23 Proposals?

[regulator 0]

I'm glad you mentioned that because I knew fairly well that nothing was going to happen to them. But my thing is...if you werent going to do shit in regards to policy regards the entertainment industry then dont incorporate them into your supposed fact finding mission on how to prevent mass shootings. Man up and admit that having a policy agaist the entertainment industry will be about as effective as having an assault weapons ban.

[billvon 2,478]

>.if you werent going to do shit in regards to policy regards the entertainment industry
> then dont incorporate them into your supposed fact finding mission on how to prevent
>mass shootings.

That was the NRA that was blaming violent video games and movies for gun violence.

[regulator 0]

I agree with you in terms of what the NRA proposed. All I'm saying is that if Biden actually went to the trouble of meeting with high up members of the entertainment industry as a part of the mission to find a solution of mass shootings then at least have one of the 23 proposals hit on ALL THE BASES...Not just gun control. Even if it was something minute like tighter control of the movie ratings system.

[Stumpy 256]

Quote

The urban area they are talking about is probably 80% black. She was not referring to urban in the classic dictionary sense.

So substitute urban neighborhood with black and re read it

No - that is YOUR implication not hers. Sorry but any racial implication here is coming from you.
20% of the people she is talking about are white by your figures. So what? Its likely more a socioeconomic distinction than a racial one.

Never try to eat more than you can lift

[billvon 2,478]

>I agree with you in terms of what the NRA proposed.

Cool.

> All I'm saying is that if Biden actually went to the trouble of meeting with high up
>members of the entertainment industry as a part of the mission to find a solution of
>mass shootings then at least have one of the 23 proposals hit on ALL THE BASES..

Your wish is his command:

=============
Obama seeks research into violent video games
Brett Molina, USA TODAY
3:07p.m. EST January 16, 2013


As part of a broader gun control plan, President Obama is pushing Congress to fund research into the impact of violent video games.

The plan features 23 executive orders focused on gun violence, including "universal background checks" and limits on ammunition magazines.

Obama also calls for the Centers for Disease Control to "research the causes and prevention of gun violence."

"I will direct the Centers for Disease Control to go ahead and study the best ways to reduce it -- and Congress should fund research into the effects that violent video games have on young minds," said Obama during a speech detailing the plan. "We don't benefit from ignorance. We don't benefit from not knowing the science of this epidemic of violence."
===============

[regulator 0]

well considering that my comment was before this article was released...but in any case


touche' good sir.



BUT...I did specifically mention the entertainment industry..dont see anything about that yet.

[billvon 2,478]

>I did specifically mention the entertainment industry..dont see anything about that yet.

Hmm, I guess I see video games as part of the entertainment industry. Did you mean specifically broadcast television? Or specifically movies released in theaters or something?

[Gravitymaster 0]

Quote

>I did specifically mention the entertainment industry..dont see anything about that yet.

Hmm, I guess I see video games as part of the entertainment industry. Did you mean specifically broadcast television? Or specifically movies released in theaters or something?

I think all of the above. People are definitely influenced by movies particularly and children are influenced by all.

[billvon 2,478]

>I think all of the above.

Fair enough.

Which makes one wonder about this:
===========================
One Month After Newtown, NRA Releases First-Person Shooter Game with AK-47

Alexander Abad-Santos 6,931 Views Jan 14, 2013

One month ago today, 20 first graders were killed at their elementary school in Newtown, Connecticut. Ever since, the National Rifle Association has blamed old-school video games and years-old Hollywood movies for the shootings, and the gaming industry is very much trying to defend itself. Well the NRA may have put itself back on its lobbying heels, because they introduced a crude new first-person shooter of their own for the iPhone and iPad last night, which the NRA's mobile developers — and Apple — say is appropriate for children ages four and up. The reaction has been as swift and loud as the gameplay, which includes virtual assault rifles for purchase within the app.
============================

[Gravitymaster 0]

Can I assume you haven't downloaded the game?

[normiss 644]

I've played video games years before Newtown.
With AK's.
I ain't kilt nobody!






yet.

[chutem 0]

I did not see an R rated movie untill I was 16 years old. There were no VCR's and no Showtime or HBO on TV. Video game violence consisted of "space invaders" or a couple of very crude tanks battling on the tv screen with the Atari game console.

Technology has definitely changed these things.

Of course step back a generation and the same scenario plays out again.

When did it start/where will it end, does it really have any affect?

[skypuppy 1]

Really they just restricted the handguns and the semi auto longs.

yes, but were you FORCED to give up the handguns and semi auto longs. And if you didn't, did the authorities have a record that you owned them, and would they show up at your door to ask for them?

It happened in canada when they decided to reclassify certain previously allowed rifles. Owners were listed on the (now defunct) long gun registry, and required to turn in or face prosecution.

If they were registered, and later banned, then they can be confiscated.

If some old guy can do it then obviously it can't be very extreme. Otherwise he'd already be dead.
Bruce McConkey 'I thought we were gonna die, and I couldn't think of anyone

[Skyrad 0]

I don't dispute any of that I was just saying that not all the firearms have been confiscated thats all.

When an author is too meticulous about his style, you may presume that his mind is frivolous and his content flimsy.
Lucius Annaeus Seneca

[billvon 2,478]

>I've never been to a gun show where there was an unlicensed dealer.

Presented for your edification:

===================
3 injured after shotgun accidentally fires at N.C. gun show
By Michael Martinez, CNN
updated 6:56 PM EST, Sat January 19, 2013

(CNN) -- A 12-gauge shotgun loaded with bird shot accidentally discharged Saturday when the owner opened its case at a gun show at the North Carolina State Fairgrounds in Raleigh, injuring a retired sheriff's deputy and two other people, police said.

The gun owner, a 36-year-old man from Wilmington, North Carolina, was carrying the weapon through security at the show entrance and was unfastening the case on a table, authorities said. The owner planned to sell the shotgun at the show.
. . .

Police are now banning any private gun sales -- in which visitors bring their firearms to sell at the gun show -- for the remainder of the two-day Dixie Gun & Knife Show, which concludes Sunday, Keith said. The gun show was closed after the shooting and will reopen Sunday.
=====================

[kallend 1,683]

Quote

>I've never been to a gun show where there was an unlicensed dealer.

Presented for your edification:

===================
3 injured after shotgun accidentally fires at N.C. gun show
By Michael Martinez, CNN
updated 6:56 PM EST, Sat January 19, 2013

(CNN) -- A 12-gauge shotgun loaded with bird shot accidentally discharged Saturday when the owner opened its case at a gun show at the North Carolina State Fairgrounds in Raleigh, injuring a retired sheriff's deputy and two other people, police said.

The gun owner, a 36-year-old man from Wilmington, North Carolina, was carrying the weapon through security at the show entrance and was unfastening the case on a table, authorities said. The owner planned to sell the shotgun at the show.
. . .

Police are now banning any private gun sales -- in which visitors bring their firearms to sell at the gun show -- for the remainder of the two-day Dixie Gun & Knife Show, which concludes Sunday, Keith said. The gun show was closed after the shooting and will reopen Sunday.
=====================

He's just playing an old semantic game, Bill. The loophole deniers claim that if someone is unlicensed they can't be a dealer.

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[JohnRish 0]

Quote

The loophole deniers claim that if someone is unlicensed they can't be a dealer.

It's not semantics, it's the law. In order to deal in firearms for profit, you must be licensed by the BATF, and you must do background checks. Many of the vendors at gun shows are such dealers, and do the checks. If you're dealing without a license and background checks, then you're breaking the law. Private sales done infrequently are not "dealing", such as selling off a few guns on an irregular basis. If a private unlicensed individual is selling guns repeatedly on a regular basis, the BATF already has the authority to look into that and charge for a crime. No new laws are needed, just enforcement of existing laws.

What this gun show "loophole" ban is really all about is outlawing private gun sales.

[Gravitymaster 0]

I wouldn'd bother correcting them. They will always search for one remote example and then try and claim it's the norm. Pretty standard SC stuff.

[GeorgiaDon 340]

Quote

What this gun show "loophole" ban is really all about is outlawing private gun sales.

That's just bullshit. Rushmc described (in post #72 of this thread if you care to look it up) how things are done in Iowa. The buyer must obtain a certificate from the sheriff's office that documents that they have passed the background check. No work/expense is incurred by the seller, other than to ask the buyer to show that they have the permit. Is the system perfect? Of course not, no system can be devised that can't be gamed by a sufficiently determined criminal. Nevertheless, it makes it more difficult for a felon, or someone who is under a restraining order, or anyone who is legally prohibited from having guns to just go to Craigs list to find a private seller. And, private sales are perfectly legal in Iowa with no burden on the seller.

Quote

If a private unlicensed individual is selling guns repeatedly on a regular basis, the BATF already has the authority to look into that and charge for a crime. No new laws are needed, just enforcement of existing laws.

But of course BATF doesn't have the resources to monitor every private sale, and if they did come by to question you about how often and to whom you sell guns we all know you'd be whining about harassment and government intimidation. Unenforceable laws do, however, nicely serve the function of providing a convenient dodge to those who wish to ensure that nothing will be done to keep guns out of the hands of those people who are legally barred from having them.

Don

_____________________________________
Tolerance is the cost we must pay for our adventure in liberty. (Dworkin, 1996)
“Education is not filling a bucket, but lighting a fire.” (Yeats)

[JohnRish 0]

Quote

Quote

hat's just bullshit. Rushmc described how things are done in Iowa. The buyer must obtain a certificate from the sheriff's office that documents that they have passed the background check...

Not bullshit.

States can implement their own procedures, as apparently Iowa has done. This is the same process the Feds would like to implement on a national scale. And if the Feds do it, it supercedes state law. The Feds require the personal approval of the FBI for every transaction - and that's not a "private" sale. A private sale is between two individuals, periood, no one else. Thus, implementation of federal background checks, which requires a licensed gun dealer as an intermediary, is not a private sale.

• Quote

[GeorgiaDon 340]

Semantic games, JohnRichJohnRish, nothing but semantic games. What I'm hearing from you is that you don't want anyone to interfere with your "right" to sell guns to convicted felons, or anyone else that the legal system has determined should not have guns. I'm sure you are well aware that law enforcement agencies have access to the same database that dealers use, as they have to be able to determine whether or not people who are arrested and possess firearms are legally allowed to have those guns.

Note that we are not talking about banning any weapons or ammunition here, we are just talking about ways to keep guns out of the hands of people who are legally barred from possessing them. Apparently, even that is too much of an intrusion on the 2nd amendment for some people.

Don

_____________________________________
Tolerance is the cost we must pay for our adventure in liberty. (Dworkin, 1996)
“Education is not filling a bucket, but lighting a fire.” (Yeats)

[ianmdrennan 2]

Considering John isn't capable of following the most simple of forum rules, why would you expect him to have anything other than the entitlement complex displayed here.

Performance Designs Factory Team