NRA needs to be labeled a terrorlst organization.

A place for intelligent and well-thought-out discussion involving politics and associated topics. No nonsense will be tolerated at all.
User avatar
srellim234
Posts: 2710
Joined: Sun Jul 15, 2007 8:12 am
Car: 2007 silver Versa SL
hatchback w/CVT
(sold 08/2011)
2008 red Toyota Prius
(purchased 04/2016)
Location: Laughlin, NV

Post

AZ- That's only one location out of thousands. You can't legitimately paint all of them with that same broad brush any more than telco tries to paint everyone. The kids at the local high school here were very respectful.

One thing about the coverage locally. They covered multiple schools and at none of them was the number of participants over about 20%. The great majority of students chose to stay in class.


User avatar
AZhitman
Administrator
Posts: 71061
Joined: Mon Apr 29, 2002 2:04 am
Car: 58 L210, 63 Bluebird RHD, 64 NL320, 65 SPL310, 66 411 RHD, 67 WRL411, 68 510 SR20, 75 280Z RB25, 77 620 SR20, 79 B310, 90 S13, 92 SE-R, 92 Silvia Qs, 98 S14.
Location: Surprise, Arizona
Contact:

Post

No question. I certainly didn't intend it to be a commentary on students nationally. You know my disdain for almost anything CA. :)

When a protest is sanctioned by the administration, it effectively becomes an assignment and ceases to be a protest. In other areas, where the percentages were higher, it's simply an exercise in conformity (another topic I hold in very low regard).

User avatar
Rogue One
Administrator
Posts: 8789
Joined: Tue Jun 14, 2011 10:15 pm
Car: 2011 Nissan Rogue SL
2012 Nissan Rogue SL
2012 Honda CR-V LX
2022 Honda Pilot Special Edition
Location: Florida, USA

Post

This 'school walkout' thing is giving me serious '1984' vibes.

Schools are sanctioning it, so it isn't actually a walkout. It's actually students conforming to the government authority by speaking a government-approved opinion in a government-approved venue. And that opinion is that they should have their own rights taken away by the government whose opinion they are expressing.

You have students marching with the sanction of the state to demand less freedom from the state... and everyone is pretending that their doing so is somehow brave and rebellious.

User avatar
srellim234
Posts: 2710
Joined: Sun Jul 15, 2007 8:12 am
Car: 2007 silver Versa SL
hatchback w/CVT
(sold 08/2011)
2008 red Toyota Prius
(purchased 04/2016)
Location: Laughlin, NV

Post

No one is taking away your (or their) right to own a gun. There are plenty of common sense laws to help alleviate some of the problems related to our discussions that still allow you to own your gun. A government buyback program is voluntary on the seller's part. Longer and more thorough background checks on every sale do not deny the right to own a gun to those those who are law abiding and sane citizens. Safety classes should be a requirement, not an option. You want to have a gun in your house? Fine? However, if you want to carry it into the supermarket where my family is you should be required to carry a permit that shows you have undergone the proper weapons training that demonstrates you will react properly in most situations with that firearm. Something that shows you are part of a "well regulated militia".

No one is going to take them away from you. The right to bear arms does not mean, however, the right to indiscriminately own an infinite number and type of them while handling them in an irresponsible way. With rights and privileges come responsibilities.

User avatar
Rogue One
Administrator
Posts: 8789
Joined: Tue Jun 14, 2011 10:15 pm
Car: 2011 Nissan Rogue SL
2012 Nissan Rogue SL
2012 Honda CR-V LX
2022 Honda Pilot Special Edition
Location: Florida, USA

Post

The gentleman doth protest too much, methinks.

User avatar
srellim234
Posts: 2710
Joined: Sun Jul 15, 2007 8:12 am
Car: 2007 silver Versa SL
hatchback w/CVT
(sold 08/2011)
2008 red Toyota Prius
(purchased 04/2016)
Location: Laughlin, NV

Post

=In my instance there is no "too much" as long as it stays peaceful. I still have a child who will be in a public high school for the next two years. I have a wife who just retired from 26 years in full time law enforcement on the streets of L.A. County and is still working part time as a bailiff in the court system. Politically the NRA continues to support anarchy with regards to guns in this country. That puts my family at risk and I will protest their political obstruction of responsible gun laws all day, every day to protect my family.

ca18det_boy
Posts: 1384
Joined: Wed Dec 24, 2003 10:47 am
Location: Homestead, FL
Contact:

Post

srellim234 wrote:
Mon Mar 19, 2018 8:41 am
=In my instance there is no "too much" as long as it stays peaceful. I still have a child who will be in a public high school for the next two years. I have a wife who just retired from 26 years in full time law enforcement on the streets of L.A. County and is still working part time as a bailiff in the court system. Politically the NRA continues to support anarchy with regards to guns in this country. That puts my family at risk and I will protest their political obstruction of responsible gun laws all day, every day to protect my family.
Although I agree with you in entirety that you will do what it takes to protect your family, let me throw so data your direction to help disprove your points. According to the FBI https://ucr.fbi.gov/crime-in-the-u.s/20 ... 9-2013.xls there were 8,454 violent crimes involving firearms in the year 2013. Per the ATF https://www.atf.gov/resource-center/doc ... 7/download there were 10,844,792 firearms manufactured in that same year. That means that .0007795447 of those firearms were used in a violent crimes (assuming that those 8,454 weapons were manufactured in that year). So since Californians are so big on "don't let a few bad apples ruin it for everyone", this should essentially support the argument that guns aren't the problem but people are. We don't blame alcohol for drunk drivers, or silverware for obesity, why blame guns for a few inept individuals? Not to mention, typically, these firearms are taken from law abiding citizens and then used in crimes. If you're so concerned with protecting your family, don't rely on the awesome response time from LEO's. Take a CCW course and arm yourself. The 1048 FPS from a .45 ACP is going to be a hell of a lot faster than dialing 911. I'm tired of people "protesting" my right to carry and own firearms. If someone doesn't want to own or carry one, then don't. There is no need to try and push your thoughts on someone else and tell them how to live. If you really want to stop gun violence, proper parenting is key. Education is what is going to stop these situations, not attempting to ban firearms. The shear fact that "NRA needs to be labeled a terrorlst organization" discussions across the web are happening, just goes to show that instead of doing proper homework and educating yourself, people are pushing their way of life on others. Everyone has their opinion, I can respect that, but quick trying to push the BS on myself and others.

User avatar
Rogue One
Administrator
Posts: 8789
Joined: Tue Jun 14, 2011 10:15 pm
Car: 2011 Nissan Rogue SL
2012 Nissan Rogue SL
2012 Honda CR-V LX
2022 Honda Pilot Special Edition
Location: Florida, USA

Post

To borrow an old phrase, gun laws are made for honest people. Psychopaths determined to kill won't be stopped by any law. You could arrest and execute the entire NRA leadership, disband the organization, and it still won't stop mass killings.

The city of Chicago has some of the strictest gun control laws in the nation. And just how well are these restrictions working?
2018 Year to Date:
Shot & Killed: 86
Shot & Wounded: 369
Total Shot: 455
And it's only March! Maybe they need more gun restrictions?

Let me throw some more stats at you.

Gun crime offenses in London surged by 42% in the last year, according to official statistics. The Met Police's figures showed there were 2,544 gun crime offenses from April 2016 to April 2017 compared to 1,793 offenses from 2015 until 2016. Knife crime also increased by 24% with 12,074 recorded offenses from 2016 to 2017.

Did you catch that? In 2017 London alone recorded 12,074 KNIFE crimes vs 2,544 gun crimes. Let me spell it out for you, it's NOT a gun problem, nor the fault of the liberal boogeyman the NRA, it's a people problem. 65 out of 67 shooters over the past 30 years had mental health issues.

Look, you're a smart guy, and you've acknowledged there's a mental health component to this problem. But the truth is that it plays a far bigger role in this than most are willing to admit. Banning bump stocks and reinstating the assault weapons ban will only appease the fear-mongers until the next tragedy, when they'll demand law abiding gun owners give up even more of their rights. The real elephant in the room is the mental health crisis, and until that's dealt with we're not going to make any real progress.

User avatar
srellim234
Posts: 2710
Joined: Sun Jul 15, 2007 8:12 am
Car: 2007 silver Versa SL
hatchback w/CVT
(sold 08/2011)
2008 red Toyota Prius
(purchased 04/2016)
Location: Laughlin, NV

Post

In what way is a better background check system giving up your right to own a gun? In what way is allowing you to take the gun home two weeks from now after a more thorough background check instead of today infringing on your right to own that gun? You still take it home in a reasonable period of time and you still own it. In what way is reducing the number of firearms in circulation through a voluntary buyback program infringing on your right to keep them if you want to? How is requiring safety classes infringing on your right to own a gun?

Re: Chicago. Establish for me where those guns came from. How many were legally purchased before the restrictions were put in place? How many were simply purchased elsewhere and brought there? How many were legally obtained but then transferred to the new owner/user without a background check? If restrictions only apply to a small geographic area there is still too much ease of access. A national policy needs to be applied.

How many mass stabbings killing over 5 people have occurred anywhere and compare that to the number involving semiautomatic weapons. Individual crimes such as a holdup using a knife instead of a gun is much less likely to result in loss of life to both the victim and innocent bystanders. The Las Vegas shooter would have had a hard time taking out hundreds of people throwing knives out of that hotel window, with a bolt action rifle that held only 10 or 20 shots and/or he had limited access to the number of magazines and rounds fired.

The NRA is a well funded special interest group but at 5 million members it in no way represents the majority of gun owners in this country. Through their political actions they promote putting guns in the hands of people who have no business owning one let alone taking it out in public.

User avatar
Rogue One
Administrator
Posts: 8789
Joined: Tue Jun 14, 2011 10:15 pm
Car: 2011 Nissan Rogue SL
2012 Nissan Rogue SL
2012 Honda CR-V LX
2022 Honda Pilot Special Edition
Location: Florida, USA

Post

"Four thousand throats may be cut in one night by a running man."
Klingon proverb

BTW, the elephant is still in the room.

ca18det_boy
Posts: 1384
Joined: Wed Dec 24, 2003 10:47 am
Location: Homestead, FL
Contact:

Post

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Mass_stabbings The list of mass stabbings

vs

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mass_shoo ... ted_States The list of mass shootings


As you can see by a quick google search, the list of mass stabbings dwarfs the mass shootings list. If you refer to my earlier post, the majority of these firearms were taken from law abiding citizens and then used in a crime. So tell me again how a longer background check (which will do absolutely nothing from changing the wait time from one week to two) will help the situation? I will refer to my earlier post, yet again, where I state that the issue is primarily parenting. You have these whiney kids who aren't thick skinned enough when someone picks on them. So they then decide to steal mom or dads gun and go shooting. It also doesn't help that social media and main stream media glorify these situations, which brings out the morons and they want to be on the news also. Simply because Sally made fun of Jimmy because he has a lisp. Anyone on this page has yet to make a valid claim, supported with objective evidence, as to why gun legislature needs to be changed. Drugs were made illegal and we can see how well that has worked. After all, if there's laws about something then everyone is going to follow them right? There are bigger issues involved here, and people are having a knee-jerk reaction to isolated incidents. In this world there are three types of people, sheep, wolves, and sheepdogs. You have to decide which type you're going to be.

User avatar
srellim234
Posts: 2710
Joined: Sun Jul 15, 2007 8:12 am
Car: 2007 silver Versa SL
hatchback w/CVT
(sold 08/2011)
2008 red Toyota Prius
(purchased 04/2016)
Location: Laughlin, NV

Post

You need to read what you link to. Your stabbing list is a worldwide list of 51 mass stabbings. Your other link refers to hundreds of mass shootings. In addition, just the beginning of your mass stabbing list includes incidents where no one was killed and another where 3000 people were wielding the weapons. I didn't bother to keep looking after I saw just the "0-9" and "A" links were not fitting what we are talking about here.

As for the delay in wait time, That would allow time for law enforcement to do the background checks thoroughly if we have to search through a lot more data as part of an improved background check system coupled with the higher volume of checks required as loopholes are closed. Allow law enforcement time to do their jobs. A side affect is the reduction in suicides but that's a totally different issue for a different thread.

Whiny kids? The Las Vegas shooter was not one. The shooters at the San Bernardino Christmas party were not. In fact, quite a few of the mass shooters over the years have been adults.

Other countries have proven that you can have some gun control, limit supply and reduce mass shootings in the process. At the same time, they are not denying decent, law abiding citizens without mental issues from gun ownership.

Some impartial evidence can be found here:

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3828709/

Among the conclusion is that every 1% rise in gun ownership correlates to a 0.9% rise in gun homicides.

The following report from Harvard is definitely worth looking at

https://www.hsph.harvard.edu/hicrc/fire ... and-death/

Countries and states with fewer guns have fewer gun homicides.

User avatar
Rogue One
Administrator
Posts: 8789
Joined: Tue Jun 14, 2011 10:15 pm
Car: 2011 Nissan Rogue SL
2012 Nissan Rogue SL
2012 Honda CR-V LX
2022 Honda Pilot Special Edition
Location: Florida, USA

Post

Image

User avatar
srellim234
Posts: 2710
Joined: Sun Jul 15, 2007 8:12 am
Car: 2007 silver Versa SL
hatchback w/CVT
(sold 08/2011)
2008 red Toyota Prius
(purchased 04/2016)
Location: Laughlin, NV

Post

It was not the package, it was the bomb inside the package combined WITH the guy who planted it inside the package. Is it your contention purchasing bombs and the possession of bombs should be totally legal in this country because it's 100% the person? The bombs played no part in the deaths and injuries?

User avatar
srellim234
Posts: 2710
Joined: Sun Jul 15, 2007 8:12 am
Car: 2007 silver Versa SL
hatchback w/CVT
(sold 08/2011)
2008 red Toyota Prius
(purchased 04/2016)
Location: Laughlin, NV

Post

BTW, if you are going to continue to blame the person 100% and not the easy availability of certain weapons, we're waiting to hear your proposal as to how we will prevent those "wrong" people from easily obtaining those weapons that can inflict mass casualties at one time. AZ and I discussed it and you failed to weigh in. In fact, I'm waiting to hear your response to the questions I asked of you a couple of posts ago. You conveniently ignored them and changed the subject. That's what telco does.

User avatar
AZhitman
Administrator
Posts: 71061
Joined: Mon Apr 29, 2002 2:04 am
Car: 58 L210, 63 Bluebird RHD, 64 NL320, 65 SPL310, 66 411 RHD, 67 WRL411, 68 510 SR20, 75 280Z RB25, 77 620 SR20, 79 B310, 90 S13, 92 SE-R, 92 Silvia Qs, 98 S14.
Location: Surprise, Arizona
Contact:

Post

We can't. No offense, Steve, but there's no reason to answer a question that's already been answered. We can't. You can't. Hillary can't. No one can. Objects and concepts and rights don't disappear because someone doesn't like them.

I don't like abortion, but I can't stop someone from getting one. I don't like alcohol, but hey, college bars sure do! Prescribed opiates? Ask your spouse how deadly they are (and how much they contribute to other crimes). Hell, I don't like claw hammers, but they're a necessity, and as it turns out, in infinitesimally rare occasions, they're a murder weapon.

*BUT THOSE DON'T KILL PEOPLE!!* Yes they do.

Look at all those laws, just sitting around doing nothing. Maybe we need some more:

Image

User avatar
srellim234
Posts: 2710
Joined: Sun Jul 15, 2007 8:12 am
Car: 2007 silver Versa SL
hatchback w/CVT
(sold 08/2011)
2008 red Toyota Prius
(purchased 04/2016)
Location: Laughlin, NV

Post

The Maryland school shooting.

Carried out with a Glock semiautomatic pistol that was stolen or otherwise illegally obtained from his father. The fact that it was a stolen gun makes all the points about the laws of Maryland irelevant.

The initial target had a relationship with the shooter that had recently ended. It could well not be an attempted mass shooting. I'll wait for the LEOs to properly investigate the incident.

According to the Baltimore Sun, the gun was legally purchased and owned by his father. The details surrounding the purchase (date, reason for purchase, etc.) are not disclosable public records under Maryland law. We have no idea when it was purchased but even if it was after the laws were passed the kid should not have been able to get his hands on it. Let's wait and see how it was stolen from his father.

Gunman stopped by a law enforcement officer trained for such circumstances. If he had gone into that building and saw an adult in civilian clothes (armed teacher) pointing a gun in the direction of students in the hallway the outcome could have been much different. A second gun in the hands of a non-uniformed officer greatly complicates the matter.

I'm all for trained officers on school grounds. A gun free zone doesn't mean the school is defenseless. My daughter's high school has at least one sheriff's deputy on campus at all times. In addition, other uniformed security personnel cruise the campus on bikes and on foot, interacting with the kids and keeping a watchful eye out. We're very thankful they are there. And yes, we are in California.

Can they stop a quick shot? Of course not. But a mass shooting is a lot less likely with the way security is handled there.

Murders and attempted murders are going to happen. It's been going on since Cain and Abel. It's an ugly fact of life and no law is going to stop it. We do, however, have an opportunity on a national scale to slow down the mass shootings by partially removing and otherwise limiting the number of the tools they use to conduct such incidents.

flartius
Posts: 138
Joined: Sat Apr 01, 2017 9:19 pm
Car: 1996 - Nissan 240sx SE RB25DET
2008 - Yamaha YZF-R6 - SOLD
2007 - Ford F150 FX4
Location: Huntsville, AL

Post

srellim234 wrote:
Thu Mar 22, 2018 7:38 am
Murders and attempted murders are going to happen. It's been going on since Cain and Abel. It's an ugly fact of life and no law is going to stop it. We do, however, have an opportunity on a national scale to slow down the mass shootings by partially removing and otherwise limiting the number of the tools they use to conduct such incidents.
Whereas I agree with this statement, I am 100% for responsible gun ownership, I have to disagree. Here in good ole Alabama if you want a permit you go to the sheriff's office fill out a piece of paper and go get your permit 3 days later... that's it. To me this is stupid. I spent 8 year in the Marines so I feel like I have a grasp on how to handle a firearm but just because you breath in the good ole USA doesn't mean your a capable of ownership. I think you should have to have: training, mental evaluation, and registration in the least. However how do you keep the government from taking advantage of those measures? How do you keep an administration like the previous from simply denying ownership for any and all reasons?

Furthermore, I hate big government and once you start allowing them to take something I don't trust them to stop. Today it will be the 30 round magazines or the "assault" rifles (politicians term, there's no such thing as an assault rifle), but tomorrow it will be pistols, shotguns, all semi-automatic handgun/rifles. For me it's simply I do not trust the government to hold up their end of the bargain.

Anyway, my $.02 and I'll get off my soapbox now.

User avatar
srellim234
Posts: 2710
Joined: Sun Jul 15, 2007 8:12 am
Car: 2007 silver Versa SL
hatchback w/CVT
(sold 08/2011)
2008 red Toyota Prius
(purchased 04/2016)
Location: Laughlin, NV

Post

flartus - How do you keep administrations from taking more and more? They're called elections.

Australia, England and Germany have all instituted restrictions without government escalation. We can do the same in this country.

I'm all for responsible gun ownership, too. That's what I've been advocating all along. The things you advocate in the way of training, mental evaluation and registration are among the things advocated in this thread but the NRA politically opposes.

As AZ and I have discussed, and you also point out, the devil is in the details. That fact, however, does not justify totally abandoning the attempt.

ca18det_boy
Posts: 1384
Joined: Wed Dec 24, 2003 10:47 am
Location: Homestead, FL
Contact:

Post

Srellim,

You're advocating something that is rather pointless. Anything and everything could be used as a weapon. I'm relatively certain that if someone were to go digging through your house, there would be plently of things in your posession that could be used as a weapon. You state that a longer background check allow law enforcement to do a more thorough background check. As it sits, the check that is done goes through ATF and FBI. I would think that they might have an idea about if someone is a convicted criminal. You stated that my links weren't "applicable" and that you didn't even bother looking into them. That goes to show that you're not willing to look at objective evidence on the other side of the fence. My point was that stabbings pose just as much of a threat as firearms, regardless of domestic or not. You brought up the adults that do shootings to try and contest my point about parenting. Congratulations, you picked out 2 that support your thoughts and disregard the rest of my comment. Later, you bring up elections. Great...you're absolutely correct (in a perfect world). We elected someone who others don't share the same point of view and now all of a sudden there's all these race baiting situations that come up and the people complain about the POTUS. Moral of where I'm going....there's no discussions with the typical person who shares your point of view. You're right and everyone else with a different perspective is wrong.

User avatar
srellim234
Posts: 2710
Joined: Sun Jul 15, 2007 8:12 am
Car: 2007 silver Versa SL
hatchback w/CVT
(sold 08/2011)
2008 red Toyota Prius
(purchased 04/2016)
Location: Laughlin, NV

Post

I am willing to look. I started to and your links weren't confirming what you were claiming so I quit following them.

You are completely overlooking that it has been expressed multiple times about developing a more thorough background check system that will probably require the longer wait time. In fact, I stated a few posts back ,

"...As for the delay in wait time, That would allow time for law enforcement to do the background checks thoroughly if we have to search through a lot more data as part of an improved background check system coupled with the higher volume of checks required as loopholes are closed. Allow law enforcement time to do their jobs. A side affect is the reduction in suicides but that's a totally different issue for a different thread..."

You are right. Under the current system a longer wait time is pointless but I'm not talking about leaving the current system as is.

Are there things in my home that can be used as weapons? Yes, including guns. Can those other things be used to kill someone? Yes, but a knife or meat cleaver or weed killer isn't going to as easily kill 10-500 people on a whim as we're seeing with these disturbed people perpetrating these crimes with semiautos. What everyday, utilitarian purpose does a semiautomatic weapon serve?

User avatar
AZhitman
Administrator
Posts: 71061
Joined: Mon Apr 29, 2002 2:04 am
Car: 58 L210, 63 Bluebird RHD, 64 NL320, 65 SPL310, 66 411 RHD, 67 WRL411, 68 510 SR20, 75 280Z RB25, 77 620 SR20, 79 B310, 90 S13, 92 SE-R, 92 Silvia Qs, 98 S14.
Location: Surprise, Arizona
Contact:

Post

srellim234 wrote:
Thu Mar 22, 2018 7:38 am
even if it was after the laws were passed the kid should not have been able to get his hands on it
Disagree.

I'm going to speak hypothetically, but here goes: I'm away from home. My daughter is here, pup-sitting. Her two babies (18 mo and 5 mo) are playing and babbling and doing what babies do.

The door gets kicked in by some assclown looking to rob my house (and maybe more, since we both know criminals are opportunists). Sheriff's Dept response time is about 20 min, even via 911.

I want her to know where my firearm is. I want her to go get it, and unload the entire clip into that POS, reload, and keep pulling the trigger until the intruder is unidentifiable as a human being.

This father may have felt the same.

Ignorant judging has no place here. The rest of your post is good stuff. But to question a FAMILY MEMBER'S access to a weapon in the home? Nope. All day nope.

Anyone wants to debate this, bring it. But be prepared to admit defeat.

User avatar
AZhitman
Administrator
Posts: 71061
Joined: Mon Apr 29, 2002 2:04 am
Car: 58 L210, 63 Bluebird RHD, 64 NL320, 65 SPL310, 66 411 RHD, 67 WRL411, 68 510 SR20, 75 280Z RB25, 77 620 SR20, 79 B310, 90 S13, 92 SE-R, 92 Silvia Qs, 98 S14.
Location: Surprise, Arizona
Contact:

Post

srellim234 wrote:
Thu Mar 22, 2018 1:18 pm
What everyday, utilitarian purpose does a semiautomatic weapon serve?
Home protection.

Isn't your home firearm semi-auto? I can't imagine owning anything for home protection, CC, or anti-varmint (common where I live) that ISN'T semi-auto.

See, definitions are critical. The anti-gun loons don't understand that WORDS MEAN THINGS. I suspect you mis-typed.

User avatar
Rogue One
Administrator
Posts: 8789
Joined: Tue Jun 14, 2011 10:15 pm
Car: 2011 Nissan Rogue SL
2012 Nissan Rogue SL
2012 Honda CR-V LX
2022 Honda Pilot Special Edition
Location: Florida, USA

Post

Rogue One wrote:
Mon Mar 19, 2018 10:31 am
To borrow an old phrase, gun laws are made for honest people. Psychopaths determined to kill won't be stopped by any law. You could arrest and execute the entire NRA leadership, disband the organization, and it still won't stop mass killings.
...

The real elephant in the room is the mental health crisis, and until that's dealt with we're not going to make any real progress.
Are you only concerned about guns in schools? Did you know that on May 18, 1927, a man named Andrew Kehoe blew up the school in Bath Township, Mich. Most of the 44 killed were children. It remains the deadliest attack on a school in U.S. history. It is also regularly left out of accounts of terrorism in America. Could that be because it doesn't fit the anti-gun narrative?

The elephant is still in the room.

ca18det_boy
Posts: 1384
Joined: Wed Dec 24, 2003 10:47 am
Location: Homestead, FL
Contact:

Post

AZhitman wrote:
Thu Mar 22, 2018 9:53 pm

The door gets kicked in by some assclown looking to rob my house (and maybe more, since we both know criminals are opportunists). Sheriff's Dept response time is about 20 min, even via 911.
To support your argument Greg....

The question was brought up "what purpose do semi-auto's have?". Not all individuals live in the city, and there's this thing called natural predators. Out in the desert, there's this magical animal called a coyote. Now these guys don't play by themselves and they tend to congregate like a pack of blue collar workers around a taco truck. Using Greg's example his daughter, the babies, or the pups could look like an easy meal to these natural predators. A single action revolver or bolt action rifle isn't going to do a damned thing to these coyotes if she's holding one of the kiddos. This is a perfect situation in which a semi-auto is going to be a necessity in order to protect herself and/or the kids.

If you want another example of when a semi-auto is a necessity, lets say that there are a couple of people trying to break into your house....yet again a bolt action or single action revolver isn't going to do much against more than one opponent.

You keep trying to argue that there isn't a point to any of this and that people should just lay down and accept whatever gun laws the government wants to enforce. Yet you fail to see all sides of the equation. Just because you don't agree with something doesn't mean that there isn't reason for it being in place. The tool keeps getting blamed instead of the operator, yet when factual information gets presented to you, you tend to ignore it and continue on your merry way with the rest of the lemmings. My main point is that everyone is entitled to their opinions and I respect everyones opinions (even if I don't agree with them), but don't sit there and try to lecture me when an individual refuses to be objective in the conversation. The ATF form 4473 is already a document in place and it works. Here is another example of how this form works....In 2010 I returned from Iraq, and naturally I wanted to purchase some more firearms. Because I had purchased "X" amount of firearms within a month, ATF put a hold on what I was allowed to purchase. I had a 90 day "cool down" period where I wasn't allowed to purchase anything. Was I planning on going on a mass shooting spree? Obviously not, because I'm still here. Furthermore, if you want to say that a semi-auto is more lethal than a bolt action....that shows me the lack of knowledge you have in regards to firearms. At a firing range, I can assure you that at varying distances from 50yds-500yds my accuracy vs speed is far greater with a bolt action than with a semi-auto. Let's say that you get your way and all "scary guns" are banned. Did you know that you can purchase a freaking cannon for less than some AR-15's? Take the vegas shooting that you're so fond of. Load up that cannon in the back of a 2500 truck, back it up, and let your balls loose. One shot out of that would have been more devastating than what the individual "had" in the casino room. Now lets say that all firearms are now illegal. The OKC bombing materials were all purchased legally and the dude rented a freaking Ryder truck to deliver it. I've said it before, along with everyone else with common sense, it's not the tool its the operator. If someone is bound and determined to cause havoc, they'll find a way to do it with or without a gun. The only things that stops a bad guy with a gun is a good guy with a gun.

This thread is about as productive as trying to teach my dog how to make me pancakes....

flartius
Posts: 138
Joined: Sat Apr 01, 2017 9:19 pm
Car: 1996 - Nissan 240sx SE RB25DET
2008 - Yamaha YZF-R6 - SOLD
2007 - Ford F150 FX4
Location: Huntsville, AL

Post

srellim234 wrote:
Thu Mar 22, 2018 9:25 am
Australia, England and Germany have all instituted restrictions without government escalation. We can do the same in this country.
What is left to take? Gun ownership in those countries are next to non existent. So I guess you could say, yes their government didn't overreach... because they took it all and there was nothing left to grab...

And to point out that yes the NRA opposes all of the 'responsible gun ownership' measures for the simple sake of they too do not trust the government to stop at a background check, or stop with only semi automatic militaristic rifles. And I can't say that I blame them, want an example? Social security. Congress was allowed to borrow money from the program with the promise to pay it back... never happened.

Hillary R. Clinton supposedly stated that she wouldn't stop until the NRA was gone and so were ALL guns in America, Dianne Feinstein, Nancy Pelosi and good ole Chucky Schumer has been quoted at saying similar comments. So you'll have to excuse my paranoia. I also fall in line with Az, I am libertarian and think the Feds have taken enough, grown too large to adequately govern and have overreached their role. If an individual state wants to disarm its citizen then they should but leave me out of it.

User avatar
srellim234
Posts: 2710
Joined: Sun Jul 15, 2007 8:12 am
Car: 2007 silver Versa SL
hatchback w/CVT
(sold 08/2011)
2008 red Toyota Prius
(purchased 04/2016)
Location: Laughlin, NV

Post

AZ - Home protection choice here is a 12 gauge pump action coupled with bolt actions, etc. Yes, we have my wife's semi-auto handgun. She is a properly trained law enforcement officer who is required by the department to qualify monthly on the range and undergoes additional training quarterly at the minimum.

That you want to give your daughter access is fine in the home but then you need to be held accountable if one of your grandchildren winds up with the gun or your daughter takes it out of the home. Signs on the outside of that home in Temple this morning read “The average response time of a 911 call is 23 minutes. The response time of a .357 is 14 hundred feet per second.” In that home a 4 year old just shot a 7 month old.

cad18det_boy - It's definitely not a matter of calling for everyone to lay down and accept whatever the government wants to do. At the same time, however, the anarchy the NRA calls for is unacceptable. Mass shootings the way they are happening and at the frequency they occur is unacceptable. Everyone should also not lay down and accept the government not doing anything at all, especially when the majority of U.S. citizens including gun owners and NRA members support government action. Concealed carry permit requlations need to be much tighter; if you're concerned about the coyotes then you should prove the need and be qualified to carry the gun. And, yes, I do know what you are talking about. When my son was about 3 we were in the San Gabriel riverbed as a pack of coyotes came through. I've also been face to face with a bobcat, coyote and mountain lion on local golf courses.

As for " The only things that stops a bad guy with a gun is a good guy with a gun," bull puckey. Multiple shooters have been stopped this year by unarmed people. Some of them stopped themselves by shooting themselves. Is it your contention that those murderers were good guys?

Estimates from Australia are that only about half of guns were turned in and the rest are still in the hands of citizens. Those who have to deal with packs of dingos and salt water crocs still have the opportunity to carry firepower for protection. The UK still has gun shops making money. It's tough to get one but it happens for those who meet the standards and establish the need.

Look, everyone, we all disagree on a lot of things on this subject. That said, there is common ground and room for coming together, as AZ and I proved earlier in this thread. I would ask Rogue, cad18et, etc. if you want to just sit on your hands and do nothing because people are going to wreak havoc anyway or can we actually do better? What improvements to the system would YOU support?

User avatar
AZhitman
Administrator
Posts: 71061
Joined: Mon Apr 29, 2002 2:04 am
Car: 58 L210, 63 Bluebird RHD, 64 NL320, 65 SPL310, 66 411 RHD, 67 WRL411, 68 510 SR20, 75 280Z RB25, 77 620 SR20, 79 B310, 90 S13, 92 SE-R, 92 Silvia Qs, 98 S14.
Location: Surprise, Arizona
Contact:

Post

You asked earlier, "What everyday, utilitarian purpose does a semiautomatic weapon serve?" I replied, but I get the sense you're 'judging' that answer as somehow insufficient.
srellim234 wrote:
Fri Mar 23, 2018 5:35 pm
AZ - Home protection choice here is a 12 gauge pump action coupled with bolt actions, etc.
Choices are good. Freedom is good. I won't question your choices, you don't question mine. Ask your spouse what makes the most sense.

When my choices materially impact you negatively, then we can talk. Same as pot and gay marriage. :)
srellim234 wrote:
Fri Mar 23, 2018 5:35 pm
Yes, we have my wife's semi-auto handgun. She is a properly trained law enforcement officer who is required by the department to qualify monthly on the range and undergoes additional training quarterly at the minimum.
Naturally. But to suggest...
1) that her training is superior to the knowledge and skills of someone like, say, CAboy, would be foolish. Might be. But not quantifiable.
2) that a semi-auto should only be possessed by a person with similar training as hers is also ludicrous. I'm a relative novice, and that's exactly why I don't have a bolt-action for home protection.

Again, we're talking about negatively impacting 99.999% of responsible people who value human life to appease the uneducated whimsy of the .001% of talking heads (and their followers) who simply can't make a logical case. NOTE: This doesn't mean "no" to "gun control." This means the "gun control" side has to STOP saying ignorant s***, lest they be ridiculed. With facts.
srellim234 wrote:
Fri Mar 23, 2018 5:35 pm
you need to be held accountable if one of your grandchildren winds up with the gun or your daughter takes it out of the home.
Likewise, you should be held accountable if (God forbid) she's ever involved in a 'bad shoot.' I'd also like to suggest that you be held fully accountable if your teenage daughter hits a pedestrian with her car. And why would I be liable for her removing my gun from my home? Liable for what? Who was harmed? And again, who's gonna enforce that? You just created ANOTHER level of government, and last I checked, they suck at their job. :)

Reasonable efforts (obviously, not leaving a firearm out where a small child can access it) make sense. Locking it away so that it's not available? Silly. And after all that, still solves nothing.

I'm glad you can predict human behavior. I can't. That's why people like myself and your lovely spouse exist.
srellim234 wrote:
Fri Mar 23, 2018 5:35 pm
Mass shootings the way they are happening and at the frequency they occur is unacceptable.
Lower than prior decades? How is that not acceptable? Steve, we covered this. You're letting the media tell you how to think again. Stats don't lie.
srellim234 wrote:
Fri Mar 23, 2018 5:35 pm
then you should prove the need
To who? Some assclown who eats tofu and kale and believes that turnips scream when they're pulled from the ground? Yeah. They're gonna be super-knowledgable about coyotes (and javelina, and wolves, and bobcats... ) I'm sure they'll approve that RIGHT AWAY. ;) "Call 911, roll up in a ball, and wait for Animal Control to arrive." LOL
srellim234 wrote:
Fri Mar 23, 2018 5:35 pm
Multiple shooters have been stopped this year by unarmed people.
*sigh* Wait, what? Are we losing you to utter panicked disarmament lunacy after all the ground we gained?
srellim234 wrote:
Fri Mar 23, 2018 5:35 pm
What improvements to the system would YOU support?
That's better. Calling things "bull puckey" without clear evidence of said "puckey" is telco-level. You know where I stand, but I'm here to keep you honest, even when you're debating someone who talks funny. ;)

flartius
Posts: 138
Joined: Sat Apr 01, 2017 9:19 pm
Car: 1996 - Nissan 240sx SE RB25DET
2008 - Yamaha YZF-R6 - SOLD
2007 - Ford F150 FX4
Location: Huntsville, AL

Post

srellim234 wrote:
Fri Mar 23, 2018 5:35 pm
AZ - Home protection choice here is a 12 gauge pump action coupled with bolt actions, etc...
Wait what? Bolt action for home defense? Have you ever drove your car by a gun shop and blew the horn? A bolt action rifle is not for home defense, most if not all (excluding firearms that were made 100 years ago) are for target shooting or hunting. I have several bolt action rifles and would consider myself proficient with them, but during a home invasion I would not want to try and cycle the bolt to ward of a criminal. Again most of the people who tell you we don't need firearms don't wield them nor have they every found themselves in a combat/hostile situation where they relied on them. Even for trained persons its a very stressful situation.

I don't like the shotgun for home defense either, I have 3 children at home ranging from 4 to 12. The problem with a shotgun (slugs excluded) is that sheet-rock doesn't stop bullets. Shotguns scatter lead in all directions to the front and I wouldn't want to risk hitting an unintended target. With my semi-auto pistol/rifle I can send a single bullet in the specific direction that I intend. Now with that being said, if it were my wife and myself.... shot gun it is!

User avatar
srellim234
Posts: 2710
Joined: Sun Jul 15, 2007 8:12 am
Car: 2007 silver Versa SL
hatchback w/CVT
(sold 08/2011)
2008 red Toyota Prius
(purchased 04/2016)
Location: Laughlin, NV

Post

The bolt action is additional to the shotgun simply because we already have them for other purposes; they weren't purchased for that reason. Very much the same as being able to utilize a carving knife to defend yourself in close encounter in the kitchen. You don't buy it for that reason but it's available to defend yourself with it.

The shotgun was actually suggested by LEOs here. It covers a doorway effectively and the fact that a wall will stop the shot is part of the reason, too. The bullet isn't passing through to adjacent rooms or buildings and hitting innocent people there.

You allow access of a gun to your daughter, instead of using it for home defense she takes it out of the home and uses it to harm someone else, you provided the murder weapon by not securing it.

My daughter takes the car out? If she's licensed and we have insurance there's no issue. If she hotwires it and steals it, different issue. We provide the keys, maybe we should be held liable. That's another discussion can be had.

Again, it is clearly NOT the case that "The only things that stops a bad guy with a gun is a good guy with a gun." not matter how often you repeat it. It is simply a campaign slogan.

https://www.csmonitor.com/USA/2013/0110 ... -to-escape

https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nat ... ns/4490009

The statistics on mass shooting frequency depends on the definition. Including domestic violence you're right. Frequency is level. Mass shootings in which the shooter was mass shooting more randomly has accelerated drastically this decade. Even if we are to come to unison on a definition, though, there is no denying that they are becoming more deadly with the more sophisticated weapons and unlimited quantities being allowed in the hands of the public.

https://www.nbcnews.com/storyline/texas ... ay-n818176

Specifically where would you draw the line regarding what you would allow people to purchase, what you would or wouldn't background check, what you would include in those checks and should they apply to all transfers of ownership?


Return to “Politics Etc.”