Slashdot Mirror

Also National Rifle Association membership. https://membership.nrahq.org/forms/signup.asp?CampaignID=nranews

You gun proof your kid. Which is cheaper and lasts them the rest of their life. If you try to kid proof your gun it had better be Nerf when you're done.

There has been a program addressing this since 1988.

http://www.nrahq.org/safety/eddie/

Was he ordered by his Sergeant or LT to use that lock box? No.

Then he had the option to do his research and properly place the lock box, like the top of his closet. Or buy a larger gun safe that couldn't be opened so easily. Or place the lock box inside of a real gun safe, providing 2 layers of security. Or he could have gone to http://www.nrahq.org/safety/eddie/infoparents.asp and signed his family up for a gun safety class.

1. ALWAYS keep the gun pointed in a safe direction.

-- NRA Gun Safety Rules

By your rule, a gun is never in control if you're firing it, or if it's even loaded. If I load my shotgun, then yell "pull", my firearm's not under control, even if I'm aimed at the flying clay pigeon. Good to know that you've never safely operated a firearm.

And to clear things up, I wouldn't care if it was the real thing or not, as long as it was carried safely (a hard thing to do in a crowded city with a rifle). If it's loaded and the person carrying it is sweeping everyone who passes with the muzzle, then yes, I do have a problem with open carry.

Whatever you think about gun control, you surely don't think they aren't dangerous.

Actually, I know for a proven, unmistakable fact that guns by and of themselves are not dangerous. I have two loaded handguns in my house right now, and two small children as well. The guns are safely locked away and my kids know about the Three Rules.

A gun is fundamentally an inanimate object and has no will and purpose of it's own. Guns by and of themselves are not dangerous: Guns in the hands of people who use them carelessly or for illegal uses are dangerous. It always amazes me that people who would recoil in horror at the thought of judging a person by their colour or appearance have no problem judging the intent of an inanimate object by it's colour and appearance.

You don't read too often about a kid finding and playing with a gun and killing their playmate when their parents have taken the time to educate the child about guns.

The ones you hear about are children who find a gun and are curious because their parents never took the time to explain gun safety to them.

http://www.nrahq.org/safety/eddie/

http://action.aclu.org/site/PageServer?pagename=FJ_donationhome

https://secure.eff.org/site/SPageServer?pagename=DON_splash

https://www.naacp.org/contribute/contribute.php ...and just in case those donations aren't enough to protect your rights,

http://membership.nrahq.org/

Seriously, get more information.
From the problem described here and the information provided you've narrowed your options far to rapidly. It's good you're asking questions, but no single item is the "magic bullet". Cameras, dogs, alarms are all among the many options you can learn about in one of these classes:
https://www.nrahq.org/rtbav/schedule.asp
and, from the organization that's been doing this for 200 years, most often this particular class is free (or very low cost).

http://www.gunsandammomag.com/ga_handguns/keltec_0 92304/

http://www.gunblast.com/KelTec_P3AT.htm

http://thearmedcitizen.com/gunpages/slipper.htm

The ethics of owning guns http://www.a-human-right.com/introduction.html

The 2nd Amendment http://www.usdoj.gov/olc/secondamendment2.htm

If you know anyone with young children who need gun safety training http://www.nrahq.org/safety/eddie/materials.asp

It ROCKS!

I usually carry my Kel-Tec P32, which has a Pocket Slipper Laser Aimer. Sits in the front pocket like a PCA or wallet. http://www.smartcarry.com/xsl.jpg

Guns And Laws

http://www.usdoj.gov/olc/secondamendment2.htm

Nice, small gun

http://www.gunblast.com/KelTec_P3AT.htm and

http://www.gunsandammomag.com/ga_handguns/keltec_0 92304/ Lifetime guarantee. .32 caliber, $250~ Slightly larger and more money: http://www.waltheramerica.com/firearms/ppks.cfm

Florida gun laws

http://www.packing.org/state/index.jsp/florida

If you know anyone with young children who need gun safety training http://www.nrahq.org/safety/eddie/materials.asp

The official police academy book for gun laws in Florida http://www.floridafirearmslaw.com/indexbook.shtml

The ethics of owning guns http://www.a-human-right.com/introduction.html

Florida's concealed carry permit office http://licgweb.doacs.state.fl.us/weapons/index.htm l

FAQ http://www.guncite.com/index.html and http://gunscholar.com/

Purchase From Dealer

There is no license or permit required to purchase a firearm (rifle, shotgun or handgun) in the State of Florida. However, at the time of purchase an "instant background check" is performed by the dealer calling an 800 number that connects him to the Florida Department of Law Enforcement (FDLE). The FDLE operator uses the basic information about you provided by the dealer (name, address, birthdate, Social Security Number, etc.) to check the state and federal computers to determine whether or not you have a criminal record, domestic violence conviction or are subject to a restraining order. If you have a clean record, FDLE tells the dealer that you are Approved, and the sale takes place. If there is a problem with your record the dealer is told that you are Disapproved, and he may not sell you the firearm. Assuming that you are "approved", you may take a rifle or shotgun home immediately. In the case of a handgun, you must wait three days to take it out of the store, a so-called "cooling-off" period. If you are approved, the state distroys the record of the call for the instant background and the dealer keeps a written record, which is later checked by the ATF. From a dealer, the minimum age of a rifle or shotgun is 18; for a handgun it is 21. Persons holding a valid Florida Concealed Weapon License are exempt from the handgun waiting period. Persons holding a Florida Concealed Weapons License must have the Instant Background Check performed. Sale or Transfer Between Individuals

There are no formal requirements for the sale/transfer of a firearm between individuals. However, it is a crime for you to knowingly transfer a firearm to an underaged person, or to a person who you know to be otherwise disqualified (such as a person previously convicted of a felony). For private sales, the minimum age for a rifle, shotgun, or handgun is 18 and no waiting period or background check.

Special County Requirements

In accordance with a Constitutional Revision passed by the voters in November of 1998, any County within Flor

Yeah thats why the NRA doesn't do safety training for kids anymore oh wait maybe they do.

"NRA is against ANY control or supervision"

Here's just one example of their hardline attitude toward gun violence. And here's supervision at work.

"Do you not understand that arms != guns?"

When the Bill of Rights was put in place, most of the arms they were concerned about happened to be guns. The same is true now.

"Please expand on how "licensing guns" violates such constitutional protections"
The protection violated is the right to keep and bear arms. This is not a priviledge, like driving the cars on the roads, for which you need a license.

"I'd like to think I was safe from him having a dangerous 100,000 round ammo dump 30 ft from my house, but that would be regulation, and his rights apparently supercede mine."

Your rights aren't even at conflict. As long as he doesn't have a bunch of nuclear rockets that are irradiating over to your property, it's really none of your concern or problem. Just like you aren't violating his rights by having a tablecloth of a color he does not like. If you don't like guns, don't own them. Problem solved.

Wow. I was with you up until this. Speaking of straw man arguments.

I belive the term you are looking for is "ad hominem": attaking the messenger rather than the message. But it's not and ad hominem if it's true.

You're right. It was not a straw man, since you weren't caricaturing an argument but rather a group.

It is not really an ad hominem either, because you weren't refuting an argument by attacking the messenger. (By the way, ad hominem is a fallacy regardless of whether it's true or not---the fallacy is about relevance, not truth.)

Instead, you said: The media isn't biased when they interview wacky nutjobs because wacky nutjobs are representative of the NRA. This isn't logical fallacy. It's simply a false statement, presumably due to prejudice and bias.

Rather than spending vast amounts of money on politics and fighting all forms of gun control, they should spend that cash talking about the responsiblities of gun ownership and the importance of getting training in the storage, maintainance and use of firearms.

In fact, the NRA spends considerable resources on training and safety programs. This fact isn't particularly newsworthy, however, at least not compared to their political lobbying. So one hears about political efforts much more often than safety training.

You might argue they still don't do enough in this area, but the fact is they don't ignore it. See http://www.nrahq.org/safety/.

Okay, it seems we have two different conversations going on.
1. Is the M16 accurate at 600+ yards?
Yes. The rear sight is easily adjustable with soldier-proof knobs. With a decent range estimation and some idea of what the wind is doing, you can reliably hit a static target at some distance. A standard NRA Highpower match goes out to 600 or 1000 yards, and it includes regular service rifles.

2. Is the M16 a practical choice for the average soldier in the field at 200+ yards?
Probably not. As soon as you throw moving, un-ranged targets into the mix, iron-sights estimation is a crapshoot at best. Additionally, the further the bullet goes, the less damage it may do (which generally isn't an issue with paper targets). Something scoped in .308 caliber is probably a better choice.

You've heard of skeet shooting, sporting clays, target competition, and literally dozens of other forms of non-killing competition, including programs for the disabled, right? Have a look at the calendar - there might be a match near you so you can see first hand what shooting sports are all about. Remember those funny-looking guys in the Olympics with rifles and skis? I don't remember any murders committed by biatheletes recently.

It torques me greatly when self-proclaimed experts on firearm usage declare that there are no non-killing uses for guns. It is quite challenging to be able to accurately poke pencil-sized holes in a target at 50 yds with a pistol or 300+ yds with a rifle.

You've heard of skeet shooting, sporting clays, target competition, and literally dozens of other forms of non-killing competition, including programs for the disabled, right? Have a look at the calendar - there might be a match near you so you can see first hand what shooting sports are all about. Remember those funny-looking guys in the Olympics with rifles and skis? I don't remember any murders committed by biatheletes recently.

It torques me greatly when self-proclaimed experts on firearm usage declare that there are no non-killing uses for guns. It is quite challenging to be able to accurately poke pencil-sized holes in a target at 50 yds with a pistol or 300+ yds with a rifle.

But you don't want such a tiny beam, and you aren't aiming at such a tiny target.

Wrong.

You want a tiny beam because, the more your spread out you beam, the more you spread out your power. You could take a 100mW laser and make it 10ft wide, but the power level would no longer be large enough to do damage. And NO, GE is not going to sell you a multi-megawatt 5ft diameter beam laser without calling a few gov't agencies. And, they're going to want to know how you're going to come up with the 7 or more figures something like that is going to cost. Something like that is NOT an off the shelf product, nor would it be light enough for a typical tripod.

And...
Your target IS that tiny because you're trying to hit someone in the eye!

No NASA boys required. Just a good sharpshooter.

Have you ever even fired a gun? You're really overestimating how easy this is. You speak as if being able to hit a target a mile away is the norm. And you're forgetting the fact that the airplane is moving at a couple hundred miles per hour. Know any sharpshooters who can shoot the eye out of a cheetah in full sprint at a mile away?

Whoever the guy is that's making this shot unassisted, he's the frickin mac daddy of all sharpshooters. You might want to check out the NRA records page to get even a small clue about how hard what you're suggesting is. There's a reason people hunt foul with a shotgun instead of a .22 rifle.

Perhaps mandatory training, or at least safety classes or something for gun owners? I don't see many NRA types willing to make that sort of compromise.

Why not? The NRA's desired primary function is weapons education and safety training. Their massive political machine is an unfortunate side-effect of the right to bear arms coming under repeated attack. Please see the following:

History of the NRA
NRA Support's Maryland Gun Safety Education Bill

http://www.nrahq.org/women/index.asp

OK, so the schools don't want Eddie Eagle to come to school and tell kids not to play with guns.

But schools are willing to let $name the ferret come to school to tell kids that they mustn't ever copy anything.

Blech.

Wait a minute - don't eagles eat ferrets?

Maybe what we need to do is get Eddie and Tux to show up at the same time as the ferret....

As an ex-military person, gun owner, concealed-carry permit holder, martial artist, and computer person ... yes, I have an opinion.

First, I would say that protecting your electronics is not a good reason for carrying a gun. Protecting your life when the electronics you carry puts your life at risk, is a good reason.

IANAL, but this is what I have learned from my gun courses.

The primary reason for carrying a firearm is almost always for self-defense, NOT defense of property. In many of the states in the US it is not acceptable to shoot someone simply because they are robbing you. In most instances there must be a threat of bodily harm and you must be unable to safely remove yourself, back away, or escape from the situation.

When a robber puts a gun/knife to your head and gives you instructions on how not to get hurt, the best solution is usually to comply. However, never "trust" a person who obviously doesn't care about your life. Just because you've handed over your goods does not guarantee that you won't get shot anyway. Escaping or using your firearm at the first opportunity are all viable options.

Regarding martial arts training -

My instructors have said that when defending your life, the primary goal is to neutralize the threat and/or remove yourself from the situation. Handing over material items to gain you that opportunity is totally acceptable.

Although I have trained for using Karate against an armed gun/knife opponent, the techniques are neither simple nor foolproof. One of our black-belts, although he disarmed his attacker and broke the guy's collarbone and wrist, still took a 22 slug in his thigh. To complicate the matter, the criminal later accused him of using excessive force!

That said, the best solution is to always avoid trouble.

The NRA recently opened up their Refuse To Be A Victim! seminars to men too. The seminars "provide participants with the information needed to minimize their chances of criminal attack." And no, they don't push guns as an easy solution. The seminar is inexpensive, and the web site offers some tips to minimize your chances of criminal attack. In London, I would seek out advice from local police stations, women's groups, colleges, and self defense instructors (ie. karate, etc) as to where similar education can be obtained.

And regarding the parent post ... some studies show that firearms are used more than 2 million times a year for personal protection, often without the need for a shot to be fired. Personally, I don't like the feeling I get walking in areas where only the criminals have guns.

After Columbine, they organized a rally in Denver.

The school shooting in Columbine, Colorado happened just before the NRA's annual meeting and convention was scheduled to take place in Denver, Colorado.

The meeting, like most such conventions, was scheduled several years in advance, and would have been all but impossible to move.

The NRA couldn't cancel the annual meeting, they are required by law to hold the meeting every year. The NRA did cancel most of the other scheduled events.

Micheal Moore's film presented the opening remarks in a false light.

Right near the NRA HQ... National Firearms Museum ;)

There is exactly one example of a lobbying group that is extremely powerful that takes in ZERO contributions from industry (and is entirely dependant upon small contributions from millions of everyday joes), and is wildly successfull to the point of having directly changed the results of hundreds if not thousands of elections, including the presidency. Granted, that power is so awsome because the members of the organization care passionaly so about their issue -- but also because that passion is backed up by $$$ contributions, not to mention folks that try to convince their neighbors, co-workers, and friends on how to vote in every election from the local level on up. Are open source advocates as passionate? The mere mention of "NRA" causes politicions to quake in their boots. How to politicions feel when someone mentions "open source?" Confused?

Gun games like IPSC or IDPA are full of geeks. There is plenty of cool equipment to tinker with. And while it takes years to master, once you know a few simple safety rules almost anyone can enjoy it.

If you want something a little less politically incorrect, there are always the service rifle competitons put on by the Civilian Marksmanship Program and the NRA.