Announcement

Collapse

Civics 101 Guidelines

Want to argue about politics? Healthcare reform? Taxes? Governments? You've come to the right place!

Try to keep it civil though. The rules still apply here.
See more
See less

Gun Control - moved from E-cig thread

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #76
    Originally posted by oxmixmudd View Post
    I still think that argument, at this point, is obsolete. To have a reasonably effective 'last line of defense' in our age means putting too much unrestrained power into potentially unstable people's hands. The realcweapons of war are so powerful and destructive it is silly to think a bunch of AR15's is going to make a lot of difference. But even an AR15, it turns out, without some sort of management of their possession and use, is too much power to let loose in a time when there are more and more unstable people around to misuse them.

    Jim
    AR-15ís are dangerous weapons.
    AR-15ís wonít make much of a difference, in an invasion.



    Let me know what one of these pills you plan on swallowing first. AR-15ís have been around for 50 years, good luck collecting them all.

    BTW tanks and bombers are nice toys, but at the end of the day, itís the boots on the ground that fight and win wars and this is coming from someone that maintains those nice toys.
    Last edited by lilpixieofterror; 09-17-2019, 10:22 AM.
    "The man from the yacht thought he was the first to find England; I thought I was the first to find Europe. I did try to found a heresy of my own; and when I had put the last touches to it, I discovered that it was orthodoxy."
    GK Chesterton; Orthodoxy

    Comment


    • #77
      Originally posted by oxmixmudd View Post
      I still think that argument, at this point, is obsolete. To have a reasonably effective 'last line of defense' in our age means putting too much unrestrained power into potentially unstable people's hands. The realcweapons of war are so powerful and destructive it is silly to think a bunch of AR15's is going to make a lot of difference. But even an AR15, it turns out, without some sort of management of their possession and use, is too much power to let loose in a time when there are more and more unstable people around to misuse them.

      Jim

      You are wrong. Just look at the Middle East where rebels and civilians have held off our military for decades. Usually a government is reluctant to use tanks and bombs against their own populace. And if civilians did make a stand against an oppressive government, they could use their civilian guns to bootstrap their way up to military grade weapons.

      It is much easier to control a populace who has no weapons. As we have seen in Venezuela and other countries.

      I am just tired of people who know little to nothing about guns trying to tell the rest of the country how guns should be controlled. Your idea of AR15s is a perfect example.

      Comment


      • #78
        ďGuns are easy to buy!!Ē

        I went to Walmart with the intention of buying a gun last week as part of an investigation into the placement, selection, marketing, and security of firearms in Walmart's stores, and to learn more about the retailer's processes governing gun sales.

        My journey to bring a gun home from Walmart turned out to be far more complicated than I expected.
        https://www.businessinsider.com/walm...a-store-2019-8
        "The man from the yacht thought he was the first to find England; I thought I was the first to find Europe. I did try to found a heresy of my own; and when I had put the last touches to it, I discovered that it was orthodoxy."
        GK Chesterton; Orthodoxy

        Comment


        • #79
          In a school shooting, a person could do just as much or more damage with any other gun than an AR15. A handgun, shotgun, or any semi-auto rifle. But the AR15 looks like a military weapon so it is evil and must be banned.

          Comment


          • #80
            Originally posted by Sparko View Post
            In a school shooting, a person could do just as much or more damage with any other gun than an AR15. A handgun, shotgun, or any semi-auto rifle. But the AR15 looks like a military weapon so it is evil and must be banned.
            I think what people donít quite get is the ARís revolutionary feature is its weight reduction. Pre AR styles are mostly made of steel with wood stocks and as a result, are heavy. The AR-10 was one of the first rifles to use aluminum for most of the metal and plastic, in place of wooden stocks. This made them a lot lighter which resulted in making it easier to use. This feature has found its way all over the market to the point that most modern guns, in general, are built with lighter materials.
            "The man from the yacht thought he was the first to find England; I thought I was the first to find Europe. I did try to found a heresy of my own; and when I had put the last touches to it, I discovered that it was orthodoxy."
            GK Chesterton; Orthodoxy

            Comment


            • #81
              Originally posted by Sparko View Post
              You are wrong. Just look at the Middle East where rebels and civilians have held off our military for decades. Usually a government is reluctant to use tanks and bombs against their own populace. And if civilians did make a stand against an oppressive government, they could use their civilian guns to bootstrap their way up to military grade weapons.
              I don't think those civilian resistance units are only holding them off with rifles. They have other, more powerful, weapons - illegal to own or very difficult to acquire.

              It is much easier to control a populace who has no weapons. As we have seen in Venezuela and other countries.
              Not talking about no weapons, just controlling access to the ones that in the wrong hand can make quick work of a crowd of people.

              I am just tired of people who know little to nothing about guns trying to tell the rest of the country how guns should be controlled. Your idea of AR15s is a perfect example.
              I'm not a person that knows 'little or nothing'. Just because I don't agree with you doesn't mean I'm stupid, or ignorant. That said, What is the 'your idea' to which you refer?

              Jim
              He will reply, ĎTruly I tell you, whatever you did not do for one of the least of these, you did not do for me."

              "So in everything, do to others what you would have them do to you, for this sums up the Law and the Prophets"

              Comment


              • #82
                Originally posted by oxmixmudd View Post
                I don't think those civilian resistance units are only holding them off with rifles. They have other, more powerful, weapons - illegal to own or very difficult to acquire.



                Not talking about no weapons, just controlling access to the ones that in the wrong hand can make quick work of a crowd of people.



                I'm not a person that knows 'little or nothing'. Just because I don't agree with you doesn't mean I'm stupid, or ignorant. That said, What is the 'your idea' to which you refer?

                Jim
                Your idea that AR15s are some especially evil weapon that "can make quick work of a crowd of people" - when in fact any semi-auto handgun or rifle can do the same.

                In fact if you are just trying to "make quick work of a crowd" you could use two handguns and shoot twice as many people in the same time as you could with an AR15.

                Comment


                • #83
                  Originally posted by lilpixieofterror View Post
                  AR-15ís are dangerous weapons.
                  AR-15ís wonít make much of a difference, in an invasion.



                  Let me know what one of these pills you plan on swallowing first. AR-15ís have been around for 50 years, good luck collecting them all.
                  (1)I don't disagree it would be very hard to remove them. That doesn't mean we should not try to limit access to them WRT new purchases, Nor does it mean we should not try to regulate in some way the ownership of the ones that currently are out there.

                  (2)I doubt seriously we'd ever face 'an invasion' until and unless the H-bombs have flown. Very few global powers can match us otherwise. It then goes back to more an oppressive government of our own.

                  And It's not that i don't think having gun's might help in that 'government gone berserk' situation, it's just that given the fact our gradually corrupting morals are producing more and more crazies, I'm not sure we can afford that luxury any longer - at least not in its current form.

                  To that point, I'm not a fan of slippery slope arguments. There are realistic, helpful things we can do that will not result in someone invading your home and taking your AR-15s. We should at least stop fighting tooth and nail those sorts of proposals - registration, some sort of monitoring (probably like Driver's licences) where people are subject to periodic safety and mental fitness evaluations and where indications the owners of the most powerful legal weapons have lost it are acted on.

                  BTW tanks and bombers are nice toys, but at the end of the day, itís the boots on the ground that fight and win wars and this is coming from someone that maintains those nice toys.
                  Boots on the ground yes. But with a lot more than just a personal AR-15. Grenades, RPG's, body armor, night vision, communications, air support, rations, medics, specially trained snipers, what else - you would know.

                  Jim
                  He will reply, ĎTruly I tell you, whatever you did not do for one of the least of these, you did not do for me."

                  "So in everything, do to others what you would have them do to you, for this sums up the Law and the Prophets"

                  Comment


                  • #84
                    Originally posted by Sparko View Post
                    Your idea that AR15s are some especially evil weapon that "can make quick work of a crowd of people" - when in fact any semi-auto handgun or rifle can do the same.
                    The idea an AR15 can make quick work of a crowd of people is simple fact Sparko. As has been demonstrated time and time again.

                    A semi-auto handgun can't do the same sparko, at least not without some training and practice. Recoil absorption in the AR15 makes it much easier for the average shooter to maintain his aim in rapid fire succession. But other weapons with sufficient ammunition capacity and recoil absorption, yes they can. And They would need to be on the list too. AR15 is just an example of the type of weapon that needs to be managed.

                    In fact if you are just trying to "make quick work of a crowd" you could use two handguns and shoot twice as many people in the same time as you could with an AR15.
                    You might be able to shoot the same number of bullets. Maybe - extended magazine rounds were/are not hard to get for the AR15.

                    But not as accurately. And not without the muzzle velocity that makes the ammunition so destructive as it passes through the target.

                    Jim
                    He will reply, ĎTruly I tell you, whatever you did not do for one of the least of these, you did not do for me."

                    "So in everything, do to others what you would have them do to you, for this sums up the Law and the Prophets"

                    Comment


                    • #85
                      Originally posted by oxmixmudd View Post
                      (1)I don't disagree it would be very hard to remove them. That doesn't mean we should not try to limit access to them WRT new purchases, Nor does it mean we should not try to regulate in some way the ownership of the ones that currently are out there.

                      (2)I doubt seriously we'd ever face 'an invasion' until and unless the H-bombs have flown. Very few global powers can match us otherwise. It then goes back to more an oppressive government of our own.

                      And It's not that i don't think having gun's might help in that 'government gone berserk' situation, it's just that given the fact our gradually corrupting morals are producing more and more crazies, I'm not sure we can afford that luxury any longer - at least not in its current form.

                      To that point, I'm not a fan of slippery slope arguments. There are realistic, helpful things we can do that will not result in someone invading your home and taking your AR-15s. We should at least stop fighting tooth and nail those sorts of proposals - registration, some sort of monitoring (probably like Driver's licences) where people are subject to periodic safety and mental fitness evaluations and where indications the owners of the most powerful legal weapons have lost it are acted on.



                      Boots on the ground yes. But with a lot more than just a personal AR-15. Grenades, RPG's, body armor, night vision, communications, air support, rations, medics, specially trained snipers, what else - you would know.

                      Jim
                      I think a lot of the police and military would be on the civilian's side and would help arm them rather than disarm them in an actual revolution. But guns are not just for protecting against a rogue government. They are also used for private protection, sporting, and hunting. We have the right to own them and the government doesn't have the right to take them away. That's it. You have no right to tell me what I can own, or try to take away my guns or limit what I have. This is America dammit. Mind your own business and stop trying to tell others what they can and can't own.

                      Comment


                      • #86
                        Originally posted by oxmixmudd View Post
                        (1)I don't disagree it would be very hard to remove them. That doesn't mean we should not try to limit access to them WRT new purchases, Nor does it mean we should not try to regulate in some way the ownership of the ones that currently are out there.
                        Why? Because you said so? You donít get it, do you? Itís too late, you canít. The cat is long out of the bag and youíre not going to get that cat back in that bag. The only thing youíll accomplish is making criminals out of millions and sending AR style weapons into black market hands. Your plan will make things worse, not better.

                        (2)I doubt seriously we'd ever face 'an invasion' until and unless the H-bombs have flown. Very few global powers can match us otherwise. It then goes back to more an oppressive government of our own.
                        Rome was the most powerful empire, in the world, in 50AD, is it now? The British Empire was the most powerful empire, in the world, in 1850, is it still? Power is fleeting Jim, today superpower is gone tomorrow. Thereís no guarantee that US dominance will continue or will be the only T Rex on the block.

                        And It's not that i don't think having gun's might help in that 'government gone berserk' situation, it's just that given the fact our gradually corrupting morals are producing more and more crazies, I'm not sure we can afford that luxury any longer - at least not in its current form.
                        Thatís an opinion not based in fact. This is the safest era, in history, where Iím in less danger now than I have ever been in. Mass shootings happen, what changed was the targets. It used to be that crazies would shoot up their own families and friends and mostly leave the rest of us alone. That changed. Pressing the panic button and saying we need to ban guns now will not solve a thing. Thereís too many guns, in too many hands, with little to no record keeping, to find them all. Youíre not going to pass laws until youíre safe.

                        To that point, I'm not a fan of slippery slope arguments. There are realistic, helpful things we can do that will not result in someone invading your home and taking your AR-15s. We should at least stop fighting tooth and nail those sorts of proposals - registration, some sort of monitoring (probably like Driver's licences) where people are subject to periodic safety and mental fitness evaluations and where indications the owners of the most powerful legal weapons have lost it are acted on.
                        Which wonít work. Mental fitness evaluations are worthless. It isnít overly difficult to fool them, so youíll pass a law that, yet again, does nothing, but make you feel good.

                        Boots on the ground yes. But with a lot more than just a personal AR-15. Grenades, RPG's, body armor, night vision, communications, air support, rations, medics, specially trained snipers, what else - you would know.
                        And how well have all those toys worked in Afghanistan or in Vietnam? We are very good at fighting against governments, weíre terrible at fighting against a bunch of farmers and herders. Why?
                        "The man from the yacht thought he was the first to find England; I thought I was the first to find Europe. I did try to found a heresy of my own; and when I had put the last touches to it, I discovered that it was orthodoxy."
                        GK Chesterton; Orthodoxy

                        Comment


                        • #87
                          Originally posted by Sparko View Post
                          I think a lot of the police and military would be on the civilian's side and would help arm them rather than disarm them in an actual revolution. But guns are not just for protecting against a rogue government. They are also used for private protection, sporting, and hunting. We have the right to own them and the government doesn't have the right to take them away. That's it. You have no right to tell me what I can own, or try to take away my guns or limit what I have. This is America dammit. Mind your own business and stop trying to tell others what they can and can't own.
                          That's an odd response sparko. We regulate a rather large number of very dangerous things because people in general are not capable or willing to do what would be required to keep others safe.

                          Should your desire to have guns without any form of regulation be yielded to at the expense of those that have died in recent years at the hands of those that could too easily obtain those same weapons? I do not believe so. First, you are the sort of person that likely will still be able to get guns and use them regardless Second, if we can make a dent in the number of these mass shooting events by putting up some roadblocks to ownership, it's worth it.

                          Jim
                          He will reply, ĎTruly I tell you, whatever you did not do for one of the least of these, you did not do for me."

                          "So in everything, do to others what you would have them do to you, for this sums up the Law and the Prophets"

                          Comment


                          • #88
                            Originally posted by oxmixmudd View Post
                            Should your desire to have guns without any form of regulation be yielded to at the expense of those that have died in recent years at the hands of those that could too easily obtain those same weapons? I do not believe so. First, you are the sort of person that likely will still be able to get guns and use them regardless Second, if we can make a dent in the number of these mass shooting events by putting up some roadblocks to ownership, it's worth it.

                            Jim
                            Jim do you realize how many lives we would save if we only manufactured vehicles that could only reach the speed of 40 MPH, and had speed limit no higher than 40 MPH? And owning and driving a car is not even a Constitutional right. And remember the worse school shooting, ever, was done with two very generic hand guns. And what gun owner today would want to register his gun with the Democrats openly talking about confiscation?

                            Right now you are getting this:

                            ĎSOLD OUTí: Arizona Gun Store Offers ĎBeto Specialsí on AR15s and AK47s

                            https://www.cnsnews.com/blog/craig-b...r15s-and-ak47s
                            Atheism is the cult of death, the death of hope. The universe is doomed, you are doomed, the only thing that remains is to await your execution...

                            https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jbnueb2OI4o&t=3s

                            Comment


                            • #89
                              Originally posted by oxmixmudd View Post
                              That's an odd response sparko. We regulate a rather large number of very dangerous things because people in general are not capable or willing to do what would be required to keep others safe.

                              Should your desire to have guns without any form of regulation be yielded to at the expense of those that have died in recent years at the hands of those that could too easily obtain those same weapons? I do not believe so. First, you are the sort of person that likely will still be able to get guns and use them regardless Second, if we can make a dent in the number of these mass shooting events by putting up some roadblocks to ownership, it's worth it.

                              Jim
                              Do we regulate these things that are:

                              1. Legally protected by the constitution.
                              2. Easily hidden away.
                              3. That are well over 300 million (est) in circulation.

                              Good luck, youíll need it.
                              "The man from the yacht thought he was the first to find England; I thought I was the first to find Europe. I did try to found a heresy of my own; and when I had put the last touches to it, I discovered that it was orthodoxy."
                              GK Chesterton; Orthodoxy

                              Comment


                              • #90
                                Originally posted by oxmixmudd View Post
                                That's an odd response sparko. We regulate a rather large number of very dangerous things because people in general are not capable or willing to do what would be required to keep others safe.
                                That are written into the constitution? Or more correctly the constitution prevents government interference and recognizes the right to bear arms. This "we are doing it for your own good" is the line dictators have used on the people for centuries. It is for their own power, not our good.

                                Should your desire to have guns without any form of regulation be yielded to at the expense of those that have died in recent years at the hands of those that could too easily obtain those same weapons? I do not believe so. First, you are the sort of person that likely will still be able to get guns and use them regardless Second, if we can make a dent in the number of these mass shooting events by putting up some roadblocks to ownership, it's worth it.

                                Jim
                                It always starts as a little nibble that nobody really minds and "it won't affect me" -- much like boiling a frog in a pot.

                                First they came for the socialists, and I did not speak outó

                                Because I was not a socialist.

                                Then they came for the trade unionists, and I did not speak outó
                                Because I was not a trade unionist.

                                Then they came for the Jews, and I did not speak outó
                                Because I was not a Jew.

                                Then they came for meóand there was no one left to speak for me.

                                Comment

                                Related Threads

                                Collapse

                                Topics Statistics Last Post
                                Started by Thoughtful Monk, Today, 11:36 AM
                                5 responses
                                11 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post rogue06
                                by rogue06
                                 
                                Started by Charles, Today, 09:40 AM
                                6 responses
                                42 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post rogue06
                                by rogue06
                                 
                                Started by rogue06, Yesterday, 08:34 PM
                                8 responses
                                45 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post Hypatia_Alexandria  
                                Started by LiconaFan97, Yesterday, 07:31 PM
                                9 responses
                                58 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post LiconaFan97  
                                Started by Bill the Cat, Yesterday, 02:47 PM
                                46 responses
                                206 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post rogue06
                                by rogue06
                                 
                                Working...
                                X