Florida Shooting: 17 Students Shot dead in another Mass Shooting in the U.S

[Ramrod]

Originally Posted by Damien

Do you not need a licence and to register the rifle with the police though?

That's why I mentioned the license

[Pierre]

Originally Posted by 1andrew1

Is that a reason to press the pause button on progress?

I'm pretty sure they great inventors, sports people, explorers, scientists, artists and entrepreneurs of this world don't say I won't do it because my predecessors didn't!

Not at all, just pointing out that trump is a republican so is less inclined to push for gun control and has been in the job for 12 months is as usual being slated by everyone for not doing enough.

Yet, Saint Obama of Barack, a democrat, had two terms, during some of which which he had a majority in both houses, and for a short period even had a super majority, did pretty much naff all.

https://www.thoughtco.com/obama-gun-...ngress-3367595

That's all I'm pointing out.

[Ramrod]

Originally Posted by Pierre

It my have been a bit Knee Jerk. But it did remove a lot of the element of concealment. You stuff a hand gun in your pocket, down the back of you trousers etc, and get into places....like a school....without raising any alarm.

However, if some one is seen walking to a school or just along the street with a rifle/shotgun is going to raise alarm. Other than that agree on your points.

I thought that someone would say that. I've just gone upstairs and measured my guns at their shortest lengths and they come to 70cm for my rifle with it's stock folded and and 65 cm my pistol as is.
If I wanted to, I could very easily remove my pistols mandatory 'coathanger' from it's grip to reduce it to 40cm (which is illegal and would land me in jail if found out) if i was inclined to in order to conceal it.
edit: It's just occurred to me that I could equally easily remove the 'long barrel' from the pistol and thereby shorten it another 20cm as well. The thing is that, in the UK, it is fiddly to obtain a gun license and the guns that the license allows you are restricted to certain lengths and/or calibers. If, however, you decided to chuck it all away and go all 'allah Akbar', you could very easily do it.

Originally Posted by Ramrod

fyi, The Southern Gun Co. make a mod for their .223 caliber that all but turns it into a semi-auto.

SGC actually do Lever Release rifles, which are like semi auto, but you have to release the bolt again after each shot by flicking a lever.
That makes things slightly slower than just having to pull the trigger, as each shot requires two actions, but I can still rattle shots off pretty quick if necessary.

Handguns btw are not banned as such, they just have to follow certain rules.
The barrel must be 30cm, and the overall length 60cm, which means they look like they have a silencer fitted, and have a weird extension off the hand grip.

You can buy semi auto .22 handguns, as well as .357 & .45 revolvers.
The whole point of the changes was to make it hard to conceal them, not ban them.

The reason we dont have these shootings in the UK is becasue you have to pass much more stringent checks to own guns, not because you cannot own them.

Originally Posted by Pierre

Pretty sure at some point he controlled both houses with a decent majority?

They focused their attention on healthcare for those two years. Plus even a Democratic house is still difficult to get gun control though. You only have so much political capital to spend.

[Ramrod]

The reason that we have so few rampages is that the legally owned guns are only obtained after someone has been a probationary member of a gun club for 3-6 months. This means that the probationer has been sat round a table with existing club members for that long, interacting and talking before they are eligible to apply for a license. Then a policeman comes round to their house and has a chat with them about why they want a gun or guns and how they are going to secure them and what will happen if those guns aren't properly secured (bad things)

---------- Post added at 22:30 ---------- Previous post was at 22:29 ----------

Originally Posted by Paul M

SGC actually do Lever Release rifles, which are like semi auto, but you have to release the bolt again after each shot by flicking a lever.
That makes things slightly slower than just having to pull the trigger, as each shot requires two actions, but I can still rattle shots off pretty quick if necessary.

Handguns btw are not banned as such, they just have to follow certain rules.
The barrel must be 30cm, and the overall length 60cm, which means they look like they have a silencer fitted, and have a weird extension off the hand grip.

You can buy semi auto .22 handguns, as well as .357 & .45 revolvers.
The whole point of the changes was to make it hard to conceal them, not ban them.

The reason we dont have these shootings in the UK is because you have to pass much more stringent checks to own guns, not because you cannot own them.

Yep. See above

The reason we dont have these shootings in the UK is because you have to pass much more stringent checks to own guns, not because you cannot own them.

And that, imo, is how the USA should go....

Originally Posted by Ramrod

That's why I mentioned the license

Completely missed that! Sorry.

Originally Posted by Ramrod

And that, imo, is how the USA should go....

They won't though. Guns are far more ingrained in their psyche than they ever were here. The amount of control and regulation suggested is beyond what even the left of the Democratic Party could hope to achieve.

[Pierre]

Originally Posted by Damien

They focused their attention on healthcare for those two years. Plus even a Democratic house is still difficult to get gun control though. You only have so much political capital to spend.

And................

The point I was making is that if ever there was a chance to bring in meaningful gun control laws, it was then.

No point having a go at trump now.

Originally Posted by Hugh

Trump has signed nearly 60 Executive Orders, which set Government Policy and have the power of law.

Major policy shifts in an existing law, still require the legislative branch and changes to gun laws would require a congressional approach, otherwise your statement above, implies and renders the legislative branch redundant, grants the presidency, dictatorial powers, which is almost certainly not the case.

---------- Post added at 00:23 ---------- Previous post was at 00:14 ----------

Originally Posted by Mr K

He did what he could with executive actions. He was stopped going further by the Republicans who controlled the house. They love their guns and shooting things.

Not just Republicans. Several Democratic Senators ALSO voted with Republicans against new gun control legislation. Sorry if facts, yet again, get in the way of your incorrect assertions and narrative.

Originally Posted by Pierre

It my have been a bit Knee Jerk. But it did remove a lot of the element of concealment. You stuff a hand gun in your pocket, down the back of you trousers etc, and get into places....like a school....without raising any alarm.

However, if some one is seen walking to a school or just along the street with a rifle/shotgun is going to raise alarm. Other than that agree on your points.

---------- Post added at 21:57 ---------- Previous post was at 21:55 ----------



Pretty sure at some point he controlled both houses with a decent majority?

But you need a supermajority (60) for a lot of things, as Trump has found out.

Originally Posted by Pierre

And................

The point I was making is that if ever there was a chance to bring in meaningful gun control laws, it was then.

No point having a go at trump now.

Well there is. Just like you can say Clinton didn't do enough, Bush didn't do enough, Obama didn't go enough and Trump isn't doing enough. Trump is fact seems quite close to the NRA.

When Trump goes we can have a go at the next President who'll also not do enough because they never will.

Originally Posted by Hugh

But you need a supermajority (60) for a lot of things, as Trump has found out.

President Barack Obama also found that out but ignored it and implemented DACA regardless. Which many felt at the time was a blatant abuse of executive power.

Originally Posted by Mick

President Barack Obama also found that out but ignored it and implemented DACA regardless. Which many felt at the time was a blatant abuse of executive power.

You mean unlike the Trump Executive Orders that have been stayed by the Courts?

Originally Posted by Hugh

You mean unlike the Trump Executive Orders that have been stayed by the Courts?

And partially overturned by the Supreme Court.

You are making my point for me, that Presidents cannot act alone Hugh. So thanks for finally admitting a President cannot do stuff on his own.

It's important to note that Obama tried to extend the DACA program to include Adults, several States sued and an injunction was put in to place to block it. It was later contested in the Supreme Court and they kept the injunction in place. So Trump is not the only President to have his authority challenged, same with Bill Clinton, he had one of his Executive Orders invalidated by a Federal Appeals Court.

So going back to Trump doing something about Guns, he needs Congress to act, he cannot do it alone, otherwise any future President can come in and just revert a prior Executive Order.

[Pierre]

Originally Posted by Hugh

But you need a supermajority (60) for a lot of things, as Trump has found out.

As I stated earlier he did have a Super Majority from From September 24, 2009 through February 4, 2010