COVID-19 INFORMATION What you need to know about the coronavirus if you are living in Japan or planning a visit.
world

Gun rights advocates rally at state capitols across US

33 Comments
By RANDALL CHASE

The requested article has expired, and is no longer available. Any related articles, and user comments are shown below.

© Copyright 2018 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.

©2020 GPlusMedia Inc.


33 Comments
Login to comment

90% ADULTS who are parents with school children.

2 ( +3 / -1 )

Photos say a thousand deaths!

2 ( +3 / -1 )

Photos say a thousand words...

Absolutely. Did you see the “student” anti gun march a few weeks ago?

90% ADULTS

-4 ( +0 / -4 )

Photos say a thousand words...

1 ( +2 / -1 )

Gun-nutters are cowards if they are so nervous they think that stricter background checks will mean taking away their 24 beloved guns. That's on top of them being flat-out lunatics. It's a fact. Gutless wonders -- the lot of these people.

More angry projection. There may come a day - and I hope for your sake it doesn't - that one of these fine people will save your life.

Then you'll sing a very different tune.

-4 ( +0 / -4 )

The call for stricter background checks is a common theme among gun control advocates and has been mentioned frequently in this thread. My question to those who advocate stricter background checks is, how do you propose to do that? That's a sincere and honest question. What would you suggest as an upgrade to the current background check system?

I have my own ideas about this. The National Instant Criminal Background Check System has been in effect since 1993 as mandated by the Brady Handgun Violence Prevention Act. The law requires all commercial firearms transactions be conducted through a federally licensed dealer. The federally licensed dealer is required to conduct a background check through the NICS before any transaction can take place. The FBI maintains a database of prohibited individuals based on information provided by the individual states and since its enactment the NICS has prevented over 1.5 million from obtaining a firearm through legal means. The NCIS relies heavily on pertinent information provided by the individual states but currently only a minority of states provide full information to the FBI. Some states have their own background check systems but fail to share their information with the FBI. Consequently, in many cases, an individual prohibited in one state could cross a state line and buy a gun in another jurisdiction because the pertinent information about them has not been shared with other states, or the FBI.

I think a reasonable fix for this situation would be for Congress to enact legislation that would establish a mandatory minimum level of compliance for the states so that the NCIS could be effectively used on a national level. Some states report that technological and financial limitations hamper their compliance. Attached to the legislation could be a program of federal grants and assistance to facilitate implementation. The US has a law on the books but its effectiveness is diminished by the lack of universal compliance from the states. Getting the states fully on board would be a good starting point.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

"Come and take it." Yeah, cause firearm owners with little to no training would be able to effectively counter a SWAT team. Low IQ individuals.

That's not the point. The fact they HAVE a gun forces any government agency that wants to rough them up to think twice. At the very least, they have to spend significantly more money to train the SWAT team.

=

Frankly, I'm less concerned that they want to keep or limit or take away guns than the fact that they seem to be making this choice centered around one incident. This kind of knee-jerk reaction is common to rights restrictions around the world which anecdotes are used to justify onerous restrictions instead of at least statistics. It is nice at least on one point of freedom, people are at least resisting.

"Right to life" isn't everything.

0 ( +1 / -1 )

The only way forward for the US is this: 1) repeal the 2nd Amendment; 2) take everyone's guns away -- no matter how long that may take. "Gun rights" outweighed by right to life. Right to "keep and bear arms" is for MILITIA ONLY -- does NOT apply to ordinary citizens.

-1 ( +1 / -2 )

White trash at its finest.

bass4funk: "Stop! That’s the slippery slope that I’m talking about which makes every gun owner nervous."

Gun-nutters are cowards if they are so nervous they think that stricter background checks will mean taking away their 24 beloved guns. That's on top of them being flat-out lunatics. It's a fact. Gutless wonders -- the lot of these people. So jittery and scared you have former fire-fighters and law enforcement shooting at black people who just knock on the door to ask directions, or trumping up reasons to shoot unarmed people and say it's their fault ("stand your ground") the nutter was scared.

"I think as Kuya points out, it would seem most liberals don’t know or understand anything about guns or even know what an assault rifle is or the difference."

Clearly, you don't know what safety is, or "necessary", practicality, or what it means when people want to keep guns out of the hands of criminals -- a point you guys like to say you think you know AFTER someone BECOMES a criminal... using guns. You can't see that guns are the problem when no other country in the world has a death rate like the US, even in more war zones, because of the guns.

-1 ( +2 / -3 )

With so many gun experts reacting on this article it's good to notice that hand weapons Made in the EU [ or designed in the EU and Made in the USA as the one right on the first pic] are very popular among gun owners.

I'm an advocate for exporting more hi end products from the EU. The Second Amendment is an internal discussion for Americans :)

0 ( +1 / -1 )

The United States is 3rd in murders throughout the world. If you remove Chicago, Detroit, Washington, D.C., St Louis and New Orleans, the United States is then 189th out of 193 countries in the world.

ALL 6 cities have STRICT gun control laws. And ALL are run by Democrats.

-4 ( +1 / -5 )

It doesn't matter whether someone believes the left wants to take away people's rights;

Stop! That’s the slippery slope that I’m talking about which makes every gun owner nervous.

The regulations can be tightened and better enforced.

I would agree. They should with the laws already in place. I think as Kuya points out, it would seem most liberals don’t know or understand anything about guns or even know what an assault rifle is or the difference.

What works in one country may work in another, but you have to try it first.

There is NO way gun owners in America include myself in that category that’s wants any part of that.

-1 ( +1 / -2 )

The AR and the M16 both have a higher maximum effect range than the typical bolt action rifle

That depends entirely on what you mean by "typical bolt action rifle". The maximum effective range of a 5.56 fired from an M16 is rated (by the US military) as 500 meters. After that the projectile velocity goes subsonic and stability goes to pot and accuracy with it. With carefully hand loaded ammunition in a well made bolt action rifle that may be extended to 600 or so meters. A very typical bolt action rifle such as the Remington 700, chambered in .300 winchester magnum has an effective range of around 1200 meters, in 7.62x51 NATO it's around 800 meters. The reason that military and law enforcement primarily use bolt action rifles in their sniper programs is because they are mainly chambered in calibers that exceed the effective range of the 5.56 by a large margin.

 modified with a bump stock equals a very powerful “deer hunting “ rifle 

Have you ever fired a AR15 with a bump stock? The only thing those things are good for is making noise and burning up ammunition. I watched a guy fire off an entire 20 round magazine at a refrigerator from a distance of 40 yards, with one of those things, and the result was three hits. A deer would be in more danger from a man with a spear than someone with a bump stock. Personally, I feel that anyone who would hunt with a bump stock should have their hunting licence revoked and be prosecuted for reckless endangerment.

2 ( +2 / -0 )

It doesn't matter whether someone believes the left wants to take away people's rights; that it doesn't is simply a fact. The right, on the other hand, wants to take away individual liberties as evidenced by its attack on women's reproductive health.

The regulations can be tightened and better enforced. What works in one country may work in another, but you have to try it first.

0 ( +3 / -3 )

The left doesn't want to take rights away from anyone.

I don’t believe that for a second, I know and every other gun holder knows they can’t do it now, but it would be done in incremental steps.

Reasonable, rational people want appropriate regulations so one person exercising their rights doesn't cause harm to others.

We have them already, the problem is, the laws in many of the urban cities are not enforced properly.

Japanese firearm laws are relevant because it demonstrates that strict laws reduce firearm deaths.

I understand, but I’m talking about the US, different country, culture, rules, reasons etc. what works in one country won’t necessarily work in another, especially with as many gun owners compared to Japan.

Intelkectual honesty and not using hyperbole go a long way in supporting an argument.

It goes both ways.

-2 ( +4 / -6 )

The AR and the M16 both have a higher maximum effect range than the typical bolt action rifle and in some cases are much lighter and easier tote and modified with a bump stock equals a very powerful “deer hunting “ rifle especially when you have to make sure that “deer “ is dead.!

0 ( +1 / -1 )

 a la the Bundy family insurgents.

The ones that have avoided guilty verdicts because of prosecutorial incompetence.

Plastic:

A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.

Seems to he it's the well regulated part that needs emphasizing.

1 ( +2 / -1 )

Kuya: I meant your post contained facts, for clarity.

2 ( +3 / -1 )

Kuya:

Facts. Plain, simple, and irrefutable.

The Modern Sporting Rifle (AR platform) is accurate, reliable and an effective hunting gun and is used extensively for hunting wherever centerfire rifles are allowable.

It is also far more effective than a bolt action, lever action, or muzzle loader for killing whatever is downrange. This is because of the capacity and rate of fire.

If you want to use a "Modern Sporting Rifle" for hunting, okay. That said, surely stricter background checks and minimum training requirements aren't arduous enough to violate the Second Amendment. And also would result in fewer people dead.

1 ( +4 / -3 )

A new study has found that higher levels of racism in white Americans is associated with having a gun in the home and greater opposition to gun control policies.

Read more at: https://phys.org/news/2013-10-racism-linked-gun-ownership-opposition.html#jCp

How the NRA won the obedience of the US government

https://qz.com/1214787/how-the-nras-money-forces-republicans-to-fight-gun-control/

3 ( +5 / -2 )

@plasticmonkey, I'm sure you already know this, but the Gadsden flag they are flying indicates they belong to an anti-government outfit, a la the Bundy family insurgents. They love to stir up anxiety in small towns by carrying their weapons of war into the public library, coffee shop, and farmers market for no explicable purpose other than maybe boosting their gang's name.

3 ( +5 / -2 )

Since this is about the 2nd Amendment, let’s read what it says:

A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.

Are these manly fellows in the photo members of a well regulated militia (i.e. army or national guard)?

4 ( +7 / -3 )

Deer hunters do not use military style semi-auto rifles of the kind in the photos. For one, the 5.56 Nato caliber (223) is too small for deer hunting, and consequently both illegal and not used in most states which require a minimum 30 calber (7.62 Nato). 

@Ossan

Actually there are no states that require a minimum of .30 caliber for deer hunting. In fact, there are several states where the use of the 5.56 (.22 caliber) centerfire calibers is completely legal. Some states require a minimum of 6 millimeter or .24 caliber, others require a minimum amount of kinetic energy (foot pounds) either at the muzzle or at 100 yards (91.44 meters). Some others require a minimum weight for the bullet. Some states only require that the cartridge be a centerfire (California included). There are literally hundreds of legal and effective hunting cartridges smaller than .30 caliber. In my state the requirement is 1200 foot pounds of kinetic energy at the muzzle, a 5.56 millimeter loaded with a 70 grain bullet at 2700 feet per second comes in at around 1400 ft lbs and therefore is legal.

Last month I went pig hunting in a group of four hunters, I was the only member of the group that did not use an AR platform rifle. And it is worth noting that none of those ARs were chambered in 5.56 (.223). One characteristic of the AR platform is the ability to change the caliber by switching the upper receiver and a number of high performance hunting cartridges have actually been designed around the platform. As an example the 6.5 mm Creedmoor was designed as a long range target and hunting cartridge specifically for use in the AR platform. As an aside, one member of the group I was hunting with had a rifle set up pretty much exactly like the one pictured in the article, his was chambered in .308 winchester which is the commercial name for the 7.62x51 NATO. The other two ARs were chambered in non 5.56 calibers one being the aforementioned 6.5 Creedmoor the other in .458 SOCOM.

The Modern Sporting Rifle (AR platform) is accurate, reliable and an effective hunting gun and is used extensively for hunting wherever centerfire rifles are allowable.

0 ( +4 / -4 )

Sorry, the pictured gun lover is named Shaun Baby? Can't be a typo since it is emblazoned on his vest. That is as weird a backwoods surname as I've ever seen.

-2 ( +2 / -4 )

bonesToday 08:24 am JST

No police presence??

or maybe they were part of the march,anyhoo guess these tough guys feel a lot tougher with high powered rifles, never know when a deer might try to sneak up and ambush you.

Deer hunters do not use military style semi-auto rifles of the kind in the photos. For one, the 5.56 Nato caliber (223) is too small for deer hunting, and consequently both illegal and not used in most states which require a minimum 30 calber (7.62 Nato). Secondly, most states have a a 5 or less shot capacity limit on deer hunting rifles. These military type rifles have 10, 15, 20, 30 round magazines, a factor directly related to the high number of casualties in these mass shooting incidents.

So while there are lawful gun owning hunters who may be against the laws allowing civilian ownership of high capacity military style semi automatic rifles, comments like the above give credence to the NRA mantra that "any restrictions on gun ownership or use eventually could lead to a ban on gun ownership,".

If one is against gun ownership it behooves one to actually study firearms, the types and how they are used. Otherwise, uneducated comments simply help the opposition.

2 ( +7 / -5 )

I guess nobody told these "patriots" that true patriots don't write the flag, they respect it.

1 ( +3 / -2 )

Tumble: Astute analysis. I guess that means I have mad fighting skills given all the action movies I've watched!

0 ( +3 / -3 )

Tommy Jones: they’ve seen enough movies to have the appropriate skills.

5 ( +8 / -3 )

“Don’t Tread On Me”

Or what? Gonna shoot people?

7 ( +9 / -2 )

"Come and take it." Yeah, cause firearm owners with little to no training would be able to effectively counter a SWAT team. Low IQ individuals.

5 ( +9 / -4 )

No police presence??

or maybe they were part of the march,anyhoo guess these tough guys feel a lot tougher with high powered rifles, never know when a deer might try to sneak up and ambush you.

8 ( +11 / -3 )

I'd respect them more if they were honest.

4 ( +8 / -4 )

I need my guns to protect myself because there are too many guns out there! The logic of gun nutters.

Very telling that the photos show a lot of rednecks.

6 ( +11 / -5 )

Login to leave a comment

Facebook users

Use your Facebook account to login or register with JapanToday. By doing so, you will also receive an email inviting you to receive our news alerts.

Facebook Connect

Login with your JapanToday account

User registration

Articles, Offers & Useful Resources

A mix of what's trending on our other sites