Gun ownership poll

[cgjackson222]

Originally Posted by G1911

It is incredibly obvious that the 'bad guy' in these discussions and scenarios is the person murdering innocent people . It's very, very, very simple. The good guy is the person taking action to stop the massacre of innocent people.

If one cannot identify who at the mall was the 'good guy' and who was the 'bad guy', well...

EDIT: For the 5,000th time they cannot legally purchase an assault rifle. "Assault rifle" is an actual object with an actual meaning.

A lot of people consider the AR-15 a weapon of war. If it's not technically an assault rifle, then my apologies. Either way, I really don't understand why an 18 year old can buy one.

[G1911]

Originally Posted by cgjackson222

A lot of people consider the AR-15 a weapon of war. If it's not technically an assault rifle, then my apologies. Either way, I really don't understand why an 18 year old can buy one.

There is not a single military force in the entire world using an AR-15 like civilians in the US may purchase. Semi-auto .223's are not used by any military. They never have been. That some find this false branding helpful to their argument does not make it true. This one is just plain factually wrong, yet again.

This one element so difficult in these debates. All of the knowledge is on one side, it's like arguing evolution with a creationist; they just do not know what they are talking about and are factually wrong over and over.

[cgjackson222]

Originally Posted by G1911

There is not a single military force in the entire world using an AR-15 like civilians in the US may purchase. Semi-auto .223's are not used by any military. They never have been. That some find this false branding helpful to their argument does not make it true. This one is just plain factually wrong, yet again.

This one element so difficult in these debates. All of the knowledge is on one side, it's like arguing evolution with a creationist; they just do not know what they are talking about and are factually wrong over and over.

For all of your knowledge, I haven't found any of your arguments against gun reform convincing.

Please enlighten me as to how it is a good idea for an 18 year old to be able to buy an AR-15 the day they turn 18?

[G1911]

Originally Posted by cgjackson222

For all of your knowledge, I haven't found any of your arguments against gun reform convincing.

Please enlighten me as to how it is a good idea for an 18 year old to be able to buy an AR-15 the day they turn 18?

You don't have to find them convincing. Many of us will disagree. My primary position is that we should disagree on rational grounds, and that claims to fact, which are distinct from opinions, should be actually true instead of complete fiction.

I think an 18 year old should have the right because they are an adult. The line between adult and child is arbitrary; not everyone ages the same or matures the same (many of us never do). I am distinctly uncomfortable with arbitrary law, but I don't see a better way to do it. Whether the age of adulthood is 16, 17, 18, 19, 20 I think an adult should be able to fully exercise their rights as an equal citizen. A 3 year old isn't old enough, an adult is. What exact year we draw the line is arbitrary, but I do not see how we should restrict core constitutionally protected liberties to a second class of adulthood. If an 18 year can enlist and be given a machine gun, I do not see why they can't have a neutered civilian version.

A factor is that the civilian AR-15 is not mechanically special, it's a neutered down version of the best tech of 60 years ago. It holds a special place as scary in the narrative, but it is not any more 'dangerous' if misused than dozens of other platforms.

[Carter08]

Originally Posted by cgjackson222

For all of your knowledge, I haven't found any of your arguments against gun reform convincing.

Please enlighten me as to how it is a good idea for an 18 year old to be able to buy an AR-15 the day they turn 18?

Not piling on but agree - would generally like a response to this. Don’t downplay the AR15 - it has been the weapon of choice in many mass shootings.

[irv]

https://youtu.be/8I_6TPWcFu0

[BCauley]

Originally Posted by irv

https://youtu.be/8I_6TPWcFu0

I’m convinced, based on your comment history in this thread, that you’re unable to form and articulate a thought on your own.

If it’s not a link to some random tik tok/Twitter/Facebook/propaganda/opinion talking head/etc that you agree with, it’s you railing against people/media doing the same exact thing that you disagree with. 100% projection on your part.

[irv]

Originally Posted by irv

With our different culture and guns laws up here there is no way I can really relate to the guns issues that are being discussed in this thread but after I watched this one just recently, I wondered how accurate it is?


https://www.tiktok.com/@knowledgeequ...20276015877381

Originally Posted by BCauley

I’m convinced, based on your comment history in this thread, that you’re unable to form and articulate a thought on your own.

If it’s not a link to some random tik tok/Twitter/Facebook/propaganda/opinion talking head/etc that you agree with, it’s you railing against people/media doing the same exact thing that you disagree with. 100% projection on your part.

I assume you missed this one?
Maybe go read the covid threads and your opinion of me may change?
If not, I honestly don't care what you think, honestly.

[Pat R]

Originally Posted by cgjackson222

For all of your knowledge, I haven't found any of your arguments against gun reform convincing.

Please enlighten me as to how it is a good idea for an 18 year old to be able to buy an AR-15 the day they turn 18?

Is it any worse than letting a teenage driver have a cellphone in their hands?

[bnorth]

Originally Posted by Pat R

Is it any worse than letting a teenage driver have a cellphone in their hands?

Cell phones are WAY worse. I do a lot of walking and see those morons all the time. I watched a moron reading his phone t-bone a guy on a motorcycle recently.

[Carter08]

Originally Posted by bnorth

Cell phones are WAY worse. I do a lot of walking and see those morons all the time. I watched a moron reading his phone t-bone a guy on a motorcycle recently.

Distracted driving is definitely a problem. But for context, in 2020 (the most recent year where all data has been aggregated), there were 3,000 distracted driver deaths in America. There were 20,000 murders by gun in America that year.

[Mark17]

Another one today:

Missouri shopper shoots, kills armed robber holding knife to clerk's neck


An unassuming customer saved a gas station clerk's life Saturday morning in Missouri after a robbery suspect put a knife to the employee's neck.

[bnorth]

Originally Posted by Carter08

Distracted driving is definitely a problem. But for context, in 2020 (the most recent year where all data has been aggregated), there were 3,000 distracted driver deaths in America. There were 20,000 murders by gun in America that year.

LOL, nice try at yet another troll post. My comment you quoted was a response to a 18 year old being able to buy a gun that easily could be used to hunt deer.

[JustinD]

.

[cgjackson222]

Originally Posted by Pat R

Is it any worse than letting a teenage driver have a cellphone in their hands?

In many states it is illegal to text or have handheld cellphone use while driving.

I wish I could say the same for allowing 18 year-olds to buy AR-15s or similar weapons.

[Pat R]

Originally Posted by cgjackson222

In many states it is illegal to text or have handheld cellphone use while driving.

I wish I could say the same for allowing 18 year-olds to buy AR-15s or similar weapons.

Yes but yet a large % of people still do it.

[cgjackson222]

Originally Posted by Pat R

Yes but yet a large % of people still do it.

Ahh yes, the "laws don't work so why have them" argument.

I would prefer to live in a society where there are enforceable laws. Even if they don't always act as a deterrent, at least there are consequences when people get caught.

Granted, many active shooters have a death wish and will never have to face sentencing.

But you do realize that the Uvalde shooter legally purchased an AR-15 on his 18th birthday? I would argue that if he needed to wait until he was 19, 20, or even 21 to legally purchase the gun, that he may not have attained the gun when he was 18. Similarly, if we had to wait a couple of weeks to obtain the weapon after applying for one, there is a chance he would have calmed down by then.

[steve B]

Originally Posted by cgjackson222

For all of your knowledge, I haven't found any of your arguments against gun reform convincing.

Please enlighten me as to how it is a good idea for an 18 year old to be able to buy an AR-15 the day they turn 18?

Is it also a good idea to let those same unformed minds that make bad choices help select the people who run our country?

I know people who I trusted more at 12 than most adults. They showed me how to load the clay bird flinger for trap shooting safely. Semi confined space, and a strong enough machine to mess up anyone if they did it wrong. He knew the right way and showed me all the safety points of what to do or not do.

I also know adults, and far too many of them who should probably be restricted from owning forks or any other sharp implement.

It shouldn't be about the age, but the individual. and even when those individuals make threats and get a talking to from the police, those events don't get into the system the background checks work from. That's the very first and possibly most important point of failure in our current system.

[steve B]

In hopes of clarifying a few things.

From this pic,
which would you ban?
Which one is the military rifle.



If you say you'd ban all three, fair enough, it's at least an opening for a serious discussion.

If you'd only ban the black one, that's perhaps an opening to a different discussion. Maybe about how certain people are attracted to items with a certain look and if that's a potential indicator of how they might act.
Also how a certain look may repel someone and what their attitudes and actions might be.

[BobbyStrawberry]

I'm not proposing any bans, and I am an ardent 2A supporter. However, there is a reason guns like the AR-15 are often the weapon of choice for deranged mass murderers: the great damage done to human flesh when hit by a bullet fired from one. Many Americans have no idea the carnage that responders saw in the Uvalde or Sandy Hook classrooms.

To pretend all guns are the same, or to pretend that a frying pan is the same as an AR-15, is tantamount to refusing to have a debate.

[bnorth]

Originally Posted by BobbyStrawberry

I'm not proposing any bans, and I am an ardent 2A supporter. However, there is a reason guns like the AR-15 are often the weapon of choice for deranged mass murderers: the great damage done to human flesh when hit by a bullet fired from one. Many Americans have no idea the carnage that responders saw in the Uvalde or Sandy Hook classrooms.

To pretend all guns are the same, or to pretend that a frying pan is the same as an AR-15, is tantamount to refusing to have a debate.

They are used because they look scary. They actually use little baby 223 ammo. That is the smallest caliber you can legally shoot a deer with where I live and larger more powerful cartriges are recommended for hunting.

[steve B]

Originally Posted by BobbyStrawberry

I'm not proposing any bans, and I am an ardent 2A supporter. However, there is a reason guns like the AR-15 are often the weapon of choice for deranged mass murderers: the great damage done to human flesh when hit by a bullet fired from one. Many Americans have no idea the carnage that responders saw in the Uvalde or Sandy Hook classrooms.

To pretend all guns are the same, or to pretend that a frying pan is the same as an AR-15, is tantamount to refusing to have a debate.

I don't think that damage or lack of damage has much to do with that being their choice.

I think that choice is more often about the "image" the weapon presents.
In the graphic I posted, the bottom gun is in nearly every way functionally identical to the AR-15 in the center. But to some it looks more old fashioned than "cool" or "tactical". It's also marketed as a "ranch gun" a term I've never heard of before now. It also happens to be at least 600 cheaper than an AR-15 type from Daniel Defense.

That was one of my points about who buys them and why.
To use an example from a different field, I'd love to get one of the current performance cars from Dodge. But if it was performance, I'd get more for my money with a Tesla. Would I probably speed a bit in both? Well, yeah. Pretty much everyone does around here. Would I be more likely to get a ticket driving a bright green charger than a silver Tesla? Also yes.
Would the typical Charger owner be more likely to be caught doing burnouts somehwere? Yes. (My opinion, as is the opinion that burnouts a stupid and display nothing but how poorly your suspension is set up. )

Would someone troubled and potentially violent prefer the AR over the Ruger? Of course. (Not all AR buyers of course, as it includes options for accessories that have genuine real world function)

That top one? That's an M1 Garand, used extensively by the US military in WWII. 30-06, and very powerful. My friend says that with a bit of fairly expensive work it can be an excellent target shooting rifle. Still competetive after 80 years. And although limited still available through the civilian marksmanship program run by the government. (fairly strict qualifying requirements though so buying one elsewhere may be cheaper)
It's also good for hunting.
If it's damage you're looking for, it's a far better choice. But again, old fashioned looks, so the crazy people won't go that route.

(and all that from a non-gun owner who has friends that target shoot and hunt)

I think a bigger and deeper problem is societal. *any use of you're or similar words are in the generic sense, not specifically you.
An overall impatience.
An absolute insistence that "I'm right"
A very self centered approach to solving a problem. Protest in a way that not only is a nuisance to the person whose actions you're* protesting, but to innocent people who may agree with your* protest.
An insistence that people don't disrespect someone. Again a self centered approach that respect must be given for merely existing rather than earned.
People on both sides of any political debate/argument dehumanize the "other side" through name calling etc.
Lack of if not outright disdain for personal responsibility.

All of that seems to make some people think violence is the quick fix for their grievances.
Why they ever think kids are the ones to go after for that is way beyond me.