, thus keeping the government from ever over-reaching it's mandate or from becoming despotic.

My Critique of this notion is that if the US was to turn despotic - the difference between the level of Firepower that the individual can acquire and the level that the US government has renders this original intent out of date.

The days where both sides had access to smoothbore blackpowder muskets and Kentucky rifles (thus having an equal playing field) are long since gone.

I'd suggest that the US gubblemunt has taken that turn already. https://www.economist.com/blogs/econ...st-explains-22

Americans are afraid all the time. so they reach for their pacifiers

[TheDemonLord]

Questions ... Which side came out ahead in the Vietnam war .. ??? Did the "Level of firepower" The US provided ... really make a difference in the end result ... ???

Fair question - and to answer, I'm going to go full armchair general...

First point is that Vietnam represented a new style of Warfare that the US simply wasn't prepared for - a Guerrilla style fight and one in a Jungle no less - which the US didn't have experience in.

Second point is that the Vietnamese didn't so much as win, as it was that America withdrew - the War wasn't popular politically, something which a government that is concerned with popular opinion seeks to avoid.

Thirdly - we've seen the modern US armed forces fight insurgency/guerilla style wars since then - and whilst I concede absolutely that a relatively lowtech armed force can inflict damage (IED strikes etc.) - they can't stop the tanks from rolling in, they can't stop the co-ordinated airstrikes, they can't stop the precision guided munitions.

Fourthly those conflicts weren't fought on home soil, they were fought on the opposite sides of the world.

The point I'm making is that if tomorrow, Trump went full dictator, there is not a damn thing the average citizen could do to stop it, except hope and pray that the US armed forces staged a Coup d'état.

[Akzle]

Happy to admit that I am fully ignorant on the subject. I don't know what a manual cycle is when it comes to guns so they both sound the same, keep your finger on the trigger and it keeps firing.

that would be automatica.

a SEMI you need to release the trigger between each shot, but it loads the next one for you.

anything else you need to pump/rack/cycle/drop/break the action, remove the spent cartridge, and load the next.

I don't get you gun lovers. I have a Hunting and Fishing catalogue next to me right now. Thinking of getting a .22 to deal with rampant rabbits and stupid roosters in the back yard. If I fancied the idea of going off and shooting a deer, a moose, a moa or a Cantabrian I would get a licence and get some fancy rifle. What I can't work out is why you would need a rapid fire gun here in little old NZ. I would have thought deer fuck off quite quickly when they hear a gun shot, it is not like spraying a crowd in Las Vegas or downtown Damascus.

to which i would recommend: a) dont buy from humping and fisting; b) either get a professional in to kill them all, or get something very quiet, so as they don't learn they're being shot; c) "rapid" is subjective, and when one has *cough* more than *cough* seven targets and no e-cat, one must be rather o-fay with lés mag changes.

goats and rabbits tend to flock.

it's usually the first shot that counts. the days of flattening mobs of deer are bygone. but most of them were taken with bolty. 30s or. 222 anyways...

[Akzle]

.

The point I'm making is that if tomorrow, Trump went full dictator, there is not a damn thing the average citizen could do to stop it, except hope and pray that the US armed forces staged a Coup d'état.

au contraire.

the us has never "won" a shooting war. they rely on being overgunned (to the profit of teh jews)
the us were never fighting a standing army, rather, every man woman and child capable (and duly motivated) to politely sugest they fuck-right-off. and that's what they face (and lose) time and again. because patriotism is strongest on home soil.

[Berries]

goats and rabbits tend to flock.

I knew a girl from Shanghai who did the same.

[Akzle]

I knew a girl from Shanghai who did the same.

a girl who did flocks of goats and rabbits?

did she also play pingpong?

[awayatc]

a girl who did flocks of goats and rabbits?

did she also play pingpong?

and she cycled full cock.......

and ejected spend cases

[pzkpfw]

... Although Trump is a certified moron, his comment that the mass killings in the US are a mental health problem not a firearm one ...

Wasn't one republican act to put down a possible law that was going to take into account mental health issues in firearm purchasing?

Yep: Trump = moron.



(I also don't understand the U.S. obsession with the 2nd Amendment. The fact it's called an "Amendment" shows they can change their constitution. They've done it at least twice! (27). Weird that some of them then treat the document as sacred scripture that can't be touched. (Must be afraid their Bibles are next.))

[TheDemonLord]

(I also don't understand the U.S. obsession with the 2nd Amendment. The fact it's called an "Amendment" shows they can change their constitution. They've done it at least twice! (27). Weird that some of them then treat the document as sacred scripture that can't be touched. (Must be afraid their Bibles are next.))

The 2A is part of the first 10 Amendments - known as the Bill of rights - And it could be argued that those rights have formed the foundational basis of the US, which is why they are held as quasi-sacred.

On top of that - all of them seek to address very real issues in order to preserve the rights of the individual and set reasonable limits on the powers of the State.

[Cosmik de Bris]

Not true.
Ours require more strenuous vetting prior to and at re-licencing time. Also concealed carry isn't legally permitted here... among other things.
Our firearm laws are possibly one of the finest, workable pieces of legislation in the world.

I did say "in some ways". Here you can get a licence even with a criminal conviction.

Cheers

[Banditbandit]

I legally own a 12-gauge semi-automatic ... what's the problem?

[Banditbandit]

The 2A is part of the first 10 Amendments - known as the Bill of rights - And it could be argued that those rights have formed the foundational basis of the US, which is why they are held as quasi-sacred.

On top of that - all of them seek to address very real issues in order to preserve the rights of the individual and set reasonable limits on the powers of the State.

it reads:

The Second Amendment of the United States Constitution reads: "A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed."

Given the time this was written the US had no standing army and the militia had fought off the British - so this is not about the generalized right to bear arms .. this is about having a militia to defend the USA ...

Arguably - but to me self-evident - now that the US has a standing army it does not need a militia - or the generalized right to bear arms. OR All gun owners can be called into a militia at any time and sent to face the enemy .. I doubt many of them would be happy with either choice - especially the latter ..