|
|
#1
|
|||
|
|||
Quote:
|
#2
|
|||
|
|||
Assault Rifle for example. The term seems to matter to gun advocates but in my opinion its semantics. I think people are really saying they have an issue with a type of weapon, let's say AR-15 since it has a history of being used in these types of situations, and it doesn't truly matter if Assault Rifle is the definitive term. They're saying they see a pattern of abuse of a certain weapon, that is the true point. But that is sometimes lost in an endless loop of definition.
|
#3
|
|||
|
|||
Quote:
"One of the Columbine shooters used 10-round magazines, and the Virginia Tech shooter used mostly 10-round magazines. The shooter from the recent Florida school shooting, although he had an AR-15-style rifle, used 10-round magazines to commit the crime. And Maryland, where the most recent school shooting occurred, already has laws banning the purchase of “high-capacity” magazines." - http://thefederalist.com/2018/03/21/...trol-debunked/ Many other weapons have this capacity (or more) including handguns. If your real reason for wanted these types of weapons banned (or restricted) is something other than capacity, then please correct me. Hopefully with the above you can understand it's not just semantics. |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
People talk about semi-automatic rifles because that type of weapon is most commonly used to carry out large scale mass shootings. You rarely see one of these individuals choose to carry out a shooting with a handgun or shotgun or .22 caliber rifle. But when someone calls the weapon an "Assault Rifle" the conversation devolves into what is what rather than discussing the propensity for a certain type of weapon to be used in carrying out these shootings.
We outlawed automatic weapons in the 30s because they posed a danger to society and law enforcement. Why was that acceptable but a ban on semi-automatic rifles is met with such opposition? I'd love to hear a gun advocate answer that question. Last edited by packs; 03-27-2018 at 12:04 PM. |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
Quote:
So you want to ban handguns and hunting rifles? |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
I didn't say anything about handguns and hunting rifles have not been semi-automatic since their inception so I see no logical reason why you couldn't hunt with one that wasn't semi-automatic.
|
#7
|
||||
|
||||
Hunting is not about feeding anybody anymore it is a sport(hobby) done for recreation. Semi-automatic guns make hunting more fun.
|
#8
|
|||
|
|||
Quote:
The conversation likely devolves because "people" are reacting more with 'feelz' rather than facts and logic. I'm not imply you are, and I appreciate the discussion. And I'm not proposing the silly argument that handguns kill more people so mass shootings aren't 'important' (bad choice of words, but at times seems suggestive on the gun rights side). Both are a problem, but the solution isn't further restriction. |
#9
|
||||
|
||||
Quote:
and you can still possess an automatic weapon, it just costs more and requires giving more $$$ to the govt. semi-automatic rifles are not the most often used weapon in a mass shooting, handguns are you don't get to take my rights away because you want safety. anyone who would sacrifice liberty for safety deserves neither. any individual who thinks that gun laws stop violence must also think that prohibition stopped drinking
__________________
"The large print giveth and the small print taketh away."- Tom Waits |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
Quote:
If I wanted to shoot up a place, my weapon of choice would be my Glock. It has the same magazine capacity as an AR-I5, the clips are lighter and less bulky and the weapon itself is lighter and less bulky. I can fire off just as many rounds, drop the clip, reload it and continue firing just as quickly as someone with an AR-15. The AR-15 is the weapon of choice for the sick-minded individuals simply because of its cosmetics - it looks scary and it makes the sickos feel empowered. Its nothing more than a handgun with a longer barrel. |
#11
|
|||
|
|||
Quote:
That's not totally true though. In some states handguns are met with stricter restrictions than rifles. In Colorado for example, you need to have a concealed carry permit to carry a handgun but you don't need one for a long gun. You could conceal your rifle lawfully but not your glock. |
#12
|
|||
|
|||
Quote:
|
#13
|
|||
|
|||
A question for David, Taylor, and pretty much anyone else, and I ask this without any cynicism at all:
What do you want to see done to make America safer from these terrible assaults? Do you suggest any changes at all with any gun laws, or do you think the status quo is just fine? You guys know a whole lot more than I do, so I take your words seriously. Again, this is a sincere question. Your encyclopedic knowledge on guns is duly respected. The floor is yours. |
#14
|
|||
|
|||
Quote:
Part of the problem, as I see it, is that the tools are in place to try and prevent the whackos from getting the guns, but the information isn't being disseminated. Look at the church shooter in San Antonio. He received a dishonorable discharge from the military, but the military failed to report that. That should have kept him from purchasing the weapon. And look at the Florida shooter. The cops were called to his house thirty-something times. He was reported to the FBI more than once. But, once again, the information wasn't disseminated. Last edited by vintagetoppsguy; 03-27-2018 at 12:43 PM. |
#15
|
|||
|
|||
Quote:
I question all those asking for changes in gun laws to show me were this has worked. Gun laws and access to guns including semi and fully automatic weapons are more restrictive now than in the 40s-60s, yet there are more mass shootings now. The AR-15 was introduced in the mid '50s (I believe), yet has only recently become the 'weapon de jour'. The problem I have with ANY laws is they are useless if not or capriciously enforced. Last edited by tschock; 03-27-2018 at 02:46 PM. Reason: PPPCC - Pulled Possibly Politically Charged Comments |
#16
|
||||
|
||||
Quote:
and no, more gun laws will make no difference at all. They never have and they never will. Not only that, but they are morally abhorrent. Not one anti-gunner has been able to demonstrate that gun laws stop violence. Why might that be?
__________________
"The large print giveth and the small print taketh away."- Tom Waits |
#17
|
|||
|
|||
Quote:
|
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
My First Master Set (but I may not be TOO proud of it) | darkhorse9 | Modern Baseball Cards Forum (1980-Present) | 5 | 05-04-2017 07:01 AM |
Rose Bowl Proud | rainier2004 | Watercooler Talk- ALL sports talk | 5 | 01-02-2014 02:58 PM |
Wich set are you the more proud | g_vezina_c55 | Net54baseball Vintage (WWII & Older) Baseball Cards & New Member Introductions | 13 | 12-02-2013 08:12 AM |
O/T TheNet54 Seinfeld Gang Should Be Proud!!! | Archive | Net54baseball Vintage (WWII & Older) Baseball Cards & New Member Introductions | 6 | 06-01-2007 06:06 PM |
Forum members be proud | Archive | Net54baseball Vintage (WWII & Older) Baseball Cards & New Member Introductions | 12 | 02-08-2007 09:07 PM |