Biden Talks Gun Control Proposals

[JLTucker]

I seem to recall you not having gun safes in your home, Alyeksa. Don't you place your weapons in various locations for easy access? I also seem to recall you posting images of yourself not practicing trigger discipline, which you admitted was goofing around.

If this is wrong, please correct me.

[Alyeska]

I seem to recall you not having gun safes in your home, Alyeksa. Don't you place your weapons in various locations for easy access? I also seem to recall you posting images of yourself not practicing trigger discipline, which you admitted was goofing around.

If this is wrong, please correct me.

When I had an apartment, I had no gun safes. I have a house now. I have two gun safes. And I don't position guns for easy access around the house. I have a handgun in my bedroom. And I've even put serious thought into a night stand safe.

[The Duchess of Zeon]

The total lack of trigger discipline, for one.

[weemadando]

Is there a reason that banning automatics/any autoloadrrs for general sales/use is off the table? Have all the pump actions, bolt actions and breech/muzzle loaders you want, but if you want to have something that doesn't require manual action between each round being chambered then you need a valid professional purpose?

Because that basically severely restricts the fundamental constitutional right of people to organise militias and maintain military arms which are necessary, in the US social consensus, for a truly free state.

More generally, there is no furthermore real evidence that the autoloader is that much more greatly effective; 15 aimed rounds a minute are well within the capability of a bolt-action rifle, more if you're not aiming--and that's one that has to be reloaded after 10 - 12 rounds with 5-round stripper clips. In short, with a small enough magazine, an autoloader is not any more dangerous in terms of rate of fire when averaged over a longer period of time (several minutes) than a bolt action. A limit on detachable magazines to 5 rounds (the same as a typical stripper clip) would make the difference between autoloaders and bolt-action rifles exquisitely small in terms of sustained rate of fire.

But surely the rational starting point would be "OK, here is our extreme and ridiculous anti-gun position to match your fucking ridiculous pro-fun position, now, let's offer and take concessions from each other until we reach an agreement." Instead of the usual: "COLD DEAD HANDS" and "well, OK, there's nothing we can do here."

[Alyeska]

The total lack of trigger discipline, for one.

My trigger discipline is just fine thank you very much. Its natural for me to pick up anything gun shaped with my finger off the trigger. I pick up drills in a "safe" manner because of the habit.

[Aaron MkII]

Shes referring to the thread a few years ago with you and your buddy at a quarry or something. It had a bunch of pictures of you pointing your pistol at the camera, no TD and some "don't try this at home."

[weemadando]

Who was the one who shot his dad's laptop while trying to take a picture?

[The Duchess of Zeon]

Look, it's not my problem the other side has the intelligence of a stoned chimp.

And yeah, Aaron is right. I am not going to take the word of someone as a self-proclaimed firearms expert who points pistols at somebody (i.e. the person holding the camera), and had no trigger discipline.. And, worse, combines the two by pointing the pistol at someone without TD!

And then thinks it is innocent enough to post the pictures on the internet.

And then thinks it's funny enough to make a "don't try this at home" joke on top of it all.

Alyeska's behaviour in that thread was more along the lines of what you'd expect from This guy visiting one of those American machine-gun experience gun stores where you can fire full autos under supervision with no prior experience than what you'd expect from someone who knew jack and shit about firearms.

[Alyeska]

Look, it's not my problem the other side has the intelligence of a stoned chimp.

And yeah, Aaron is right. I am not going to take the word of someone as a self-proclaimed firearms expert who points pistols at somebody (i.e. the person holding the camera), and had no trigger discipline.. And, worse, combines the two by pointing the pistol at someone without TD!

And then thinks it is innocent enough to post the pictures on the internet.

And then thinks it's funny enough to make a "don't try this at home" joke on top of it all.

Alyeska's behaviour in that thread was more along the lines of what you'd expect from This guy visiting one of those American machine-gun experience gun stores where you can fire full autos under supervision with no prior experience than what you'd expect from someone who knew jack and shit about firearms.

Give me a fucking break. A posed photo is what you are bitching about? Seriously? So do you think the actors are idiots when they point a gun at someone for a scene in a movie or TV series? Those are frequently real guns being used, even for scenes without gun shots.

I guess because I shoot a gun my trigger discipline must be crap. Since my finger was on the trigger.

Someone must be a real shitty driver because they drive fast on a race track. Afterall, that proves they can't drive for shit on a real road because they clearly were driving really fast.

Reloading a gun isn't rocket science. It doesn't take a stupidly long time to get the motions and movement down. We aren't talking about a skate board. We aren't talking about skiing. Its a hand full of very simple motions. A single days practice can create for very quick reload speeds.

And all because I disagreed with you over the speed at which you can reload a gun, you resort to poisoning the well logical fallacies and outright insult me? What the fuck is your problem?

[JLTucker]

Give me a fucking break. A posed photo is what you are bitching about? Seriously? So do you think the actors are idiots when they point a gun at someone for a scene in a movie or TV series? Those are frequently real guns being used, even for scenes without gun shots.

I guess because I shoot a gun my trigger discipline must be crap. Since my finger was on the trigger.

I don't think you're getting it. Comparing your situation to where life and death is at stake to a controlled Hollywood production is disingenuous. Not only do your photos show rampant unprofessional behavior, it gives the impression that it's okay to break safety under the guise of looking cool. Imagine if someone who was just beginning to learn how to shoot saw you doing it. What would they think? Hell, Aaron related an anecdote elsewhere about how someone who was given the proper safety training waved a gun around without thinknig of anyone. What you did is exactly like that.

Someone must be a real shitty driver because they drive fast on a race track. Afterall, that proves they can't drive for shit on a real road because they clearly were driving really fast.

This would make sense if she said your lack of trigger disciplined indicated you are a horrible shot. Your example goes against your favor: what you described would make them a danger to others, which is exactly what your photos indicated, regardless if the magazines had ammunition.

[Alyeska]

I don't think you're getting it. Comparing your situation to where life and death is at stake to a controlled Hollywood production is disingenuous. Not only do your photos show rampant unprofessional behavior, it gives the impression that it's okay to break safety under the guise of looking cool. Imagine if someone who was just beginning to learn how to shoot saw you doing it. What would they think? Hell, Aaron related an anecdote elsewhere about how someone who was given the proper safety training waved a gun around without thinknig of anyone. What you did is exactly like that.

Life and death is at stake in a Hollywood production too. Bruce Lee Jr.

What I did was not even remotely like the example from Aaron. Not in the least. It was a controlled situation with only two people involved. The guns were unloaded. We consented to making the photos.

Waving a gun around completely lacks consent.

This would make sense if she said your lack of trigger disciplined indicated you are a horrible shot. Your example goes against your favor: what you described would make them a danger to others, which is exactly what your photos indicated, regardless if the magazines had ammunition.

And a race car driver is a danger to others because they clearly lack the control necessary to drive. As evidence by their repeatedly driving faster than the speed limit.

[JLTucker]

Life and death is at stake in a Hollywood production too. Bruce Lee Jr.

You're right. I'm sure the necessary steps taken to prevent that from happening again have not been taken since 1993. And I'm sure their production staff aren't as awesome as you are in making sure the environment is controlled so such mishaps never happen again. I am also positive that they don't have actual professionals, many of them, on set to make sure no one is harmed. That is completely equivalent to two hobbyists thinking they have taken the necessary precautions to prevent a disaster.

What I did was not even remotely like the example from Aaron. Not in the least. It was a controlled situation with only two people involved. The guns were unloaded. We consented to making the photos.

And what if you made a mistake when checking the magazines and the chamber? What if, in your feeble and unsuccessful attempt to look cool, you overlooked a round and accidentally pulled the trigger?

And a race car driver is a danger to others because they clearly lack the control necessary to drive. As evidence by their repeatedly driving faster than the speed limit.

I'm not confident in what is being meant here, so I'll address the two meanings I interpret from these statements. First, if you are referring to actual races where the professionals use their skill, there's a difference between that and what I said. That environment is full of professionals who know the risk. The non-professionals on the open, real road do not have that luxury. They trust others to follow the given laws. The race car driver speeding is a danger to them.

Second, I don't care if they are complete professionals. Mistakes can happen on the open road and when they speed, they endanger everyone else, just like mistakes can happen with such reckless gun usage as you displayed in that thread.

If your meaning was not one of those two, I'd greatly appreciate a clarification to I can respond accordingly.

I have come to the conclusion that people like you, who continue to justify such horrible gun practices, should not have the privilege to own a weapon. After all, you were so bent on owning a gun that you didn't think of buying a safe either prior to or concurrently with the weapon purchase. If you couldn't afford it or didn't have the space, then you wait until both conditions are met.

[Alyeska]

You're right. I'm sure the necessary steps taken to prevent that from happening again have not been taken since 1993. And I'm sure their production staff aren't as awesome as you are in making sure the environment is controlled so such mishaps never happen again. I am also positive that they don't have actual professionals, many of them, on set to make sure no one is harmed. That is completely equivalent to two hobbyists thinking they have taken the necessary precautions to prevent a disaster.

Well for starters, the movie involved firing a blank at someone. Which is a far cry from an unloaded gun.

And what if you made a mistake when checking the magazines and the chamber? What if, in your feeble and unsuccessful attempt to look cool, you overlooked a round and accidentally pulled the trigger?

It would have been a tragic accident. But that didn't happen.

What if I fell while hiking? What if I fell off a ski lift in heavy winds? What if a meteor struck your house? Shit happens. As evidence by Bruce Lee Jr. Saying that because shit happens people should never do something dangerous. Well, a lot of things we enjoy are dangerous. Sports are dangerous. Just going outside is dangerous. Driving down the road is dangerous.

I'm not confident in what is being meant here, so I'll address the two meanings I interpret from these statements. First, if you are referring to actual races where the professionals use their skill, there's a difference between that and what I said. That environment is full of professionals who know the risk. The non-professionals on the open, real road do not have that luxury. They trust others to follow the given laws. The race car driver speeding is a danger to them.

Second, I don't care if they are complete professionals. Mistakes can happen on the open road and when they speed, they endanger everyone else, just like mistakes can happen with such reckless gun usage as you displayed in that thread.

I have come to the conclusion that people like you, who continue to justify such horrible gun practices, should not have the privilege to own a weapon. After all, you were so bent on owning a gun that you didn't think of buying a safe either prior to or concurrently with the weapon purchase.

What makes a professional? What makes an armature? That someone gets paid more?

You are making gross accusations against me while saying its perfectly OK for other people to do exactly the same thing. So if I take the same safety precautions that a "professional" takes, thats not good enough?

I have come to the conclusion that you are a fucking coward who lives in fear of his own shadow.

[Kamakazie Sith]

Fuck off. When you talk about banning all Federal funding of research and suppressing statistics generated by Federal agencies then YOU are the one who is politically motivated.

We have every right considering the statements of the gun grabbing left to refuse to let them allocate money for this kind of research. I don't care what you say, we will stop this from happening and fortunately as an Australian you can't do anything about it.

I disagree. Information is critical to help others inform the public and make decisions. That can't be done when information is suppressed. I'm a bit shocked that you are for such a measure and that your stated reason is because there are people that want to take guns away. Yes, they exist but that doesn't give anyone the right to suppress information.


The following isn't addressed directly to you, Duchess.

Ando, hit it right on the head. If you really want to make a difference then you'd need to restrict firearms to single shot weapons. Though that will effect the ability for one to use the firearm in self defense which will become a constitutional issue and likely not live very long.

A ban on high capacity magazines can be defeated by practice, good positioning, and possession of multiple weapons. Could a high capacity ban save lives in the next incident. Perhaps. The shooter may not have additional weapon, may not have good position, and may not be competent. For example - You could argue that had Loughner only had a ten round magazine he would have dropped it as well and lives would be saved since he only had one weapon. It seems like it would be impossible to really know so at this point you need to decide whether you think it would make enough of a difference to restrict these to law abiding gun owners.

By the way, 1.5 second reload is pretty damn fast. I have heard that there are people that can accomplish this they are very rare. My average reload speed is 3-4 seconds transitioning from a proper pistol grip. 2 seconds if I have a hand* on a magazine.

* EDIT - I had "hard on" LMAO!

[JLTucker]

Well for starters, the movie involved firing a blank at someone. Which is a far cry from an unloaded gun.

I see you missed my point. I won't come back to it because I doubt you'll get it if I reiterate in a clearer manner, which may not even be possible.

It would have been a tragic accident. But that didn't happen.

The other day I didn't cause an accident while excessively speeding (hypothetical; I don't speed) and endangering others. Am I now vindicated that something tragic didn't happen? Is it now acceptable for me to speed at any given whim as long as something horrible doesn't take place? This is what I gather from your statements.

What if I fell while hiking? What if I fell off a ski lift in heavy winds? What if a meteor struck your house? Shit happens. As evidence by Bruce Lee Jr. Saying that because shit happens people should never do something dangerous. Well, a lot of things we enjoy are dangerous. Sports are dangerous. Just going outside is dangerous. Driving down the road is dangerous.

Do you know what the difference is between these and the scenario we are discussing outside of the obvious false equivalencies? Another party is involved. Can I possibly kill someone with my accidental fall, being unable to take precautions that may arise with a misplaced step or a loose stone? Sure. There's no doubt about that. The difference is that I can't anticipate everything when I go hiking. I can't make sure that the weather will not turn against me, that every rock is firmly implanted into the mountainside. I can't make sure that other drivers on the road will be as safe as I am. In these scenarios, the best I can do is abide by the laws and the safety precautions taught and learned through experience and make sure I follow them to a T. These environment are not under my complete control, so I do my best to mitigate harm. Your horrible experience, however, was under your complete control, as you tacitly admitted. But here's the caveat: even then mistakes can happen. Can you honestly say with 99% confidence that you will never make a mistake when performing such a stunt again or ever handling your weapon? Are you certain that you will always know when your gun is not loaded?

I think it's unfortunate that "shit happens" is your response to a dead or even maimed human being at the hands of reckless gun practices.

What makes a professional? What makes an armature? That someone gets paid more?

You are making gross accusations against me while saying its perfectly OK for other people to do exactly the same thing. So if I take the same safety precautions that a "professional" takes, thats not good enough?

I have come to the conclusion that you are a fucking coward who lives in fear of his own shadow.

Instead of addressing my points, which saliently pointed out the flaws in your logic, you are playing a game of semantics. But I'll have a go. First, a professional wouldn't joke around with an item designed for killing while attempting to look cool. If they do, they aren't professionals. Period. A gun is not a toy. Monetary gain is irrelevant, so I don't know why you brought that up. I also think that anyone who handles a gun in the manner you did, no matter the amount of experience, has reverted their experience back to an amateur level because they are not practicing one of the fundamental safety precautions when handling such a device.

I'm a coward, though, for taking precautions when I do certain things to make sure I and others aren't harmed.

[Alyeska]

I also think that anyone who handles a gun in the manner you did, no matter the amount of experience, has reverted their experience back to an amateur level because they are not practicing one of the fundamental safety precautions when handling such a device.

And right back to the begining. Anyone who handles a gun in the manner I did. What did I do? I pointed the gun at someone else. No matter the experience.

http://www.imfdb.org/wiki/File:MatrixBeretta92FS-2.jpg

Guess what. The same thing. You just said the experience level doesn't matter. The mere act of pointing a gun at someone else is what is wrong.

[Kamakazie Sith]

On the issue of Alyeska's photograph I have the following to explain. Now I have not actually seen the photograph in question or the thread but I'm going to assume that it was in a place where other people were not present. I'm also going to assume Alyeska explained his actions either in the OP or when people asked questions.

We'll start with a review of the rules for firearm safety.

1 - All guns are always loaded.
2 - Never let the muzzle cover anything you are not willing to destroy.
3 - Keep your finger off the trigger until your sights are on the target.
4 - Be sure of your target and what is beyond it.

1; Yes, it says always. That means that when someone hands you a pistol and says "Hey, it is unloaded" you check anyway. It does NOT mean that the weapon is loaded even after you check it. I'll go into this further in a moment.

2-4; Only apply to loaded weapons.

I said the above because during training actual weapons will be used for training effect. During these times other safety measures are brought into play. These training events are rare but they do take place during specific situations.

1; All persons involved will be searched for live ammunition when they pass through a controlled entry point. If they leave this entry point and return they will be searched again. This applies regardless of the extent or distance that they left the controlled area. No live ammunition will be permitted in the training area under any circumstances.

2; All involved firearms and magazines will be visually and physically inspected by those people involved in the training to ensure both are clear. That means if you have twenty people involved then all twenty will visually and physically inspect each weapon to ensure that the magazine is empty and the chamber is clear.

These weapons then can be used for a training scenario in which they will be pointed at people.

I bring this up because while Alyeskas' photograph might be unprofessional it does not mean he is incompetent.

[The Duchess of Zeon]

Unfortunately, Alyeska's picture was in an area including several people shooting at an informal shooting range at a quarry, so a bunch of the circumstances you list which could make him not incompetent don't apply.

[weemadando]

Also, in that Matrix shot, there would have been multiple layers of safety involved: armourers ensuring the weapon and any ammunition is correctly prepared, firearms trainers who ensured that the guns are being handled and fired safely, stunt and fight coordinators ensuring that the surrounding actors and actions are choreographed so that performers are safe, there would likely be studio and maybe even insurance company reps present to ensure compliance with occupational health and safety and identify any other issues.

Not to mention that the camera and crew in that shot was probably behind a safety shield of some kind, or if they were particularly concerned, using a mirror rig or similar to make sure that the guns are not being fired at anyone.

But hey, that's totally the same as some dickheads playing at manliness on a quarry.

[weemadando]

*ghetto edit*

And also there would have been paramedics and an ambulance standing by because that's standard for any level of risky stuff when filming.

Plus, being shot in Australia there's even a chance that police would have been on site to audit the safety and security of all weapons and ammunition throughout filming.

[Ralin]

Could someone clarify for us non-gun people how exactly Alyeska's trigger discipline or lack thereof has anything to do with his judgement on how quickly you can reload a gun? Because I don't get the connection between the two.

[weemadando]

Goes towards discrediting his 1.5s statement, which would be an intensively drilled person under ideal conditions.

It also serves as a fine distraction from actually discussing issues, so really, bravo Aly, you have served the pro-gun lobby well.

[Kamakazie Sith]

Unfortunately, Alyeska's picture was in an area including several people shooting at an informal shooting range at a quarry, so a bunch of the circumstances you list which could make him not incompetent don't apply.

So, the weapon was being pointed at other people at this quarry who had not checked and consented to it and/or was it not being pointed down range?

The point of my post wasn't to list procedures that people should follow. It was to point out that pointing a real weapon at someone doesn't make you incompetent if you and that other person checked and verified that it was unloaded.

So, how could someone have been hurt if Alyeska and another person checked and verified that the weapon was unloaded?

It is possible that an uninformed patron of this range could have seen this happening and assumed that Alyeska was about to kill another person so they shoot Alyeska to preserve a life. There have been instances of such a thing happening. IIRC some lady shot and killed two other people in a range a while ago so this isn't unheard of.

[Dark Hellion]

Jesus fucking christ... can't any of you people see how fucking undermining this kind of asinine arguing is to any actual progress on reducing gun violence. No wait you can' because you are so goddamn convinced of your own smug moral superiority. How can people I know are intelligent be so fucking retarded?

[Kamakazie Sith]

Jesus fucking christ... can't any of you people see how fucking undermining this kind of asinine arguing is to any actual progress on reducing gun violence. No wait you can' because you are so goddamn convinced of your own smug moral superiority. How can people I know are intelligent be so fucking retarded?

Dark Hellion you know as well as I do that conversations on this board are constantly evolving.

I'm sick of hearing this. Sorry but it's bullshit. We are not going to reduce gun violence. We're having a discussion and these discussions evolve. You don't like the direction then add something to bring it in a direction you want to talk about. Obviously, going into detail on firearm safety is not going to reduce mass shootings. Thank you, Captain Obvious.