krs
Autocross Champion
- Location
- Las Vegas, NV
- Car(s)
- MKVIIS R
Okay, deep breathe here. Firearms, politics, and religion. Some of the passionate topics that get's people fired up in arguments, which I'm not saying there's arguing going on here, but that tipping point is always a fine balance. I own (or lost in a boating accident) dozens of firearms, including a registered SBR, other AR's, handguns, etc. I bought all my ammo wholesale back when I was really into shooting, and training. I have enough of the calibers I care to own, that I haven't shopped since 2010ish. I have boxes of unopened mags for my AR's, and handguns. I am for some firearm legislation, and will do what I can where I can against others. But using Nazi Germany and the Soviet Union as some of the only examples get's tiring to read, as there are other developed countries with tighter legislation, and are still considered free countries.
Firearm legislation, or the lack of, is a complicated matter in my opinion. What is really being looked at to consider? You'll get all sorts of opinions on the topic, but ultimately I'd say lessening the deaths where firearms were the instrument used is the ultimate end state. It's not because one part is looking to suppress another, and next thing you know you're being marched off to a gas chamber. Australia is an example of a country with very tight firearm laws. But let's be real, Australia never had, and still does not, have the amount of firearm related deaths that the U.S. has, but you can argue a point based on per capita numbers. This could be due to the fact that the US population is very mobile, we have decentralized law enforcement, racial division has been and still is rampant, and generally we have a higher tolerance for homicide.
Research can also be found in regard to the number of mass killings in AUS before and after the NFA law of 1996, and also whether the law changes affected the number of firearm related deaths. This particular study (multiple) found that there was a drop in the rate of firearm deaths, particularly with suicides. But AUS also leads the US in mental health awareness and support, which could be a factor in suicide prevention as well. The same university research also showed that while there had been 13 mass shootings (using the definition of five or more people killed) in the 18 years before the law changes, there had been none in the 22 years following until 2018. Modelling suggested that if shootings had continued at a similar rate as that prior to the NFA, then approximately 16 incidents would have been expected by February 2018. (essentially educated guessing).
During the 90's, many American states liberalized firearm laws considerably, allowing more concealed carry provisions and lessening controls in general. Is that purely the reason homicide rates decreased in response to loosening of firearms laws? So what other factors could have contributed to that? I don't know.
So what I'm getting at for me, some legislation could be beneficial, but even more so is better enforcement of what's currently there.
Firearm legislation, or the lack of, is a complicated matter in my opinion. What is really being looked at to consider? You'll get all sorts of opinions on the topic, but ultimately I'd say lessening the deaths where firearms were the instrument used is the ultimate end state. It's not because one part is looking to suppress another, and next thing you know you're being marched off to a gas chamber. Australia is an example of a country with very tight firearm laws. But let's be real, Australia never had, and still does not, have the amount of firearm related deaths that the U.S. has, but you can argue a point based on per capita numbers. This could be due to the fact that the US population is very mobile, we have decentralized law enforcement, racial division has been and still is rampant, and generally we have a higher tolerance for homicide.
Research can also be found in regard to the number of mass killings in AUS before and after the NFA law of 1996, and also whether the law changes affected the number of firearm related deaths. This particular study (multiple) found that there was a drop in the rate of firearm deaths, particularly with suicides. But AUS also leads the US in mental health awareness and support, which could be a factor in suicide prevention as well. The same university research also showed that while there had been 13 mass shootings (using the definition of five or more people killed) in the 18 years before the law changes, there had been none in the 22 years following until 2018. Modelling suggested that if shootings had continued at a similar rate as that prior to the NFA, then approximately 16 incidents would have been expected by February 2018. (essentially educated guessing).
During the 90's, many American states liberalized firearm laws considerably, allowing more concealed carry provisions and lessening controls in general. Is that purely the reason homicide rates decreased in response to loosening of firearms laws? So what other factors could have contributed to that? I don't know.
So what I'm getting at for me, some legislation could be beneficial, but even more so is better enforcement of what's currently there.
Last edited: