Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

benEzra

benEzra's Journal
benEzra's Journal
June 20, 2015

That's what the Third Way said in 1994, 1996, 2000, and 2004, too.

And support for new restrictions on lawful ownership is lower now than it was then.

June 19, 2015

Depends on the depth, I would imagine.

Just above the freezing point at the crust/ocean boundary, with temps rising as you go down. That's just a guess on my part, though.

June 18, 2015

Not allowed to in SC...carry in church is prohibited

except for possibly with written permission of the pastor or board.

June 18, 2015

It's the "ZOMG MODERN LOOKING RIFLES ARE A HUUUUUGE THREAT" crowd that are the science deniers.

Murder, by State and Type of Weapon, 2013 (FBI)

[font face="courier new"]Total murders...................... 12,253
Handguns............................ 5,782 (47.2%)
Firearms (type unknown)............. 2,079 (17.0%)
Clubs, rope, fire, etc.............. 1,622 (13.2%)
Knives and other cutting weapons.... 1,490 (12.2%)
Hands, fists, feet.................... 687 (5.6%)
Shotguns.............................. 308 (2.5%)
Rifles................................ 285 (2.3%)[/font]

And there nothing whatsoever about a handgrip that sticks out, or a modular aluminum receiver, that makes an AR-15 more dangerous than a traditional-looking rifle like a Ruger Mini-14. They fire the same ammunition at the same rate (one and only one shot per trigger pull) as other civilian rifles, and have the same range of magazine capacities.
June 18, 2015

Actually, it's not.

It is, however, the American homeowner's rifle of choice, by a huge margin.

You are aware that rifles are the least misused of all weapons in this country, yes?

Murder, by State and Type of Weapon, 2013 (FBI)

[font face="courier new"]Total murders...................... 12,253
Handguns............................ 5,782 (47.2%)
Firearms (type unknown)............. 2,079 (17.0%)
Clubs, rope, fire, etc.............. 1,622 (13.2%)
Knives and other cutting weapons.... 1,490 (12.2%)
Hands, fists, feet.................... 687 (5.6%)
Shotguns.............................. 308 (2.5%)
Rifles................................ 285 (2.3%)[/font]


The trend in rifle homicide is down, even though the AR-15 platform has been the most popular civilian rifle in the United States for going on two decades now.

Rifle homicides, 2005-2013 (from FBI Uniform Crime Reports 2005-2013, Table 20, collated):

2005: 442
2006: 436
2007: 450
2008: 375
2009: 348
2010: 358
2011: 323
2012: 302
2013: 285

And that's for all rifles combined. FWIW, the worst mass shooting in U.S. history was carried out using a pair of ordinary-looking pistols, which fire just as fast as an AR or any other civilian rifle, and a backpack full of low-capacity magazines. Anyone who is fighting to outlaw the most popular rifles isn't going after "gun violence", they are going after lawful ownership.
June 18, 2015

Intentional conflation of violent criminals with gun owners.

The majority of homicides are committed by people who can't legally so much as touch a gun or a single round of ammunition; very, very few homicides are committed by first-time offenders, as the VPC well knows.

Of course, the VPC is the same organization that trolled Dems into throwing away the House and Senate in 1994 over the VPC's "assault weapon" fraud, who pushed the "precision bolt-actions are a threat to airliners" meme, etc. etc., and who tried to portray holders of concealed carry licenses (statistically even less likely to commit unjustifiable homicide than law enforcement are) so consider the source.

June 16, 2015

Generally no.

Some old designs (think antique revolvers and some antique semiautos) could go off if they dropped and fell on the hammer a certain way, or some older semiautos fell pointing straight down so that inertia could move the firing pin hard enough to discharge a shot into the ground on impact. In the 19th century, revolvers were often carried with an empty chamber under the hammer to render them drop-safe, but that is not necessary with most modern designs. Modern handguns incorporate passive safeties to prevent accidental discharge, and most could be thrown off a building onto pavement and not go off, though some mid-century designs (like the Walther PPK and the Phoenix Arms Raven) require the manual safety to be on.

Ammo can go off due to heat if the temperature of the powder exceeded its ignition temperature, but that would be around 300 degrees, give or take 10%. You can achieve that in an oven, or in a fire, but not by leaving it in a car with the windows up.

Nearly 100% of the "the gun just went off" stories you'll hear involve accidentally pulling the trigger, usually either as the result of carelessly putting a finger on the trigger when the shooter did not intend to fire the gun, trying to catch a falling gun (don't, it's drop-safe but a snatch can pull the trigger), or accidentally pulling the trigger while holstering. It's a fundamental rule of gun safety that your finger goes on the trigger only when you are about to shoot, and one of the easiest ways to identify a total n00b is to see whether they casually rest their finger on the trigger.

Some older bolt-action rifles designed in the 1940s through the 1970s aren't drop-safe because they weren't intended to be carried with the chamber loaded, but most modern designs incorporate better safety systems and are intended to be drop-safe with the safety engaged, and some incorporate passive safeties as well. Also, some older rifles and shotguns could be fired by closing the action, and the Remington 700 had a problem for a while in which a neglected and dirty rifle could fire when the safety was disengaged, but handguns designed to be carried loaded tended to have a lot more attention paid to those kinds of failure modes.

June 13, 2015

Colt lost their way a few times...

when they let their line of civilian revolvers and pistols wither while wasting resources on politically favored but unreliable "smart guns", mostly abandoning the civilian AR market to other companies just as the AR became the top selling civilian rifle in the United States, and setting themselves up for gun-owner boycotts once or twice in the '90s. The disaster with the promising All-American 2000 9mm pistol (interesting design, lousy quality assurance) hurt them badly and sent them into Chapter 11 for a while. And when they finally re-entered the AR market, their quality was excellent (a Colt 6920 is still of the more highly regarded AR's) but they lagged in adapting to civilian innovation on that platform; to this day, you can't buy a Colt AR with a midlength gas system, for example.

What is really hurting them right now is debt from their prior poor decisions, though; their revenues are decent, but given their debt load they would have to have stellar revenues to survive.

I do think they will emerge from bankruptcy a much healthier company; we'll see.

Good writeup at Wikipedia: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Colt%27s_Manufacturing_Company

June 7, 2015

The Four Rules of Gun Safety:

The Four Rules of Gun Safety:

(1) Always treat a gun as if it is loaded.

(2) Never point a gun in an unsafe direction. (If you say "But it's OK, it's unloaded", see Rule 1.)

(3) Keep your finger off the trigger unless you are on target and ready to shoot. (If you say "But it's OK, it's unloaded", see Rule 1.)

(4) Always be sure of your target and what is beyond it.

That's why my HD carbine has a light on it, and why I *always* have a light with me when carrying a handgun, at home or otherwise. Shooting at unidentified shadows runs the risk of a tragedy like this happening.

And FWIW, this is definitely chargeable as negligent homicide or manslaughter in Florida. The conditions under which one can claim Castle Doctrine immunity are clearly spelled out and are NOT subjective, and do not apply in this case. Castle Doctrine applies to unlawful forced entries, which this was not.

Profile Information

Gender: Male
Hometown: Eastern North Carolina
Home country: United States
Current location: Eastern NC
Member since: Wed Dec 1, 2004, 04:09 PM
Number of posts: 12,148
Latest Discussions»benEzra's Journal