Ten innocents dead

[pcs]

i’m at the edge of the pool and i know the water is cold but everyone is getting in...i hate cold water. i guess since everyone is chiming in.
223 is a way more destruction round than a 9mm. for example, 223 are still effective through car sheet metal and when striking “soft target” bones, they easily render it ineffective.
AR platform was a military design weapon for offensive combat purposes and has lots of features that make it suitable for handling multiple targets, clearing out walmarts and night clubs.
hand guns kill more people for many reasons. victims don’t see them, concealable, cheap, easier to carry. like a fighter who didn’t see a punch is the one that KOs him.
FBI has the stats of mass shooting on their website. u can look at it by race gender age ect. if anyone wants to blame a particular group.
comparing the rates of shooting in rual vs urban is more complex than everyone on the farm owning guns. just compare a night at a crowded bar vs a non crowded one. see which one will have more fights. people in crowded areas(urban) behave much different.
can people kill one another w/o guns... ofcourse. guns just make it easier to do so. the basic purpose of a gun is to kill, makes sense they are the tool of choice.
the 2A is not absolute, you can have that right taken away. convicted felon, DV, sex offender to name a few.
i have no issue with guns for hunting or home protection but too many mass shootings keep happen in the US so what we have been doing is not working. gun violence should be studied more, the more it’s understood the better it can be dealt with rather than 2 political parties blaming the other side. example, the auto industry. people use to get killed or hurt more easily during crashes. so the problem was studied. yes the auto industry didn’t like it and gov had to stop in a few times. what was discovered was the problem has multiple solutions. road designs changed, protective barriers added, better car designs, warning signs, driver lic. requirements, ect. whether we are pro or not, we need to confront the problem and not act like children when someone has tells us something we don’t like or proves us wrong.
come on in the water is fine

 

[Bumblebee]

i’m at the edge of the pool and i know the water is cold but everyone is getting in...i hate cold water. i guess since everyone is chiming in.
223 is a way more destruction round than a 9mm. for example, 223 are still effective through car sheet metal and when striking “soft target” bones, they easily render it ineffective.
AR platform was a military design weapon for offensive combat purposes and has lots of features that make it suitable for handling multiple targets, clearing out walmarts and night clubs.
hand guns kill more people for many reasons. victims don’t see them, concealable, cheap, easier to carry. like a fighter who didn’t see a punch is the one that KOs him.
FBI has the stats of mass shooting on their website. u can look at it by race gender age ect. if anyone wants to blame a particular group.
comparing the rates of shooting in rual vs urban is more complex than everyone on the farm owning guns. just compare a night at a crowded bar vs a non crowded one. see which one will have more fights. people in crowded areas(urban) behave much different.
can people kill one another w/o guns... ofcourse. guns just make it easier to do so. the basic purpose of a gun is to kill, makes sense they are the tool of choice.
the 2A is not absolute, you can have that right taken away. convicted felon, DV, sex offender to name a few.
i have no issue with guns for hunting or home protection but too many mass shootings keep happen in the US so what we have been doing is not working. gun violence should be studied more, the more it’s understood the better it can be dealt with rather than 2 political parties blaming the other side. example, the auto industry. people use to get killed or hurt more easily during crashes. so the problem was studied. yes the auto industry didn’t like it and gov had to stop in a few times. what was discovered was the problem has multiple solutions. road designs changed, protective barriers added, better car designs, warning signs, driver lic. requirements, ect. whether we are pro or not, we need to confront the problem and not act like children when someone has tells us something we don’t like or proves us wrong.
come on in the water is fine

....and you swim well.....

 

[fallenarch]

i’m at the edge of the pool and i know the water is cold but everyone is getting in...i hate cold water. i guess since everyone is chiming in.
223 is a way more destruction round than a 9mm. for example, 223 are still effective through car sheet metal and when striking “soft target” bones, they easily render it ineffective.
AR platform was a military design weapon for offensive combat purposes and has lots of features that make it suitable for handling multiple targets, clearing out walmarts and night clubs.
hand guns kill more people for many reasons. victims don’t see them, concealable, cheap, easier to carry. like a fighter who didn’t see a punch is the one that KOs him.
FBI has the stats of mass shooting on their website. u can look at it by race gender age ect. if anyone wants to blame a particular group.
comparing the rates of shooting in rual vs urban is more complex than everyone on the farm owning guns. just compare a night at a crowded bar vs a non crowded one. see which one will have more fights. people in crowded areas(urban) behave much different.
can people kill one another w/o guns... ofcourse. guns just make it easier to do so. the basic purpose of a gun is to kill, makes sense they are the tool of choice.
the 2A is not absolute, you can have that right taken away. convicted felon, DV, sex offender to name a few.
i have no issue with guns for hunting or home protection but too many mass shootings keep happen in the US so what we have been doing is not working. gun violence should be studied more, the more it’s understood the better it can be dealt with rather than 2 political parties blaming the other side. example, the auto industry. people use to get killed or hurt more easily during crashes. so the problem was studied. yes the auto industry didn’t like it and gov had to stop in a few times. what was discovered was the problem has multiple solutions. road designs changed, protective barriers added, better car designs, warning signs, driver lic. requirements, ect. whether we are pro or not, we need to confront the problem and not act like children when someone has tells us something we don’t like or proves us wrong.
come on in the water is fine

Agreed. However, this is not an argument between parties. Americans overwhelmingly agree we need gun control. We have a small fringe group that has Republicans in fear of crossing them. Even a majority of NRA members agree we need more background checks, yet it doesn't happen.

 

[Mathewrussell52]

Agreed. However, this is not an argument between parties. Americans overwhelmingly agree we need gun control. We have a small fringe group that has Republicans in fear of crossing them. Even a majority of NRA members agree we need more background checks, yet it doesn't happen.

what is more background checks? They do a background check when you purchase a fire arm?

 

[Dougyp333]

Wow. Just so much complete and total creation of "facts" in this thread to prop up the narrative.

Where to start. An AR-15 is NOT an assault rifle, it is a standard semi-auto. To be an assault rifle it must have the ability to go to full auto (burst) mode.

Suicide accounts for the vast majority of gun related deaths in the US annually. Something that is never brought up in these discussions, but it won't change anyone's mind. Maybe better mental heath care would make more of a difference than a law that strips people of their rights.

Now if you want to talk about a lot of people dying lets talk medicine. 225,00+ people are killed by medical malpractice every year. Linky

What it comes down to is one simple question: Are you willing to give up your rights for the illusion of safety?

Ban guns if you want but it won't have an affect on violet crime rates this has been proven many times over.

Want safer roads make the speed limit 55. How'd that go the last time we tried it, national outcry if I remember correctly.

Want to stop drunk drivers and deaths from alcohol abuse, prohibit booze. I'm pretty sure that was an abject failure.

It's a never ending circle jerk of my facts are better and I'm smarter. The 2nd amendment says what it says and people are going to interpret it to meet their world view. My world view says that buying a gun and voting should be equally difficult. Your world view may be different. I'm ok with that but stop trying to take away my rights and freedoms.

 

[fallenarch]

what is more background checks? They do a background check when you purchase a fire arm?

gun shows and private sales?

 

[Dougyp333]

gun shows and private sales?

This is what I am talking about. A gun show has nothing to do with how a gun is sold. A dealer must complete a background check no matter where the sale takes place. A private person to person sale doesn't require a back ground check (it might in some states). However you can get into trouble easily if you are not careful. Linky

 

[pcs]

i never said AR15 was an assault rifle i said the AR platform was originally a military design. the reason the gun lobby groups get so heated about definition is so they can argue a new design or feature in court. they keep changing definitions and get people all fired up about it. that’s why i said AR platform. Ar15, m16, m4... variations of the same platform optimized for different situations. it’s a weapon designed for military purposes that has been modified to get around legal vocabulary to be sold for profit. ar15s are just as effective as the other versions without having 3rd burst or fully auto features. i’m not trying to take peoples rights away, never said that but a small number of people are causing big problems with guns and the manufactures aren’t really trying to regulate themselves.
... hayabusa... gentleman’s agreement...300km/hr. if the manufacturers would come up with solutions the government wouldnt have to step in.

55mph federal speed limit was done in response to the oil crisis to reduce demand for oil not for safety reasons. however collisions at slower speed do reduce chances of injuries and fatalities. during WW2 the government imposed speed limits to reduce demand on oil and conserve it for war efforts. seat belt laws were created to reduce fatalities from crash around that time too.

the difference with booze and dui is those subjects are openly studied by the gov and private universities and the findings are openly published so the average person can exercise the freedom of choice and decide of they want to use alcohol and the dangers of dui are openly talked about in schools with no objection. i don’t understand why people object to openly talking and studying the problem? if we understand the issues we can make better decisions about dealing with it.

zero background checks at gun shows in az and no controls on private sales. cars come with a title of ownership and registrations. those government requirements haven’t stopped people from owning, collecting, dealing, trading cars. just a some accountability. it also helps law enforcement deal with problems revolving around cars such as theft, chop shops, hit and run...

i have no quarrel with responsible people owning fire arms but i also don’t have a problem with keeping certain types of guns out of the hands of amateurs. back to my cars analogies. you can’t just go buy a top fuel dragster at a dealer and drive it down the street to the grocery store, legally. created for a specific purpose but its still an automobile. you cant just drive an 18 wheeler fully loaded with 80k pounds on a highway without special training and licenses. with guns, some states you can walk in, fill out a form, show your drivers license, wait a hr, then walk out with a piece of equipment designed to kill. no training or license. some people are ok with having to get permits to legally use automobiles but not guns?

lastly, lets not create enemies over a gun topic. we should respect others views and not get heated or ruin the rest of your day bc other see a problem from a different point of view.

 

[Bumblebee]

Wow. Just so much complete and total creation of "facts" in this thread to prop up the narrative.

Where to start. An AR-15 is NOT an assault rifle, it is a standard semi-auto. To be an assault rifle it must have the ability to go to full auto (burst) mode.

Suicide accounts for the vast majority of gun related deaths in the US annually. Something that is never brought up in these discussions, but it won't change anyone's mind. Maybe better mental heath care would make more of a difference than a law that strips people of their rights.

View attachment 1633672

Now if you want to talk about a lot of people dying lets talk medicine. 225,00+ people are killed by medical malpractice every year. Linky

What it comes down to is one simple question: Are you willing to give up your rights for the illusion of safety?

Ban guns if you want but it won't have an affect on violet crime rates this has been proven many times over.

Want safer roads make the speed limit 55. How'd that go the last time we tried it, national outcry if I remember correctly.

Want to stop drunk drivers and deaths from alcohol abuse, prohibit booze. I'm pretty sure that was an abject failure.

It's a never ending circle jerk of my facts are better and I'm smarter. The 2nd amendment says what it says and people are going to interpret it to meet their world view. My world view says that buying a gun and voting should be equally difficult. Your world view may be different. I'm ok with that but stop trying to take away my rights and freedoms.

Who said the AR was an assault rifle...it is an assault styled weapon along with all it's brethren which can be made full auto with the change out of the trigger group sear.

I admit, after using this style of weapon for most of my career, I am comfortable using the platform and it feels good when at the range.

Limiting these sorts of weapons from getting into the hands of some nut certainly does not take away your rights and freedoms.

The US is too far along to impose any sort of ban at this stage, there are just too many weapons out in the general populace to try and control them.

 

[Mathewrussell52]

gun shows and private sales?

If we bring it back to this tragic topic. Would it of changed anything? We all know the answer is no.
But how do you enforce that. That is thee real question. Your first comment is one people love to use. Ask peopleif they think universal background checks are a good thing. 90% people say yes. But we all know the only way to enforce it is a gun registry. That is where the debate is at we’re just not being honest about it.

 

[fallenarch]

If we bring it back to this tragic topic. Would it of changed anything? We all know the answer is no.
But how do you enforce that. That is thee real question. Your first comment is one people love to use. Ask peopleif they think universal background checks are a good thing. 90% people say yes. But we all know the only way to enforce it is a gun registry. That is where the debate is at we’re just not being honest about it.

I don't disagree. Remember I am a gun owner and have a few of them now. But where we are is gun owners are stuck on an interpretation of the 2nd amendment that is historically incorrect and they will not take anything less than a total unrestricted right. In the past when gun violence got out of control they cured the problem with the prohibition against weapons. From the wild west towns that instituted no gun zones to control machine guns in the '30s (and complete ban in '80s) to gun laws of the '60s that resulted from movements like the Black Panthers to the assault rifle bans of the early '90s.

The real question is do gun owners have a right that overshadows everyone else's rights. Gun owners are shooting up schools, malls, and stores. They are using those guns to intimidate politicians with armed protests and scaring people away from voting locations with an armed presence. This is mostly unchecked because of this absolute blocking of any gun control, even against the will of the people.

Gun problems follow racial tension in this country. I bought mine because my neighbor was at Charlottesville and DC on the 6th. We need to make gun owners responsible for their weapons and the damage they are doing to society through taxes and penalties. The reality is gun control does and has worked and it's needed because of gun owners acting badly.

 

[jellyrug]

I don't disagree. Remember I am a gun owner and have a few of them now. But where we are is gun owners are stuck on an interpretation of the 2nd amendment that is historically incorrect and they will not take anything less than a total unrestricted right. In the past when gun violence got out of control they cured the problem with the prohibition against weapons. From the wild west towns that instituted no gun zones to control machine guns in the '30s (and complete ban in '80s) to gun laws of the '60s that resulted from movements like the Black Panthers to the assault rifle bans of the early '90s.

The real question is do gun owners have a right that overshadows everyone else's rights. Gun owners are shooting up schools, malls, and stores. They are using those guns to intimidate politicians with armed protests and scaring people away from voting locations with an armed presence. This is mostly unchecked because of this absolute blocking of any gun control, even against the will of the people.

Gun problems follow racial tension in this country. I bought mine because my neighbor was at Charlottesville and DC on the 6th. We need to make gun owners responsible for their weapons and the damage they are doing to society through taxes and penalties. The reality is gun control does and has worked and it's needed because of gun owners acting badly.

I am really careful and responsible with my gun.

At an early age I learnt it gets a lady pregnant at the drop of a hat.

 

[michael parris heuberger]

Easy big man, easy.....Red is a solid poster around here

You won't be picking a mini-14 off the shelf here in Canada as they are banned...

...and a mini-14 has the same round size but not the same capabilities...as I explained before the ability to conduct rapid mag changes is what separates the AR from many other platforms. The two rifles might even have the same magazine capacity but when a person can do a mag change in sub 10 seconds, that's the game changer....

As a guy who has spent more than his fair share with weapons of every sort in my hands, weapons such as these have no place in society.

Hi. I can do a mag change in under six seconds on my S&W 380. 10 seconds while you are being shot at is like forever, and it could be for you. Lets say 3 armed men brake into you house how many rounds will you need to stop them? This is not fair but in Nam it was over 50,000 rounds to kill 1.

 

[Bumblebee]

Hi. I can do a mag change in under six seconds on my S&W 380. 10 seconds while you are being shot at is like forever, and it could be for you. Lets say 3 armed men brake into you house how many rounds will you need to stop them? This is not fair but in Nam it was over 50,000 rounds to kill 1.

Exactly, the ability to conduct fast mag changes is what separates the platforms...we are not talking handguns here. The average person can be taught to do sub 10 second mag changes pretty quickly with an AR platform-faster than most other mainstream platforms and much quicker than an AK...

Thankfully for my situation, there are VERY few armed home invasions in Canada and if there were, my .12ga would be my go to platform....I would need 3 rounds or less to dispatch the described invaders.

As for engaging enemy targets...that was an entirely different situation in my case but in the regular forces, targeting has become much better and the round count per engagement has dropped substantially from Viet Nam where in many cases scared, raw kids fired their weapons with their eyes closed and at the sound of a twig snapping...

 

[michael parris heuberger]

Exactly, the ability to conduct fast mag changes is what separates the platforms...we are not talking handguns here. The average person can be taught to do sub 10 second mag changes pretty quickly with an AR platform-faster than most other mainstream platforms and much quicker than an AK...

Thankfully for my situation, there are VERY few armed home invasions in Canada and if there were, my .12ga would be my go to platform....I would need 3 rounds or less to dispatch the described invaders.

As for engaging enemy targets...that was an entirely different situation in my case but in the regular forces, targeting has become much better and the round count per engagement has dropped substantially from Viet Nam where in many cases scared, raw kids fired their weapons with their eyes closed and at the sound of a twig snapping...

Hi you are right about that. In real life not that many people are trained as us. After the Army I took a 12 day course in hand guns, I fired 2500 round in 12 days. I still train about 100 days a year on my own range in my back yard.

 

[Bumblebee]

Hi you are right about that. In real life not that many people are trained as us. After the Army I took a 12 day course in hand guns, I fired 2500 round in 12 days. I still train about 100 days a year on my own range in my back yard.

In the SOF world, we spent quite a bit of time on multiple complex ranges...

I did a course one time where we fired over 3000 rds in a day from a few different platforms. After 3 days on that course, I was wore out from shooting....Aussie rappelling and trying to hit targets was a challenge....

 

[SSGT_B]

Gun violence........ I find this statement to be ludicrous! My guns have not gotten up and been violent to anyone. The gun is not the problem. People are. A gun is a tool. Any tool,used correctly, will serve no purpose other than what it was intended for. A ranger got a confirmed kill with a plastic more spoon in Afghanistan. Should we ban spoons? It was a violent action however done for a better reason. Cars kill people all day. Cigarettes have killed more people than guns. The list goes on. You can ban all the guns and take them all away, the criminals however do not adhere to your laws. They do not fear judge nor jury. They can get all the guns they want. I guess to end my rambling, like guns, don’t like guns. People are the problem. Guns cannot make a conscious decision to act in a violent manner. Only the person who uses it can make that choice.

/rant. Getting pie

 

[Bumblebee]

Gun violence........ I find this statement to be ludicrous! My guns have not gotten up and been violent to anyone. The gun is not the problem. People are. A gun is a tool. Any tool,used correctly, will serve no purpose other than what it was intended for. A ranger got a confirmed kill with a plastic more spoon in Afghanistan. Should we ban spoons? It was a violent action however done for a better reason. Cars kill people all day. Cigarettes have killed more people than guns. The list goes on. You can ban all the guns and take them all away, the criminals however do not adhere to your laws. They do not fear judge nor jury. They can get all the guns they want. I guess to end my rambling, like guns, don’t like guns. People are the problem. Guns cannot make a conscious decision to act in a violent manner. Only the person who uses it can make that choice.

/rant. Getting pie

Correct, people are the final solution to gun violence however, a person has to have a gun from which to conduct this violent act. It is far too late to enact any gun ban in the US, controls will help-in controls I mean start enforcing gun safety such as proper storage including locks and storage locations. A weapon platform such as an AR with high capacity magazines and the ability to rapidly change those magazines makes this a dangerous weapon in even the hands of a novice...weapons such as these have no place in society.

These controls will do a couple things-it will keep loaded guns out of hands of the innocent who stumble upon mom and dad's loaded gun, and it will keep guns out of the hands of burglars who find unlocked, unsecured weapons in homes-these weapons are then used in crimes-this happens quite a bit.

Finally, weapons such as firearms have one purpose-to kill, plastic spoons, cars and cigarettes were never designed to kill...can they kill? Sure...anything can kill...horses kill people, bicycles kill people and the list goes on and on and on....none of those were designed to kill people...rifles, shotguns and pistols are all designed to kill.

 

[fallenarch]

Gun violence........ I find this statement to be ludicrous! My guns have not gotten up and been violent to anyone. The gun is not the problem. People are. A gun is a tool. Any tool,used correctly, will serve no purpose other than what it was intended for. A ranger got a confirmed kill with a plastic more spoon in Afghanistan. Should we ban spoons? It was a violent action however done for a better reason. Cars kill people all day. Cigarettes have killed more people than guns. The list goes on. You can ban all the guns and take them all away, the criminals however do not adhere to your laws. They do not fear judge nor jury. They can get all the guns they want. I guess to end my rambling, like guns, don’t like guns. People are the problem. Guns cannot make a conscious decision to act in a violent manner. Only the person who uses it can make that choice.

/rant. Getting pie

It isn't ludicrous. Guns do kill people, people just tell them to do it. A gun is a force multiplier. A weak punk can now kill 10 people. Use a car correctly and it gets you from A to B. Use a gun correctly somebody or something dies. I don't want to give up my guns but all of these cliches and pop logic defenses of guns aren't going to do anything but get an ovation at your local NRA meeting.

Wearing an open weapon in public is stupid tactically. You give up the right to engage a situation on your terms, to your advantage. Wearing a gun openly is an effort to intimidate, it is not a defensive act. It's like the superhero paradigm: Do superheroes protect us from bad actors, or do they invite more bad actors? Showing up to a political protest geared up like you are going to assault a little village in Afganistan is an offensive act. It should not be legal to use guns to intimidate the public or elected officials, everyone knows this is wrong.

If we never saw guns and weak punks weren't using them to butcher innocent people, even children, there would not be a conversation about them. You want to carry a gun do it quietly, concealed. You want to shoot it as a hobby go to a range. While it's silly to say guns don't kill people, it is right on target to say the problem with guns is the gun owner.

 

[michael parris heuberger]

Gun violence........ I find this statement to be ludicrous! My guns have not gotten up and been violent to anyone. The gun is not the problem. People are. A gun is a tool. Any tool,used correctly, will serve no purpose other than what it was intended for. A ranger got a confirmed kill with a plastic more spoon in Afghanistan. Should we ban spoons? It was a violent action however done for a better reason. Cars kill people all day. Cigarettes have killed more people than guns. The list goes on. You can ban all the guns and take them all away, the criminals however do not adhere to your laws. They do not fear judge nor jury. They can get all the guns they want. I guess to end my rambling, like guns, don’t like guns. People are the problem. Guns cannot make a conscious decision to act in a violent manner. Only the person who uses it can make that choice.

/rant. Getting pie

Ho. OH No, now we have to ban spoons now?