Before we took steps to safeguard air travel... how many people died in planes taken down by terrorists compared to people landing safely at their destinations?
People had no problem with the elevated security steps because everybody wanted safe air travel and the security measures- as painful as they are- made much sense in the interest of safety.
The statistics pointing out relatively few people die as a result of getting mowed down by a maniac wielding a military grade weapon bought from the grocery store are pointless. They are really pointless when you present them to the survivors.
so statistics are pointless when they go against your view? I forgot who brought it up but he/she were just showing that a very very very small part of the population gets killed by firearms in the u.s. That is all. No one is saying it is insignificant rather just a smaller number than people perceive it.
And I think it depends on what specific survivor you are talking about. I would imagine 1/3 become more anti gun, 1/3 become indifferent and 1/3 arm themselves even more. But that is an opinion and I have no link or statistical data to back that up.
What number do people perceive it to be?
4 no statistical data or links to back that up.
Wouldn’t debating facts be more productive than perceptions or random made up bullshit? I mean, why throw something out there that has no relevance to the debate? Unless it’s to denigrate the debate and exhibit your lack of seriousness to debate the issue? More deflections and distractions.
I actually enjoy making up bullshit when I debate; it keeps things interesting. Deflections and distractions are two essential components when winning a debate. Why not call a draw play if they are expecting a hail mary?
I seriously doubt that any survivors become indifferent after such an event, let alone 33% of them.
When it comes to preventable deaths in the tens of thousands, trying to minimize them with a low percentage compared to the population definitely becomes problematic.... Thirty makes a good point in mentioning terrorist attack victims. The same people who reject gun reform also tend to be pretty gung ho about fighting terror, when in fact gun owners are far more dangerous than terrorists are if you're considering victim stats. It's a valid counterpoint.
gun owners are more dangers that terrorists? that's a new one.
should I pull the typical question here and ask where are your links or data to prove that "the same people who reject gun reforms also tend to be pretty gung ho about fighting terror?"
and the terrorist attacks were a god damn act of war, our gun issue is not an act of war. Big difference. I mean over 10,000 people die in drunken driving accidents a year, should we ban bars? Responsible drinker until they weren't right?
DUI related deaths have dropped significantly due to legal changes and a shift in social norms. I’d like to see the same with guns. Very few claim that you should be allowed to drive drunk and only face consequences when you hurt someone in a crash. Can’t say the same in relation to guns.
Before we took steps to safeguard air travel... how many people died in planes taken down by terrorists compared to people landing safely at their destinations?
People had no problem with the elevated security steps because everybody wanted safe air travel and the security measures- as painful as they are- made much sense in the interest of safety.
The statistics pointing out relatively few people die as a result of getting mowed down by a maniac wielding a military grade weapon bought from the grocery store are pointless. They are really pointless when you present them to the survivors.
so statistics are pointless when they go against your view? I forgot who brought it up but he/she were just showing that a very very very small part of the population gets killed by firearms in the u.s. That is all. No one is saying it is insignificant rather just a smaller number than people perceive it.
And I think it depends on what specific survivor you are talking about. I would imagine 1/3 become more anti gun, 1/3 become indifferent and 1/3 arm themselves even more. But that is an opinion and I have no link or statistical data to back that up.
What number do people perceive it to be?
4 no statistical data or links to back that up.
Wouldn’t debating facts be more productive than perceptions or random made up bullshit? I mean, why throw something out there that has no relevance to the debate? Unless it’s to denigrate the debate and exhibit your lack of seriousness to debate the issue? More deflections and distractions.
I actually enjoy making up bullshit when I debate; it keeps things interesting. Deflections and distractions are two essential components when winning a debate. Why not call a draw play if they are expecting a hail mary?
And there you have it folks, the reason nothing changes. Who needs facts?
I seriously doubt that any survivors become indifferent after such an event, let alone 33% of them.
When it comes to preventable deaths in the tens of thousands, trying to minimize them with a low percentage compared to the population definitely becomes problematic.... Thirty makes a good point in mentioning terrorist attack victims. The same people who reject gun reform also tend to be pretty gung ho about fighting terror, when in fact gun owners are far more dangerous than terrorists are if you're considering victim stats. It's a valid counterpoint.
gun owners are more dangers that terrorists? that's a new one.
should I pull the typical question here and ask where are your links or data to prove that "the same people who reject gun reforms also tend to be pretty gung ho about fighting terror?"
and the terrorist attacks were a god damn act of war, our gun issue is not an act of war. Big difference. I mean over 10,000 people die in drunken driving accidents a year, should we ban bars? Responsible drinker until they weren't right?
DUI related deaths have dropped significantly due to legal changes and a shift in social norms. I’d like to see the same with guns. Very few claim that you should be allowed to drive drunk and only face consequences when you hurt someone in a crash. Can’t say the same in relation to guns.
what do you mean can't say the same in relation to guns? I'm telling you, gun deaths go down if we start with: impose mental/criminal background checks for every purchase, registration, some sort of safety training before initial buy and you know what, i've come to the conclusion that you don't need high capacity mags any more. I'm good with 15 as opposed to 30/40/50/100. and of course no reason to have a bump stock.
Before we took steps to safeguard air travel... how many people died in planes taken down by terrorists compared to people landing safely at their destinations?
People had no problem with the elevated security steps because everybody wanted safe air travel and the security measures- as painful as they are- made much sense in the interest of safety.
The statistics pointing out relatively few people die as a result of getting mowed down by a maniac wielding a military grade weapon bought from the grocery store are pointless. They are really pointless when you present them to the survivors.
so statistics are pointless when they go against your view? I forgot who brought it up but he/she were just showing that a very very very small part of the population gets killed by firearms in the u.s. That is all. No one is saying it is insignificant rather just a smaller number than people perceive it.
And I think it depends on what specific survivor you are talking about. I would imagine 1/3 become more anti gun, 1/3 become indifferent and 1/3 arm themselves even more. But that is an opinion and I have no link or statistical data to back that up.
What number do people perceive it to be?
4 no statistical data or links to back that up.
Wouldn’t debating facts be more productive than perceptions or random made up bullshit? I mean, why throw something out there that has no relevance to the debate? Unless it’s to denigrate the debate and exhibit your lack of seriousness to debate the issue? More deflections and distractions.
I actually enjoy making up bullshit when I debate; it keeps things interesting. Deflections and distractions are two essential components when winning a debate. Why not call a draw play if they are expecting a hail mary?
This is the only play you’ve called in this debate:
Before we took steps to safeguard air travel... how many people died in planes taken down by terrorists compared to people landing safely at their destinations?
People had no problem with the elevated security steps because everybody wanted safe air travel and the security measures- as painful as they are- made much sense in the interest of safety.
The statistics pointing out relatively few people die as a result of getting mowed down by a maniac wielding a military grade weapon bought from the grocery store are pointless. They are really pointless when you present them to the survivors.
so statistics are pointless when they go against your view? I forgot who brought it up but he/she were just showing that a very very very small part of the population gets killed by firearms in the u.s. That is all. No one is saying it is insignificant rather just a smaller number than people perceive it.
And I think it depends on what specific survivor you are talking about. I would imagine 1/3 become more anti gun, 1/3 become indifferent and 1/3 arm themselves even more. But that is an opinion and I have no link or statistical data to back that up.
Not at all.
I support airport security just as much as I support cleaning up the gun problem in your country. If you can make common sense improvements that decrease risk to the public... then giddy up.
Yes... it's a drag taking off your shoes and waiting in line to catch a plane, but the task is worth it.
Yes... (for some) it's a drag you can't shoot shit with an awesome gun, but the concession is worth it.
* And I rarely hear of survivors of these mass shootings speaking publically about the need to arm themselves better. Most speak to the glaring need for reform. So I respectfully disagree with your 'thirds' assertion.
I didn't realize you were talking about mass shootings, I thought you meant overall people injured.
So are you canadian's this vocal in your own country since you can legally purchase an ar-15 there and other "assault" weapons legally?
I honestly didn't even know it was a possibility. I've never seen them in any outdoor shop selling guns. I know of nobody who owns one.
If this revelation is accurate... I'm strongly opposed to the idea of ownership. And somewhat in disbelief.
* With the aforementioned stated... we haven't experienced the epidemic of mass shootings you guys have. If you guys wish to maintain the idea of assault weapons, it might be wise to study our model of distribution and tracking to see if there are any items you might be able to emulate for a safer future.
Before we took steps to safeguard air travel... how many people died in planes taken down by terrorists compared to people landing safely at their destinations?
People had no problem with the elevated security steps because everybody wanted safe air travel and the security measures- as painful as they are- made much sense in the interest of safety.
The statistics pointing out relatively few people die as a result of getting mowed down by a maniac wielding a military grade weapon bought from the grocery store are pointless. They are really pointless when you present them to the survivors.
so statistics are pointless when they go against your view? I forgot who brought it up but he/she were just showing that a very very very small part of the population gets killed by firearms in the u.s. That is all. No one is saying it is insignificant rather just a smaller number than people perceive it.
And I think it depends on what specific survivor you are talking about. I would imagine 1/3 become more anti gun, 1/3 become indifferent and 1/3 arm themselves even more. But that is an opinion and I have no link or statistical data to back that up.
What number do people perceive it to be?
4 no statistical data or links to back that up.
Wouldn’t debating facts be more productive than perceptions or random made up bullshit? I mean, why throw something out there that has no relevance to the debate? Unless it’s to denigrate the debate and exhibit your lack of seriousness to debate the issue? More deflections and distractions.
I actually enjoy making up bullshit when I debate; it keeps things interesting. Deflections and distractions are two essential components when winning a debate. Why not call a draw play if they are expecting a hail mary?
This is the only play you’ve called in this debate:
I seriously doubt that any survivors become indifferent after such an event, let alone 33% of them.
When it comes to preventable deaths in the tens of thousands, trying to minimize them with a low percentage compared to the population definitely becomes problematic.... Thirty makes a good point in mentioning terrorist attack victims. The same people who reject gun reform also tend to be pretty gung ho about fighting terror, when in fact gun owners are far more dangerous than terrorists are if you're considering victim stats. It's a valid counterpoint.
gun owners are more dangers that terrorists? that's a new one.
should I pull the typical question here and ask where are your links or data to prove that "the same people who reject gun reforms also tend to be pretty gung ho about fighting terror?"
and the terrorist attacks were a god damn act of war, our gun issue is not an act of war. Big difference. I mean over 10,000 people die in drunken driving accidents a year, should we ban bars? Responsible drinker until they weren't right?
Um, I think you missed my point here.
Yeah, if you're considering victim statistics, gun owners are way more dangerous than terrorists in America. I don't know if it's new or not, but it's a hard fact.
Obviously I have no links or data to prove that people against gun reform are gung ho about fighting terrorism, but I am comfortable saying that it's a very safe assumption that I've made after lots of observation and the attitudes expressed by politicians who express that sentiment and all the voters who vote for them.
Hey man, you're the one who opened the door to what I'm saying. You're the one who quoted a statistic about death and claimed it meant something to your perspective. I'm not sure why you're now trying to say that this tactic doesn't work, because, in case you missed it, that is the exact point I was trying to make when you did it.
With all its sham, drudgery, and broken dreams, it is still a beautiful world. Be careful. Strive to be happy. ~ Desiderata
I seriously doubt that any survivors become indifferent after such an event, let alone 33% of them.
When it comes to preventable deaths in the tens of thousands, trying to minimize them with a low percentage compared to the population definitely becomes problematic.... Thirty makes a good point in mentioning terrorist attack victims. The same people who reject gun reform also tend to be pretty gung ho about fighting terror, when in fact gun owners are far more dangerous than terrorists are if you're considering victim stats. It's a valid counterpoint.
gun owners are more dangers that terrorists? that's a new one.
should I pull the typical question here and ask where are your links or data to prove that "the same people who reject gun reforms also tend to be pretty gung ho about fighting terror?"
and the terrorist attacks were a god damn act of war, our gun issue is not an act of war. Big difference. I mean over 10,000 people die in drunken driving accidents a year, should we ban bars? Responsible drinker until they weren't right?
DUI related deaths have dropped significantly due to legal changes and a shift in social norms. I’d like to see the same with guns. Very few claim that you should be allowed to drive drunk and only face consequences when you hurt someone in a crash. Can’t say the same in relation to guns.
what do you mean can't say the same in relation to guns? I'm telling you, gun deaths go down if we start with: impose mental/criminal background checks for every purchase, registration, some sort of safety training before initial buy and you know what, i've come to the conclusion that you don't need high capacity mags any more. I'm good with 15 as opposed to 30/40/50/100. and of course no reason to have a bump stock.
I mean we haven’t seen the legal and societal shift with guns like we have with DUI. And we also don’t view the potential lethality with guns like we do drumk drivers.
I seriously doubt that any survivors become indifferent after such an event, let alone 33% of them.
When it comes to preventable deaths in the tens of thousands, trying to minimize them with a low percentage compared to the population definitely becomes problematic.... Thirty makes a good point in mentioning terrorist attack victims. The same people who reject gun reform also tend to be pretty gung ho about fighting terror, when in fact gun owners are far more dangerous than terrorists are if you're considering victim stats. It's a valid counterpoint.
gun owners are more dangers that terrorists? that's a new one.
should I pull the typical question here and ask where are your links or data to prove that "the same people who reject gun reforms also tend to be pretty gung ho about fighting terror?"
and the terrorist attacks were a god damn act of war, our gun issue is not an act of war. Big difference. I mean over 10,000 people die in drunken driving accidents a year, should we ban bars? Responsible drinker until they weren't right?
Um, I think you missed my point here.
Yeah, if you're considering victim statistics, gun owners are way more dangerous than terrorists in America. I don't know if it's new or not, but it's a hard fact.
Obviously I have no links or data to prove that people against gun reform are gung ho about fighting terrorism, but I am comfortable saying that it's a very safe assumption that I've made after lots of observation and the attitudes expressed by politicians who express that sentiment and all the voters who vote for them.
Hey man, you're the one who opened the door to what I'm saying. You're the one who quoted a statistic about death and claimed it meant something to your perspective. I'm not sure why you're now trying to say that this tactic doesn't work, because, in case you missed it, that is the exact point I was trying to make when you did it.
I'm done arguing for a while. Excuse me from the conversation while I go deer hunting with my Dear Old Dad for a while. I leave you with this tune. https://youtu.be/3cQNkIrg-Tk One more BB Guns & Dirt Bikes By The White Buffalo https://youtu.be/uLAlLZgKafs
I'm done arguing for a while. Excuse me from the conversation while I go deer hunting with my Dear Old Dad for a while. I leave you with this tune. https://youtu.be/3cQNkIrg-Tk
I saw this guy live last year.
He poked fun at gays. When he did, he got a couple of 'yee haws' from the crowd (maybe even a few 'git 'er duns' too). I didn't storm out of there like the Cletuses did at Roger Waters when he called the sexual predator, lying POTUS a 'pig'. I recognized the setting I was in an went in knowing what to expect. It was an interesting experience.
The individuals I met at the show were very friendly and warm. I wondered how my experience might have been had I been a different color or of a different sexual orientation.
I'm done arguing for a while. Excuse me from the conversation while I go deer hunting with my Dear Old Dad for a while. I leave you with this tune. https://youtu.be/3cQNkIrg-Tk
I saw this guy live last year.
He poked fun at gays. When he did, he got a couple of 'yee haws' from the crowd (maybe even a few 'git 'er duns' too). I didn't storm out of there like the Cletuses did at Roger Waters when he called the sexual predator, lying POTUS a 'pig'. I recognized the setting I was in an went in knowing what to expect. It was an interesting experience.
The individuals I met at the show were very friendly and warm. I wondered how my experience might have been had I been a different color or of a different sexual orientation.
Sorry I don't know I don't follow this guy's person life, never been to a show. I just like some of his music. But it might be kind of like a conservative at a Pearl Jam Show, because I know I'm in the minority. But I would never excuse racial or homophobic stuff from Hank if that's what he said or says. I just liked the tune.
I'm done arguing for a while. Excuse me from the conversation while I go deer hunting with my Dear Old Dad for a while. I leave you with this tune. https://youtu.be/3cQNkIrg-Tk
I saw this guy live last year.
He poked fun at gays. When he did, he got a couple of 'yee haws' from the crowd (maybe even a few 'git 'er duns' too). I didn't storm out of there like the Cletuses did at Roger Waters when he called the sexual predator, lying POTUS a 'pig'. I recognized the setting I was in an went in knowing what to expect. It was an interesting experience.
The individuals I met at the show were very friendly and warm. I wondered how my experience might have been had I been a different color or of a different sexual orientation.
Sorry I don't know I don't follow this guy's person life, never been to a show. I just like some of his music. But it might be kind of like a conservative at a Pearl Jam Show, because I know I'm in the minority. But I would never excuse racial or homophobic stuff from Hank if that's what he said or says. I just liked the tune.
I was not suggesting that's what you intended.
I was just relaying my experience. Those people at the show were genuinely nice people to me. I just wished that some of those same people, who might hold some traditional values that allow for discrimination, would extend their gracious attitude to all people regardless of race or sexual orientation.
Hank never helped them get where they need to be with his remarks. He enforced and promoted that horrible mentality.
California rampage puts spotlight on homemade 'ghost guns'
Michael Balsamo, Associated Press,Associated Press 5 hours ago
In this Tuesday, Aug. 29, 2017, photo, homemade rifles are displayed on a table at an ATF field office in Glendale, Calif. Police say Kevin Neal, who was barred from having guns because of a restraining order, made the two high-powered rifles he used in his shooting rampage in Northern California on Tuesday, Nov. 14. (AP Photo/Jae C. Hong)
LOS ANGELES (AP) -- The gunman who killed his wife and four others in a rampage in Northern California this week found an easy way around a court order prohibiting him from having guns: He built his own at home.
Kevin Neal, 44, was armed with what authorities believe were two high-powered rifles that he made himself when he opened fire Tuesday on homes, cars and an elementary school around his tiny hometown of Rancho Tehama Reserve. A deputy finally shot and killed him.
It is the latest case of homemade semi-automatic weapons being used in a crime, and it comes as federal authorities try to draw attention to the dangers posed by these "ghost guns," which contain no registration numbers that can be used to trace them. In Baltimore, a man used a homemade AR-15-style rifle to shoot at four police officers in July 2016. They returned fire, killing him.
It's legal to build a gun in a home or a workshop, and advances in 3-D printing and milling have made it easier to do so. Kits can be purchased legally for $450 to $1,000 from hundreds of websites without the kind of background check required for traditional gun purchases.
"The more restrictive the laws become for people to purchase firearms, we're going to see those criminal elements build their own," Tehama County Assistant Sheriff Phil Johnston said. "That's what they do."
In Neal's case, he had been ordered to give up all his guns earlier this year under a restraining order issued against him after he was charged with assaulting two women who lived nearby. He signed a document in February saying he surrendered a 9 mm handgun to a gun store, which also attested to that. When Neal was arrested, police seized an AR-15 Bushmaster semi-automatic rifle.
While making a ghost gun is legal, selling one is not. Federal officials are sounding the alarm about an increasing black market for homemade military-style semi-automatic rifles and handguns.
Mills where such weapons are built are popping up across the country and especially in California, which has strict gun laws. By 2019, people who own or create homemade firearms in California will have to apply for a serial number from the state and permanently affix it to the weapon.
I'm done arguing for a while. Excuse me from the conversation while I go deer hunting with my Dear Old Dad for a while. I leave you with this tune. https://youtu.be/3cQNkIrg-Tk
I saw this guy live last year.
He poked fun at gays. When he did, he got a couple of 'yee haws' from the crowd (maybe even a few 'git 'er duns' too). I didn't storm out of there like the Cletuses did at Roger Waters when he called the sexual predator, lying POTUS a 'pig'. I recognized the setting I was in an went in knowing what to expect. It was an interesting experience.
The individuals I met at the show were very friendly and warm. I wondered how my experience might have been had I been a different color or of a different sexual orientation.
Sorry I don't know I don't follow this guy's person life, never been to a show. I just like some of his music. But it might be kind of like a conservative at a Pearl Jam Show, because I know I'm in the minority. But I would never excuse racial or homophobic stuff from Hank if that's what he said or says. I just liked the tune.
I was not suggesting that's what you intended.
I was just relaying my experience. Those people at the show were genuinely nice people to me. I just wished that some of those same people, who might hold some traditional values that allow for discrimination, would extend their gracious attitude to all people regardless of race or sexual orientation.
Hank never helped them get where they need to be with his remarks. He enforced and promoted that horrible mentality.
It's Friday for me so, Perhaps I should leave you with a better song from a much better guy. I am a patriot https://youtu.be/QQNVJQR65Zc
I have always assumed that the lyrics to I Am A Patriot were meant ironically. How else can you take the line "I love my country because my country is all I know"?
my small self... like a book amongst the many on a shelf
I have always assumed that the lyrics to I Am A Patriot were meant ironically. How else can you take the line "I love my country because my country is all I know"?
I started off with the Hank Williams jr. Tune, that got shut down, understandingly it got tossed back because he's a homophobic racist Southern Confederate. Ok I am sensitive, not an inconsiderate À-Hole, SOB to that sort of stuff. So okay, I switch gears, and put up a patriotic song that Pearl Jam does. That is met with blowback and distortion. Do you hate your country? You've got the word ironically mistaken for the word facetious if that's what you're insinuating the song means. I thought it was a song about tossing out all the barriers that separate us. And focusing on the things that we agree on one-party freedom. No matter what I toss out there, it becomes a controversial boomerang. That is amazing to me. That suggests to me that you're not actually concerned about the issues, rather you're more interested in arguing with whoever, more than actually trying to solve any of these issues. Doesn't matter what it's about as long as you're arguing you are happy. Even a great song sung by Eddie Vedder & Pearl Jam gets scrutinized to the highest degree. I don't get it.
I have always assumed that the lyrics to I Am A Patriot were meant ironically. How else can you take the line "I love my country because my country is all I know"?
I started off with the Hank Williams jr. Tune, that got shut down, understandingly it got tossed back because he's a homophobic racist Southern Confederate. Ok I am sensitive, not an inconsiderate À-Hole, SOB to that sort of stuff. So okay, I switch gears, and put up a patriotic song that Pearl Jam does. That is met with blowback and distortion. Do you hate your country? You've got the word ironically mistaken for the word facetious if that's what you're insinuating the song means. I thought it was a song about tossing out all the barriers that separate us. And focusing on the things that we agree on one-party freedom. No matter what I toss out there, it becomes a controversial boomerang. That is amazing to me. That suggests to me that you're not actually concerned about the issues, rather you're more interested in arguing with whoever, more than actually trying to solve any of these issues. Doesn't matter what it's about as long as you're arguing you are happy. Even a great song sung by Eddie Vedder & Pearl Jam gets scrutinized to the highest degree. I don't get it.
Again, I'll say what others have said - if you're not open to discussion and comment on your posts, then don't post them. You may also want to take a step back from the sensitivity - people are allowed to comment on songs - yes, even songs sung by Eddie Vedder! - without it being a criticism of you.
my small self... like a book amongst the many on a shelf
I have always assumed that the lyrics to I Am A Patriot were meant ironically. How else can you take the line "I love my country because my country is all I know"?
I started off with the Hank Williams jr. Tune, that got shut down, understandingly it got tossed back because he's a homophobic racist Southern Confederate. Ok I am sensitive, not an inconsiderate À-Hole, SOB to that sort of stuff. So okay, I switch gears, and put up a patriotic song that Pearl Jam does. That is met with blowback and distortion. Do you hate your country? You've got the word ironically mistaken for the word facetious if that's what you're insinuating the song means. I thought it was a song about tossing out all the barriers that separate us. And focusing on the things that we agree on one-party freedom. No matter what I toss out there, it becomes a controversial boomerang. That is amazing to me. That suggests to me that you're not actually concerned about the issues, rather you're more interested in arguing with whoever, more than actually trying to solve any of these issues. Doesn't matter what it's about as long as you're arguing you are happy. Even a great song sung by Eddie Vedder & Pearl Jam gets scrutinized to the highest degree. I don't get it.
You took that way too personally, Often was essentially musing aloud on a point of interest and curiosity about a song you posted. The fact that it was you who posted it is irrelevant, the comment was on the song
California rampage puts spotlight on homemade 'ghost guns'
Michael Balsamo, Associated Press,Associated Press 5 hours ago
In this Tuesday, Aug. 29, 2017, photo, homemade rifles are displayed on a table at an ATF field office in Glendale, Calif. Police say Kevin Neal, who was barred from having guns because of a restraining order, made the two high-powered rifles he used in his shooting rampage in Northern California on Tuesday, Nov. 14. (AP Photo/Jae C. Hong)
LOS ANGELES (AP) -- The gunman who killed his wife and four others in a rampage in Northern California this week found an easy way around a court order prohibiting him from having guns: He built his own at home.
Kevin Neal, 44, was armed with what authorities believe were two high-powered rifles that he made himself when he opened fire Tuesday on homes, cars and an elementary school around his tiny hometown of Rancho Tehama Reserve. A deputy finally shot and killed him.
It is the latest case of homemade semi-automatic weapons being used in a crime, and it comes as federal authorities try to draw attention to the dangers posed by these "ghost guns," which contain no registration numbers that can be used to trace them. In Baltimore, a man used a homemade AR-15-style rifle to shoot at four police officers in July 2016. They returned fire, killing him.
It's legal to build a gun in a home or a workshop, and advances in 3-D printing and milling have made it easier to do so. Kits can be purchased legally for $450 to $1,000 from hundreds of websites without the kind of background check required for traditional gun purchases.
"The more restrictive the laws become for people to purchase firearms, we're going to see those criminal elements build their own," Tehama County Assistant Sheriff Phil Johnston said. "That's what they do."
In Neal's case, he had been ordered to give up all his guns earlier this year under a restraining order issued against him after he was charged with assaulting two women who lived nearby. He signed a document in February saying he surrendered a 9 mm handgun to a gun store, which also attested to that. When Neal was arrested, police seized an AR-15 Bushmaster semi-automatic rifle.
While making a ghost gun is legal, selling one is not. Federal officials are sounding the alarm about an increasing black market for homemade military-style semi-automatic rifles and handguns.
Mills where such weapons are built are popping up across the country and especially in California, which has strict gun laws. By 2019, people who own or create homemade firearms in California will have to apply for a serial number from the state and permanently affix it to the weapon.
Criminals finding ways around laws...you don’t say! Maybe we should tell them they cannot make “ghost guns”. That should stop them......
0
Options
unsung
I stopped by on March 7 2024. First time in many years, had to update payment info. Hope all is well. Politicians suck. Bye. Posts: 9,487
I'm glad you both think it's funny that criminals have yet another loophole to buy a "gun". I won't ask you if a law should be passed making it illegal to purchase these kits because we all know that would infringe on the 2nd Amendment and the NRA won't make it an issue so it's dead. Laugh away. Stay locked and loaded because there could be a ghost haunting your life someday.
I'm glad you both think it's funny that criminals have yet another loophole to buy a "gun". I won't ask you if a law should be passed making it illegal to purchase these kits because we all know that would infringe on the 2nd Amendment and the NRA won't make it an issue so it's dead. Laugh away. Stay locked and loaded because there could be a ghost haunting your life someday.
“There’s something strange...in the neighborhood” Look, I’ve said numerous times on here that people that really really want an AR-15 can make one in the comfort of their own homes using a 3D printer for little more than it would have cost to buy it legitimately. Does not take an engineering degree or a mechanical genius to make a lower receiver. The rest are just simple parts...There is no way of truly stopping a person from obtaining (or making) an ar-15 if they are set on having one.
I'm glad you both think it's funny that criminals have yet another loophole to buy a "gun". I won't ask you if a law should be passed making it illegal to purchase these kits because we all know that would infringe on the 2nd Amendment and the NRA won't make it an issue so it's dead. Laugh away. Stay locked and loaded because there could be a ghost haunting your life someday.
“There’s something strange...in the neighborhood” Look, I’ve said numerous times on here that people that really really want an AR-15 can make one in the comfort of their own homes using a 3D printer for little more than it would have cost to buy it legitimately. Does not take an engineering degree or a mechanical genius to make a lower receiver. The rest are just simple parts...There is no way of truly stopping a person from obtaining (or making) an ar-15 if they are set on having one.
That's fine and dandy, but let them find each piece individually instead of the all in one kit my kid could probably assemble. People can also make their own bomb with a bunch of store bought chemicals, doesn't mean we need to enable them by selling them the home bomb kit with everything included.
Comments
Libtardaplorable©. And proud of it.
Brilliantati©
I'm telling you, gun deaths go down if we start with: impose mental/criminal background checks for every purchase, registration, some sort of safety training before initial buy and you know what, i've come to the conclusion that you don't need high capacity mags any more. I'm good with 15 as opposed to 30/40/50/100. and of course no reason to have a bump stock.
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=6i7VKQwDS2s
Libtardaplorable©. And proud of it.
Brilliantati©
I honestly didn't even know it was a possibility. I've never seen them in any outdoor shop selling guns. I know of nobody who owns one.
If this revelation is accurate... I'm strongly opposed to the idea of ownership. And somewhat in disbelief.
* With the aforementioned stated... we haven't experienced the epidemic of mass shootings you guys have. If you guys wish to maintain the idea of assault weapons, it might be wise to study our model of distribution and tracking to see if there are any items you might be able to emulate for a safer future.
Lol
I knew what it was before I even clicked on the link.
Yeah, if you're considering victim statistics, gun owners are way more dangerous than terrorists in America. I don't know if it's new or not, but it's a hard fact.
Obviously I have no links or data to prove that people against gun reform are gung ho about fighting terrorism, but I am comfortable saying that it's a very safe assumption that I've made after lots of observation and the attitudes expressed by politicians who express that sentiment and all the voters who vote for them.
Hey man, you're the one who opened the door to what I'm saying. You're the one who quoted a statistic about death and claimed it meant something to your perspective. I'm not sure why you're now trying to say that this tactic doesn't work, because, in case you missed it, that is the exact point I was trying to make when you did it.
I leave you with this tune.
One more
BB Guns & Dirt Bikes
By The White Buffalo
I saw this guy live last year.
He poked fun at gays. When he did, he got a couple of 'yee haws' from the crowd (maybe even a few 'git 'er duns' too). I didn't storm out of there like the Cletuses did at Roger Waters when he called the sexual predator, lying POTUS a 'pig'. I recognized the setting I was in an went in knowing what to expect. It was an interesting experience.
The individuals I met at the show were very friendly and warm. I wondered how my experience might have been had I been a different color or of a different sexual orientation.
But I would never excuse racial or homophobic stuff from Hank if that's what he said or says. I just liked the tune.
I was not suggesting that's what you intended.
I was just relaying my experience. Those people at the show were genuinely nice people to me. I just wished that some of those same people, who might hold some traditional values that allow for discrimination, would extend their gracious attitude to all people regardless of race or sexual orientation.
Hank never helped them get where they need to be with his remarks. He enforced and promoted that horrible mentality.
California rampage puts spotlight on homemade 'ghost guns'
LOS ANGELES (AP) -- The gunman who killed his wife and four others in a rampage in Northern California this week found an easy way around a court order prohibiting him from having guns: He built his own at home.
Kevin Neal, 44, was armed with what authorities believe were two high-powered rifles that he made himself when he opened fire Tuesday on homes, cars and an elementary school around his tiny hometown of Rancho Tehama Reserve. A deputy finally shot and killed him.
It is the latest case of homemade semi-automatic weapons being used in a crime, and it comes as federal authorities try to draw attention to the dangers posed by these "ghost guns," which contain no registration numbers that can be used to trace them. In Baltimore, a man used a homemade AR-15-style rifle to shoot at four police officers in July 2016. They returned fire, killing him.
It's legal to build a gun in a home or a workshop, and advances in 3-D printing and milling have made it easier to do so. Kits can be purchased legally for $450 to $1,000 from hundreds of websites without the kind of background check required for traditional gun purchases.
"The more restrictive the laws become for people to purchase firearms, we're going to see those criminal elements build their own," Tehama County Assistant Sheriff Phil Johnston said. "That's what they do."
In Neal's case, he had been ordered to give up all his guns earlier this year under a restraining order issued against him after he was charged with assaulting two women who lived nearby. He signed a document in February saying he surrendered a 9 mm handgun to a gun store, which also attested to that. When Neal was arrested, police seized an AR-15 Bushmaster semi-automatic rifle.
While making a ghost gun is legal, selling one is not. Federal officials are sounding the alarm about an increasing black market for homemade military-style semi-automatic rifles and handguns.
Mills where such weapons are built are popping up across the country and especially in California, which has strict gun laws. By 2019, people who own or create homemade firearms in California will have to apply for a serial number from the state and permanently affix it to the weapon.
I am a patriot
Do you hate your country? You've got the word ironically mistaken for the word facetious if that's what you're insinuating the song means. I thought it was a song about tossing out all the barriers that separate us. And focusing on the things that we agree on one-party freedom.
No matter what I toss out there, it becomes a controversial boomerang. That is amazing to me. That suggests to me that you're not actually concerned about the issues, rather you're more interested in arguing with whoever, more than actually trying to solve any of these issues. Doesn't matter what it's about as long as you're arguing you are happy.
Even a great song sung by Eddie Vedder & Pearl Jam gets scrutinized to the highest degree. I don't get it.
Ghost guns!
https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/loophole-lets-criminals-buy-untraceable-ghost-guns-online-n719121
Look, I’ve said numerous times on here that people that really really want an AR-15 can make one in the comfort of their own homes using a 3D printer for little more than it would have cost to buy it legitimately. Does not take an engineering degree or a mechanical genius to make a lower receiver. The rest are just simple parts...There is no way of truly stopping a person from obtaining (or making) an ar-15 if they are set on having one.
It could be a theme song for some. And everybody needs a theme song.
https://youtu.be/ocHdNYvFtkQ
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/acts-of-faith/wp/2017/11/17/a-man-accidentally-shot-himself-and-his-wife-at-a-church-shortly-after-a-discussion-on-shootings/
Libtardaplorable©. And proud of it.
Brilliantati©
I'm confused. Advertisement? Gene Simmons? Heckler?
I tried to play along.