|
Although this thread does not function under the same strict guidelines as the USPMT, it is still a general practice on TL to provide a source with an explanation on why it is relevant and what purpose it adds to the discussion. Failure to do so will result in a mod action. |
On July 27 2012 19:14 TS-Rupbar wrote:Show nested quote +On July 27 2012 18:56 Cloud9157 wrote:On July 27 2012 18:17 SEA KarMa wrote:
i dont understand, if there is a complete ban on weapons for civilians then there should be less murder. Simple as that. Letting people have 'self defence' is good, but the problem is that they may use it for killing instead. Its not like you are going to be carry weapons with you all the time, so public shootings won't help you either way. And obviously if you don't allow civilians acquiring firearms then there are much, much less possibilities of shootings occurring. It still wouldn't stop people. Prohibition didn't stop people from drinking alcohol, 100% ban on guns won't solve everything either. If people want something that badly, they'll turn to the black market and arms dealers. Now restricting them to only being usable for hunting purposes or to one's house is what I feel would help. Guns also need to be harder to obtain. The fact he got 4 guns over the course of 60 days is disturbing. You can't compare alcohol and weapons. Here is a small list of why: 1. People can make their own alcohol, but not their own guns. 2. I'd argue that guns are more directly dangerous than alcohol. 3. There is a larger social stigma on breaking laws on guns than breaking those of alcohol. I'd find it hard to believe that people would as often break gun laws as they break alcohol laws, such as drinking before 21.
Sorry, but your first two points are dead wrong.
|
Zurich15310 Posts
On July 28 2012 00:06 ImAbstracT wrote:Thirdly, I have read no official reports of him having 100 round beta-c mag. In fact, the pictures I have seen, it was only a standard 30 round magazine: ![[image loading]](http://www.thedailybeast.com/content/dailybeast/articles/2012/07/21/how-alleged-colorado-shooter-james-holmes-bought-his-guns/_jcr_content/body/inlineimage.img.503.jpg/1342898278043.cached.jpg) Notice in the top left the gun has a grey magazine, which is a stardard milsurp magazine.
Do we know that that is his gun and not one of the cops? There is also what seems to be a riot shield randomly lying around.
I agree though that infographic was way too sensationalist.
|
On July 28 2012 02:02 zatic wrote:Show nested quote +On July 28 2012 00:06 ImAbstracT wrote:Thirdly, I have read no official reports of him having 100 round beta-c mag. In fact, the pictures I have seen, it was only a standard 30 round magazine: Notice in the top left the gun has a grey magazine, which is a stardard milsurp magazine. Do we know that that is his gun and not one of the cops? There is also what seems to be a riot shield randomly lying around. I agree though that infographic was way too sensationalist.
No way a cop or swat would ever leave a loaded gun in a pile of blood near a door of a mass shooting crime scene lol. Plus it has a little yellow evidence sign by it.
|
On July 28 2012 03:01 ImAbstracT wrote:Show nested quote +On July 28 2012 02:02 zatic wrote:On July 28 2012 00:06 ImAbstracT wrote:Thirdly, I have read no official reports of him having 100 round beta-c mag. In fact, the pictures I have seen, it was only a standard 30 round magazine: Notice in the top left the gun has a grey magazine, which is a stardard milsurp magazine. Do we know that that is his gun and not one of the cops? There is also what seems to be a riot shield randomly lying around. I agree though that infographic was way too sensationalist. No way a cop or swat would ever leave a loaded gun in a pile of blood near a door of a mass shooting crime scene lol. Plus it has a little yellow evidence sign by it.
There's a yellow sign at the riot shield aswell, just saying  ...
|
copying a well written letter that a friend of mine is sending to our senator regarding a proposed senate amendment that is IMO pretty relevant to the discussion at hand. i personally agree fully with it
I am one of your Ohio constituents from the ----- zip code and am writing to you today to voice my opposition to proposed Senate Amendment (S.A. 2575) to restrict the sale of firearm magazines with a capacity beyond 10 cartridges. New York Senator Schumer opened his remarks defending his idea of "reasonable" gun control. I would suggest to you that trying to prevent gun violence by limiting the size of the magazines they use would be tantamount to trying to prevent drunk driving by limiting the size of a vehicle's gas tank; in each case we are blaming an inanimate object for the will of the person yielding it. In the words of Ronald Reagan, "We must reject the idea that every time a law is broken, society is guilty rather than the lawbreaker. It is time to restore the American precept that each individual is accountable for his actions."
I encourage you to embrace this opportunity to stand up for personal accountability. I respectfully ask that you honor our Second Amendment, and VOTE AGAINST S.A. 2575.
|
Your friend's letter has no substance.
Certain inanimate objects are not sold to random people because that would be too dangerous. Whether certain guns should fall under that category is up for discussion. To say that an item should be necessarily unrestricted because it's inanimate is to avoid the entire question: what is a sensible balance point between us being safe and us being free to buy lethal items?
It would be just as correct and sophisticated for the senator to write back, "No, guns are dangerous." No shit.
Also his analogy is nonsense because the amount of fuel in a tank doesn't affect the death toll in a drunk driving accident (unless it ignites, I guess), but a person who has to reload more often is likely to kill fewer people when firing into a crowded theater.
|
Article about a man with a gun stopping a stabbing spree.
+ Show Spoiler [Article] +SALT LAKE CITY (ABC 4 News) - A citizen with a gun stopped a knife wielding man as he began stabbing people Thursday evening at the downtown Salt Lake City Smith's store.
Police say the suspect purchased a knife inside the store and then turned it into a weapon. Smith's employee Dorothy Espinoza says, "He pulled it out and stood outside the Smiths in the foyer. And just started stabbing people and yelling you killed my people. You killed my people."
Espinoza says, the knife wielding man seriously injured two people. "There is blood all over. One got stabbed in the stomach and got stabbed in the head and held his hands and got stabbed all over the arms."
Then, before the suspect could find another victim - a citizen with a gun stopped the madness. "A guy pulled gun on him and told him to drop his weapon or he would shoot him. So, he dropped his weapon and the people from Smith's grabbed him."
By the time officers arrived the suspect had been subdued by employees and shoppers. Police had high praise for gun carrying man who ended the hysteria. Lt. Brian Purvis said, "This was a volatile situation that could have gotten worse. We can only assume from what we saw it could have gotten worse. He was definitely in the right place at the right time."
Dozens of other shoppers, who too could have become victims, are also thankful for the gun carrying man. And many, like Danylle Julian, are still in shock from the experience. "Scary actually. Really scary. Five minutes before I walk out to my car. It could have been me."
Police say right now they have no idea what caused the suspect to go on the dangerous rampage. (We will update as soon as we learn new information.)
So far, police have not released the names of the suspect, the victims or the man who pulled the gun.
|
|
|
On July 28 2012 05:52 mastergriggy wrote:Article about a man with a gun stopping a stabbing spree.+ Show Spoiler [Article] +SALT LAKE CITY (ABC 4 News) - A citizen with a gun stopped a knife wielding man as he began stabbing people Thursday evening at the downtown Salt Lake City Smith's store.
Police say the suspect purchased a knife inside the store and then turned it into a weapon. Smith's employee Dorothy Espinoza says, "He pulled it out and stood outside the Smiths in the foyer. And just started stabbing people and yelling you killed my people. You killed my people."
Espinoza says, the knife wielding man seriously injured two people. "There is blood all over. One got stabbed in the stomach and got stabbed in the head and held his hands and got stabbed all over the arms."
Then, before the suspect could find another victim - a citizen with a gun stopped the madness. "A guy pulled gun on him and told him to drop his weapon or he would shoot him. So, he dropped his weapon and the people from Smith's grabbed him."
By the time officers arrived the suspect had been subdued by employees and shoppers. Police had high praise for gun carrying man who ended the hysteria. Lt. Brian Purvis said, "This was a volatile situation that could have gotten worse. We can only assume from what we saw it could have gotten worse. He was definitely in the right place at the right time."
Dozens of other shoppers, who too could have become victims, are also thankful for the gun carrying man. And many, like Danylle Julian, are still in shock from the experience. "Scary actually. Really scary. Five minutes before I walk out to my car. It could have been me."
Police say right now they have no idea what caused the suspect to go on the dangerous rampage. (We will update as soon as we learn new information.)
So far, police have not released the names of the suspect, the victims or the man who pulled the gun.
Reaffirming the old adage that you don't bring a knife to a gunfight.
Although I must admit I found the article amusing in that he purchased the knife at the store and then proceeded to stab people with it while screaming.
|
On July 28 2012 05:56 bonifaceviii wrote:Show nested quote +On July 28 2012 05:52 mastergriggy wrote:Article about a man with a gun stopping a stabbing spree.+ Show Spoiler [Article] +SALT LAKE CITY (ABC 4 News) - A citizen with a gun stopped a knife wielding man as he began stabbing people Thursday evening at the downtown Salt Lake City Smith's store.
Police say the suspect purchased a knife inside the store and then turned it into a weapon. Smith's employee Dorothy Espinoza says, "He pulled it out and stood outside the Smiths in the foyer. And just started stabbing people and yelling you killed my people. You killed my people."
Espinoza says, the knife wielding man seriously injured two people. "There is blood all over. One got stabbed in the stomach and got stabbed in the head and held his hands and got stabbed all over the arms."
Then, before the suspect could find another victim - a citizen with a gun stopped the madness. "A guy pulled gun on him and told him to drop his weapon or he would shoot him. So, he dropped his weapon and the people from Smith's grabbed him."
By the time officers arrived the suspect had been subdued by employees and shoppers. Police had high praise for gun carrying man who ended the hysteria. Lt. Brian Purvis said, "This was a volatile situation that could have gotten worse. We can only assume from what we saw it could have gotten worse. He was definitely in the right place at the right time."
Dozens of other shoppers, who too could have become victims, are also thankful for the gun carrying man. And many, like Danylle Julian, are still in shock from the experience. "Scary actually. Really scary. Five minutes before I walk out to my car. It could have been me."
Police say right now they have no idea what caused the suspect to go on the dangerous rampage. (We will update as soon as we learn new information.)
So far, police have not released the names of the suspect, the victims or the man who pulled the gun. Reaffirming the old adage that you don't bring a knife to a gunfight. Although I must admit I found the article amusing in that he purchased the knife at the store and then proceeded to stab people with it while screaming.
Seems a bit ridiculous that you'd sell a knife to a man who is clearly out of his mind in the first place.
|
On July 28 2012 05:08 sereniity wrote:Show nested quote +On July 28 2012 03:01 ImAbstracT wrote:On July 28 2012 02:02 zatic wrote:On July 28 2012 00:06 ImAbstracT wrote:Thirdly, I have read no official reports of him having 100 round beta-c mag. In fact, the pictures I have seen, it was only a standard 30 round magazine: Notice in the top left the gun has a grey magazine, which is a stardard milsurp magazine. Do we know that that is his gun and not one of the cops? There is also what seems to be a riot shield randomly lying around. I agree though that infographic was way too sensationalist. No way a cop or swat would ever leave a loaded gun in a pile of blood near a door of a mass shooting crime scene lol. Plus it has a little yellow evidence sign by it. There's a yellow sign at the riot shield aswell, just saying ...
Could have been the second shooters.
*trollface.jpg*
|
For the last time for anyone who cares to learn something. Gun rights is not a fucking lobby in the united states, its in our goddamn constitution @ #2. It's a popular decision to have guns in this country such that groups of people have had these discussions in rooms and agreed to keep them.
Coal, oil, medical, and alternative energies are lobbies because they are competing against one another for government money. The NRA and/or private weapons industry doesn't get shit from the government.
|
On July 27 2012 07:06 Silidons wrote:Show nested quote +On July 27 2012 01:35 ImAbstracT wrote:On July 27 2012 00:09 Lagcraft wrote:
There is no need for a citizen to own any kind of semi-automatic or automatic gun. Period. None whatsoever. If you really want a gun, the only kinds that could be vaguely necessary would be a small pistol or a hunting rifle. Besides to protect themselves from the criminals who have semi-automatic rifles. It all depends what your view of rights and liberties are. I believe every American has the right to own whatever firearm they choose, until they do something stupid enough to lose that right. It seems the majority of people here think no one has the right to own a gun, it is a privileged the state should be able to give and take at will. Never Forget, even for an instant, that the one and only reason anybody has for taking your gun away is to make you weaker than he is, so he can do something to you that you wouldn't allow him to do if you were equipped to prevent it. This goes for burglars, muggers, and rapists, and even more so for policemen, bureaucrats, and politicians. Alexander Hope bahahahah protect ourselves from the criminals with semi-automatic rifles... the reason people want to take guns away is to save human lives because every single study has shown that an increase in gun regulation leads to less people dying every year. you think owning your gun is worth even 1 dead person? you sound like you follow alex jones...
the reason people want to take alcohol away is to save human lives because every single study has shown that an increase in alcohol regulation leads to less people dying every year. you think owning your alcohol is worth even 1 dead person? you sound like you follow alex jones...
|
On July 28 2012 05:48 Djabanete wrote:
Your friend's letter has no substance.
Certain inanimate objects are not sold to random people because that would be too dangerous. Whether certain guns should fall under that category is up for discussion. To say that an item should be necessarily unrestricted because it's inanimate is to avoid the entire question: what is a sensible balance point between us being safe and us being free to buy lethal items?
It would be just as correct and sophisticated for the senator to write back, "No, guns are dangerous." No shit.
Also his analogy is nonsense because the amount of fuel in a tank doesn't affect the death toll in a drunk driving accident (unless it ignites, I guess), but a person who has to reload more often is likely to kill fewer people when firing into a crowded theater.
Sure it has substance. The senator has an obligation to represent the viewpoints of the people - they are not parents, and it is not their call to simply agree with an amendment (which is fucking huge) based on their own opinions (specifically if they differ from the opinions of the people.)
It would also be inappropriate and disrespectful (keep in mind, these guys serve us, not vice versa) to respond with something so simple or short as "No, guns are dangerous." (and no, it would not be as correct or sophisticated - what are you even talking about?)
|
On July 28 2012 06:39 Millitron wrote:Show nested quote +On July 27 2012 07:06 Silidons wrote:On July 27 2012 01:35 ImAbstracT wrote:On July 27 2012 00:09 Lagcraft wrote:
There is no need for a citizen to own any kind of semi-automatic or automatic gun. Period. None whatsoever. If you really want a gun, the only kinds that could be vaguely necessary would be a small pistol or a hunting rifle. Besides to protect themselves from the criminals who have semi-automatic rifles. It all depends what your view of rights and liberties are. I believe every American has the right to own whatever firearm they choose, until they do something stupid enough to lose that right. It seems the majority of people here think no one has the right to own a gun, it is a privileged the state should be able to give and take at will. Never Forget, even for an instant, that the one and only reason anybody has for taking your gun away is to make you weaker than he is, so he can do something to you that you wouldn't allow him to do if you were equipped to prevent it. This goes for burglars, muggers, and rapists, and even more so for policemen, bureaucrats, and politicians. Alexander Hope bahahahah protect ourselves from the criminals with semi-automatic rifles... the reason people want to take guns away is to save human lives because every single study has shown that an increase in gun regulation leads to less people dying every year. you think owning your gun is worth even 1 dead person? you sound like you follow alex jones... the reason people want to take alcohol away is to save human lives because every single study has shown that an increase in alcohol regulation leads to less people dying every year. you think owning your alcohol is worth even 1 dead person? you sound like you follow alex jones...
There's a difference in drinking yourself to death and people shooting other people to death.
|
On July 28 2012 07:03 sereniity wrote:Show nested quote +On July 28 2012 06:39 Millitron wrote:On July 27 2012 07:06 Silidons wrote:On July 27 2012 01:35 ImAbstracT wrote:On July 27 2012 00:09 Lagcraft wrote:
There is no need for a citizen to own any kind of semi-automatic or automatic gun. Period. None whatsoever. If you really want a gun, the only kinds that could be vaguely necessary would be a small pistol or a hunting rifle. Besides to protect themselves from the criminals who have semi-automatic rifles. It all depends what your view of rights and liberties are. I believe every American has the right to own whatever firearm they choose, until they do something stupid enough to lose that right. It seems the majority of people here think no one has the right to own a gun, it is a privileged the state should be able to give and take at will. Never Forget, even for an instant, that the one and only reason anybody has for taking your gun away is to make you weaker than he is, so he can do something to you that you wouldn't allow him to do if you were equipped to prevent it. This goes for burglars, muggers, and rapists, and even more so for policemen, bureaucrats, and politicians. Alexander Hope bahahahah protect ourselves from the criminals with semi-automatic rifles... the reason people want to take guns away is to save human lives because every single study has shown that an increase in gun regulation leads to less people dying every year. you think owning your gun is worth even 1 dead person? you sound like you follow alex jones... the reason people want to take alcohol away is to save human lives because every single study has shown that an increase in alcohol regulation leads to less people dying every year. you think owning your alcohol is worth even 1 dead person? you sound like you follow alex jones... There's a difference in drinking yourself to death and people shooting other people to death.
Plenty of drunks crash their cars into innocent people. Plenty of drunks get violent and kill innocent people.
|
|
|
|
|
I don't know many countries where I can buy a gun as easy as in the USA.
If I want to shot a gun I can go to a gun club. There I have instructors who show me how to use it.
I don't need to take it home. The chance that I meet somebody who wants to shot me is not that big...
I'm more frightened that I accidentally hurt somebody with it.
So where lies the "problem" that Americans want to have a gun because of their safety?
Is it because they are afraid by the huge amount of guns that are circulating around?
Every human that really wants to kill others is going to get a gun from somewhere. But couldn't you reduce the amount of deaths that happen in the heat of passion?
|
Its not a good article though, because they only argue against strawmen.
For instance, in the "Guns don't kill people" section, they make the claim that the primary use of guns is to kill. I'd wager an extremely large amount of money that guns are actually used more often at the range, or on empty beer cans than on people, making target practice the actual primary use.
I know I've shot way more cardboard boxes than I have people.
On July 28 2012 08:23 Ohaio wrote:
I don't know many countries where I can buy a gun as easy as in the USA.
If I want to shot a gun I can go to a gun club. There I have instructors who show me how to use it.
I don't need to take it home. The chance that I meet somebody who wants to shot me is not that big...
I'm more frightened that I accidentally hurt somebody with it.
So where lies the "problem" that Americans want to have a gun because of their safety?
Is it because they are afraid by the huge amount of guns that are circulating around?
Every human that really wants to kill others is going to get a gun from somewhere. But couldn't you reduce the amount of deaths that happen in the heat of passion?
I own a gun but I'm absolutely not afraid of being robbed or anything. And not because I have a gun either, I'm not afraid because I know how extremely unlikely it is. If I lived in Detroit or something, I'd be worried, but even if the thugs didn't have guns I'd be worried. I own a gun because I enjoy shooting old cardboard boxes and soda cans. Where I live, we don't really have any public ranges, I just go in the woods on either family's or my friend's land.
I'm not afraid of accidentally hurting myself or others because to be honest, you have to be extraordinarily careless to do that nowadays. Modern guns don't just go off at the drop of a hat. Plus, whenever I'm not on the way to or from my favorite shooting spot, (i.e. 99% of the time) my gun is unloaded and locked up. Can't really hurt anyone in my steel gun cabinet can it?
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT![[image loading]](http://nationalpostnews.files.wordpress.com/2012/07/na0725_denvershooting15001.gif)
