Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

ladypanther

Ban weapons of mass destruction.....NOW

613 posts in this topic

Your arguement is terrible.

There is no such thing as personal accountability to a liberal. The guy did this....not the gun.

This guy did this WITH a gun.

Don't deny it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If this nation had an epidemic of people getting into cars with the sole purpose of killing people I would get behind banning cars or at least some cars or making it harder to own a car.

But as far as I know, most deaths by automobile not from people getting into cars with the direct intent of killing themselves or other people.

Also automobiles are considered essential for your livelihood and economic stability, guns are no longer essential for livelihood .

Hopefully the comparison of firearms to automobile deaths will be seared into the public consciousness. Why?

Because the federal government has required car manufactures to improve vehicle safety significantly over the last several decades. The result has been deaths from automobile accidents in relation to miles driven is at an historic low.

Self-driving automobiles are already in the test phase and are expected to be available to the general public in little over a decade. Once the "human factor" is reduced and eventually eliminated, death by automobile will be, for all intents and purposes, a thing of the past.

What will then be the leading cause of unnatural death? What will happen to America's tolerance for firearms killing tens of thousands of friends and family every year?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Another way to look at this issue is the US lost 50,000 soldiers in Vietnam before public outcry required our withdrawal from that conflict.

Can anyone imagine the American public standing still for 50,000 soldiers dying in a regional war today?

After withdrawing from Iraq and Afghanistan we will have lost less than 5,000, a tenth of our losses in Vietnam.

The American publics tolerance for death is decreasing at a rapid rate thanks to modern mass media.

Reasonable gun advocates would be wise to push for safety reforms or they will eventually find themselves on the wrong side of history.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Why isn't this plausible?

There. Everyone is happy. Done and done. Your 2nd amendment right is not taken away, the power and lethalness of the guns available is greatly reduced, the access to guns is more difficult, and mental health care is expanded.

Surely everyone could get on board with that right??

I actually own a DE .50, and of all the handguns I own, it would be the last one I'd grab if I needed to defend myself (for a number of reasons)...

The others are (IMHO) far more dangerous, while not as imposing, intimidating or fearful...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Once the "human factor" is reduced and eventually eliminated, death by automobile will be, for all intents and purposes, a thing of the past.

What will then be the leading cause of unnatural death?

Suicide surpassed automobile deaths last year to take over the #1 spot on that list. So it goes back to the issue of mental illness vs gun control.

So do you restrict guns and infringe on 2nd amendment rights to protect the public? Or do you restrict those with a deemed significant mental illness and infringe on their 14th amendment rights (and perhaps their 1st)?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I actually own a DE .50, and of all the handguns I own, it would be the last one I'd grab if I needed to defend myself (for a number of reasons)...

The others are (IMHO) far more dangerous, while not as imposing, intimidating or fearful...

I agree and that is sort of my point If I am going to concede that handguns are necessary as a form of self defense, the DE .50 and .350 magnum are actually not very good handguns for self defense.

But both are very powerful single shot guns.

If they aren't guns that are most effective for self defense, what is their purpose??

So get rid of them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Why isn't this plausible?

There. Everyone is happy. Done and done. Your 2nd amendment right is not taken away, the power and lethalness of the guns available is greatly reduced, the access to guns is more difficult, and mental health care is expanded.

Surely everyone could get on board with that right??

Some yea.

Pooping right now. Will discuss later.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Your poop>better than the poo you'll type later

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Your poop>better than the poo you'll type later>Poo I post

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Some yea.

Pooping right now. Will discuss later.

Thanks for the heads up. Hope your poop goes well.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree and that is sort of my point If I am going to concede that handguns are necessary as a form of self defense, the DE .50 and .350 magnum are actually not very good handguns for self defense.

But both are very powerful single shot guns.

If they aren't guns that are most effective for self defense, what is their purpose??

So get rid of them.

Actually the DE is semi-automatic... It'll fire 8 times just as fast as I can pull the trigger... Now, it'll kick so bad I'm not gonna hit a damn thing after the first round, but it'll still fire as fast as I can manage to fire it... It's a fun gun to shoot, and has one hell of a fear factor (the muzzle blast and boom alone are enough to scare just about anyone out of my house), but all in all it's more effective in movies than it'll ever be in (my) home... I agree, it's really nothing more than a showpiece to me...

It's a scary looking gun I admit, but I also think a Chinese Crested is a scary looking dog, and they're pretty useless, too...

I'd be MUCH more afraid of some nutjob running around with a .22 Remington magnum rifle... It's not scary looking, and most people are quicker to dismiss a 'kid caliber' like a .22, but it would be a MUCH more effective and efficient killing tool than my DE .50...

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This guy did this WITH a gun.

Don't deny it.

Again....you are blaming the inanimate object rather than the person.

I had a childhood friend who was killed by a drunk driver WITH a car. I don't blame the car....I blame the idiot who was using the car.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites