Quote: @Vikergirl said:
I would agree that big pharma should be on the table. It is so sad that so much data was lost due to the inability for the cdc to research gun violence. If big pharma is on the table, I don't see why gun manufacturers shouldn't be. Well I know why they aren't but they should be. And of course the cuts to funding for mental health and domestic terrorism are extremely important to factor in.
make your case against the gun mfg.
Quote: @JimmyinSD said:
@ MaroonBells said:
There was a picture going around the media recently of a young lady at Kent State University. She was wearing a sunny white dress and an AR-15 over her shoulder. My first thought was..."wow, what a brilliant commentary on the absurdity of our gun laws." Turns out the statement she was attempting to make was the opposite. Recently graduated, she was protesting that as a student she was not allowed to carry the AR-15 around campus. Poor thing. Can't imagine why THAT would be a problem.
I think the best thing we can do is to make it harder to access weapons like this. Drugs should be on the table. Increased school security should be on the table. Better and more effective gun regulations should be on the table.
just to clarify, MB you are aware that contrary to some media reports that the recent shooter was using an AR, this in fact was done with a typical sporting style shotgun? ( not trying to be a smart ass here, just wanting to make sure that if we are going to talk AR platform rifles that we are on the same page )
as far as the AR platform... what again is so threatening about it? the fact that it can carry a larger magazine than most other hunting weapons? (changing a clip is a matter of a few seconds at most, in a live fire event for the untrained I dont think the fraction of time would make a difference at all) is it the semi automatic aspect of the firearm? there are many many semi auto firearms out there, are all of them going to be banned, if so I dont think anybody is ready for that back lash as that would eliminate a very large segment of the sporting arms out there. the AR is scary looking, it looks military so then people immediately think that it is more deadly than other firearms or some such crap. Now if you bring up the aftermarket accessories like a "bump stock" which basically makes the rifle fully auto.... then we would be in agreement, that is a device created to specifically by pass a law and it should have never been legal IMO, but it really only slows down the shooter by about a second a round or so.
I just read an article today about a guy (ex cop, family of cops) having mental issues that took his own guns away, he knew that he shouldnt have access to them in his mental state, basically put himself into that little gun free utopia that some people are championing for.... well last weekend he was with his family out for a meal at a local restaurant, as the food was arriving he excused himself from the table to go to the restroom, the next thing anybody knew he was crashing his vehicle through the wall of the restaurant killing 2 people (of his family) and injuring others, it will find a way.
Yeah, I'm fully aware the Santa Fe shooter used a shotgun. Doesn't make the AR15 any more lovable.
Quote: @MaroonBells said:
@ JimmyinSD said:
@ MaroonBells said:
There was a picture going around the media recently of a young lady at Kent State University. She was wearing a sunny white dress and an AR-15 over her shoulder. My first thought was..."wow, what a brilliant commentary on the absurdity of our gun laws." Turns out the statement she was attempting to make was the opposite. Recently graduated, she was protesting that as a student she was not allowed to carry the AR-15 around campus. Poor thing. Can't imagine why THAT would be a problem.
I think the best thing we can do is to make it harder to access weapons like this. Drugs should be on the table. Increased school security should be on the table. Better and more effective gun regulations should be on the table.
just to clarify, MB you are aware that contrary to some media reports that the recent shooter was using an AR, this in fact was done with a typical sporting style shotgun? ( not trying to be a smart ass here, just wanting to make sure that if we are going to talk AR platform rifles that we are on the same page )
as far as the AR platform... what again is so threatening about it? the fact that it can carry a larger magazine than most other hunting weapons? (changing a clip is a matter of a few seconds at most, in a live fire event for the untrained I dont think the fraction of time would make a difference at all) is it the semi automatic aspect of the firearm? there are many many semi auto firearms out there, are all of them going to be banned, if so I dont think anybody is ready for that back lash as that would eliminate a very large segment of the sporting arms out there. the AR is scary looking, it looks military so then people immediately think that it is more deadly than other firearms or some such crap. Now if you bring up the aftermarket accessories like a "bump stock" which basically makes the rifle fully auto.... then we would be in agreement, that is a device created to specifically by pass a law and it should have never been legal IMO, but it really only slows down the shooter by about a second a round or so.
I just read an article today about a guy (ex cop, family of cops) having mental issues that took his own guns away, he knew that he shouldnt have access to them in his mental state, basically put himself into that little gun free utopia that some people are championing for.... well last weekend he was with his family out for a meal at a local restaurant, as the food was arriving he excused himself from the table to go to the restroom, the next thing anybody knew he was crashing his vehicle through the wall of the restaurant killing 2 people (of his family) and injuring others, it will find a way.
Yeah, I'm fully aware the Santa Fe shooter used a shotgun. Doesn't make the AR15 any more lovable.
thats fine, just wanted to make sure we werent headed down a path with bad information. so what is it about the AR that makes it the boogieman of firearms? I dont really understand why it gets brought up so often. sure it seems to be used more often than some other weapons, but it is also by far the biggest selling gun platform for the last decade plus...there are simply more of them out there. so what is it about that gun that makes it so much worse than a semi auto 223 in a sporting package with wood grain?
Quote:Yeah, I'm fully aware the Santa Fe shooter used a shotgun. Doesn't make the AR15 any more lovable.
It does, however, have the "honor" of being ridiculously vilified by much of the media. It's been pointed out, for many years now, that the media bobbleheads and even legislators have misused and manipulated the term "assault weapon" to the point where it has no meaning...and in crimes where no AR-15 was used, they still find a way to wedge it into the conversation.
This is brainwashing/manipulation...and those responsible should be held accountable.
Psych meds are a scary element in all this. Have been reading quite a bit on that angle. Seems it is a growing side effect to imagine harm to self or others.
Quote: @JimmyinSD said:
@ MaroonBells said:
@ JimmyinSD said:
@ MaroonBells said:
There was a picture going around the media recently of a young lady at Kent State University. She was wearing a sunny white dress and an AR-15 over her shoulder. My first thought was..."wow, what a brilliant commentary on the absurdity of our gun laws." Turns out the statement she was attempting to make was the opposite. Recently graduated, she was protesting that as a student she was not allowed to carry the AR-15 around campus. Poor thing. Can't imagine why THAT would be a problem.
I think the best thing we can do is to make it harder to access weapons like this. Drugs should be on the table. Increased school security should be on the table. Better and more effective gun regulations should be on the table.
just to clarify, MB you are aware that contrary to some media reports that the recent shooter was using an AR, this in fact was done with a typical sporting style shotgun? ( not trying to be a smart ass here, just wanting to make sure that if we are going to talk AR platform rifles that we are on the same page )
as far as the AR platform... what again is so threatening about it? the fact that it can carry a larger magazine than most other hunting weapons? (changing a clip is a matter of a few seconds at most, in a live fire event for the untrained I dont think the fraction of time would make a difference at all) is it the semi automatic aspect of the firearm? there are many many semi auto firearms out there, are all of them going to be banned, if so I dont think anybody is ready for that back lash as that would eliminate a very large segment of the sporting arms out there. the AR is scary looking, it looks military so then people immediately think that it is more deadly than other firearms or some such crap. Now if you bring up the aftermarket accessories like a "bump stock" which basically makes the rifle fully auto.... then we would be in agreement, that is a device created to specifically by pass a law and it should have never been legal IMO, but it really only slows down the shooter by about a second a round or so.
I just read an article today about a guy (ex cop, family of cops) having mental issues that took his own guns away, he knew that he shouldnt have access to them in his mental state, basically put himself into that little gun free utopia that some people are championing for.... well last weekend he was with his family out for a meal at a local restaurant, as the food was arriving he excused himself from the table to go to the restroom, the next thing anybody knew he was crashing his vehicle through the wall of the restaurant killing 2 people (of his family) and injuring others, it will find a way.
Yeah, I'm fully aware the Santa Fe shooter used a shotgun. Doesn't make the AR15 any more lovable.
thats fine, just wanted to make sure we werent headed down a path with bad information. so what is it about the AR that makes it the boogieman of firearms? I dont really understand why it gets brought up so often. sure it seems to be used more often than some other weapons, but it is also by far the biggest selling gun platform for the last decade plus...there are simply more of them out there. so what is it about that gun that makes it so much worse than a semi auto 223 in a sporting package with wood grain?
and theres the problem. i dont on an ar15 but if you were to take its features and ban them my guess is it would ban north of 75% of all firearms out there. every firearm i own is semiautomatic. its kind of like trying to buy a stick shift car. they just dont make many non semiauto.
so on one side you have the anti gunners saying ban the black scary ones.....so legitimatly have no clue that its no different...some are using it as the rabbit holes door to ban all firearms. then you have the pro gunners who know theres isnt any difference between a scarry looking gun and all of the other ones and they know damn well if they give an inch theyll get taken a mile.
I don't weigh into these conversations often. But I would agree that talking in terms of AR this or that is a bunch of noise (in fact I believe the rifle in her pic is an AR-10... Not an AR15, but I digress). In fact even the argument over the whole AR-15 is the same as any rifle is a distraction to having any real conversation about the issue at all. So why bother.
Have a conversation about the type of guns and what can be done to give people a fighting chance in the event that they are used inappropriately.
Have a conversation about magazine capacity for general public purchase. Allow for discussion about larger magazines if criteria is met or necessity is shown.
We can no longer deny that there is an issue that is killing our kids. It's happening. We can sit and argue about all of this until we are blue in the face but the fact of the matter is that if the sad boy gets a gun and wants to blow away 10, 17, 27 or however many of his school mates... He is going to do it. It keeps happening in schools with and without armed guards. With and without gun free zones, with and without security checkpoints. It keeps happening and I got two kids that will be going to highschool real soon (although elementary schools apparently are ripe for getting shot up too)and ya know what I don't give a fuck about people's feelings and fantasies about taking on the government. The reality right now is that kids are getting killed before they have even really lived. We cannot keep putting off doing something about it because we need to take on the government... yeah the same government that we keep expanding our military budget for at the same time we keep this charade going that someday we may have to take them on.
I know gun owners that look at responsible gun ownership as a no brainer. They secure their weapons, they inventory frequently. They keep firearms that provide for their needs. They don't own guns for the hard on effect of what it can do, they own them for what they need them to do. I like that. I respect that. I support that. Frankly I appreciate that.
For decades we have heard that someone is going to take all of our guns away. And it has never happened. We have only seen More guns sold and interestingly enough from what I have read it has been to an increasingly smaller population of owners.
I like some of what I have read in this thread already. Some good suggestions. BUt also, there has been some dismissal and some belittling over a misnomer and possibly some ignorance of what names of guns etc. While one person may be ignorant of stats of a gun remember that there are others that would perpetuate that ignorance just to beat people over the head with that and use it to keep the divide going in regards to the issue.
I still haven't purchased my guns (I know I have been talking about it for about 2 years now) but I do intend to become a gun owner more from the standpoint that I view them as tools that I should be proficient with in their use. I own a framing nailer. I know how to use it. But I don't use it everyday. It's just a tool that I own. But it is stored appropriately and safely. Just like any gun I own will be.
The thing that I hear often about is the hysteria of "the anti gun people" but I don't hear much about the hysteria that frequently props up regarding the need to go get more guns. After every shooting there is a run up on gun sales. And there is frequently a message that this will be the time that "the anti gun people" will take away your right for guns. Aren't people tired of being told that?
We have a serious issue. It is a recurring issue. And far too many kids aren't making it home and too many parents are putting their kids in the ground. Man..... we have to change the way we own guns. What are we waiting for? 8 years of W Bush and nobody needed to take on the government. 8 years of Obama and nobody needed to take on the government. 4-8 years of Trump and I highly doubt we will be taking on the government. And even if we did..... we wouldn't stand a chance. Farts in the wind. Meanwhile in a week or maybe three we will hear about more kids gunned down at school. Buck up. Be a sensible gun owner. Show your pride in being a responsible gun owner and demand fellow gun owners do the same by coming to the table and having sensible conversations that, even though we know it will not stop everything bad from happening, that we know it will help to curb the insanity that we are going through right now. Because this shit has gone way beyond normalcy.
Quote: @Zanary said:
Yeah, I'm fully aware the Santa Fe shooter used a shotgun. Doesn't make the AR15 any more lovable.
It does, however, have the "honor" of being ridiculously vilified by much of the media. It's been pointed out, for many years now, that the media bobbleheads and even legislators have misused and manipulated the term "assault weapon" to the point where it has no meaning...and in crimes where no AR-15 was used, they still find a way to wedge it into the conversation.
This is brainwashing/manipulation...and those responsible should be held accountable.
Yeah, I've heard all of these ridiculously condescending arguments before. The "assault" semantic rhubarb. The "scary" talking points. Personally, I support a ban on all fully automatic weapons (as they are), all semi-automatic weapons, bump stocks and all magazines over...hell, let's just start at 20 rounds. I know, I know, what's the difference between ten 30-round clips and fifteen 20-round clips. Still 300 rounds, right. Well if eleven 6-year-olds escape while a gunman pauses to change clips, and he does this 10 times, how many 6-year-olds could escape if he had to do it 20 times? I know, maybe not enough to justify letting your deer get away, or zombie, or tyrannical government, or whatever the hell else you need to shoot 300 times to bring down, but still...
Quote: @MaroonBells said:
@ Zanary said:
@ MaroonBells said:
There was a picture going around the media recently of a young lady at Kent State University. She was wearing a sunny white dress and an AR-15 over her shoulder. My first thought was..."wow, what a brilliant commentary on the absurdity of our gun laws." Turns out the statement she was attempting to make was the opposite. Recently graduated, she was protesting that as a student she was not allowed to carry the AR-15 around campus. Poor thing. Can't imagine why THAT would be a problem.
I think the best thing we can do is to make it harder to access weapons like this. Drugs should be on the table. Increased school security should be on the table. Better and more effective gun regulations should be on the table.
Interesting cherry-picking there, as she had recently graduated and was showing that the moment she was no longer a student, that open carry was legal...which is odd, given that students aren't allowed to be armed. I'm assuming you read the whole article...?
Cherry picking what? I'm just telling you my reaction to the photo. From what i understand she was protesting the fact that, as a student, she could not carry a weapon. But now that she had graduated she could. And so she marches out there with an AR-15 draped over her shoulder. What I thought was a brilliant commentary on the absurdity of our lax gun laws was just the opposite. She was protesting the fact that students could NOT carry. What did I get wrong?
First of all, the articles I've seen state that it's an AR-10, not the "media created Darth Vader of rifles", the AR-15.
Secondly...why should visitors have that self-defense capability when students don't? It's not like that would override laws regarding acceptable ages of ownership, and I'd actually push for concealed carry because so many are-I use this term for dual purpose-"triggered" by just the sight of a firearm.
The AR-15 is "guilty" of being widely sold. I figure that the whacko that rented the F-150 and mowed people down in New York will cause demands to ban the country's most popular vehicle any moment now...
...and it'll be called the "F-150 AR-15 by Four" by some bobblehead.
Quote: @Zanary said:
@ MaroonBells said:
@ Zanary said:
@ MaroonBells said:
There was a picture going around the media recently of a young lady at Kent State University. She was wearing a sunny white dress and an AR-15 over her shoulder. My first thought was..."wow, what a brilliant commentary on the absurdity of our gun laws." Turns out the statement she was attempting to make was the opposite. Recently graduated, she was protesting that as a student she was not allowed to carry the AR-15 around campus. Poor thing. Can't imagine why THAT would be a problem.
I think the best thing we can do is to make it harder to access weapons like this. Drugs should be on the table. Increased school security should be on the table. Better and more effective gun regulations should be on the table.
Interesting cherry-picking there, as she had recently graduated and was showing that the moment she was no longer a student, that open carry was legal...which is odd, given that students aren't allowed to be armed. I'm assuming you read the whole article...?
Cherry picking what? I'm just telling you my reaction to the photo. From what i understand she was protesting the fact that, as a student, she could not carry a weapon. But now that she had graduated she could. And so she marches out there with an AR-15 draped over her shoulder. What I thought was a brilliant commentary on the absurdity of our lax gun laws was just the opposite. She was protesting the fact that students could NOT carry. What did I get wrong?
First of all, the articles I've seen state that it's an AR-10, not the "media created Darth Vader of rifles", the AR-15.
Secondly...why should visitors have that self-defense capability when students don't? It's not like that would override laws regarding acceptable ages of ownership, and I'd actually push for concealed carry because so many are-I use this term for dual purpose-"triggered" by just the sight of a firearm.
The AR-15 is "guilty" of being widely sold. I figure that the whacko that rented the F-150 and mowed people down in New York will cause demands to ban the country's most popular vehicle any moment now...
...and it'll be called the "F-150 AR-15 by Four" by some bobblehead.
I don't see this as a good discussion tactic at all.
Because someone ran people down with a truck we cannot have a discussion about the 1,238 kids under 18 that have been killed or injured this year due to gun violence? It is not even Memorial day yet. We probably could have a discussion about how to deal with vehicular homicide but that's not really what this is about.
The fact of the matter is that we have WAY too much of a problem with gun violence. Now there's truth to the matter that bad guys with guns are always going to be bad guys with guns. But part of the research needs to be on why guns keep finding their way into the hands of people that shouldn't have them. And I have to think that the number of guns in this country HAS to play into that somehow. No?
The real deal is that if things keep going the way that they are then maybe it is quite possible that the general public WILL have enough and move to outlaw guns entirely. It is already known that by far the general public supports gun legislation. At this point it might be in gun owners best interest to put in gun safety legislation. If not I can see guns going the way of Cigarettes. Eventually there will be a cultural shift away from their acceptance because the harm to the public will outweigh the general public's desire to have them be prevalent in society. We aren't that many years removed from ashtrays in the armrests of airplanes and vehicles. And dead kids aren't a real popular thing either.
Seems to me that making some concessions on what people actually need for realistic self defense and hunting is in the best interest of responsible gun owners. At least coming to the table with the demand that we get tough on bad guys with guns. Meaning Real Tough. For a lot of the country (I am NOT saying anyone in this thread) there is the idea of a boogey man with a gun. Black Gangs. Muslim Terrorists. Illegal aliens. Or klansmen, or just general whitey (yeah even whitey is being marketed to brown people to protect themselves against... .Gun crazy... it isn't just for white folks anymore) to which many people believe that they need to be armed to the teeth to defend themselves against. And you know what? I'm not even saying that you don't have to be armed for protection. But let's be honest about what we need versus what the likelihood is that our weapons may end up causing more harm than good. The ratio isn't in favor of more guns means more safety.
With any product that may pose any public health risks we have to figure out what it's place in society is. There's no difference in that with guns. In fact eh USSC ruled that very thing in that they said that the 2nd does not guarantee any firearm for every citizen. It found in it's ruling that the types of weapons that can be made available to the public absolutely can be regulated. And still through Bush W, Through Obama, Through Yea one of Trump not much has changed.
And I haven't heard any word from my lunatic liberal friends of going after F150's either.
|
