WTF is it with all the gun threads lately?

[Red Squirrel]

Most of the people here are American, and Americans are gun nuts. Not that there's anything wrong with that, it's just fact.

 

[DCal430]

You know what is sickening that there are some ATOTS who own weapons of mass murder like that used in Colorado, 30+ round killing rifles. Weapons who sole purpose to murder and maim as many people as possible.

 

[mikeymikec]

Bet you a lot of these 800k people wished they have a gun before they were killed.

Ok, so so far people on this thread have compared the US to Rwanda and the Middle East. Where will you take us next? Somebody fetch the popcorn.

Before you launch into your next comparison, please explain the basis for your comparison, because in your attempt to say "see, guns are good!", you just compared AMERICA to RWANDA.

I have .22LR pistol I enjoy target shooting with and would never use for self-defense, but why should I need to store it at the range and pay safekeeping fees? Would you insist someone who owns a motorcycle be forced to store it at the mechanics shop when not in use, lest they run over someone with it while it was parked in their own home? Or that I store my kitchen knives at the store lest I stab someone with them while not cooking dinner?

A good reason to keep a motorbike at home is because it's a mode of transport. Having to travel in order to use a mode of transport reduces its effectiveness, and also it is designed as a mode of transport, as opposed to a clumsy and inefficient tool for killing people.

A good reason for keeping a kitchen knife in the kitchen is because that's where dinner is prepared, and it would severely hamper the making of dinner if one had to travel to a secure facility to do all their cutting and chopping. It has a much higher offensive potential than a motorbike for killing people, but nowhere near a firearm.

So you want to keep your pistol at home where it has no purpose because it would be cheaper for you and your hobby? I'm failing to see the good reason.

Look at the lunacy of the situation in the US. You've got people comparing it to the Middle East and Rwanda, and confusing having a CC licence with heroism. Is it really a good idea to allow these people access to firearms? I personally think of it this way - think of the biggest idiot you know, the person whose opinions and reality don't often see eye-to-eye, then think "do I really want this person to own a firearm?".

It's sad and sometimes wrong to legislate based on the intelligence of the lowest common denominator, but on the topic of ownership of deadly weapons, I think it's absolutely right. The legislation has problems if it allows some loon to purchase enough fire-power to cause a bloodbath. Of course there are other ways of achieving similar results (and since 911 there are allegedly some crazy rules in the UK regarding the sale of fertiliser in bulk, which basically involves trusting the central bureaucracy to know best), but none so direct and simple as picking up a gun and some rounds.

The real problem with guns is...they're just so damn fun to shoot. :awe:

Probably the best counter-logic in this thread so far.

 

[Phoenix86]

Lots of dead paper targets out there.

SOMEONE think of the trees!

 

[SSSnail]

To all the anti-gun-nuts, allow me to paint an analogy and hopefully you can understand the reasons behind guns. Let's forget about the Constitutional rights for a minute.

Imagine a really big, powerful cocky bully walking around school campus amongst the weaklings. He wouldn't even think twice about kicking your ass, and take your lunch money. Why? Because he knows he has the power, and ultimately, he decides what he wants to do.

Now, imagine that same big, powerful cocky bully walking around school campus amongst equally big, powerful cocky bullies. He'd certainly think twice about doing something stupid, because he'd get popped.

You see? When only criminals have guns, they have the power to decide who lives and die. In your world filled with unicorns, teddy bears and snorgles, I would agree that no guns are needed. Unfortunately, we don't live in such world so guns are the power equalizer. If a criminal knows that everyone, and anyone, at any moment, can retaliate, they'd certainly think twice about committing crimes.

Welcome to reality, and please keep your hands and feet inside the capsule while traveling through it.

The problems with libruls is that they think with their heart, unfortunately, the heart is not a thinking organ. Feel free to quote me on it.

 

[OverVolt]

I think the anti-gun crowed stems from a lack of confidence. From the other thread, someone had said

And your a moron for thinking a hand gun had much of a chance against a person wearing complete body armor, so your gonna pop off some rounds from a 9mm aiming at a muzzle flash, inside a smoke filled packed theater, brilliant Einstein, the one round that might find him would be easily repelled by the armor and the other 9 would spray into the crowd.

Or...

In the hectic, chaotic, dark, smoke and irritant filled room with adrenaline pumping they could miss the gunman and shoot an innocent bystander trying to get away.

Its like... what if the smoke whisped in front of your face, what if your finger was buttery with popcorn, what if your ammo was corroded from the high humidity of the theatre and jammed, what if your gun gets caught on your shirt and you shoot yourself in the knee, what if its been more than 8 hours since you last ate. You get the idea.

They struggle with making decisions apparently. If you can't take a clean shot, you don't take the shot. No one thinks they are some kind of superhero. They just fear someone else with a gun while they are helpless but thats WHY people get CCW's, so they are not helpless if their life is threatened. The only thing really in your control in that situation is to duck and wait for help without a CCW. If this guy was looking right at you getting ready to sight you and you have a CCW you can at least try to defend yourself. And I find it ironic they were linking George Constanza because I already knew it stemmed from a lack of confidence and it made me chuckle.

Now me personally I would have just ran if I could. There wouldn't have likely been a clean shot, but if there were say 5 CCW carriers in there, at least one of them would have had the opportunity. Of course if the theatre wasn't a "gun free zone" in say Texas, he probably wouldn't have even tried what he did. These tradgedies suck since no one in a crowd just watching a movie deserves to be killed but the messed up mentality of people like him is to blame not AR-15's (much good it did him, apparently it jammed, but continue on your crusades of blaming the wrong thing).

That also explains the paradox of these shooting events, one guy here was just motivated to get a CCW and others are calling for less guns. It depends if you have confidence in yourself which these days is a rarity. So probably some type gun control push from this, but it is definately misdirected at the wrong problem. There is a trend with these mass shootings, they target places where people are helpless. The solution is not to make law abiding people even more helpless.

 

[shortylickens]

To all the anti-gun-nuts, allow me to paint an analogy and hopefully you can understand the reasons behind guns. Let's forget about the Constitutional rights for a minute.

Imagine a really big, powerful cocky bully walking around school campus amongst the weaklings. He wouldn't even think twice about kicking your ass, and take your lunch money. Why? Because he knows he has the power, and ultimately, he decides what he wants to do.

Now, imagine that same big, powerful cocky bully walking around school campus amongst equally big, powerful cocky bullies. He'd certainly think twice about doing something stupid, because he'd get popped.

You see? When only criminals have guns, they have the power to decide who lives and die. In your world filled with unicorns, teddy bears and snorgles, I would agree that no guns are needed. Unfortunately, we don't live in such world so guns are the power equalizer. If a criminal knows that everyone, and anyone, at any moment, can retaliate, they'd certainly think twice about committing crimes.

Welcome to reality, and please keep your hands and feet inside the capsule while traveling through it.

The problems with libruls is that they think with their heart, unfortunately, the heart is not a thinking organ. Feel free to quote me on it.

That only applies to level headed individuals. Psychos with no thought of their own mortality arent as restricted.

 

[mikeymikec]

To all the anti-gun-nuts, allow me to paint an analogy ....

Ok, now be prepared for a shocking revelation, but there are other developed countries around the world, and *shock horror*, the general populace in those developed countries are not packing, nor are they allowed to without an extremely good reason (and even then I don't know whether they would be allowed to stroll into town with the firearm).

Personal experience, living in the UK - apart from once on a farm in Ireland, a couple of times in the most busy train stations in London (police carrying MP5s in case of terrorist action IIRC), I've never seen a gun first-hand outside of air cadets. Of course there'll be people who have illegally acquired firearms, but a person of the general populace is less likely to get shot by them than they are of winning the jackpot on the national lottery twice in their life. The police here don't typically carry firearms, there's just no need.

If the general populace are allowed to own and carry firearms, then it's a case of escalation and more people are going to be inclined to own them. I'd like to know why you think this is a better scenario than not needing them.

If a criminal knows that everyone, and anyone, at any moment, can retaliate, they'd certainly think twice about committing crimes.

Wait, am I thinking of the correct United States of America, where the crime rates are very low because anyone at any moment can retaliate so would-be criminals think twice?

Of course if the theatre wasn't a "gun free zone" in say Texas, he probably wouldn't have even tried what he did.

Just out of curiosity, has anyone heard of a situation where a would-be serial gunman was shot by a member of the public thereby stopping the imminent wave of carnage? I suppose it must have happened, and of course I don't live in the US but I regard myself to be fairly well-tuned into international current events.

 

[rh71]

people in places with nothing better to do - blow shit up

 

[clamum]

Firearms are like cars, computers, skydiving or anything else like that...

They are mechanical, they are technical, in most cases they are aesethically pleasing. They are fun to shoot, fun to reload for, fun to pick out the 'right one just for you.' They also represent if not an investment of money, per se, they are certainly a valuable commodity. You can build one up from parts, or you can mod an existing one. It takes a certain amount of skill to use one properly.

You can also carry one to defend your life and property... can't do that with much else.

Once you get past the nonsensical 'Guns are evil' thing... there is a lot more to owning a firearm than meets the eye.

Sense. You're making it.

LOL, this x 10000000.

 

[clamum]

Most of the people here are American, and Americans are gun nuts. Not that there's anything wrong with that, it's just fact.

Not really. I can think of only two people I know that I guess you'd call "gun nuts" (besides me, lulz): my brother and a close friend.

As is evident by this thread and the one about the Aurora, CO tragedy, there's plenty of Americans who hate guns and are afraid of them.

 

[pontifex]

I think you need to think long and hard about it.

Would you be willing to take another person's life? Are you willing to have to deal with the court cases, cost and grief that would come with it?

The massacre in Colorado was horrible to say the least. But chances are guns were not allowed in the theater. Here in MI, you can't carry into any venue that seats more than 2500 people. Movie theaters always fall into that category around here. So even if I was in that theater, I would have had to run to my car, get my gun, make it past the screaming people and risk getting shot by a cop thinking I was the one shooting at innocents.

CCW's are not for heroes.

if they were trying to take my life or a family member's life? FUCK YEAH!

no ifs, ands, or buts about it. My life is worth way more than some lowly scumbag who is out there to to hurt/kill people. you'd have to be a retard to even think twice about it.

that said, i hope i never have to use a gun in self defense.

 

[pontifex]

You know what is sickening that there are some ATOTS who own weapons of mass murder like that used in Colorado, 30+ round killing rifles. Weapons who sole purpose to murder and maim as many people as possible.

interesting. i have an ar-15 ith 30 round mags
I have several pistols with 15+ round mags

I've never shot another person. i've never even once thought of going on a "mass murder" spree.

hmm...maybe my guns are defective? They aren't controlling my mind, telling me to kill people!

 

[pontifex]

Ok, now be prepared for a shocking revelation, but there are other developed countries around the world, and *shock horror*, the general populace in those developed countries are not packing, nor are they allowed to without an extremely good reason (and even then I don't know whether they would be allowed to stroll into town with the firearm).

Personal experience, living in the UK - apart from once on a farm in Ireland, a couple of times in the most busy train stations in London (police carrying MP5s in case of terrorist action IIRC), I've never seen a gun first-hand outside of air cadets. Of course there'll be people who have illegally acquired firearms, but a person of the general populace is less likely to get shot by them than they are of winning the jackpot on the national lottery twice in their life. The police here don't typically carry firearms, there's just no need.

If the general populace are allowed to own and carry firearms, then it's a case of escalation and more people are going to be inclined to own them. I'd like to know why you think this is a better scenario than not needing them.



Wait, am I thinking of the correct United States of America, where the crime rates are very low because anyone at any moment can retaliate so would-be criminals think twice?



Just out of curiosity, has anyone heard of a situation where a would-be serial gunman was shot by a member of the public thereby stopping the imminent wave of carnage? I suppose it must have happened, and of course I don't live in the US but I regard myself to be fairly well-tuned into international current events.

Wasn't there an incident where an armed guy came into a church and one of the church-goers had a concealed handgun and took the guy out?

I get an NRA magazine every month and it has a section of at least 10 incidents where people defended themselves with firearms. Interestingly enough, a lot of the defenders are elderly people who wouldn't be able to defend themselves otherwise.

why are you so fucking scared of guns? A gun can do nothing without a person on the other end. The people are the ones you should be afraid of, not the tool.

 

[mikeymikec]

why are you so fucking scared of guns? A gun can do nothing without a person on the other end. The people are the ones you should be afraid of, not the tool.

I'm not afraid of guns at all, I'm afraid of giving them to general populace in the name of 'safety'.

I'm curious as to how you came to the conclusion that I was afraid of guns.

Do you have a source for such a news article that isn't the "we love guns" club?

 

[pontifex]

I'm not afraid of guns at all, I'm afraid of giving them to general populace in the name of 'safety'.

Do you have a source for such a news article that isn't the "we love guns" club?

yes you are afraid of guns.

oh, because they make it all up?

 

[mikeymikec]

yes you are afraid of guns.

Hmm:

I enjoyed shooting when I was in the air cadets. When I have more money for hobbies I might sign up to membership at the local firing range, purely for my own enjoyment. I'm not sure why I would need one at home.

oh, because they make it all up?

Pick an unrelated topic that courts a bit of controversy. If you are looking for information on said topic with as little bias as possible, do you ask an organisation which has a strong opinion on it for that information?

 

[pontifex]

Hmm:





Pick an unrelated topic that courts a bit of controversy. If you are looking for information on said topic with as little bias as possible, do you ask an organisation which has a strong opinion on it for that information?

when they list their sources and they check out, yes.

i had several links posted and somehow closed the window or lost the window. I'm not going back through and finding them again.

it's easy to find articles where people defended themselves with guns.

 

[clamum]

when they list their sources and they check out, yes.

i had several links posted and somehow closed the window or lost the window. I'm not going back through and finding them again.

it's easy to find articles where people defended themselves with guns.

Yeah I get the "American Rifleman" magazine through my NRA membership and each month there's a bunch of incidents (recently occurring, too) where people defend themselves and/or others with firearms. I ain't gonna check their website but they might post some there. I guess they could be making it all up (those dirty gun loving NRA bastards), but I doubt it.

But yeah, it would not take more than 30 seconds to find a bunch of examples/stories online.

 

[jlee]

Yeah I get the "American Rifleman" magazine through my NRA membership and each month there's a bunch of incidents (recently occurring, too) where people defend themselves and/or others with firearms. I ain't gonna check their website but they might post some there. I guess they could be making it all up (those dirty gun loving NRA bastards), but I doubt it.

But yeah, it would not take more than 30 seconds to find a bunch of examples/stories online.

http://www.nrapublications.org/index.php/armed-citizen/

They list sources as well.

 

[slag]

Fat nerds holed up in basements tend to believe the world is out to get them.

Command Center, asshole

 

[clamum]

http://www.nrapublications.org/index.php/armed-citizen/

They list sources as well.

Nice, thanks! :thumbsup:

EDIT: WOW, I can't believe one of the entries is from Marquette, MI. I used to live about an hour south of there and that is one of the last places I'd think of something like this happening. Funny (not literally, but...) how that happens. Link

 

[pontifex]

http://www.nrapublications.org/index.php/armed-citizen/

They list sources as well.

and I checked a few out from the last issue i received and was able to find the articles on the newspaper site, so they are not made up.

 

[glenn1]

So you want to keep your pistol at home where it has no purpose because it would be cheaper for you and your hobby? I'm failing to see the good reason.

Because you're looking at things from your own, narrow viewpoint rather than considering the needs, preferences, and motivations of others. Instead of my target pistol, would you force a rancher to drive to a range to pick up his rifle to protect his livestock from wolves? If I'm camping in Alaska, should I have to wait until a bear is munching on my daughter before retrieving a weapon to defend us?

 

[mikeymikec]

Because you're looking at things from your own, narrow viewpoint rather than considering the needs, preferences, and motivations of others.

Actually, if you read what I wrote, you would have noticed I said "an extremely good reason" (to own a firearm).

Instead of my target pistol, would you force a rancher to drive to a range to pick up his rifle to protect his livestock from wolves?

In the UK (and most developed countries I'm sure), if someone's occupation requires (or at least is strongly recommended) a firearm, they can get a licence for one. I know a few farmers in the UK that have their own firearms, for example.

If I'm camping in Alaska, should I have to wait until a bear is munching on my daughter before retrieving a weapon to defend us?

I would file this under "good reasons" - if someone is travelling to an area where about the only decent defence against the local fauna is a firearm, that would seem prudent. I'm failing to see the connection between this and the average person living in most locations in the US, and people here are talking about defending themselves from other people. These two scenarios are extremely different, justifying one does not automatically justify the other.