613 replies to this topic

[teeray]

However you don't understand the basic differences between different types of rifles.

I have an AR-15 with a 20 inch bull barrel, and a 9X24 powered scope on it, with spring loaded tripod.

I also have a .308 deer hunting rifle with none of that stuff and it looks like a gun from the 1890's.

Which one can I do more damage with?

To a human? Probably could kill one with either. So I would say the same amount to a human.

You don't have to be a gun expert to know that they are killing people every single day.

[teeray]

Well, what about a security guard?

Rogue police officer?

I mean, I suppose anyone can snap. Like has been said on here in the last day or so, gasoline, knives, TNT all have been used to harm folks. Not sure there is a scenario which is perfect

So the argument now is "Welp, since we can't save everybody we should just not save anybody"

smh

If getting guns out of people's hands reduces these events even marginally it should get done right now.

[teeray]

What you might not know is that with all their " success" in limiting gun violence, England has had an explosion in knife violence over the last decade. It's gotten so bad that they have commercials aimed at youth to combat it. ( Think the TRUTH anti- tobacco ads we have) It goes to show you that the criminal element with a penchant for violence will have it their way regardless

When was the last time someone killed 20 people at once with a knife?

[NanuqoftheNorth]

Do you know why people shoot up schools? No one there can defend themselves.

I am not advocating weapons in schools. I do think that you should think with logic and not emotion though which is not how this thread was started.

Gun lobbyists/NRA

The USA leads all industrialized nations in deaths via firearms.

The USA leads all industrialized nations in number of firearms.

Therefore the solution to reducing firearm deaths is more firearms/less restrictions.


That kind of thinking (if you can call it that) sounds precisely like the opposite of logic.

Washington, DC—States with low gun ownership rates and strong gun laws have the lowest rates of gun death according to a new analysis by the Violence Policy Center (VPC) of 2009 national data (the most recent available) from the federal Centers for Disease Control and Prevention’s National Center for Injury Prevention and Control.

The analysis reveals that the five states with the lowest per capita gun death rates were Massachusetts, Hawaii, New Jersey, New York, and Connecticut. Each of these states had a per capita gun death rate far below the national per capita gun death rate of 10.19 per 100,000 for 2009. Each state has strong gun laws and low gun ownership rates. By contrast, states with weak gun laws and higher rates of gun ownership had far higher rates of firearm-related death. Ranking first in the nation for gun death was Louisiana, followed by Wyoming, Alabama, Montana, and Mississippi.

http://www.vpc.org/fadeathchart12.htm

[NanuqoftheNorth]

A study in the Journal of Trauma and Acute Care Surgery found that the gun murder rate in the U.S. is almost 20 times higher than the next 22 richest and most populous nations combined.

Among the world’s 23 wealthiest countries, 80 percent of all gun deaths are American deaths and 87 percent of all kids killed by guns are American kids.

But regardless, polls show that public attitudes don’t change, even after a mass slaughter like this. Forty-nine percent say it’s more important to protect gun rights while 45 percent favor tighter gun control.

But no one of any political stripe can denying the human cost of our collective trigger fingers.

According to the Children’s Defense Fund, in the 44 years since Bobby Kennedy and Martin Luther King were shot to death, bullets have ended the lives of more than one million people — including 12 in Aurora, Colo., who came together at midnight, just looking to cheer for a superhero.

http://abcnews.go.co...can-experience/

[Happy Panther]

I think I could be in favor of a security guard (not just a Joe Schmo though someone with the qualifications for dealing with a potentially armed threat) personally and many schools already have at least one armed police officer on the premises at all times. I agree there would never be a perfect scenario. At least not one that I can yet envision or have seen described.

One thing I fear though is escalation.

Yeah that is what I am saying as well. The image above is just for laughs.

[tight lines]

"They who can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety"
Benjamin Franklin

[teeray]

The 2nd ammendment isn't about HUNTING, it is about granting the citizens of this country ACCESS to the tools the need to defend their homes and families and to safeguard us from the rise of tyranny.

This is not why the second amendment exists.

[stirs]

Yes, according to Mr ED, NFL players should be forced to give up all their guns and assault weapons are not just AR 15's but glocks and semi automatic handguns. Change constitution? Not a problem for Mr. ED

http://newsbusters.o...un-confiscation

[teeray]

"They who can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety"
Benjamin Franklin

It is not essential that you own a gun.

The definition of essential is "absolutely necessary; indispensable".

Since many people survive their entire lives without owning a gun, gun ownership is not something that can be considered essential.

Therefore this quote does not apply to this topic.

[Tarheel31]

This is not why the second amendment exists.

Why isn't it?

Didn't the founders of this nation take up arms and fend off a tyrannical government to create it?

Did they not think to include "That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government" in the Declararion of Independence?

Who are you to speculate that was not their intent?
You must have known those men very well...

[NanuqoftheNorth]

"They who can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety"
Benjamin Franklin

First: 30 round clips and semi automatic weapons are not "essential" to liberty. If they were, we would have never gained our freedom from King George during the Revolutionary War.

Second: Do you honestly think Benjamin Franklin, a strong advocate of public education, would even remotely consider repeating his quote to the parents of the deceased Sandy Hook children? You really think he would say those children were not deserving of " liberty nor safety" to pursue their education?

I seriously doubt it.

However, as a leading progressive thinker of his time, Ben might have a few choice words for you, for taking his words out of context... 230 years out of context!

[ladypanther]

For those who are waving the 2nd amendment at us....I will say, I am ok with gun ownership....that is, you should be able to own the same guns that were in existence when that amendment was enacted. That should clear up everything here.

[Priapism]

One of the firearms I currently own is a Glock model 22 .45 caliber. I have it in a secure but easily accessed place with a full magazine (10) and one in the pipe at all times. It's been there for three years (outside of range time and cleaning).

Maybe someone can explain to me how in the hell it has never fired once on it's own. Ever.
I await this much anticipated answer many of us want to know.

[ladypanther]

Actually he's quiet right. LP showed us stats of how GUN related violence went down after UK restricted their guns, but in actuality violence as a whole went through the roof because guns were restricted.

LP do your self a favor and find out how much UK's violence increased after the gun bans. Dont' look up "gun" violence look up total numbers of crimes after their gun bans.

Read this one:

http://www.carolinahuddle.com/boards/topic/81508-ban-weapons-of-mass-destructionnow/#entry2047872