2nd amendment right ... where should it end?

by Simon 166 Replies latest social current

• 

  freemindfade

  Please stop it! You guys honestly watch too many movies!!! :) Your comments are more deadly than guns because they are killing me! This is getting silly. I bet you also think:

  • Silencers actually make guns silent
  • No one runs out of bullets if they have a machine gun on full auto
  • and so on...

  hand guns or shot guns are pretty useless against full automatics or semi-automatics guns designed mostly for military use.

  If you had any military training or knowledge you would know that full auto is not used for shooting people but for creating suppressing fire. Probably the deadliest thing you could have is sniper rifle and be sitting far away from everything. Talk to someone who has been in real wartime fire fights, they are not using full auto to shoot someone accurately.

  But this is silly. The reality is most deaths from gun violence come from the old handgun. I think you can still get those in Canada no??
• 

  Finkelstein

  Freemindfade when a person uses unrelating subjects as tactical means to support a position, that's usually means the held position isn't solidly supported by facts or reasoning.
• 

  freemindfade

  I have no position to hold

  I have a gun... its not going anywhere, I am just letting you guys talk and having a laugh.

  I'm pro gun for me and no one else. It ends there, all this political crap? whatever. Everyone else can figure that out on their own. I think loop holes should be closed, and more regulation is good. All these opinions do nothing to change anything. Only actions change the world.

  I have no position so I am not debating anything and i know that is driving you guys nuts. But if someone says something crazy I have to point it out. That's all. Don't get mad

  State your facts, don't mind me if I question them.
• 

  Hadriel

  What about your children at school or College, a movie theater or their place of work, will you be there to protect your family with a gun in hand ?

  Funny how these things rarely happen in free gun states. Wonder why?

  I won't be there when that fertilizer bomb goes off either or whatever else may fall upon them that I can't control. I can't protect them from the nutcase that procures weapons in an illegal manner.

  The point is so in the situations I can control I should just throw my hands up and say sorry I can't protect you at the theater so I guess I should give up.

  That is just ridiculous logic. nutty people will do nutty things regardless of the method of destruction.

  But then maybe anyone that takes an antidepressant should be locked up. Let's just ban everything!!!
• 

  Finkelstein

  All what's been said on this thread reconfirms the fact when there is a high level of gun ownership within a given population, there is going to be higher incidences of guns being used in acts of violence, both a provable and undeniable statistically model.
  
• 

  Hadriel

  @freemindfade is DEAD on accurate.

  Full auto is the last thing you'd do in a serious gun fight. Suppressive fire to keep the combatant at bay while moving positions is about it. Outside of that full-auto is the least accurate thing you can do.

  Some of the best wartime weapons have been medium to long range semi-auto rifles. Why? Because they were accurate from moderate distance and without being full-auto had far less recoil. You are taught even with semi-auto to shoot in small burst groupings because these very accuracy issues.

  Pistols cocked sideways and full auto are for the movies...
• 

  Hadriel

  @Finkelstiein that is patently false in the U.S. high gun ownership states are far safer. it's fact it cannot be argued. When there's a status quo people are far less likely to act like idiots.

  As I posted earlier many states with very lenient gun laws aren't even recorded in some analytics because the amount of murder/homicides by guns are so low they don't even register. e.g. Alaska, Wyoming etc.

  However states like California with very strict gun laws have very high murder/homicides by guns. The theory at first blush seems plausible however it is just that a theory. The numbers say otherwise.
• 

  freemindfade

  All this reminds me of the demonizing of pot and the fear mongering propaganda of days past. People still swear "its a gateway drug!!!!" You'll get refer madness!!! It's a bandwagon that is blown out of proportion. You smoke pot you'll lose your mind! Pick up a gun somewhere a mass shooting takes place. And "ban" is just the simplest solution to more complex problems people can come up with.

  Back when columbine happened I remember people on the news debating the impact of the entertainment industry... they watched The Matrix!! They played Doom!!! They listened to Marilyn Manson!!!.. all these "things" were taking heat for what these kids did. Whatever the big agenda is lets scream about that now!
• 

  freemindfade

  However states like California with very strict gun laws have very high murder/homicides by guns. The theory at first blush seems plausible however it is just that a theory. The numbers say otherwise.

  Chicago and New York are also good examples. You just as easily acquire this RPG everyone has been talking about as get a gun in the city limits of New York legally.

  Outside of highly sensationalized and emotional mass shootings most of the death by gun is going on in the inner cities where gun restrictions are highest.
• 

  Hadriel

  Bowing out of this one at this point.

  My final comment and I think this is fair to say but I bet no one commenting in this thread are likely to go spray bullets at a park picnic anytime soon.

  So regardless of your side of the fence there's that...