I never hated bananas until this thread.

I think your apology was quite classy. Thank you. And yeah. Life crap sucks for many of us these days. (Hugs)

I’ve never been to a range that didn’t sell ammo. There could be a separate system. For range use at the range, no limit. Practice to your heart content and wallet limit. It would add to the cost of the range though bc gets have to have some kind of CYA system for making sure ammo bought for range use was use at the range only. Hmmm. I’m 90% confident that’s doable though. There could even be an incentive there! Range ammo for example wouldn’t require a permit and could be sold cheaper. Take away ammo, require a permit and mag limit.

People. Focus. Ways and means to reasonable and effectively regulate guns/ammo to reduce violent deaths on a massive scale. Also, pity and sadness for the victims. Let’s let the rest go in an effort to keep discussion moving along and the thread open.

Rabbiting from that. Doomsday prepping bugs the dickens out of me. Maybe these two topics could be a separate thread though?

Maybe. It took me forever and nearly the cost of a thumb to load that 24 clip for the hand guns I used to rent at the range. 20+ Dadblum minutes to fill a mag for *maybe* 5-10 minutes of target practice sucks. Or it’s possible it’s just me that sucks. I’ve seen more than one fella muttering about it under his breath too though. Lol Hmm. Maybe there should be a magazine limit. Like you can have a 30-50 mag, but not more than 2 mags per gun. Along with my previously mentioned recommendations for permitting for guns and ammo. Granted, in theory someone could still stockpile, but it’d be harder, more expensive, and take a lot longer. And they couldn’t have say, 2 guns and 100, 50 round mags.

Idk. Of course there’s no argument that 30>10. But on the other hand. 30 isn’t much to practice on the range with either. Regardless of that side debate, I’d be okay with requiring permits for ammo purchases.

Nm. Kid Interuptus posting error.

I just don't understand how anyone could be not okay with those. No one needs to buy a gun this second or else they will just... wait. Wait is what they will do and it won't hurt them or anyone else. Gun sellers might not like it because it will reduce impulse buys, but I'm okay with that. There's some things no one should ever buy on impulse and guns are one of them, imnsho. Sure felons and violent offender criminals will find some other way, but I see no reason to make it easier for them.

Okay. I disagree back. If we took the steps I have suggested, I'd be interested in knowing how that affects the statistics. And what those statistics include to begin with. Given the scant info wet gunownership research, it'd be difficult to have a reliable statistic on responsible, permitted, gun safety following gun presence. For example, I wouldn't feel I was statistically less safe in a room full of armed police officers even though police have a higher chance of gun related problems. I wouldn't feel unsafe around permitted, sober, gun safety following hunters. Circumstance matters. It's matter so much it's why we are discussing reasonable gun regulations.

Oh geez. She was fine. I said it's just a hunting rifle. She said that's incorrect bc of the possible mag size options for it. I'd have to research if that is true specifically for the AR-556 and series, and not semi automatic rifles generally, but mostly I suggested if the mags are the problem, then that should be the focus instead of the guns. Nothing to get knickers twisted over. No semantics there. Reign is an articulate person, if she wanted to label me rudely, I wager she'd find a better word than "incorrect".😎

One, the size of the magizine doesn't change that they still have to pull the trigger for every bullet. Two, if magazine size is the concern, then I'd rather focus on that than the gun. I'd be okay with restricting high capacity magazines in some manner. Either under an ammo limit, or requiring a special permit, or I'm open to other options.

This analogy doesn't work for me. One, smoking isn't a right. Two, smoking is what you can't do anywhere/time. You can carry unlit cigarettes on your person all you want. I actually don't have an issue with guns mostly anywhere/time. It's not much of a right if we can only avail that right in such a restricted manner that it doesn't really exist. If we were to use this analogy with guns. Then it's not the having guns on us anywhere/time that would be the focus. It would only be the firing of the guns. Which I'm okay with. I agree people shouldn't be firing up guns anywhere anytime for funzies. But just having a permitted gun a holstered? Wouldn't bother me.

Well once banned, the compensation is usually a joke. Pennies on the dollar what it was worth. It's similiar to eminent domain. Once a property is deemed such, it becomes slightly better than completely worthless and the compensation is usually similiar to that worth, not the worth a year or so before it was targeted for eminent domain. It isn't supposed to be like that, but more often than not it is. But unlike real estate, it would suddenly create a bigger profit to sell on the black market rather than into the buy back. They'd have to compensate enough to make it worth turning in. And all this costs money. When supposedly money is a factor in why this guy got slipped through so some many cluster bleep. Not enough people in various agencies to enter all the information into state and national databases. Not enough mental health care. Not enough mental health care workers. Not enough police. And huge state and federal cuts. We are close to dealing with austerity measures if the cuts get even worse, and by most expectations they will. Even so, I see no reason to have a buy back on what's just a normal rifle. There is nothing about this rifle that makes it anything more than a normal hunting rifle. I would agree though that bump stocks should be restricted. No one needs to hold a trigger down and spray bullets in a continuous stream. I'm unsure if the practicalities of making them illegal. I wonder how easy it is to makeshift one. Maybe a better course would be to insist manufactures make rifles in such a way that it's harder or impossible to bump stock them?

I have zero confidence in anything being private these days. The IRS has been hacked. Credit agencies have been hacked. (Tho I swear I think that bs given how equifax makes more money off people being hacked than protecting them.grrrrrr) I think any notion that information intended only for police or any other government agency would stay in that agency is BS. I also think it could be used in ways unintended by those who would register, just like nearly all our information is used in ways we have no control over and no genuine ability to opt out of. Our government/financial system/society mostly sucks eggs at protecting information of any kind these days.

That criminals will find a way doesn't mean we need to make it easier for them. Permits that require for each gun purchase: Background checks that weed out any felons and any violent offenses in the last 10 years Mandatory safety and law courses 2-4 week wait Ammo purchase limit permits. Maybe similiar to hunting tag limits? Idk, but I think something reasonable to be figured out.

I would absolutely vote no against a mandatory registry of gun owners. The best gun is the gun no one knows you have and that you never need to use. I think "advertising" that a person or a home has a gun on them is stupid.

The AR-556 (and similiar AR-15s) semi automatic rifles are often used for hunting. They are just one trigger pull, one shot rifles. http://time.com/4390506/gun-control-ar-15-semiautomatic-rifles/ Also, I know it's been said, but it needs repeating. The AR does not stand for assault rifle. It stands for armalite rifle.

When they start college or trade classes, usually 15/16, same age as we allow computer use. It is not their phone. It is mine that I let them use. Usually we upgrade either Dh or I and they get whatever is the oldest phone. Even so, Dh and I are usually 1 or 2 iPhone editions behind the newest. Iphones usually. A son switched to Samsung Galaxy when he was 18. Bit jealous of it actually, but not enough to switch. The phone stays set up under my account with my password, so they can't put anything on it without bringing it to me. And we make it clear that any inappropriate use in either content or addiction tendency can cost them their phone. I have zero problems taking it if either becomes a problem. Currently we have an unlimited everything plan for a very reasonable price considering we have 7 phones on our account. But before then, we set the phones up to give an alert if they got down to only so much free data/talk left. Mostly it wasn't problem bc they just made sure wifi was their default setting to avoid data usage. But we don't do things that everyone else seems to do these days. I don't have them on find my phone or find my friends to track where they are. We actually don't have that set up on any of our phones. I don't have it set up to copy me their screens content or messages. I could. I simply refuse. Mostly bc none of us have cloud accounts and I don't want to have yet another type of account to keep track of. If it gets to a point where I think I need to, I'd rather take the phone away. I might change my mind on the phone tracker, mostly bc we had one stolen a couple months ago. We pay for the phone and plan until they are 18, then the phone is their problem and we pay the account. When they are past college age, I'll probably ask them to kick in for their portion of the bill to save us all money. ETA: We make it clear that the phones are for family communication. They don't give their number to anyone for the most part. Close friends is about it. They usually don't give it to teachers and youth ministers or bosses. College teachers are required by school policy to send all official communication through the school email system. And think that's a wise policy, so stick to it. Other adults get my cell phone or the house number. And none of my kids get social media before 18. For the most part my adult kids (4 ages 18-23) say they are really glad about it. Apparently they've seen/heard enough horror stories to be glad they were spared. The closest issue we have had is they've had some jobs that use groupme(?) for shift scheduling, so they have to use their phone for that. Personally I hate it, bc I miss the days when people (bosses no less!) could get their crap together and make a schedule more than 3 days in advance. But apparently things planning head have become archaic notions. (Mild rant over.😖)

This. I’m for gun law reform and I still think you hit the nail with this post. This guy was a total cluster bleep of repeated ball drops that would have prevented this if people had done their jobs.

He should be visiting multiple campuses, whether he plans to commute or not, to get a feel for which ones will best suit him. This can also make all the difference in his motivation too.

It is completely normal for a teen to feel overwhelmed and not know where to start or to feel intimidated about how to go about things. That doesn’t mean they aren’t willing to do it. They might not be. But usually it’s normal for them to need some direction and walking through. There’s nothing about wanting it or being a hard worker that means they will just know what to do and not feel jittery about it. I’d sit him down and work through the options. Option A - go to colleges x y or z. You can input act score and gpa and most have decent cost calculators. Option B - trade school and work Option C - commute from home to schools 1 or 2 I’m not sure what you mean by leave home on someone else’s dime. Education is an investment in his future. It’s not mooching to accept financial aid for that.

This is why I say a short commute is required for success. My boys don’t live on campus, but they can’t avoid being at the campus 5 days a week. Labs, study groups, teacher sessions and so forth are all around classes. If he has a full schedule 3 days a week, he is going to need to use the other two for all the outside class requirements. For example, my kids outside of class this week have Lab A mandatory event to attend for art, for sign language and for botany in the evening of a weekday. A teacher meeting is scheduled for a non class day. (The teacher is scheduling everyone’s for that day bc he has classes the other days.) And the sign language kid has a silent lunch to attend on Saturday. This isn’t mandatory, but helpful. And he is required to attend 3(iirc?) silent events outside of class per semester. This is all normal and to be expected. Engineers will have study groups, labs, and projects to work on outside of class.

Can I ask why he needs to commute? If dad is willing to help that much, and I bet son gets more financial aid than you think he will, why can't he live either on campus, or right off of campus? I understand if you just think he isn't ready to leave home yet. Btdt too.

If you give more details (via pm?) I could walk you through that and maybe some other options for you to give him for consideration. I'd be happy to do it.