Another Fucking Mass Shooting At US School

[Jarhyn]

I get Derec's ironic point. After all, it is people like Derec and the NRA because they support maniacal SCOTUS decisions that expand 2nd amendment rights which make easy to legally obtain a fire arms and fight against reasonable Constitutional restrictions.

I have been consistent in supporting common sense restrictions on gun ownership.

So you support banning the private ownership of automatic or semi-automatic weapons?

I wanna say the "common sense" here is the same kind of idea behind that card the police officer in Family Guy used to evaluate whether or not to arrest Peter...

Which is to say, "Sounds About White."

 

[Jarhyn]

The 3D guns are starting to appear on the scene.

What’s your goobermint doing about it?

Haven't heard much but it is illegal to create guns (AFAIK) by 3D printing.
(Plus we have instituted plans to have people spell government correctly)

The issue comes on what part is considered the 'gun'.

If the 'gun' is the lower receiver, you can 3d print the 'gun' and nobody can stop you because you can't really stop people from making 3d printers.

If the 'gun' is the hardened steel barrel and chamber capable of withstanding the discharge load of a round and forcing it to go a direction, then it's MUCH harder to acquire a gun because you need special machining tools and skills and heat treatments that can be legally controlled.

 

[Elixir]

The 3D guns are starting to appear on the scene.

What’s your goobermint doing about it?

Haven't heard much but it is illegal to create guns (AFAIK) by 3D printing.
(Plus we have instituted plans to have people spell government correctly)

The issue comes on what part is considered the 'gun'.

If the 'gun' is the lower receiver, you can 3d print the 'gun' and nobody can stop you because you can't really stop people from making 3d printers.

If the 'gun' is the hardened steel barrel and chamber capable of withstanding the discharge load of a round and forcing it to go a direction, then it's MUCH harder to acquire a gun because you need special machining tools and skills and heat treatments that can be legally controlled.

Yabut (there’s always a Yabut with these matters) steel bar stock, hardened drill bits etc can’t be controlled. The difficult part of making a gun is the load and trigger mechanisms, most of which is amenable to 3d printing.

 

[Jarhyn]

The 3D guns are starting to appear on the scene.

What’s your goobermint doing about it?

Haven't heard much but it is illegal to create guns (AFAIK) by 3D printing.
(Plus we have instituted plans to have people spell government correctly)

The issue comes on what part is considered the 'gun'.

If the 'gun' is the lower receiver, you can 3d print the 'gun' and nobody can stop you because you can't really stop people from making 3d printers.

If the 'gun' is the hardened steel barrel and chamber capable of withstanding the discharge load of a round and forcing it to go a direction, then it's MUCH harder to acquire a gun because you need special machining tools and skills and heat treatments that can be legally controlled.

Yabut (there’s always a Yabut with these matters) steel bar stock, hardened drill bits etc can’t be controlled. The difficult part of making a gun is the load and trigger mechanisms, most of which is amenable to 3d printing.

Steel bar stock movements can absolutely be tracked, as can sudden combined purchases of steel bar stock and hardened bits.

There are vanishingly few people competent enough to make a barrel that won't explode, and loads of people competent enough to make the mechanical parts because of how easy "mechanical parts" are these days.

You can keep at least some eye on what machine shops are doing, and have stiff penalties for unauthorized barrel manufacturing because making a barrel is hard and requires infrastructure.

Its just not tenable to enforce those penalties on lower receivers, because "anyone" can print those with "anything" the moment they actually need the LR, but a barrel is skilled labor with a high tool/skill cost barrier to entry.

 

[Elixir]

Steel bar stock movements can absolutely be tracked,

lol! By WHOM?
I worked at as a heliarc welder in a shop that discarded literally TONS of 440 Stainless and mild steel bar stock, half inch plate, quarter inch plate, 2” square stock and more, EVERY WEEK! It all stacked up in the alley behind the shop, free for the taking.
If you think anyone would notice a foot or even a hundred feet of missing scrap, you’re sadly mistaken. Some people who worked there had yard fences -hundreds of feet of it - made from punched out 4x8’ sheets of 1/4” stainless. Beautiful application! But what is the MOST a gun barrel could require? Maybe 22” of 3/8 to 3/4” bar stock. I bet I could find suitable pieces laying in a field within a mile of here. We’re not talking about arming a platoon, Jarhyn. It’s one murderous gangster, thug or trumpsucker at a time.

 

[Jarhyn]

Steel bar stock movements can absolutely be tracked,

lol! By WHOM?
I worked at as a heliarc welder in a shop that discarded literally TONS of 440 Stainless and mild steel bar stock, half inch plate, 2” square stock and more, EVERY WEEK! It all stacked up in the alley behind the shop, free for the taking.
If you think anyone would notice a foot or even a hundred feet of missing scrap, you’re sadly mistaken. Some people who worked there had yard fences -hundreds of feet of it - made from punched out 4x8’ sheets of 1/4” stainless. Beautiful application! But what is the MOST a gun barrel could require? Maybe 22” of 3/8 to 3/4” bar stock. I bet I could find suitable pieces laying in a field within a mile of here. We’re not talking about arming a platoon, Jarhyn. It’s one murderous gangster, thug or trumpsucker at a time.

The reality is that whole you could do that, I doubt you also happen to have the lathe, and the people who own lathes will not be turning out a gun barrel for a murderous gangster, thug, or trumpsucker. None of the above are likely to have skills to do so, or to hear treat the barrel, or even find stock that won't critically fail or damage the lathe due to flaws.

Some trumpsucker on a farm might have everything they need and a field filled with steel, but that's one guy making a gun for one guy to commit one crime.

We ARE talking guns at volume to arm a platoon, because like voter fraud, it can't happen on the individual scale that way.

The guns that end up in the hands of gangsters and thugs are manufactured en masse by normal weapons manufacturers, and in a lesser part by boutique arms manufacturers. It is these boutique manufacturers, I expect, who produce the majority of upper receivers used with printed lower receivers.

 

[bilby]

Making your own gun is always going to be a rare hobby.

If somebody wants a gun, even in a place with very strict gun control, they can buy one.

It's illegal; but it's not difficult. Making your own is always going to be just as illegal, and at least slightly more difficult.

Gun control doesn't work by stopping determined lawbreakers from getting a gun. It works by making having a gun a risky prospect.

If you want a gun to rob a bank, you can readily get one, whether you are in the US or the UK, Germany, France, whereever.

The difference us that if you see a guy with a gun in the US, and call the cops, they will say "was he doing something illegal"?

They don't ask that in the UK, Germany, France, whereever. Being seen with a gun is almost certain to be illegal, outside a handful of controlled and well established circumstances; And it's a quick and easy matter for police in those places to determine if the person with the gun has a licence for it.

You can own a gun in the UK easily enough. But if your gun is seen in a public place, it will be assumed that you are breaking the law. And if it is seen (even on private property), you probably are breaking the law too - the law is very strict about how guns must be secured when not in use.

A farmer can very easily get a shotgun certificate in the UK (unless he has a criminal record); But he won't keep that certificate for long if he leaves his shotgun lying around unsecured, or unattended in his vehicle, or if he carries it around in public places.

Gun laws work by making it a rare and frightening occurrance to encounter a gun, such that the mere sight of one will be reported to police, and the report of such a sighting will be treated by police as an urgent and serious matter.

They don't work by preventing criminals from getting guns; They work by preventing criminals from wanting guns.

If getting a gun gets you treated as a bank robber whether or not you have robbed a bank, indeed, whether or not you are even thinking about robbing a bank, it quickly becomes highly desirable not to have a gun, unless you actually are planning to rob a bank. And bank robbers are rare.

Bank robbers who shoot up schools are rarer still.

 

[bilby]

The idea that gun control makes getting a gun difficult (or even should make getting a gun difficult) for anybody who really wants one, is pure propaganda.

It's easy to show that it doesn't and can't.

Which looks like an easy win for the fans of the Second Amendment, to any fool who believes that that's how gun control works.

That's not how gun control works, which is why 3D printed and/or home-made guns are a red herring.

 

[Derec]

So you support banning the private ownership of automatic or semi-automatic weapons?

No, I do not. Automatic weapons are already strictly regulated, and I see no reason why semi-autos should be put in that category or even outright banned.
I think our efforts should be focused on people, not the types of guns.

We do not ban cars because they have too many horsepowers and torques. We do not ban cars because they look flashy. We do ban cars based on the type of engine or, speaking of autimatic, the type of transmission.

No, we license drivers, with both written and practical tests. We mandate insurance. We should adopt a similar approach to guns.

 

[Derec]

The idea that gun control makes getting a gun difficult (or even should make getting a gun difficult) for anybody who really wants one, is pure propaganda.

It would just limit private gun ownership to outlaws while restricting law-abiding citizens.

 

[Derec]

Derec can blather all he wants about “wrong hands”, but the facts are clear.

It was Gospel who first used that phrase.

It’s IMPOSSIBLE to mitigate the existence of “wrong hands”. The only effective way to reduce gun deaths has PROVEN to be to reduce guns.

If you propose to do that by banning (or severely restricting) gun ownership for law-abiding citizens, I am against that.
I would be for making it more difficult to get legal guns - by having a licensure and insurance requirement for example - and to go more forcefully against those who possess guns illegally or using it illegally. Shamar Elkins, the Shreveport shooter from upthread, was convicted of shooting at a car in the vicinity of a school, but only got 18 months probation for it.

 

[Derec]

I’ll rephrase this, since you keep acting like I’m arguing for a total ban, which I haven’t said at any point. Most illegal guns originate from legal markets. That means any policy that keeps firearms widely available has to account for that leakage. You can argue the trade-off is worth it, but you can’t pretend the connection doesn’t exist. You own that trade-off.

Yes. Freedom has consequences. That does not mean that there is a binary choice between doing nothing and banning guns willy-nilly as some on here want. There are things we can do to limit this pipeline well short of banning guns for law-abiding citizens.

Ain’t nobody ask you to hit that boring and seen a billion times ‘mass shooter macro hotkey, relax.

Huh?

 

[Derec]

I wanna say the "common sense" here is the same kind of idea behind that card the police officer in Family Guy used to evaluate whether or not to arrest Peter...

Which is to say, "Sounds About White."

Let me know where I have ever advocated for different standards based on race.

It is your Ilk, i.e. the far left, who generally wants to treat people differently by race in the name of "equity".

 

[bilby]

The idea that gun control makes getting a gun difficult (or even should make getting a gun difficult) for anybody who really wants one, is pure propaganda.

It would just limit private gun ownership to outlaws while restricting law-abiding citizens.

See, that right there is exactly my point. Your response is to pile on yet more absurd propaganda.

We have a big gap between theory and reality.

Only outlaws own guns in the UK, and law abiding citizens are restricted from doing so*. So, in theory, that makes the law abiding UK resident an easy mark for the hordes of gun-toting outlaws, and we should see armed robbery rates in the UK that are far higher than those in the USA.

When a theory predicts the opposite of that which we observe, it should be discarded.

Of course, the Second Amendment activists in the US need not worry; Few Americans ever observe anything that happens outside the USA, and the theory is completely safe as long as they continue not to look at the evidence against it.









* Of course, even if it were true that only outlaws own guns, that does not imply that all, or even many, outlaws own guns. Nobody ever seems to notice that inconvenient fact.

 

[bilby]

The assumption that if gun ownership is extended to non-outlaws, then non-outlaws will have better protection from outlaws, is not at all sound.

A gun is not a defence. If somebody threatens you with a gun, attempting to bring your gun into play will just get you shot. And if you shoot them before they threaten you, it is you who is the outlaw.

Body armour can defend against a gun. A gun cannot.

And defence isn't needed if your probability of being threatened with a gun in the first place is low.

If reducing lawful gun ownership to zero (ie "only outlaws have guns") is the price we have to pay for reducing outlaw gun ownership by 95%, then that's a price well worth paying.

 

[laughing dog]

So you support banning the private ownership of automatic or semi-automatic weapons?

No, I do not. ….

So “sensible” has a different meaning for you.

FYI, the car analogy is inappropriate because one of the major functions is not killing people.

 

[Derec]

See, that right there is exactly my point. Your response is to pile on yet more absurd propaganda.

Hardly.

Only outlaws own guns in the UK, and law abiding citizens are restricted from doing so*. So, in theory, that makes the law abiding UK resident an easy mark for the hordes of gun-toting outlaws, and we should see armed robbery rates in the UK that are far higher than those in the USA.

Do you have stats to that effect? I tried looking up burglary rates. This website has a list, but there is no data for the UK.

US has a burglary rate lower than Germany and Canada, and much lower than Sweden, Australia, Denmark, Austria and France.
This is hardly surprising, since burglary becomes a less attractive business proposition if your victim can shoot at you when you break into their home.

When a theory predicts the opposite of that which we observe, it should be discarded.

But you have not shown any data on robberies, just asserted it.

Note also that we have to be careful with attributing differences between countries to a single cause.

 

[Elixir]

Steel bar stock movements can absolutely be tracked,

lol! By WHOM?
I worked at as a heliarc welder in a shop that discarded literally TONS of 440 Stainless and mild steel bar stock, half inch plate, 2” square stock and more, EVERY WEEK! It all stacked up in the alley behind the shop, free for the taking.
If you think anyone would notice a foot or even a hundred feet of missing scrap, you’re sadly mistaken. Some people who worked there had yard fences -hundreds of feet of it - made from punched out 4x8’ sheets of 1/4” stainless. Beautiful application! But what is the MOST a gun barrel could require? Maybe 22” of 3/8 to 3/4” bar stock. I bet I could find suitable pieces laying in a field within a mile of here. We’re not talking about arming a platoon, Jarhyn. It’s one murderous gangster, thug or trumpsucker at a time.

The reality is that whole you could do that, I doubt you also happen to have the lathe, and the people who own lathes will not be turning out a gun barrel for a murderous gangster, thug, or trumpsucker. None of the above are likely to have skills to do so, or to hear treat the barrel, or even find stock that won't critically fail or damage the lathe due to flaws.

Who said anything about quality?
Back in my day we had hand cannons.
(Okay, that was maybe a little before my day)

Some trumpsucker on a farm might have everything they need and a field filled with steel, but that's one guy making a gun for one guy to commit one crime.

“everything they need” is only a chamber and a barrel. The rest can be 3d printed.

We ARE talking guns at volume to arm a platoon, because like voter fraud, it can't happen on the individual scale that way.

No more so than calling the entire US supply of goons “a platoon”. And remember - we were talking about the Roos.

The guns that end up in the hands of gangsters and thugs are manufactured en masse by normal weapons manufacturers, and in a lesser part by boutique arms manufacturers.

Dude, I don’t know what kind of upscale gang you belong to. All I know is untraceable guns are at a premium on the street

It is these boutique manufacturers, I expect, who produce the majority of upper receivers used with printed lower receivers.

Who gives a fuck? Even if you need to pull back a spring mechanism with the other hand to activate a primitive single shot mechanism, you can use it to knock over a liquor store. And if you don’t have to fire it, you can use it at the next gas station.

As usual, it’s all about benefit/(cost+risk).
I don’t know much about the Australian gangster scene, except I hear it’s not as easy to get guns … maybe unless you’re a boutique gangster.
Hypothetically that would raise the desirability of dyi firearms considerably, assuming the existence of US-style thugs.

 

[Derec]

So “sensible” has a different meaning for you.

I would be concerned if we did.

FYI, the car analogy is inappropriate because one of the major functions is not killing people.

I do not see why it's inappropriate, as they can both be dangerous. And this approach would make gun ownership much safer than it is today.

 

[bilby]

See, that right there is exactly my point. Your response is to pile on yet more absurd propaganda.

Hardly.

Only outlaws own guns in the UK, and law abiding citizens are restricted from doing so*. So, in theory, that makes the law abiding UK resident an easy mark for the hordes of gun-toting outlaws, and we should see armed robbery rates in the UK that are far higher than those in the USA.

Do you have stats to that effect?

No. It is obvious that armed robbery rates in the UK are not FAR HIGHER than those in the US. If nothing else because if they were, we would never hear the end of it from the Second Amendment activists.

I tried looking up burglary rates.

Why?

Burglary is not the same as Armed Robbery.

This website has a list, but there is no data for the UK.

US has a burglary rate lower than Germany and Canada, and much lower than Sweden, Australia, Denmark, Austria and France.

That's nice.

This is hardly surprising, since burglary becomes a less attractive business proposition if your victim can shoot at you when you break into their home.

I am sure that this is so. I am not sure why you imagine it to be relevant. Certainly there is no suggestion here that US burglars are less likely to be armed than German ones.

When a theory predicts the opposite of that which we observe, it should be discarded.

But you have not shown any data on robberies, just asserted it.

Yup.

Note also that we have to be careful with attributing differences between countries to a single cause.

Indeed. Yet you just did exactly that in your irrelevant commentary on burglary.