Is it time for a serious conversation about Gun Control?

[3rdgen 2]

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.

[Ouchyfish 67]

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

I thought we couldn't resort to name calling...

[homersapien 11,373]

I have answered it. You just refuse to read. I have actually answered it a few times, in fact. You guys are just too busy covering your eyes and ears and screaming "no mean guns! no mean guns!" to have seen it.

Since I'm feeling charitable today I will save you from all that tough reading. I'm sure it would hurt.

First: I don't want government telling me what I can or cannot have. I don't want some liberal hippies picking and choosing how we get to enjoy our constitutional rights.

As with anything else, as long as you aren't effing with someone else's rights, you should be able to have whatever guns you like. So far, this has not been a problem for 99% of the population, yet you chicken littles always start to come out of the barn whenever stuff like this happens.

Second: I do not trust this government to always do the right thing. Jefferson didn't. Why should I? They have big guns by the way.

Do you HONESTLY think that ammonium nitrate is the only explosive ingredient out there?

Get your heads out of your butts. You guys are worse than the supposed "gun nuts" with your ridiculous slant on reality.

Ever fear that if the guy had used explosives there would be even more dead kids? Crazy people will just keep finding new and inventive ways to do crazy things. They don't need guns to do it. Did you know the reason this wasn't the worst is due to the fact that it was surpassed by an explosives attack?

I'm sick of repeating myself so I'm done. I've basically said all that I can. The liberals are going to sit there and repeat "nuh-uh nuh-uh guns are bad we need to all live happily in peace using our words" and it's pointless for me to discuss any further. I'm not too fond of talking to brick walls.

Long live Ron Paul. Long live freedom. Long live those who fight to protect it from all threats foreign and domestic.

It appears you can't distinguish logic from rationality.

That was good for four (4) Homers:

:homer: :homer:

[alexava 6,973]

No because there is legitimate use for cars and alchohol. Not machine guns

[homersapien 11,373]

.... the guy with the "assault" rifles my new best friend.

.....it starts with one thing and then pretty soon we're back to bows and arrows.

..... Why aren't people this crazy about drunk drivers? blah blah blah

...... second-hand smoke or from outright smoking? blah blah blah

....you all want to continue to uncontrollably expel excrement when you hear about gun crimes..or "assault" weapons...

.....Twelve Americans are murdered every day by illegal aliens

......Do you think they are just waltzing in here with a bag of oranges or a bag of tools innocently looking for a chance to make it in the world?

......Keep thinking we don't need guns...keep thinking we aren't at risk from some invading "army".

Well, it's certainly hard to argue with that!

Congratulations, that's worth three :Homers"

:homer:

You have proven to me that you are incapable of an intelligent discussion. You turn a blind eye/deaf ear to anything that either doesn't make sense to you, or you don't like. I gave you concrete facts to support my opinion to debate and you instead reacted like a spoiled child covering their ears. I sincerely hope that you do not believe yourself to be witty or even remotely humorous. Let me know when you can debate serious issues by bringing an adult opinion to the floor instead of paraphrasing and attempting weak "gotchas" with them.

I thought you quit this thread.

[homersapien 11,373]

why is ammonium nitrate no longer available to me? why is it that it is such a hassle to board an airplane? why do people who appear to be of middle eastern descent seem to be randomly pulled out of terminals and double searched for possible weapons? its because when tradegy strikes people with common sense react accordingly. will it stop all mass murders? no. but doing nothing just invites it. you folks who are against limiting the most destructive weapons are not gonna wake up and think differently all the sudden, i know that. but to those of us who can see that there is no need for high capacity assault rifles, you seem very stubborn. i have not seen any reasonable response as to why these weapons should be legal or available to us. if this kid had been more thoroughly trained that number of 26 would have one more digit in it and you folks think the weapons are not the problem? i bet less than 0.5% of the population own these anyway, so why are so many people against banning them?

There already are laws against assault style weapons. Those laws so stop people from getting their hands on them and using them. Even if there wasn't one already in the home, what's to say he wouldn't have gone out to find one somewhere or just used the Glock and Sig or just got a Remington 1187 semi-auto shotgun?

The "you's" in the below rant are not directed directly at alexava.

The Second Amendment gave us a right to have firearms, but those that will never and don't want one, want the government to step in an infringe on my right to want to purchase one. I would want one for the fun of going out to the range, for self protection, and the protection of my family, IF/WHEN something happens I want to be able to protect them, myself and our belongings. So many of the left, want to just keep on trampling on the Constitution. I think what this 20 year old maniac did was despicable and I know he will rot in hell, but having been in law enforcement and still in the public safety field at a major university, it is pretty much impossible to predict these things.

It's the mis-use of these weapons that is the problem. It's the people and society that have let morality break down to the point that someone would even think that this was what they should do b/c they have had a bad life or been picked on or what ever the excuse is, insert it here. Yes, I know bullying is bad, but how much worse is this? The gun was just laying around in the closet until the moron picked up and made the choice to use it to kill innocents. Blame society as things perpetually break down to where people think this way. The mentality of "I want to die, so I'm going to take out a bunch of other people with me." Are you kidding me?!? Just off yourself and leave everyone else alone, especially the children!!! Restricting gun laws is not going to solve it, illegal weapons will ALWAYS find there way into society, hell, our own government is doing it and getting LEOs killed by doing so!!!

People need to wake up and see that more government control is NOT the answer!! We don't need the government dictating EVERYTHING we do! If you feel this way, then grow up!!

So are you OK with WalMart selling hand grenades?

[homersapien 11,373]

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.

Brilliant!

:homer:

[3rdgen 2]

No because there is legitimate use for cars and alchohol. Not machine guns

That is a low information statement these are not machine guns. They are semi automatic weapons that have the same style and furniture as military weapons. But without the selective fire capability of a military weapon.

[homersapien 11,373]

Interesting that everyone always jumps to the guns. But nobody ever jumps on the media. Within minutes of this happening you had:

- media trying to contact friends of Adam on FB and Twitter

- media shoving cameras and mics into the faces of traumatized children

- media using the story for total link bait and revenue increase

- media sensationalizing the story with obvious falsehoods

- media today doing slideshows of the funeral images

EVERY SINGLE TIME one of these deals happens, the media sensationalizes and over reports the damn thing. They drive it into the ground. And they make these killers more than famous. They elevate them to levels of epic infamy.

It's not even the video games. We didn't have the saturated media coverage 30-40 years ago that we have now. We didn't have a media constantly focused on their revenue model absent of any morals or virtue, so this stuff didn't get sensationalized like it did now.

Why is nobody beating this drum?

We had guns 40 years ago. We had crazy people. The only things different are:

- over saturation of media motivated by profit

- a culture and society that drastically values life less than it did 40 years ago

Well, it could be worse. They could be showing close-up photos of 6 and 7 year-old kids shot multiple times at short range with a "Bushmaster".

[homersapien 11,373]

so now its the damn medias fault.\

According to a number of well renowned mental health professionals, yes, yes it is.

Makes more sense than blaming an inanimate object, wouldn't you say?

Well, I suppose it depends. Are you talking about assigning total (100%) responsibility to one or the other?

[homersapien 11,373]

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.

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

[alexava 6,973]

They look like machine guns and function almost as a machine gun. Im very aware of the difference.

[homersapien 11,373]

The media has already been partly blamed in this thread. Or do you mean society at large?

We're on an 18 page discussion about guns. There's no similar thread about the media coverage.

Thus illustrating my point.

It may be mentioned in passing, but it doesn't get the attention it deserves. Instead all the effort is wasted blaming guns.

Has someone blamed this incident on guns? I must have missed it.

[homersapien 11,373]

I don't trust nutjobs that have easy access to assault weapons with 30 to 100 magazines. Why do civilians *need* that capability?

These aren't muzzle loaded guns. Take away the long clips and what keeps them from carrying more standard ones?

Someone could still kill 20-30 people with two pistols and a whole lot of clips before anything could be done to effectively stop them.

So then they ban those clips too. Pretty soon every gun owner is playing one in the chamber. Then they take that away too because some crazy had a gym bag with 8 stolen pistols and killed 9 people somehow.

Then they ban guns altogether.

Sound impossible? So did a lot of other crap this government has pulled in the last few years...

Right. And once they ban abortion, they will ban birth control, and then they will ban sex and before you know it, we're extinct!

[homersapien 11,373]

What is the purpose of civilians owning assault weapons with 30 round mags? None. I don't have an issue with handguns even Glocks were targeted to reduce magazine sizes. Although you can still buy high capacity clips. Why the fixation on owning assault weapons?

All weapons are assualt weapons when the intent is to assault another individual.

As in the 1790's, the basic musket was considered the "assault" weapon of it's time. When the people have their rights infringed upon the government rarely stops at just one thing. Automatic weapons are already illegal. Next, the government wants to restrict magazine size.....next it will be semi-auto....until finally it's handguns and shotguns.

When will people learn that bad people do bad things and the tools they use doesn't keep them from being bad people. Oklahoma City comes to mind.

No, you are wrong.

While all weapons - or tools for that matter - can be used to assault other people, they were not designed for that. They were designed for hunting or self-defense.

Assault weapons were designed specifically for high intensity military combat which emphasizes effect and rate of fire, including the necessity of re-loading. There is no justifiable civilian use for them. One does not require a 30 round magazine to defend oneself.

Would you draw a line anywhere? I seems you resent the automatic weapons regulations. How about hand grenades?

Honest question, not an argument. What is the ratio of people owning those crazy military guns compared to those that commit crimes with them?

Compared with.......

All other sorta hippy-friendly guns used in crimes?

You have a keen eye for irrelevance.

[3rdgen 2]

They look like machine guns and function almost as a machine gun. Im very aware of the difference.

Then why call them machine guns? Is it just hyperbole to suck in those who aren't knowledgable enough to know the difference?

[homersapien 11,373]

What is the purpose of civilians owning assault weapons with 30 round mags? None. I don't have an issue with handguns even Glocks were targeted to reduce magazine sizes. Although you can still buy high capacity clips. Why the fixation on owning assault weapons?

All weapons are assualt weapons when the intent is to assault another individual.

As in the 1790's, the basic musket was considered the "assault" weapon of it's time. When the people have their rights infringed upon the government rarely stops at just one thing. Automatic weapons are already illegal. Next, the government wants to restrict magazine size.....next it will be semi-auto....until finally it's handguns and shotguns.

When will people learn that bad people do bad things and the tools they use doesn't keep them from being bad people. Oklahoma City comes to mind.

No, you are wrong.

While all weapons - or tools for that matter - can be used to assault other people, they were not designed for that. They were designed for hunting or self-defense.

Assault weapons were designed specifically for high intensity military combat which emphasizes effect and rate of fire, including the necessity of re-loading. There is no justifiable civilian use for them. One does not require a 30 round magazine to defend oneself.

Would you draw a line anywhere? I seems you resent the automatic weapons regulations. How about hand grenades?

The guns sold to civilians are not military grade weapons. These weapons fire a single shot with each pull of the trigger. Military weapons fire a three round burst with each pull and have a selector switch for full auto. As others have said if you limit magazine capacity people will only carry more mags . Or more guns if you take away magazine fed weapons. Also you can obtain grenades with a 200 dollar tax stamp on each one purchased and then proof that each has been expended once it has been used.

Please, don't make trivial distinctions between military issue and military "style". It's insulting.

And to my point, I seriously doubt just anyone can buy a grenade - even with a $200 stamp. Regardless, I thought my question was obvious - should grenades be as accessible as a Bushmaster (for example)?

[homersapien 11,373]

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)

[homersapien 11,373]

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)

Against what? A flock of doves? There's a reason our military doesn't primarily use pump shotguns. If someone wants to defend themselves like a soldier, they should be entitled to. It doesn't become a problem until they use it against innocent people. Same goes for drinking alcohol or driving a car. When they combine the two and risk others' lives, then you have a problem. Should you ban either?

First, go back an read my original post about the appeal of assault rifles on fantasy-driven people such as yourself.

Second, drop the alcohol, driving, abortion arguments. They make you sound like, well, let's just say someone who is not real intelligent. This thread is about "gun control". If you have to talk about drunk driving or smoking or abortion, start a thread on it.

[3rdgen 2]

What is the purpose of civilians owning assault weapons with 30 round mags? None. I don't have an issue with handguns even Glocks were targeted to reduce magazine sizes. Although you can still buy high capacity clips. Why the fixation on owning assault weapons?

All weapons are assualt weapons when the intent is to assault another individual.

As in the 1790's, the basic musket was considered the "assault" weapon of it's time. When the people have their rights infringed upon the government rarely stops at just one thing. Automatic weapons are already illegal. Next, the government wants to restrict magazine size.....next it will be semi-auto....until finally it's handguns and shotguns.

When will people learn that bad people do bad things and the tools they use doesn't keep them from being bad people. Oklahoma City comes to mind.

No, you are wrong.

While all weapons - or tools for that matter - can be used to assault other people, they were not designed for that. They were designed for hunting or self-defense.

Assault weapons were designed specifically for high intensity military combat which emphasizes effect and rate of fire, including the necessity of re-loading. There is no justifiable civilian use for them. One does not require a 30 round magazine to defend oneself.

Would you draw a line anywhere? I seems you resent the automatic weapons regulations. How about hand grenades?

The guns sold to civilians are not military grade weapons. These weapons fire a single shot with each pull of the trigger. Military weapons fire a three round burst with each pull and have a selector switch for full auto. As others have said if you limit magazine capacity people will only carry more mags . Or more guns if you take away magazine fed weapons. Also you can obtain grenades with a 200 dollar tax stamp on each one purchased and then proof that each has been expended once it has been used.

Please, don't make trivial distinctions between military issue and military "style". It's insulting.

And to my point, I seriously doubt just anyone can buy a grenade - even with a $200 stamp. Regardless, I thought my question was obvious - should grenades be as accessible as a Bushmaster (for example)?

It is insulting that you and most of the other people spouting assault rifles must be banned don't know the difference. The round fired by a 223 is not even the same as the 5.56 nato round used by the military. While it is safe to fire 223 ammo in a rifle chambered for 5.56 nato the reverse is not the case. Due to the fact 223 cartridge is shorter and the 5.56 nato round would be in contact the firing pin in a 223 chamber. They already are harder to access than a rifle. But I don't really care about ease of access since if the desire is there to get them. It can be done legally or not.

[3rdgen 2]

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.

[Ouchyfish 67]

Second, drop the alcohol, driving, abortion arguments. They make you sound like, well, let's just say someone who is not real intelligent. This thread is about "gun control". If you have to talk about drunk driving or smoking or abortion, start a thread on it.

So I don't sound intelligent because I use logical comparisons?

:-\

[alexava 6,973]

If you were in position to be armed and take out a nut job like this 20 year old 125lb kid. A shotgun would be my choice. I would aim high to take his eyes out, hopefully his head off. But that is not reality. These nuts dont do this in dove fields or duckblinds or skeet competitions. They pick places to do it not me or any of you 2nd amendment militia folks will be ready. And we legally arm them to the gills. They have all the advantages especially being that they don't fear any consequences.

[alexava 6,973]

Those are not logical comparisons

[3rdgen 2]

If you were in position to be armed and take out a nut job like this 20 year old 125lb kid. A shotgun would be my choice. I would aim high to take his eyes out, hopefully his head off. But that is not reality. These nuts dont do this in dove fields or duckblinds or skeet competitions. They pick places to do it not me or any of you 2nd amendment militia folks will be ready. And we legally arm them to the gills. They have all the advantages especially being that they don't fear any consequences.

That last sentence is the biggest problem with these killers. Anybody willing to die to achieve their ends is a hard person to stop.