Here Is the Place, if any on this forum, for Gun Discussion

[steve B]

Well, lets give this a try for packs.

I'm not a gun owner.
I have ADD and even before being diagnosed I knew I had a tendency towards being a bit disorganized. That to my mind is something that doesn't combine well with any sort of firearms.

But I do occasionally shoot, since friends have some.

It's challenging and yes, it's fun. I've tried pistol, maybe 4-5 different? small and medium rifles and skeet shooting. All different , all fun and challenging. I'm an ok shot, not what I'd call "good" but I can get all the shots on the target, and hit about half the birds. I figure that's pretty good for someone who might get to a range once every couple years or maybe a bit less often.
(Feel free to laugh gun guys )


I think the entire definition of "assault rifle" is a silly fiction made up by politicians as a typical knee jerk reaction to something they couldn't legislate.
It's basically banning things based on how they look. As someone else pointed out there are a number of non-"Assault rifles" that are essentially identical in function, and some that are far more powerful. One of the most popular larger rifles for hunting and target shooting was actually a military weapon when it was new. It's not banned. With the right ammunition there's not a lot of stuff that would make good cover.

If I ever do own a firearm, one of the things that would be part of my choice would be that many of them are fantastic bits of very well made machinery. Taking one apart and seeing how stuff was done mechanically is really amazing. (Yes, I've done that. I'm guessing the group of no gun owners who have taken one apart is pretty small. )

Now, you might wonder why the bad stuff always seems to be done with the same piece of hardware. The answer is to me a simple one. It has nothing to do with whether it was the best choice. It's about image. To use the car analogy - there are stereotypes about different cars and their drivers. Like some cars are more often bought by people who are more prone to speeding or acting superior for some reason. Show a movie scene where the guy in a sleeveless shirt says "Hey, don't lean on the Camaro!" And everyone just smiles and laughs because we've all seen that guy. Not all Camaro owners are, but enough that it's a common image. Same as the BMW driver who thinks he's better than everyone because his car is nice or the Prius driver who looks down on the people wrecking the planet with normal cars. In the same way, something like an AR-15 is more attractive to the nuts than many other bits of hardware. Only a small number of owners are nuts, many are very serious responsible people. But the nuts get the attention.

Some stuff does need to change, firstly a return to reasonableness on both sides. (Some controls do work, full auto has been tightly regulated since I think 1938 and last time I checked there had been exactly 0 crimes committed with a legally owned machine gun) Those rules are probably too strict to be practical for anything else.

Personally I feel that if a person can show they're responsible, safe and respect other people enough in general to not shoot them without a very good reason (Like "he was raving and running at me with a big knife") There shouldn't be any restriction.

If someone demonstrates a lack of those traits then they should get nothing.

If they are going through something that might make them temporarily irresponsible or untrustworthy maybe there should be a system that lets them store the stuff away until they get their stuff back together. currently the only options are " nearly everything is ok" or " you cant have that stuff anymore so we're taking it"

Yes, the middle ground is full of gray area and pitfalls and trying to get that right is much harder than a simple yes/no set of rules. But it would be worth doing.
The current societal "me first and sometimes only" attitude extends to so much and is so hard to change I don't think we'll make much progress if any.

Steve B

[egri]

As an aside, does the term "gun control" remind anyone else of the 'this is my rifle and this is my gun' scene from Full Metal Jacket? (won't post it here in case it violates forum rules; just do a YouTube search for it and you'll see what I mean) That's always the first thing that comes to my mind when I hear someone talk about the need for "gun" control.

[2dueces]

Here is my take on the CHL's. I own and carry a hand gun 90% of the time. I have a Texas CHL and it is honored in 37 states. I understand that certain venues do not allow CHL's. But I will state this. If one person had a CHL in Colorado in the theater, less lives would have been lost. If one person had a CHL in the church, less lives would have been lost. If one of our Service men would have had a gun in the recruiting office..well you get the picture. These scumbags pick out easy targets. Not so easy when others have guns, are trained with them and not afraid to use them. Concealed Handgun is just that "concealed". I'd rather have one when I need it and suffer the fine if I use it than watch as a criminal who could care less about the law uses it against unarmed people.

[freakhappy]

Originally Posted by 2dueces

Here is my take on the CHL's. I own and carry a hand gun 90% of the time. I have a Texas CHL and it is honored in 37 states. I understand that certain venues do not allow CHL's. But I will state this. If one person had a CHL in Colorado in the theater, less lives would have been lost. If one person had a CHL in the church, less lives would have been lost. If one of our Service men would have had a gun in the recruiting office..well you get the picture. These scumbags pick out easy targets. Not so easy when others have guns, are trained with them and not afraid to use them. Concealed Handgun is just that "concealed". I'd rather have one when I need it and suffer the fine if I use it than watch as a criminal who could care less about the law uses it against unarmed people.

It makes sense what you are saying...and I agree with it. But let me ask you this: how many accidental injuries/deaths have occurred since people have been allowed to carry firearms? I don't know statistics, but I'm willing to bet it's a decent amount...more to offset the good reasons to carry one? Who knows, but I also feel like I hear of more people shooting people over non issues too. In theory, carrying one for protection sounds fabulous, just not sure it works out that way half of the time.

I'm not totally against guns, I just don't see where guns are a positive outside of the military. Sure, they make for a great sport and practice, but outside of that, they just seem dangerous for the most part. We have to admit, even though most of the time it's the people that are the issue, they always get into the wrong hands and people always die when they shouldn't have. In reality, this will never end and people will always have guns, but that doesn't mean I have to say guns are cool and the Constitution gives me enough backing to say they are ok (we have evolved)...yes, guns are a necessary evil in some areas, but are too risky for any random joe to be walking around with one. Just my opinion...

One more thing...the cars/guns comparison doesn't carry any weight. Anyone could pick up a butter knife and go on a killing spree...anyone could ram their car into another car. A car's purpose isn't to kill, but to travel. A gun's purpose is to destroy something...anything if one desires

[2dueces]

Originally Posted by freakhappy

It makes sense what you are saying...and I agree with it. But let me ask you this: how many accidental injuries/deaths have occurred since people have been allowed to carry firearms? I don't know statistics, but I'm willing to bet it's a decent amount...more to offset the good reasons to carry one? Who knows, but I also feel like I hear of more people shooting people over non issues too. In theory, carrying one for protection sounds fabulous, just not sure it works out that way half of the time.

I'm not totally against guns, I just don't see where guns are a positive outside of the military. Sure, they make for a great sport and practice, but outside of that, they just seem dangerous for the most part. We have to admit, even though most of the time it's the people that are the issue, they always get into the wrong hands and people always die when they shouldn't have. In reality, this will never end and people will always have guns, but that doesn't mean I have to say guns are cool and the Constitution gives me enough backing to say they are ok (we have evolved)...yes, guns are a necessary evil in some areas, but are too risky for any random joe to be walking around with one. Just my opinion...

One more thing...the cars/guns comparison doesn't carry any weight. Anyone could pick up a butter knife and go on a killing spree...anyone could ram their car into another car. A car's purpose isn't to kill, but to travel. A gun's purpose is to destroy something...anything if one desires

In the hands of an untrained person guns are as dangerous as an unskilled driver. I'm 59, have carried for 28 years and have never once pulled it or shot it besides at the range. My girls were all trained on the dangers of guns. They knew and respected the power both inside my house and at their friends house. Trained to know that they are not toys and are not to be fooled with. But I'd rather have one and not need it than not have one and need it. And as a side, I am not a gun enthusaist.

[freakhappy]

Originally Posted by 2dueces

In the hands of an untrained person guns are as dangerous as an unskilled driver. I'm 59, have carried for 28 years and have never once pulled it or shot it besides at the range. My girls were all trained on the dangers of guns. They knew and respected the power both inside my house and at their friends house. Trained to know that they are not toys and are not to be fooled with. But I'd rather have one and not need it than not have one and need it. And as a side, I am not a gun enthusaist.

It definitely makes sense! One big reason we own guns is to defend ourselves from people that have ill intent...protect from people with guns. In the end, owning a gun is a huge responsibility and now that any ol joe can carry one, we are asking for more issues IMO.

[packs]

I know what you're insinuating: that if someone had a gun they would have shot him. But that is assuming a lot out of a person who has never been in that situation. And besides, if you arm people like security guards at high schools, you're going to be at the mercy of that person's sanity.

[chaddurbin]

Originally Posted by 2dueces

But I will state this. If one person had a CHL in Colorado in the theater, less lives would have been lost. If one person had a CHL in the church, less lives would have been lost. If one of our Service men would have had a gun in the recruiting office..well you get the picture. These scumbags pick out easy targets. Not so easy when others have guns, are trained with them and not afraid to use them. Concealed Handgun is just that "concealed". I'd rather have one when I need it and suffer the fine if I use it than watch as a criminal who could care less about the law uses it against unarmed people.

this is wrong, guns don't deter crimes and shootings with all the studies having been done. all i know is there's a weekly mass shooting across the country, and i read about how some dude just killed a waitress because he couldn't smoke inside the waffle house??? now another mass shooting in san berdune which hits a little too close to home.

this country is effed with no cure in sight. i don't feel safe going to the mall, i don't feel safe going to the theater, i don't feel safe sending my kids to school, and i certainly don't feel safe at work as some mentally disturbed individual can just go off on the rest of us because HR looked at them wrong. i'm actively looking for a transfer to my home country or might even consider canada at this point...y'all have fun with the assault rifles and open carries.

p.s.oh yea and i'm not white so i gotta watch my back for the po-po also....

[packs]

Guns used in this attack were AR-15s, the same AR-15s that would have been banned and illegal to sell under the previously held Federal Assault Weapons Ban.

[vintagetoppsguy]

Originally Posted by packs

Guns used in this attack were AR-15s, the same AR-15s that would have been banned and illegal to sell under the previously held Federal Assault Weapons Ban.

So an assault weapon ban would would eliminate these type shootings? Is that what you're saying? If that's not what you're saying, please explain your comment.

Assault weapons are banned in France too. That didn't stop the terrorists. 129 people dead.

They're banned in Norway as well. That didn't stop Breivik. 69 people dead.

[packs]

I guess we should sell them to whoever wants them and just wait around to see what they do with them. That's a better idea than taking them off the market and allowing people to possess other weapons not on the ban.

Also your mention of France and Norway is actually counter intuitive to your point, seeing as France and Norway do not have mass shootings in their countries that out number the days of the year like we do. So I would say not selling them in France and Norway does indeed impact the number of mass shootings in the country in which assault weapons are used.

Lastly, if your argument is that making something illegal doesn't mean you can't get it, that's obvious to everyone. But I don't see why you don't think there's a difference between something being legal to buy and illegal to buy.

[Joshchisox08]

Originally Posted by vintagetoppsguy

So an assault weapon ban would would eliminate these type shootings? Is that what you're saying? If that's not what you're saying, please explain your comment.

Assault weapons are banned in France too. That didn't stop the terrorists. 129 people dead.

They're banned in Norway as well. That didn't stop Breivik. 69 people dead.

Not sure why more people don't think like this. Getting rid of weapons is not going to stop a criminal.

If you just lock the door to your house surely there will be NObody breaking in will there? Ummm yeah a "door lock" will stop a thief like "gun control" will stop a criminal.

I also don't know about you guys but all this gun-control crap is starting to seem more and more like big-brother.