New normal?

[pondwater]

^^^^ To quote the survivors "I say BS"

The question is not will such an action stop every fucking shooting in the country the question is will it reduce it.  Your stance is the equivalent of we should make drunk driving legal, because making it illegal hasn't completely eliminated all automobile fatalities.

WTF non sense are you talking about. Yes it's illegal to drive drunk, just like it's already illegal to shoot and kill people. Creating a law to ban guns to reduce mass shootings would be the equivalent of banning alcohol to reduce automobile fatalities. Oh wait, we already tried that. Didn't think that through too well did you?

If someone is willing to face the death penalty for mass shooting of others. Do you think that a fine or jail term for possessing a banned gun is going to deter them. Your whole train of thought is "BS"

No it is not. I want us to treat guns exactly like we treat cars.  You must pass a test showing that you competently and safely operate a gun.  You must register  and insure any gun you own.  If you use the gun irresponsible you lose the right to access one.  And we get rid of and hold the manufacturer responsible for any product that is unreasonably dangerous (Ford Pinto).

Driving is a privilege. The right to bear arms is a RIGHT. Do you take a test to exercise your first amendment rights?

[MyGodWearsAHoodie]

^^^ There are limits on the first amendment. 

There should be limits on the second.  And yes making murder illegal is not enough to prevent mass shootings.  Nor is making drunk driving illegal enough to prevent mass shootings.  But what has been very effective at reducing drunk driving is expanding the dram shop laws.  Repeal Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act and replace it with the same liabilities in the dram shop acts.

[Spider-Dan]

Full auto Class III weapons ARE NOT BANNED!!!

Please explain why specifically Class III fully-automatic weapons that are manufactured after 1986 are, in your words,  "not sold to the public."

Class III NFA weapons manufactured after 1986 are, in fact, BANNED from sale to the public.  Every fully-automatic weapon that is legal for sale to the public already exists, and no more may be manufactured.  That is a ban.

[pondwater]

^^^ There are limits on the first amendment. 

There should be limits on the second.  And yes making murder illegal is not enough to prevent mass shootings.  Nor is making drunk driving illegal enough to prevent mass shootings.  But what has been very effective at reducing drunk driving is expanding the dram shop laws.  Repeal Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act and replace it with the same liabilities in the dram shop acts.

Yes, we have the firearm equivalent of Dram shop laws. They are called NICS background checks. NICS is used by FFL dealers to determine whether a buyer is eligible to buy firearms. A dealer cannot legally sell a firearm to a person that can't legally buy a firearm. Just like a bar can't sell liquor to someone who appears legally drunk. A gun dealer who illegally sells a firearm to a prohibited person can be held liable.

Next...

[pondwater]

Please explain why specifically Class III fully-automatic weapons that are manufactured after 1986 are, in your words,  "not sold to the public."
Is that not an outright ban on public sales of those weapons?

Stop talking in circles and trying to spin things. Can a US citizen legally buy and own a Class III fully-automatic weapon? YES or NO? Just answer the question.

[Spider-Dan]

Can they buy some limited subset of Class III weapons?  Sure.
Can they buy any Class III weapon? No, because some of them are banned from sale to the public.

Since you're going to repeatedly insist that I "just answer the question," I'd really like for you to answer mine:

If gun control laws don't work, why is it any easier to buy a class III weapon made before 1986 than it is to buy one made after 1986?

[MyGodWearsAHoodie]

Yes, we have the firearm equivalent of Dram shop laws. They are called NICS background checks. NICS is used by FFL dealers to determine whether a buyer is eligible to buy firearms. A dealer cannot legally sell a firearm to a person that can't legally buy a firearm. Just like a bar can't sell liquor to someone who appears legally drunk. A gun dealer who illegally sells a firearm to a prohibited person can be held liable.

Next...

Except with booze the liability includes anyone who provides alcohol including private hosts or parties not at a bar.  So let's include the background check to ALL gun transfers.  Also we need to close the gaps in reporting that exist.  

[pondwater]

Can they buy some limited subset of Class III weapons?  Sure.
Can they buy any Class III weapon? No, because some of them are banned from sale to the public.

Since you're going to repeatedly insist that I "just answer the question," I'd really like for you to answer mine:

If gun control laws don't work, why is it any easier to buy a class III weapon made before 1986 than it is to buy one made after 1986?

Your limited knowledge is showing again. You have it backwards. US citizens can buy any and all Class III weapons except for a single limited subset. Let's take a look:

1) Machineguns pre 1986
2) Short Barreled Rifles (SBRs),
3) Short Barreled Shotguns (SBSs),
4) Suppressors,
5) Any Other Weapon (AOWs) and
6) Destructive Devices:
Any explosive, incendiary, or poison gas, including bombs, grenades, rockets, missiles, mines and similar devices (e.g. grenade launchers, rocket launchers). Parts intended for making such a device are also DDs. Small rockets, with less than 4 ounces (113 grams) of propellant, are exempt.
Large bore firearms
Any projectile weapon with a bore diameter greater than ​1⁄2 inch (50 caliber, 12.7 mm), except for shotguns "generally recognized as particularly suitable for sporting purposes".

Yes Spider, you are free to own missiles and mines.

I can buy and own anything on that Class III list except post 1986 fully automatic firearms, a small subset. You're focused on post '86 Class III full auto weapons like that is the reason that no crimes are committed with Class III weapons. Virtually anything on that list can be legally owned except for a small subset made after 1986. But yet NONE of them have been used in crimes. So please explain to me how Post '86 automatic weapons affects crime rates for anything else on that list.

[pondwater]

Except with booze the liability includes anyone who provides alcohol including private hosts or parties not at a bar.  So let's include the background check to ALL gun transfers.  Also we need to close the gaps in reporting that exist.  

Sure go ahead. I could care less about that. With 350 million firearms already in the country there would be no way to even enforce something like that among private citizens.

[Tenshot13]

Sure go ahead. I could care less about that. With 350 million firearms already in the country there would be no way to even enforce something like that among private citizens.

Couldn't* 

Dude we've been through this 

[Spider-Dan]

Oh, is "limited subset" the word game of the day?  Let me take a swing.

I propose that of the following classes of weapons, we ban only a single limited subset:

1) semi-automatic firearms (<--- this one)
2) longswords
3) knives and daggers
4) katanas
5) nunchaku
6) throwing stars (shuriken)
7) staves
8) brass knuckles
9) morning stars/maces
10) spears
11) hand axes/hatchets
12) great axes
13) recurve bows
14) compound bows

Will you look at that?  My extremely fair and narrow ban only affects a limited subset of the listed weapons.  Kind of like describing a ban of the last 30 years and the indefinite future of fully-automatic weapons as a "limited subset."

[MyGodWearsAHoodie]

Sure go ahead. I could care less about that. With 350 million firearms already in the country there would be no way to even enforce something like that among private citizens.

Absolutely ther would be.  You buy a gun with serial number 123, you sell it without doing a background check, said gun is used to kill someone, you go to jail as an assessory to murder.  Also you lose your house and all assets in the wrongful death lawsuit.

[pondwater]

Oh, is "limited subset" the word game of the day?  Let me take a swing.

I propose that of the following classes of weapons, we ban only a single limited subset:

1) semi-automatic firearms (<--- this one)
2) longswords
3) knives and daggers
4) katanas
5) nunchaku
6) throwing stars (shuriken)
7) staves
8) brass knuckles
9) morning stars/maces
10) spears
11) hand axes/hatchets
12) great axes
13) recurve bows
14) compound bows

Will you look at that?  My extremely fair and narrow ban only affects a limited subset of the listed weapons.  Kind of like describing a ban of the last 30 years and the indefinite future of fully-automatic weapons as a "limited subset."

You used the words "limited subset" first, only you got it backwards because you don't have knowledge of the topic your discussing. If you ban all new semi autos made tomorrow going forward but everything already manufactured and owned is grandfathered. Then by definition, they are NOT BANNED. You seem to have a problem grasping that fact.

[MyGodWearsAHoodie]

If you ban all new semi autos made tomorrow going forward but everything already manufactured and owned is grandfathered. Then by definition, they are NOT BANNED. You seem to have a problem grasping that fact.

Okay.  That is not perfect but a great start.  In much the same way requiring all new cars to have antilock brakes wasn't perfect because it left millions of cars on the road without the better brakes, but such a law would stop more guns from entering the system. Much like the 1807 law prohibiting the importation of slavery didn't end the injustice of slavery it was a step in the right direction.

[pondwater]

Absolutely ther would be.  You buy a gun with serial number 123, you sell it without doing a background check, said gun is used to kill someone, you go to jail as an assessory to murder.  Also you lose your house and all assets in the wrongful death lawsuit.

I bought a gun from the classified ads with serial#123 from Joe Fuckface 3 years ago for $100. Nobody knows that I own gun with serial#123. I sell gun to Sally Cunthead for $300. Nobody knows that I ever owned the gun with serial#123. And nobody knows that Sally Cunthead owns gun with serial#123. And since nobody knows anything there is nothing to enforce. I would assume that the majority of firearms in the hands of private citizens fit this scenario. Records are only kept from the original sale when it was new.