Controversial Discussion - Guns

[fauxshizle]

America's probably the worst place in the world to live.

Obv posted by someone that has not seen much of the world..

I've got this Nigerian Headhunter buddy, who needs a few "disposable" human appendages.... been meaning to tell Kirban-Turban to drop by and pay him a visit. That'll learn him all boutz this big world.

 

[fauxshizle]

If we "the Public" loose our weapons.......how will we shoot down the mega-force of spy/weaponized drones that are now being deployed in US airspace.
Bullshit u say.........well...read on

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2012/dec/21/coming-drone-attack-america

 

[SiegeTank]

I agree. The best reason to require every American to be armed is so the next time someone is kidnapped by space aliens they can shoot the alien and finally we can obtain some actual evidence of extra-terrestrial visitations.

 

[Blitzkrieg]

Beware the military-industrial complex. Oops, already here. Sadface.

 

[gayknight]

I tried to not post on this but I finally broke down.

Baseball vs. Bushmaster .223 with a 30 round clip and a back up 30 round clip and 2 - 9 mm pistols with probable back up round clips
Will always equal more destruction. The rifle round is a bit off the NATO 5.56 round I do believe, not the most powerful round in the world but a decent one for stopping people.

First person shot in Columbine was the armed guard. Just because these people are deemed mentally unstable does not mean they are stupid.

I would say there needs to be a on overhaul of medical treatment in the US to help find and identify these people early on. But trouble with that is no one wants to pay to do it. Most did not want the mucked up reform of health care we got not and used the statement of "If you want health insurance buy it yourself poor bastards!!" So when the poor bastard stumble upon a assault rifle and 30 or even 90 round clips and thinks it would be cool to shoot up a place similar to some scene in his/her latest first person video game, who is to blame? Really who is?

The parent/owner who carelessly leaves the gun where person can get? The law for allowing loose laws on gun storage? Law for allowing weapons that come close to matching what a soldier is using somewhere?

America has to sit down and have an honest talk about guns, gun control (background checks, storage, do we need assault weapons
), health care, and many more things like caring for one another enough to be able to maybe help each other and in the same process identify a person with mental issues. We now sit behind our computers and talk to whom we want through internet sites, hell we even meet our mate same way anymore.

Oh well rant off, last note goes back to first point. I love my guns, they are fun and I feel needed to some extent. I do not think armed teachers who may snap thanks to the ill mannered children who's parents do not teach polite and kindness, pressing their buttons and well most teachers do not have to take a mental evaluation test (I think). Again first person shot in Columbine armed guard, Virginia tech there were numerous armed police that patrol the campus everyday.

I myself say I could sacrifice myself to save some children by trying to slow down a man with a bat, so they may run off through a back exit and get distance between them and him.
But a man with a Bushmaster (I have shot one and seen the damage) will be able to plow through me quickly and pick off whomever he wants.
Also a bat does not have the same fear factor as an assault rifle. I mean a guy swing and hitting a wall with a bat is oh shit moment, but a man firing off a few rounds over your head while you cower in fear will freeze most people.
Also I only remember 2 maybe 3 accounts of an armed civilian actually using their concealed gun to fire back. One was a big thing sometime back. I remember faces real well, I can't remember the names or dates but I remember the shooters face that was shot, also a swept under the rug account not as old as the first instance, and in my home city of St Louis.
They just passed carry and conceal and guy got his license and was packing when a group of kids tried to car jack him. I do not remember who had what but I know a .22 pistol was involved and a 9mm, for life of me I think the guy who own the truck had the .22 pistol. He shot and nearly killed the one with gun trying to car jack him. But again a lot of these mass shooting and not a lot of return fire.
Now those who come in body armor, you do need something like an assault rifle o have a chance or an excellent shot with a pistol and nerves of steel to stare down a person in armor and packing 30 round of semi auto fire, and try pop'ing off a few rounds at him let alone hit a soft spot for a kill.

I hate to say it, as I love my guns but maybe we need to restrict the type allowed out. Serious background checks & some sort of mental illness clause (that the NRA can not mess with), and stiffer laws on how you should store a gun.

I have more but I need to rant off and decompress.

 

[SiegeTank]

Y'know, any post loses me from the get-go when they contain expressions like "I love my guns."

I love my kids.
I love my wife.
I love playing Everquest.
I love being an American.
I love driving my car.

But I don't love my car, nor any objects per se, especially not an object designed to kill like a firearm.

See, the problem is "gun lovers" will get NOWHERE making their cases with "regular" people (notice I didn't say "normal", trying to avoid using judgemental adjectives here) if they include in their arguments declarations of their "love" for these cold metal objects that are designed to kill people.

I'll even tolerate 'I love going target shooting with my friends using our guns" because lots of us love activities involving other people and sport-like challenges.

Nobody here knows me IRL but I do think you have to understand that given my highly conservative and right-wing inclinations, if you can't convince ME of the merits of pro-gun rights arguments that include "odes to the loving of my guns" you sure aren't going to convince "the masses."

 

[JimJohnson]

Y'know, any post loses me from the get-go when they contain expressions like "I love my guns."

I love my kids.
I love my wife.
I love playing Everquest.
I love being an American.
I love driving my car.

But I don't love my car, nor any objects per se, especially not an object designed to kill like a firearm.

See, the problem is "gun lovers" will get NOWHERE making their cases with "regular" people (notice I didn't say "normal", trying to avoid using judgemental adjectives here) if they include in their arguments declarations of their "love" for these cold metal objects that are designed to kill people.

I'll even tolerate 'I love going target shooting with my friends using our guns" because lots of us love activities involving other people and sport-like challenges.

Nobody here knows me IRL but I do think you have to understand that given my highly conservative and right-wing inclinations, if you can't convince ME of the merits of pro-gun rights arguments that include "odes to the loving of my guns" you sure aren't going to convince "the masses."

gun lovers should not have to try and help you understand why they love guns.

You ever sit down and try to explain to someone who is overly active with what every they do, why you love sitting down killing digital pixels on a computer screen for hours/days at a time?

Unless you have a passion for something you will never understand it. For you, me, the president of the united states or god himself could ever understand why people love what they love.

Stopping stupid females from going back to abusive husbands that would decrease gun violence by 1-5 % alone.

Unforgettably what ever we do to fix the issue only strains the bounds of other civil liberties we enjoy.

 

[SiegeTank]

Nah, you're right you shouldn't have to explain to me why you love guns. But also don't expect me, and a whole lot of millions of other people, to be supportive of extreme liberality in gun rights when we are collectively thinking that expressing "love" for one's firearms is just enough off the deep end to make us think twice about tightening up the gun laws.

It's not the "passion for something" that's hard for others to understand. People have passions for lots of things. It's having a very strong emotional attachment to a formed piece of metal designed expressedly to kill other living things. That's what hard for us to accept.

Sure, it's none of my business that you may love your guns. Except when you want us to enable people to own such guns with very little restrictions on who can acquire them, how, and why. Then it IS our business.

In the big picture, gun-lovers would be wiser not to talk too much publicly about loving guns. Make it another one of those "loves that don't dare speak their names." rather than the love that never shuts up!

 

[JimJohnson]

It's not the "passion for something" that's hard for others to understand. People have passions for lots of things. It's having a very strong emotional attachment to a formed piece of metal designed expressedly to kill other living things. That's what hard for us to accept.

This goes right back into explaining why people like the weapon of said choice. You are passing judgement on a poor little piece of metal/carbon object because when you look at them YOU see it killing other living things.

So its hard to accept that when people look at it they can not see the time and craftsmen ship put into the same object, with a desire to go target practice because he finds shooting at something half a mile away relaxing.

You and the majority of other people only see the news tabloids blowing up how wrong guns are.. BECAUSE it sells and people are so stupid they believe what they read. As it never actually makes the news when guns do good.

 

[SiegeTank]

People collect barbed wire. Yeah, they actually get enjoyment out of adding pieces of barbed wire to their collection. I guess the variety comes from the age and design of the pieces of barbed wire.

As a person who has collected "things" in my time, I can relate to that in a theoretical sense, altho I'd have no interest myself in collecting barbed wire.

But where this differs from gun collecting, is that in no plausible manner is a collection of pieces of barbed wire a danger to others. A collection of guns IS.

If you don't see why that would cause me (and millions of other US citizens) concern, then you're right ultimately there's no point in discussing this.

 

[JimJohnson]

People collect barbed wire. Yeah, they actually get enjoyment out of adding pieces of barbed wire to their collection. I guess the variety comes from the age and design of the pieces of barbed wire.

As a person who has collected "things" in my time, I can relate to that in a theoretical sense, altho I'd have no interest myself in collecting barbed wire.

But where this differs from gun collecting, is that in no plausible manner is a collection of pieces of barbed wire a danger to others. A collection of guns IS.

If you don't see why that would cause me (and millions of other US citizens) concern, then you're right ultimately there's no point in discussing this.

What you do not seem to see is the issue is not the item. Stop trying to blame any item that does not see or act on its own free will. Guns are not the problem. you remove every gun from the world and people would still find ways to inflict harm on others.

Take away guns, see how long it takes for people who are already going to commit suicide after they kill 5 or 20 people with a gun of some kind. Just so they can change up to tried and proven methods, suicide bomb vests. And then what? Do you want to remove all products used to create bombs also?

People want a utopia that is not practical or possible with any real amount of freedom.

 

[Deflator]

But where this differs from gun collecting, is that in no plausible manner is a collection of pieces of barbed wire a danger to others. A collection of guns IS.

That's one helluva ludicrous assertion.

 

[wwarwolf911]

But where this differs from gun collecting, is that in no plausible manner is a collection of pieces of barbed wire a danger to others. A collection of guns IS.

That's one helluva ludicrous assertion.

I know a guy who cut his hand on barbed wire fence. His hand got infected, he lost his pinky finger and half his ring finger. True story!

 

[wwarwolf911]

But where this differs from gun collecting, is that in no plausible manner is a collection of pieces of barbed wire a danger to others. A collection of guns IS.

That's one helluva ludicrous assertion.

how is this for an assertion -- to OP!


If you remove the barbed wire, the bull will kill someone!

 

[PRWraith]

This is kind of heartless. But i think its kind of a miracle that during these massacres only a a relatively small number of people die.

I mean, going into a school essentially a target rich environment, with as many rounds and weapons as they do. Killing 20 is kind of a small miracle.

When it could have easily been double or triple that number.

 

[gayknight]

SiegeTank please read all the way through the post.

PRWraith, you are very right, I was hinting to that in my above post. You give some a assault rifle and they have half ass training they can do a whole lot of damage. One .223 hits a person in the midsection would be very devastating, most of the time victim would have only a few minutes.

I own 2 pistols, a shotgun, rifle, and 2 bows. I grew up being taught proper gun safety and usage. I no longer talk to my father we are estranged I guess you say, but my only good memories are of us hunting.
I grew up poor and back in the late 70's a rifle or bow was cheap and easy to come by. Plus deer meat or duck kept food on our table even in the worst times.
Also a being in the service you are instilled with a certain idea of "This is your weapon, she is all that stands between you and death!" Years later I lost that feeling somewhat.

But my love is for the old memories of childhood, the fun of as JJ said going out with my son now and teaching him proper safety. Then practice hitting some non living targets. Not all guns are used the same or even used at all.

Again as I said in my above post, I think maybe we do need a serious and level headed discussion in America about certain things.
1- Like maybe a universal health care that is worth a damn, that can help the poor and maybe catch and identify mentally ill people and get them tagged so they can not get access to guns of ANY kind easily.

2-Maybe we should talk about do we the people really need and assault rifle?
Second amendment (general loose term) says we have right to own guns to protect us from the government or foreign powers. But I can tell you then if you think your .223 Bushmaster can stop a tank, a couple of Apache's, or a Drone with a bunker buster on it, you might need to go get checked out for mental illness and let someone hold your guns.
By definition of 2nd amendment should we not have right to own those same weapons? I think the second amendment is a little out dated for today's technology. I do not want to see it gone but again maybe we should as people and Government talk about what weapons are proper. No loose terminology used that could mean every weapon, but a proper law with common sense.

3- 30 to 90 round clips or drums? I mean yes if you are fighting a war, I highly recommend it. But 300 million people in US. I dated a shrink and she said 1 in 4 people have mental issues and 3 in 5 of those have serious issues, so 15% of Americans are semi to fully crazy? Again going back to some mental health check some way. Do they really need to be able to get their hands on military grade equipment? Like assault rifles and 30 round clips and body armor?

4- Leads me too last two points, nation wide background checks that could tap into the health care system I mentioned above to see those types of things.

5- And more comprehensive laws on gun storage. If you leave a gun out that a child can easily obtain or a crazy person well, you deserve punishment too.

 

[twizzops]

Y'know, any post loses me from the get-go when they contain expressions like "I love my guns."

I love my kids.
I love my wife.
I love playing Everquest.
I love being an American.
I love driving my car.

But I don't love my car, nor any objects per se, especially not an object designed to kill like a firearm.

Also a being in the service you are instilled with a certain idea of "This is your weapon, she is all that stands between you and death!" Years later I lost that feeling somewhat.

Sorry, but I couldn't help it:

[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Hgd2F2QNfEE"]Rifleman's Creed - YouTube[/ame]

4 years in the marines and I still love this movie.

 

[Nicedreamsbt]

I am not sure if you were in the military but tanks are not the indestructible. I have taken out plenty of tanks with 1 fire team playing opfor. Even with today tech just having assault rifles would help have a guerrilla force

SiegeTank please read all the way through the post.


2-Maybe we should talk about do we the people really need and assault rifle?
Second amendment (general loose term) says we have right to own guns to protect us from the government or foreign powers. But I can tell you then if you think your .223 Bushmaster can stop a tank, a couple of Apache's, or a Drone with a bunker buster on it, you might need to go get checked out for mental illness and let someone hold your guns.
By definition of 2nd amendment should we not have right to own those same weapons? I think the second amendment is a little out dated for today's technology. I do not want to see it gone but again maybe we should as people and Government talk about what weapons are proper. No loose terminology used that could mean every weapon, but a proper law with common sense.

3- 30 to 90 round clips or drums? I mean yes if you are fighting a war, I highly recommend it. But 300 million people in US. I dated a shrink and she said 1 in 4 people have mental issues and 3 in 5 of those have serious issues, so 15% of Americans are semi to fully crazy? Again going back to some mental health check some way. Do they really need to be able to get their hands on military grade equipment? Like assault rifles and 30 round clips and body armor?

.

 

[JimJohnson]

I am not sure if you were in the military but tanks are not the indestructible. I have taken out plenty of tanks with 1 fire team playing opfor. Even with today tech just having assault rifles would help have a guerrilla force

SiegeTank please read all the way through the post.


2-Maybe we should talk about do we the people really need and assault rifle?
Second amendment (general loose term) says we have right to own guns to protect us from the government or foreign powers. But I can tell you then if you think your .223 Bushmaster can stop a tank, a couple of Apache's, or a Drone with a bunker buster on it, you might need to go get checked out for mental illness and let someone hold your guns.
By definition of 2nd amendment should we not have right to own those same weapons? I think the second amendment is a little out dated for today's technology. I do not want to see it gone but again maybe we should as people and Government talk about what weapons are proper. No loose terminology used that could mean every weapon, but a proper law with common sense.

3- 30 to 90 round clips or drums? I mean yes if you are fighting a war, I highly recommend it. But 300 million people in US. I dated a shrink and she said 1 in 4 people have mental issues and 3 in 5 of those have serious issues, so 15% of Americans are semi to fully crazy? Again going back to some mental health check some way. Do they really need to be able to get their hands on military grade equipment? Like assault rifles and 30 round clips and body armor?

.

Somehow we have guns topic turn into anti tank defense. They are sorta not the same thing.

other then in order to conquer or defend any piece of land you INFANTRY with guns on the ground.

You can drone strike all day long but you will not hold land until you hold it with ground troops and support elements. Lucky things like those are not openly available to everyday people. Wish the Government would use them less as it is.

 

[SiegeTank]

I know this sounds shitty, but concerning the shooting at Sandy Hook, a determined person with a little ability could have achieved the same thing with a baseball bat instead of a gun.

I don't agree at all. Unless you think the teachers and kids would line up quietly and just let themselves be beaten to death one by one. I mean, GET REAL! Don't you think there'd be a lot of screaming and running around once this lunatic started whacking away at a kid?

You think there wasn't screaming and running around when he was shooting them?

Exactly my point. It's much easier to shoot a bunch of moving targets with semi-automatic rapid-fire guns than it is to smash them all with a bat.

To be honest, though, knowing the passivity of our culture, if the deranged killer had told the kids to stand still through this, they might well have done that. My gun-owning friend reminded me that the "official" recommendation nowadays if you're confronted by a bear in the wild and you have no gun is to roll up into a ball and lie on the ground.

Passivity.... it's the new American tradition!