Political Crossfire Forums

[Venom]

I've got a almost random question but it has a reason.
Is a disassembled pistol with bullets nearby still dangerous?

[agentkgb]

Not immediately but I wouldn't give one to a lunatic.

[thefranzkafkafront]

No more than a steel works and a gunsmith is.

[CursedLemon]

Does it legally count as a weapon? Probably.

[perdidochas]

Venom wrote: I've got a almost random question but it has a reason.
Is a disassembled pistol with bullets nearby still dangerous?

As Agent says, not immediately.

[micfranklin]

Venom wrote: I've got a almost random question but it has a reason.
Is a disassembled pistol with bullets nearby still dangerous?

Well if you throw one hard enough it might be dangerous. Why, have you disassembled a pistol before?

[Moracca]

What a dumb question.

[Venom]

Quote: Not immediately but I wouldn't give one to a lunatic.
Well looking at the answers here it seems weird. First off a gun that is taken apart can be put back together to shoot someone. That is obvious, without debate. Now would you allow a convicted felon, who is not allowed to own a firearm, to have this dismantled pistol?

[agentkgb]

Venom wrote: Quote: Not immediately but I wouldn't give one to a lunatic.
Well looking at the answers here it seems weird. First off a gun that is taken apart can be put back together to shoot someone. That is obvious, without debate. Now would you allow a convicted felon, who is not allowed to own a firearm, to have this dismantled pistol?
No, if you give him dismantled pistol you give him access to a operational pistol.

[thefranzkafkafront]

agentkgb wrote: Venom wrote: Quote: Not immediately but I wouldn't give one to a lunatic.
Well looking at the answers here it seems weird. First off a gun that is taken apart can be put back together to shoot someone. That is obvious, without debate. Now would you allow a convicted felon, who is not allowed to own a firearm, to have this dismantled pistol?
No, if you give him dismantled pistol you give him access to a operational pistol.

If he's had training to reassmeble it.

[agentkgb]

thefranzkafkafront wrote: agentkgb wrote: Venom wrote: Quote: Not immediately but I wouldn't give one to a lunatic.
Well looking at the answers here it seems weird. First off a gun that is taken apart can be put back together to shoot someone. That is obvious, without debate. Now would you allow a convicted felon, who is not allowed to own a firearm, to have this dismantled pistol?
No, if you give him dismantled pistol you give him access to a operational pistol.

If he's had training to reassmeble it.
Or if he knows someone who does.

[Venom]

Quote: If he's had training to reassmeble it.

Quote: Or if he knows someone who does

So a convicted felon that has the training to put a pistol together and has people he knows that can put it together should be allowed to have this disassembled pistol?

[thefranzkafkafront]

agentkgb wrote: thefranzkafkafront wrote: agentkgb wrote: Venom wrote: Quote: Not immediately but I wouldn't give one to a lunatic.
Well looking at the answers here it seems weird. First off a gun that is taken apart can be put back together to shoot someone. That is obvious, without debate. Now would you allow a convicted felon, who is not allowed to own a firearm, to have this dismantled pistol?
No, if you give him dismantled pistol you give him access to a operational pistol.

If he's had training to reassmeble it.
Or if he knows someone who does.

Hows this any more dangerous than bulding a gunhimself or him making a shiv?

[Charlie Man]

I think you're trying to set up a comparison to everyday objects, but I think it's going to be false because of the utility of small arms to intimidate, kill, and be transported.

I'd say if you give, say, a violent lunatic a diassembled gun and he or she has the means (That means really feasible, not just physically possible) to reassemble and use it even once it without anyone knowing, then yes, it should be kept away.

You can indeed say the same of a shiv and point out availability of sharp things, but as I said, they just aren't the same. Pretty much anything you can do with a knife you can do with your bare hands, and I'm hardly against having those... small arms are a different proposition.

[perdidochas]

Venom wrote: Quote: If he's had training to reassmeble it.

Quote: Or if he knows someone who does

So a convicted felon that has the training to put a pistol together and has people he knows that can put it together should be allowed to have this disassembled pistol?

For purposes of ownership by a convicted felon, I believe the receiver of the gun is legally considered a gun.

[thefranzkafkafront]

Charlie Man wrote: I think you're trying to set up a comparison to everyday objects, but I think it's going to be false because of the utility of small arms to intimidate, kill, and be transported.

I'd say if you give, say, a violent lunatic a diassembled gun and he or she has the means (That means really feasible, not just physically possible) to reassemble and use it even once it without anyone knowing, then yes, it should be kept away.

You can indeed say the same of a shiv and point out availability of sharp things, but as I said, they just aren't the same. Pretty much anything you can do with a knife you can do with your bare hands, and I'm hardly against having those... small arms are a different proposition.

You can make a weapon capable of killing mutiple people with a few nitrates some wood, a metal tube, scrap peices of metal and ball bearings.

A gun is simply a catergory of weapon. Trying to associate an ethical mythos around the 'gun' is silly.

[agentkgb]

thefranzkafkafront wrote: agentkgb wrote: thefranzkafkafront wrote: agentkgb wrote: Venom wrote: Quote: Not immediately but I wouldn't give one to a lunatic.
Well looking at the answers here it seems weird. First off a gun that is taken apart can be put back together to shoot someone. That is obvious, without debate. Now would you allow a convicted felon, who is not allowed to own a firearm, to have this dismantled pistol?
No, if you give him dismantled pistol you give him access to a operational pistol.

If he's had training to reassmeble it.
Or if he knows someone who does.

Hows this any more dangerous than bulding a gunhimself or him making a shiv?
It's not. I just happen to prefer that a lunatic didn't have a working gun.

[thefranzkafkafront]

agentkgb wrote: thefranzkafkafront wrote: agentkgb wrote: thefranzkafkafront wrote: agentkgb wrote: Venom wrote: Quote: Not immediately but I wouldn't give one to a lunatic.
Well looking at the answers here it seems weird. First off a gun that is taken apart can be put back together to shoot someone. That is obvious, without debate. Now would you allow a convicted felon, who is not allowed to own a firearm, to have this dismantled pistol?
No, if you give him dismantled pistol you give him access to a operational pistol.

If he's had training to reassmeble it.
Or if he knows someone who does.

Hows this any more dangerous than bulding a gunhimself or him making a shiv?
It's not. I just happen to prefer that a lunatic didn't have a working gun.

Anyone can build a gun out of easily obtainable industrial materials, its not got a mystical property to it.

[perdidochas]

Venom wrote: Quote: Not immediately but I wouldn't give one to a lunatic.
Well looking at the answers here it seems weird. First off a gun that is taken apart can be put back together to shoot someone. That is obvious, without debate. Now would you allow a convicted felon, who is not allowed to own a firearm, to have this dismantled pistol?

Define dismantled? Do you mean dissassembled, as per cleaning, or do you mean to make unworkable without buying parts for it?

[bigstick61]

A disassembled gun is still a working gun; it only needs to be reassembled, something which is not too difficult, especially for someone with a good mechanical sense or who knows how to do it. DEWAT guns are a different story altogether.