Is it time for a serious conversation about Gun Control?

[homersapien 11,396]

As to those who can't see the use of these weapons or high capacity magazines in civilian hands. I would point to things like Katrina, the LA riots, or any other various instances when the rule of law breaks down. When the police aren't coming and single person may be faced with a mob of people. In which case these weapons are extremely useful for one to have around.

Nice apocalyptic fantasy you have there. Except in the real world, a pump shotgun would be no less (extremely) useful than an assault rifle. (Unless your fantasy includes zombies)

:homer:/>

So you are admitting a shotgun is as dangerous as an assault rifle?

Certainly not.

I am saying that a shotgun is just as effective in repelling a bunch of looters (who are undoubtedly black in your fantasy)

Yep can't win the argument pull the race card. If as you said it is just as effective in repelling looters. Then it would be just as effective in a classroom of kids doing what this guy did.

Oh I am sorry. It must be zombies in your particular fantasy.

I haven't posted anything about zombies that was ouchyfish. But you seemed to have fixated on it. Instead of the fact that you just admitted that a shotgun would have been just as capable of causing this type of incident.

I will concede one can kill children with a shotgun. But if you really want to maximize the carnage, one would use a Bushmaster and carry a lot of high capacity clips.

The fact that kids can be killed with a shotgun does nothing to counter the arguments for increased regulations (reduced availability) of military style combat weapons.

[homersapien 11,396]

It boils down to the people that want the government running their lives as if they were 5 years old and those of us that do not need nor want a conservator.

So that's what it boils down to?

Brilliant!

:homer:

I am more afraid of my children being killed by a drunk driver than I am of some survivalist getting at them with his stockpile of doomsday guns and for good reason.

.

So I take it you do support laws against drunk driving and having government "conservators" taking them off the road?

[homersapien 11,396]

Its not the weapon....it's the person with the weapon, andthe chemical imbalance in their heads. There's no other way to paint it. No matter how many valid points each side presents. That is the trump card.

So are you OK with making hand grenades as readily available as assault rifles?

That's irrelevant. But, no, I don't believe they should. I still believe it makes no difference what the weapon is these kind of people are going to find whatever means necessary to carry out their insane plans. It wouldn't have mattered if he had a bat, he was obviously crazy and willing to cross the line.

What do you mean it's irrelevant? There is a direct contradiction between what you said in your first statement and opposing the ready availability of hand grenades.

It's not healthy to respond to cognitive dissonance with indifference. You need to explore it. (Hint: it has to do with making unqualified statements.)

[homersapien 11,396]

How many of you idiots thst are opposed to banning high capacity assault weapons actually own one?

Thanks for the insult. I notice that coming a lot from your side of the argument in this thread. I own several and plan on picking up a few more as well as some mags before next year.

you guys are funny. I know a guy who went out and purchased a bushmaster in 2008 after the election fearing gun ban. Of course, it never materialized. So he overpaid for his gun for that cool factor. The gun industry loves you guys.

Not really concerned about the cool factor. I'm looking for a new rig for 3 gun competitions.

Yeah you are.

You just don't think of it as the "cool" factor. Any red-blooded man who participates or wants to participates in most any sport does so in part for the "cool" factor. Especially if there is some danger involved. I speak from experience. Indulging your fantasy is fun ("cool"), especially if you get good at it.

So be honest with yourself. Self-awareness is a wonderful thing to have. But it does take time to develop.

Thanks for projecting your feelings onto me once again. In 3 gun competitions there is no danger you are shooting at paper and steels targets. In fact any safety lapses penalize the shooter and can lead to them being asked not to return. The guns have about as much of a cool factor as a baseball bat. Just a piece of equipment needed to compete.

The danger I am speaking of doesn't have to be literal or practical, it only needs to be present, even if only in potential.

Guns obviously meet that psychological need.

Similarly, Tennis can be considered a "contact" sport because you are hitting something. The feel of a loaded gun is very similar to holding the throttle of a powerful motorcycle. The inherent power - and thus danger - is present in a psychological sense. Controlling that power is psychologically gratifying. I doubt if competing with air guns be as much fun, even if the same skills were required.

I am not projecting myself. I am projecting truths about human nature that reveal themselves from study, experience and introspection.

[leglessdan 1,934]

I'm really getting sick of people pulling the race card and calling people racists in here. Those that do it make this society stagnant. Pitiful.

I am getting really sick of people talking about the "race card". You can't tell me that many people who are fantasying about mowing down raging rioters in New Orleans are "seeing" black people in their vision.

But then, like I said, I could be mistaken. Maybe you are one of the few who see zombies.

Regardless it has nothing to do with my arguments so it is hardly playing a "card". Find something else to rescue your case.

Wow, your a danm fool. I personally don't envision gunning anyone down. And your the only one in here I've seen say anything racially motivated. Just because someone used Katrina as a reference to widespread looting doesn't specify anything to do with race.

One should never deploy a weapon without envisioning using it.

And chill out on the race thing. I'll even stipulate that all your fantasy looters are white zombies if you prefer.

Hey, you are the one that brought it into play in this thread. And it's not the only time I've seen you throw that crap around here on this board, so you sir need to chill out with the race thing.

[homersapien 11,396]

How many of you idiots thst are opposed to banning high capacity assault weapons actually own one?

Thanks for the insult. I notice that coming a lot from your side of the argument in this thread. I own several and plan on picking up a few more as well as some mags before next year.

you guys are funny. I know a guy who went out and purchased a bushmaster in 2008 after the election fearing gun ban. Of course, it never materialized. So he overpaid for his gun for that cool factor. The gun industry loves you guys.

Not really concerned about the cool factor. I'm looking for a new rig for 3 gun competitions.

Yeah you are.

You just don't think of it as the "cool" factor. Any red-blooded man who participates or wants to participates in most any sport does so in part for the "cool" factor. Especially if there is some danger involved. I speak from experience. Indulging your fantasy is fun ("cool"), especially if you get good at it.

So be honest with yourself. Self-awareness is a wonderful thing to have. But it does take time to develop.

This is ridiculous. You really believe that you know why other people choose to do things better than they do?

I played sports because I loved competition and hated to lose. It had nothing to do with the "cool factor." If you do things for the cool factor, it seems you don't really do things because you enjoy them, but rather so other people might think you are cool.

I think I have perhaps confused the issue with my use of "cool". I meant it literally - as a mental rush of enjoyment or a thrill, as in feeling "wow, that was really cool" after turning a hot lap on a sport bike (for example).

I didn't mean it as simply trying to impress others.

Sorry for the confusion.

[leglessdan 1,934]

Its not the weapon....it's the person with the weapon, andthe chemical imbalance in their heads. There's no other way to paint it. No matter how many valid points each side presents. That is the trump card.

So are you OK with making hand grenades as readily available as assault rifles?

That's irrelevant. But, no, I don't believe they should. I still believe it makes no difference what the weapon is these kind of people are going to find whatever means necessary to carry out their insane plans. It wouldn't have mattered if he had a bat, he was obviously crazy and willing to cross the line.

What do you mean it's irrelevant? There is a direct contradiction between what you said in your first statement and opposing the ready availability of hand grenades.

It's not healthy to respond to cognitive dissonance with indifference. You need to explore it. (Hint: it has to do with making unqualified statements.)

There's not a contradictive statement. I don't think we need grenades. Point blank. I don't see where that has a correlation with a damn gun. But to be clear, it wouldn't matter what was readily available people like the guy that did this is going to do these things regardless. It seems your only view of this is if a certain type of weapon was banned then these things wouldn't happen, which is completely false and IDIOTIC. If you want to take a stance take one that addresses the REAL problem instead of shooting in the dark tryin to dance around the REAL problem.

[homersapien 11,396]

But the question is, does he have a point? This move for gun control is not going to end with people not able to own handguns or hunting rifles. So put that aside. So let's say you eliminate the AR-15 and similar rifles. The question becomes:

Have you really accomplished anything that will make a real difference or just managed to make yourself feel like you accomplished something?

I understand your point and to a certain extent it's a valid question.

But it seems logical to me that society would be better off with fewer of these weapons than with lots. That's why I keep bringing up things like hand grenades and what not. It's perfectly analogous IMO.

The fact that this kid took his mother's (otherwise useless) but legally-obtained Bushmaster to do this is Prima-facea evidence seems to me. Yeah, maybe he would have obtained equivalent firearms from a different source, but maybe not. Maybe if he hadn't spent time shooting one he wouldn't have developed such a fantasy to start with. No one knows.

[AUGradinTX 0]

How many of you idiots thst are opposed to banning high capacity assault weapons actually own one?

Thanks for the insult. I notice that coming a lot from your side of the argument in this thread. I own several and plan on picking up a few more as well as some mags before next year.

you guys are funny. I know a guy who went out and purchased a bushmaster in 2008 after the election fearing gun ban. Of course, it never materialized. So he overpaid for his gun for that cool factor. The gun industry loves you guys.

Not really concerned about the cool factor. I'm looking for a new rig for 3 gun competitions.

Yeah you are.

You just don't think of it as the "cool" factor. Any red-blooded man who participates or wants to participates in most any sport does so in part for the "cool" factor. Especially if there is some danger involved. I speak from experience. Indulging your fantasy is fun ("cool"), especially if you get good at it.

So be honest with yourself. Self-awareness is a wonderful thing to have. But it does take time to develop.

This is ridiculous. You really believe that you know why other people choose to do things better than they do?

I played sports because I loved competition and hated to lose. It had nothing to do with the "cool factor." If you do things for the cool factor, it seems you don't really do things because you enjoy them, but rather so other people might think you are cool.

I think I have perhaps confused the issue with my use of "cool". I meant it literally - as a mental rush of enjoyment or a thrill, as in feeling "wow, that was really cool" after turning a hot lap on a sport bike (for example).

I didn't mean it as simply trying to impress others.

Sorry for the confusion.

You're speaking of adrenaline.

I think this whole conversation has gotten convoluted. The rifle used (AR-15) is not a military weapon, combat weapon, nor is it an assault weapon. It is a semi-automatic rifle most use for hunting. There are a lot of rifles like it that just don't hold as many rounds in the cartridge. As far as I'm concerned, what the weapon looks like has little to do with the issue, but is causing most of the hysteria. It's the capabilities of weapons that may need tweaking. With that said, to make this rifle just like any other used for hunting, take away the capability to hold 20 rounds in the clip. That's it.

[alexava 6,973]

How many of you idiots thst are opposed to banning high capacity assault weapons actually own one?

Thanks for the insult. I notice that coming a lot from your side of the argument in this thread. I own several and plan on picking up a few more as well as some mags before next year.

you guys are funny. I know a guy who went out and purchased a bushmaster in 2008 after the election fearing gun ban. Of course, it never materialized. So he overpaid for his gun for that cool factor. The gun industry loves you guys.

Not really concerned about the cool factor. I'm looking for a new rig for 3 gun competitions.

Yeah you are.

You just don't think of it as the "cool" factor. Any red-blooded man who participates or wants to participates in most any sport does so in part for the "cool" factor. Especially if there is some danger involved. I speak from experience. Indulging your fantasy is fun ("cool"), especially if you get good at it.

So be honest with yourself. Self-awareness is a wonderful thing to have. But it does take time to develop.

This is ridiculous. You really believe that you know why other people choose to do things better than they do?

I played sports because I loved competition and hated to lose. It had nothing to do with the "cool factor." If you do things for the cool factor, it seems you don't really do things because you enjoy them, but rather so other people might think you are cool.

I think I have perhaps confused the issue with my use of "cool". I meant it literally - as a mental rush of enjoyment or a thrill, as in feeling "wow, that was really cool" after turning a hot lap on a sport bike (for example).

I didn't mean it as simply trying to impress others.

Sorry for the confusion.

You're speaking of adrenaline.

I think this whole conversation has gotten convoluted. The rifle used (AR-15) is not a military weapon, combat weapon, nor is it an assault weapon. It is a semi-automatic rifle most use for hunting. There are a lot of rifles like it that just don't hold as many rounds in the cartridge. As far as I'm concerned, what the weapon looks like has little to do with the issue, but is causing most of the hysteria. It's the capabilities of weapons that may need tweaking. With that said, to make this rifle just like any other used for hunting, take away the capability to hold 20 rounds in the clip. That's it.

10 round max. is what sen. fienstien is proposing. this has been my point the whole time and i get blasted as a "liberal hippi". no one can give me a legitimate reason for the need of more than 10 rounds in a clip with out getting into some type of fringe insane crap.

[homersapien 11,396]

How many of you idiots thst are opposed to banning high capacity assault weapons actually own one?

Thanks for the insult. I notice that coming a lot from your side of the argument in this thread. I own several and plan on picking up a few more as well as some mags before next year.

you guys are funny. I know a guy who went out and purchased a bushmaster in 2008 after the election fearing gun ban. Of course, it never materialized. So he overpaid for his gun for that cool factor. The gun industry loves you guys.

Not really concerned about the cool factor. I'm looking for a new rig for 3 gun competitions.

Yeah you are.

You just don't think of it as the "cool" factor. Any red-blooded man who participates or wants to participates in most any sport does so in part for the "cool" factor. Especially if there is some danger involved. I speak from experience. Indulging your fantasy is fun ("cool"), especially if you get good at it.

So be honest with yourself. Self-awareness is a wonderful thing to have. But it does take time to develop.

This is ridiculous. You really believe that you know why other people choose to do things better than they do?

I played sports because I loved competition and hated to lose. It had nothing to do with the "cool factor." If you do things for the cool factor, it seems you don't really do things because you enjoy them, but rather so other people might think you are cool.

I think I have perhaps confused the issue with my use of "cool". I meant it literally - as a mental rush of enjoyment or a thrill, as in feeling "wow, that was really cool" after turning a hot lap on a sport bike (for example).

I didn't mean it as simply trying to impress others.

Sorry for the confusion.

You're speaking of adrenaline.

I think this whole conversation has gotten convoluted. The rifle used (AR-15) is not a military weapon, combat weapon, nor is it an assault weapon. It is a semi-automatic rifle most use for hunting. There are a lot of rifles like it that just don't hold as many rounds in the cartridge. As far as I'm concerned, what the weapon looks like has little to do with the issue, but is causing most of the hysteria. It's the capabilities of weapons that may need tweaking. With that said, to make this rifle just like any other used for hunting, take away the capability to hold 20 rounds in the clip. That's it.

The AR-15 was not designed as a hunting weapon. It is derived on a combat purposed design. And the .223 is a poor cartridge for deer.

It is the combat oriented design features that make it an example of guns that should require more control or restrictions. Simply outlawing high capacity magazines while continuing to proliferate the availability of these guns would be useless in addressing the problem (for obvious reasons).

[Ouchyfish 67]

So I take it you do support laws against drunk driving and having government "conservators" taking them off the road?

I am no more in favor of drunk drivers than I am in mass murderers. The difference between you and I is that I do not wish for good law-abiding citizens (non drunk drivers) to have their right to buy alcohol taken away (or for the sake of argument, their right to drive taken away) just to prevent drunk driving accidents.

For some reason that you have yet to explain, that is precisely what you plan to accomplish in your assault weapons crusade. The whole "baby out with the bathwater" solution. Just ban this or ban that and no more bad things will ever happen. It doesn't take a military strategist to come up with a way to kill a large amount of people with or without an assault rifle.

You attempt to discredit honest comparisons to real-life events that take MORE lives and present more dangers than kooks with guns. When the comparison doesn't support your argument, you resort to saying the person is less intelligent.

[AUGradinTX 0]

How many of you idiots thst are opposed to banning high capacity assault weapons actually own one?

Thanks for the insult. I notice that coming a lot from your side of the argument in this thread. I own several and plan on picking up a few more as well as some mags before next year.

you guys are funny. I know a guy who went out and purchased a bushmaster in 2008 after the election fearing gun ban. Of course, it never materialized. So he overpaid for his gun for that cool factor. The gun industry loves you guys.

Not really concerned about the cool factor. I'm looking for a new rig for 3 gun competitions.

Yeah you are.

You just don't think of it as the "cool" factor. Any red-blooded man who participates or wants to participates in most any sport does so in part for the "cool" factor. Especially if there is some danger involved. I speak from experience. Indulging your fantasy is fun ("cool"), especially if you get good at it.

So be honest with yourself. Self-awareness is a wonderful thing to have. But it does take time to develop.

This is ridiculous. You really believe that you know why other people choose to do things better than they do?

I played sports because I loved competition and hated to lose. It had nothing to do with the "cool factor." If you do things for the cool factor, it seems you don't really do things because you enjoy them, but rather so other people might think you are cool.

I think I have perhaps confused the issue with my use of "cool". I meant it literally - as a mental rush of enjoyment or a thrill, as in feeling "wow, that was really cool" after turning a hot lap on a sport bike (for example).

I didn't mean it as simply trying to impress others.

Sorry for the confusion.

You're speaking of adrenaline.

I think this whole conversation has gotten convoluted. The rifle used (AR-15) is not a military weapon, combat weapon, nor is it an assault weapon. It is a semi-automatic rifle most use for hunting. There are a lot of rifles like it that just don't hold as many rounds in the cartridge. As far as I'm concerned, what the weapon looks like has little to do with the issue, but is causing most of the hysteria. It's the capabilities of weapons that may need tweaking. With that said, to make this rifle just like any other used for hunting, take away the capability to hold 20 rounds in the clip. That's it.

The AR-15 was not designed as a hunting weapon. It is derived on a combat purposed design. And the .223 is a poor cartridge for deer.

It is the combat oriented design features that make it an example of guns that should require more control or restrictions. Simply outlawing high capacity magazines while continuing to proliferate the availability of these guns would be useless in addressing the problem (for obvious reasons).

I don't hunt deer, but I live in TX and know many people who use AR .223s for that purpose. They have box freezers full of deer meat, so it seems to work just fine.

Why are you so caught up on the appearance or the design. Those two factors have nothing to do with lethality. Have you ever shot one? What are these combat oriented design features that you are talking about and how do they make the weapon more lethal? I have fired one many times. It looks like an M4, it shoots like a hunting rifle. You can't ban one gun over another because it looks scarier.

[FatherUppercut 48]

I understand that this is a hot topic, so I'm not trying to push any buttons or put my beliefs on others... just stating my opinion, some of which may have already been expressed by others. I only read a little of the first few pages and the last page.

The problem I have is that this guy (and the movie theater shooter) was able to gun down a large number of people in a very short amount of time with semi automatic weapons. Rather it's a ban completely on Assault Rifles or rather it's a ban on the amount of Ammo they can hold in clips I'm not really sure. I imagine there are people closer to the issue that know what is fair or unfair if we take into consideration the 'practical' uses of a semi automatic rifle in a civilians hand.

PERSONALLY - I see no practical use whatsoever, but then again I don't own a gun.

The disturbing part is these kids that shot up the school and the movie theater don't appear on the surface to have alot of training at the shooting range, but I could be totally wrong about that. My gut tells me that they were able to easily spray bullets with little skill involved.

I don't EVER want to have to take my chances against ANYONE with a gun, but if I have to choose, I'd rather take my chances against something was a little harder to use skillfully. People are missing the point on a few things. Those of us that want stricter gun control don't expect evil to be wiped away from the face of the earth forever, but it isn't a bad thing if this country is able set up laws that eliminate a degree of probability that someone can walk into a public place and easily spray 500 bullets in any general direction in the span of 2 minutes.

At the end of the day, we all have a personal responsibility to be good citizens.

[AUGradinTX 0]

How many of you idiots thst are opposed to banning high capacity assault weapons actually own one?

Thanks for the insult. I notice that coming a lot from your side of the argument in this thread. I own several and plan on picking up a few more as well as some mags before next year.

you guys are funny. I know a guy who went out and purchased a bushmaster in 2008 after the election fearing gun ban. Of course, it never materialized. So he overpaid for his gun for that cool factor. The gun industry loves you guys.

Not really concerned about the cool factor. I'm looking for a new rig for 3 gun competitions.

Yeah you are.

You just don't think of it as the "cool" factor. Any red-blooded man who participates or wants to participates in most any sport does so in part for the "cool" factor. Especially if there is some danger involved. I speak from experience. Indulging your fantasy is fun ("cool"), especially if you get good at it.

So be honest with yourself. Self-awareness is a wonderful thing to have. But it does take time to develop.

This is ridiculous. You really believe that you know why other people choose to do things better than they do?

I played sports because I loved competition and hated to lose. It had nothing to do with the "cool factor." If you do things for the cool factor, it seems you don't really do things because you enjoy them, but rather so other people might think you are cool.

I think I have perhaps confused the issue with my use of "cool". I meant it literally - as a mental rush of enjoyment or a thrill, as in feeling "wow, that was really cool" after turning a hot lap on a sport bike (for example).

I didn't mean it as simply trying to impress others.

Sorry for the confusion.

You're speaking of adrenaline.

I think this whole conversation has gotten convoluted. The rifle used (AR-15) is not a military weapon, combat weapon, nor is it an assault weapon. It is a semi-automatic rifle most use for hunting. There are a lot of rifles like it that just don't hold as many rounds in the cartridge. As far as I'm concerned, what the weapon looks like has little to do with the issue, but is causing most of the hysteria. It's the capabilities of weapons that may need tweaking. With that said, to make this rifle just like any other used for hunting, take away the capability to hold 20 rounds in the clip. That's it.

10 round max. is what sen. fienstien is proposing. this has been my point the whole time and i get blasted as a "liberal hippi". no one can give me a legitimate reason for the need of more than 10 rounds in a clip with out getting into some type of fringe insane crap.

I don't think people who own ARs would even have a problem with this. It's all the talk about banning them that is just silly.

[AUGradinTX 0]

I understand that this is a hot topic, so I'm not trying to push any buttons or put my beliefs on others... just stating my opinion, some of which may have already been expressed by others. I only read a little of the first few pages and the last page.

The problem I have is that this guy (and the movie theater shooter) were able to gun down a large number of people in a very short amount of time with semi automatic weapons. Rather it's a ban completely on Assault Rifles or rather it's a ban on the amount of Ammo they can hold in clips I'm not really sure. I imagine there are people closer to the issue that know what is fair or unfair if we take into consideration the 'practical' uses of a semi automatic rifle in a civilians hand.

PERSONALLY - I see no practical use whatsoever, but then again I don't own a gun.

The disturbing part is these kids that shot up the school and the movie theater don't appear on the surface to have alot of training at the shooting range, but I could be totally wrong about that. My gut tells me that they were able to easily spray bullets with little skill involved.

I don't EVER want to have to take my chances against ANYONE with a gun, but if I have to choose, I'd rather take my chances against something was a little harder to use skillfully. People are missing the point on a few things. Those of us that want stricter gun control don't expect evil to be wiped away from the face of the earth forever, but it isn't a bad thing to set up things to try and eliminate some probability.

At the end of the day, we all have a personal responsibility to be good citizens.

That guy had a drum clip capable of holding 100 rounds or more. I will agree there is no need for such a cartridge. However, I believe that weapon jammed and he used two handguns to kill. I may be wrong on that.

[leglessdan 1,934]

I understand that this is a hot topic, so I'm not trying to push any buttons or put my beliefs on others... just stating my opinion, some of which may have already been expressed by others. I only read a little of the first few pages and the last page.

The problem I have is that this guy (and the movie theater shooter) were able to gun down a large number of people in a very short amount of time with semi automatic weapons. Rather it's a ban completely on Assault Rifles or rather it's a ban on the amount of Ammo they can hold in clips I'm not really sure. I imagine there are people closer to the issue that know what is fair or unfair if we take into consideration the 'practical' uses of a semi automatic rifle in a civilians hand.

PERSONALLY - I see no practical use whatsoever, but then again I don't own a gun.

The disturbing part is these kids that shot up the school and the movie theater don't appear on the surface to have alot of training at the shooting range, but I could be totally wrong about that. My gut tells me that they were able to easily spray bullets with little skill involved.

I don't EVER want to have to take my chances against ANYONE with a gun, but if I have to choose, I'd rather take my chances against something was a little harder to use skillfully. People are missing the point on a few things. Those of us that want stricter gun control don't expect evil to be wiped away from the face of the earth forever, but it isn't a bad thing to set up things to try and eliminate some probability.

At the end of the day, we all have a personal responsibility to be good citizens.

That guy had a drum clip capable of holding 100 rounds or more. I will agree there is no need for such a cartridge. However, I believe that weapon jammed and he used two handguns to kill. I may be wrong on that.

I've heard rumors of the same in relation to him using handguns.

[alexava 6,973]

why people have to take extreme stances on legislation that is, from what i can, tell is not extreme at all. i have not heard one person other than micheal moore who proposed banning all guns. if you take him as anything other than a fatass radical idiot you have more serious problems. i just want some common sense put into the 2nd ammendment to fit todays world. the most radical people i am seeing are the ones that say these mass killings will be just as bad with a pistol, shotgun, bat or samuri sword. or try to tie traffic accidents, drunk drivers and the availability of automobiles to that of mass murders and call it logic.

[alexava 6,973]

I understand that this is a hot topic, so I'm not trying to push any buttons or put my beliefs on others... just stating my opinion, some of which may have already been expressed by others. I only read a little of the first few pages and the last page.

The problem I have is that this guy (and the movie theater shooter) were able to gun down a large number of people in a very short amount of time with semi automatic weapons. Rather it's a ban completely on Assault Rifles or rather it's a ban on the amount of Ammo they can hold in clips I'm not really sure. I imagine there are people closer to the issue that know what is fair or unfair if we take into consideration the 'practical' uses of a semi automatic rifle in a civilians hand.

PERSONALLY - I see no practical use whatsoever, but then again I don't own a gun.

The disturbing part is these kids that shot up the school and the movie theater don't appear on the surface to have alot of training at the shooting range, but I could be totally wrong about that. My gut tells me that they were able to easily spray bullets with little skill involved.

I don't EVER want to have to take my chances against ANYONE with a gun, but if I have to choose, I'd rather take my chances against something was a little harder to use skillfully. People are missing the point on a few things. Those of us that want stricter gun control don't expect evil to be wiped away from the face of the earth forever, but it isn't a bad thing to set up things to try and eliminate some probability.

At the end of the day, we all have a personal responsibility to be good citizens.

That guy had a drum clip capable of holding 100 rounds or more. I will agree there is no need for such a cartridge. However, I believe that weapon jammed and he used two handguns to kill. I may be wrong on that.

I've heard rumors of the same in relation to him using handguns.

not sure which killing these last two posts are refering to i suspect the former is the theater and the later is elementary sch. but there are basically no rumors as to what weapon was used. this info has been released now.

[BamaGrad03 0]

the most radical people i am seeing are the ones that say these mass killings will be just as bad with a pistol, shotgun, bat or samuri sword. or try to tie traffic accidents, drunk drivers and the availability of automobiles to that of mass murders and call it logic.

How many died in the Va Tech killings?

[The Freak 2,528]

How many of you idiots thst are opposed to banning high capacity assault weapons actually own one?

Thanks for the insult. I notice that coming a lot from your side of the argument in this thread. I own several and plan on picking up a few more as well as some mags before next year.

you guys are funny. I know a guy who went out and purchased a bushmaster in 2008 after the election fearing gun ban. Of course, it never materialized. So he overpaid for his gun for that cool factor. The gun industry loves you guys.

Not really concerned about the cool factor. I'm looking for a new rig for 3 gun competitions.

Yeah you are.

You just don't think of it as the "cool" factor. Any red-blooded man who participates or wants to participates in most any sport does so in part for the "cool" factor. Especially if there is some danger involved. I speak from experience. Indulging your fantasy is fun ("cool"), especially if you get good at it.

So be honest with yourself. Self-awareness is a wonderful thing to have. But it does take time to develop.

This is ridiculous. You really believe that you know why other people choose to do things better than they do?

I played sports because I loved competition and hated to lose. It had nothing to do with the "cool factor." If you do things for the cool factor, it seems you don't really do things because you enjoy them, but rather so other people might think you are cool.

I think I have perhaps confused the issue with my use of "cool". I meant it literally - as a mental rush of enjoyment or a thrill, as in feeling "wow, that was really cool" after turning a hot lap on a sport bike (for example).

I didn't mean it as simply trying to impress others.

Sorry for the confusion.

You're speaking of adrenaline.

I think this whole conversation has gotten convoluted. The rifle used (AR-15) is not a military weapon, combat weapon, nor is it an assault weapon. It is a semi-automatic rifle most use for hunting. There are a lot of rifles like it that just don't hold as many rounds in the cartridge. As far as I'm concerned, what the weapon looks like has little to do with the issue, but is causing most of the hysteria. It's the capabilities of weapons that may need tweaking. With that said, to make this rifle just like any other used for hunting, take away the capability to hold 20 rounds in the clip. That's it.

10 round max. is what sen. fienstien is proposing. this has been my point the whole time and i get blasted as a "liberal hippi". no one can give me a legitimate reason for the need of more than 10 rounds in a clip with out getting into some type of fringe insane crap.

I don't think people who own ARs would even have a problem with this. It's all the talk about banning them that is just silly.

Yes they would. There is a 10 round max in California and they hate it.

[Weegle777 78]

Side note: It's ironic how most of the hippies yelling for tighter gun control to protect the poor children with their whole lives ahead of them have no problem with all of the babies being aborted.

Extremely well said. :bow:/>

Well said maybe, but totally irrelevant, if not downright wacko.

Bet you were one of the wackos that thought it was great that "life" might have been found on Mars aren't you. :laugh:/>

wtf?

I didn't think you were intelligent enough to see the correlation. Shocking.

[4AUsince62 10]

How many of you idiots thst are opposed to banning high capacity assault weapons actually own one?

Thanks for the insult. I notice that coming a lot from your side of the argument in this thread. I own several and plan on picking up a few more as well as some mags before next year.

you guys are funny. I know a guy who went out and purchased a bushmaster in 2008 after the election fearing gun ban. Of course, it never materialized. So he overpaid for his gun for that cool factor. The gun industry loves you guys.

Not really concerned about the cool factor. I'm looking for a new rig for 3 gun competitions.

Yeah you are.

You just don't think of it as the "cool" factor. Any red-blooded man who participates or wants to participates in most any sport does so in part for the "cool" factor. Especially if there is some danger involved. I speak from experience. Indulging your fantasy is fun ("cool"), especially if you get good at it.

So be honest with yourself. Self-awareness is a wonderful thing to have. But it does take time to develop.

This is ridiculous. You really believe that you know why other people choose to do things better than they do?

I played sports because I loved competition and hated to lose. It had nothing to do with the "cool factor." If you do things for the cool factor, it seems you don't really do things because you enjoy them, but rather so other people might think you are cool.

I think I have perhaps confused the issue with my use of "cool". I meant it literally - as a mental rush of enjoyment or a thrill, as in feeling "wow, that was really cool" after turning a hot lap on a sport bike (for example).

I didn't mean it as simply trying to impress others.

Sorry for the confusion.

You're speaking of adrenaline.

I think this whole conversation has gotten convoluted. The rifle used (AR-15) is not a military weapon, combat weapon, nor is it an assault weapon. It is a semi-automatic rifle most use for hunting. There are a lot of rifles like it that just don't hold as many rounds in the cartridge. As far as I'm concerned, what the weapon looks like has little to do with the issue, but is causing most of the hysteria. It's the capabilities of weapons that may need tweaking. With that said, to make this rifle just like any other used for hunting, take away the capability to hold 20 rounds in the clip. That's it.

The AR-15 was not designed as a hunting weapon. It is derived on a combat purposed design. And the .223 is a poor cartridge for deer.

It is the combat oriented design features that make it an example of guns that should require more control or restrictions. Simply outlawing high capacity magazines while continuing to proliferate the availability of these guns would be useless in addressing the problem (for obvious reasons).

I don't hunt deer, but I live in TX and know many people who use AR .223s for that purpose. They have box freezers full of deer meat, so it seems to work just fine.

Why are you so caught up on the appearance or the design. Those two factors have nothing to do with lethality. Have you ever shot one? What are these combat oriented design features that you are talking about and how do they make the weapon more lethal? I have fired one many times. It looks like an M4, it shoots like a hunting rifle. You can't ban one gun over another because it looks scarier.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AR-15

Get real, and I like and own guns, GUNS with an S.

[alexava 6,973]

33

the most radical people i am seeing are the ones that say these mass killings will be just as bad with a pistol, shotgun, bat or samuri sword. or try to tie traffic accidents, drunk drivers and the availability of automobiles to that of mass murders and call it logic.

How many died in the Va Tech killings?

33

[AUGradinTX 0]

How many of you idiots thst are opposed to banning high capacity assault weapons actually own one?

Thanks for the insult. I notice that coming a lot from your side of the argument in this thread. I own several and plan on picking up a few more as well as some mags before next year.

you guys are funny. I know a guy who went out and purchased a bushmaster in 2008 after the election fearing gun ban. Of course, it never materialized. So he overpaid for his gun for that cool factor. The gun industry loves you guys.

Not really concerned about the cool factor. I'm looking for a new rig for 3 gun competitions.

Yeah you are.

You just don't think of it as the "cool" factor. Any red-blooded man who participates or wants to participates in most any sport does so in part for the "cool" factor. Especially if there is some danger involved. I speak from experience. Indulging your fantasy is fun ("cool"), especially if you get good at it.

So be honest with yourself. Self-awareness is a wonderful thing to have. But it does take time to develop.

This is ridiculous. You really believe that you know why other people choose to do things better than they do?

I played sports because I loved competition and hated to lose. It had nothing to do with the "cool factor." If you do things for the cool factor, it seems you don't really do things because you enjoy them, but rather so other people might think you are cool.

I think I have perhaps confused the issue with my use of "cool". I meant it literally - as a mental rush of enjoyment or a thrill, as in feeling "wow, that was really cool" after turning a hot lap on a sport bike (for example).

I didn't mean it as simply trying to impress others.

Sorry for the confusion.

You're speaking of adrenaline.

I think this whole conversation has gotten convoluted. The rifle used (AR-15) is not a military weapon, combat weapon, nor is it an assault weapon. It is a semi-automatic rifle most use for hunting. There are a lot of rifles like it that just don't hold as many rounds in the cartridge. As far as I'm concerned, what the weapon looks like has little to do with the issue, but is causing most of the hysteria. It's the capabilities of weapons that may need tweaking. With that said, to make this rifle just like any other used for hunting, take away the capability to hold 20 rounds in the clip. That's it.

The AR-15 was not designed as a hunting weapon. It is derived on a combat purposed design. And the .223 is a poor cartridge for deer.

It is the combat oriented design features that make it an example of guns that should require more control or restrictions. Simply outlawing high capacity magazines while continuing to proliferate the availability of these guns would be useless in addressing the problem (for obvious reasons).

I don't hunt deer, but I live in TX and know many people who use AR .223s for that purpose. They have box freezers full of deer meat, so it seems to work just fine.

Why are you so caught up on the appearance or the design. Those two factors have nothing to do with lethality. Have you ever shot one? What are these combat oriented design features that you are talking about and how do they make the weapon more lethal? I have fired one many times. It looks like an M4, it shoots like a hunting rifle. You can't ban one gun over another because it looks scarier.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AR-15

Get real, and I like and own guns, GUNS with an S.

I read the Wiki page, but am not sure what you want me to get real about. The civilian AR is not an assault rifle. The arguments against them bring me back to the amount of rounds held in a single cartridge. I can agree with that. The base cartridge holds 20 rounds. You can buy them that hold 30. If that is the reason you want them banned, simply make it illegal to use a cartridge that holds more than 10. End of debate.

For those that have some other issue with the rifle, you need to get specific. Saying it looks like a military weapon, or it was based off of one, doesn't make it one. So, I would like to know, other than round capacity, what makes it any different than other semi-automatic guns?