Gun ownership poll

[bnorth]

Originally Posted by BobbyStrawberry

Wait, so after telling me you aren't interested in the subject and don't follow it, you now want to know my opinions? Why is that?

About the remark you quoted, do you not agree that such instances are more common today than they were in the past? It isn't a personal dig, and it's not about gun laws or the politics surrounding them.

No, I said I was not interested in a specific shooting.

I do care about the subject as I own guns. I have not shot one in about a decade but 3 of the 6 have special meaning to me.

I personally am tired of anti gun people using mass shootings to try to make more gun laws that only hurt honest gun owners.

[BobbyStrawberry]

Originally Posted by bnorth

No, I said I was not interested in a specific shooting.

I do care about the subject as I own guns. I have not shot one in about a decade but 3 of the 6 have special meaning to me.

I personally am tired of anti gun people using mass shootings to try to make more gun laws that only hurt honest gun owners.

I appreciate the clarification. I am interested in the subject as well, but I don't see the issue in as black and white terms as it seems many do. Why do you think it is that some gun owners seem to fear the government coming and taking them away? Or that any law regulating or restricting firearms will inevitably lead to that outcome? I have some ideas, but they all suggest that the issue really isn't about guns, and more about distrust of government.

[bnorth]

Originally Posted by BobbyStrawberry

I appreciate the clarification. I am interested in the subject as well, but I don't see the issue in as black and white terms as it seems many do. Why do you think it is that some gun owners seem to fear the government coming and taking them away? Or that any law regulating or restricting firearms will inevitably lead to that outcome? I have some ideas, but they all suggest that the issue really isn't about guns, and more about distrust of government.

2 reasons. Some are just nut cases, not dangerious types but the type that think everyone is out to get them. The other is many people actually want to take all guns away. No matter your opinion people are very passionate about it when it comes to guns.

Like I posted before. I believe we have enough laws now. They just need to be enforced.

The only one I would not have a problem with is required gun courses for everyone to own a gun. We actually have something like that here but it is for people under 18 so they can hunt. I live in an area that almost everyone owns a gun and many hunt. So everyone is taught to respect them. The only mass killing here was done with a sword.

[BobbyStrawberry]

Originally Posted by bnorth

The other is many people actually want to take all guns away.

I'm not asking this to cast doubt on your statement, but could you direct me to where I could find out about some of these people? This isn't something that I've encountered.

Originally Posted by bnorth

The only one I would not have a problem with is required gun courses for everyone to own a gun. We actually have something like that here but it is for people under 18 so they can hunt. I live in an area that almost everyone owns a gun and many hunt. So everyone is taught to respect them. The only mass killing here was done with a sword.

I would support a mandatory course like that. It seems to me that some of these school shooters only know about guns through video games where you shoot people, and have no idea of the "respect" that you mention. (Which I agree is important.) They might even think of the whole thing as a game, even as they have the gun in hand.

[bnorth]

Originally Posted by BobbyStrawberry

I'm not asking this to cast doubt on your statement, but could you direct me to where I could find out about some of these people? This isn't something that I've encountered.

It has been brought up multiple times in this thread.

I would support a mandatory course like that. It seems to me that some of these school shooters only know about guns through video games where you shoot people, and have no idea of the "respect" that you mention. (Which I agree is important.) They might even think of the whole thing as a game, even as they have the gun in hand.

I am very against teachers having guns for any reason. So much so that if one is caught with one in school they need to be instantly fired and banned from ever teaching again.

I do not have kids so have no idea about our local graded schools. I do know our middle and high schools have one armed officer at each one. They actually do a lot of good in many different areas.

[BobbyStrawberry]

Originally Posted by bnorth

Originally Posted by BobbyStrawberry View Post
I'm not asking this to cast doubt on your statement, but could you direct me to where I could find out about some of these people? This isn't something that I've encountered.

It has been brought up multiple times in this thread.

I am very against teachers having guns for any reason. So much so that if one is caught with one in school they need to be instantly fired and banned from ever teaching again.

I do not have kids so have no idea about our local graded schools. I do know our middle and high schools have one armed officer at each one. They actually do a lot of good in many different areas.

I'll have to go back and read through, as I don't recall anyone commenting here that they want to "take all guns away". But it's not like I have anything else to do for the next few hours 🙃

I'm curious to know why you are so opposed to teachers having guns.

[bnorth]

Originally Posted by BobbyStrawberry

I'll have to go back and read through, as I don't recall anyone commenting here that they want to "take all guns away". But it's not like I have anything else to do for the next few hours 🙃

I'm curious to know why you are so opposed to teachers having guns.

There are so many reasons in my honest opinion. I could list them for a very long time. I am not typing that much. I am all for a trained profesional with a gun in schools like we have here.

I wouldn't waste the time of going back and reading more. Most of it is beyond silly.

[Carter08]

Originally Posted by BobbyStrawberry

I'll have to go back and read through, as I don't recall anyone commenting here that they want to "take all guns away". But it's not like I have anything else to do for the next few hours 🙃

I'm curious to know why you are so opposed to teachers having guns.

I have repeatedly said the worst outcome would be a law abiding citizen is held defenseless against someone with a gun that wants to do bad things. They don’t want to hear that. They hear hear, hey how can we balance rights but maybe prevent some deaths as you want to take my guns away so I hate you.

[Deertick]

Originally Posted by BobbyStrawberry

Why do you think it is that some gun owners seem to fear the government coming and taking them away? Or that any law regulating or restricting firearms will inevitably lead to that outcome? I have some ideas, but they all suggest that the issue really isn't about guns, and more about distrust of government.

Because that is how the money has been couching the argument for decades. "Be able to keep the tyranny at bay, while having fun at the range in the mean time. It is not only your Right, it is your Duty." And then marketing "Get 'em while they last! They're coming for you and yours!"

It is all about keeping the money rolling in and ZERO to do with Constitutional faithfulness to the 2nd amendment.

The "AR" debate has been skewed a bit with semantics. It is not an "assault rifle", it is a "low-powered" rifle. But the problem arises with it's marketing (official and otherwise) of being smaller, cheaper, lightweight, easier to use, and able to inflict serious damage to would be wrongdoers (or even deer).

There is a reason that it is a very popular firearm for enthusiasts and mass shooters alike. For the mass shooters, I don't know whether it is because it is ubiquitous, or the best bang for the buck.

[JustinD]

Originally Posted by Deertick

There is a reason that it is a very popular firearm for enthusiasts and mass shooters alike. For the mass shooters, I don't know whether it is because it is ubiquitous, or the best bang for the buck.

I have seen a few posts in which you have extended a fallacy that AR-15 type designed rifles are the choice of mass shooters or "ubiquitous" as just said now.

This is in no way true and I am sure you can find no proof of this over the past 20 years as handguns outnumber that statistic by a rather large margin (roughly 3 to 1). You have fallen for assumption, please research that number than go off thoughts. Also, understand that FBI statistics lump all shootings under the rifle category, which includes black rifles into the same number as any other rifle...thus that number is indeed much lower than the 3 to 1.

I am assuming you just are parroting things you have heard, so I am trying to help your statements become at least truthful in your defense.

This is why banning "assault" rifles is called a slope. It will not make much of an effect and then when the item that really is the greater use is noted it will be the new villain. And the beat goes on.

[ALR-bishop]

[bnorth]

Originally Posted by ALR-bishop

LOL now that is funny. PS invite me because that sounds fun.

[cgjackson222]

Originally Posted by JustinD

I have seen a few posts in which you have extended a fallacy that AR-15 type designed rifles are the choice of mass shooters or "ubiquitous" as just said now.

This is in no way true and I am sure you can find no proof of this over the past 20 years as handguns outnumber that statistic by a rather large margin (roughly 3 to 1). You have fallen for assumption, please research that number than go off thoughts. Also, understand that FBI statistics lump all shootings under the rifle category, which includes black rifles into the same number as any other rifle...thus that number is indeed much lower than the 3 to 1.

I am assuming you just are parroting things you have heard, so I am trying to help your statements become at least truthful in your defense.

This is why banning "assault" rifles is called a slope. It will not make much of an effect and then when the item that really is the greater use is noted it will be the new villain. And the beat goes on.

An AR-15 style weapon was reportedly used by: 1) Uvalde shooter 2) Parkland shooter (Smith and Wesson M&P15, that manufacturer's version of the AR-15) 3) Las Vegas shooter (23 different weapons were recovered in the gunman's hotel suite, including multiple AR-15 style rifles and hundreds of rounds of ammunition) 4) Aurora Colorado (One AR-15 variant from Smith & Wesson, a pump-action 12-gauge shotgun and at least one .40-caliber semiautomatic pistol, according to) 5) Sandy Hook (Remington AR-15-style bushmaster) 6) Waffle House in Nashville TN (AR-15 assault-style rifle) 7) San Bernadino Office party (Two AR-15 variants (Smith & Wesson M&P assault rifle and a DPMS Panther Arms assault rifle) a Smith & Wesson handgun and a Llama handgun) 8) Midland/Odessa (At least one AR-15 variant, as stated in a Justice Department press release about a case involving the man who sold the gun to the shooter.) 9) Poway Synagogue near San Diego 10) Sutherland Springs Texas (Ruger AR-15 variant) 11) Tree of Life Synagogue in Pittsburgh ("multiple firearms'' including a Colt AR-15 rifle)
https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/...gs/7039204002/

In a 2016 blog post, the NRA referred to the AR-15 as "America's most popular rifle" https://web.archive.org/web/20191116...popular-rifle/

It has been reported that there are 20 million AR-15 style rifles in circulation in the USA: https://www.businessinsider.com/us-2...on-2022-5?op=1

Ubiquitous does not mean it is the most popular gun in the country. But it does mean they can be found pretty much everywhere.

[JustinD]

Originally Posted by cgjackson222

An AR-15 style weapon was reportedly used by: 1) Uvalde shooter 2) Parkland shooter (Smith and Wesson M&P15, that manufacturer's version of the AR-15) 3) Las Vegas shooter (23 different weapons were recovered in the gunman's hotel suite, including multiple AR-15 style rifles and hundreds of rounds of ammunition) 4) Aurora Colorado (One AR-15 variant from Smith & Wesson, a pump-action 12-gauge shotgun and at least one .40-caliber semiautomatic pistol, according to) 5) Sandy Hook (Remington AR-15-style bushmaster) 6) Waffle House in Nashville TN (AR-15 assault-style rifle) 7) San Bernadino Office party (Two AR-15 variants (Smith & Wesson M&P assault rifle and a DPMS Panther Arms assault rifle) a Smith & Wesson handgun and a Llama handgun) 8) Midland/Odessa (At least one AR-15 variant, as stated in a Justice Department press release about a case involving the man who sold the gun to the shooter.) 9) Poway Synagogue near San Diego 10) Sutherland Springs Texas (Ruger AR-15 variant) 11) Tree of Life Synagogue in Pittsburgh ("multiple firearms'' including a Colt AR-15 rifle)
https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/...gs/7039204002/

In a 2016 blog post, the NRA referred to the AR-15 as "America's most popular rifle" https://web.archive.org/web/20191116...popular-rifle/

It has been reported that there are 20 million AR-15 style rifles in circulation in the USA: https://www.businessinsider.com/us-2...on-2022-5?op=1

Ubiquitous does not mean it is the most popular gun in the country. But it does mean they can be found pretty much everywhere.

Listing off instances it was used does not make it the most used gun in mass shootings, facts say it is not. FBI statistics slap it in a general rifle category which includes any and every rifle made and it's still not in the neighborhood...not even in the suburb.

That was my statement.

[cgjackson222]

Originally Posted by JustinD

Listing off instances it was used does not make it the most used gun in mass shootings, facts say it is not.

That was my statement.

Okay, do you have any evidence supporting your facts?

It could be that the weapon was just used in virtually all high profile mass shootings, such as ones in schools and ones with particularly high amounts of deaths. I realize there are technically about 1 mass shooting per day or something like. I am sure a lot of those aren't with an AR-15 style weapon.

[Deertick]

Originally Posted by JustinD

(1)I have seen a few posts in which you have extended a fallacy that AR-15 type designed rifles are the choice of mass shooters or "ubiquitous" as just said now.

(2)This is in no way true and I am sure you can find no proof of this over the past 20 years as handguns outnumber that statistic by a rather large margin (roughly 3 to 1). You have fallen for assumption, please research that number than go off thoughts. Also, understand that FBI statistics lump all shootings under the rifle category, which includes black rifles into the same number as any other rifle...thus that number is indeed much lower than the 3 to 1.

(3)I am assuming you just are parroting things you have heard, so I am trying to help your statements become at least truthful in your defense.

(4)This is why banning "assault" rifles is called a slope. It will not make much of an effect and then when the item that really is the greater use is noted it will be the new villain. And the beat goes on.

1. No you haven't. And I believe CG defined ubiquitous in context for you.

2. I neither agree nor disagree with your contention (other than the "assumption" part), as there has been no definitive data report that I am aware of. Using your logic that all are lumped into "rifles", then one could illogically claim that they are ALL AR style, no?

There is no consensus on what qualifies as a mass shooting. Some are based on number killed, some on number shot. Some exclude gang and drug related, some don't. There are databases that specify make/model used in nearly all cases, but I am not aware of any sortable. I do "feel" that a large majority of the '3+ shot' are handguns.

3. I don't "parrot" anything. I have pushed back on the notion that the 2nd provides unfettered access. I know that "unfettered" is not actually the case, but there are many that have fought EVERY.SINGLE.FETTER. tooth and nail. I'm *for* strict regulation, not banning guns.

4. See post 877. No one has argued against it.

Edited to add: I cannot see the source of the stats that you cited, but see that they are counting 3+ fatalities. Change this criteria to persons shot, and that number skyrockets.

"Since 2013, the source defines a mass shooting as any single attack in a public place with three or more fatalities, in line with the definition by the FBI. Before 2013, a mass shooting was defined as any single attack in a public place with four or more fatalities."