It's always interesting when the guy shows up with one of these arguments: 1. The AR-15 isn't an assault rifle 2. The (insert whatever weapon the latest mass shooter used) isn't any different than your Grandpa's 22
It always interests me when a guy 1) doesn’t understand guns 2) thinks he knows something about guns 3) offers nothing to the conversation except the I think I know about guns but I really don’t.
now to entertain you, let’s say ar’s are illegal. If someone’s going to commit these acts, do you really think it would be hard for them to get a hold of one?
In what way is that a reason not to make them illegal?
"Mostly I think that people react sensitively because they know you’ve got a point"
It's always interesting when the guy shows up with one of these arguments: 1. The AR-15 isn't an assault rifle 2. The (insert whatever weapon the latest mass shooter used) isn't any different than your Grandpa's 22
It always interests me when a guy 1) doesn’t understand guns 2) thinks he knows something about guns 3) offers nothing to the conversation except the I think I know about guns but I really don’t.
now to entertain you, let’s say ar’s are illegal. If someone’s going to commit these acts, do you really think it would be hard for them to get a hold of one?
In what way is that a reason not to make them illegal?
If that’s your response, that’s exactly why the should be legal. What difference right?
It's always interesting when the guy shows up with one of these arguments: 1. The AR-15 isn't an assault rifle 2. The (insert whatever weapon the latest mass shooter used) isn't any different than your Grandpa's 22
It always interests me when a guy 1) doesn’t understand guns 2) thinks he knows something about guns 3) offers nothing to the conversation except the I think I know about guns but I really don’t.
now to entertain you, let’s say ar’s are illegal. If someone’s going to commit these acts, do you really think it would be hard for them to get a hold of one?
In what way is that a reason not to make them illegal?
If that’s your response, that’s exactly why the should be legal. What difference right?
So if you are saying people will get them anyhow...even if illegal. Are you for not having anything be illegal? Cause you could make the same argument for almost anything couldn't you?
Jeez when I saw 60 new posts in this thread since I last visited about 8 hours ago, I figured there was a mass shooting overnight or something. Thankfully that's not the case and it's just the usual crap: gifs of Jeff Goldblum, references to Kiss live albums, and of course,suggestions that someone's post is parroted from cable news.
Aren't you the guy being up in arms about AOC and Omar not stopping and responding to an alt-right, anti-muslim youtube channel?
I mean, I bet these 60 posts - including discussing KISS - have been of more substance than that. So maybe chill with calling other people's posts "crap" ?
Hmm, nope. Not me. Have been off the forum for about a year, probably more. But great job of assuming and not researching.
Prevention of the tragedies would be great, but reduction of the carnage is a good start. Banning sales of military style weapons would achieve that end. The weapon used in El Paso was purchased legally and recently. Had the assault ban still been in place, chances are he could not have acquired the weapon. That's a really, really easy one.
Not really. A rifle is a rifle. No matter how much it looks military, it’s not. Have you ever heard the saying you can paint a trash can but in the end it’s still a trash can? That’s all ar’s are. Cool looking rifles, but no difference from the same one o deer hunt with.
There's that pile of turds I predicted!
How so? Please point out the difference. You call it a pile of turds, explain why it’s a pile of turds. I really want to know. I might be wrong. Show me I’m wrong. I’ll agree with you.
I already did. Make AR's as bolt or lever action, then you'll be right. But until then, you're wrong.
Jeez when I saw 60 new posts in this thread since I last visited about 8 hours ago, I figured there was a mass shooting overnight or something. Thankfully that's not the case and it's just the usual crap: gifs of Jeff Goldblum, references to Kiss live albums, and of course,suggestions that someone's post is parroted from cable news.
Aren't you the guy being up in arms about AOC and Omar not stopping and responding to an alt-right, anti-muslim youtube channel?
I mean, I bet these 60 posts - including discussing KISS - have been of more substance than that. So maybe chill with calling other people's posts "crap" ?
Hmm, nope. Not me. Have been off the forum for about a year, probably more. But great job of assuming and not researching.
Prevention of the tragedies would be great, but reduction of the carnage is a good start. Banning sales of military style weapons would achieve that end. The weapon used in El Paso was purchased legally and recently. Had the assault ban still been in place, chances are he could not have acquired the weapon. That's a really, really easy one.
Not really. A rifle is a rifle. No matter how much it looks military, it’s not. Have you ever heard the saying you can paint a trash can but in the end it’s still a trash can? That’s all ar’s are. Cool looking rifles, but no difference from the same one o deer hunt with.
There's that pile of turds I predicted!
How so? Please point out the difference. You call it a pile of turds, explain why it’s a pile of turds. I really want to know. I might be wrong. Show me I’m wrong. I’ll agree with you.
I already did. Make AR's as bolt or lever action, then you'll be right. But until then, you're wrong.
Then you need to do the same with all handguns and any shotgun that’s not a single load or pump. You are aware how guns work right?
It's always interesting when the guy shows up with one of these arguments: 1. The AR-15 isn't an assault rifle 2. The (insert whatever weapon the latest mass shooter used) isn't any different than your Grandpa's 22
It always interests me when a guy 1) doesn’t understand guns 2) thinks he knows something about guns 3) offers nothing to the conversation except the I think I know about guns but I really don’t.
now to entertain you, let’s say ar’s are illegal. If someone’s going to commit these acts, do you really think it would be hard for them to get a hold of one?
In what way is that a reason not to make them illegal?
If that’s your response, that’s exactly why the should be legal. What difference right?
So if you are saying people will get them anyhow...even if illegal. Are you for not having anything be illegal? Cause you could make the same argument for almost anything couldn't you?
Isn’t that kind of how the war on drugs has gone, the war on immigration has gone? Let’s not pretend that because something becomes illegal it ceases to exist.
It's always interesting when the guy shows up with one of these arguments: 1. The AR-15 isn't an assault rifle 2. The (insert whatever weapon the latest mass shooter used) isn't any different than your Grandpa's 22
It always interests me when a guy 1) doesn’t understand guns 2) thinks he knows something about guns 3) offers nothing to the conversation except the I think I know about guns but I really don’t.
now to entertain you, let’s say ar’s are illegal. If someone’s going to commit these acts, do you really think it would be hard for them to get a hold of one?
In what way is that a reason not to make them illegal?
If that’s your response, that’s exactly why the should be legal. What difference right?
now to entertain you, let’s say rape is illegal. If someone’s going to commit these acts, do you really think it would be hard for them to rape?
"Mostly I think that people react sensitively because they know you’ve got a point"
It's always interesting when the guy shows up with one of these arguments: 1. The AR-15 isn't an assault rifle 2. The (insert whatever weapon the latest mass shooter used) isn't any different than your Grandpa's 22
It always interests me when a guy 1) doesn’t understand guns 2) thinks he knows something about guns 3) offers nothing to the conversation except the I think I know about guns but I really don’t.
now to entertain you, let’s say ar’s are illegal. If someone’s going to commit these acts, do you really think it would be hard for them to get a hold of one?
In what way is that a reason not to make them illegal?
If that’s your response, that’s exactly why the should be legal. What difference right?
now to entertain you, let’s say rape is illegal. If someone’s going to commit these acts, do you really think it would be hard for them to rape?
I do believe rape is illegal, and it still happens. I’m lost on your point.
Jeez when I saw 60 new posts in this thread since I last visited about 8 hours ago, I figured there was a mass shooting overnight or something. Thankfully that's not the case and it's just the usual crap: gifs of Jeff Goldblum, references to Kiss live albums, and of course,suggestions that someone's post is parroted from cable news.
Aren't you the guy being up in arms about AOC and Omar not stopping and responding to an alt-right, anti-muslim youtube channel?
I mean, I bet these 60 posts - including discussing KISS - have been of more substance than that. So maybe chill with calling other people's posts "crap" ?
Hmm, nope. Not me. Have been off the forum for about a year, probably more. But great job of assuming and not researching.
Prevention of the tragedies would be great, but reduction of the carnage is a good start. Banning sales of military style weapons would achieve that end. The weapon used in El Paso was purchased legally and recently. Had the assault ban still been in place, chances are he could not have acquired the weapon. That's a really, really easy one.
Not really. A rifle is a rifle. No matter how much it looks military, it’s not. Have you ever heard the saying you can paint a trash can but in the end it’s still a trash can? That’s all ar’s are. Cool looking rifles, but no difference from the same one o deer hunt with.
There's that pile of turds I predicted!
How so? Please point out the difference. You call it a pile of turds, explain why it’s a pile of turds. I really want to know. I might be wrong. Show me I’m wrong. I’ll agree with you.
I already did. Make AR's as bolt or lever action, then you'll be right. But until then, you're wrong.
Then you need to do the same with all handguns and any shotgun that’s not a single load or pump. You are aware how guns work right?
stop with that stupid fucking question. You already showed that you don't know how lever action rifles work, so you're moving onto a secondary argument, with handguns. The point I'm making is that we can reduce the carnage by eliminating a weapon capable of grave, pervasive damage WITHOUT ever having to modify the weapon.
It's always interesting when the guy shows up with one of these arguments: 1. The AR-15 isn't an assault rifle 2. The (insert whatever weapon the latest mass shooter used) isn't any different than your Grandpa's 22
It always interests me when a guy 1) doesn’t understand guns 2) thinks he knows something about guns 3) offers nothing to the conversation except the I think I know about guns but I really don’t.
now to entertain you, let’s say ar’s are illegal. If someone’s going to commit these acts, do you really think it would be hard for them to get a hold of one?
In what way is that a reason not to make them illegal?
If that’s your response, that’s exactly why the should be legal. What difference right?
now to entertain you, let’s say rape is illegal. If someone’s going to commit these acts, do you really think it would be hard for them to rape?
I do believe rape is illegal, and it still happens. I’m lost on your point.
Ok. Now I know where you stand.
"Mostly I think that people react sensitively because they know you’ve got a point"
Jeez when I saw 60 new posts in this thread since I last visited about 8 hours ago, I figured there was a mass shooting overnight or something. Thankfully that's not the case and it's just the usual crap: gifs of Jeff Goldblum, references to Kiss live albums, and of course,suggestions that someone's post is parroted from cable news.
Aren't you the guy being up in arms about AOC and Omar not stopping and responding to an alt-right, anti-muslim youtube channel?
I mean, I bet these 60 posts - including discussing KISS - have been of more substance than that. So maybe chill with calling other people's posts "crap" ?
Hmm, nope. Not me. Have been off the forum for about a year, probably more. But great job of assuming and not researching.
Prevention of the tragedies would be great, but reduction of the carnage is a good start. Banning sales of military style weapons would achieve that end. The weapon used in El Paso was purchased legally and recently. Had the assault ban still been in place, chances are he could not have acquired the weapon. That's a really, really easy one.
Not really. A rifle is a rifle. No matter how much it looks military, it’s not. Have you ever heard the saying you can paint a trash can but in the end it’s still a trash can? That’s all ar’s are. Cool looking rifles, but no difference from the same one o deer hunt with.
There's that pile of turds I predicted!
How so? Please point out the difference. You call it a pile of turds, explain why it’s a pile of turds. I really want to know. I might be wrong. Show me I’m wrong. I’ll agree with you.
I already did. Make AR's as bolt or lever action, then you'll be right. But until then, you're wrong.
Then you need to do the same with all handguns and any shotgun that’s not a single load or pump. You are aware how guns work right?
stop with that stupid fucking question. You already showed that you don't know how lever action rifles work, so you're moving onto a secondary argument, with handguns. The point I'm making is that we can reduce the carnage by eliminating a weapon capable of grave, pervasive damage WITHOUT ever having to modify the weapon.
Jeez when I saw 60 new posts in this thread since I last visited about 8 hours ago, I figured there was a mass shooting overnight or something. Thankfully that's not the case and it's just the usual crap: gifs of Jeff Goldblum, references to Kiss live albums, and of course,suggestions that someone's post is parroted from cable news.
Aren't you the guy being up in arms about AOC and Omar not stopping and responding to an alt-right, anti-muslim youtube channel?
I mean, I bet these 60 posts - including discussing KISS - have been of more substance than that. So maybe chill with calling other people's posts "crap" ?
Hmm, nope. Not me. Have been off the forum for about a year, probably more. But great job of assuming and not researching.
Prevention of the tragedies would be great, but reduction of the carnage is a good start. Banning sales of military style weapons would achieve that end. The weapon used in El Paso was purchased legally and recently. Had the assault ban still been in place, chances are he could not have acquired the weapon. That's a really, really easy one.
Not really. A rifle is a rifle. No matter how much it looks military, it’s not. Have you ever heard the saying you can paint a trash can but in the end it’s still a trash can? That’s all ar’s are. Cool looking rifles, but no difference from the same one o deer hunt with.
There's that pile of turds I predicted!
How so? Please point out the difference. You call it a pile of turds, explain why it’s a pile of turds. I really want to know. I might be wrong. Show me I’m wrong. I’ll agree with you.
I already did. Make AR's as bolt or lever action, then you'll be right. But until then, you're wrong.
Then you need to do the same with all handguns and any shotgun that’s not a single load or pump. You are aware how guns work right?
stop with that stupid fucking question. You already showed that you don't know how lever action rifles work, so you're moving onto a secondary argument, with handguns. The point I'm making is that we can reduce the carnage by eliminating a weapon capable of grave, pervasive damage WITHOUT ever having to modify the weapon.
It’s not a stupid fucking question. A damn 9mm hand gun operates the same as a damn ar. If you knew anything about guns you would know that. Take your high and mighty bullshit somewhere else. You think by getting pissy it proves any point you are trying to make aside from just making you sound completely flustered and out of ideas? Because that’s exactly what it does. Blame an ar or bushmaster. Now go back and look at mass shootings and how many of them were used. Then further educate yourself on what a semiautomatic does and how it operates. But yes, let’s ban Ar’s. How much has changed?
Looks like we’re now back to blaming single parent homes for these shootings. Anything to avoid the obvious reason for gun deaths.
Does the US really have that much higher a rate of single parent families than every other country?
I also wonder how many fatherless families there were back in these golden times some people speak of, back when the country was founded. What with war, farming and logging accidents, and other dangers of the natural world, I think quite a few.
my small self... like a book amongst the many on a shelf
It's always interesting when the guy shows up with one of these arguments: 1. The AR-15 isn't an assault rifle 2. The (insert whatever weapon the latest mass shooter used) isn't any different than your Grandpa's 22
It always interests me when a guy 1) doesn’t understand guns 2) thinks he knows something about guns 3) offers nothing to the conversation except the I think I know about guns but I really don’t.
now to entertain you, let’s say ar’s are illegal. If someone’s going to commit these acts, do you really think it would be hard for them to get a hold of one?
In what way is that a reason not to make them illegal?
I say go for it. How much does that change? According to govt statistics, you don’t even put a dent in gun Homicides
Jeez when I saw 60 new posts in this thread since I last visited about 8 hours ago, I figured there was a mass shooting overnight or something. Thankfully that's not the case and it's just the usual crap: gifs of Jeff Goldblum, references to Kiss live albums, and of course,suggestions that someone's post is parroted from cable news.
Aren't you the guy being up in arms about AOC and Omar not stopping and responding to an alt-right, anti-muslim youtube channel?
I mean, I bet these 60 posts - including discussing KISS - have been of more substance than that. So maybe chill with calling other people's posts "crap" ?
Hmm, nope. Not me. Have been off the forum for about a year, probably more. But great job of assuming and not researching.
Prevention of the tragedies would be great, but reduction of the carnage is a good start. Banning sales of military style weapons would achieve that end. The weapon used in El Paso was purchased legally and recently. Had the assault ban still been in place, chances are he could not have acquired the weapon. That's a really, really easy one.
Not really. A rifle is a rifle. No matter how much it looks military, it’s not. Have you ever heard the saying you can paint a trash can but in the end it’s still a trash can? That’s all ar’s are. Cool looking rifles, but no difference from the same one o deer hunt with.
There's that pile of turds I predicted!
How so? Please point out the difference. You call it a pile of turds, explain why it’s a pile of turds. I really want to know. I might be wrong. Show me I’m wrong. I’ll agree with you.
I already did. Make AR's as bolt or lever action, then you'll be right. But until then, you're wrong.
Then you need to do the same with all handguns and any shotgun that’s not a single load or pump. You are aware how guns work right?
stop with that stupid fucking question. You already showed that you don't know how lever action rifles work, so you're moving onto a secondary argument, with handguns. The point I'm making is that we can reduce the carnage by eliminating a weapon capable of grave, pervasive damage WITHOUT ever having to modify the weapon.
It’s not a stupid fucking question. A damn 9mm hand gun operates the same as a damn ar. If you knew anything about guns you would know that. Take your high and mighty bullshit somewhere else. You think by getting pissy it proves any point you are trying to make aside from just making you sound completely flustered and out of ideas? Because that’s exactly what it does. Blame an ar or bushmaster. Now go back and look at mass shootings and how many of them were used. Then further educate yourself on what a semiautomatic does and how it operates. But yes, let’s ban Ar’s. How much has changed?
Okay dude. You challenged that a 3030 marlin hunting rifle could be modified to be as pervasive of a killer as an AR. That's total bullshit because you either 1. Don't know that the rifle is lever action or 2. Believe there is some fairy dust that turns a Marlin into a high capacity 30 shots per minute killing machine. And I'm the one that doesn't know anything about guns. I'm a gun owner, but not an enthusiast. I own rifles and several handguns, including a .357 that I can also magically turn from a revolver into a 30 shot capacity. It's really a fascinating mod that I've developed to make that happen. But oh yeah, there's no way you can both own a gun and not have it spit out 30 rounds per minute right? There are solutions, but your own ignorance of weapons prevents you from understanding that not all guns can be turned into semi automatic high capacity killing tools.
It's always interesting when the guy shows up with one of these arguments: 1. The AR-15 isn't an assault rifle 2. The (insert whatever weapon the latest mass shooter used) isn't any different than your Grandpa's 22
It always interests me when a guy 1) doesn’t understand guns 2) thinks he knows something about guns 3) offers nothing to the conversation except the I think I know about guns but I really don’t.
now to entertain you, let’s say ar’s are illegal. If someone’s going to commit these acts, do you really think it would be hard for them to get a hold of one?
In what way is that a reason not to make them illegal?
I say go for it. How much does that change? According to govt statistics, you don’t even put a dent in gun Homicides
So, do you see any changes to the gun laws of the test being a good idea?
And no need to start acting out. Just saying, beforehand.
"Mostly I think that people react sensitively because they know you’ve got a point"
Jeez when I saw 60 new posts in this thread since I last visited about 8 hours ago, I figured there was a mass shooting overnight or something. Thankfully that's not the case and it's just the usual crap: gifs of Jeff Goldblum, references to Kiss live albums, and of course,suggestions that someone's post is parroted from cable news.
Aren't you the guy being up in arms about AOC and Omar not stopping and responding to an alt-right, anti-muslim youtube channel?
I mean, I bet these 60 posts - including discussing KISS - have been of more substance than that. So maybe chill with calling other people's posts "crap" ?
Hmm, nope. Not me. Have been off the forum for about a year, probably more. But great job of assuming and not researching.
Prevention of the tragedies would be great, but reduction of the carnage is a good start. Banning sales of military style weapons would achieve that end. The weapon used in El Paso was purchased legally and recently. Had the assault ban still been in place, chances are he could not have acquired the weapon. That's a really, really easy one.
Not really. A rifle is a rifle. No matter how much it looks military, it’s not. Have you ever heard the saying you can paint a trash can but in the end it’s still a trash can? That’s all ar’s are. Cool looking rifles, but no difference from the same one o deer hunt with.
There's that pile of turds I predicted!
How so? Please point out the difference. You call it a pile of turds, explain why it’s a pile of turds. I really want to know. I might be wrong. Show me I’m wrong. I’ll agree with you.
I already did. Make AR's as bolt or lever action, then you'll be right. But until then, you're wrong.
Then you need to do the same with all handguns and any shotgun that’s not a single load or pump. You are aware how guns work right?
stop with that stupid fucking question. You already showed that you don't know how lever action rifles work, so you're moving onto a secondary argument, with handguns. The point I'm making is that we can reduce the carnage by eliminating a weapon capable of grave, pervasive damage WITHOUT ever having to modify the weapon.
It’s not a stupid fucking question. A damn 9mm hand gun operates the same as a damn ar. If you knew anything about guns you would know that. Take your high and mighty bullshit somewhere else. You think by getting pissy it proves any point you are trying to make aside from just making you sound completely flustered and out of ideas? Because that’s exactly what it does. Blame an ar or bushmaster. Now go back and look at mass shootings and how many of them were used. Then further educate yourself on what a semiautomatic does and how it operates. But yes, let’s ban Ar’s. How much has changed?
Okay dude. You challenged that a 3030 marlin hunting rifle could be modified to be as pervasive of a killer as an AR. That's total bullshit because you either 1. Don't know that the rifle is lever action or 2. Believe there is some fairy dust that turns a Marlin into a high capacity 30 shots per minute killing machine. And I'm the one that doesn't know anything about guns. I'm a gun owner, but not an enthusiast. I own rifles and several handguns, including a .357 that I can also magically turn from a revolver into a 30 shot capacity. It's really a fascinating mod that I've developed to make that happen. But oh yeah, there's no way you can both own a gun and not have it spit out 30 rounds per minute right? There are solutions, but your own ignorance of weapons prevents you from understanding that not all guns can be turned into semi automatic high capacity killing tools.
I am impressed with your resolve to argue the obvious with someone who clearly doesn't get it or care.
Here is a decently put together graphic from NY Times that portrays some of the difficulties in banning “parts”. The problem is that AR-15s are extremely adaptable and configurable. I don’t have the answer, but I just wanted to point out the flaws with some of this “copy and paste” gun laws from other countries rhetoric. Before the last assault weapons ban, these were not nearly as configurable and it was a bit easier to broadly ban them. Now, it would take much more legislation to effectively ban these rifles. In a time with such political animosity, I would not hang my hat on that coming any time soon, even if we get a Democrat president the next go around. Better background checks on all purchases and training (as mentioned by Mcgruff) is a lot more attainment at this point and is where I believe the focus should be if anything at all is to be done. Anyways, here is the mentioned article from way up there: https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2019/07/31/us/assault-weapons-ban.html
It's always interesting when the guy shows up with one of these arguments: 1. The AR-15 isn't an assault rifle 2. The (insert whatever weapon the latest mass shooter used) isn't any different than your Grandpa's 22
It always interests me when a guy 1) doesn’t understand guns 2) thinks he knows something about guns 3) offers nothing to the conversation except the I think I know about guns but I really don’t.
now to entertain you, let’s say ar’s are illegal. If someone’s going to commit these acts, do you really think it would be hard for them to get a hold of one?
In what way is that a reason not to make them illegal?
If that’s your response, that’s exactly why the should be legal. What difference right?
So if you are saying people will get them anyhow...even if illegal. Are you for not having anything be illegal? Cause you could make the same argument for almost anything couldn't you?
Isn’t that kind of how the war on drugs has gone, the war on immigration has gone? Let’s not pretend that because something becomes illegal it ceases to exist.
You didnt answer the question. So you are saying nothing should be illegal?
Here is a decently put together graphic from NY Times that portrays some of the difficulties in banning “parts”. The problem is that AR-15s are extremely adaptable and configurable. I don’t have the answer, but I just wanted to point out the flaws with some of this “copy and paste” gun laws from other countries rhetoric. Before the last assault weapons ban, these were not nearly as configurable and it was a bit easier to broadly ban them. Now, it would take much more legislation to effectively ban these rifles. In a time with such political animosity, I would not hang my hat on that coming any time soon, even if we get a Democrat president the next go around. Better background checks on all purchases and training (as mentioned by Mcgruff) is a lot more attainment at this point and is where I believe the focus should be if anything at all is to be done. Anyways, here is the mentioned article from way up there: https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2019/07/31/us/assault-weapons-ban.html
There is a menu of incremental improvements that can make a difference. There's no magic pill, as most of us understand. But that's where the 2A lunatics try to make their argument. Unless one solution solves 100% of the problem, there's no point in trying anything.
Jeez when I saw 60 new posts in this thread since I last visited about 8 hours ago, I figured there was a mass shooting overnight or something. Thankfully that's not the case and it's just the usual crap: gifs of Jeff Goldblum, references to Kiss live albums, and of course,suggestions that someone's post is parroted from cable news.
Aren't you the guy being up in arms about AOC and Omar not stopping and responding to an alt-right, anti-muslim youtube channel?
I mean, I bet these 60 posts - including discussing KISS - have been of more substance than that. So maybe chill with calling other people's posts "crap" ?
Hmm, nope. Not me. Have been off the forum for about a year, probably more. But great job of assuming and not researching.
Prevention of the tragedies would be great, but reduction of the carnage is a good start. Banning sales of military style weapons would achieve that end. The weapon used in El Paso was purchased legally and recently. Had the assault ban still been in place, chances are he could not have acquired the weapon. That's a really, really easy one.
Not really. A rifle is a rifle. No matter how much it looks military, it’s not. Have you ever heard the saying you can paint a trash can but in the end it’s still a trash can? That’s all ar’s are. Cool looking rifles, but no difference from the same one o deer hunt with.
There's that pile of turds I predicted!
How so? Please point out the difference. You call it a pile of turds, explain why it’s a pile of turds. I really want to know. I might be wrong. Show me I’m wrong. I’ll agree with you.
I already did. Make AR's as bolt or lever action, then you'll be right. But until then, you're wrong.
Then you need to do the same with all handguns and any shotgun that’s not a single load or pump. You are aware how guns work right?
stop with that stupid fucking question. You already showed that you don't know how lever action rifles work, so you're moving onto a secondary argument, with handguns. The point I'm making is that we can reduce the carnage by eliminating a weapon capable of grave, pervasive damage WITHOUT ever having to modify the weapon.
It’s not a stupid fucking question. A damn 9mm hand gun operates the same as a damn ar. If you knew anything about guns you would know that. Take your high and mighty bullshit somewhere else. You think by getting pissy it proves any point you are trying to make aside from just making you sound completely flustered and out of ideas? Because that’s exactly what it does. Blame an ar or bushmaster. Now go back and look at mass shootings and how many of them were used. Then further educate yourself on what a semiautomatic does and how it operates. But yes, let’s ban Ar’s. How much has changed?
Okay dude. You challenged that a 3030 marlin hunting rifle could be modified to be as pervasive of a killer as an AR. That's total bullshit because you either 1. Don't know that the rifle is lever action or 2. Believe there is some fairy dust that turns a Marlin into a high capacity 30 shots per minute killing machine. And I'm the one that doesn't know anything about guns. I'm a gun owner, but not an enthusiast. I own rifles and several handguns, including a .357 that I can also magically turn from a revolver into a 30 shot capacity. It's really a fascinating mod that I've developed to make that happen. But oh yeah, there's no way you can both own a gun and not have it spit out 30 rounds per minute right? There are solutions, but your own ignorance of weapons prevents you from understanding that not all guns can be turned into semi automatic high capacity killing tools.
I am impressed with your resolve to argue the obvious with someone who clearly doesn't get it or care.
Any opportunity to pull out the "snark" must be leveraged. Right, @Spiritual_Chaos?
Here is a decently put together graphic from NY Times that portrays some of the difficulties in banning “parts”. The problem is that AR-15s are extremely adaptable and configurable. I don’t have the answer, but I just wanted to point out the flaws with some of this “copy and paste” gun laws from other countries rhetoric. Before the last assault weapons ban, these were not nearly as configurable and it was a bit easier to broadly ban them. Now, it would take much more legislation to effectively ban these rifles. In a time with such political animosity, I would not hang my hat on that coming any time soon, even if we get a Democrat president the next go around. Better background checks on all purchases and training (as mentioned by Mcgruff) is a lot more attainment at this point and is where I believe the focus should be if anything at all is to be done. Anyways, here is the mentioned article from way up there: https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2019/07/31/us/assault-weapons-ban.html
In what way does it point our flaws with "some of this 'copy and paste' gun laws from other countries rhetoric" ?
"Mostly I think that people react sensitively because they know you’ve got a point"
Jeez when I saw 60 new posts in this thread since I last visited about 8 hours ago, I figured there was a mass shooting overnight or something. Thankfully that's not the case and it's just the usual crap: gifs of Jeff Goldblum, references to Kiss live albums, and of course,suggestions that someone's post is parroted from cable news.
Aren't you the guy being up in arms about AOC and Omar not stopping and responding to an alt-right, anti-muslim youtube channel?
I mean, I bet these 60 posts - including discussing KISS - have been of more substance than that. So maybe chill with calling other people's posts "crap" ?
Hmm, nope. Not me. Have been off the forum for about a year, probably more. But great job of assuming and not researching.
Prevention of the tragedies would be great, but reduction of the carnage is a good start. Banning sales of military style weapons would achieve that end. The weapon used in El Paso was purchased legally and recently. Had the assault ban still been in place, chances are he could not have acquired the weapon. That's a really, really easy one.
Not really. A rifle is a rifle. No matter how much it looks military, it’s not. Have you ever heard the saying you can paint a trash can but in the end it’s still a trash can? That’s all ar’s are. Cool looking rifles, but no difference from the same one o deer hunt with.
There's that pile of turds I predicted!
How so? Please point out the difference. You call it a pile of turds, explain why it’s a pile of turds. I really want to know. I might be wrong. Show me I’m wrong. I’ll agree with you.
I already did. Make AR's as bolt or lever action, then you'll be right. But until then, you're wrong.
Then you need to do the same with all handguns and any shotgun that’s not a single load or pump. You are aware how guns work right?
Yep, let's do that, glad you agree on something sensible!
Here is a decently put together graphic from NY Times that portrays some of the difficulties in banning “parts”. The problem is that AR-15s are extremely adaptable and configurable. I don’t have the answer, but I just wanted to point out the flaws with some of this “copy and paste” gun laws from other countries rhetoric. Before the last assault weapons ban, these were not nearly as configurable and it was a bit easier to broadly ban them. Now, it would take much more legislation to effectively ban these rifles. In a time with such political animosity, I would not hang my hat on that coming any time soon, even if we get a Democrat president the next go around. Better background checks on all purchases and training (as mentioned by Mcgruff) is a lot more attainment at this point and is where I believe the focus should be if anything at all is to be done. Anyways, here is the mentioned article from way up there: https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2019/07/31/us/assault-weapons-ban.html
There is a menu of incremental improvements that can make a difference. There's no magic pill, as most of us understand. But that's where the 2A lunatics try to make their argument. Unless one solution solves 100% of the problem, there's no point in trying anything.
Sweden may have the answer to America’s gun problem
Being in this new setting (Sweden) that was much like and yet so different from Wisconsin got me thinking about hunting in new ways. I began to think more about the responsibilities of gun owners rather than gun owners' rights. I also learned that it was possible to maintain a lively hunting culture along with mandatory gun registration and required safe storage. As we face a firearm crisis in America today, it’s time for hunters to stop hiding behind the Second Amendment and claim the moral high ground as our nation’s responsible gun owners.
/.../
In Sweden, only responsible people can have guns
Here’s how the Swedish system works: Only responsible people are trusted with firearms. Sweden licenses guns in much the same way we license cars and drivers. You can have up to six guns but can get more with special permission.
To apply for a firearm permit you must first take a year-long hunter training program and pass a written and shooting test. You can also apply for a gun permit if you’ve been a member of an established shooting club for six months.
In addition to undergoing training, Sweden’s gun owners must store their firearms safely. Guns must be locked away in a vault, not stored beneath your car seat or in the nightstand where your kids can find them.
Responsibility in Sweden goes further yet: Convicted of a felony? No guns for you. Beat your wife? No guns. Under a restraining order? No guns. Drive drunk? No guns.
(The gun law does not spell out specific actions that cause a citizen to be "unfit" to have a gun permit. It does say that the police must have a "reasonable cause" to suspend a permit, and these kinds of things might signal that a gun owner is "unfit.")
Even so, being responsible is not such a tough job. Sweden denies permits to only about 1,000 people a year (out of 600,000 permit holders), and they can appeal their rejection to the courts.
And despite these restrictions, Sweden has a strong hunting culture.
/.../
And yet gun violence is low in Sweden. The country ranks 10th out of 178 countries in the world for per capita gun ownership but in 2014 had only 21 homicides by firearms. In contrast, the US is first in per capita ownership and had more than 8,000 gun homicides in 2014. Controlling for population, US firearms homicides are 700 percent higher than Sweden’s.
/.../
Sweden shows it’s possible to have a serious hunting culture with firearms restrictions. With rights comes responsibility. Let’s show the way. Who will be the courageous, visionary sportsmen and women who establish the first hunter registration system in Vermont, or New York, or in my home state of Wisconsin, and take a step forward to sensible gun use in America?
largely due to the .223-caliber high-capacity rifle with 100-round magazines he was wielding, 30 seconds was all the time he needed to leave nine people dead and at least 27 others injured before he was killed by police. CNN, citing Dayton officials, reported that the gunman fired 41 shots in less than 30 seconds, and stuck 14 people with gunfire.
/.../
during his most recent speech to the National Rifle Association, he (Trump) claimed that “the only way to stop a bad guy with a gun is a good guy with a gun.” The NRA, unsurprisingly, endorses that position, and polling indicates that a broad swath of Republicans support ittoo.
/.../
Tragically, the Dayton shooting isn’t the only recent mass shooting illustrating that the “good guy with a gun” myth is just that. As I detailed just last week, the timeline of the mass shooting that took place on July 28 at a garlic festival in Gilroy, California, teaches the same lesson:
It's always interesting when the guy shows up with one of these arguments: 1. The AR-15 isn't an assault rifle 2. The (insert whatever weapon the latest mass shooter used) isn't any different than your Grandpa's 22
It always interests me when a guy 1) doesn’t understand guns 2) thinks he knows something about guns 3) offers nothing to the conversation except the I think I know about guns but I really don’t.
now to entertain you, let’s say ar’s are illegal. If someone’s going to commit these acts, do you really think it would be hard for them to get a hold of one?
I think it would be harder to get one if they were illegal...without a doubt. I can walk down the street and buy one right now. If illegal I couldn't do that. So.....yeah
Remember the Thomas Nine !! (10/02/2018)
1998: Noblesville; 2003: Noblesville; 2009: EV Nashville, Chicago, Chicago 2010: St Louis, Columbus, Noblesville; 2011: EV Chicago, East Troy, East Troy 2013: London ON, Wrigley; 2014: Cincy, St Louis, Moline (NO CODE) 2016: Lexington, Wrigley #1; 2018: Wrigley, Wrigley, Boston, Boston 2020: Oakland, Oakland:2021: EV Ohana, Ohana, Ohana, Ohana 2022: Oakland, Oakland, Nashville, Louisville; 2023: Chicago, Chicago, Noblesville 2024: Noblesville, Wrigley, Wrigley, Ohana, Ohana
largely due to the .223-caliber high-capacity rifle with 100-round magazines he was wielding, 30 seconds was all the time he needed to leave nine people dead and at least 27 others injured before he was killed by police. CNN, citing Dayton officials, reported that the gunman fired 41 shots in less than 30 seconds, and stuck 14 people with gunfire.
/.../
during his most recent speech to the National Rifle Association, he (Trump) claimed that “the only way to stop a bad guy with a gun is a good guy with a gun.” The NRA, unsurprisingly, endorses that position, and polling indicates that a broad swath of Republicans support ittoo.
/.../
Tragically, the Dayton shooting isn’t the only recent mass shooting illustrating that the “good guy with a gun” myth is just that. As I detailed just last week, the timeline of the mass shooting that took place on July 28 at a garlic festival in Gilroy, California, teaches the same lesson:
Hmmm, that's weird. Maybe someone can explain how to make my lever action rifle accommodate a 100 round magazine and become semi-automatic. I'm fascinated by the possibilities. 41 shots in 30 seconds, with a quite poor 35% hit rate. I'm fairly certain I can't achieve that with 6 shot capacity.
Comments
Looks like we’re now back to blaming single parent homes for these shootings. Anything to avoid the obvious reason for gun deaths.
Does the US really have that much higher a rate of single parent families than every other country?
I also wonder how many fatherless families there were back in these golden times some
people speak of, back when the country was founded. What with war, farming and logging accidents, and other dangers of the natural world, I think quite a few.
There are solutions, but your own ignorance of weapons prevents you from understanding that not all guns can be turned into semi automatic high capacity killing tools.
And no need to start acting out. Just saying, beforehand.
https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2019/07/31/us/assault-weapons-ban.html
Sweden may have the answer to America’s gun problem
Being in this new setting (Sweden) that was much like and yet so different from Wisconsin got me thinking about hunting in new ways. I began to think more about the responsibilities of gun owners rather than gun owners' rights. I also learned that it was possible to maintain a lively hunting culture along with mandatory gun registration and required safe storage.
As we face a firearm crisis in America today, it’s time for hunters to stop hiding behind the Second Amendment and claim the moral high ground as our nation’s responsible gun owners.
/.../
In Sweden, only responsible people can have guns
Here’s how the Swedish system works: Only responsible people are trusted with firearms. Sweden licenses guns in much the same way we license cars and drivers. You can have up to six guns but can get more with special permission.
To apply for a firearm permit you must first take a year-long hunter training program and pass a written and shooting test. You can also apply for a gun permit if you’ve been a member of an established shooting club for six months.
In addition to undergoing training, Sweden’s gun owners must store their firearms safely. Guns must be locked away in a vault, not stored beneath your car seat or in the nightstand where your kids can find them.
Responsibility in Sweden goes further yet: Convicted of a felony? No guns for you. Beat your wife? No guns. Under a restraining order? No guns. Drive drunk? No guns.
(The gun law does not spell out specific actions that cause a citizen to be "unfit" to have a gun permit. It does say that the police must have a "reasonable cause" to suspend a permit, and these kinds of things might signal that a gun owner is "unfit.")
Even so, being responsible is not such a tough job. Sweden denies permits to only about 1,000 people a year (out of 600,000 permit holders), and they can appeal their rejection to the courts.
And despite these restrictions, Sweden has a strong hunting culture.
/.../
And yet gun violence is low in Sweden. The country ranks 10th out of 178 countries in the world for per capita gun ownership but in 2014 had only 21 homicides by firearms. In contrast, the US is first in per capita ownership and had more than 8,000 gun homicides in 2014. Controlling for population, US firearms homicides are 700 percent higher than Sweden’s.
/.../
Sweden shows it’s possible to have a serious hunting culture with firearms restrictions. With rights comes responsibility. Let’s show the way. Who will be the courageous, visionary sportsmen and women who establish the first hunter registration system in Vermont, or New York, or in my home state of Wisconsin, and take a step forward to sensible gun use in America?
https://www.vox.com/2016/8/8/12351824/gun-control-sweden-solution
/.../
during his most recent speech to the National Rifle Association, he (Trump) claimed that “the only way to stop a bad guy with a gun is a good guy with a gun.” The NRA, unsurprisingly, endorses that position, and polling indicates that a broad swath of Republicans support ittoo.
/.../
Tragically, the Dayton shooting isn’t the only recent mass shooting illustrating that the “good guy with a gun” myth is just that. As I detailed just last week, the timeline of the mass shooting that took place on July 28 at a garlic festival in Gilroy, California, teaches the same lesson:
https://www.vox.com/2019/8/5/20755047/dayton-mass-shooting-timeline-good-guy-with-a-gun-myth
1998: Noblesville; 2003: Noblesville; 2009: EV Nashville, Chicago, Chicago
2010: St Louis, Columbus, Noblesville; 2011: EV Chicago, East Troy, East Troy
2013: London ON, Wrigley; 2014: Cincy, St Louis, Moline (NO CODE)
2016: Lexington, Wrigley #1; 2018: Wrigley, Wrigley, Boston, Boston
2020: Oakland, Oakland: 2021: EV Ohana, Ohana, Ohana, Ohana
2022: Oakland, Oakland, Nashville, Louisville; 2023: Chicago, Chicago, Noblesville
2024: Noblesville, Wrigley, Wrigley, Ohana, Ohana