Here Is the Place, if any on this forum, for Gun Discussion

[SAllen2556]

Originally Posted by packs

I can't think of a single mass car murder or mass ladder murder. Please point one out to me so I can make an informed decision. For the last time, my opinion is driven by mass murder events. Not the number of total gun deaths. Not figures that have to do with gun violence. My opinion is driven by mass shootings. That's very specific.

Would it make you feel better if they was all pushed outta windows?
-Archie Bunker

Seriously though, do you not remember the Boston Marathon bombing? They had guns and instead chose to use a bomb! Oklahoma City - bomb! 9/11 - airplanes.

I don't mean to be rude but you're really demonstrating some extremely narrow-minded thinking. You have your opinion and no form of persuasive argument will change your mind. Your opinion is based on only those selected mass murder events that fit your apparently ingrained indoctrination. Frankly, people like you scare me way more than anyone who owns an assault rifle.

Look, think about it logically: If you want to kill a bunch of people and you can't get one type of gun, wouldn't you just use a different kind or come up with a different method? You don't honestly believe outlawing one type of deadly weapon will prevent anyone seriously bent on mass murder from using another method do you? That's just insane. Your only real logical argument is to ban all guns. At least admit that that's what you really favor. Because I'd bet if you could vote to ban all guns, you'd do it.

Here's a novel idea: Instead of banning these weapons so only the bad guys have them, how about giving one volunteer at each public high school access to one along with extensive training. That, my friend, would do more to end mass murders at schools than anything anyone like you could ever come up with.

[packs]

Well in response all I can say is that we don't really have a bombing problem in this country. Bombings like the Boston bombing and Oklahoma City are very rare. And a 9/11 event even rarer. What we do have in this country is a higher than usual rate of mass shootings.

[vintagetoppsguy]

Originally Posted by packs

Well in response all I can say is that we don't really have a bombing problem in this country. Bombings like the Boston bombing and Oklahoma City are very rare. And a 9/11 event even rarer. What we do have in this country is a higher than usual rate of mass shootings.

Yes, and we also have a high rate of DWI related deaths. You said you asked your question to understand my persepctive. I'm trying to understand yours, and those that think like you. Given the high rate of DWI deaths (something that could absolutely be avoided), where is your outrage over that? And don't give me your chicken chit answer that this thread is about gun control and blah, blah, blah...

[packs]

You are someone I will never engage with again, either in conversation or otherwise. You insulted me twice now for no reason and I won't tolerate your antics.

[vintagetoppsguy]

Originally Posted by packs

You are someone I will never engage with again, either in conversation or otherwise. You insulted me twice now for no reason and I won't tolerate your antics.

You asked me a fair question because you wanted to understand my thought proces. I asked you a fair question because I wanted to understand yours. You couldn't answer my question.

[porkchops]

It's unfortunate that topics like this have to(usually)end in accusations
and name calling. Perhaps a "poll" would be a better way to express
our opinions on important topics of the day ? At least , we could
see which way the wind blows ........... here at net54 .
Ken

[steve B]

Well, lets give this a try for packs.

I'm not a gun owner.
I have ADD and even before being diagnosed I knew I had a tendency towards being a bit disorganized. That to my mind is something that doesn't combine well with any sort of firearms.

But I do occasionally shoot, since friends have some.

It's challenging and yes, it's fun. I've tried pistol, maybe 4-5 different? small and medium rifles and skeet shooting. All different , all fun and challenging. I'm an ok shot, not what I'd call "good" but I can get all the shots on the target, and hit about half the birds. I figure that's pretty good for someone who might get to a range once every couple years or maybe a bit less often.
(Feel free to laugh gun guys )


I think the entire definition of "assault rifle" is a silly fiction made up by politicians as a typical knee jerk reaction to something they couldn't legislate.
It's basically banning things based on how they look. As someone else pointed out there are a number of non-"Assault rifles" that are essentially identical in function, and some that are far more powerful. One of the most popular larger rifles for hunting and target shooting was actually a military weapon when it was new. It's not banned. With the right ammunition there's not a lot of stuff that would make good cover.

If I ever do own a firearm, one of the things that would be part of my choice would be that many of them are fantastic bits of very well made machinery. Taking one apart and seeing how stuff was done mechanically is really amazing. (Yes, I've done that. I'm guessing the group of no gun owners who have taken one apart is pretty small. )

Now, you might wonder why the bad stuff always seems to be done with the same piece of hardware. The answer is to me a simple one. It has nothing to do with whether it was the best choice. It's about image. To use the car analogy - there are stereotypes about different cars and their drivers. Like some cars are more often bought by people who are more prone to speeding or acting superior for some reason. Show a movie scene where the guy in a sleeveless shirt says "Hey, don't lean on the Camaro!" And everyone just smiles and laughs because we've all seen that guy. Not all Camaro owners are, but enough that it's a common image. Same as the BMW driver who thinks he's better than everyone because his car is nice or the Prius driver who looks down on the people wrecking the planet with normal cars. In the same way, something like an AR-15 is more attractive to the nuts than many other bits of hardware. Only a small number of owners are nuts, many are very serious responsible people. But the nuts get the attention.

Some stuff does need to change, firstly a return to reasonableness on both sides. (Some controls do work, full auto has been tightly regulated since I think 1938 and last time I checked there had been exactly 0 crimes committed with a legally owned machine gun) Those rules are probably too strict to be practical for anything else.

Personally I feel that if a person can show they're responsible, safe and respect other people enough in general to not shoot them without a very good reason (Like "he was raving and running at me with a big knife") There shouldn't be any restriction.

If someone demonstrates a lack of those traits then they should get nothing.

If they are going through something that might make them temporarily irresponsible or untrustworthy maybe there should be a system that lets them store the stuff away until they get their stuff back together. currently the only options are " nearly everything is ok" or " you cant have that stuff anymore so we're taking it"

Yes, the middle ground is full of gray area and pitfalls and trying to get that right is much harder than a simple yes/no set of rules. But it would be worth doing.
The current societal "me first and sometimes only" attitude extends to so much and is so hard to change I don't think we'll make much progress if any.

Steve B