When I refer to ghost guns I am speaking of lower receivers made from the "Ghost Gunner" mill. Obviously, black market guns are way cheaper and easily accessible. But, that is what this thread is about, trying to make those harder to get, more risky to play with, etc.
I don't think anyone here thinks getting a gun is hard, and that is entirely the reason why making it harder should be at the forefront of the discussion.
If a penalty for possession or transference of a black market firearm was, say, 25-life on the first offense, don't you think Johnny crackhead slinging hot weapons for a buck 25 might think twice?
One thing I forgot to add in mine that I had thought about was liability. If a gun that is licensed to you is used in a crime, and you haven't reported the gun as stolen prior, then you are just as liable as the perpetrator. This would apply to negligent parents, negligent firearms owners, and retailers/manufacturers.
I'm not meaning any offense here, and I absolutely agree with most of what you're saying, but I think there is a bit too much cynicism in your views. I think you're skeptical that much can be done, and don't give enough credit to what can be done.
As far as the ghost gunner's go... It is harder than you would think. It is also a bit more costly than people presume. Wired magazine had a nice writeup a couple issues ago about a guy trying to make his own lower receiver. Basically, he spent a lot of money before he ever had an end product that would function.
I think we need to start looking at ghost gunning and try to regulate it. Make penalties for having unregistered/un-serialed parts. If you're a hobbyist, cool... Comply. If you're doing it for other reasons, then you're knowingly abusing the system.
I would love to start with the societal issues that lead to violence, but that, in my opinion, is like trying to swim across the ocean with only knowing how to doggy paddle in a pool. If we can master the little pool first, then maybe we can swim across the ocean?
Disclaimer: I own multiple guns and, in general, I am for people's freedom to own whatever they want to own from a firearms perspective.
My ideas, some piggybacking on those mentioned prior:
Licensing: Adopt a federal licensing mandate. No more local sheriff's office breezethru's for licensing procedures. Apply this to both long guns and handguns. Let licensing fall under jurisdiction of a federal Public Safety dept. or something similar. In order to legally purchase firearms of any sort, people would have to go through a thorough licensing procedure, pay a one time filing fee (less than $100), and agree to renew every 5 years by paying a renewal fee. Licensee's are also required to have a (cost compensated, tax deductible?) mental evaluation annually. Lapsed licenses are subject to another filing fee and are considered void until renewed. Parents can license their children (age 12 until their 18th birthday) under their own license, but must be present if the child is in possession of a firearm. Nobody is grandfathered in, and if you own guns now you must participate.
The licensing procedure involves: Background check (no felonies, assaults, domestic violence, etc. convictions EVER), psychological evaluation, safety course completion, vision check, and license issuance
Registration: Come up with a system in which guns are tied to an individual's license number. If someone is caught in possession of a gun that is not registered to their license or a gun that has no identifying marks, then they are fined a minimum of $5,000 and could also face lengthy imprisonment (in the case of stolen/ghost gun possession.) State agencies and local law enforcements are to immediately confiscate unregistered, misregistered, or "ghost" guns and hold them for 30 days, upon which they are turned over to the federal government.
Industrial Regulation: Manufacturers of firearms, ammunition, and firearm accessories are subject to a slew of new liability laws and manufacturing regulations. Cap limits are set on how many firearms companies can produce in and import into the US. Increase tax on profits and close loopholes. In theory, it passes some of the moral burden onto the companies that make the guns easier to get, load, unload, fire, etc. It will likely be passed on to consumers, raising prices, but that's not a terrible thing either. For the new "ghost gunners" milling their own lower receivers and other parts: these laws and regulations will also apply. A home-manufactured gun or gun with a homebrewed component (not including ammunition reloading) is seen in the eyes of the law as an unlicensed firearm.
Buybacks: Not many people by my estimates will participate, but some is better than none. Use the revenues generated from licensing, taxes, etc. and have yearly firearm buybacks. Offer market value or even more for people to bring in guns. On top of that, offer tax deductions of $100 per firearm. Melt down the guns that are brought in and recycle the materials. Those are just my initial thoughts. I might add more later.
Ultimately, we can't penalize everyone who wants to own a firearm when someone who possesses one does something bad. At the same time, we as a society need to progress to a point where people don't feel the need to own a firearm for whatever reasons they use to justify owning one.
As far as the black market goes and the criminal element. It will likely always exist. I'm hoping that some of these things will at least hinder and cut down on it though.
I thought that, overall, this was a really good show, and they did a great job with only 6 episodes.
My favorite characters are Strand and Travis. I see there being a conflict between those 2 and the other guy for the alpha male role. I don't know what Strand's past, or Travis' for that matter, involves enough to know what to expect. We saw some hints of Travis going Rick Grimes on the dude, so I am expecting he has some dark stuff in his past.
I can't tell if Strand is going to be a super badass good guy or a Shane type role.
I wonder if there will be much of a fight to get to the boat, to get it supplied once they are on it, etc. I also wonder where they will go. I'm assuming they will eventually end up in Alexandria, VA. with a certain familiar group.
The show did a great job of showing how slowly people would be to adapt to a new way of life in the event of an apocalyptic type event, and I can really appreciate that.
I agree that something, anything, needs to be done to prevent this. I've been trying to think of things that would help. Primarily, I think manufacturers should be held somehow accountable to an extent. Maybe place the burden of informational tracking about the guns that they make on the manufacturers themselves? I've got enough guns, personally. I don't need to hoard any more. Limitations on manufacturers wouldn't harm me or my individual rights or liberties very much.
As an owner of firearms, I obviously understand that there isn't much you can do with guns that are already out there. That is a given. But, if we could somehow start at the source, and not the individuals that already have firearms, I think you would see more of a result. Cap limits on production, import tax increases on foreign manufacturers, tax increases on sales of firearms, production limits on ammo, tax increases on ammo manufacturers, smart technology on new firearms, etc. etc. There are tons of options out there, if politicians would just stop trying to pass the burden onto the consumer and place them onto the corporations that profit from such tragedy.
The biggest hurdle in the whole debate is that, for every solution by either side, there is a counter by the opposition. In a lot of cases, both points and counterpoints have an element of validity, though.
I don't think there is much that can be done to the existing population of firearms in the US, nor on the people that own them. I think, to make an impact, we need to look at the economy of firearms, ammo, and accessories, and tap into that for the most immediate solutions. Then we can try to look at the existing problems and start trying to brainstorm legislation or whatever to keep guns out of the criminal elements of society. Don't get me wrong, I am not saying that legislation can't be a good, fast solution. In fact, I think there need to be less state rights when it comes to gun laws, and states should be made to follow more uniform federal procedures. It is obvious, in the case of firearms and many other things, that states just can't get it right by themselves and actually need the union to make them get it right.
What are some toys and other stuff that you still remember vividly from your early/middle childhood? Like, before your middle school years...
There was a pic of a plane approaching a carrier in the Post a Pic, Any Pic thread that totally brought back my memories of trying to land on the damn carrier in the NES game Top Gun... up up up!! down!! up! down!! I think I was like 7 or 8 at the time... Other things I can think of off the top of my head:
Ninja Turtle figures Captain Power He-Man and the Masters of the Universe Thundercats Silverhawks the NES Ninja Turtles game and how I could never get past the swimming/diffusing bombs level I also remember the commercials for the Big Bad Wolf roller coaster and how they used to scare the poo out of me... I would run into another room when they came on the TV I was Michael Jackson's #1 fan at one point in my childhood... I had the glove, the Thriller jacket... and I can remember sitting on the front porch listening to Thriller on vinyl with my portable record player... I also got creeped out when Vincent Price's laughing part came on and would always have to get up and move the needle to skip it... lol
Why put him out there and risk it if he has a chance of re-injuring himself or whatever? We've got a gimme game if we fire on most cylinders, and then a BYE week which we come out of into a damn tough stretch of games. Sit him and don't give those opponents current film on him, and let Klein continue to boost his potential trade value.
Most of that logic can also be applied to other "injured" players. Davis, Stew, etc.
Hell, we could honestly probably let Cam rest this week and come out with a W.
As a proud gun owner, I wish all you other proud gun owners would stfu and stop always turning this into an "our forefathers" argument or whatever other lame excuse you want to use to justify why you should be able to own a gun, and simply own up to the fact that we, as a country, have a huge problem with violence, gun violence, and mental illness. Just admit that everything that can be possibly done to prevent these mass shootings needs to be done, and that it needs to happen fast, and stop using your obsession with defending rights you think apply to you, while ignoring other people's rights to live their lives without fear that one of your guns, or one of you, will someday harm them because someone got your drive thru order wrong or some other entitled excuse you or someone else picks to go berserk over.
I've defended guns and my right to purchase and own them on here more than anyone probably, but some of the points you all choose to defend your rights, especially in these mass shooting threads, are just further proof that you, deep down, have very little regard for anyone other than yourself.
Individual rights and liberties are wonderful things, but waving them in the face of tragedy is not only cold-hearted, but should be considered a sign of mental illness.
I won't go so far as to say Josh has won two games for us by himself, but he has definitely prevented us from losing them the way we have had a history of losing games in the past (last minute drives, bad luck, etc.) He's made two plays that pretty much locked 2 of our three W's.
I've thought it to myself but I will say it here... That INT last week is basically last year's OBJ's one handed catch, except Josh got it with two hands worth of fingertips. Probably one of the best defensive plays in Panthers history, and more clutch than I can remember in a long time as far as outcome of the game.
The context of how much the Pope actually knew about Davis' situation has been called into question, or so I have heard.
He also visited prisoners while here too. I bet he told them to be strong in their faith, or something along those lines too. Does that mean people on the right supporting the pope also support criminal activity? Because that is the parallel that has been drawn in this topic now as far as people on the left liking the pope and the Kim Davis situation.
I still think the pope is a good dude, and he's doing very progressive things for his faith in the face of (mostly American) conservatism that whines because some of the those progressive things somehow weaken some individuals' agenda/bigotry.