The least dirtiest shirt in the closet

Which is the worst ?

  • Assault weapons ban

    Votes: 17 21.3%
  • High Capacity Magazine Ban

    Votes: 11 13.8%
  • Red Flag Laws

    Votes: 27 33.8%
  • Semi Automatic Weapons Ban

    Votes: 63 78.8%
  • Universal Background checks

    Votes: 14 17.5%

  • Total voters
    80
Status
Not open for further replies.

SharpDog

Member
Joined
Oct 9, 2006
Messages
3,203
Location
Tennessee
thought exercise this is as close as I can come to a prioritization mechanism for the various gun control ideas bandied about. Which ones are worst ?

I know, I know, they're ALL bad. But if it was easy is wouldn't be exercise .. :evil:

For 'Universal Background Checks' you can assume they will retain the data for a national gun registry
 
Last edited:
Out of the choices, the 3 outright bans. At least the other 2 have allowances bestowed upon us by our most gracious officials. [/sarcasm]
 
Depending on how you define "high capacity," the magazine ban might be the worst. If you take over-10-rounds as the benchmark, that would include most modern pistols as well as "assault rifles." Even M1 carbines would be affected. And legal, registered machine guns would be useless without their feeding devices.

Since I live in Virginia, I've been taking Gov. Northam's proposed AWB as a model for planning purposes. That doesn't include any grandfather clause, and would give owners of both AWB's and high-cap magazines a few months to turn them in or remove them from the state. My biggest moving job would involve all the magazines and belts that would be outlawed. And these are so ubiquitous in my collection that I couldn't be sure I got them all.
 
I think a semiauto ban would be the clear winner for worst. But I also don't discount the horror of red flag laws because I doubt they would include adequate protections. I know we may be inclined to think it wouldn't happen to us, but after going through a divorce, I'm not so sure.
 
I said AWB because “assault weapons” is, as far as I know, a poorly defined term whose definition is pretty fluid and could be adapted down the road to cover a wider range of “weapons”. Might as well call it a “scary gun” ban - it’s just as subjective, IMHO.
 
I can see two areas of concern that are hardly mutually exclusive:

The security of the liberty of the people and their republic.

Individual freedoms.

If we look at things like an "AWB" or "semi-auto" ban, they have a severe impact on individual liberties, but also drastically effect the people's capabilities like continuity of fire. I realize that talking about the people's militia is mostly theoretical or on principle under present circumstances. I don't want to argue irrationally, but clearly, the purpose of the 2nd Amendment isn't limited to just "self-defense." A ban in these areas would have a consequence that would be immediately crippling to the people's capabilities.

Magazine Limits. It seems like this one primarily limits self-defenders, and interferes with individuals. As long as magazines remain detachable (they might not be under an AWB), the continuity of fire of a militia wouldn't be terribly diminished and under the kind of circumstances where the militia may be necessary, arbitrary magazine limits seem like they would be easy to circumvent. These are the same reasons why it can hardly be effective in thwarting the unlawful. So, again, this one seems mostly to interfere with would-be lawful individuals. This one is also the easiest to reverse, but capitulation would make a future reversal harder.

Red Flag Laws. This has been discussed in other threads. It seems like it could be very onerous on an individual basis, but not immediately a threat to the militia. However, this kind of infringement could easily grow in a way such that it became Green Flag law where people would be red-flagged by default except upon possessing the favor to be green-flagged.

UBC's - obviously a defacto national registry. This one avoids the most onerous interference with the militia and individuals at least immediately, but it sets up the opportunity for mass confiscation. In the short-term, it feels the most palatable (and voting seems to indicate this). But in the longer term, it may be more damaging than magazine limits or red flag laws.


Needless to say, none of these proposals will stop suicidal maniacs from mass and spree killings. Red Flag laws are the only of the listed options that even have a chance of thwarting some, but are more likely to be abused. Look, the Parkland shooter gave an abundance of warnings and they were all ignored. Having a Red Flag law won't stop anything if people continue to marginalize and ignore the people that need help, and there is no evidence those laws will change anyone's apathy. The Vegas shooter, to my knowledge, gave no warnings that were recognized or could have been expected to be.
 
Last edited:
Needless to say, none of these proposals will stop suicidal maniacs from mass and spree killings. Red Flag laws are the only of the listed options that even have a chance of thwarting some, but are more likely to be abused. Look, the Parkland shooter gave an abundance of warnings and they were all ignored. Having a Red Flag law won't stop anything if people continue to marginalize and ignore the people that need help, and there is no evidence those laws will change anyone's apathy. The Vegas shooter, to my knowledge, gave no warnings that were recognized or could have been expected to be.
This right here, is the whole problem with the proposals, that common sense cannot fathom any other outcome. Everywhere, the facts show that none of these proposals would have prevented any of the instances that prompted them, but, but, "we must do SOMETHING." Okay, how about looking at the societal issues that drive people to these attacks, LONG before they start thinking about what weapon to carry it out with?
 
I would think that the worst choice/ result is not listed; the response of millions of American gun owners to a ban and ultimately confiscation.
 
Semi-auto ban includes all self loading firearms from 22LR thru to 50BMG rifles. Handguns, shotguns and rifles that self load will be outlawed somehow. All repeating firearms will come next, if it has a magazine or a rotating cylinder it will be next.
 
You can keep your AR by removing the gas tube and making it a single shot. That, is the way things are in UK. So AWB and mag limits are the least poisonous IMHO. The others are a big no go for me.
 
Red flag covers and affects the widest swathe/type of gun; all of them.
Here in San Diego, we have a city attorney who is trying to make a name for herself for political ascension, and who's been using GVROs where they're completely unnecessary, just for the appearance of doing something. Letting a public official run amok with an extremely vague policy that can be abused and deny people their 2A rights is, in my book, the worst thing imaginable.

link:
https://sandiegocountygunowners.com/gvro/
 
Red flag law would be the worst. One of my few neighbors is a former "resident" of where I worked in corrections. A call from him could have SWAT kicking in my door because he didn't get an extra toothbrush and didn't like me.
 
I just finished two letters (real paper and 50 cent stamps) to my representatives about the "red flag" thing and Due process of law. Told em' to think twice about taking away my 2nd amendment rights.
Get out your Microsoft word and write a letter or two.
I have also signed all the e-petitions concerning same.
Sheesh, I hate this pressure!
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top