Summations Only

Understatement.Yes, you as the authorized legal purchaser of a firearm may transfer its ownership, as a gift, to anyone legally qualified for gun ownership in their state of residence. Just like a vehicle, all legal paperwork required by the state of the person receiving the gift, being filed.So giving your brother a shotgun for christmas or receiving a handgun as a gift from a friend? Barring any legal hold, hell yes, it can be done.

My hell no was more to the question, "SHOULD it be done?" I have no doubt that it CAN be done in many places. I wouldn't be surprised if there were places in the US where there are no "legal holds" to giving firearms to toddlers. The problem we are discussing in this thread is that the existing legal holds are woefully inadequate.

Erik Eckholm writes in today's New York times:

quote:

---

Columbine, Virginia Tech, Sandy Hook, and now, a community college in Roseburg, Ore. One after another, mass shootings have horrified the nation, stoking debate about the availability of legal guns and anguish over the inability of society to keep weapons out of the hands of seething killers.

​

But such rampage killings are not the typical face of gun violence in America. Each day, some 30 people are victims of gun homicides, slain by rival gang members or drug dealers, trigger-happy robbers, drunken men after bar fights, frenzied family members or abusive partners. An additional 60 people a day kill themselves with guns.

---

Article here: Rampage Killings Get Attention, but Gun Violence Is Constant--Percy

Straw buyers move an enormous number of guns here in the U.S., and from here to Mexico. In states where guns cannot be bought or held by the accused in domestic abuse cases, straw buyers routinely rearm them.Gun dealers continue to be upset in the southwest because they have to report same-day sales to the same individual of five or more high-powered rifles. Such a grossly over-regulated drag on doing business... On the other hand, it's good for labor: If your oil field job washed out, you can probably find work as a straw buyer.The southeastern states provide most of the guns to the northeast through one form of straw buying or another, all with the intent to resell to folks in other states who could not legally obtain them.There's a lot of money in them there guns.Edited by Omnivorous, : No reason given.

Small one this time, at Arizona University in Flagstaff, not much information yet: Suspect in custody after shooting at N. Arizona University leaves 1 dead--Percy

As I see it there are two rightwing , ammosexual fantasies that drive them. One is the idea that a good guy with a gun can stop a bad guy with a gun. When you actually look at it, this is a very scary idea. The last thing we need is untrained or minimally trained people engaging in firefights. Americans have watched too many moves and played too many video games. The idea that a weekend of training makes one capable of stopping a school shooting is ridiculous. Law enforcement and armed forces receive continual training and many instances with law enforcement show that even what they receive is not enough.
The crazy thing is that schools that have armed teachers are providing minimal training.
Argyle School district in Texas has a 30-hour training course that involves firing 900 rounds of ammunition.
Error 404 - Page Not Found
Even military veterans say this is a bad idea.
Page not found | The NationThe second right wing ammosexual fantasy is the whole I am going to save the US from a tyrannical government. No one can show that this was the intent of the 2nd amendment. The founders were actually worried about the armed rabble and that is why they were for an armed, organized, well regulated militia. Not these yahoos in their self styled militias we have today. That is another argument for another day.In order to justify their need to oppose government tyranny is the myth that armed farmers, shopkeepers and laborers defeated the British in the Revolutionary War. This is myth and revisionist history. The rabble got their asses kicked every time they went up against the British regulars.The continental forces did not achieve anything of significance until they were trained and were a real army. The armed rabble usually were a hindrance because they had no discipline. The militia, being undisciplined and prone to panic caused the loss of a few battles. The Battle of Camden is a prime example.Militia and armed rabble can not stand against regular army troops.
During the latter years of the war the militias were used to draw in the British, who knew the militia forces would break easily. This was used brilliantly by General Daniel Morgan at the Battle of Cowpens.So what was the key to winning the Revolutionary War, if not the armed populace, which is over emphasized. Gun ownership was much lower than what people perceive. Guns were expensive and for someone that lived in a town or city, they had no practical purpose. Remember this is before most industrialization or cartridge guns. Handguns would have been extremely rare.The key to winning the Revolutionary War was the British unable to or unwilling to commit the resources needed and the French Kingdom.
If Rochambeau had not convinced Washington to give up his plan to retake New York or if De Grasse had not defeated the British Navy at the Battle of the Chesapeake. There is a good chance the USA as it is never would have come into being.

quote:

---

Two separate student groups got into a confrontation, the confrontation turned physical and one of our students, Steven Jones, 18, produced a handgun and shot four of our other students," Fowler said. "One of our students is deceased.

---

It's possible that this turned out exactly the way gun enthusiasts wanted it to, because God forbid anyone get into a confrontation and get his butt whupped.

quote:

---

Two separate student groups got into a confrontation, the confrontation turned physical and one of our students, Steven Jones, 18, produced a handgun and shot four of our other students," Fowler said.

---

My first thought was that it was a bizarre end to a debate: reductio ad firearm.

It's Latin: Reductio ad pistolium

Just more student shenanigans. Look at the fun to be had in Texas:

quote:

---

A professor at the University of Texas at Austin says he is quitting because of the safety risks posed by the state’s new campus carry law, which will allow concealed handguns in classrooms, dorms and other campus buildings.

​

Daniel Hamermesh, an economics professor emeritus who has taught at the university since 1993, said in a letter to the college’s president that with a huge group of students my perception is that the risk that a disgruntled student might bring a gun into the classroom and start shooting at me has been substantially enhanced by the concealed-carry law.

​

The letter, published by the Daily Texan, said that rather than teach in Austin in fall 2016 and 2017, Hamermesh will out of self-protection instead spend part of next year at the University of Sydney, where, among other things, this risk seems lower.

​

The Republican-dominated Texas legislature passed the bill last summer. It goes into effect on 1 August next year. That date will mark the 50th anniversary of the first US mass college shooting — which took place on the University of Texas campus.

​

The law’s sponsor, state senator Brian Birdwell, has described bearing arms as a God-given right.

---

Tradition is big in Texas.Oh, and elsewhere in Texas academe: Southern Texas University: Second fatal shooting on a U.S. campus todayGood times! Party hearty football schools with guns... What could go wrong?

Hate radios finest hour.

You’ll take our guns over your cold, dead children, confirm NRA

This story seems to be creating something of a buzz:Texas university students in dildo protest over gun law - BBC News

Woman in Michigan Charged After Shooting at Fleeing ShopliftersIf we can't use our guns to deter criminals, what good are they?

quote:

---

Law enforcement officers said they would have held their fire in similar circumstances.

---

The criminals did not represent a threat to the shooter or anyone else, and apparently in Michigan a criminal has to threaten you or someone before you can use your own weapon.The lesson in all this? Shoplifters in Michigan should wear educational signs saying, "You can't shoot at me, I'm unarmed."--Percy

I can't believe you didn't lead your post with this quote:

quote:

---

"As a parent I feel more comfortable with my children having a weapon on campus rather than a dildo,"

---

The former could be a tragedy; the latter would be in all cicumstances embarrassing.Family values.Edited by Omnivorous, : No reason given.