Here's where the gun debate should go!

[JaneV2.0]

I readily admit lack of knowledge when it comes to weaponry, and I suppose "weapon of mass destruction" could be considered hyperbolic by some.

[bae]

The AR-15 ....

AR-15-style rifles are the top-selling type of rifle in the USA, and have been for several years now. They range in price from $500 to $10,000, depending on configuration and manufacturer.

I believe the main reason they are so popular is that they are so modular - you can reconfigure them a million different ways, changing sights, stocks, grips, barrels, caliber, and so on, generally without special tools. This has spawned a huge accessory industry.

I myself am not too concerned about the 100-round magazines - if you've ever seen one, you'll realize they are expensive, heavy, very unreliable, and cause malfunctions of the firearm. They are mostly toys meant to attract people who like shiny objects, much as the several rows of fishing lures at Cabelas are designed to catch fishermen, not fish. I've never seen anyone with a clue show up to a real range with a 100-round magazine.

[kenh]

"I've never seen anyone with a clue show up to a real range with a 100-round magazine."

I doubt that anyone with a 100-round magazine will show up at a real range. Instead, they will keep it loaded, unpracticed, in their closet until they get mad enough at the world to trigger its use.

Does anyone have a short summary of the Glocks used, and the amazing history of that gun becoming the premier murder weapon of our time?

[bae]

I doubt that anyone with a 100-round magazine will show up at a real range. Instead, they will keep it loaded, unpracticed, in their closet until they get mad enough at the world to trigger its use.

Since it will quite likely jam and malfunction out-of-the-gate, that's probably the kind of magazine you want crazies to have, if you can't keep weapons out of their hands...

Does anyone have a short summary of the Glocks used, and the amazing history of that gun becoming the premier murder weapon of our time?[/COLOR]

Glocks are relatively inexpensive, tremendously reliable, easy to use, very safe for trained users, very easy to service, and have great factory support. As a result, they have captured the lion's share of the US law enforcement handgun market, and a huge share of the civilian market. So it is not surprising that they should turn up in crime stats as well.

(I helped write a textbook on the Glock, back in 1992, when I was a new convert from the older styles of weapons, and am a certified Glock armorer...)

[freein05]

One point that has not been covered is the money involved in firearms. The manufactures of firearms and their accessories have a vested interest in firearms control. These groups spend a lot of money on the NRA and buying politicians. Our politicians are afaird to propose any gun control laws to do so would end their political carrier. That is just not wright.

[bae]

One point that has not been covered is the money involved in firearms. The manufactures of firearms and their accessories have a vested interest in firearms control. These groups spend a lot of money on the NRA and buying politicians.

How large is the US firearms industry, in dollars?

How does that compare to other industries that lobby?

Back-of-the-envelope-time....

(I'll give you a hint - the last company I started is about 50% larger in revenue than the US firearms and ammunition industry. Whole Food Markets has 2.5x the revenue of the entire firearms industry, yet somehow they don't have the same influence over policy. Why is that? Another hint: how many NRA members will write letters and make phone calls if they are informed Yet Another Piece Of Legislation is heading down the pike to add to the thousands of laws already on the books?)

[Gregg]

A more telling figure might be the revenue generated by the illicit gun trade. I do not know what that figure is. I suspect it is very lucrative for a few players who can't be bothered with traditional cost of doing business line items and regulatory compliance. Very few legal gun dealers are getting rich through their trade.

[freein05]

I could not find the total dollar amount of gun sales but I fond the following interesting. I will grant that a lot of the 6 million dollars comes from individuals the NRA has scared into believing Obama is taking away their toys/guns even though he has done nothing in the gun the control area.

"Chad Ramsey, the Brady Campaign's senior associate director, says that the NRA has spent $6.67m campaigning against Obama, a sum more than 30 times what it put in to the election campaign against Al Gore in the 2000 election. He adds: "The gun lobby, particularly the NRA, throughout the election has fomented this paranoia that the Obama administration and the Democrats were going to come and take your guns. I think folks responded to that. We're seeing people who are stockpiling weapons because they believed it. It's very problematic and scary. The gun lobby and the NRA have a real interest in spreading this fear. They get a lot of their funding from gun manufacturers and gun dealers. They're feeding their own coffers by doing this."

We will have to agree to disagree. I would agree to reasonable gun control laws and so would many gun owners. The NRA will not be satisfied until everyone owns a gun and preferably a fully automatic machine gun.

[iris lily]

...The NRA will not be satisfied until everyone owns a gun and preferably a fully automatic machine gun.

Oh free, that is so much hyperbole, it's ridiculous.

[Zoebird]

Yes, very hyperbolic.

Here's the thing. I support the NRA. I own zero guns.

The purpose of the second amendment was not to provide options for people to have weapons in their hunting. It was designed so that we could have a standing militia and so that we could fight our own government if need be.

As such, I think that it's great that there are people out there who understand these weapons, who purchase them and keep them in good condition, and are preparing themselves for a great tyranny.

I rely on them to do so. Not because I am eschewing responsibility. I only hope that should something come to pass that sets us up in this way, that I will have another responsibility within that community. It may be that I am taught to carry and use those weapons in the assistance of others, or it may be that I teach those people how to meditate in between battles to better manage their PTSD. Everyone will have a roll, no doubt, should such a terrible vision come to pass.

It will also allow people to secure themselves. Responsible gun owners -- who are the majority of gun owners -- actually reduce the risk of gun violence. No doubt, Bae would have taken down that young man in 30 seconds flat and been a hero -- assuming the laws allowed him to legally conceal-carry. Which, I hope that they would.

In fact, I would honestly trust bae with my life if need be, beucase I believe that he understands this stuff far better than I do. And I'm glad that he does.

Now, this might seem wholly incongruous with why I own no guns.

I'll be honest: guns are difficult tools. They require a great deal of care and knowledge. They require practice and effort. Haivng not been raised in a family that handled guns, I have no experience with them. My family carries a certain measure of fear around them (I don't know why), even though my grandfathers (all 5 of them -- my father had a step dad) were all highly regarded marksmen in their respective military groups (Army, Navy). My cousin is also an excellent marksman. Several of my friends are hunters as well -- so they are clear on weaponry. And three of my friends work almost exclusively with hand-guns, usually doing the casual 'tournaments' at the shooting ranges.

I simply have not taken the time to learn the skills required to be both safe and effective with guns -- for myself and for others. It is too risky for me to have or carry a gun. And with this, I'm not sure I'd use it for security, and *that* is a big issue. Hesitating with a gun is more risky than people imagine (or so my grandfather told me). He said that if I was to carry a weapon, I damn well be both able. . .and more importantly willing. . .to use it. If you dont' have *that* then it's a danger to have the weapon on you, because the other guy will remove it from you and use it against you.

Thus, at the end of the day, I am too risky around those weapons.

But, I value that people have access, and i value that there are people who responsibly learn how to use these weapons.

And in the future, I may learn to use them myself. I don't know. I think going to a shooting range and learning would be fun, and I always through that skeet shooting looked like a real good time. I'd love for DS to learn, but he's way more interested in archery right now. ANd he has time. He's only 4. He wouldn't like the noise.