Quote from: Phil B on August 06, 2012, 10:06:37 AM

Quote from: The Buddha on August 06, 2012, 08:28:42 AM
The reason these things dont happen @ a police station. Its those metal detectors in the front lobby, no one can get in with a gun.

Dont be silly. It's not the metal detector that stops them. It's the armed police officers STANDING NEXT TO the metal detectors.

They dont try it because people are armed and waiting for them.

Any place that has a serious concern about weapons based violence, never just puts "a metal detector" there.
They put a metal detector *with an armed guard* there.

Correct good point ... however I dont believe they dont try it because people are armed and waiting for them ... they dont try it cos people are armed, waiting for them and they are not armed.

Essentially unless we see metal detectors everywhere and armed guards next to them (thanks Phil B) this sorta crap will keep happening.
However there is another way to get this under control.

If you're killed/injured by a bullet made by say luger, you can sue luger for loss of life or limb, like tobacco.

I dont know guys this seems to happen on a large scale every few months. My whole point of attack is not to do un control, that is futile. Bullet control is far more effective. Cut off the chemicals/materials that are used to make bullets and make bullets harder to get for criminals and at the very least make it rather $$$ to dump untold 100's into some random passers by.
Cool.
Srinath.

Sorry, but I would think it's a whole lot easier to make bullets, than guns.
Specially if you dont do it legally. Then you can skip details like "full metal jacket", blah blah, and do it old school:

make your own gunpowder, or canibalize from fireworks
cast your own lead bullets (trivial!)
hand-load into old shell casings (which should be trivial to get. You cant, after all, make shell casings illegal. Aint no way that law's gonna passs)

And, if you're talking about a shotgun, instead of a high precision weapon.. ammo for that should be even easier to make.

Quote from: Phil B on August 06, 2012, 12:16:54 PM
Sorry, but I would think it's a whole lot easier to make bullets, than guns.
Specially if you dont do it legally. Then you can skip details like "full metal jacket", blah blah, and do it old school:

make your own gunpowder, or canibalize from fireworks
cast your own lead bullets (trivial!)
hand-load into old shell casings (which should be trivial to get. You cant, after all, make shell casings illegal. Aint no way that law's gonna passs)

And, if you're talking about a shotgun, instead of a high precision weapon.. ammo for that should be even easier to make.

Making shotgun shells is one thing. Making rifle/pistol rounds is another. It's not nearly as simple as you put it.

The -easier- and -legal- thing is to make a cannon. Did you know that's legal? Providing it uses a fuse and loads from the muzzle, it's completely legal to make and produce your own cannon(s) - any caliber, any size. Why? Because in the U.S. they are considered archaic technology. Make no mistake, however, they have all the same laws as any other firearm - you cannot fire it in your backyard if you live within X number of miles from the city and Y number of feet from your neighbor. You also cannot legally have, possess, or manufacture such a device if you are prohibited by either law, age, or local governing authority, from owning a firearm.

Did you also know that Gatling guns are NOT considered "automatic" weaponry? Reason: because the weapon itself is not sustaining fire from a single pull of the trigger. Instead, it is using a device to aid in pulling the trigger over and over again in rapid succession.

Knowledge is power. Gain all you can.

Choke points - lets see how many there are.

Gunpowder is not exactly fireworks explosive, I have played with fireworks explosive since I was a baby. The thing is 99% of fireworks comes from asia, India and china to be precise. Dont let in as many or make it cost a lot more.

Lead is rather valuable as it is, which is why batteries have a "street value" Doube it or triple it or quadruple it. Heck make it so you cant buy without turning in a core. Also lead is mined most of it in australia if I recall, where ever it is, it will have to be tightly controlled which will happen if we were to artificially tax lead @ 400% or 1000%.

Shell casings - we should mandate it so you have to return a casing to buy ammo, turn in 10 and you get 10 turn in 5 and you only get 5.

Guess what, some random bystander victim only needs to sue the bullet or gun maker and some judge only needs to let it go forward that it will automatically cause the ammo companies to regulate all of this.

Tobacco companies denied they were causing cancer as late as the 60's. I dont think bullet companies can deny it even for a day. 1 lawsuit and all of this will happen.

I'd rather see a truck with a cannon loaded on it. Atleast if you were to pull up to a police station you could blow away their pesky metal detector along with the armed guard next to it.

Cool.
Buddha.

You know, decades ago in australia the govt to encourage us to use less gas by raising the price. Didn't work as intended but made them heaps in tax revenue.

Increasing bullet cost will have zero effect as well. These crazy peeps seen to acquire rather expensive firearms with little money. Darn odd. Martin Bryant in aust was the same. Toughest state for gun laws. But some how this unlicensed guy acquired bloody expensive guns without evidence off how he acquired them.

Michael

no matter if made illegal in any way shape or form, they still will be acquired

Once again guys you're thinking short term. You pass 1 gun law and the next shooting that occours ... bam "See I told you gun laws dont work"
This is like killing a person by sending mosquitos to suck their blood. Will take 30-40 years but will happen.
Implement all of these and in 20-30 years I would see a difference, assuming nothing else happens to reverse it. Gun bans dont work cos you can spend the $ and make a gun, 1 time expense. Has to be bullet based.
Cool.
Buddha.

How long have street drugs (cocaine, herion, meth, etc.) been illegal in the US?  How much money have we spent trying to enforce drug laws?  Yet, we still have drugs all over the streets of the US.  I have a hard time believing that gun laws would be any different.  The only difference is that then you just took a group of law abiding citizens, and made them into criminals that you have to spend money to prosecute just because they don't want to give up their guns or AMMO.  Prohibition didn't work, drug laws (however necessary) haven't worked, and bullet selling bans would most certainly not work.  Except to keep ammo out of the hands of law abiding citizens.

So take away all bullets. Problem solved? Not quite. Put some chemicals into a bottle and toss it into a crowd. No metal for the detectors to find and can be made from common readily available materials. No bullets or firearms required. A person intent on hurting or killing people will find a way regardless of any solution you might dream up. Where there's a will, there's a way.

Bombsquad: I am not talking about trying to stop the chemicals that are needed, I am trying to make them more $$$. Once more time, 10 years before it starts to show any effect. Drug war isn't that simple. Its comming across the border. OK we gotta stop that. Cos pretty soon ammo will come across too.

Dam: Numbers man, numbers. Yes bottle into a crowd can hurt ... except its hurt vs kill, and its a few people instead of dozen and up.

Cool.
Buddha.

Buddha, you can call it bullet ban all you like and still be like a politician saying "But you can still keep your guns we aren't denying that" but the end result will be the same... the honest law abiding citizen is the one hurt by it.

Apparently there are no handguns in the UK. But handgun crime is rampant.

Gun crime in Aust is caused by guns which records show never even entered the country - ie, licensed importers didn't bring them in. In Aust we also need to show a Weapons License to buy ammo. Somehow the criminals without such a license are not only acquiring guns but also your precious ammo.

Now, if you want to save some lives.... go after Doctors!

Here's a couple of videos for you to mull over...

Why doctors are more dangerous than guns http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jhj3u3LoooM

How to stop a massacre http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=epZod2qyyN4

Legitimate Govts don't like to Use Force on their home territories because it exposes them for what they are. They NEED the people to Voluntarily go along with them. Even though they have Tanks and the like that doesn't mean they are unbeatable by people armed only with small arms. In countries run by Dictators things are different. But even then, a military dictator with tanks and stuff doesn't necessarily have a peaceful existence and the next Coup is just around the corner.

A govt is less likely going to resort to total 100% control of everything, from a situation not already like that, when the people are armed.

PLUS, and this is often forgotten... an armed populace makes a country not likely to be invaded, or invaded well. Governmental military conflicts costs a LOT of money and can bleed countries dry very fast.

Michael

<rant>
Not to get too political here, but what we need is not more laws that infringe on our freedoms.  We need lawmakers that are less interested in getting re-elected, and more interested in what's best for this country.  We need politicians that realize that people have to learn to be responsible for their own actions, instead of having their hands held.  Sure it's popular to extend jobless benefits and disability benefits to more and more people.  We are creating a culture with too large of a safety net.  With no incentive to succeed, people will continue to subsist.  Eventually you have more people on government handouts or payroll for all of these "entitlement" (don't get me started on the word "entitlement") programs than people paying taxes to support them.  At that point we are bound to fail, with no way of electing officials who will do what's actually in the interest of the country.  Ultimately it brings down more and more of those who have decided to try to work and succeed in life.
</rant>

What were we talking about again?

Quote from: bombsquad83 on August 07, 2012, 02:11:11 PM
Eventually you have more people on government handouts or payroll for all of these "entitlement" (don't get me started on the word "entitlement") programs than people paying taxes to support them.

I heard we actually just reached that point. 50% of the population in in the US is now receiving some kind of "government aid"

Now the question is how many of those people have any morals and work ethic left, to vote the aid away?

PS: specific references: 49%, reported as of 2010. But given the constant growth, seems like we should be at 50% today.
http://mercatus.org/publication/nation-government-dependents

I've heard something similar Phil.  Scary stuff.  Our entire society is being rotted away by the lack of responsibility created by the entitlement atmosphere.

Phil; Bomb

If you haven't read it I think you'll find the 1922 work "The Revolt Against Civilization" an Interesting read. Free PDF version here http://www.solargeneral.com/library/revolt-against-civilization-lothrop-stoddard.pdf

Summary: Stoddard analyses why past, advanced-for-the-time civilizations collapsed and examines whether the same signs are present in our societies. Quite insightful.

Michael

Yes 50% on gubbamint aid, and as soon as we can prevent people from getting older and getting to that pesky social security receivable age we should be able to cut it off, and yea there is the people on unemployment - (sorry I am guilty here atleast till the 13th) they should just get off their asses and work I say ... I mean I did, so the rest are still unemployed, sorry they are just lazy.

I think Mitt should just get over to the white house and put americans to work, by cutting off their dole. It just makes people lazy and dependent on govt.

Anyway back to guns and gun crime etc ...

Yea we have a damn porous border, so the guns will end up here, only the drug dealers will have guns cos they are smuggled along with drugs.
No one has legislated bullets. Yes a bullet ban wont be a gun ban. You use bullets, and turn the casings in, it wont affect you at all, so you get onto your porch and shoot off a few rounds ... it will affect you only in the sense you need to keep those casings. Same with a gun range or with self defense in your house.

It will just be impossible to effect a drive by but you can well return fire when it happens.

I am only looking to stopping large quantity bullet purchases and subsequent use.

Once again nothing is gonna happen with our ideas here, so dont just say no no no no ... some ideas need to be floated.

Cool.
Buddha.

but large quatitities can be purchsed in small amounts

Quote from The Revolt Against Civilization....

Compared to the vast differences between mankind and other life forms, human differences sink to insignificance and mankind appears a substantial unity.  Compared with each other, the wide differences between men themselves stand out, and mankind becomes an almost infinite diversity.
   
If these distinctions had been clearly recognized, democracy and aristocracy would have been viewed as parts of a larger truth, and there might have been no deep antagonism between them.  Unfortunately, both concepts were formulated long ago, when science was in its infancy and when the laws of life were virtually unknown.  Accordingly, both were founded largely on false notions: democracy upon the fallacy of natural equality; aristocracy upon the fallacy of artificial inequality.

Thus based on error, both democracy and aristocracy worked badly in practice: democracy tending to produce a destructive, levelling equality; aristocracy tending to produce an unjust oppressive inequality.  This merely increased the antagonism between the two system's; because one was continually invoked to cure the harm wrought by the other, and because social ills were ascribed exclusively to the defeated party, instead of being diagnosed as a joint product.

For the past half century the democratic idea has gained an unparalleled ascendancy in the world, while the aristocratic idea has been correspondingly discredited. Indeed, so complete has been democracy's triumph that it has been accorded a superstitious veneration, and any criticism of its fundamental perfection is widely regarded as a sort of lese-majeste or even heresy.

Now, this is an unhealthy state of affairs, because the democratic idea is not perfect but is a mixture of truth with errors like "natural equality" which modern science has proved to be dearly unsound. Such a situation is unworthy of an age claiming to be inspired by that scientific spirit whose basic quality is unflinching love of truth. In a scientific age no idea should be sacrosanct, no facts above analysis and criticism.

The above comes from later in the book. I suggest this Work because it is a Good read.

Michael

indeed it is michael. were seeing this passage almost daily in many places in the world

Quote from: yamahonkawazuki on August 07, 2012, 07:01:22 PM
but large quatitities can be purchsed in small amounts

Not unless you show proof that the previous small quantity you bought has been used up as per my restriction.
In fact we can implement this right now. Core charge for bullets, $10 per. That will make old bullets worth a lot of $$$ and we will see a big drop in people wanting to dump 1500 bucks into random crowds.
Of course someone with a huge stock pile they bought for nothing could still do it, but think about it, the core alone is worth $10, they have 1000+, obviously they will also be faced with a dilema, sell it ... or shoot into a crowd ?

Mister: Anyone can theorise something and write a book or article. I remember reading a well regarded article in 2004 which basically said "do you know of a dirt manufacturer in the US manufacturing more land ?" So what is available is all that there is ? so it is a limited supply right ? so to make $ you need to buy as much of it as you can cos it will be worth more and more and more."

All these theories and the books that explain what they are are based on a some assumptions. So is mine - namely, people with guns cant over throw a govt with tanks and aircraft, and people wont make bullets out of compressed air and rocks - really I thought about it too, sorry I cant prevent someone from doing a paint ball thing but use polished sharpened rock/stone or even moulded plastic or something like that. Anyway that will still hurt or injure good but not kill. anyway the theory under lying any of these eloquent books could be flawed, and all the author accomplished is to sell you a big collection of words. Seen many many many ... including the ones that our economy was built on for decades till it collapsed ... Ayn Rand.

Its not quite like increasing gas prices to curtail driving ... and turning around as saying the next day that its making revenue for the govt but people still driving as much ... Increase gas prices and people will start slowly changing to using less and less. BTW in the 80's in india the jap manufacturers were all the rage. All of them had a 100cc bike they were making.Southern india had a suzuki partnership and they made a Tvs-Suzuki, yeaaaaaaayyy we bought it in droves, then came northern India's Escorts with yamaha, and that bike made more power but tirned in 40 k/l instead of the 50 of the suzuki, it was luke warm, then came bajaj with kawasaki which promised 60, people went nuts for it. Then came Hero a bicycle company with literally no experience bigger than a moped, but they had a honda CD100 motor - 4 stroke the only one in the bunch ... and they literally killed the market. They took up over 40% by the late 80's. Why - 80 k/l.

10 years if you want to change behavior of people with $. If gas cost $10 and I didn't have a 60 mpg bike I'd tell my boss to kiss my a$$ I'm working from home 4 days out of 5. By that point all the rest of my team mates will have done the same thing. Yes govt makes $ in the mean time but in the end we will behave differently.

Cool.
Buddha.