|
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. |
It's going to be interesting to see the effects of a federal "assault weapon" ban, if it does make it through the house/senate. My guess is, it will do nothing. It will be modeled after CA's AWB (that still exists today). You can own as many as you want here provided your rifle meets the easy loopholes (hello bullet button). It's a political show that will not affect at all rates of ownership.
Hi-cap mags have been selling beyond anything seen before. Brownells have sold 3.5 years worth of high-cap mags in the past 3 days alone(src), with God knows how much on backorder.
If this bill doesn't pass, Feinstein will be kicking herself because this show has only served to skyrocket ownership of everything they want banned. And if it does pass, it won't stop new ownership at all.
It's all pomp and circumstance that will only make it slightly more difficult to own while doing nothing to solve the problem (tighter screening, mental healthcare, media propping murderers up like they're the Joker)
|
The assault weapon ban isn't really supposed to do anything on it's own. It opens the door to more action further down the line and makes the politicians look like they're trying something.
|
But when the assault weapon ban does nothing it will allow conservative politicians to use that as ammunition against gun control.
|
Why do Americans feel like people are going to go break in their house and kill them, and use that irrational fear to justify arming everyone with assault rifles ?
|
On December 22 2012 09:32 Supert0fu wrote:
Why do Americans feel like people are going to go break in their house and kill them, and use that irrational fear to justify arming everyone with assault rifles ?
Yeah, it is kind of silly. Remember though, the idea came with keeping an armed militia in case of an oppressive government.
|
On December 22 2012 09:32 Supert0fu wrote:
Why do Americans feel like people are going to go break in their house and kill them, and use that irrational fear to justify arming everyone with assault rifles ?
Because everyone can just buy guns man. Got to arm yourself against those!
They should just arm everyone with video games, what, with those training everyone into killers. Talk about your deterrent.
|
On December 22 2012 09:32 Supert0fu wrote:
Why do Americans feel like people are going to go break in their house and kill them, and use that irrational fear to justify arming everyone with assault rifles ?
Blame the american government for that
|
On December 22 2012 08:15 SweetNJoshSauce wrote:Show nested quote +On December 22 2012 07:58 sunprince wrote:On December 22 2012 07:00 dUTtrOACh wrote:On December 22 2012 06:48 Jermstuddog wrote:
I have no problem with people owning guns, but after a debate with a coworker today, I just feel like typing it out here:
There is no need for a civilian population to own anything with any form of automatic or burst firing capabilities. For the extent of civilian purposes: "one trigger pull, one bullet" should be more than enough to: protect yourself/your loved ones/your property from unsavory aggressors, to hunt, to take part in recreational activities like shooting ranges, or any other reasonable use of a gun I can think of as a civilian. As far as compact clips etc, I would not put that on the same level as automated weaponry, but do not see a reasonable need for civilian personnel to be carrying these either.
I would consider myself a rather liberal person, but I understand the desire for people to own their own weapons, and don't see an inherent issue with it.
The only reason why I would consider automated weaponry/compact clips any different is because there is no functional use for those things outside of war. When defending your personal things, you want to fire one or a few shots to scare away the attackers. When hunting, you want to fire one or a few shots to take down your target animal. When at a shooting range, you are usually judging marksmanship, not bullets-per-minute. Any weapon modification that causes multiple shots per trigger pull or extended shooting without reloading would be exclusively useful in assaulting hostile targets in an aggressive fashion with the goal of killing the target and/or suppressing return fire.
I'd like it much more if our politicians could be debating over things like this, instead of this retarded "guns" vs "no guns" conversation we get to hear about.
/rant Only, the spirit of the 2nd amendment seems to be that civilians should be able to stand up to an oppressive military regime more than protect trinkets like property or simply practice their aim. How can they do that without some heavy artillery? Ask the insurgents in Afghanistan and Iraq. Well actually don't ask the ones in Iraq. Things didn't fare well for them
The point is, they put up a fight without heavy artillery. The would have gotten steamrolled much more badly, though, if they didn't even have firearms.
|
My mother is a 1st grade teacher in a very small community. I have no problems with her obtaining a Concealed Handgun License and caring a pistol to school.
|
On December 22 2012 08:52 Nagano wrote:
The upcoming AWB will do nothing to curb the violence they intended the law to stop.
American politics at its finest.
|
On December 22 2012 10:02 Rhino85 wrote:
My mother is a 1st grade teacher in a very small community. I have no problems with her obtaining a Concealed Handgun License and caring a pistol to school.
I wonder if her first grade students+their parents would. Willing to wager they would have some issue with it.
|
On December 22 2012 09:32 Supert0fu wrote:
Why do Americans feel like people are going to go break in their house and kill them, and use that irrational fear to justify arming everyone with assault rifles ?
I can respond to this one, even though I don't own a gun.
There's the idea that if someone or something like an animal threatens you or property, you should have a means to protect yourself and property independent of anyone that could help you like the police or fellow neighbors. If you get hurt or die or have property stolen or damaged, then you might as well have had some chance to prevent or mitigate it. It goes to the idea that since it's your life and property, then you should have some power/enabler that lets your protect it all on your own.
Now for most Americans, they will never be in situations where their life or property is in jeopardy, but it happens relatively to few Americans, and to those Americans, they would've absolutely uphold the reasoning.
|
On December 22 2012 10:09 Cloud9157 wrote:Show nested quote +On December 22 2012 10:02 Rhino85 wrote:
My mother is a 1st grade teacher in a very small community. I have no problems with her obtaining a Concealed Handgun License and caring a pistol to school. I wonder if her first grade students+their parents would. Willing to wager they would have some issue with it.
I wonder if the students/parents of Newtown CT would have wanted their teachers to?
|
On December 22 2012 10:13 Rhino85 wrote:Show nested quote +On December 22 2012 10:09 Cloud9157 wrote:On December 22 2012 10:02 Rhino85 wrote:
My mother is a 1st grade teacher in a very small community. I have no problems with her obtaining a Concealed Handgun License and caring a pistol to school. I wonder if her first grade students+their parents would. Willing to wager they would have some issue with it. I wonder if the students/parents of Newtown CT would have wanted their teachers to?
You ask that knowing what already happened. I could just as easily ask you the same question if nothing ever happened to those kids. If nothing happened for those 20 children's' entire experience at elementary school, would their parents have wanted their teachers equipped with guns? Hell no.
But since they know a shooting happened, wanting guns in a school is appealing to people.
On December 22 2012 10:12 BirdKiller wrote:Show nested quote +On December 22 2012 09:32 Supert0fu wrote:
Why do Americans feel like people are going to go break in their house and kill them, and use that irrational fear to justify arming everyone with assault rifles ? I can respond to this one, even though I don't own a gun. There's the idea that if someone or something like an animal threatens you or property, you should have a means to protect yourself and property independent of anyone that could help you like the police or fellow neighbors. If you get hurt or die or have property stolen or damaged, then you might as well have had some chance to prevent or mitigate it. It goes to the idea that since it's your life and property, then you should have some power/enabler that lets your protect it all on your own. Now for most Americans, they will never be in situations where their life or property is in jeopardy, but it happens relatively to few Americans, and to those Americans, they would've absolutely uphold the reasoning.
I hate guns, but I will always uphold that you deserve the right to own a gun and use it in your own house. But owning an assault rifle to defend yourself? What, are you expecting a cartel hit squad to break into your house and murder you?
No one should own assault weapons except law enforcement. Civilians have no need for weapons that can just spray and kill numerous people in a matter of seconds. Give them handguns and never take them away, but don't let them own assault weapons.
|
I hope nothing even remotely close ever happens in my mother's classroom as what happened in Newtown. I still have no problem with her carrying a firearm to her place of work just like any other American does that has a CHL. I believe most places of work are non gun free zones.
|
On December 22 2012 09:32 Supert0fu wrote:
Why do Americans feel like people are going to go break in their house and kill them, and use that irrational fear to justify arming everyone with assault rifles ?
Because the bad people people in USA have guns! If they want to kill people, they can, easily. Therefore everyone needs more guns, obviously.
|
|
|
It's not that Americans are only exclusively fed, but also choose to exclusively feed on US sources, and don't give a damn about what the rest of the world thinks. It goes in conjunction of calling football soccer and being generally skeptical of international treaties and organizations like the U.N.
Frankly, I myself don't really care what the rest of the world thinks on this issue as well as most of them probably don't have a gun culture that's accepted, or at least tolerated, by their population.
|
On December 22 2012 04:33 a176 wrote:
It must be terrible to live in a place where you feel you cannot even be safe in public on a daily basis and fearfully carry a gun with you at all times.
I'm 100% proud to live where I do and am never moving anywhere else unless it fits better into my life goals. I never fearfully carry a gun. I don't constantly look over my shoulder or assume that everyone I run across in public is a crazed murderer bent on ending my life and raping my wife. I live in a place that give me rights.. I believe if I don't use them.. I lose them.. So I use as many as I can.
On December 22 2012 05:08 YumYumGranola wrote:+ Show Spoiler +One thing I don't understand is how many Christians are able to rationalize gun ownership and stand your ground laws with their religious beliefs. Jesus tells us that the greatest form of strength is to not repay evil with evil, and to forgive our enemies. Therefore keeping a gun to defend yourself against an aggressor is really the greatest form of weakness that a Christian can have, since essentially what you're saying is that you value your temporary Earthly existence more than following the teachings of Christ and being with him in eternity. Christians have a moral obligation towards non-violence or retreat when attacked or threatened.
I mean, non-violence was basically the WHOLE point of Jesus, or at least the really revolutionary idea that he preached. That's the whole irony of him being the Messiah: At the time the Messiah was supposed to be a great warrior king who would free Israel, and instead what they got was Jesus telling them to pay Caesar his taxes. Of course in actuality he did free his followers by showing them the way into heaven, which is the only nation Christians should be concerned with. Even as he was about to be brutally tortured and killed, he told Peter to put away his sword, and instead forgave the soldiers who were about to nail him to a tree and leave him to die.
The irony of Christian militarism extends into how we view national security as well. If Christ were in charge after 9/11 we never would have gone to war. Period. We would have forgiven the people who attacked us. Sure lesser minds might interpret this as weakness, but the righteous would understand that not abandoning your principles in times of crisis is the greatest strength there is. Those who push for newer shinier weapons capable of killing more and more people more any more efficiently are the farthest things from Christians, and those who accept collateral damage as a necessary evil of war to keep us safe are even worse.
I should qualify this by stating that I have extreme respect for our soldiers. They are putting themselves on the line for others, and that is one of the greatest forms of selflessness that can exist. What I'm saying is that those who expect others to put themselves in harms way and to do harm to our enemies are not worthy of God's glory.
Jesus didn't say I couldn't laugh at people for being stupid or saying stupid things.. My sides are split. I look at The Gospel of Luke, the very verses before the ones you bring up too...
+ Show Spoiler +36 He said to them, “But now if you have a purse, take it, and also a bag; and if you don’t have a sword, sell your cloak and buy one. 37 It is written: ‘And he was numbered with the transgressors’; and I tell you that this must be fulfilled in me. Yes, what is written about me is reaching its fulfillment.”
He tell them that their journey will be hard and dangerous.. carry swords.. The ear being cut off and healed is, IMO, is Jesus telling them those who live by violence will die by violence..
Tell me how this situation is me fighting evil with evil...Me, my wife.. and several kids are returning to our car after an evening of fun... A man walks out behind a car with what appears to be a knife, and I know it's not a gun. I pull my pistol out.. I'll assume my wife does the same, and we order the man to the ground.. one of us call the police and they come arrest him. Where was I evil? Should he run away we wouldn't shot him.. we'd call the cops.. Should he come at one of us it's over for him, but he's the one who made that choice..
I understand my permit holds me to a higher responsibility then the average citizen. I value that responsibility very much.
On December 22 2012 10:09 Cloud9157 wrote:
On December 22 2012 10:02 Rhino85 wrote:
My mother is a 1st grade teacher in a very small community. I have no problems with her obtaining a Concealed Handgun License and caring a pistol to school.
I wonder if her first grade students+their parents would. Willing to wager they would have some issue with it.
As someone who will have children in public school soon.. I would choose a school that allowed armed teacher in the class. I do not believe that they would pull them out to settle down wild children because unlike more than half of you irrational people.. I have faith in people to do what's right..
[B]On December 22 2012 10:20 Cloud9157 wrote:
I hate guns, but I will always uphold that you deserve the right to own a gun and use it in your own house. But owning an assault rifle to defend yourself? What, are you expecting a cartel hit squad to break into your house and murder you?
No one should own assault weapons except law enforcement. Civilians have no need for weapons that can just spray and kill numerous people in a matter of seconds. Give them handguns and never take them away, but don't let them own assault weapons.
Why can't I be allowed to own an assault rifle just to own one? Let me ask you a legit "what if" question...
"What if" I or my wife won a substantial lottery winning or settlement agreement. We've already spent some on what is needed.. Paid off the house.. set enough aside for children future and even some for more kids in the future... I myself have 300k to spend on whatever I want.. I'm not a person who likes to be flashy.. I don't need/want 5 car... (I want to spend my money without people knowing I have money)..
Guns are a very good way of spending that money.. I could easily spend 200k on gun and my neighbors would never know.. and they don't need to know. Why does my need to own assault rifles have to be on the premise that I'm going to shoot someone with it? Could I not just want one just to have it?
I've noticed so many people putting in some one line post saying... absolutely stupid things.. so for all them
+ Show Spoiler +Chirping in with your grossly uninformed opinions will only make you look dumb and irritate the heck out of the people who do know what's going on.
|
Why can't I be allowed to own an assault rifle just to own one? Let me ask you a legit "what if" question...
"What if" I or my wife won a substantial lottery winning or settlement agreement. We've already spent some on what is needed.. Paid off the house.. set enough aside for children future and even some for more kids in the future... I myself have 300k to spend on whatever I want.. I'm not a person who likes to be flashy.. I don't need/want 5 car... (I want to spend my money without people knowing I have money)..
Guns are a very good way of spending that money.. I could easily spend 200k on gun and my neighbors would never know.. and they don't need to know. Why does my need to own assault rifles have to be on the premise that I'm going to shoot someone with it? Could I not just want one just to have it?
So your justification for owning assault weapons is... because you want to spend money?
Good god. That may be the lamest "what if" I've ever read in my life. Give the money to charity, invest in something, hell, let it sit in your bank so that your kids/nephews/nieces/whoever has more money if they are in your will.
And if that is the best you can come up with, then no, you don't get assault weapons. That was just silly.
As someone who will have children in public school soon.. I would choose a school that allowed armed teacher in the class. I do not believe that they would pull them out to settle down wild children because unlike more than half of you irrational people.. I have faith in people to do what's right.
The irony here is that the only reason why it was suggested to have armed guards in schools was because someone DIDN'T do what was right, and instead chose to shoot 27 people, 20 of which were children.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
