Gun Manufacturers and Laws
 

Simple design tweaks are allowing gun makers to get around restrictions New York put in place following the 2012 school shootings in Connecticut, prompting some critics to say the laws were mere window dressing.

New York lawmakers passed the SAFE Act last year, and announced with fanfare that it effectively banned the sale of “assault weapons.” But AR-15s, the most popular type of guns often referred to as assault weapons, are sold in Empire State gun shops, freely and legally. The gun is being marketed by Stag Arms as a "New York-compliant AR-15," and features a slightly modified stock and no bells and whistles. The gun does not have a pistol grip, for instance - one of the features banned by the act.

The AR-15 can be converted to full automatic in less than 30 minutes and there are even instruction videos on the internet to show step-by-step how to do it.

Ridiculous to allow such a weapon to be manufactured - much less sold - and is going to contribute to more mass killings such as Newtown.

A semi automatic shotgun could do the same amount of damage.

The problem is, these people are INSANE.

You've got to figure out a way to keep any kind of gun out of the hands of insane people. Unfortunately, that's tough to do.

I bet you can find all the instructions online to build a meth lab also
What's your point

The point is that it is ridiculous to allow the manufacture of such a weapon that can be transformed into a weapon of mass destruction so easily. Also, that manufacturers like Stag just do little tweaks to skate by with minor modifications to "be legal" are allowed to do so.

Buggy, surely by now you know that gun laws are a waste of time, since criminals will never follow them.

Laws against murder, rape & theft are really useless, too... & might as well be abolished, since murderers, rapists & thieves tend to ignore them, also.

Yes, criminals AND manufacturers!

The OP while copying this from Fox News neglected to add this which is also in the article and adds a bit of balance to the conversation....

""This just shows that the gun prohibition lobby uses symbolic gestures over substance to push their anti-gun rights agenda. Banning guns based on cosmetic features proves that point," Alan Gottlieb, president of the Second Amendment Foundation, told FoxNews.com."

To view the entire article...

Cosmetic tweaks to AR-15 thwart New York's 'ban' on assault rifles | Fox News

I could maybe see you point if you were on Crusade against Saturday Night Specials which probably 95% of all gun deaths, You know the 75 dollar .380's. Most deranged people on mission won't spend the 800 plus dollars for the knock-off AR let along Colt or they will steal it. If they do buy probably would be the cheap Chinese SKS which usually will fire automatic whether you want it to or not with no modifications right out of the cheap box.

The north east manufactures majority of American made guns they don't mind the tax dollars of them do they?. You might as well give up they will NEVER be day no guns in this country or the world. Even if you had law to band them they would still be around on the street for another 1000 years or till they become obsolete:ohdear:!

Doubt a mass murderer will purchase an AR with only a 7-10 round magazine capacity.

General reminder...if you copy verbatim text from another source you must include a link or attribution to the source.

Thank you for your cooperation.

Moderator.

Functionally, the AR-15 is no different from semi-automatic rifles made 100 years ago. The only real difference is, 100 years ago, rifles were made of wood and steel whereas the AR-15 is made from plastic, steel, and aluminum. For whatever reason, the antigun politicians don't like the looks of AR-15 rifles so they pass laws that make certain cosmetic features illegal. The gun manufacturers then go to the trouble to redesign the rifle to eliminate these cosmetic features. I would think these politicians and the rest of the antigun people would now be happy since the new AR-15 no longer has the cosmetic features they didn't like in the first place.

Notice - please quote and reference copy righted content from other sources. Thanks

So noted.

I believe the mass murderer at Newtown used an AR-15, didn't he? I am not sure but I believe he had high capacity magazines for it - which are easy to buy.

I also believe the mass murderer at the Colorado theater used an AR-15 and had high capacity magazines for it.

OY!:spoken:

The school at Newtown and the theater in Colorado were both "gun free zones". Criminals and the mentally insane do not abide by the laws. Maybe we should concentrate on them instead of the tool they used. As far as the AR-15 being used, it is the most popular type of rifle sold in the US. 4-Door sedans are also the most popular type of car sold. Maybe we should ban 4-Dr cars since they are more likely to be used by a drunk driver to murder people than other styles of cars. It makes as much sense as banning AR-15 style rifles.

[QUOTE=Dusty74;829645]The school at Newtown and the theater in Colorado were both "gun free zones". Criminals and the mentally insane do not abide by the laws. Maybe we should concentrate on them instead of the tool they used. As far as the AR-15 being used, it is the most popular type of rifle sold in the US. 4-Door sedans are also the most popular type of car sold. Maybe we should ban 4-Dr cars since they are more likely to be used by a drunk driver to murder people than other styles of cars. It makes as much sense as banning AR-15 style rifles.[/QUOTE]

No, it doesn't. :ohdear:

The weapons that are sold are legal, If a person modifies them, they are a criminal, just as they would be if they stole the gun. The difference is if, they purchased and modified the weapon there is at least a record of ownership. Bottom line is if you outlaw guns then only outlaws will have guns. I am a gun owner and I sleep better at night knowing I have them. In the back of my mind, I remember what Adolph Hitler said
" to conquer a country you must first disarm its citzens".

No one is talking about "outlawing" guns.

I would also like to see your source for the Hitler quote. According to Snopes.com, there is no evidence of that quote.

Gun Control is NOT the Answer
 

JP is right on the money here. It is the insane people who do the killings and GUNS or type of guns is not the issue here. They could get and use any number of items to harm lots of people. All gun control and banning certain types of guns does is harm and restrict the purchase and use by honest responsible people. There are millions and millions of guns out there and the criminals will always be able to get whatever they want or need.

Gun safety and handling should be required in all high schools as far as I am concerned.

Those who oppose guns and the 2nd Amendment will NEVER agree on the gun right issue.

If the powers to concentrated on treating mental health issues instead of passing the buck.Violent crimes would be minuscule.
and post here wouldn't be trivial drama

Why, exactly, do you believe honest and responsible people NEED an AR15 and the high capacity magazine? A shotgun for hunting or a pistol for the feeling of protection at home but a rifle that can empty a 60 round magazine in 5 seconds?

Interesting approach. What, precisely, do you propose as a solution?

Why do you think they should not? The weapon of choice is not the problem. There is lots of evidence that when you pass a law to ban something it does not work. We have had a ban on drugs for years, how has that worked out? We have laws against drunk driving, driving without insurance, How has that worked out? To focus on the device is not focusing on the problem. I don't particularly want a high capacity magazine, or an AR style weapon, but I will not pass a law that forbids my neighbor from buying one. None of these incidents were committed by sane people. If they did not use this type of weapon they would have chosen another. There have already been instances were a shot gun was used. Now should we ban shot guns? Violence in our society, lack of respect for authority, no discipline in the schools or at home, poverty, mental illness, these are the problems to set our focus on.

Why do we waste our time with this topic. You are either for or against.

The crux of the problem is not what is in the hands of a perpetrator but rather what is in his/her head. As a nation we are doing a deplorable job of caring for people with mental health issues. Progressive view this situation as they do some many others focused on people's rights depriving family members etc from seeking such assistance .

We need to focus on treatment measures for people with mental health issues. we need to involve and invite their family members toward sensible policies that work Family members are treated as the enemy of a mentally disable person rather than their main sources of support.

WHY DON'T PEOPLE GET THAT AND STOP THIS GUN PROHIBITIOPN ISSUE

GEEEZZZZZ

Would on of the pro gun folks please tell me why they are against background checks. Is it because of registration or some other form of government record keeping? That's just plain crazy to me and yes I do support the second amendment and have extensive military tng and experience with all types of firearms from a military 45 to a 3.5 in rocket launcher.

There are already background checks to buy weapons. I'm not sure what the issues were last time. It usually involves some sort of addition legislation that is put into a sensible bill that kills it. There is little coordination between states however and the Federal Government. There is a system in place currently but like most Federally run programs it is very poorly run.

I'm not against background checks, I lived in a state where they were required before the purchase of any gun and it was quick and inexpensive, but it was the gun store (a business) calling the state police to initiate the check. When someone can tell me how I, as an individual, can have a background check performed on an individual prior to a private sale I'm willing to listen. A mandatory background check before all sales would prevent and/or hinder private sales, and in some locales even passing a gun on to your children won't be possible without the check.

Just make the sale through your local FFL...$25

Funny I have never heard of any mass attacker using a modified AR-15 fully automatic. Aside from the legal issues, it requires machining the receiver to accept an auto sear (a BIG job), replacing the entire trigger mechanism, installing a full-auto bolt carrier, and perhaps a few other small tasks. More knowledgable people than me have stated that is is esier to build a machinegun from scratch than to convert a semi-auto.

An AR-15 is nothing more than a semi-automatic rifle that LOOKS ominous.

Gun control
 

I always thought that gun control was hitting what
you're aiming at.;)

You can have background checks and background checks and background checks but if you are insane and want to kill a bunch of people you will figure out a way to get the guns you need.

I wonder what the statistics are for how many of these insane mass shooters have had background checks and if it inhibited them at all in obtaining guns.

Well said. Thank you and thanks to all Second Amendment supporters. For all others, Remember, "When life & death are often measured in seconds, the police are only several minutes away."

It is evident from the majority of comments that this issue like abortion is very emotional heavily defended by each side and will never result in a solution for those school/office tragedies . Perhaps experts ought to attempt a resolution from another starting point because this one is a simple dichotomy revolving around the 2nd Amendment rights and it will never progress beyond those positions

Gun control advocates, Jersey lawmakers set to pick up the fight in 2014 | NJ.com

You are very right about that judging from this article on New Jersey and its gun controls. They seem to be talking past one another and never really getting the others' points.

I know of no one killed by a gun
I know of thousands and thousand killed by humans

That quip and smiley face would probably give a big laugh to the parents of the children in this attached article, wouldn't it?

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/09/29/us...toll.html?_r=0

This is serious business about a serious problem. I read the article and all of the incidents described are tragedies. But the author tries to make a fool of truthful data and that is not truthful. His article itself indicates that this problem is ninth down the list. The NRA and is not the monster he is trying to project. Neither are those that advocate for gun ownership Every one of those incidents happened because the adult that owned the fire arm was negligent. For every one he portrays I can find 100 tragedies that happened and had nothing to do with firearms. These tear jerker pieces to promote a point are not an argument. There are already laws on the books that cover criminal negligence. You need prosecutors that will use them. Owning a firearm comes with a very grave responsibility that is not to be taken lightly. A stricter law of any kind would not have stop one tragedy in his article. People need to use their brain for more then holding their ears a part. If you have a weapon in your home and Children or Teenagers are there, Lock It UP. I physically disassemble mine while my Grandchildren are in my home and Lock them Up. I also have no problem teaching my grandchildren how to handle and use a firearm safely. What you understand and are taught to respect is no longer a problem.

Car Crashes Kill 40,000 in U.S. Every Year
Published February 03, 2005WebMD
Lets ban Detroit

2005? Seriously?