Yes violent crime rose...... more fist fights (assault).
but the murder rate dropped.
I'd rather have punchups than shooting anyday.
CT: 27 dead including 18 kids in CT school shooting. There are no words - WTF?!
- Thread starter stoney
- Start date
but the murder rate dropped.
I'd rather have punchups than shooting anyday.
"Andrew Leigh of the national university there, who studied over a period of 10 years, homicides fell 59 per cent, and suicides 65 per cent. "
you use the image of 6 or 7 y/o children, that were literally scared to death while a mass murderer killed their friends in the next room to theorize about how to kill most efficiently? you're a sick f*ck.
Oh boy..go cry yourself to sleep..he says they would all run around I say they would huddle up. Is there a difference? (We both stated physical reactions) If I said they would run around would you still be crying?.... Yeah it is terrible no doubt, But if a car hit a bunch of children at a bus stop would you be blaming the car?
Last edited:
just to give you an impression, what you are talking about, you idiot.
this is a six year old child, my daughter Liza.
a fragile human being. just like any other six year old child. just like YOU a few years ago. how can you just ignore the fact, that little people like her were round up and shot with a semi-automatic weapon in an elementary school? that they watched their friends die? their teachers?? how can it be, that you're ridiculing the killing of little children??? how can you value an abstract "right" higher than the lives of these children and the broken hearts, minds and lifes of their parents? how can you disrespect their deaths??? how can you be so desensitized?
and while i did not cry when i read about this killing, i was deeply upset and sad. as any decent human being should be.
which you are obviously not, you piece of ****.
@ admins: the insults in this post were not diluted on purpose. if you have to, delete the post.
this is a six year old child, my daughter Liza.
a fragile human being. just like any other six year old child. just like YOU a few years ago. how can you just ignore the fact, that little people like her were round up and shot with a semi-automatic weapon in an elementary school? that they watched their friends die? their teachers?? how can it be, that you're ridiculing the killing of little children??? how can you value an abstract "right" higher than the lives of these children and the broken hearts, minds and lifes of their parents? how can you disrespect their deaths??? how can you be so desensitized?
and while i did not cry when i read about this killing, i was deeply upset and sad. as any decent human being should be.
which you are obviously not, you piece of ****.
@ admins: the insults in this post were not diluted on purpose. if you have to, delete the post.
Give me a break..the fact of you blaming guns and not the shooter is the problem. I am ridiculing the death of children? Your outa your mind..is describing a physical action ridiculing the killing of them? You think evil semi auto guns load their own magazines? Or maybe they pull the trigger all by them self? Answer my question please. If a car hits a group of kids should we blame the object (car,gun) or should we blame the person (driver,shooter) ..am I ignoring the fact? no not at all, already said it was horrible as is any other thing of this nature. It seems more like your ignoring the fact that machines don't operate themselves. Does a crane lift an I beam 800ft into the air without someone controlling it? Does a bike pedal it's self? Does a cap remove its self from a bottle of water or is a physical movement involved? And finally does a magazine load rounds, insert its self, pull its slide back, disengage the safety, acquire a target and pull its on trigger? You tell me..guns don't kill people, people kill people as said before. Cars don't drive them selfs, people start the car put it in drive and apply pressure to the gas pedal. I am a piece of ****? Ok, if that's how you feel despite never meeting me that's ok.
But then again the guns are part of the equation. If they were not available you can't shoot them bullets too.
That is a formula for failure in a modern gun culture that leads to the frequency and number of incidents the US has today (over 60 in the last 30 years). We have to leave the psychology to the experts.
Sociopaths have existed in all societies throughout history, false placed hopes on discipline have no bearing on fixing mental illness.
China has much more strict discipline than America has ever had, nasty prisons, and plenty of capital punishment and yet on the same day as this event a sociopath attacked a similar number of children for over a half hour netting zero deaths with a kitchen knife vs over twenty in minutes with a gun. The widespread availability of guns to everyone in a America is clearly the reason for the frequency of large casualty massacres from sociopaths.
At the top of the heap of American sociopaths is prototypical traditional values tea party sociopath - a church-going pillar of his community from almost a hundred years ago. Gun efficiency and availability was more limited but it was the perfect storm that he happened to be a farmer that knew how to build bombs and was the caretaker of the school.
Bomb making takes expertise unlike widely available easy to use modern guns. You can't go to your local (or online) bomb store and buy an assortment of foolproof ready made bombs and accessories.
http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=103186662
Also don't forget the availability of guns has frequently been linked with suicide rates throughout the world. Israel figured this out and helped save lives:
Last edited:
just to give you an impression, what you are talking about, you idiot.
this is a six year old child, my daughter Liza.
a fragile human being. just like any other six year old child. just like YOU a few years ago. how can you just ignore the fact, that little people like her were round up and shot with a semi-automatic weapon in an elementary school? that they watched their friends die? their teachers?? how can it be, that you're ridiculing the killing of little children??? how can you value an abstract "right" higher than the lives of these children and the broken hearts, minds and lifes of their parents? how can you disrespect their deaths??? how can you be so desensitized?
and while i did not cry when i read about this killing, i was deeply upset and sad. as any decent human being should be.
which you are obviously not, you piece of ****.
@ admins: the insults in this post were not diluted on purpose. if you have to, delete the post.
And this is my (Just turned...) 7 year old. Her right to life is worth far more than anyones right to a firearm.
How is it that the Right can deny abortion and birth control rights, then allows those little llives that were created to be snuffed out so easily? I would think they would want to protect the little ones at any cost...
MUST SPREAD REP!!!!! Exactly.........
I really was trying to refrain from posting this on this thread (See TreeSaw’s post), but since some of you mouth breathers have no respect and don’t visit the PAWN here goes.
Gun owner here, I’ve got a Sig P226 with 3, 15 round mags. I don’t have my concealed carry license, it’s for home protection only. I shoot at least 200 rounds monthly to stay proficient, and do dry fire drills weekly.
If the military and law enforcement mandate weeks of training before their members are issued and allowed to carry a firearm as part of their job, why is the same not true for civilians? Why in the world would we trust some dumbass untrained civilian with a weapon very similar to what is issued to our military? I’ve lost count the FB pictures I’ve seen where dumbass gun owners have their pic taken with a FINGER ON THE F’ING TRIGGER!!! WTF!!!! These people have zero trigger discipline, why in GOD’s NAME would we trust people like that with AR/AK/SKS’s and the like????
The idea that it’s easier to purchase an AR/AK/SKS at a gun show than it is to purchase a car is ludicrous. The 2nd Amendment doesn’t mandate it should be easy to acquire a firearm. As much as I’d love a nice full quad railed 14.5” middy Bravo Company AR or a HK MR223 and go out and play DEVGRU in an abandoned field somewhere in north central Arkansas, it’s not going to happen, and it shouldn’t happen and that is NOT an infringement on my 2nd Amendment rights. I have the right to protect myself and my family, which I can do quite effectively with my 226, if I need more “oomph” I’ll spring for a Remington 870. That’s more than enough to protect my family in the event something “Katrina like” happens here in central Arkansas.
AR/AK/SKS’s and the like should either be ridiculously difficult to own/purchase or banned altogether. If you’re a law abiding citizen then you have nothing to hide, if you want one of these go through a LONG detailed background check (including checking for any mental illness issues) and mandatory training. Don’t give me the “it’s my right to protect myself/family/home” because if you NEED one of those you a) have ZERO clue about CQB b)are a horrible marksman with a pistol c) you’re compensating for something. If it’s the middle of the night and my front door is bashed in by badguys I’d much rather have a suppressed Mk25 with a Surefire light than an AR any day of the week and twice on Sunday.
Your argument FOR AR/AK/SKS’s and the like is invalid, period. No one (or very few, they are not optimum) hunts with those, they are designed to kill people and they are not optimum for home defense.....so there's no legitimate NEED for that sort of weapon. You’re “right” to own those doesn’t not trump my children’s right to live, or anyone’s right to live.
Gun owner here, I’ve got a Sig P226 with 3, 15 round mags. I don’t have my concealed carry license, it’s for home protection only. I shoot at least 200 rounds monthly to stay proficient, and do dry fire drills weekly.
If the military and law enforcement mandate weeks of training before their members are issued and allowed to carry a firearm as part of their job, why is the same not true for civilians? Why in the world would we trust some dumbass untrained civilian with a weapon very similar to what is issued to our military? I’ve lost count the FB pictures I’ve seen where dumbass gun owners have their pic taken with a FINGER ON THE F’ING TRIGGER!!! WTF!!!! These people have zero trigger discipline, why in GOD’s NAME would we trust people like that with AR/AK/SKS’s and the like????
The idea that it’s easier to purchase an AR/AK/SKS at a gun show than it is to purchase a car is ludicrous. The 2nd Amendment doesn’t mandate it should be easy to acquire a firearm. As much as I’d love a nice full quad railed 14.5” middy Bravo Company AR or a HK MR223 and go out and play DEVGRU in an abandoned field somewhere in north central Arkansas, it’s not going to happen, and it shouldn’t happen and that is NOT an infringement on my 2nd Amendment rights. I have the right to protect myself and my family, which I can do quite effectively with my 226, if I need more “oomph” I’ll spring for a Remington 870. That’s more than enough to protect my family in the event something “Katrina like” happens here in central Arkansas.
AR/AK/SKS’s and the like should either be ridiculously difficult to own/purchase or banned altogether. If you’re a law abiding citizen then you have nothing to hide, if you want one of these go through a LONG detailed background check (including checking for any mental illness issues) and mandatory training. Don’t give me the “it’s my right to protect myself/family/home” because if you NEED one of those you a) have ZERO clue about CQB b)are a horrible marksman with a pistol c) you’re compensating for something. If it’s the middle of the night and my front door is bashed in by badguys I’d much rather have a suppressed Mk25 with a Surefire light than an AR any day of the week and twice on Sunday.
Your argument FOR AR/AK/SKS’s and the like is invalid, period. No one (or very few, they are not optimum) hunts with those, they are designed to kill people and they are not optimum for home defense.....so there's no legitimate NEED for that sort of weapon. You’re “right” to own those doesn’t not trump my children’s right to live, or anyone’s right to live.
Basically, and this comment is aimed at people like DMG and the others defending safe use and ownership of firearms, while you might love firing your gun responsibly and without any threat to other people, letting off steam, with eco friendly rounds and whatever other things you want to list to try and justify owning these ridiculous weapons, would you not give up this non-essential right just to see even one less of these type of incidents in your country? I know i would.
Last edited:
I'm getting real sick of hearing the car vs. gun anology. It is such a bull **** attempt to compare the two. Apples and f^cking oranges.
The fact is there is no easy answer. The fact is a mother gave access to firearms to an unstable child. The fact is the mother probably needed help herself. The fact is 20 children are dead because of this. The fact that arguing over gun policy over the internet is even more bullsh!t. The fact that semi-automatic weapons are sold to the common man is far more bull sh!t. My only question is when is the NRA going to show up in Newtown and throw a rally just like all the other mass killings that have occured with the guns they support.
http://www.cnn.com/2012/12/18/politics/nra-silence-regrouping/index.html
The fact is there is no easy answer. The fact is a mother gave access to firearms to an unstable child. The fact is the mother probably needed help herself. The fact is 20 children are dead because of this. The fact that arguing over gun policy over the internet is even more bullsh!t. The fact that semi-automatic weapons are sold to the common man is far more bull sh!t. My only question is when is the NRA going to show up in Newtown and throw a rally just like all the other mass killings that have occured with the guns they support.
http://www.cnn.com/2012/12/18/politics/nra-silence-regrouping/index.html
Last edited:
Conor, let me respond directly to you.
1. A non-essential right? What right do you think it is that secures the rest of your freedoms? Ever seen what happens when the people with guns (cops, military, etc) tell the people without guns what their rights are? You have no rights after that. Go ask your friends in N. Ireland how they'd feel about being disarmed and left totally to the will of the English.
You pretentious euro-trash piece of ****. You're not an American, I suspect you've never served in the military, and I suspect that if threatened by your government you'd roll over like a little bitch and capitulate. I am not you, so please you limey bastard, do not attempt to speak for me.
2. I got to thinking about the 35 years of my life, and the interesting events I've seen during them. One of them was living through Hurricane Katrina. I was on the ground for 9 days passed August 29, 2005. The funny thing about it was people like you, and the rest of the liberal, cry me a river fun bunch bleeding heart choir in this discussion ended up at my house because we did have guns, and food, and water. We were able to secure our home, and we did by taking shifts on the roof keeping an eye out for looters AND the cops. When you live somewhere like New Orleans where the cops are the criminals, and are more than willing to put you in the Mississippi River just as fast, if not faster than, the local gang bangers if you have something they want, you have to protect yourself.
In situations like that, which do occur in places like New Orleans, where I am fully intending to go home to in the next four years, you do need a semi-automatic weapon that has a capacity of 20, 30 or 100 rounds to take care of you and yours. You cannot count on the police or the government to come and take care of you, that was proven beyond the shadow of a doubt. When your neighbor is more than willing to kill you for your flat screen or your car, you have the right and the responsibility to defend yourself.
Now I am sure you're going to counter with "well then just don't live there." But here's the thing, I want to live there. Yes, I have to take some harder measures to live there, but its a choice I am making that I can do safely due to the fact that we do have the 2nd Amendment, a very necessary Amendment by the way.
You have faith in your government and in your police. I've been in places, lived in places, worked in places, where that faith and that comfort is an illusion. I'd much rather have the ability to take care of myself and my family by any means necessary as provided under our current laws and our long standing 2nd Amendment than to wait blindly with my thumb up my ass for the police to come and save me.
So please, never call it an "unnecessary amendment" again. I did my four years in the Army to assure that the Constitution would be upheld. I work every day in the law, working under an oath I took to again defend that document. If you were smart you'd apologize and leave the debate, because trying to frame the 2nd Amendment as "unnecessary" is an insult to anyone who has ever worn the uniform for the United States.
1. A non-essential right? What right do you think it is that secures the rest of your freedoms? Ever seen what happens when the people with guns (cops, military, etc) tell the people without guns what their rights are? You have no rights after that. Go ask your friends in N. Ireland how they'd feel about being disarmed and left totally to the will of the English.
You pretentious euro-trash piece of ****. You're not an American, I suspect you've never served in the military, and I suspect that if threatened by your government you'd roll over like a little bitch and capitulate. I am not you, so please you limey bastard, do not attempt to speak for me.
2. I got to thinking about the 35 years of my life, and the interesting events I've seen during them. One of them was living through Hurricane Katrina. I was on the ground for 9 days passed August 29, 2005. The funny thing about it was people like you, and the rest of the liberal, cry me a river fun bunch bleeding heart choir in this discussion ended up at my house because we did have guns, and food, and water. We were able to secure our home, and we did by taking shifts on the roof keeping an eye out for looters AND the cops. When you live somewhere like New Orleans where the cops are the criminals, and are more than willing to put you in the Mississippi River just as fast, if not faster than, the local gang bangers if you have something they want, you have to protect yourself.
In situations like that, which do occur in places like New Orleans, where I am fully intending to go home to in the next four years, you do need a semi-automatic weapon that has a capacity of 20, 30 or 100 rounds to take care of you and yours. You cannot count on the police or the government to come and take care of you, that was proven beyond the shadow of a doubt. When your neighbor is more than willing to kill you for your flat screen or your car, you have the right and the responsibility to defend yourself.
Now I am sure you're going to counter with "well then just don't live there." But here's the thing, I want to live there. Yes, I have to take some harder measures to live there, but its a choice I am making that I can do safely due to the fact that we do have the 2nd Amendment, a very necessary Amendment by the way.
You have faith in your government and in your police. I've been in places, lived in places, worked in places, where that faith and that comfort is an illusion. I'd much rather have the ability to take care of myself and my family by any means necessary as provided under our current laws and our long standing 2nd Amendment than to wait blindly with my thumb up my ass for the police to come and save me.
So please, never call it an "unnecessary amendment" again. I did my four years in the Army to assure that the Constitution would be upheld. I work every day in the law, working under an oath I took to again defend that document. If you were smart you'd apologize and leave the debate, because trying to frame the 2nd Amendment as "unnecessary" is an insult to anyone who has ever worn the uniform for the United States.
Dirt, why the hell would you want to live in such a place?
Yes, she has a right to life. But I also have a right to protect my life and the lives of those around me.
Also, abortion and birth control are not "rights" as provided for under the constitution. There is no amendment assuring the access to birth control or to the services of a doctor or medical staff to end the life of an unborn child.
Mind you, I fully agree that they should be amended into the Constitution as rights as if you think about it they would be assured under the 1st Amendment and in the section that assures the free exercise of "life, liberty, and the pursuit of freedom" as unwanted pregnancy can be a pretty strong deterrent to a woman's future in this nation.
If I were ever to be a father, and I really hope that I never am, I could not live in good conscience without the ability to defend my children from any threat there is. I suspect that this is why I do not have or want children, the idea of losing them to something like last Friday elicits a response in parts of me I didn't know existed. Purely from a selfish point of view I am not wired to handle that type of loss. I don't think anyone really is, but I am even less so.
However, I do draw the line at the point where your choice to be a father countermands or overrules my right to defend myself. You chose to have a child, I choose to own assault weapons. A child, down the line, is more dangerous than my weapon.
I agree it is your absolute, god given, never to be infringed upon right to defend your daughter and her life in any way you deem fit. In that same breath I wish you'd understand that I too have the same right to defend the people I love. I do that by owning weapons that you'd choose to have banned. Just as banning your right to breed because of the potential danger of your child down the line is wrong, so is your short sighted attempt to gain security by leveraging my rights to defend myself.
I didn't ask you to have a child. You didn't ask me to own guns like the ones I do. So let's leave it as a Détente, or agree to disagree if you will. Sorry if that sounds callous or harsh, but that's how I see it in the simple math.
Ever been to a place that feels like "home?"
In 35 years, 18 of which I have been a nomad for, living in 10 different states, some 20 cities and 4 countries, nowhere has felt more like home to New Orleans. For being the worst, dirtiest, most corrupted, wonderful, magical, fun as hell place to live, no where has even come close.
Yes, its got a lot of crime. Yes, you should carry a gun if you live there. Yes, the cops, the city, mother nature and most of the people who live in the projects are there just to cause you harm. But goddamn if it doesn't feel like home, more than anywhere I've ever been.
What can I say, I love it there. Part of its Siren's song is that danger. You have to be on point, aware of your surroundings, all of the time. I get a charge out of that.
But as you all know, I am not the smartest person in the room most of the time.
Can we kill this thread yet? :circlejerk:
I see what you did there....Can we kill this thread yet? :circlejerk:
Agreed.
Here's another thought--- Regarding the parents of the children lost, are they going to be strong enough to continue on? I think you know what I mean about that comment. There have been very few days I have not thought about joining Alaina, and a gun would be my choice. However, with the help of Compassionate Friends and many, many of you here on the RM (I can never thank you enough for letting me voice about Alaina and my feelings), I have been able to survive almost 10 years without her physically here. I really feel for the parents, and hope that they will continue on, difficult as it will be, so they, too, can keep their child's voice heard and memory alive.
Though you say you are responsible with your guns, that is why I know I can no longer be around them, and choose to stay away so I can ride, ride, and ride some more. Besides, how else would I be able to read some of these posts that put a smile on my face when I need it most????
Last edited:
Oh for f*ck's sake...we get he didn't obtain them legally. Someone did, however, obtain fragmenting rounds. Define the need for those in our society. Just willy nilly shooting, a bullet may pass through and a life not lost. With a fragmenting round, there is little hope of that.
There is a point where we have to look at the ramifications of the things we have. If you can limit me to 3 rounds to hunt birds, you can limit what manufacturers provide for capacity. There are tons of things that can be done without taking our guns. We have passed the point of sensible firearms. Perhaps if we worked to get back to logic and understanding for what they are, we'd get somewhere.
You mean frangible rounds?
Can't say as I have ever owned them or used them. I have hollow points in my pistols because they have a higher knock down potential. In my shotguns I have buckshot or slugs. In my rifles I just use ball ammo or ballistic tipped stuff because it feeds better.
Are you talking about something like Glaser Safety Slugs? Can't say as I've ever used or fired them, so I can't speak intelligently on that. I know they were tested by the Air Marshal service. Not sure if they ever went into use.
From what I have read on them, they're not as accurate and are easily defeated by heavy clothing/leather jackets. If I did have to shoot someone in a self defense situation, I'd want to make sure they didn't get up, so I'd not use something like the Glaser.
Dirt, beleive me, I am perfectly capable of defending my home and hearth. I am a gun owner also, yet not a hoarder, and am fully trained in the use of same, and in the escalation and de-escalation of force. I have been carrying weapons and voluntarily living in a violent world for over 20 years now. I am very good at what I do...
I need to know just what you are afraid of regarding guns...are you more afraid of losing a possesion or living through another mass shooting? The fear of big government is a farcical tale perpetrated by the Right in order to keep the frothers frothing. Yes, the Founding Fathers feared big governement, but they also didnt have 50 states and over 300 million citizens to deal with...governemt had to grow.
The problem is not the guns...the problem is simply keeping them out of the wrong hands.
I need to know just what you are afraid of regarding guns...are you more afraid of losing a possesion or living through another mass shooting? The fear of big government is a farcical tale perpetrated by the Right in order to keep the frothers frothing. Yes, the Founding Fathers feared big governement, but they also didnt have 50 states and over 300 million citizens to deal with...governemt had to grow.
The problem is not the guns...the problem is simply keeping them out of the wrong hands.
There is a difference in a defense round and ammunition. I didn't say to scrap bullets. They just don't need hand grenades attached to the ends of them.
The problem with coming up with intelligible regulation is that proponents for guns have a feast or famine view point. It doesn't have to be like that.
At least the NRA had the decency to step back and play cool on this awful tragedy. I fear that many of their supporters don't have the capacity to do the same.
Me, also a father of a little girl turning 7 next Saturday, I think there needs to be some sort of regulation as to what we can and cannot have. Guns...ok. Guns capable of taking 20 lives in a matter of minutes...not ok. And I don't just blame the guns...I still think types of ammunition should be considered as well.
Heh, Dirt is alone on an island here. But, it's fun to watch.
Stick your fingers in your ears, shut your eyes, and shout all you want, but change is coming. It has to, and the majority of the country is in support of it. This isn't going to just go away.
Stick your fingers in your ears, shut your eyes, and shout all you want, but change is coming. It has to, and the majority of the country is in support of it. This isn't going to just go away.
.223 and 5.56 rounds will tumble and likely fragment (depending on velocity at impact) when they hit soft tissue. They are designed to do as much damage as possible. Studies were done in the early '60's when the M-16 was in it's infancy on the effects of the 5.56 round vs. the 7.62 round. 7.62 round did less damage on impact than the 5.56.
Hunters don't want a round that tears up the soft tissue, that's where the good eats are, so this is not a "hunting" round. .223 bolt guns are not preferred (at least in these parts) for hunting deer because they tear up the meat.
Hunters don't want a round that tears up the soft tissue, that's where the good eats are, so this is not a "hunting" round. .223 bolt guns are not preferred (at least in these parts) for hunting deer because they tear up the meat.
Look, If you can be confronted with the fact that there were 6 and 7 year old kids with up to 11 bullets in them and not think there is a problem with having that kind of weapon available, you are a piece of ****.
And to all you constitutional scholars, I highly recommend you read the first sentence of the damn thing.
Jesus you're an idiot.
It's too bad Adam lanzas mom didn't have a gun in the house to protect herself.
So let's assume this ban on the sales of assault weapons and high capacity mags goes through.
So what?
You have thousands, possibly hundreds of thousands of these weapons in private hands. You have millions of mags out there in private ownership. I, myself, have six "assault weapons," eight semi-automatic hand guns, four semi-automatic shotguns. I have enough ammo, mags, parts and supplies to maintain these weapons until 20 years after I am dead.
So what do you propose?
Furthermore, what does the ban actually achieve? Besides making people like me A LOT of money should we ever decide to sell any of our collection, which is well within our rights under common law of property, it achieves none of what you're hoping for. Do you think people like me will find benevolence and hand over our guns? Good luck with that.
Yea, I might be alone on an island here on RM. I'm good with that. I tend to think my own thoughts, base my actions from what I have seen and what I have experienced first hand. So if that means I get to be the cheese, so be it.
I still think as a group think gestapo you're missing the bigger issue here. Someone forwarded me this blog piece on the current state of mental health care in the US. I understand that banning guns is a solution in your mind. In my mind, and in the mind of 49% of your countrymen, it is not. Why not deal with the actual root of the problem instead of dealing with on of the symptoms? We're Americans, you like the fastest possible solution to the symptoms created by any disease rather than dealing with the actual systemic root of a problem. That's been our way since after Viet Nam in this country.
But from where I am sitting, this is the wrong decision.
Out of respect for the 20 dead kids, this is going to be the last thing I post in this discussion. I am just as guilty of getting wrapped up in the hubris of the moment when people start threatening rights that people better than all of us have fought and died for. They were also fighting to protect those kids, and somewhere in the system a failure occurred. Nothing can bring those kids back. Us sitting here fighting over possessions is trivial and insincere. So I am going to stop talking. I could go on and on for weeks, litigation and debate are my chosen stock and trade. Instead I am going to sit down, shut up, and actually fight for something of substance rather than a shoddy band-aid to stop the hemorrhaging chest wound our society is currently suffering from.
So what?
You have thousands, possibly hundreds of thousands of these weapons in private hands. You have millions of mags out there in private ownership. I, myself, have six "assault weapons," eight semi-automatic hand guns, four semi-automatic shotguns. I have enough ammo, mags, parts and supplies to maintain these weapons until 20 years after I am dead.
So what do you propose?
Furthermore, what does the ban actually achieve? Besides making people like me A LOT of money should we ever decide to sell any of our collection, which is well within our rights under common law of property, it achieves none of what you're hoping for. Do you think people like me will find benevolence and hand over our guns? Good luck with that.
Yea, I might be alone on an island here on RM. I'm good with that. I tend to think my own thoughts, base my actions from what I have seen and what I have experienced first hand. So if that means I get to be the cheese, so be it.
I still think as a group think gestapo you're missing the bigger issue here. Someone forwarded me this blog piece on the current state of mental health care in the US. I understand that banning guns is a solution in your mind. In my mind, and in the mind of 49% of your countrymen, it is not. Why not deal with the actual root of the problem instead of dealing with on of the symptoms? We're Americans, you like the fastest possible solution to the symptoms created by any disease rather than dealing with the actual systemic root of a problem. That's been our way since after Viet Nam in this country.
But from where I am sitting, this is the wrong decision.
I see the Irish school system does a great job of teaching logic and debate skills.
Out of respect for the 20 dead kids, this is going to be the last thing I post in this discussion. I am just as guilty of getting wrapped up in the hubris of the moment when people start threatening rights that people better than all of us have fought and died for. They were also fighting to protect those kids, and somewhere in the system a failure occurred. Nothing can bring those kids back. Us sitting here fighting over possessions is trivial and insincere. So I am going to stop talking. I could go on and on for weeks, litigation and debate are my chosen stock and trade. Instead I am going to sit down, shut up, and actually fight for something of substance rather than a shoddy band-aid to stop the hemorrhaging chest wound our society is currently suffering from.
There is a bigger picture, Dirt. We all know that. I'm ten million percent in favor of addressing the mental health issues. As society, we've devolved. Once upon a time, Billy the Kid was evil. Turns out, by today's standards, he was a choir boy. We need to fix all of that, but more than not, society isn't responsible enough to have the killing machines at their disposal. That's my point.
I'm glad to see you share much of the same thoughts on fixing the issue. Compromise is the only thing that will get us moving in the right direction.
I'm glad to see you share much of the same thoughts on fixing the issue. Compromise is the only thing that will get us moving in the right direction.
Oh yeah. Mad respect for the kids. Your primary concern is defending your right to hoard weapons so you can one day return to live in a sh1thole. Crazy amounts of reverent respect.
Why is it that gun nuts get so defensive about gun control that you'd think someone was trying to castrate them ? Oh wait...never mind.
For the record, I'm not for banning guns. I'm not even for an all-out ban on 'assault weapons'.
I AM for making them a whole lot harder to get for the average knucklehead.
And even if there are already millions of them in the hands of tens of thousands of people (everybody's gotta have a bunch of them for some reason it seems), that doesn't mean we can't start being a little more picky on who gets them from here on in. Even a few kept out of the wrong hands is a good start, and totally worth any minor inconvenience to the hobbyists. Be nice if we started getting serious about enforcing the laws already out there too.
I AM for making them a whole lot harder to get for the average knucklehead.
And even if there are already millions of them in the hands of tens of thousands of people (everybody's gotta have a bunch of them for some reason it seems), that doesn't mean we can't start being a little more picky on who gets them from here on in. Even a few kept out of the wrong hands is a good start, and totally worth any minor inconvenience to the hobbyists. Be nice if we started getting serious about enforcing the laws already out there too.
Ok I must be a peice of ****. I dont care how many rounds were in someone. What if it was a knife, lets say someone had 11 stab wounds in them. You dont think there is a problem with having that type of weapon available?
Last edited:
Ok...let's do this really slow.
A gun.
A knife.
Gun makes lots of bullets go into kids, really fast.
Knife takes much, much longer to damage kids.
Gun can shoot innocent children from a short distance, or a long distance.
Knife needs kids to be close.
Gun can help insane person gain quick access to school full of children.
Knife might take much longer, as it is a bad lock picking device.
Gun made to kill many people, rapidly.
Knife made to cut things.
Gun can be used to murder many, many people before cops show up.
Knife can be used to murder much, much less people than gun before cops show up.
Gun can be used by coward for suicide when cops show up.
Knife can also be used by coward for suicied, but is much less effective and might take much longer.
Gun related deaths in USA, including children, per year: 8-10k
Knife and other cutting instrument related deaths in USA, including children, per year: less than 2k
Number of mass killings at schools in the USA that involved guns: ALL
Number of mass killings at schools in the USA that involved knives: NONE
Ok? Now shut the fvck up with the comparisons. Seriously.