|
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. |
Guns don't kill people, people kill people. But I don't think anyone on either side of the isle would have anything against background checks, or raising red flags for someone who starts buying mass amounts of ammo in bulk.
Also find it interesting that instead of police or authorities not being suspicious of his purchases or ramblings, a gun club the shooter tried to join was and prevented his joining.
|
On July 28 2012 08:08 Millitron wrote:Show nested quote +On July 28 2012 07:03 sereniity wrote: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 think your argument about alcohol is invalid. While alcohol is a poison - so is pretty much every other drug at some dosage. Alcohol is not made to kill things - guns are. As the Cracked article I posted points out - if you misuse alcohol you can die, but if you misuse a gun - nothing dies because making things die is the point of a gun. Alcohol is not for making things die.
|
On July 28 2012 05:12 LaSt)ChAnCe wrote: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 Show nested quote +
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.
Wasn't sure what logical fallacy this was at first, but I've figured it out. There are basically two strawman fallacies contained in this letter.
The first is crafting a totally impractical and ridiculous solution to drunk driving, when there are already much better ones available, such as ignition interlocking devices (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ignition_interlock_device), then comparing it to a reduction in magazine capacity for the purposes of gun control, when the two already don't meaningfully compare.
The second is comparing a vehicle and a gun on the basis that they are both inanimate objects under the control of the operator. One of these "inanimate objects" is designed to kill people, which inherently invites regulation, and is not totally necessary for your day to day routine. The other is a means for transportation, which is not designed to kill people, and is totally necessary for most people's day-to-day routine. So, basically a gun and a vehicle do not meaningfully compare for the purposes of any sort of regulation.
Thirdly, we are forgetting the obvious fact that vehicles are already highly regulated, making the whole comparison even more backwards and ludicrous. So, this letter is actually attempting to highlight the inanimate object used for transportation that is already highly regulated to suggest that the inanimate object used for killing people shouldn't be regulated?
Fourthly, this letter just plain misses the point. We aren't just a group of individuals that are isolated from each other's mutual interaction and influence, we're a group of people trying to live together. It is unreasonable to argue individual responsibility to this extreme, when social responsibility is also important. Basically, whoever wrote this letter is attempting to critique a law designed at social responsibility by talking about personal responsibility.
Finally, how does this even violate the 2nd amendment, it still allows you to own a gun, it merely puts a restriction on the magazine size. And how does 10 cartridges even affect you? You can still kill multiple people entering your house, you can still go hunting, you can still shoot recreationally, the only thing it makes more difficult is a massive killing spree. Restricting the size of the magazine is already something many other countries do to good effect.
|
On July 28 2012 08:26 {CC}StealthBlue wrote:
Guns don't kill people, people kill people. But I don't think anyone on either side of the isle would have anything against background checks, or raising red flags for someone who starts buying mass amounts of ammo in bulk.
Also find it interesting that instead of police or authorities not being suspicious of his purchases or ramblings, a gun club the shooter tried to join was and prevented his joining.
Read the article read it read it! Not saying you're wrong just read it please!!!
http://www.cracked.com/blog/the-4-most-meaningless-arguments-against-gun-control/
And that is interesting! Go gun club dude! Good for him.
|
On July 28 2012 08:27 Arghmyliver wrote:Show nested quote +On July 28 2012 08:08 Millitron wrote:On July 28 2012 07:03 sereniity wrote: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 think your argument about alcohol is invalid. While alcohol is a poison - so is pretty much every other drug at some dosage. Alcohol is not made to kill things - guns are. As the Cracked article I posted points out - if you misuse alcohol you can die, but if you misuse a gun - nothing dies because making things die is the point of a gun. Alcohol is not for making things die.
I shoot soda cans all the time. What's dying then? Am I misusing my gun? Guns are used far more often on paper targets at the range, or soda cans on private property FAR more often than they're used on living things. I'd say that means that killing is actually NOT their primary use then.
On July 28 2012 08:26 {CC}StealthBlue wrote:
Guns don't kill people, people kill people. But I don't think anyone on either side of the isle would have anything against background checks, or raising red flags for someone who starts buying mass amounts of ammo in bulk.
Also find it interesting that instead of police or authorities not being suspicious of his purchases or ramblings, a gun club the shooter tried to join was and prevented his joining.
Its often MUCH cheaper to buy in bulk, so it shouldn't be viewed as TOO suspicious, but I wouldn't be opposed to an extra check for stupidly huge purchases.
|
On July 28 2012 08:28 sevencck wrote:Show nested quote +On July 28 2012 05:12 LaSt)ChAnCe wrote: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.
Wasn't sure what logical fallacy this was at first, but I've figured it out. There are basically two strawman fallacies contained in this letter. The first is crafting a totally impractical and ridiculous solution to drunk driving, when there are already much better ones available, such as ignition interlocking devices (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ignition_interlock_device), then comparing it to a reduction in magazine capacity for the purposes of gun control, when the two already don't meaningfully compare. The second is comparing a vehicle and a gun on the basis that they are both inanimate objects under the control of the operator. One of these "inanimate objects" is designed to kill people, which inherently invites regulation, and is not totally necessary for your day to day routine. The other is a means for transportation, which is not designed to kill people, and is totally necessary for most people's day-to-day routine. So, basically a gun and a vehicle do not meaningfully compare for the purposes of any sort of regulation. Thirdly, we are forgetting the obvious fact that vehicles are already highly regulated, making the whole comparison even more backwards and crazy. So, this letter is attempting to highlight the inanimate object used for transportation that is already highly regulated as a comparison for the inanimate object used for killing people not being regulated? Fourthly, this letter just plain misses the point. We aren't just a group of individuals that are isolated from each other's mutual interaction and influence, we're a group of people trying to live together. It is unreasonable to argue individual responsibility to this extreme, when social responsibility is also important. Basically, whoever wrote this letter is attempting to critique a law designed at social responsibility by talking about personal responsibility. Finally, how does this even violate the 2nd amendment, it still allows you to own a gun, it merely puts a restriction on the magazine size. And how does 10 cartridges even affect you? You can still kill multiple people entering your house, you can still go hunting, you can still shoot recreationally, the only thing it makes more difficult is a massive killing spree. Restricting the size of the magazine is already something many other countries do to good effect.
Well said Seven! Restricting the ammo capacity directly reduces the number of things you can kill with your instant-point-and-death stick. Restricting gas tank capacity has only a direct effect on the distance you can travel in the car. There is really no similarity.
|
On July 28 2012 08:33 Millitron wrote:Show nested quote +On July 28 2012 08:27 Arghmyliver wrote:On July 28 2012 08:08 Millitron wrote:On July 28 2012 07:03 sereniity wrote: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 think your argument about alcohol is invalid. While alcohol is a poison - so is pretty much every other drug at some dosage. Alcohol is not made to kill things - guns are. As the Cracked article I posted points out - if you misuse alcohol you can die, but if you misuse a gun - nothing dies because making things die is the point of a gun. Alcohol is not for making things die. I shoot soda cans all the time. What's dying then? Am I misusing my gun? Guns are used far more often on paper targets at the range, or soda cans on private property FAR more often than they're used on living things. I'd say that means that killing is actually NOT their primary use then.
Target shooting = practice killing.
Edit: Don't get me wrong I don't necessarily think we should outlaw guns - but you can't argue that guns are the same as cars or any other tool not invented for the explicit purpose of killing. There is a reason guns are classified as "weapons" and not "toys." They were made to kill things. It's a death machine. Like a gallows, or a claidheamh mòr.
|
On July 28 2012 08:35 Arghmyliver wrote:Show nested quote +On July 28 2012 08:33 Millitron wrote:On July 28 2012 08:27 Arghmyliver wrote:On July 28 2012 08:08 Millitron wrote:On July 28 2012 07:03 sereniity wrote: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 think your argument about alcohol is invalid. While alcohol is a poison - so is pretty much every other drug at some dosage. Alcohol is not made to kill things - guns are. As the Cracked article I posted points out - if you misuse alcohol you can die, but if you misuse a gun - nothing dies because making things die is the point of a gun. Alcohol is not for making things die. I shoot soda cans all the time. What's dying then? Am I misusing my gun? Guns are used far more often on paper targets at the range, or soda cans on private property FAR more often than they're used on living things. I'd say that means that killing is actually NOT their primary use then. Target shooting = practice killing.
Target shooting= practice shooting your gun to hunt with?
Target shooting= fun
Target shooting= hobby
Don't be so ignorant, obviously you have never held a gun in your life
|
On July 28 2012 08:37 Moonling wrote:Show nested quote +On July 28 2012 08:35 Arghmyliver wrote:On July 28 2012 08:33 Millitron wrote:On July 28 2012 08:27 Arghmyliver wrote:On July 28 2012 08:08 Millitron wrote:On July 28 2012 07:03 sereniity wrote: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 think your argument about alcohol is invalid. While alcohol is a poison - so is pretty much every other drug at some dosage. Alcohol is not made to kill things - guns are. As the Cracked article I posted points out - if you misuse alcohol you can die, but if you misuse a gun - nothing dies because making things die is the point of a gun. Alcohol is not for making things die. I shoot soda cans all the time. What's dying then? Am I misusing my gun? Guns are used far more often on paper targets at the range, or soda cans on private property FAR more often than they're used on living things. I'd say that means that killing is actually NOT their primary use then. Target shooting = practice killing. Target shooting= practice shooting your gun to hunt with? Target shooting= fun Target shooting= hobby Don't be so ignorant, obviously you have never held a gun in your life
Lol - I have held a gun so it would appear that you are the ignorant one ^_^. And what exactly do you do when you hunt? Wound the animals and watch them suffer? You sick freak. But seriously. Hunting = killing.
Edit: You're avoiding the point. Guns are made for killing - alcohol and cars are not. You can't really compare them.
|
On July 28 2012 08:37 Moonling wrote:Show nested quote +On July 28 2012 08:35 Arghmyliver wrote:On July 28 2012 08:33 Millitron wrote:On July 28 2012 08:27 Arghmyliver wrote:On July 28 2012 08:08 Millitron wrote:On July 28 2012 07:03 sereniity wrote: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 think your argument about alcohol is invalid. While alcohol is a poison - so is pretty much every other drug at some dosage. Alcohol is not made to kill things - guns are. As the Cracked article I posted points out - if you misuse alcohol you can die, but if you misuse a gun - nothing dies because making things die is the point of a gun. Alcohol is not for making things die. I shoot soda cans all the time. What's dying then? Am I misusing my gun? Guns are used far more often on paper targets at the range, or soda cans on private property FAR more often than they're used on living things. I'd say that means that killing is actually NOT their primary use then. Target shooting = practice killing. Target shooting= practice shooting your gun to hunt with? Target shooting= fun Target shooting= hobby Don't be so ignorant, obviously you have never held a gun in your life
I'd be more inclined to agree with you philosphically if the rounds you used for target shooting weren't designed to be lethal to living beings. Target shooting is possible with rubber bullets or other forms of ammunition. Perhaps you could use those if it really is just a fun hobby? When the rounds you're using are designed to kill, then yeah, target shooting may be a fun hobby, but aren't you really just honing a killing strike?
|
On July 28 2012 08:35 Arghmyliver wrote:Show nested quote +On July 28 2012 08:33 Millitron wrote:On July 28 2012 08:27 Arghmyliver wrote:On July 28 2012 08:08 Millitron wrote:On July 28 2012 07:03 sereniity wrote: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 think your argument about alcohol is invalid. While alcohol is a poison - so is pretty much every other drug at some dosage. Alcohol is not made to kill things - guns are. As the Cracked article I posted points out - if you misuse alcohol you can die, but if you misuse a gun - nothing dies because making things die is the point of a gun. Alcohol is not for making things die. I shoot soda cans all the time. What's dying then? Am I misusing my gun? Guns are used far more often on paper targets at the range, or soda cans on private property FAR more often than they're used on living things. I'd say that means that killing is actually NOT their primary use then. Target shooting = practice killing.
Here's the thing though; my gun is a pretty tiny .22 caliber rifle, and all my ammo has low powder loads. I'd have to land a one-in-a-million shot to kill someone. If I shot someone who was wearing a leather jacket, I doubt it'd break the skin, and even if it did, it wouldn't even need stitches. If I was practicing to kill, wouldn't I practice with a weapon that could actually do damage?
I don't shoot because I'm practicing to take a life, I do it because its pretty fun.
|
Ok, so I have a compromise that'll piss the hell off of both gun control and gun rights advocates, but oh well.
The thing most anti-gun people seem to be complaining about assault rifles is the ability to lay down firepower extremely fast. So, move high capacity magazines from unregulated to being considered NFA, basically same category as fully automatic rifles, short barreled shotguns/rifles, and silencers. It'll be legal to obtain, but basically it'll require jumping through hella paperwork as well as pay a special tax. Many states outright ban stuff that require class 3 licences, not to mention it'll jack up the prices way higher. Crime with class 3 weapons are practically nil. In return, move silencers from being class 3 and make them unregulated. Before anti-gun people start going crazy, silencers reduce noise from firearms from 160 decibels (insta-hearing damage) to ~100 decibels (still holy freakin' loud), nothing like the pew you hear in movies (on the other hand, semi automatic rifles aren't the death dealing machines that you see in movies either even with high cap mags... but oh well). Silencers are amazing for new shooters who will still jump at the loud sound but won't develop as much of a flinch. Not to mention it'll save many a person's hearing.
tl;dr: Silencers now unregulated, high-cap mags now require class 3 licence to obtain. Result: Both sides pissed off =P
|
On July 28 2012 08:41 sevencck wrote:Show nested quote +On July 28 2012 08:37 Moonling wrote:On July 28 2012 08:35 Arghmyliver wrote:On July 28 2012 08:33 Millitron wrote:On July 28 2012 08:27 Arghmyliver wrote:On July 28 2012 08:08 Millitron wrote:On July 28 2012 07:03 sereniity wrote:On July 28 2012 06:39 Millitron wrote:On July 27 2012 07:06 Silidons wrote:On July 27 2012 01:35 ImAbstracT wrote:
[quote]
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 think your argument about alcohol is invalid. While alcohol is a poison - so is pretty much every other drug at some dosage. Alcohol is not made to kill things - guns are. As the Cracked article I posted points out - if you misuse alcohol you can die, but if you misuse a gun - nothing dies because making things die is the point of a gun. Alcohol is not for making things die. I shoot soda cans all the time. What's dying then? Am I misusing my gun? Guns are used far more often on paper targets at the range, or soda cans on private property FAR more often than they're used on living things. I'd say that means that killing is actually NOT their primary use then. Target shooting = practice killing. Target shooting= practice shooting your gun to hunt with? Target shooting= fun Target shooting= hobby Don't be so ignorant, obviously you have never held a gun in your life I'd be more inclined to agree with you philosphically if the rounds you used for target shooting weren't designed to be lethal to living beings. Target shooting is possible with rubber bullets or other forms of ammunition. Perhaps you could use those if it really is just a fun hobby? When the rounds you're using are designed to kill, then yeah, target shooting may be a fun hobby, but aren't you really just honing a killing strike?
Exactly - and like I said - I don't necessarily think we should outlaw guns. But don't pretend they aren't made to kill.
This is a REALLY REALLY good article:
http://www.cracked.com/blog/the-4-most-meaningless-arguments-against-gun-control/
User was warned for spamming the same link
|
On July 28 2012 08:39 Arghmyliver wrote:Show nested quote +On July 28 2012 08:37 Moonling wrote:On July 28 2012 08:35 Arghmyliver wrote:On July 28 2012 08:33 Millitron wrote:On July 28 2012 08:27 Arghmyliver wrote:On July 28 2012 08:08 Millitron wrote:On July 28 2012 07:03 sereniity wrote:On July 28 2012 06:39 Millitron wrote:On July 27 2012 07:06 Silidons wrote:On July 27 2012 01:35 ImAbstracT wrote:
[quote]
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 think your argument about alcohol is invalid. While alcohol is a poison - so is pretty much every other drug at some dosage. Alcohol is not made to kill things - guns are. As the Cracked article I posted points out - if you misuse alcohol you can die, but if you misuse a gun - nothing dies because making things die is the point of a gun. Alcohol is not for making things die. I shoot soda cans all the time. What's dying then? Am I misusing my gun? Guns are used far more often on paper targets at the range, or soda cans on private property FAR more often than they're used on living things. I'd say that means that killing is actually NOT their primary use then. Target shooting = practice killing. Target shooting= practice shooting your gun to hunt with? Target shooting= fun Target shooting= hobby Don't be so ignorant, obviously you have never held a gun in your life Lol - I have held a gun so it would appear that you are the ignorant one ^_^. And what exactly do you do when you hunt? Wound the animals and watch them suffer? You sick freak. But seriously. Hunting = killing. Edit: You're avoiding the point. Guns are made for killing - alcohol and cars are not. You can't really compare them.
I never said anything about wounding an animal? I shoot to kill when I hunt
I like to have the right to have a gun in my household and shoot somebody if they enter. The world is not a fairy tale world of peace and harmony which is what I imagine you are pushing for. I agree I would love if the world had no guns etc etc. fact of the matter is there are sick people in the world especially now. The fact that I can have my concealed gun license t in my state gives me comfort in knowing I can fight for my life if need be, and not have to rely on police solely.
|
On July 28 2012 08:42 Millitron wrote:Show nested quote +On July 28 2012 08:35 Arghmyliver wrote:On July 28 2012 08:33 Millitron wrote:On July 28 2012 08:27 Arghmyliver wrote:On July 28 2012 08:08 Millitron wrote:On July 28 2012 07:03 sereniity wrote: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 think your argument about alcohol is invalid. While alcohol is a poison - so is pretty much every other drug at some dosage. Alcohol is not made to kill things - guns are. As the Cracked article I posted points out - if you misuse alcohol you can die, but if you misuse a gun - nothing dies because making things die is the point of a gun. Alcohol is not for making things die. I shoot soda cans all the time. What's dying then? Am I misusing my gun? Guns are used far more often on paper targets at the range, or soda cans on private property FAR more often than they're used on living things. I'd say that means that killing is actually NOT their primary use then. Target shooting = practice killing. Here's the thing though; my gun is a pretty tiny .22 caliber rifle, and all my ammo has low powder loads. I'd have to land a one-in-a-million shot to kill someone. If I shot someone who was wearing a leather jacket, I doubt it'd break the skin, and even if it did, it wouldn't even need stitches. If I was practicing to kill, wouldn't I practice with a weapon that could actually do damage? I don't shoot because I'm practicing to take a life, I do it because its pretty fun.
Awesome! It sounds like you are a responsible gun owner who genuinely enjoys target shooting! Right on. Guns still = weapons. Cars still = transportation and alcohol still = drinky drinky.
|
On July 28 2012 08:44 Moonling wrote:Show nested quote +On July 28 2012 08:39 Arghmyliver wrote:On July 28 2012 08:37 Moonling wrote:On July 28 2012 08:35 Arghmyliver wrote:On July 28 2012 08:33 Millitron wrote:On July 28 2012 08:27 Arghmyliver wrote:On July 28 2012 08:08 Millitron wrote:On July 28 2012 07:03 sereniity wrote:On July 28 2012 06:39 Millitron wrote:On July 27 2012 07:06 Silidons wrote:
[quote]
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 think your argument about alcohol is invalid. While alcohol is a poison - so is pretty much every other drug at some dosage. Alcohol is not made to kill things - guns are. As the Cracked article I posted points out - if you misuse alcohol you can die, but if you misuse a gun - nothing dies because making things die is the point of a gun. Alcohol is not for making things die. I shoot soda cans all the time. What's dying then? Am I misusing my gun? Guns are used far more often on paper targets at the range, or soda cans on private property FAR more often than they're used on living things. I'd say that means that killing is actually NOT their primary use then. Target shooting = practice killing. Target shooting= practice shooting your gun to hunt with? Target shooting= fun Target shooting= hobby Don't be so ignorant, obviously you have never held a gun in your life Lol - I have held a gun so it would appear that you are the ignorant one ^_^. And what exactly do you do when you hunt? Wound the animals and watch them suffer? You sick freak. But seriously. Hunting = killing. Edit: You're avoiding the point. Guns are made for killing - alcohol and cars are not. You can't really compare them. I never said anything about wounding an animal? I shoot to kill when I hunt I like to have the right to have a gun in my household and shoot somebody if they enter. The world is not a fairy tale world of peace and harmony which is what I imagine you are pushing for. I agree I would love if the world had no guns etc etc. fact of the matter is there are sick people in the world especially now. The fact that I can have my concealed gun license t in my state gives me comfort in knowing I can fight for my life if need be, and not have to rely on police solely.
On July 28 2012 08:35 Arghmyliver wrote:
Don't get me wrong I don't necessarily think we should outlaw guns - but you can't argue that guns are the same as cars or any other tool not invented for the explicit purpose of killing. There is a reason guns are classified as "weapons" and not "toys." They were made to kill things. It's a death machine. Like a gallows, or a claidheamh mòr.
Edit: I agree - you never said anything about wounding animals. You did say that target shooting might be practice hunting - which is still killing. So I was making a joke like "oh you don't kill things when you hunt?" That's why I said "You sick freak" (a joke) and "But seriously" (Read: Previous statement was a joke).
|
On July 28 2012 08:33 Millitron wrote:Show nested quote +On July 28 2012 08:27 Arghmyliver wrote:On July 28 2012 08:08 Millitron wrote:On July 28 2012 07:03 sereniity wrote: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 think your argument about alcohol is invalid. While alcohol is a poison - so is pretty much every other drug at some dosage. Alcohol is not made to kill things - guns are. As the Cracked article I posted points out - if you misuse alcohol you can die, but if you misuse a gun - nothing dies because making things die is the point of a gun. Alcohol is not for making things die. I shoot soda cans all the time. What's dying then? Am I misusing my gun? Guns are used far more often on paper targets at the range, or soda cans on private property FAR more often than they're used on living things. I'd say that means that killing is actually NOT their primary use then.
Okay.
O. Kay. Seeing as you shoot soda cans all the time allow me to congratulate you, citizen, for a Job Well Done. However, this still doesn't solve the problem with the mass murdering madme running around in our backyard and killing people in movie theaters. If you will argue against restricting gun ownership, then what is, in your opinion, the solution for all these mass-shootings we've seen in recent years?
Your argument that because guns are used primarily to shoot at non-living targets then their intended use can't be to kill people is completely, utterly wrong. The firearm was built with the express purpose of being used as a military weapon. Correct me if I'm wrong, but it's only in recent years that soldiers have taken to building schools, am I right? Firearms were, are and always will be manufactured as weapons of war, which means that they are implements designed for killing people. That, and the thought that the guy designing an implement that could hurl a projectile incredibly fast intended for it to be used to shoot the middleage equivalent of soda cans seems kind of ridiculous.
|
On July 28 2012 08:26 {CC}StealthBlue wrote:
Guns don't kill people, people kill people. But I don't think anyone on either side of the isle would have anything against background checks, or raising red flags for someone who starts buying mass amounts of ammo in bulk.
Also find it interesting that instead of police or authorities not being suspicious of his purchases or ramblings, a gun club the shooter tried to join was and prevented his joining.
Define "mass amount of ammo".
Many gun enthusiasts will disagree on what this amount is and whether it should even raise a red flag. The guy who went on the shooting rampage didn't even use a fraction of what he bought to do the damage he did.
Also, the cracked article is ridiculous.
People do kill people. There are many instruments to kill someone with, regardless of their original intended purpose. How can you discredit those arguments when they hold solid ground? If anything, the title should be "The Most Over-Used Arguments Against Gun Control".
|
On July 28 2012 08:50 stevarius wrote:Show nested quote +On July 28 2012 08:26 {CC}StealthBlue wrote:
Guns don't kill people, people kill people. But I don't think anyone on either side of the isle would have anything against background checks, or raising red flags for someone who starts buying mass amounts of ammo in bulk.
Also find it interesting that instead of police or authorities not being suspicious of his purchases or ramblings, a gun club the shooter tried to join was and prevented his joining. Define "mass amount of ammo". Many gun enthusiasts will disagree on what this amount is and whether it should even raise a red flag. The guy who went on the shooting rampage didn't even use a fraction of what he bought to do the damage he did.
http://www.cracked.com/blog/the-4-most-meaningless-arguments-against-gun-control/
Read! Everyone READ! NOW! READ IT! I dare you! I triple dare you! Use literateness now! Read! I will bug everyone till they read!
|
On July 28 2012 08:46 Arghmyliver wrote:Show nested quote +On July 28 2012 08:42 Millitron wrote:On July 28 2012 08:35 Arghmyliver wrote:On July 28 2012 08:33 Millitron wrote:On July 28 2012 08:27 Arghmyliver wrote:On July 28 2012 08:08 Millitron wrote:On July 28 2012 07:03 sereniity wrote:On July 28 2012 06:39 Millitron wrote:On July 27 2012 07:06 Silidons wrote:On July 27 2012 01:35 ImAbstracT wrote:
[quote]
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 think your argument about alcohol is invalid. While alcohol is a poison - so is pretty much every other drug at some dosage. Alcohol is not made to kill things - guns are. As the Cracked article I posted points out - if you misuse alcohol you can die, but if you misuse a gun - nothing dies because making things die is the point of a gun. Alcohol is not for making things die. I shoot soda cans all the time. What's dying then? Am I misusing my gun? Guns are used on paper targets at the range, or soda cans on private property FAR more often than they're used on living things. I'd say that means that killing is actually NOT their primary use then. Target shooting = practice killing. Here's the thing though; my gun is a pretty tiny .22 caliber rifle, and all my ammo has low powder loads. I'd have to land a one-in-a-million shot to kill someone. If I shot someone who was wearing a leather jacket, I doubt it'd break the skin, and even if it did, it wouldn't even need stitches. If I was practicing to kill, wouldn't I practice with a weapon that could actually do damage? I don't shoot because I'm practicing to take a life, I do it because its pretty fun. Awesome! It sounds like you are a responsible gun owner who genuinely enjoys target shooting! Right on. Guns still = weapons. Cars still = transportation and alcohol still = drinky drinky.
But I'm not the only responsible gun owner. The media makes it sound like we're a minority, but we're actually the vast majority. You never hear about all the gun owners who go through their lives day to day without incident. You only hear about the ones screw up.
For the vast majority of gun owners, guns provide a fun past-time that they can share with likeminded, responsible friends and family. Occasionally though, people get careless and hurt themselves or others.
For the vast majority of alcohol enthusiasts, alcohol provides a fun past-time that they can share with likeminded, responsible friends and family. Occasionally though, people get careless and hurt themselves or others.
On July 28 2012 08:47 DerNebel wrote:Show nested quote +On July 28 2012 08:33 Millitron wrote:On July 28 2012 08:27 Arghmyliver wrote:On July 28 2012 08:08 Millitron wrote:On July 28 2012 07:03 sereniity wrote: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 think your argument about alcohol is invalid. While alcohol is a poison - so is pretty much every other drug at some dosage. Alcohol is not made to kill things - guns are. As the Cracked article I posted points out - if you misuse alcohol you can die, but if you misuse a gun - nothing dies because making things die is the point of a gun. Alcohol is not for making things die. I shoot soda cans all the time. What's dying then? Am I misusing my gun? Guns are used far more often on paper targets at the range, or soda cans on private property FAR more often than they're used on living things. I'd say that means that killing is actually NOT their primary use then. Okay. O. Kay. Seeing as you shoot soda cans all the time allow me to congratulate you, citizen, for a Job Well Done. However, this still doesn't solve the problem with the mass murdering madme running around in our backyard and killing people in movie theaters. If you will argue against restricting gun ownership, then what is, in your opinion, the solution for all these mass-shootings we've seen in recent years? Your argument that because guns are used primarily to shoot at non-living targets then their intended use can't be to kill people is completely, utterly wrong. The firearm was built with the express purpose of being used as a military weapon. Correct me if I'm wrong, but it's only in recent years that soldiers have taken to building schools, am I right? Firearms were, are and always will be manufactured as weapons of war, which means that they are implements designed for killing people. That, and the thought that the guy designing an implement that could hurl a projectile incredibly fast intended for it to be used to shoot the middleage equivalent of soda cans seems kind of ridiculous.
The solution for mass shootings is simply background checks, and better training for Firearms dealers to spot unstable individuals. I'd also be cool with a little more regulation for private sales as well, though I don't believe any of the more recent gunmen purchased their weapons from private individuals. Just because the current system lets a few slip past doesn't mean it needs drastic changes.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
