• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Why gun control push fizzled?

Sabretooth said:
Yeah. I wish Paladino didn't come off like such a lunatic during that campaign. He probably would have won...
Click to expand...

As much as I criticize Cuomo for some things, I've been pleasantly surprised on many other things. Personally I think Paladino was completely unfit for the job based on my experience with some of his 'business' dealings in the Buffalo area. The other craziness just cemented my views on him, although I do think some of the crazy crap was just playing to the far right and not his actual views.

And that brings me back to this thread. I don't understand the optics politically on why some of the more reasonable gun control measures aren't gone after both in NY and the nation more generally. Are politicians just really lacking the imagination to go after stuff besides AWB and backdoor general restriction? Do they think those are the only things they can get passed? The only things the public will give them credit for? How much political capital is needed to dangle in front of their faces to get them to actually do the job and figure stuff out?

Cuomo could have gone after something that might actually help, get less opposition, and get political credit. For example, reduce restrictions on certain elements currently controlled to get some support from certain sectors of gun users and implement a generalized permit/certification system. Change the current county by county, county sheriff permission system of CCW and hunter safety courses to a state wide shall issue system to identify criminals and crazies while letting the lawful have a clearer picture on what is and is not legal. It would be a simplified system that helps all involved besides criminals, although obviously I'm leaving a lot of details out.

But no, we get very broad weapons bans and raised taxes on ammo. So many of us agree on various means to help, but no... just more of the same.
 
newyorkguy said:
What's your beef with Andrew Cuomo? You're comparing him with Rick Perry? I'm not getting this...

:confused:
Click to expand...

No, I'm comparing Sabretooth's frustrations to mine.

As much as he hates being stuck with Cuomo, it is nothing compared to my feelings about being stuck with Governor Good Hair.
 
Last edited:
tyr_13 said:
As much as I criticize Cuomo for some things, I've been pleasantly surprised on many other things. Personally I think Paladino was completely unfit for the job based on my experience with some of his 'business' dealings in the Buffalo area. The other craziness just cemented my views on him, although I do think some of the crazy crap was just playing to the far right and not his actual views.

And that brings me back to this thread. I don't understand the optics politically on why some of the more reasonable gun control measures aren't gone after both in NY and the nation more generally. Are politicians just really lacking the imagination to go after stuff besides AWB and backdoor general restriction? Do they think those are the only things they can get passed? The only things the public will give them credit for? How much political capital is needed to dangle in front of their faces to get them to actually do the job and figure stuff out?

Cuomo could have gone after something that might actually help, get less opposition, and get political credit. For example, reduce restrictions on certain elements currently controlled to get some support from certain sectors of gun users and implement a generalized permit/certification system. Change the current county by county, county sheriff permission system of CCW and hunter safety courses to a state wide shall issue system to identify criminals and crazies while letting the lawful have a clearer picture on what is and is not legal. It would be a simplified system that helps all involved besides criminals, although obviously I'm leaving a lot of details out.

But no, we get very broad weapons bans and raised taxes on ammo. So many of us agree on various means to help, but no... just more of the same.
Click to expand...

Those things that makes sense require actual work.
 
tyr_13 said:
<snip>
Cuomo could have gone after something that might actually help, get less opposition, and get political credit. For example, reduce restrictions on certain elements currently controlled to get some support from certain sectors of gun users and implement a generalized permit/certification system. Change the current county by county, county sheriff permission system of CCW and hunter safety courses to a state wide shall issue system to identify criminals and crazies while letting the lawful have a clearer picture on what is and is not legal. It would be a simplified system that helps all involved besides criminals, although obviously I'm leaving a lot of details out.
Click to expand...

Politics is compromise. Democracy is compromise. For thirty years people have been telling gun advocates, if you stay above the fray and do nothing but take pot shots then your voices don't get heard.

As I've said all along. I have no great feeling either way in this gun debate. Although the gun nuts have slammed me time and time again because...I guess I'm too moderate.

Hey tyr instead of writing another message lambasting me for creating straw men why not take a couple minutes and email your state senator and assembly person? Tell them what you're telling us.

tyr_13 said:
But no, we get very broad weapons bans and raised taxes on ammo. So many of us agree on various means to help, but no... just more of the same.
Click to expand...

Cuomo implemented a broad weapons ban and an ammo tax in New York? I'm not sure that's what you mean but it sounds like it.

Dr. Keith said:
No, I'm comparing Sabretooth's frustrations to mine.

As much as he hates being stuck with Cuomo, it is nothing compared to my feelings about being stuck with Governor Good Hair.
Click to expand...

If you're comparing your frustrations to Sabretooth's than you have some serious frustration. :D

I never heard Rick Perry and Andrew Cuomo mentioned in the same breathe before but thanks.
 
newyorkguy said:
An amateur trains until they get it right. A professional trains until they can't get it wrong. (That's from a LEO site.)
Click to expand...

Minor, off-topic nitpick.....That's not unique to LEO's. What's funny, is today I was shooting next to a police officer that shoots at my club, and challenged him to a friendly competition. I beat him by almost 10 seconds on the quick reaction range. 3 times. I won beers afterwards.

newyorkguy said:
I wasn't talking about practice firing. I'm sure you know that.
Click to expand...

What you were talking about is irrelevant. It applies to all ammo, and is under the guise of well, nothing really. It's just another way to control guns. I'm willing to bet it gets thrown out by some court as being unconstitutional.

newyorkguy said:
I was asking -- and does everybody see how the anti-gun regulation crowd will not touch this question? -- how often in California do gun owners have to shoot it out with armed attackers.
Click to expand...

Irrelevant. If I had to pay upwards of $5 per bullet, I'm not carrying anymore as I cannot shoot and be proficient enough to be confident I'll hit what I aim at.

newyorkguy said:
The point being, does it happen frequently enough that it should drive public policy. And I'm not saying it doesn't. I'm asking if it does.
Click to expand...

Have you even read what the law's claimed intent is?

newyorkguy said:
Hello?
Click to expand...

Easy with the snark buddy. Nobody's being rude with you. Not even me...
 
Last edited:
One of the issues seldom discussed in this or any gun control thread is the role the NRA plays. According to political analysts they play a big role. They are often accused of fear mongering. e.g. They have accused President Obama of having a secret campaign to confiscate guns nation-wide.

The key to getting sensible gun control laws passed is probably getting the NRA to take a more responsible role.

One of the major issues is the so-called AWB, the ban on assault weapons. Maryland has just passed legislation under which "45 different types of assault rifles will be banned, as will sales of magazines that hold more than 10 bullets and handguns that only accept such larger magazines..." Link

I don't know that much about it. Why is having access to the so-called assault rifles so critical?
 
newyorkguy said:
Politics is compromise. Democracy is compromise. For thirty years people have been telling gun advocates, if you stay above the fray and do nothing but take pot shots then your voices don't get heard.

As I've said all along. I have no great feeling either way in this gun debate. Although the gun nuts have slammed me time and time again because...I guess I'm too moderate.
Click to expand...

You're not too moderate. It's painfully obvious that you will not step outside your comforting bias about being able to blame gun enthusiasts. While I do believe some of them share the blame, so do the foolish actions of gun-control advocates pushing useless things like AWB. Put that stuff forward and then complain you can't get gun advocates on board? Pull the other one. It's a two way street, a compromise as you say.

There is enough blame to go around, both to the NRA guns for all types who fight any and all measures and gun grabbers trying to restrict weapons any way they can. Politicians then exploit both of these sentiments. To oversimplify it to simply gun advocates not doing anything right, as if they were a monolithic group, isn't useful.

Hey tyr instead of writing another message lambasting me for creating straw men why not take a couple minutes and email your state senator and assembly person? Tell them what you're telling us.
Click to expand...

Because they are more to the right on this issue than I am, and when I write them it's with worded differently with that in mind. Oh, I'm sorry, you were just assuming that I did nothing weren't you?

EDIT: To be fair, Mr. Goodell's office was prompt and responsive.

Cuomo implemented a broad weapons ban and an ammo tax in New York? I'm not sure that's what you mean but it sounds like it.
Click to expand...

No, I'm talking more broadly about state level actions.
 
Last edited:
newyorkguy said:
I'm blaming gun enthusiasts for what?
Click to expand...

Only allowing things like AWB to take place and sitting out of the fray, taking pot shots. It's the fault of gun nuts, the NRA, gun advocates, hobiests... just not gun control advocates or heaven's forefend, the general public!
 
tyr_13 said:
Only allowing things like AWB to take place and sitting out of the fray, taking pot shots. It's the fault of gun nuts, the NRA, gun advocates, hobiests... just not gun control advocates or heaven's forefend, the general public!
Click to expand...

I'm sorry I responded to you because I just went back through the thread to see if I could figure out what I'm supposed to be guilty of. What I discovered was you've been attacking me since last night.

I guess I'm the only one here available to attack. Because with few exceptions most people posting in USA politics -- and two of them told me this off-list -- avoid gun control threads.

Do you think it would be possible to discuss the issues? This thread is supposed to be about why federal gun control laws failed.
 
Last edited:
newyorkguy said:
Why is having access to the so-called assault rifles so critical?
Click to expand...

You ( i think, I could be wrong) and others want to restrict the right to buy them. Some others want to outlaw them completely. The burden is on you, not us, to defend or tear down your position. A much better question is why are they such a threat to society in general, and what will be solved by outlawing/removing them? I have no burden.
 
To get more on track with the topic, I believe it's because most of the knee jerk reactions have worn off, as has the sting of Newtown et al.
 
Apparently Maryland has just passed legislation under which "45 different types of assault rifles will be banned, as will sales of magazines that hold more than 10 bullets and handguns that only accept such larger magazines..." The bill also will limit gun ownership for people with mental illness, and requires police to fingerprint new owners of handguns before they are granted a license. Link

I'm surprised a state like Maryland would do something like that. Maybe I shouldn't be.

In signing the Bill [last month], Maryland Governor Martin O'Malley said the measures were aimed at saving lives. “States with similar licensing provisions have substantially lower gun death rates than states that do not, so if we want better results we have to make better choices, and this legislation is part of that series of the better choices that we are making,” O’Malley said.

Other states include New Jersey, Connecticut, New York, Massachusetts, and Hawaii.
Click to expand...

Is Governor O'Malley wrong?
 
newyorkguy said:
I'm sorry I responded to you because I just went back through the thread to see if I could figure out what I'm supposed to be guilty of. What I discovered was you've been attacking me since last night.
Click to expand...

Then you have ignored a substantial portion of the thread and many of my points from my last two posts.

I guess I'm the only one here available to attack. Because with few exceptions most people posting in USA politics -- and two of them told me this off-list -- avoid gun control threads.
Click to expand...

I'm sorry you feel attacked, but I'm not retracting my criticisms because you feel that way.

Do you think it would be possible to discuss the issues? This thread is supposed to be about why federal gun control laws failed.
Click to expand...

I did discuss the issue. You contented blame go to gun advocates. I disagreed and content there is blame to go around. Again, sorry you feel attacked by this. Try to get past your hurt feelings and look at the arguments.

Don't forget your feeling of feeling attacked though. Keep that in mind while reading the responses of others who may very well feel attacked for their hobbies.
 
Dr. Keith said:
Yes, but if we follow that inent to its logical conclusion then we have civilian ownership of all military grade tech,
Click to expand...
Please cite the part of the Heller decision that leads you to this conclusion.

Of course, I know in advance that you'll be completely unable to do any such thing, because I've actually read it and you obviously haven't. Do you think arguing from a position of ignorance is helpful to your argument?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom