Gun Promoters No Place to Hide Now
Quote: Zcore13Huh? Guns are the problem? I have 4 and not one has ever shot anyone, robbed a store or threatened anyone. Can you show me any news stories where a gun has done this? If guns are the problem, then aren't cars at fault for traffic fatalities?
ZCore13
You are too smart not to see what is lacking in your argument. NO ONE who wants guns banned or curtailed is saying that the guns fire without a human pulling the trigger. What gun rights opponents do say, which you must know is true, is that there are SOME examples of violence that are committed with guns that would not be committed if the gun was not available, or if the person chose to still be violent, the result would be less severe. If the LV shooter, or Miami nightclub shooter cam with a samurai sword instead far fewer would have been killed. Fact.
The adult discussion should be whether it is worth giving up our gun rights as we have them now to likely save some lives. I can save way more lives by lowering the speed limit on all roads to a maximum of 50mph, no doubt about it. I can list lots of other laws we could pass that would save lives. Its up to us as a country to figure out if the right to bear arms is worth the added deaths it causes. I'll let Face give us all the yesses. I'll let terapined give us all the no's.
Quote: Zcore13So why don't we? They kill more people than guns. Why not start with the #1 killer??
Dude, I would LOVE to live in a world where cars didn't exist. I hate driving. I would like to live in one of those picturesque European towns/cities where very few people have cars and you can walk or ride a bike everywhere.
Quote: SteverinosThe United States crime rates are pretty normal when you compare them to other industrialized countries. The one glaring exception is homicide. On average, assaults in the US are 3 times more likely to involve guns than in these other countries. The difference is NOT because we have more mentally ill people. It's also not because our country has worse access to mental health care (it does). The difference is because our country has an overwhelming abundance of GUNS.
Quit blaming mentally ill people, which are more likely to be victims of such violence than perpetrators, for mass shootings and start focusing your blame on the problem, America's abundance of guns.
I'm sure guys like John Paul Stevens and Warren Burger are just ignorant hypocritical liberals and know less than the guys from Alabama posting on this forum. George Washington used the 2A in the exact opposite way in which most people posting above says it was designed for in the repel of the Whiskey Rebellion. Interesting that he would do such a thing.
Glad you're back. I've been looking for an opportunity to post this...
Remember how just days ago you railed hard on this, then admitted you had no real idea of any facts of the matter? You took a lot of heat for that. I guess I just wanted to say, and might have earlier if I had not been too intent on making my own point, that I commend you for it. Too often we are too proud, or ashamed, oddly, to state, or even admit to ourselves, that we might not know something, or need others' help to understand something. It's refreshing to see such openness. Good on ya.
So let's start here. I'm not here to challenge; pretend you're in charge and I am your general. You think there are too many guns, seems obvious that your intent is to reduce that number. There is, last I checked, one gun for every one person here. That makes it roughly 360mm total firearms. I think it's a little less than half of the pop who owns a gun. I think a safe percentage would be in the neighborhood of 40% of the pop that owns them, but we can be optimistic and just say it's only a quarter. Makes the math easier for me =p. So 80mm people.
80mm.
Guns don't really "go bad". Short of storing one at the bottom of a pool, you can pretty much leave em sit for a decade or two and find little more than surface rust on the barrel. Perhaps some semi's may get gummy and prone to jamming, what I'm trying to say is even if you could push a button and stop sales in their entirety, it doesn't address this issue.
So how?
I see only two ways. 1st is "...but Australia!" That is one option, and one I'm not entirely opposed to, the option being a federal gun buyback program. But for supporters, understand that AU has laws stating .au has to appropriately compensate for items confiscated. No asset forfeiture horses#$% down under. This means their attempt, which got ~1.Xmm guns off their streets, cost $X00mm dollars. That is a low "X", mind; I believe they expected it to be $500mm but it came in under. But it's not a simple thing. Retail for a used rifle is around $400 for your best case, Adams Arms / HiPoint junk, likely around $600 - $700 for a used Colt, and up from there.
It's not a bad idea. Even a skeptic would have to agree that, at least in AU, it didn't not work. But for those championing it, you gotta understand that there will be a heavy cost to it. There has to be for it to have a hope of being effective. We have these in NY all the time, I've mentioned it before. Putting price tags of $10 minimum to $75 maximum and expecting anything but attic scrap isn't going to do anything. Also understand, a not entirely huge aspect but one that does exist, is buybacks only work and are only ever done with a "No Questions" guarantee. There is a social cost to such a bill, this one being that a lot of evidence is going to be destroyed. Perhaps cost of doing business, but one of such a level it can't be ignored.
Second way is straight up door knocking. Darkoz worries about black markets. The real worry is red streets. I know nothing of your family or friends, but I don't want to send mine into offense on the public. Nor do I want my civilian friends subject to militarized occupation of their homes. Forget civil war. Even a skirmish is too much an affront to everything that is proper and decent to do. You may feel differently, but you can't reasonably think confiscation is an option. Or maybe you do. That's an argument I'd be eager to hear.
That's mine. Your turn. Add something.
Quote: SOOPOOYou are too smart not to see what is lacking in your argument. NO ONE who wants guns banned or curtailed is saying that the guns fire without a human pulling the trigger. What gun rights opponents do say, which you must know is true, is that there are SOME examples of violence that are committed with guns that would not be committed if the gun was not available, or if the person chose to still be violent, the result would be less severe. If the LV shooter, or Miami nightclub shooter cam with a samurai sword instead far fewer would have been killed. Fact.
The adult discussion should be whether it is worth giving up our gun rights as we have them now to likely save some lives. I can save way more lives by lowering the speed limit on all roads to a maximum of 50mph, no doubt about it. I can list lots of other laws we could pass that would save lives. Its up to us as a country to figure out if the right to bear arms is worth the added deaths it causes. I'll let Face give us all the yesses. I'll let terapined give us all the no's.
How do you know that if the Las Vegas shooter couldn't get all his rifles that he wouldn't have built a car bomb? You can't say that nobody would have died at his hands if he had no access to guns. There have been nurses that have killed dozens and dozens of people without a gun. There have been people that have strangled dozens of people without a gun. Murderers are murderers. They don't change their thoughts because they don't have access to a firearm.
Anyway, there is no chance that all guns would be banned. There is no chance that the Second Amendment will be repealed. There's also no chance that no matter what law got passed anyone is getting all the guns that people have. There would be a civil war before that would happen. What probably will happen is that bump stocks will be banned. No Factor. There will be more stringent mental health background checks and lists to put people on. And, although there is no such thing as a Gun Show loophole, because licensed firearms dealers have to do background checks whether they are at their store or at a gun show, there probably will be a system where a background check is required when selling a gun from an individual to another individual.
ZCore13
Quote: Zcore13How do you know that if the Las Vegas shooter couldn't get all his rifles that he wouldn't have built a car bomb? You can't say that nobody would have died at his hands if he had no access to guns. There have been nurses that have killed dozens and dozens of people without a gun. There have been people that have strangled dozens of people without a gun. Murderers are murderers. They don't change their thoughts because they don't have access to a firearm.
Anyway, there is no chance that all guns would be banned. There is no chance that the Second Amendment will be repealed. There's also no chance that no matter what law got passed anyone is getting all the guns that people have. There would be a civil war before that would happen. What probably will happen is that bump stocks will be banned. No Factor. There will be more stringent mental health background checks and lists to put people on. And, although there is no such thing as a Gun Show loophole, because licensed firearms dealers have to do background checks whether they are at their store or at a gun show, there probably will be a system where a background check is required when selling a gun from an individual to another individual.
ZCore13
If there is no chance then what are you so upset about?
Quote: darkozIf there is no chance then what are you so upset about?
I'm not upset at all. I laugh at the liberal agenda. Actually, I shake my head most of the time. But I do laugh a lot also.
ZCore13
Quote: FaceGlad you're back. I've been looking for an opportunity to post this...
Remember how just days ago you railed hard on this, then admitted you had no real idea of any facts of the matter? You took a lot of heat for that. I guess I just wanted to say, and might have earlier if I had not been too intent on making my own point, that I commend you for it. Too often we are too proud, or ashamed, oddly, to state, or even admit to ourselves, that we might not know something, or need others' help to understand something. It's refreshing to see such openness. Good on ya.
So let's start here. I'm not here to challenge; pretend you're in charge and I am your general. You think there are too many guns, seems obvious that your intent is to reduce that number. There is, last I checked, one gun for every one person here. That makes it roughly 360mm total firearms. I think it's a little less than half of the pop who owns a gun. I think a safe percentage would be in the neighborhood of 40% of the pop that owns them, but we can be optimistic and just say it's only a quarter. Makes the math easier for me =p. So 80mm people.
80mm.
Guns don't really "go bad". Short of storing one at the bottom of a pool, you can pretty much leave em sit for a decade or two and find little more than surface rust on the barrel. Perhaps some semi's may get gummy and prone to jamming, what I'm trying to say is even if you could push a button and stop sales in their entirety, it doesn't address this issue.
So how?
I see only two ways. 1st is "...but Australia!" That is one option, and one I'm not entirely opposed to, the option being a federal gun buyback program. But for supporters, understand that AU has laws stating .au has to appropriately compensate for items confiscated. No asset forfeiture horses#$% down under. This means their attempt, which got ~1.Xmm guns off their streets, cost $X00mm dollars. That is a low "X", mind; I believe they expected it to be $500mm but it came in under. But it's not a simple thing. Retail for a used rifle is around $400 for your best case, Adams Arms / HiPoint junk, likely around $600 - $700 for a used Colt, and up from there.
It's not a bad idea. Even a skeptic would have to agree that, at least in AU, it didn't not work. But for those championing it, you gotta understand that there will be a heavy cost to it. There has to be for it to have a hope of being effective. We have these in NY all the time, I've mentioned it before. Putting price tags of $10 minimum to $75 maximum and expecting anything but attic scrap isn't going to do anything. Also understand, a not entirely huge aspect but one that does exist, is buybacks only work and are only ever done with a "No Questions" guarantee. There is a social cost to such a bill, this one being that a lot of evidence is going to be destroyed. Perhaps cost of doing business, but one of such a level it can't be ignored.
Second way is straight up door knocking. Darkoz worries about black markets. The real worry is red streets. I know nothing of your family or friends, but I don't want to send mine into offense on the public. Nor do I want my civilian friends subject to militarized occupation of their homes. Forget civil war. Even a skirmish is too much an affront to everything that is proper and decent to do. You may feel differently, but you can't reasonably think confiscation is an option. Or maybe you do. That's an argument I'd be eager to hear.
That's mine. Your turn. Add something.
Yes, I remember the exchange where I claimed ignorance on guns. And I am. I'm not a hunter. My dad wasn't a hunter. We are fishermen, lol. My point in that exchange is that you do not need to be an expert on guns to have an opinion about guns. Yes, we know an AR-15 isn't FULLY AUTOMATIC (you have to pull the trigger for each bullet). I suppose some people might not know that. But what bothers me is that gun rights advocates claim that if you are not a an expert on guns than your opinion is totally invalid. I disagree...heavily.
And if I remember things correctly, I posted the below article for you to specifically comment on and you didn't. I'll post again:
https://www.nbcnews.com/think/opinion/parkland-shooter-s-ar-15-was-designed-kill-efficiently-possible-ncna848346
The premise of this article is that an AR-15 totally destroys its target. Meaning, if you get hit in the liver with a bullet from a handgun, it's possible you can survive. If you get hit with a bullet from an AR-15, it PULVERIZES its target and your chances of survival will go down drastically. That, coupled with its accuracy and less recoil, makes it an instrument for killing.
I'm from Alaska. I'm surrounded by hunters. I'm surrounded by 2A supporters. ALL of them will say, "no self-respecting hunter will use an AR-15 for hunts." I do not want to ban all guns. I DO want to ban ALL things that's sole purpose is for the MASS killing of HUMAN BEINGS, bump stocks, high-capacity magazines, etc. In my estimation, the ONLY use for an AR-15 is the quick and easy killing of human beings...oh, and umm, I guess a target range hobby? Well, I'm sorry, I don't support your stupid hobby if that's the only thing the damn thing is used for. Find a new hobby. Play video poker or craps. If that's the only thing we have to sacrifice, that stupid hobby, for our society to be just a little safer, hell yeah it's worth doing.
As for the different methods to achieve that, yeah, a buyback program makes sense. You could use Austrailia for a model if you choose. You'd have to offer meaningful compensation for the guns. I would lol at somebody who says we don't have the money for it (did you see the omnibus spending bill? Will the real conservatives please stand up?). We have the money. It's just a matter of will. I don't think confiscation is an option. But then again, I didn't think Trump's plan of rounding up 11 million people, going door to door, was an option either. But apparently, some people did. (I never thought he considered it an option either, but he was telling people what they wanted to hear).
Quote: Zcore13So why don't we? They kill more people than guns. Why not start with the #1 killer??
ZCore13
/sigh
This is the stupidest argument that can be contributed to the conversation. Cracks me up every time it's introduced. Cars have other purposes besides KILLING. They get you from point A to B. Knives have other purposes besides killing. They are tools and they cut your ribye into bit sized pieces. Hands have other purposes besides strangling. Get it?
So let's try to add something meaningful to the debate instead of saying "buh-buh-buh, what about fried chicken? That kills more people than guns. Let's ban KFC!"
Quote: Zcore13There is no chance that the Second Amendment will be repealed.
There is always a chance that the 2A will be repealed. It's called an amendment.
Quote: Steverinos/sigh
This is the stupidest argument that can be contributed to the conversation. Cracks me up every time it's introduced. Cars have other purposes besides KILLING. They get you from point A to B. Knives have other purposes besides killing. They are tools and they cut your ribye into bit sized pieces. Hands have other purposes besides strangling. Get it?
So let's try to add something meaningful to the debate instead of saying "buh-buh-buh, what about fried chicken? That kills more people than guns. Let's ban KFC!"
So target shooting is not another purpose for guns? How about those that use them to hunt for their food? Not another purpose? How about competitions? Not a purpose either? Self defense? No? Get it?
ZCore13
If you think the Dems are gonna take the House & Senate by stumping this Fall on "repealing the 2nd Amendment", I say go for it. There isn't a single issue that will unilaterally ruin the Dems momentum against the current administration/Republican majorities as quickly as taking up a "Repeal of the 2nd Amendment" battle. Do you actually believe the Dems are stupid enough to go down this path? Maybe so, after all they did put Hillary up in 2016 instead of Bernie, so anything is possible with the DNC.
Never any specifics from the gun controllers group. Here is some of what is possible:
1) Better background check system (NICS) that all states are forced into participating in and every gun transfer is subject to a NICS check & run through an FFL.
2) Better mental health restrictions on gun purchases/ownership...you might even get 72 hour confiscation without due process if you allow for huge financial penalties awarded to those who's rights were infringed without real cause, but there is that Constitution thingy out there so.....
3) Magazine restrictions to 10 rounds (the People's Republic of California already has this...it helped a lot in San Bernadino)
4) Raising the minimum age to 21 for all firearms [I pity the 18-20 year old women living on their own out there, but Romes can start a new MMA training biz, right Axel...I am kidding :-)]
Here is what you won't get:
A. Repeal of the Second Amendment
B. Confiscation/Mandatory Buy Back Program for the 5 million AR-15's currently in circulation and the 300 million firearms currently owned by 40% of US Households....I bet 100+ million are semi-automatics capable of firing just as fast as the dreaded AR-15 type weapon.
C. Banning all future sales of semi-automatic weapons. I give it 2-1 against chance of a reinstatement of a ban on some "black scary looking" semi-automatic rifles...and if you can't ban them all, I don't see the point. You have a better chance of going after a .223/.556 ammunition ban and frankly that would be more effective...sorry Face, maybe I shouldn't have given them that idea, but hey, still lots of options out there.
D. Meaningful restriction on the number of firearms an individual can own or buy in a given period.
E. Meaningful restriction on number of magazines or ammunition an individual can own or buy in a given period.
So focus on 1) through 4) and claim victory if you can get those accomplished. Stop wasting all this time and money marching on Washington. It didn't help the "March for Life" folks move the needle politically and they have had hundreds of thousands more people on their marches over the years. I don't expect the "March for Our Lives" to be any more effective, do you?
The kids don't get the ball over the goal line for any logical person just because they suffered a tragedy...while every rational person hurts for them and the nightmare they endured, that doesn't make those same kids any smarter about what can be improved with regard to gun legislation and how to get it accomplished. If a life tragedy makes you smarter about a subject, why aren't we putting the survivors of the FIU bridge collapse on TV telling us how to build better bridges and listening to them about new construction regulations? Because putting David and Emma up on stage shouting ridiculous statements and standing in silence for a some meaningful period of time makes for good TV & a good news cycle...if your in to that sort of thing...or if the ratings will make your network $$.
Quote: SteverinosThere is always a chance that the 2A will be repealed. It's called an amendment.
Nope. No chance. The vocal liberal extremist minority is mostly ignored and laughed at by the majority. Things would be taken a lot more serious if they attempted to repeal the 2nd Amendment. Zero chance of that happening.
ZCore13
Quote: Zcore13Nope. No chance. The vocal liberal extremist minority is mostly ignored and laughed at by the majority. Things would be taken a lot more serious if they attempted to repeal the 2nd Amendment. Zero chance of that happening.
ZCore13
I'm sure folks thought slavery would never be abolished too. What I'm saying is...never say never. Some day enough Americans are going to wake up and say, "wait, I guess I'm not part of a militia." Hopefully I'll be around to say, "duh".
Quote: Zcore13So target shooting is not another purpose for guns? How about those that use them to hunt for their food? Not another purpose? How about competitions? Not a purpose either? Self defense? No? Get it?
ZCore13
I guess you didn't read my other post to Face. I'm not for banning of all guns, just those that's sole purpose is for the MASS killing of HUMANS.
Quote: ParadigmThe kids don't get the ball over the goal line for any logical person just because they suffered a tragedy...while every rational person hurts for them and the nightmare they endured, that doesn't make those same kids any smarter about what can be improved with regard to gun legislation and how to get it accomplished.
I don't know. These kids grew up in the social media age. They've already demonstrated that they have the ability to demonstrate. I think people writing the next generation of leaders off are making a mistake. There's probably a reason why the right-wing blogosphere keeps posting conspiracy theories about them; they are genuinely afraid they can make a difference.
Quote: Zcore13So target shooting is not another purpose for guns? How about those that use them to hunt for their food? Not another purpose? How about competitions? Not a purpose either? Self defense? No? Get it?
ZCore13
What? Tell those people that hunt for their food to go to the supermarket. Lot safer and easier
Quote: SteverinosI guess you didn't read my other post to Face. I'm not for banning of all guns, just those that's sole purpose is for the MASS killing of HUMANS.
Specifically, which guns...if you say AR-15, that is one model of gun...give us a list of what the specifics of the guns you believe have the "sole purpose of the MASS killing of HUMANS"...and tell us what separates them from the "other" guns.
Quote: ParadigmSpecifically, which guns...if you say AR-15, that is one model of gun...give us a list of what the specifics of the guns you believe have the "sole purpose of the MASS killing of HUMANS"...and tell us what separates them from the "other" guns.
Already posted an article. Scroll up.
Quote: Steverinos
And if I remember things correctly, I posted the below article for you to specifically comment on and you didn't. I'll post again:
I promise you I wrote you a novella in response. You left that link in the same post where you stated about being a fisherman and not a hunter. I responded back immediately, and continued with a follow up with gamerfreak in the vein of damage and lethality. For that reason, I'll spare the forum a repeat. It's easily found and you can check it out.
Quote: SteverIn my estimation, the ONLY use for an AR-15 is the quick and easy killing of human beings...oh, and umm, I guess a target range hobby? Well, I'm sorry, I don't support your stupid hobby if that's the only thing the damn thing is used for.
It's not.
Quote: SteverFind a new hobby.
No. Now what do we do?
Quote: FaceI promise you I wrote you a novella in response. You left that link in the same post where you stated about being a fisherman and not a hunter. I responded back immediately, and continued with a follow up with gamerfreak in the vein of damage and lethality. For that reason, I'll spare the forum a repeat. It's easily found and you can check it out.
It's not.
No. Now what do we do?
Elect enough Americans to public office that support common sense gun legislation. The day will come.
Quote: FaceI promise you I wrote you a novella in response. You left that link in the same post where you stated about being a fisherman and not a hunter. I responded back immediately, and continued with a follow up with gamerfreak in the vein of damage and lethality. For that reason, I'll spare the forum a repeat. It's easily found and you can check it out.
It's not.
No. Now what do we do?
Repeal and replace!
Now where have i heard that before?
Quote: Face
No. Now what do we do?
You must have really angered Face cuz that one line response is the shortest i have ever seen him give
Quote: darkozYou must have really angered Face cuz that one line response is the shortest i have ever seen him give
Not angry, I promise. I'm really trying the brevity thing. And the stark negative was only to show that hand wavium isn't going to solve the problem, as opposed to being purposely rude to Stever.
On repeal and replace, go for it. It absolutely is an amendment, they've absolutely been changed before, they've absolutely been eliminated before. I, as a bona fide ammosexual, would enjoy watching the process.
But when it fails, then what?
Quote: FaceNot angry, I promise. I'm really trying the brevity thing. And the stark negative was only to show that hand wavium isn't going to solve the problem, as opposed to being purposely rude to Stever.
On repeal and replace, go for it. It absolutely is an amendment, they've absolutely been changed before, they've absolutely been eliminated before. I, as a bona fide ammosexual, would enjoy watching the process.
But when it fails, then what?
Then you win
And we deal with mass school shootings by digging more graves
Quote: SteverinosElect enough Americans to public office that support common sense gun legislation. The day will come.
You are on the wrong side of the political spectrum if you covet common sense.
ZCore13
Quote: darkozThen you win
And we deal with mass school shootings by digging more graves
/sigh.
Quote: Face/sigh.
Okay now THAT was the shortest reponse from Face!
Quote: Zcore13You are on the wrong side of the political spectrum if you covet common sense.
ZCore13
Quote: Steverinos
Lol. Yup. I you know what those are worth... from both sides.
ZCore13
John F. Kennedy was killed with a bolt action rifle, MLK was killed with a Remington pump action 30.06. Robert Kennedy was killed with a revolver and Reagan was shot with a .22 pistol.Quote: FaceThat's mine. Your turn. Add something.
How many names from "the 17" does anyone remember, excluding Babs?
Quote: FaceNot angry, I promise. I'm really trying the brevity thing. And the stark negative was only to show that hand wavium isn't going to solve the problem, as opposed to being purposely rude to Stever.
On repeal and replace, go for it. It absolutely is an amendment, they've absolutely been changed before, they've absolutely been eliminated before. I, as a bona fide ammosexual, would enjoy watching the process.
But when it fails, then what?
I lean left on a lot of issues, but gun control isn’t one of them. I’d be upset to see outright banning of semi-automatic rifles.
That said, I think it would behoove 2A advocates to make some small compromises. I think if nothing at all is done, we would then risk much more extreme measures eventually being put into place. A large amount of voters aren’t going to be happy with nothing at all being done.
What gun control measures, if any, would you be ok with?
What about any of these?
- Bumpstock Ban
- Raise minimum buying age to 21
- Mandatory NFA transfers for all firearms
- Buyback program for all magazines > 12 rounds
I’m not steadfast on any of that, just thinking out loud. Except for maybe the magazine buyback, all of those seem like fairly benign in terms of how much you are limiting constitutional rights.
Quote: petroglyphHow many names from "the 17" does anyone remember, excluding Babs?
Peter Wang
Its a pretty easy name to remember and his story is pretty compelling
Held a door open so fellow students could escape
Was killed for holding that door open. Incredible bravery in the face of fire.
Member of the JR ROTC program
Received a rare posthumous admission to West Point.
Quote: SteverinosI'm from Alaska. I'm surrounded by hunters. I'm surrounded by 2A supporters. ALL of them will say, "no self-respecting hunter will use an AR-15 for hunts."
The reason hunters don't hunt with AR-15's is precisely because they are not lethal enough FMJ bullets [AR 15 etc.] were internationally agreed upon for use in war precisely because the fmj is a less lethal round. FMJ's will make a lot of through and through's, they don't partition or expand.
If soldiers used hollow points like cops do, the survival rate of wounded soldiers would plummet. I have two friends shot in the lung in Viet Nam. Both survived. Morphine caused more damage.
Did you get far from the city fishing and no one in your group was armed, just curious.
Good call.Quote: terapinedPeter Wang
Its a pretty easy name to remember and his story is pretty compelling
Quote: petroglyphThe reason hunters don't hunt with AR-15's is precisely because they are not lethal enough FMJ bullets [AR 15 etc.] were internationally agreed upon for use in war precisely because the fmj is a less lethal round. FMJ's will make a lot of through and through's, they don't partition or expand.
If soldiers used hollow points like cops do, the survival rate of wounded soldiers would plummet. I have two friends shot in the lung in Viet Nam. Both survived. Morphine caused more damage.
Did you get far from the city fishing and no one in your group was armed, just curious.
Your friends weren't shot by AR-15s, were they?
They didn't sayQuote: billryanQuote: petroglyphThe reason hunters don't hunt with AR-15's is precisely because they are not lethal enough FMJ bullets [AR 15 etc.] were internationally agreed upon for use in war precisely because the fmj is a less lethal round. FMJ's will make a lot of through and through's, they don't partition or expand.
If soldiers used hollow points like cops do, the survival rate of wounded soldiers would plummet. I have two friends shot in the lung in Viet Nam. Both survived. Morphine caused more damage.
Did you get far from the city fishing and no one in your group was armed, just curious.
Your friends weren't shot by AR-15s, were they?
The right.Quote: billryanWhich side were they on?
Quote: ParadigmSpecifically, which guns...if you say AR-15, that is one model of gun...give us a list of what the specifics of the guns you believe have the "sole purpose of the MASS killing of HUMANS"...and tell us what separates them from the "other" guns.
Quote: SteverinosAlready posted an article. Scroll up.
Your referenced article talks about smaller bullets at high velocity with a low recoil and high energy transfer being shot from a semi-automatic rifle. And somehow this is the set up to "kill as efficiently as possible"? Every gun can be used to efficiently kill people. Somehow the good doctor thinks a 9mm round from a handgun is less lethal, but you're still going to be dead.
Just ask the administration at Virginia Tech. Their shooter only had 9mm & .22 caliber handguns. 32 dead in 10 minutes...do the math, in the 6-7 minutes the Parkland shooter was active at MSD HS he killed 17 people. The Virginia Tech shooter would have that death toll up to 19-22 in that period of time using a 9mm & a .22 caliber handguns. So tell me again which guns you want to ban because some are just more efficient killers than others.
Virginia Tech is a fact that the "assault weapons ban" bandwagon folks don't like to talk about. You know who else they don't like to talk about, Stephen Willeford. He is a NRA Member & former NRA Instructor so therefore must be an gun nut asshole with "blood on his hands". Just ask the marchers last weekend. Small problem is he saved who knows how many in the Sutherland Springs Texas church shooting using what weapon? You guessed it, his AR-15...if he isn't there with his AR-15, the real asshole goes back into the church with his handgun and starts killing more people. But let's not talk about that...those are inconvenient truths.
Quote: Romes"You are 36% conservative (snip)... but let's look at REALITY: 100 companies compete and over a couple years are bought out and widdled down to 4 giant companies. ...etc.
Romes,
I get a kick out of you, and I don't usually go grammar nazi, but...
"widdled"? That's like a baby word for peeing your pants or something. Not that it's a word I've ever heard. Hahaha.
Guessing you were saying "whittled". As in carving down a stick with a knife a little bit at a time to make something. Old-time hobby of people (men, mostly) before electronics. Still a few around.
Quote: ParadigmYou guessed it, his AR-15...if he isn't there with his AR-15, the real asshole goes back into the church with his handgun and starts killing more people. But let's not talk about that...those are inconvenient truths.
Cops have shot out of uniform cops, because frankly, they can't tell coming upon scene necessarily who is friend or foe. Being as they're going to be in a hurry, there's also not a lot of time to wait as more and more shots will be fired.
Charles Whitman, the Texas tower shooter may have actually taken into account people returning fire which is why he took cover before he started shooting.
Trained police shoot people quite a bit when they get nervous, and too often it looks unnecessary. It's not a vote of confidence having more untrained people.
To me, the most effective program is in Israel. And they've had serious problems with violent people for a long time. But they don't make it easy to own a gun, and the training is thorough. Although guns are ubiquitous there, the process to acquiring them ISN'T A JOKE like it is in the US.
The inconvenient truth is our system isn't built for security, IT'S A JOKE, pretending to be about security, where getting a gun is only a process of knowing how to get around the laws and get a gun.
Quote: Zcore13Nope. No chance. The vocal liberal extremist minority is mostly ignored and laughed at by the majority. Things would be taken a lot more serious if they attempted to repeal the 2nd Amendment. Zero chance of that happening.
ZCore13
"No chance" is wishful thinking. Not there yet, but the pendulum is swinging. The momentum is with the control side.
When the gun questions are polled, the gun control side wins with 70%, 80%, even 90% or more on a couple of the questions. Those numbers are increasing over the last couple of decades. Congress has been an outlier on them, representing the money rather than their constituents, so now those same.Congress people are under attack for inaction.
The longer nothing meaningful gets done, the more likely the overreaction will include a 2nd repeal.
Quote: beachbumbabs"No chance" is wishful thinking. Not there yet, but the pendulum is swinging. The momentum is with the control side.
When the gun questions are polled, the gun control side wins with 70%, 80%, even 90% or more on a couple of the questions. Those numbers are increasing over the last couple of decades. Congress has been an outlier on them, representing the money rather than their constituents, so now those same.Congress people are under attack for inaction.
The longer nothing meaningful gets done, the more likely the overreaction will include a 2nd repeal.
Are these the same pollsters that had Hillary winning the election? :)
Still no chance. People are already getting fed up with the extreme liberalism. Even California cities are now backlashing against the liberal State leadership. Liberal leadership does not work in California, it doesn't work in Chicago, it doesn't work in New Orleans. It bankrupts the system and pits people against other people.
Like I said in an earlier post there will be some minor changes, but the marches and the protests and the obnoxious extremists are all here and gone in less than six months. It happens in every situation. Once the headlines and top story on the news goes away, so do these activists. Many are the same ones going from event to event. Very short attention spans and in it more for the attention and hoopla then wanting an actual resolution.
ZCore13
Quote: beachbumbabs"No chance" is wishful thinking. Not there yet, but the pendulum is swinging. The momentum is with the control side.
When the gun questions are polled, the gun control side wins with 70%, 80%, even 90% or more on a couple of the questions. Those numbers are increasing over the last couple of decades. Congress has been an outlier on them, representing the money rather than their constituents, so now those same.Congress people are under attack for inaction.
The longer nothing meaningful gets done, the more likely the overreaction will include a 2nd repeal.
Simply laughable...go ahead and put together that list of 38 states that you believe will ratify the repeal of the 2nd Amendment and get back to us...seriously Babs, you are so off the rails here its embarrassing.
Quote: SteverinosI guess you didn't read my other post to Face. I'm not for banning of all guns, just those that's sole purpose is for the MASS killing of HUMANS.
No such gun exists. I’m glad to see you’ve changed your mind on the subject.
Edit: AFAIK, no such gun exists.
Quote: beachbumbabsRomes,
I get a kick out of you, and I don't usually go grammar nazi, but...
Just wait till he wants to use the word “who” again. Inevitably he’ll forget if he should use “who” or “whom”, then he’ll use “whom” because he thinks it sounds fancy, but it will be wrong, I’ll correct him, and he’ll still think he’s right.
Quote: ParadigmSimply laughable...go ahead and put together that list of 38 states that you believe will ratify the repeal of the 2nd Amendment and get back to us...seriously Babs, you are so off the rails here its embarrassing.
What part of "overreaction" do you not understand?
I'm not advocating the repeal of the 2nd.
I'm also not stupid enough to defend Nazis and KKK marching in our streets while mocking students who don't want to be shot at in their schools.
Y'all (talking to and about 2A die-hards) are on the wrong side of this, Paradigm. If the 2nd amendment continues to be bastardized to defend ANY restrictions on guns and their equipment, the 2nd itself will become vulnerable.
Decide, like in your list, to make some substantial changes and it will not come to that. Keep acting like derisive bullies, and defending the indefensible, and you will lose it. Might take 10 years. Might take longer. But you're seriously underestimating the groundswell of anger over this. In some ways, your side has escalated it.
Quote: Zcore13Are these the same pollsters that had Hillary winning the election? :)
Still no chance. People are already getting fed up with the extreme liberalism. Even California cities are now backlashing against the liberal State leadership. Liberal leadership does not work in California, it doesn't work in Chicago, it doesn't work in New Orleans. It bankrupts the system and pits people against other people.
Like I said in an earlier post there will be some minor changes, but the marches and the protests and the obnoxious extremists are all here and gone in less than six months. It happens in every situation. Once the headlines and top story on the news goes away, so do these activists. Many are the same ones going from event to event. Very short attention spans and in it more for the attention and hoopla then wanting an actual resolution.
ZCore13
I seem to recall many times when people were angrily marching for something and everyone opposed said no way were the angry marchers going to achieve anything
Hmmm lets see:
Women suffrage didnt work
Integration in southern schools didnt work
Gay marriage rights were never going to happen and marching didnt work
Yep, you 2a supporters have nothing to worry about. Marching and protests are totally meaningless
Oh yea, pick up your Constitution, read the Federalist Papers, Madisons Notes, read every landmark U.S Supreme Court Case from the past 2 centuries, and learn about American history and the history of corrupt governments around the world. Because guess what? The Constitution is alive and well regardless of what our govt says and what our ex president, Bush, had to say. It's not just a 'piece of paper'. Their agenda sticks out so badly when they say that because they would never even exist if it wasnt for that 'piece of paper'. People just don't know the first thing about what's written in there, let alone knowing how to enforce it and keep the government in check.
Oh yea, start understanding how your body really works and learn to adopt a fasting lifestyle combined with a healthy nutritious diet without processed sugar, exercise regularly, etc.
Oh yea, stop relying on government and doctors to take care of you, stop asking for a government handout, and stop buying things you don't have money for.
Oh yea, start worrying about who you're electing in your respective states and only elect the ones who will end the Federal Reserve and that will start holding the media accountable for the lies and misleading information that is being spewed and fed to us on a daily basis. These people you elect in your respective states are the ones who will represent you when it comes time to passing laws, not some puppet president.
Oh yea, STOP worrying about which puppet president you're electing because guess what, the federal government has very few powers over each citizen of their respective states due to the construction of the legal system in place by our great founding fathers. The federal govt DOES have its place as does the president, BUT it's mostly military and foreign relations and this was purposely done if you understand what our founding fathers fought against and what they aimed for this country to become and that's to have a system in place that is completely absent of a central gov't that can do as they please over its citizens.
Thanks.
Quote: ZenKinGNo one has yet told me why there are no rallies to ban prescription drugs or any drugs for that matter. Where is the drug ban outcry? Where is the outcry to end big pharma? Do people not realize the amount of deaths and long term damage to patients all around the world by simply being prescribed this useless plastic and venom through their vaccines? That should tell you all you need to know about the agenda at work and the educated society we live in. Turn off the TV, throw your newspapers in the trash, get off social media and go about your day.
Oh yea, pick up your Constitution, read the Federalist Papers, Madisons Notes, read every landmark U.S Supreme Court Case from the past 2 centuries, and learn about American history and the history of corrupt governments around the world.
Oh yea, start understanding how your body really works and learn to adopt a fasting lifestyle combined with a healthy nutritious diet without processed sugar, exercise regularly, etc. Oh yea, stop relying on government and doctors to take care of you, stop asking for a government handout and stop buying things you don't have money for.
Oh yea, start worrying about who you're electing in your respective states and only elect the ones who will end the Federal Reserve and that will start holding the media accountable for the lies and misleading information that is being spewed and fed to us on a daily basis. STOP worrying about which puppet president you're electing because guess what, the federal government has so few powers over each citizen of their respective states due to the construction of the legal system in place by our great founding fathers. The federal govt has its place as does its president, but its mostly military and foreign relations and this was purposely done if you understand what our founding fathers fought against and what they aimed for this country to become and that's as far away possible from having a central gov't doing as they please over us.
Thanks.
Good luck with that!
