In partnership with CBSSports.com
The place to talk about the Florida State Seminoles
The place to discuss general topics outside of Florida State
You have no favorite boards.
The most viewed topics.
The most replied to topics.
The most up-voted topics.
The most down-voted topics.
The most up-voted posters.
The most down-voted posters.
The most followed posters.
I wanted to get others opinion on what issues people would have with requiring full background checks on all firearm purchases, both new and used along with requiring the registration of all guns. This isn't really response to the shooting because obviously the guns were legally purchased. What do you guys think? What are the issues and or violations of personal rights that people would be concerned about?
Full background checks? No issue at all
I agree with Akis. No issue at all. No guns for psycho nut jobs.
3-2-1 TOUCHDOWN FSU
Ban on assault weapons, full background checks and mental evaluations.
Pretty much what I was thinking, just wanted to make sure I wasn't missing something. I think it is kind of crazy that the government knows exactly who owns every car in the country but has very little idea who has what firearms.
Absolutely you should have to have a full background check and a mental evaluation. Way to easy for psycho's to legally obtain guns.
The only problem would be even if you did this there are so many guns out there already that it still wouldn't be hard for anyone that wanted a gun to get one.
I'm indifferent with more gun control. I think there are too many guns out there to make any meaningful difference. I can think of a handful of people I know who own guns, which I could easily access, if needed. I suspect this is common... and suspect the vast majority of people you banned could easily get their hands on them.
A few weeks ago, well before this incident, I decided I was going to sell my firearms (glock/shotgun)... just to get them out of my house. I decided to do this after weighing the risk...
1) Odds someone will steal them and use it against someone else
2) Odds someone will take them away from me and use it against me
3) Odds of something escalating where having the option around increases the likelihood of me going to prison
It's my own personal preference, but as someone who has held LEO certification, I just feel like there are much better personal defense items available. Honestly, if I was going to had to choose between a handgun and a big ass can of sabre red...in a close quarter battle inside my house.... I'd choose the pepper spray every time... It's got a far higher chance of immobilizing someone... I can stand behind a wall and and paint 30 ft x 15 ft wall.... exposing nothing but my arm to the shooter... Good luck, i hope your a great shot... and brought your goggles, because if you didn't you are going to spend the next 45 minutes with your eyes involuntarily sealed.
Amazon.com: Sabre Family Home and Property Protection Pepper Spray (13.0-Ounce): Sports Outdoors
This post has been edited 3 times, most recently by FsuFanForever 19 months ago
I like it. I'm getting some.
I have zero issues with extensive background checks, shouldn't be held to just criminal imo
This post was edited by 2Noles241961 19 months ago
Absolutely fine with me. Can't believe it isn't in place already.
I'm with you. I see no reason why anyone would need an AR-15 or any other type of assault weapon. I have a handgun in my house, but that pepper spray idea actually sounds good.
"...just played physical football. That's Florida State football. That's the standard from now on! It never goes back!" - Jimbo Fisher
Anyone who doubts pepper spray should visit basic training on the day they get sprayed. 40+ grown men rolling around blind,in pain that rivals child birth or losing a limb.....for 45 minutes.
If you doubt it, dose yourself, ride it out and get back with me :-)
This post was edited by FsuFanForever 19 months ago
I had tear gas in the Navy, and it was awful. You are completely incapacitated.
Btw, your posts have made me request some as a stocking stuffer. Ha.
I don't see a reason either.
That being said, you do realize at the close range of these massacres a 12 gauge shotgun that holds 20 shells would cause a lot more damage right?
You ever seen the damage a 12 gauge can do inside of 30 feet?
Yes, that shits awful. I asked an ex troop which was worse... between pepper, tear gas, and taser...
He said taser worst, but most temporary...cooks your insides.. tear gas second... cause of the way it kills breathing... pepper was a close third, because it only blinds/fries your eyes.... doesnt shut off oxygen or cook your inside.
Either way, he agreed they were all equally effective at incapacitating. Feeling like your dying is universal through all of them
I don't doubt the pepper spray idea...like I said, I think it's a good one. And it would add a layer of comfort in removing a gun from my house as I am days away from welcoming my second child.
As for ever seeing the results of a 12 gauge shotgun up close, I have not. I don't hunt and have never held a shotgun. My father has seen the results of a shotgun slug to a woman and her 2 children as an investigator with the Sheriff's office he worked at. I remember watching him sit at our dining room table crying as he dealt with the images of that.
Not sure if I think shotguns should be included in any kind of gun control. I wouldn't want hunters to not have access to those. Background checks could obviously help in those situations.
I did find this article about Australia's efforts interesting though (their reform included shotguns). The statistic are interesting.
The author of a report on Australia's sweeping gun reform program that was instituted after a mass killing in 1996 says the United States would have many fewer deaths by dramatically decreasing the number of
First off: There is no constitutionally protected right to own a car. Hence comparing cars to guns is apple to oranges.
Second: In the words of Rahm Emanuel: "Never let a good crisis go to waste." Hence obama's photo op speech. He could care less about some rich white kids killed in CT. No, that little spectacle is nothing more than an excellent opportunity to further his agenda and to deflect from Benghazi, "the fiscal cliff", the negative effects of his pending healthcare behemoth coming to life and so on. Period. Speaking of that agenda a disarmed populace certainly aids that endeavor. None need look any further than Pol Pot, Hitler, Castro, Stalin, ad infinitum for examples of what a government can and will do to a populace that is no threat to fight back. How about Iran in '08? ANother example of what happens when unarmed folk disagree w/ their very armed government.
Third: We have succumbed to the left's vision. Kicked God out of everything, created this false industry known as "psychiatry" where every normal person has some kind of issue that needs medicating, glorified the destruction of the nuclear family, created "gun free zones", glorified the filth that emanates from hollywierd and TV daily daily, and so on. But we wonder how this happens and let's blame the guns. In other words let's do more leftist stoopid crap to solve problems caused by leftist policies. Brilliant.
Fourth: No "need" for an AR? That's fine if you don't want one, but it is downright criminal to conspire to deprive others' of obtaining the best possible tools for defense of one's home and family, be that from government or hoodlums (which BTW are largely the result of government).
In closing, guns are my redline (as they are w/ many other Americans). As a student of history I understand full well what happens and has ALWAYS happened once a government takes it upon itself to disarm it's people. Be that "assault weapons" or blades and arrows centuries ago, once the people have no means of resistance full blown tyranny is bound to follow. Hence, y'all may pontificate until it makes your belleding hearts overflow w/ the self-satisfaction of "having done something" but know this: the wanna be tin-pot dictator and his ilk will run into a brick wall when it comes to their ideas of theft of our firearms. To put it mildly.
Thank God what seemed like a pretty benign question that a lot of people are probably asking didn't get turned into something vitriolic and political.
This post was edited by John4FSU 19 months ago
Don't worry, you'll get used to it.
If EJ throws a pick, Levy thinks it's a left wing conspiracy.
And you don't think gun control is political? Nor that it has any connections to other things going on? That it exists wholly in a vacuum? That those who would endeavor to take away the most American of rights may have some other motives?
When it comes to "doing something" how about let's take a page from the Israeli's: Arm the teachers and admins. Or at least those that want to be and are/have been qualified. Take away gun free zones as they have been proven to be nothing less than an abject failure. Expanding law abiding people's ability to defend themselves will go ALOT further in preventing/limiting mass shootings than more of the same. The "same" BTW that brought nutjobs the splendid target rich envrionments within which they flourish.
And one moar thing: To the media: how about quit giving these people weeks of fame for their actions. You think that doesn't play a major role in these type's decision m aking process?
The only question asked was if we thought there was a problem with background checks.
Gun control is a political issue and click on the link in the fifth post and you will US Senator Feinstein looking back at you. So Levy did not start it, just joined the conversation.
Back to work
I like to cover all the bases.
Do I think gun control is political? Yes...it will take some form of legislation to allow for gun control. I also think it's probably worth a discussion on the processes that need to take place before guns end up in people's hands.
When you start lumping in Obama making a photo op appearance, not caring about some white kids dying, just to distract from these other things going on. It's pretty whacked out. Not to mention you going all Tom Cruise about " false industry known as 'psychiatry'". Don't be so glib, Levy.
247Sports In partnership with CBS Sports