Fwck gun control

[joesbruiser]

So an accurate gun using the same rounds as a standard hunting gun is not a good choice? Sure it is.

5.56 NATO = .223 hunting round
7.62 NATO = .308 hunting round

Those rounds came FROM the hunting rounds, they were not created and approved by NATO then became available.

Not to mention the ability to get multiple optics and personalize a gun to we



The biggest fallacy in your posts is you are saying Assault Rifle...then trying to combine the semi-automatic to make an impact. Fact is to be an assault rifle the gun needs to be an automatic or burst fire. Any purchased AR15 or similar is semi automatic, and to get an actual assault rifle you need a class 3 license which registers the owner and guns.

Finally, before you jump on the wonderful world of being wrong...AR in AR15 has nothing to do with Assault Rifle like many believe. It comes from when it was being designed by Armalite, based on the companies name.

As you know my wife or me for that matter do not agree with your religious beliefs but as a top not driver I respect you and you are spot on with this one for sure.

 

[cbr6fs]

So an accurate gun using the same rounds as a standard hunting gun is not a good choice? Sure it is.

5.56 NATO = .223 hunting round
7.62 NATO = .308 hunting round

Those rounds came FROM the hunting rounds, they were not created and approved by NATO then became available.

Not to mention the ability to get multiple optics and personalize a gun to we



The biggest fallacy in your posts is you are saying Assault Rifle...then trying to combine the semi-automatic to make an impact. Fact is to be an assault rifle the gun needs to be an automatic or burst fire. Any purchased AR15 or similar is semi automatic, and to get an actual assault rifle you need a class 3 license which registers the owner and guns.

Finally, before you jump on the wonderful world of being wrong...AR in AR15 has nothing to do with Assault Rifle like many believe. It comes from when it was being designed by Armalite, based on the companies name.

So if you were describing a AR15 to a mate that knows nothing about guns, how would you describe how the gun looks?

Me personally i'd say assault rifle "thumbsup"

You can try and pick bits of quotes as much as you want to try and divert the real problem.
Problem is though the next nutter isn't going to care if it's described as a assault rifle or a pink duster, he'll still use it as a method of mass murder.

The choices are not was it officially classed as an assault rifle or not, the choices as i see them are

a/ Do nothing and wait for the next tragedy to happen
b/ Do something that is likely to restrict these nutter from getting hold of weapons of mass murder

My suggestions are not much of a inconvenience and are certainly not enough to stop people killing each other.
BUT if it offers a chance to stop say 1 in a million nutters doing this sort of thing again the very very slight inconvenience would be worth it i recon.

Be interesting to have a poll.

a/ Do nothing
b/ Ban hand guns and semi automatic rifles
c/ Tighten up licensing
d/ Gun safes that MUST be used

 

[cbr6fs]

I do believe its you that do not get it.
Do you have a clue how fast a 38 revolver can be reloaded and the damage that round can cause?
Or how fast any 1911,glock,or many other handguns can be reloaded.
Its not the style of guns fault it the idiot behind it.So doing away with certain guns is not going to fix anything.
IDPA Drills - YouTube

As for someone coming into my house to see whats in my safe not a chance.Its none of there business.

AGAIN with the ridiculous

This kid was NOT a expert, how many people do you know in civilian life that can operate a gun to that level.

Again your taking a quote and exaggerating it to the ridiculous.

You've also missed the fact that most handgun rounds would have done a LOT less damage.

Also it's not your safe that would be checked, it would be a specific gun safe, and it would be empty as they'd be checking before issuing your license.

Out of curiosity what's your suggestion for avoiding this sort of thing happening again?

 

[binaryterror]

So if you were describing a AR15 to a mate that knows nothing about guns, how would you describe how the gun looks?

Me personally i'd say assault rifle "thumbsup"

That's funny, since an AR15 is 100% customizable you'd be shocked how different you can make it look based on your design and parts.

So you'd say a Winchester 300 looks "Like a sniper rifle"? :lmao:

This kid was NOT a expert, how many people do you know in civilian life that can operate a gun to that level.

See here in America we have hunters training were you learn about guns.

Assuming an AR15 is a hard to shoot weapon? Again wrong. It's very simple to load, aim, and fire - quite a bit like a semi auto pistol

You've also missed the fact that most handgun rounds would have done a LOT less damage.

Less damage? Nope sorry.

.45 pistol round with 230 grains going 875 fps is going to cause major internal damage. If you hit something on a body, you've likely stopped the threat. The .45 will transfer 100% of it's energy upon impact, where the .223 will pass through and lose energy elsewhere, making it less effective.

The 45 would enter and exit larger and cause far more internal disruption staying the in body. The 223 or even 308 would enter cleaner and exit cleaner because of its velocity.

 

[Charlie-III]

And turtles,,,,,can't pass up a turtle

That's it, now I draw the line.......LEAVE THE TURTLES ALONE!!:shock:

:lmao::lmao:

Lots of reading here, some good points, some not so good points.

Curious to see what is later determined to be the reason for the shooting (if a reason is ever found).

I did see a discussion last night with a writer that did a book on Columbine. His basic comment?, "All the info the press stated about the shooters was ALL WRONG! This time around, the news media needs to MAKE SURE they are correct before issueing a final statement as this is what we will be left with down the road."

Basically he asked what everyone remembered about the Columbine shooters:
Loners
Goths
Troublemakers
ETC.

The research for the book about the shooting blows everything out of the water.

I own a few guns (inherited from my GrandFather) and have had training.
The guns are hidden away in the house.
Hope I never need to use them to defend my home, but would if it came to that.

 

[MommaBear]

AGAIN with the ridiculous

This kid was NOT a expert, how many people do you know in civilian life that can operate a gun to that level.

Again your taking a quote and exaggerating it to the ridiculous.

You've also missed the fact that most handgun rounds would have done a LOT less damage.

Also it's not your safe that would be checked, it would be a specific gun safe, and it would be empty as they'd be checking before issuing your license.

Out of curiosity what's your suggestion for avoiding this sort of thing happening again?

Since when does age have anything to do with how fast someone can reload a weapon? How is it that you are such an expert at summing up that kid's shooting abilities?

You obviously don't understand the workings of the AR. These guys have explained quite well. Admit you don't get it and bow out. Have you ever even fired one of these weapons?

I will say it again. You are not even a U.S. citizen and you dont live here, so what is your deal? I'm sure you think you are making some good points, but your points have huge holes in them. Then you have the audacity to question the guys that obvoiusly get it.

Since most everyone on this thread knows each other, your accusations of insanity and ridiculousness aren't going to hold much weight here. It is quite obvious the direction in which those terms should be directed.

 

[BUBBA069]

how many people do you know in civilian life that can operate a gun to that level.

I know several that I shot with regularly. This is a guy who shoots in the same IDPA class at STL Benchrest that I do. He is shooting in the CDP class, with a 1911 in 45ACP. This is not what is considered as a "high capacity" pistol.

2011 Missouri State IDPA Match - Jeff Meyers - YouTube

You've also missed the fact that most handgun rounds would have done a LOT less damage.

Wrong. Typical 5.56 round is 62gr. Typical 45ACP round is 230gr. Couple the larger mass with the expanding capability of a hollow point. The 45ACP produces MUCH more devastating results.

Out of curiosity what's your suggestion for avoiding this sort of thing happening again?

Mandatory gun safety training from about 6th grade to graduation.
Automatic death penalty for any crime committed with firearm.

 

[Coops]

I'd like to know how many massacres it take before anything actually gets done, and I'm not implying the answer is gun control.

I'd also like to know where the line is between your right to be safe and free and your right to walk around armed. If I lived in a state of paranoia where I needed to pack a gun everywhere I go just to feel safe, I probably would have gone full crazy a long time ago.

A possible problem would be when the police finally do show up and everyone is armed, who is the threat? I'm pretty sure they'd be taking aim at anyone holding a gun.

 

[Charlie-III]

Mandatory gun safety training from about 6th grade to graduation.
Automatic death penalty for any crime committed with firearm.

OK, my wife and I had a discussion this morning. Keep in mind:

I'm a US citizen
Never considered "unstable" (crazy ideas at times, like thinking I may beat Turbofest at a comp at some point:roll
Own a couple guns (inherited, 12ga shotgun, 20ga shotgun, 22 lever action rifle....all from a farm owner---my GrandFather)
Have had "training" at scout camp
Have my own school age kids

-Training from 6th grade to graduation, not sure, but I likely wouldn't say no either. Living in a high density area (NY Metro area) is different than rural Texas.
-Automatic death penalty...nice idea, likely slim chance of getting it passed. Quite a few states have either repealed the death penalty, or have them but don't use them.

Part of my discussion this morning:
-Register gun owners
-Register guns
-Need proof of recurrent training, yearly
-Show to police that you use trigger locks & a gun safe, yearly
-Insure your weapons to cover innocent people that "may" get shot by YOUR weapons

Now, some of this is already done, but not all. I believe you can cross state lines to a "lax" state to get some guns. I also believe that "reporting" & "screening" is a bit lax at guns shows and likely non-existent for private sales.

Now I'm not the "gun paperwork expert", but hang with quite a few that are big into guns. I also know it varies some state to state.

Not sure I agree with the insurance bit we discussed, but see the rest as "reasonable". Just my ideas.

I think trying to regulate guns out of existence is hard at a minimum, and not really needed.
Making them hard for ANYONE to just grab & use, great.

Did the mother in the CT shooting keep the guns locked?
If she did, did the son know how to get them?

Frankly a few simple things would have stopped/limited a stupid shooting.

And yes, I agree that, "People kill people, not guns". Guns are a tool that can be miss-used just like ANY tool.

PS, Rockhard, you sorta scare me with your comments and "ready access" to multiple guns. Frankly if it's that bad near you, I would just frikkin move.:shock:

 

[Coops]

Registering guns doesn't work. We tried it in Canada and shit-canned that idea. To costly and ineffective. We're just required to show a possession acquisition to buy.

Sorry, long gun registry was scrapped. Restricted still have to be registered. Pretty sure to buy a hand gun you need to be a member of a. Gun club/range.

 

[Duuuuuuuude]

A possible problem would be when the police finally do show up and everyone is armed, who is the threat? I'm pretty sure they'd be taking aim at anyone holding a gun.

It wouldn't be that hard if they were to take a second to assess the situation before running in.

 

[binaryterror]

A possible problem would be when the police finally do show up and everyone is armed, who is the threat? I'm pretty sure they'd be taking aim at anyone holding a gun.

Pretty simple, anyone with training and not insane will follow orders from the law agents as they arrive. Typically lunatics like this shooter will either fire upon the law or take his life like a coward little bitch.

No different than how the situation is handled if I hold a person at gun point for breaking into my house. I hold him until the law arrives, abide by the orders of the law officers and no one just gets randomly shot.

 

[rock hard]

OK, my wife and I had a discussion this morning. Keep in mind:

I'm a US citizen
Never considered "unstable" (crazy ideas at times, like thinking I may beat Turbofest at a comp at some point:roll
Own a couple guns (inherited, 12ga shotgun, 20ga shotgun, 22 lever action rifle....all from a farm owner---my GrandFather)
Have had "training" at scout camp
Have my own school age kids

-Training from 6th grade to graduation, not sure, but I likely wouldn't say no either. Living in a high density area (NY Metro area) is different than rural Texas.
-Automatic death penalty...nice idea, likely slim chance of getting it passed. Quite a few states have either repealed the death penalty, or have them but don't use them.

Part of my discussion this morning:
-Register gun owners
-Register guns
-Need proof of recurrent training, yearly
-Show to police that you use trigger locks & a gun safe, yearly
-Insure your weapons to cover innocent people that "may" get shot by YOUR weapons

Now, some of this is already done, but not all. I believe you can cross state lines to a "lax" state to get some guns. I also believe that "reporting" & "screening" is a bit lax at guns shows and likely non-existent for private sales.

Now I'm not the "gun paperwork expert", but hang with quite a few that are big into guns. I also know it varies some state to state.

Not sure I agree with the insurance bit we discussed, but see the rest as "reasonable". Just my ideas.

I think trying to regulate guns out of existence is hard at a minimum, and not really needed.
Making them hard for ANYONE to just grab & use, great.

Did the mother in the CT shooting keep the guns locked?
If she did, did the son know how to get them?

Frankly a few simple things would have stopped/limited a stupid shooting.

And yes, I agree that, "People kill people, not guns". Guns are a tool that can be miss-used just like ANY tool.

PS, Rockhard, you sorta scare me with your comments and "ready access" to multiple guns. Frankly if it's that bad near you, I would just frikkin move.:shock:

I have lived in the city with cops.....it was even worse...murders every day, little kids snatched from the parks....not to mention you cant hardly go to walmart without the possability of coming across a dope head ( meth I guess ).....at least out on the country, I see less drug use, less violence.

there is always a danger, it probably seems scary to you, cuz you probably didint grow up with a gun at the door...I did...cuz there have always been crazies...and its just sheer luck that that havnt came a knocking at any of our doors.

Pluse we have a nantural elemennt...we live in a hunting area, in th country.
have you ever come across a moma hog? or how about a cow or horse about to calf......we have 2 guns in teh house open, one on the wall, one on the door. both cars have a weapon...all the rest are in the cabenit...still loaded.
I dont really care if you think thats accessiive, its not to me.

nature is not your friend.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CE0Q904gtMI&feature=youtube_gdata_player

dont think the eagle could have pulled iit off?
watch this one.....around 5:09-6:00
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VklTs-Tid_I

we dont have big ars eagles here, but we got snakes, hogs and big cats....and turtles ( turtles are hard on fish )

 

[Coops]

It wouldn't be that hard if they were to take a second to assess the situation before running in.

You are right, but it does add a level of complexity to the situation.

 

[Duuuuuuuude]

You are right, but it does add a level of complexity to the situation.

A bit of complexity is better than an armed assailant going on an uncontested shooting spree.

Most people that do these kind of horrendous acts to not plan to survive them, but at the same time they go to places where they are least likely to be fired upon (theater, school, a no-weapons-allowed mall).

 

[difflocker]

i think it is just stuid to think that gun control is going to stop people from doing crazy stuff.

I think we need to take all the energy we are putting into gun control and focus on.


mental health

if all these shooter had some mental health, they might not of done what they have done.

Just my opinion, don't shoot me.

totally agree!!!!

Here in CA we can thank the former "Governator" for making Mental Health funding a slash line item to save money!

 

[rock hard]

Absolute rubbish and if you believe that then your obsession with firearms is clouding your judgement to the point of insanity.

If this guy could only get his hand on a .22 or even a 38 a hell of a LOT more kids would have gone home that night.

If he only had access to a double barrelled shotgun then the teachers could have easily overpowered a skinny little kid like this in-between reloading.



I don't understand the logic here.

This guy did NOT use explosives
From the evidence i've seen so far he did not plan this, it just kicked off.

You've then got other ops seemingly coming to the conclusion that because they were near enough to feel a explosion their knowledge is more than someone that's been working around explosives for the last 20 years.

If NOTHING is done then your countries kids and innocent victims are going to suffer and die again and again and again.

If NOTHING is done

here is the logic....dkf used.
Your right, this guys did noto use explosives.....
but if a person is set on distruction, no law you pass, no number of guns you remove from the streets, or lock up with stop thier distruction.

Even if there was no guns available, they could fashoin a bomb....
thats dkf's point.....removing the gun, does not stop the intent.


I speal of oklahoma cuz your response to dkf was "its to difficullt to obtain
the materials and requires much skill"

Bull shit, I was theier, I rememebr the day, I remember the case.....its a part of OUR history...

It was NOT a difficult device....

your just wrong

dkf is right, removing teh guns, doesn not insure saftey as it does not remove the assailants intent.
dkf is right, a very devestating explosive can be fashioned
our history ( oklahoma ) proves his point

 

[rock hard]

totally agree!!!!

Here in CA we can thank the former "Governator" for making Mental Health funding a slash line item to save money!

I definatly dont understand the mental health issue enough...
would an alcholic be considered "metal"?
oor a person who is tested pos. for drugs?
how about post tramatic stress???

to me these are people who shouldnt carry....
but if a person has a drinking problem, and know they could lose thier right to carry if they seek help.....it may prevent them seeking help...no good.

There is a law...if you are alone, or in a group...and a person is
overdosing.....you can all 911 and everyone present is "except" from any
charges of the drugs...
this is to prevent poeple from NOT calling in for fear of consequences.

I think if a person suspects themself of needing help, and they seek it.
they should have some reasurannce they wont lose thier right to carry.
otherwise, they may noot seek treatment....
you could have cops, with post tramatic strees, not seek help for fear
they could lose thier ability to carry.

amnesty will insure they have no reason NOT to seek help.

oh, we know a girl....poor girl is big...docs though she was past due....cut her to get baby.
baby was like 5 lbs and premature...she didnt get to hold teh baby for lik a week.
she was in real bad shape as was teh baby...

she has a bad case of the post....? its when a mom doesnt accept her child.....fkn rough, I had no
idea how bad it was.

appearently its kinda common in today world, woen dont often get that initial bond......and some moms have done
HORRIBLE things......is this worthy of lose of gun rights????
cuz the one woman used a knife..remember?

so ricky is right about that......you got to treat the sickness.
removing guns wouldnt have stopped her from ............those kids.

you cant legeslate kids to be safe from crazy....you got to recognize crazy and get em help.

 

[Duuuuuuuude]

I definatly dont understand the mental health issue enough...
would an alcholic be considered "metal"?
oor a person who is tested pos. for drugs?
how about post tramatic stress???

to me these are people who shouldnt carry....

Anyone in a position that compromises their judgement or interpretation of reality should not be allowed to carry, or, depending on the severity, own a weapon. Alchoholics, drug users, those that suffer from PTSD too. TatooKenny lost a friend this year to a member of our military that was chemically impaired and more that likely suffering from PTSD.

That doesn't mean you can't casually drink or casually smoke weed, you just shouldn't be carrying a weapon while you do. Just like you shouldn't be behind the wheel.

 

[rock hard]

Anyone in a position that compromises their judgement or interpretation of reality should not be allowed to carry. Alchoholics, drug users, those that suffer from PTSD too.

That doesn't mean you can't casually drink or casually smoke weed, you just shouldn't be carrying a weapon while you do. Just like you shouldn't be behind the wheel.

so people diiagnosed with ptsd shouldnt drive?

and you say no carry, so people who are considered alcholoics cant carry?
even though they may not be drunk when they carry?

how about drunks....who are not diagnosed yet as alcoholics, can they carry?

how about owning a weapon and having in the home....just not carry?