Controversial Discussion - Guns

[JimJohnson]

As for adding more guns into the equation that is a stupid idea. People distraught with emotion with fire arms after a situation like that should not be the ones making decisions. Because at the point you execute the other person you step over the line of civility. We do not need people taking the law into their own hands. Specially with so much hate and ignorance in this world.

Not 100% sure that I am understanding your point in this paragraph. Are you inferring that if I have my legally owned colt 45 on me and I see someone start shooting in public that I shouldn't take the opportunity to take him down?

--------------------------------------------------------------------------

As for the people that live in a Country that outlaws guns. That's your business and if you are happy with it, that's your choice. I will not try and arm you as long as you don't try to un-arm me. Just don't come to us when North Korea, China, or some other country decides it likes your unarmed country.

Guns kill people every day and that's a very sad thing. Those using the guns are usually criminals, but in some cases it's someone protecting their life against someone wanting to take it. Look into the past 100 years of ethnic cleansing. The reason it happened is because a populous of many had no way to defend themselves against a few that did. The US and other countries don't always step in the stop it and if they do, it's usually already too late.

For the quoted part.

I would shoot him down without a second thought, but I question my moral character on a lot of things. This does not make it right. It could also cause more collateral damage because we clearly would not know enough information to make educated decisions. Being why I think its unwise for the every day person to take care of it themselves.

What appears a lone gunman could easily have other working with them.

 

[Tewgn]

I heard a really interesting radio program on the way to work this morning.

Question #1They wanted someone to provide a reason as to why owning a semi - automatic assault rifle was necessary and in what scenario it could be used efficiently for good (and other means of protection would not work, glock, etc...)

Not trying to open a can of worms, but this did get me thinking and I couldn't answer it.

Since this is a forum of extremely smart men (and a few extremely smart girlies , I thought I'd see if anyone wants to chime in.

RULE - must answer the question as stated...no digressing

Question #2 - Should folks with mental disabilities, aspergers, autism, mental illness be taught to shoot gun for any reason?

Question #1-- Ok, first off if the govt. bans guns we lose out right to defend ourselves. As of right now from what i know about the law and concealed carry, you can be strapped like rambo and walk down the street. (where i live)

That being said, i don't think it would be wise to do so because of the fact people would call 911 and say you are about to do something. The general population of our nation is scared of people with guns because of things that happens and that are shown on the news. "These few people are the ones that 1. haven't even fired a gun, 2. don't know how to defend themselves, 3. and are just blind to what is happening in the world and why people arm themselves."

My Basic answer is to defend my family and friends at all cost, no matter what weapon i use and no matter from what threat foreign or domestic. Because its my duty to do so.

Question #2-- My answer is ? because of risks, but everything has risks. So id say im 50/50 on that one.

 

[fauxshizle]

Besides the semantic twists of "what" a semi-auto is...and who has the right to determine if "we the public" should be able to own one is irrelevant. Any firearm with the ability to use a clip/auto-reload and fire as fast as the trigger can be pulled - includes many, many firearms. Not just an AR-15.
So when we talk about "assault weapons" were talking about thousands of firearms.

Im just going to use what i still think applies to all of us:
(THE US CONSTITUTION)
The day we become complacent with its destruction, you might as well give up all of your rights.
This has already started...the day NDAA passed.

 

[twizzops]

Besides the semantic twists of "what" a semi-auto is...and who has the right to determine if "we the public" should be able to own one is irrelevant. Any firearm with the ability to use a clip/auto-reload and fire as fast as the trigger can be pulled - includes many, many firearms. Not just an AR-15.
So when we talk about "assault weapons" were talking about thousands of firearms.

Im just going to use what i still think applies to all of us:
(THE US CONSTITUTION)
The day we become complacent with its destruction, you might as well give up all of your rights.
This has already started...the day NDAA passed.

And the patriot act. Man what a misleading name for the loss of privacy and complete removal of court warranted wire taps and emails.

 

[fauxshizle]

Besides the semantic twists of "what" a semi-auto is...and who has the right to determine if "we the public" should be able to own one is irrelevant. Any firearm with the ability to use a clip/auto-reload and fire as fast as the trigger can be pulled - includes many, many firearms. Not just an AR-15.
So when we talk about "assault weapons" were talking about thousands of firearms.

Im just going to use what i still think applies to all of us:
(THE US CONSTITUTION)
The day we become complacent with its destruction, you might as well give up all of your rights.
This has already started...the day NDAA passed.

And the patriot act. Man what a misleading name for the loss of privacy and complete removal of court warranted wire taps and emails.

You are correct sir....if anyone missed WIRED mag front page in March...here u go.
http://www.wired.com/threatlevel/2012/03/ff_nsadatacenter/

OMG Watch this.....Pants on fucking FIRE
http://www.wired.com/threatlevel/20...medium=RelatedLinks&utm_campaign=MoreRecently

 

[Blitzkrieg]

Ya GG on that post. That data center been in the works for a min, though I had thought it was to be in CO, not UT. Oh well, they can suck it. Big Brother is watching you!

 

[Blitzkrieg]

Lol too bad I don't use any of that shiz, FB or Instagram or any of that other crap.

 

[hoppy96pgtbs]

I heard a really interesting radio program on the way to work this morning.

Question #1They wanted someone to provide a reason as to why owning a semi - automatic assault rifle was necessary and in what scenario it could be used efficiently for good (and other means of protection would not work, glock, etc...)

Not trying to open a can of worms, but this did get me thinking and I couldn't answer it.

Since this is a forum of extremely smart men (and a few extremely smart girlies , I thought I'd see if anyone wants to chime in.

RULE - must answer the question as stated...no digressing

Question #2 - Should folks with mental disabilities, aspergers, autism, mental illness be taught to shoot gun for any reason?

Q1: Zombie Apocalypse.

Q2: Broad question. My wife has a mental disability. But she is stable enough to not go on a rampage.

 

[JimJohnson]

We need a machine that tests moral character.

With settings to read basically like when you rolled your old RPG toons.



Lawful Good
Neutral Good
Chaotic Good

Lawful Neutral
Neutral (2 versions)
Chaotic Neutral

Lawful Evil
Neutral Evil
Chaotic Evil

 

[Alexandra]

Interesting views, thanks all.

Something I've been thinking about a lot for the past few days.

It seems most of you feel very strongly that banning assault weapons really won't fix any problem. I honestly am leaning this way too. Are they really needed, the answer appears to be NO, however with that said if someone wants to go on a killing spree, they will find another effective method to use.

I do after reading many comments see the general concern with banning even one type of gun, the definition is very broad and those laws can eventually be used against gun owners, to lead to the eventual banning of all guns (which I sense is the general fear here).

I don't know what else to say, I think everyone wants answers, no one really has a solution, banning a gun type is grasping at straws.

Ok and for my next topic. Violent Video Games - The desensitization of taking human life... (I’m kidding, but surprised this hasn’t been to blame yet?)

 

[rob]

I'm sure it is less about desensitization of taking human life and more about people being batshit insane.

 

[jodwop]

Interesting views, thanks all.

Ok and for my next topic. Violent Video Games - The desensitization of taking human life... (I’m kidding, but surprised this hasn’t been to blame yet?)

This is a mixed feeling topic for me, depending on which side of the coin I am looking at.

Growing up in the 80's and with a stepfather in seminary, I was hit from all angles.

One of my earliest memories relating to this was me coming home from a week visit with grandparents. My grandmother bought me the album "Motley Crue- Shout at the devil". This album in general was mispercieved by many in its day. My father heard it playing, asked what it was and asked if he could have the tape to listen to himself. Now if you are not familiar with this album there is Shout at the Devil and Helter Skelter for tracks. 1. Shout at, not Shout with as many let their uninformed minds make judgement. 2. Helter Skelter is a beatles song, but Charles Manson referenced the White Album it came from and other songs as part of telling about an apocalytic prophecy. My father listen to the album, came out and we talked about meanings or feelings from what was heard and both went away with a better understanding of each other and the music. Now fastforward about 20 years....

I come home from work one day and my brother in law is messing around in the kitchen and my 6 year old niece is playing Grand Theft Auto on a larger than life screen. Going around beat people up, pulling them out of cars and laughing about it. I lost my temper, calmly got her to stop playing and got her coloring, then took my brother in law outside and scolded him for about 30 mins. Why? He did not necessarily force her to play, but he allowed her to partake in an activity that desensitizes and pleasures a part of the brain that should stay innocent. I am all for not lying to children and to not shield them from every detail of life (a sheltered existence is no way to grow up). Their personal morals at that age are being shaped and the fantasy from the reality has little separation. There are some exceptional kids at that age and thankfully my niece I feel is one of them.

I think and feel there is a desensitization. There has always been violence and there always will. Mentally challenged or disturbed, it does not matter, the result can be the same.

 

[Lorekeeper]

Taking guns out of the control won't prevent this, this is a worthless discussion in my opinion, we need better security at schools with normal evaluations, The same SRO at the local highschool has been there for 20 years, hes yet to lay a finger on anyone when it was un-necessary.

Like I said, pointless.

 

[kirbanmanaburn]

Without the US rebuilding of Japan after WWII.....you wouldn't be living there... etc etc crazy cray cray yadda

That was some serious topshelf xenophobic coocoo. Japan ain't never miss you neither, Cletus.

There's plenty to dislike about Japan. But the part where nobody owns guns and nobody shoots each other? That one's kinda important. And I happen to like it.

 

[fauxshizle]

Without the US rebuilding of Japan after WWII.....you wouldn't be living there... etc etc crazy cray cray yadda

That was some serious topshelf xenophobic coocoo. Japan ain't never miss you neither, Cletus.

There's plenty to dislike about Japan. But the part where nobody owns guns and nobody shoots each other? That one's kinda important. And I happen to like it.

Apparently, History... isn't your strong suit.

Watch this video Cudacuf posted...im assuming you missed it.
Take notice of the part where JAPAN comments on an armed US population.

And when you quote someone, don't modify what was actually said, it only invalidates your relevance.

www.youtube.com/watch?v=evEg1VNfX3o

 

[fauxshizle]

Taking guns out of the control won't prevent this, this is a worthless discussion in my opinion, we need better security at schools with normal evaluations, The same SRO at the local highschool has been there for 20 years, hes yet to lay a finger on anyone when it was un-necessary.

Like I said, pointless.

Turning schools into prisons isn't the answer, in order to solve a problem, you must get to the root of the issue...and that is society, and its gross misunderstanding concerning the responsibility that rides "shotgun" to our constitutional rights.

 

[kirbanmanaburn]

Sorry, I missed the part where I was supposed to take Chuck Woolery seriously. About anything. Ever.

Too bad you hadn't sent me that link a couple years ago -- I could have saved myself the trouble of taking all those graduate courses in Japanese history. Apparently it's not my strong suit.

 

[SiegeTank]

Hang on a sec please while I make some popcorn...BRB!

 

[fauxshizle]

Sorry, I missed the part where I was supposed to take Chuck Woolery seriously. About anything. Ever.

Too bad you hadn't sent me that link a couple years ago -- I could have saved myself the trouble of taking all those graduate courses in Japanese history. Apparently it's not my strong suit.

Well now that we have established that you slept through history class before you were deported to Japan, I can explain why you fail at seeing the true issue that we as AMERICANS face. The funny thing about that video, is that a Game Show Host has a better understanding of why the U.S. Constitution and its granted rights are whats most important. Not your snuggly good morning mocha-chino feeling you get from the illusion that you are safe from violence by hiding behind "Sanctimonious Virtue" b/c your adopted nation doesn't trust its own people enuff to brandish firearms for defense from those who would steal/rape/kill you and your family.

Go back to playing Pokemon and tell Pikachu that he can blow me.

 

[kirbanmanaburn]

Actually, what Chuck Woolery does is present a completely unsupported claim for which he cites zero credible sources (and I can assure you -- there are none). He does this while playing -- no shit -- clips from a MOVIE, not a historical film recording.

And really, nobody should even have to get that far in the clip to tear it down. The guy is a game show host spewing a bunch of loosely linked logical fallacies that only an utterly credulous, deeply angry white man would ever buy into.

I don't have any adopted nationality, nor do I take any offense at the notion that I'm not a real American. Nationalism is bullshit. Borders are bullshit. I feel just as much obligation toward a Japanese person as I do toward an American or a Nigerian or an Ecuadorian. They're all human beings. I could give a shit what country they come from. Hopefully someday way down the line flags and borders and all that nonsense won't matter anymore.

Though I would point out that -- as far as caring about your countrymen goes -- America's probably the worst place in the world to live. Except for maybe Singapore. It's one of the most competitive societies in the world, with one of the largest income gaps and one of the most insidious racism/sexism problems.