Keeping law-abiding citizens away from guns is not going to stop the bad guys from getting them.
First, if I had my way tacking on legislation unrelated to any bill would not be allowed.
gun violence = violence committed by people using guns - is that really too difficult for you to grasp?
XJustMeX21 said:As a gun owner I have no problem with this. There is no reason to have a 100 round magazine to go "hunting".
This is complete fallacy. The worst argument made. The truth is most gun deaths and injuries in this country do not come from the "corner" criminals. I agree that for those type of criminals, laws will have no effect. But, most of the killings are committed by people who are quote unquote law abiding citizens. The latest mass shootings have been committed by people who had not even gotten a traffic ticket. So while the local drug dealer I am concerned about, its my law-abiding citizen who lives next door that more than likely be the person to shoot me.
This is complete fallacy. The worst argument made. The truth is most gun deaths and injuries in this country do not come from the "corner" criminals. I agree that for those type of criminals, laws will have no effect. But, most of the killings are committed by people who are quote unquote law abiding citizens. The latest mass shootings have been committed by people who had not even gotten a traffic ticket. So while the local drug dealer I am concerned about, its my law-abiding citizen who lives next door that more than likely be the person to shoot me.
This is complete fallacy. The worst argument made. The truth is most gun deaths and injuries in this country do not come from the "corner" criminals. I agree that for those type of criminals, laws will have no effect. But, most of the killings are committed by people who are quote unquote law abiding citizens. The latest mass shootings have been committed by people who had not even gotten a traffic ticket. So while the local drug dealer I am concerned about, its my law-abiding citizen who lives next door that more than likely be the person to shoot me.
in all seriousness - what would be the real harm in banning sales of 100 round magazines?
Politically they get to say they did something.
Real world implication for gun owners? I'm not seeing it, and don't give me any of the slippery slope BS.
This is complete fallacy. The worst argument made. The truth is most gun deaths and injuries in this country do not come from the "corner" criminals. I agree that for those type of criminals, laws will have no effect. But, most of the killings are committed by people who are quote unquote law abiding citizens. The latest mass shootings have been committed by people who had not even gotten a traffic ticket. So while the local drug dealer I am concerned about, its my law-abiding citizen who lives next door that more than likely be the person to shoot me.
As a gun owner I have no problem with this. There is no reason to have a 100 round magazine to go "hunting".
I'm curious... do you have facts to back this up? I'm genuinely interested in knowing the truth here.
So while the local drug dealer I am concerned about, its my law-abiding citizen who lives next door that more than likely be the person to shoot me.
Projection
About a year ago I received an e-mail from a member of a local Jewish organization. The author, who chose to remain anonymous, insisted that people have no right to carry firearms because he didnt want to be murdered if one of his neighbors had a "bad day". (I dont know that this person is a "he", but Im assuming so for the sake of simplicity.) I responded by asking him why he thought his neighbors wanted to murder him, and, of course, got no response. The truth is that hes statistically more likely to be murdered by a neighbor who doesnt legally carry a firearm(1) and more likely to be shot accidentally by a law enforcement officer.(2)
How does my correspondent "know" that his neighbors would murder him if they had guns? He doesnt. What he was really saying was that if he had a gun, he might murder his neighbors if he had a bad day, or if they took his parking space, or played their stereos too loud.
This is an example of what mental health professionals call projection unconsciously projecting ones own unacceptable feelings onto other people, so that one doesnt have to own them.(3) In some cases, the intolerable feelings are projected not onto a person, but onto an inanimate object, such as a gun,(4) so that the projector believes the gun itself will murder him.
Projection is a defense mechanism. Defense mechanisms are unconscious psychological mechanisms that protect us from feelings that we cannot consciously accept.(5) They operate without our awareness, so that we dont have to deal consciously with "forbidden" feelings and impulses. Thus, if you asked my email correspondent if he really wanted to murder his neighbors, he would vehemently deny it, and insist that other people want to kill him.
Projection is a particularly insidious defense mechanism, because it not only prevents a person from dealing with his own feelings, it also creates a world where he perceives everyone else as directing his own hostile feelings back at him.(6)
(This discussion of psychological mechanisms applies to the average person who is uninformed, or misinformed, about firearms and selfdefense. It does not apply to the antigun ideologue. Fanatics like Charles Schumer know the facts about firearms, and advocate victim disarmament consciously and willfully in order to gain political power. This psychological analysis does not apply to them.)
Hmmm, seems a few anti-gunners were making the comment that gun people are always worried about new gun laws? Hmmmm, I wonder why?
" it will do nothing but inconvenience law-abiding shooters." Cry me a river.
Agree with you that it's a knee-jerk reaction - but at least it's a reaction.
How many people have to die every day at the hands of a gun before we at least try to do something?
Note that I'm not at all calling for a repeal of the 2nd amendment - but the NRA reaction of "no problem, nothing to see here"....how long are you ok with that answer?
I have a 100 round MAGAZINE for my AR-15. I can't say I ever spent the time filling the damn thing up. Too tedius.
Do I hunt with it? Nope! I bought it to shoot people, honestly. If there was ever a day I needed to. Take a look at Syria and other places in revolt. I'd rather be the guy with a gun with a 100 round MAGAZINE , and 2000 rounds of ammo back home, and I'm prepared... And it will stay that way until this place becomes Syria.
You think a senator putting an amendment up for a vote that almost certainly won't go anywhere is a reason to be always worried about new gun laws? If a legislator putting up a amendment is cause for such alarm you have a pretty huge list of things you should be freaking out about.
as expected - more of 'access to guns isn't the problem'
nothing to see here, keep heads buried in the sand...
MAGAZINE MAGAZINE MAGAZINE!!!!!!!!
calling it a "clip" makes you look stupid.
I have a 100 round clip for my AR-15. I can't say I ever spent the time filling the damn thing up. Too tedius.
Do I hunt with it? Nope! I bought it to shoot people, honestly. If there was ever a day I needed to. Take a look at Syria and other places in revolt. I'd rather be the guy with a gun with a 100 round clip, and 2000 rounds of ammo back home, and I'm prepared... And it will stay that way until this place becomes Syria.