Gun ownership poll

G1911 · #1 07-19-2022, 08:56 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Carter08

Not sure where Idaho comes into this mix but the point - lost on some apparently - is that urban gang violence primarily involving handguns doesn�t affect 99 percent of the population and seems a poor justification for everyone to be able to buy AR-15s. Let the point sink in, miss it, and the. Write something over the top crazy, mean, and trolly. I will wait.

Yes, you said Iowa. I was wrong. I should have said "why is the life of someone in Chicago less important than one in Iowa?"

Of course it doesn't affect 99%. School shootings don't affect 99.999%, but you wanted to de facto ban all firearms under your 10,000x 'tax' plan to address that. I don't get how the fact that a person in Chicago (a progressive city with heavy gun laws) is more likely to be shot and killed than in rural Iowa invalidates the point. Since the topic is broad federal laws to apply to all without regard for locality (nobody here has proposed repealing the 2nd and then applying the 10th), how does it matter?

If you know that the vast majority of firearms crimes, gang and otherwise, are committed with handguns, why the constant obsession with AR-15's that, relative to their commonality, is among the least used of firearms in crime? It is the only gun you single out, and have many, many times.

Carter08 · #2 07-19-2022, 09:06 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by G1911

Yes, you said Iowa. I was wrong. I should have said "why is the life of someone in Chicago less important than one in Iowa?"

Of course it doesn't affect 99%. School shootings don't affect 99.999%, but you wanted to de facto ban all firearms under your 10,000x 'tax' plan to address that. I don't get how the fact that a person in Chicago (a progressive city with heavy gun laws) is more likely to be shot and killed than in rural Iowa invalidates the point. Since the topic is broad federal laws to apply to all without regard for locality (nobody here has proposed repealing the 2nd and then applying the 10th), how does it matter?

If you know that the vast majority of firearms crimes, gang and otherwise, are committed with handguns, why the constant obsession with AR-15's that, relative to their commonality, is among the least used of firearms in crime? It is the only gun you single out, and have many, many times.

I want some guns to be a little harder to get. It�s not just school mass shootings. The Vegas shooter. Whatever he had would seem like there doesn�t need to be such easy access to such things. There are far more situations where they seem to do bad things versus good things. And it�s not my fault that yet again I think one of his weapons of choice was an AR-15.

If you said to me, we need these weapons to prevent a tyrannical leader from taking over the country/army in violation of democratic processes, I would not think that was crazy. The problem is that battle has already been lost. You are already restricted from owning the weapons needed to fight an actual army. AR-15s are not going to do well against a fighter jet. What we are fighting about is window dressing to that issue. Sadly it�s window dressing that result in a mass shooting in this country far too often with little perceived benefit.

G1911 · #3 07-19-2022, 09:17 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Carter08

I want some guns to be a little harder to get. It�s not just school mass shootings. The Vegas shooter. Whatever he had would seem like there doesn�t need to be such easy access to such things. There are far more situations where they seem to do bad things versus good things. And it�s not my fault that yet again I think one of his weapons of choice was an AR-15.

Didn't you just say single incidents weren't valid to prove a greater point? That was the first logical thing you'd said all thread, besides your first post where you had a completely different view.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Carter08

If you said to me, we need these weapons to prevent a tyrannical leader from taking over the country/army in violation of democratic processes, I would not think that was crazy. The problem is that battle has already been lost. You are already restricted from owning the weapons needed to fight an actual army. AR-15s are not going to do well against a fighter jet. What we are fighting about is window dressing to that issue. Sadly it�s window dressing that result in a mass shooting in this country far too often with little perceived benefit.

I don't believe anyone has made a case they want a gun to overthrow the state. That the government can murder us all with aircraft does not seem relevant to any point anyone has actually made. Sure, my AR-15 would be useless if the government decided to carpet bomb my state.

Carter08 · #4 07-19-2022, 09:24 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by G1911

Didn't you just say single incidents weren't valid to prove a greater point? That was the first logical thing you'd said all thread, besides your first post where you had a completely different view.

I don't believe anyone has made a case they want a gun to overthrow the state. That the government can murder us all with aircraft does not seem relevant to any point anyone has actually made. Sure, my AR-15 would be useless if the government decided to carpet bomb my state.

Here�s where we can engage. I feel like the right to have weapons is meant to protect you and the citizens of whatever state you are in from a rogue federal government/federal leader more than it is to protect you from the fellow citizens of your own state. No?

G1911 · #5 07-19-2022, 09:31 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Carter08

Here�s where we can engage. I feel like the right to have weapons is meant to protect you and the citizens of whatever state you are in from a rogue federal government/federal leader more than it is to protect you from the fellow citizens of your own state. No?

It was the largest concern when the 2nd was written, and a driving one as the text makes clear. It was not the only one; the founders certainly believed very much in a natural born right to defend one's family and hearth, and to hunt.

Nobody here is threatening to use them against a rogue state, or saying they will/would. Few of the pro-gun comments have stated what specifically they own or why, I think bnorth did; none imply this. Civilian's are not using their 5.56's against aircraft, they are using them mostly for sport and home defense (to which the AR is particularly well suited), some for hunting.

Carter08 · #6 07-19-2022, 09:33 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by G1911

It was the largest concern when the 2nd was written, and a driving one as the text makes clear. It was not the only one; the founders certainly believed very much in a natural born right to defend one's family and hearth, and to hunt.

Nobody here is threatening to use them against a rogue state, or saying they will/would. Few of the pro-gun comments have stated what specifically they own or why, I think bnorth did; none imply this. Civilian's are not using their 5.56's against aircraft, they are using them mostly for sport and home defense (to which the AR is particularly well suited), some for hunting.

Is it really needed for home defense I think is they question many of us are asking. Because it seems to be used an awful many times for mass shootings.

G1911 · #7 07-19-2022, 09:43 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Carter08

Is it really needed for home defense I think is they question many of us are asking. Because it seems to be used an awful many times for mass shootings.

A civilian AR-15 is the best tech of the 1960's, and then neutered down to comply with bans. Rifles are rarely used in crime, but the majority of rifles these days are AR variants. It's like the Honda Civic of rifles, it's not particularly great but it is ubiquitous, and once something is the standard it is difficult to unseat it.

No single firearm is necessary for home defense, there are many other firearms in the same caliber with the same capacity. Rifles of this type are well-suited to home defense, because of their lack of firepower. The ballistics of 5.56 minimize danger to neighbors, the energy is dumped faster than most other rounds. The light recoil, because of the lack of power, makes it easier to manage than other cartridges for people who do not put in thousands and thousands of rounds of practice. The AR is usually selected over other 5.56 options because parts are everywhere and made by everybody. It's been the civilian standard for over 30 years. It has numerous downsides as well as the upsides, but its downsides aren't things particularly important in a home defense situation.

My home defense rifle is an AR for these reasons; there are better platforms overall or for other purposes.

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
WTB Comiskey (ownership years card) for evolving HOF set.	Misunderestimated	Pre-WWII cards (E, D, M, etc..) B/S/T	1	01-02-2020 08:50 PM
One more way to ruin the hobby - fractional ownership	Throttlesteer	Net54baseball Vintage (WWII & Older) Baseball Cards & New Member Introductions	49	08-14-2019 02:19 PM
Help determining ownership status of several high profile items	Sean1125	Net54baseball Vintage (WWII & Older) Baseball Cards & New Member Introductions	5	08-29-2015 10:42 AM
Ownership of old photographs	theantiquetiger	Net54baseball Sports (Primarily) Vintage Memorabilia Forum incl. Game Used	5	08-17-2011 02:43 PM
Scan Ownership	Archive	Net54baseball Vintage (WWII & Older) Baseball Cards & New Member Introductions	3	12-14-2005 01:10 PM