The God Damned Gun Control Thread

[Doves]

So if one child dies by a knife than we should call for a ban on knives with different blade lengths? Again, my favorite question. If a child dies in a rollover of a 8 passenger SUV should we ban those too? Because owning a SUV is not essential to own in one's life unless maybe you have 8 kids. I can bring up example after example so where does it stop? I mentioned this before that in China which happened twice where someone went into a school and murdered children just using a knife. So possible that another massacare could occur without the use of any type of gun.

The positive every day benefits of knives and cars far outway the cons of the possibility of a murder, not to mention how much harder it is to pull off a mass murder with a knife or car. The problem with extended magazines is the ease with which they can kill lots of people and the almost no positive benefits in everyday life. Why do you have to have a 30 round clip? What makes it so essential to you? Is your enjoyment at the shooting range worth people dying?

Here's the reality the statistics of people dying from guns with high capacity rounds/clips is miniscul compared to the rest of the ways that people die everyday.

Thats partly because people use cars all the time and guns not as often.

[WD-40]

Yes but everything else is giving us benefits too. What benefit do you get from your extended clip that makes it worth people's lives?

I can see Bailey's point here...however, if the law says (and every wack and law-breaker agrees to abide by this) you cannot have more than 15 rounds capability, then carry one extra clip to have your 30. Carry 3 and have 45.

Now, say Joe wackjob shows up at a park or school or theater, and using his 15 round clip rifle or handgun, starts shooting and killing. Everyone will likely try to run for cover. Why? Because of the shock and awe effect, the likelihood that they are all unarmed and unable to defend themselves (maybe the Law doesn't allow them to have a weapon?) makes his control of the situation very plausible. While the survivors are hiding or cowering, maybe protecting a loved one, Joe Wackjob empties his 15 round clip, reloads with (you guessed it!) clip #2, and starts firing at the survivors.

Point is, you can reduce the ammo capability all you want, but if people (victims) are unprepared for a situation like this, are not trained in firearms use, and are simply un-armed, they are [m'kay]. Pray for a misfire or gun jam, and then a couple dudes who haven't [poo] themselves to jump the wack and take him down, because he's gonna clear the malfunction and reload.

Now, let's say the U.S. economy completely goes to [poo] after Obama gets done [m'kay] it all up. I'd want that 30 round clip, and many like it to defend my property and my family from poachers and thieves and murderers. A 30 round clip enables home defense better than 15. And the way our infrastructure is headed, we are well on our way towards a big economic problem.

[Bailey]

Yes but everything else is giving us benefits too. What benefit do you get from your extended clip that makes it worth people's lives?

I can see Bailey's point here...however, if the law says (and every wack and law-breaker agrees to abide by this) you cannot have more than 15 rounds capability, then carry one extra clip to have your 30. Carry 3 and have 45.

Now, say Joe wackjob shows up at a park or school or theater, and using his 15 round clip rifle or handgun, starts shooting and killing. Everyone will likely try to run for cover. Why? Because of the shock and awe effect, the likelihood that they are all unarmed and unable to defend themselves (maybe the Law doesn't allow them to have a weapon?) makes his control of the situation very plausible. While the survivors are hiding or cowering, maybe protecting a loved one, Joe Wackjob empties his 15 round clip, reloads with (you guessed it!) clip #2, and starts firing at the survivors.

Point is, you can reduce the ammo capability all you want, but if people (victims) are unprepared for a situation like this, are not trained in firearms use, and are simply un-armed, they are [m'kay]. Pray for a misfire or gun jam, and then a couple dudes who haven't [poo] themselves to jump the wack and take him down, because he's gonna clear the malfunction and reload.

Now, let's say the U.S. economy completely goes to [poo] after Obama gets done [m'kay] it all up. I'd want that 30 round clip, and many like it to defend my property and my family from poachers and thieves and murderers. A 30 round clip enables home defense better than 15. And the way our infrastructure is headed, we are well on our way towards a big economic problem.

Yeah theoretically I understand how easy it is to change a magazine however as I stated earlier Jared loughner, the Tucson shooter was taken down while reloading after emptying an extended clip. So even though in theory it shouldn't er, sometimes in reality that few seconds is all you need.

[Dad]

I will always retain the ability to defend myself and the ones I love, from anyone or anything.

Especially if it makes me a criminal to do so.

Please lock this thread. It's fulfilling my 8 year old sig and it came far sooner than I thought it would.

God (hmph) Rest America.

[Bailey]

Now, let's say the U.S. economy completely goes to [poo] after Obama gets done [m'kay] it all up. I'd want that 30 round clip, and many like it to defend my property and my family from poachers and thieves and murderers. A 30 round clip enables home defense better than 15. And the way our infrastructure is headed, we are well on our way towards a big economic problem.

Yeah in this situation I completely agree that a 30 round clip would be a handy thing. I guess personally I do not believe that we are headed towards a future like that any time soon, so the short term benefits of safety in common sense gun laws make more sense to me than leaving current gun laws and being more prepared for a post-apocalyptic setting.

Let me reiterate though, I in no way support bans on all guns. I think that having firearms and being able to defend oneself are basic liberties and should never be taken away. I do however think that some restrictions, in particular on what types of firearms, and their magazine size need to be put in place. I understand that there is no way that we could stop all gun violence with laws, or that we could ever completely prevent the most dedicated of criminals from killing, however I think that if it would save even a couple of lives it would be worth it. If one of these maladjusted young men could not so easily get their hands on an extended magazine and therefor could not kill as many on a rampage before being stopped, then we should enact new laws. I am sorry if I have offended anybody in this thread; I appreciate the opportunity for an open and honest debate and I hold you all in the utmost respect.

[WD-40]

In the interest of not wasting page space, I won't quote it all. Bailey, you are correct, after that a-hole started reloading he was taken down. But in a public location, surrounded by adults in close quarters, that is RARE. You have to admit, most shootings of this magnitude occur in situations where the victims are NOT near the wack shooter, and likely are under aged children that are the targets. That rips the Country the most. Children as victims. It's horrid. Breaks my heart.

It brings a bad name to, not just those who are gun enthusiasts, but also those who support the Right to bear arms. Granted, our Fore-Fathers could not conceive entirely the capability of assault weapons, but based on the progression of weapons from Jesus to the 1700's, the thought had to have crossed their minds.

They seriously thought this out from the stand point of the political and personal Freedoms they were trying to protect due to the oppression they experienced due to British Rule at that time.. They also knew that if 'the people' lose control of Government, then Government would control them. Think about that! What Nation on a Planet ruled by Monarchys could come up with something like a 'Constitution' to keep a Government in-check by 'the People'?

Brilliant Fore-Fathers!! We, as The People, are so damn lucky to have set a Standard that actually works without some damn king/queen/Dictator, etc [m'kay] 'Rights' all up.

So a guy like Franklin comes along, believes what he says, and meant the basic tenant of it's meaning! Keep the Government in-check. Guns see to that. What else do you have short of grenades mortars C-4, but those extras didn't exist then. Gun advocates have a passion for weapons for many, MANY reasons. A hobby, love of military, home defense, a feeling of power, and the right to keep our ignorant and stupid teleprompter Government in check amongst other reasons. We are at a VERY SERIOUS crossroads right now in a very divided country. Somehow, someway (Mexicans and Minorities and stupid women) we managed to re/elect a guy who outspent in only 4 years what every President before him spent in the 200 years before him COMBINED!! The Fear has officially become valid that we as a Nation are in trouble. Our Goverent is OFFICIALLY out of control!!. If any person cannot see this fact, then they are spending way too much time in mama's basement or are retarded (aka Liberal).

Guns. Our Nation's last line of defense against anarchy. Retarded wacks are NOT part of that equation, and they do NOT over rule our Constitutional Right to protect Our Nation's survival. Trust Obama? Then you are a Fool!

[Bailey]

In situations where children are the target, such as a classroom, then they wouldn't have equal firearms to defend themselves no er what, so the fact that extended magazines and the like are legal would not help them anyways. Also I disagree with your assertion that most target areas are not public, and do not have adults present. With the exception of schools, attacks like this have happened at grocery stores, movie theaters, and public streets, areas where adults were present and some were in close proximity.

I wish that we lived in a world where gun enthusiasts could own whatever they wanted and none of it ended up in the wrong hands doing the wrong things. [m'kay] if I could own a grenade launcher and had a safe place to launch it, I'd save up and buy that myself because of how fun I think it could be. Unfortunately I think the few wackos ruin it for the rest of the law abiding citizens and gun enthusiasts who just want to enjoy (or collect or whatever) their guns. I think that we fundamentally disagree on the current direction of our government. While I am not an extreme Obama supporter I do not think that we are running ourselves into the ground. I find myself to be somewhat of a moderate and I wish that more compromises could be made to ensure the majority are happy and safe. I do not see a point in the near future where I would have to worry about an invasion or mobs of looters trying to sack my house. Plus I have a great security system and a rather large knife and machete collection that, given most situations I would feel adequate in defending my house with. When I have kids, I will buy a firearm to give them the best security possible. I don't think that one president really has the power to make or break our government. I do not really wish to debate the future of our great country though because I do not think that we would ever reach a consensus and I would rather agree to disagree.

An interesting point that I do no believe has been debated yet is the fact that we ALREADY are limited in our right to bear arms. I cannot go out and buy military grade weapons or explosive weapons so technically if we are to literally take the constitution at its word, then we already are breaking it. If people are worried that some gun restrictions are somehow losing our constitutional rights, then haven't we already lost them a long time ago with the current gun restrictions?

[haasd0gg]

Buhbye stig

[Darth Crater]

... Okay, what is going on here? Censorship by the forum admins?

[Col. Hstar]

Sounds like just early spring cleaning of morons