Let's get political. Gun Debate!

Have you ever tried to reason with a child in the middle of a full-blown, red in the face, snot coming out of their nose, gasping for air crying fit?

Yeah, well welcome to the national conversation on gun control.

Point, regular capacity (high capacity to the ill informed) magazines are in common use. I read that one distributor sold 70,000 Magpul PMags in one day, 70,000 30 round AR-15 magazines. And with 3D printing, small portable machine tools and such, making your own regular capacity magazines is becoming easier by the day.

And if you think banning them will change anything, let me sell you a bridge in Brooklyn, cheap.

And since semi autos seem to be on the table, take a look at this.



That's Jerry Miculek firing 12 rounds in under three seconds. Granted, he's exceptional, but if someone were to become 1/4 as competent as he is, that's still impressive.

And the term assault weapon is a made up term having to do with the cosmetics of a gun. Josh Horowitz of the Violence Policy Center coined it back when the original AWB was being pushed. There is no federal LEGAL definition of an assault weapon. It was used to sway public opinion that a weapon that looked like a military m-16/M-4 is deadly because of it's appearance.

And please, let's get rid of these gun free zones. They become victim disarmament zones instead. Columbine, Virginia Tech, Newtown, Aurora, Arrowhead stadium are all places where the average citizen by law is forced to disarm. We've falsely come to rely upon words upon paper to shield us from danger in this world. Warren v. District of Columbia settled the matter that the police are not responsible for your safety. In no way am I advocating for forcibly arming teachers. First off, too many would probably balk at this, and second, I'd rather give them the choice and have them willingly come to the conclusion that arming themselves is an empowering thing.

I want to keep weapons out of the hands of those who would do harm to innocent folks. Please allow me to have a decided advantage when people with evil intent are able to slip through the cracks and carry out their plans.

---

It is useless for the sheep to pass resolutions in favour of vegetarianism, while the wolf remains of a different opinion.
William Ralph Inge

TANSTAAFL

1. Due to large numbers of bear issues in my area I have serious enough firepower to take one down if it breaks through glass doors and enters my house. I also have magazines that hold enough rounds to stop it if the first shots miss or do not stop the threat.

2. About 7 years ago (in a different house - a duplex) I needed to protect my 90 year old neighbor from some groundhog that was acting very much rabid. There was no animal control officer to call. I called the police. They told me not to shoot it, and they would come. I did not shoot it fearing my handgun permit would be taken. Someone else dispatched the animal. THE COPS NEVER CAME.

3. I have enough firepower to handle multiple home invasion criminals. Home invasions are becoming common. 911 response to my house is at least 10 to 15 minutes. A lot can happen in that time.

4. In another house I had to call 911 at midnight when five unknown men were walking down my 300 foot driveway and refusing to leave the property. Finally after repeated warnings they walked off the property. It took the cops 11 minutes to get there. If they did not stop I would have retreated into my house. However, if they broke in I would have defended myself and family with as many rounds as necessary to stop the threat. I would not like having to reload while defending myself against 5 guys.

The police disarmed me, questioned me, gave me back my weapon and commended me regarding my actions.

Quote
Gravity Fed
so let's get political! Discussion on the US, guns, gun owners, the 2nd amendement, and the rest, go!

Guns don't kill people, people who want to be glorified by the media kill people.

---

Pete Remner
Cleveland, Ohio

1984 RX-7 (rallycross thing)
1978
Silence is golden, but duct tape is silver.

Quote
Dazed_Driver
Stop publicizing mass shootings and glorifying the criminals who commit the atrocities.


Why just shoot yourself when you could shoot up a school and become famous?


Stop glamorizing them.

This this this this this THIS.

Quote

As its been said, guns, whether flint lock or semi automatic (there is really no reason a civilian needs a fully automatic anything, lol. Hell, M-16's only have 3 round burst or semi. M-4's have automatic, from my understanding, but how fast do you empty a magazine with auto? A few seconds... ), are not the problem.

250,000 fully automatic firearms registered in the US. Roughly half are owned by civilians, half law enforcement. Murders with legally owned full auto weapons: Two.

Quote

Not banning the tool used. They'll just find something else. Bombs are fairly easy to make.

You know, I always wondered about Sideshow Bob. Supposedly he had a bunch of bombs or grenades on him when he went into the movie theater. If he really wanted a good kill count, he'd have scattered them throughout the theater. Hell, don't even use a gun, bullets can miss while exploding things don't.

---

Pete Remner
Cleveland, Ohio

1984 RX-7 (rallycross thing)
1978
Silence is golden, but duct tape is silver.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 12/19/2012 08:49PM by Pete.

Quote
Pete

Quote
Dazed_Driver
Stop publicizing mass shootings and glorifying the criminals who commit the atrocities.


Why just shoot yourself when you could shoot up a school and become famous?


Stop glamorizing them.

Quote


This this this this this THIS.

Quote

As its been said, guns, whether flint lock or semi automatic (there is really no reason a civilian needs a fully automatic anything, lol. Hell, M-16's only have 3 round burst or semi. M-4's have automatic, from my understanding, but how fast do you empty a magazine with auto? A few seconds... ), are not the problem.

250,000 fully automatic firearms registered in the US. Roughly half are owned by civilians, half law enforcement. Murders with legally owned full auto weapons: Two.

Quote

Not banning the tool used. They'll just find something else. Bombs are fairly easy to make.

You know, I always wondered about Sideshow Bob. Supposedly he had a bunch of bombs or grenades on him when he went into the movie theater. If he really wanted a good kill count, he'd have scattered them throughout the theater. Hell, don't even use a gun, bullets can miss while exploding things don't.

Yeah, it is a very small number of murders committed with fully automatic weapons. I was just thinking, if there WAS some sort of a ban, make it PARTIAL. Limit rifles to 15-20 rounds or less, if its not a hunting style weapon. You really don't need to be cycling through a bolt action rifle with 30 rounds after a deer 10 would probably be more than enough.

Besides the novelty of it, I really don't see a point in civilians having fully automatic weapons... but whatever. I'm not against it, I just dont personally want one, or see why. Then again, I like target and trap shooting, not aimlessly destroying water heaters, dish washers, and whatever else I can find in the back woods.

That's all I'm thinking. Shot guns are fine, pistols are fine, most rifles are fine. If anything, just reduce the magazine capacity, and get ride of fully automatic. They'll still fire as fast as you can pull the trigger in semi... (unless you have a shitty grip on a pistol and you take too much of the recoil energy in your arms, making the slide get stuck on the chambering round... Ask me how I know [but man, p226's are NICE when you figure out how to hold them properly] )

---

Welcome to the cult of JVL drink the koolaid or be banned.

Regarding reloading vs. large magazines please read my post below about my experience with 5 hostile tresspassers.

And here's the video I should have posted along with my others.

---

It is useless for the sheep to pass resolutions in favour of vegetarianism, while the wolf remains of a different opinion.
William Ralph Inge

TANSTAAFL

i can probably rationalize we dont need cars with more than 100 hp either since sport cars kill plenty of people.

---

First Rally: 2010 First RallyX: 2004 (a bunch)
Driver (0), Co-Driver (7)
Organizer (3), Volunteer (3)
Cars Built (2.5), Engines Blown (2) Cages Built (0) # of rotations (3.5)
Last Updated, Apr 9, 2023

I have yet to read one valid argument for why any civilian "needs" multi round weapons.

Supposing that the government took away all weapons that could fire more than one round, just for the sake of discussion. They handed out stiff penalties, and fines for simple possession (trigger lock or not), and a few years down the road... they managed to have collected multi round weapons from all civilians. Sure some peole may hang on to them but if they were ever caught in possession, they would spend some time stamping liscence plates behind tall walls with razor wire.

So no "bad people or people with mental issues" have a multi round firing weapon.

Why would you "need" one?

@ Gene:

"Single shot weapons for hunting isn't the answer, its not even a good answer. Single shot kills of a 1000lb animal is a sign of ...well quite frankly ignorance. And I'll bet statements such as that are chosen more for trolling efforts that honest opinions."

An average moose weighs what 1200 Lbs.?

Gene how many shots would it take you to kill one? (I'm curious about this answer because it will speak volumes about you personally as a hunter)

You mentioned that a 5 - 10 round mag is more than adequate for defense and hunting.

I guess you've never heard of a single shot kill of a moose since you call the notion "ignorant". The larger the animal the larger the targets of vital organs. A brain shot or spine shot are difficult. A mooses lungs area are about the size of a car door and there's one on either side of the animal. A single shot to a lung will kill a moose. If you aim low on the lung you may hit the heart (instant kill) if you aim high on the lung you may hit the spine. If you aim for the shoulders you will disable the animal and the fragments will wreak havoc on the vital organs.

Not knowing that you can kill a moose with a single shot, makes you look "ignorant".

If you can't take a single shot and have a clean kill, don't take the shot. It's pretty simple.

The argument for multi round weapons for hunting speaks of the Rambo mentality that some hunters unfortunately have.

I have a friend that hunts with a bow (not cross bow), he gets 1 shot and never takes it unless he can have a clean kill.

@ Gene:

"Choosing not to hunt, or not to be able to dispatch an angry bear if you live in a remote area because you have to reload isn't the problem or the cure."

I wonder what the stats are about people dying from being shot with a multi round weapon vs. dying by attack from an angry bear?

The argument is is pretty weak and the comparrison equally so.

I live in an area where there's bears and occasioanlly signs warning of a cougar in the neighbourhood. I see black bears about a half dozen times a year when I'm walking my dog. I don't carry a gun, bear bangers, pepper spray, etc.

Why is it that a response to an aggressive animal always has to be lethal for some people? There are reasons why animals can become aggressive, knowing them, how to react and co-existance actually prevails.

Why was Group B eliminated? Oh yeah, too many fatalities.

Eliminating multi round weapons in civilian hands will have the same effect.

Well Morten, I've been hunting for about 45 years and have passed the police course locally as an expert marksman. So please don't worry about my ability to hit a target. Not long ago a local Seattlish resident was mauled by a bear at his residential home , many people have been damaged by wild life, maybe they don't have the Dr.Doolittle persona you have. Watched an Alaska Trooper load more than one round in a pump 12 ga shot gun the other day on TV while worrying about a bear.Another had a big bore Marlin going into the brush and they hold 4 or 5 rds depending. My neighbor , a state trooper had to shoot an injured cow the other day along side the road. Animal had been shot a couple times by the guy driving the wrecked trailer. Shooting large or small game with the appropriate sized ammo doesn't ever guarantee a one shot kill. Animals turn, wind blows, people slip, bullets hit bone and deflect or occasionally misfire. Facts of life, most hunting rifles have a 3 to 5 round capacity for a reason. People defending themselves don't always have the blessing of a perfect shot nor the option of not taking a hurried shot. I just can't believe Canada is so perfect the animals just lay down and die when they hear a gun cock.

No one cares what your friend hunts with, his choice and not relevant to the conversation or the issues at hand.

I don't think I ever said an animal can't be killed with a single shot..I did imply you were trolling again. I think I'm correct.

And coincidentally right this minute on The Best Defense they have a professional instructor showing hunters how to take multiple moving shots with a bolt action rifle. So must be more than myself and Jens who like multiple rounds. But feel free to hunt with a single shot gun. I assume you take only one bullet? Otherwise why worry about whether the gun is single shot or not? That is your self imposed standard and you certainly have a right to do so. I like my old Marlin lever action and don't mind packing a couple extra rounds even if they come back home.

GpB..really? Now that there's a stretch of the topic.

I can't count the number of new words I've invented with this new lap top keyboard...



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 12/20/2012 12:29AM by heymagic.

BTW, anyone who isn't a card carrying member and like their guns should sign up http://www.shootingusa.com/LATEST_UPDATES/NRA_news/NRA_Membership/nra_membership.html

$10 off a yearly membership.

Quote
RWD4ME
I have yet to read one valid argument for why any civilian "needs" multi round weapons.

Supposing that the government took away all weapons that could fire more than one round, just for the sake of discussion. They handed out stiff penalties, and fines for simple possession (trigger lock or not), and a few years down the road... they managed to have collected multi round weapons from all civilians. Sure some peole may hang on to them but if they were ever caught in possession, they would spend some time stamping liscence plates behind tall walls with razor wire.

So no "bad people or people with mental issues" have a multi round firing weapon.

Why would you "need" one?

@ Gene:

"Single shot weapons for hunting isn't the answer, its not even a good answer. Single shot kills of a 1000lb animal is a sign of ...well quite frankly ignorance. And I'll bet statements such as that are chosen more for trolling efforts that honest opinions."

An average moose weighs what 1200 Lbs.?

Gene how many shots would it take you to kill one? (I'm curious about this answer because it will speak volumes about you personally as a hunter)

You mentioned that a 5 - 10 round mag is more than adequate for defense and hunting.

I guess you've never heard of a single shot kill of a moose since you call the notion "ignorant". The larger the animal the larger the targets of vital organs. A brain shot or spine shot are difficult. A mooses lungs area are about the size of a car door and there's one on either side of the animal. A single shot to a lung will kill a moose. If you aim low on the lung you may hit the heart (instant kill) if you aim high on the lung you may hit the spine. If you aim for the shoulders you will disable the animal and the fragments will wreak havoc on the vital organs.

Not knowing that you can kill a moose with a single shot, makes you look "ignorant".

If you can't take a single shot and have a clean kill, don't take the shot. It's pretty simple.

The argument for multi round weapons for hunting speaks of the Rambo mentality that some hunters unfortunately have.

I have a friend that hunts with a bow (not cross bow), he gets 1 shot and never takes it unless he can have a clean kill.

@ Gene:

"Choosing not to hunt, or not to be able to dispatch an angry bear if you live in a remote area because you have to reload isn't the problem or the cure."

I wonder what the stats are about people dying from being shot with a multi round weapon vs. dying by attack from an angry bear?

The argument is is pretty weak and the comparrison equally so.

I live in an area where there's bears and occasioanlly signs warning of a cougar in the neighbourhood. I see black bears about a half dozen times a year when I'm walking my dog. I don't carry a gun, bear bangers, pepper spray, etc.

Why is it that a response to an aggressive animal always has to be lethal for some people? There are reasons why animals can become aggressive, knowing them, how to react and co-existance actually prevails.

Why was Group B eliminated? Oh yeah, too many fatalities.

Eliminating multi round weapons in civilian hands will have the same effect.

Yes, that Canadian gun registry has stopped how many crimes? Cost how many millions of Canadian dollars and how much actual crime has it stopped?

---

It is useless for the sheep to pass resolutions in favour of vegetarianism, while the wolf remains of a different opinion.
William Ralph Inge

TANSTAAFL

Quote
Vorpal_Rally

Yes, that Canadian gun registry has stopped how many crimes? Cost how many millions of Canadian dollars and how much actual crime has it stopped?

Its gone now. And as for the overall cost, you mean billion. Yes, 1000 millions were spent on that abortion. Now we don't have to hide the .22's whenever we move in fear a neighbour might see them!

I know John got all teary eyed and posted some BS about deranged dudes doing most of the killing to ex-gfs/wives/whatever, but he didn't actually provide any credible evidence to back that up.

I think that either way, gun related deaths are a red herring of sorts. I think it has nothing to do with guns, and everything to do with a culture. I also don't think that passing laws will change anything in the US. I think it's a good thing that the US does have an insane love of freedom, one of the few places left in the world that does. Of course, this has been at the cost of personal responsibility, but I digress.

Quote
HiTempguy


I know John got all teary eyed and posted some BS about deranged dudes doing most of the killing to ex-gfs/wives/whatever, but he didn't actually provide any credible evidence to back that up.
.... I think it's a good thing that the US does have an insane love of freedom, one of the few places left in the world that does. Of course, this has been at the cost of personal responsibility, but I digress.

Gee Adam, sometimes you might have to click and clack a little yourself to look up things that are a commonplace.. Then when you've done some little reading you might be able to call BS. I know its a lot of work to expect thinking how to form the inquiry.. But try it---or present your "credible evidence"..
Know any cops? Ask them what their most hated calls are cause the chance of very bad outcomes are...the 5 I've know well here, the one I knew in Sweden, the one I knew well in France all said the same thing...


And freedom in USA...most people have a lot of opinions on it but I've rarely met any Americans who have given the idea much thought except in the most superficial and simplistic way---really an interesting cultural phenomenon.. it's almost invariably "we haz freedom---nobody else does".. Yep real deep thought.


Tell me, oh great sage, what does this have to do with the sheer number of lunatics running loose that can do these kind of senseless murders so often?

Isn't that the subject?

---

John Vanlandingham
Sleezattle, WA, USA

Vive le Prole-le-ralliat

www.rallyrace.net/jvab
CALL +1 206 431-9696
Remember! Pacific Standard Time
is 3 hours behind Eastern Standard Time.

So what what was the Canadian gun registry for? All guns? All citizens?