Can we please just admit that maybe gun control is a good idea finally?

VP Biden was recently on a Google+ Hangout and a viewer asked his opinion on the assault weapon ban and magazine capacity limit. He admits "assault weapons" aren't as bad as the gun control advocates have made them out to be.

He's got his lower lip pulled in because he's about to yell "Fuck tha police!"

Is this video a joke? Assault weapons aren't "mythical," for one thing, and I'm pretty sure Biden isn't planning to confiscate all firearms for another. That and other stupid nonsense almost made me bail on the video a third of the way in, but I'm glad I didn't because then I would have missed the call for--you guessed it!--armed teachers.

Also:

Biden: A shotgun is much more effective for home defense than an assault rifle.
Nutbag: SEE? Even Joe Biden, who wants more than anything to ban assault weapons, admits that they aren't deadly at all!
Biden: I'm not really concerned with assault weapons so much as limiting magazine sizes.
Nutbag: I CAN'T BELIEVE WHAT I'M HEARING!!! What he really means is that even though he'd love to ban assault weapons he doesn't think he'll be able to, so he'll settle for magazine size restrictions!
Biden: You know, if we could have saved one life, that would be worth it.
Nutbag: I DON'T GET IT! HOW COME HE ONLY WANTS TO SAVE ONE CHILD'S LIFE?!? HE'S OBSESSED WITH SAVING JUST ONE LIFE!!!!!

The Seattle gun buy-back this weekend turned some up some real gems.

That gun buy back was a pretty interesting story. Apparently the police are now looking into what the story is with that launcher.

Aren't those things supposed to be "no questions asked"?

Guess who's profiting from the fear of a magazine ban? (It's now down to $99) I think they're normally under $30.

I was talking to my brother about my fruitless search for a 9mm carbine and he now wants to build me an AR instead since he's done them before and has some of the parts available. Of course, many parts are really hard to find now. The "upper", which is the barrel and some other stuff, is pretty much sold out everywhere and the used market wants $1k+ just for that!

That said, watching the auctions on Gunbroker I am seeing that there is a ceiling to what people are willing to pay for an AR, and that is about $1500 for a used one. Auctions asking for more then that are generally expiring without a single bid.

9mm ammo is fun to go look for right now as well. I finally found some russian stuff on a website and ordered some, but it was still overprice for what it was (normally its about $15/50 for target 9mm, this was almost $20).

If I was living in the US I would buy a Webley-Fosbery revolver. Not to use, just to be able to say "I have a Webley-Fosbery" & have Zardoz viewing parties.

No, he states that a shotgun is a far more useful weapon for home defense. The argument breaks down when you try to interpret that as "bad" or "deadly," because it should be patently obvious to anyone with even a cursory knowledge of firearms that it is really, really fucking hard to keep consistently high rates of fire with the vast majority of shotguns; while an assault rifle is expressly designed for exactly that.

Yeah really. I mean if you just want a cool toy there are so many more guns that look awesome and have a cool story. I have an 1851 Navy Revolver because it looks cool (I'd like a Webley too), why get a standard gun that fires more bullets?
Problem is they've said "for home defense!!" for so long they actually believe it

I think the video does make a good point, well just from Biden's comments in general, that we have someone that knows next to nothing about firearms, heading the debate on gun control measures.

The couple of pictures provided from that Seattle buyback really aren't a big deal. You are looking at a missile launcher that can't be used to fire missiles anymore. There are tons of RPG's and bazookas out there that are either single use (and already used) or de-milled and made inert which you can buy freely now and are no more than paperweights or things to hang on the wall. The super evil black looking gun with a drum, is just a drum fed shotgun, this particular one normally known as the "Street Sweeper" but properly known as the Amsel Striker. It had a 12-round or 7-round drum, which really isn't all that high. It was also a fairly crummy gun and difficult to use.

Did anyone else notice Feinstein's ban list included .22 rifles simply because they "looked" like military weapons? And as others have mentioned, there are a fair amount of handgun caliber weapons on that list.

Ok on the launcher, but for the shotgun:

The federal govenrment doesn't think it's no big deal.

What in the fucking hell are even half of these things.

The launcher is a Stinger and not legal for civilian ownership, which is why they're following up.

The Striker is a rather crude shotgun, there are options currently available that will hold that many, and then some 12 gauge shells, and from much more reliable firearms. Such as a Saiga shotgun with an aftermarket 12 gauge 20rd drum. Or the Keltec KSG or the UTAS shotgun both hold a fair amount of shells.

Nothing really crazy in that picture from what little I can tell from the image. Mind you, some or all of those might be fully automatic, but they would be the pre-1986 automatics which are heavily regulated. Otherwise they are probably just average semi-automatic rifles, some of which look scary with their black furniture, bayonet, or rifle scope.

The only real oddball in that group IMO is the one to the left of the launcher with the silver upper/barrel. It looks kinda like an old Sten, I imagine it's some sort of full-auto WWII era machine gun. I really don't know older military guns that well.

If that's the best they have to show for what they collected, it's really very unremarkable IMO.

Says the guy who thinks the totally illegal Striker is no big deal!

There are unfortunately a fair amount of oddities, usually from the WWI and WWII days that turn up in private citizens possessions here and there. Things like unexploded mines and grenades. That stuff is really scary!

They are only a Class III weapon, it is FAR from illegal to own, you just have to jump through some hoops to obtain one (aka massive background check from ATF, and $200 tax stamp).

And I more meant that it's not a big deal, due to other options just like it, if not more effective currently available for anyone to buy. without an ATF stamp.

I would love to know what the hell the history on these things is. Where in the fucking hell do you get a Sten gun from (that's what QT3 says the silver business is)?

What is the 5th one from the left, right next to the rocket launcher?
(5th from the right too) The one in the middle what is it?

old war weapons really aren't as rare as you might think. I mean do you think they had very good ways of keeping track of weapons during WWI or WWII? Soldiers just brought them home. A coworker recently traded in a pistol of her grandfathers at the local gun store for something else. This was a WWII Nazi pistol, emblazoned with swastika's and everything which her grandfather had taken off a dead soldier as a relic or trophy and brought home with him at the end of the war and held onto it ever since.

Something military from the last 30 or so years would be more eye opening and demanding of alot of questions be answered.

Looks to be some sort of Sten: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sten

A really impressive gun in it's day.

Why the hell would she do that??

Want one now.

I think it was a mixture of, wanting a new gun, not interested in that old gun, and not so much liking a swastika emblazoned nazi pistol around the house. Some stores won't touch anything Nazi as they don't want the stigma of having it around the shop, the risk of offending some customers, or even worse the risk of attracting some customers.

The people buying on the road side really do show off the main issue we have with firearms regulation. We absolutely need to title and track these things so that resale is legal but verified.

Here in Canada any .22LR rifle (which is normally Non-Restricted and has no magazine capacity limit) that looks like a Restricted firearm (like an AR-15) or Prohibited firearm (like an AK-47) become classified as either Restricted or Prohibited. The Striker, the Franchi SPAS and many other semi-automatic combat shotguns are Prohibited.

President Obama apparently is trying to look sympathetic to sport shooters by saying that he shoots clay pigeons "all the time" when he goes to Camp David.

Looping back here, wait a damn minute.....

Does this mean the US too-dangerous Class 3 weapon ban is 1) too restrictive, 2) not restrictive enough, or 3) post-1980 it's been impossible to get weapons added to it?

I think the Class 3 system is fine as is. It will take you on average about 6 months to get a background check back from the ATF (probably alot longer right now as they seem to be quite busy!). You also have to pay a $200 stamp, which is negligible really. But the real kicker is the price of the full-auto gun. For a decent shape and well working full-auto gun you are probably looking at $15,000 - $20,000 minimum. That's a heck of alotta dough that very few people will be able to afford. And you can bet that those that own them take good care of them and wouldn't dare use them in a crime for fear of losing them.

On a side note, one thing with current gun laws however, that I think is too restrictive and would love to see removed is the whole ban on forward vertical grips on "pistols" and stocks. There really is no logic with these laws, and was only geared towards banning things that "looked scary", which seems to be the basis for most of these gun control propositions.

For instance, this firearm is 100% legal and anyone can buy one: http://www.usacarry.com/forums/atta...o-you-have-any-mods-post-pics-ar15-pistol.jpg

It uses AR-15 magazines, as small or big as you want, and fires rifle caliber rounds, yet it is considered a "pistol". Therefore, it is illegal to add a forward grip or a shoulder stock. You can however have that little rod sticking out of the back, which you can rest on your cheek to brace it while firing. You can also grip the magazine area as a sort of forward grip. But oh dear heaven! Don't put an actual protruding vertical grip on the front! That makes it super evil!

Left to Right:

1. Ruger Mini-14. Barrel shroud is off.
2. Russian. Bayonet is telltale. Probably a SVD or variant in an aftermarket stock with the bayonet added on.
3. Going by the gas tube, probably an SKS or variant that had strange things done to it.
4. AK-47 or variant.
5. Sten.
6. FIM-92 Stinger.
7. SKS.
8. ???
9. M16A1.

Hahaha, no. My grandpa fucking hated the things because the only time they actually fired without jamming was when you set them down a little rough.

I'm going to chime in and say that shotguns are a particularly murky area to claim legality as a source of .. anything.

The National Firearms Act of 1934 outlaws all destructive devices and then defines destructive device using:

Importantly, your bog-standard hunting 12 gauge round is 0.729" in diameter, meaning all shotguns potentially fall into this banned category. The law also contains a list of exemptions, the relevant one exempting "[a] shotgun or shotgun shell which is determined by the Attorney General to be generally recognized as particularly suitable for sporting purposes."

In practice, this means the infamously wise and measured ATF gets to say which shotguns are legal. They could declare all 12 gauge shotguns illegal tomorrow (and face a hell of a lot of noncompliance, I'd imagine). I'm not sure I'd call it "no big deal," but Pacodeth is correct that there are much 'worse' shotguns out there legally already because of the inconsistent application of vague law.

Aaah, interesting. Thanks, I thought it was a laundry-list bill.

In other news, lol.

Probably because he's a professional author who makes his living by writing things and selling them? Nobody would blink at a 300-page nonfiction book about gun control on the shelves of Barnes & Noble for $20. Nobody complains about the author of a NY Times op-ed piece being paid for it. Nobody gripes about Jon Stewart drawing a salary.

I'm not griping and don't disagree with his right to make a buck, but since he's giving all proceeds to charity, only Amazon s making a buck, so that's clealy not hs goal - I'd imagine he felt he had something important to say, so getting as many as possible to read it, should be a goal. In interviews he's said "if I can sway just one person..." or similar, so selling his piece really doesn't seem to be the grand plan here.

All I can say to this thread and this situation is that I'm glad I live in Norway.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Norway_massacre

However the fact remains that we can talk about 'the Norway Massacre'. When we talk about 'the US massacre' we have to qualify which one that we mean.

Quite. From my point of view if there's anything positive at all about this, it's that whenever I want to feel better about living in Switzerland, I can just dip my toes in the US gundebate.

Fair enough. I cannot find a good source of spree-killer massacres for most other countries. Doesn't mean there aren't more in Norway's history, but maybe thats the only one they ever had in recorded history, It is definitely one of the worst though.

The US has a cultural problem moreso than a gun control problem. Norway has fairly gun friendly laws, but fewer crazy, killer assholes probably.

About the Sten, I do believe semi automatic versions have been produced making that firearm potentially legal to own.