Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Orbit

Scientific American review of gun violence and control studies

Recommended Posts

10 hours ago, mymistake said:

 

Nobody is trying to infringe.  Ever.  The US has millions of cars despite the fact that every state has it's own traffic laws and every driver needs a license.  Why can't we have sensible gun laws?  Regulation does not infringe.

 

Ok yes I agree. your not trying to infringe so If we shall not infringe on american rights to bear arms in order to defend against other countries military or our own if need be. We should change laws so that it allows us to have any weapons that the military can use for warfare. Fully automatic capability, apache heliopters, spy drones, tanks, etc etc. Your right we should not be infringed upon so lets get this ball rolling. please write your legislators and let them know you want us to have our rights back like the fore fathers intended, PLEASE :-)

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Geezer said:

Legislators don't fear the NRA

No, they're paid off by them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, florduh said:

I hear that one all the time. Were those rifles of the AR15 variety designed for killing as many as possible in the shortest time possible, or were they perhaps just hunting rifles? What is the intended use of a hunting rifle as opposed to the AR15?

 

really Florduh? I thought you fact checked stuff before you said it..... The only thing that makes an AR-15 more deadly than a ordinary deer rifle is the magazine capacity. The frame that the AR-15 is built upon is the same frame as that of the military but we do not have the 3 round burst capability that the military has. Just as any other SEMI automatic deer rifle only one round is fired per trigger pull. It is not fully automatic (meaning it fires over and over again until you let off the trigger) and it doesn't have 3 round burst (meaning it fires three rounds with each pull of the trigger). We can buy these weapons if we want to pay the price. One it takes a special license and a tax stamp which costs $$$ that most people cant afford. I could probably afford it but here is the other problem. You have to give up your right to privacy. If you want those types of weapons you have to allow the ATF into your house at any point in time they want to come inspect your guns. It also has to be secured a certain way or you lose them.  I"m not willing to give my rights up so I will never have that type of weapon unless it is de-regulated

 

I need to get some time and make a video for you with another type of rifle other than an AR with multiple lower capacity magazines and show you that with enough practice it wouldn't be much of a difference. 

 

But hunting isn't a right. You have to buy a license to hunt or its illegal. The constitution isn't protecting our right to hunt. It is protecting our right to fight other people for our freedom. An AR was designed for military purposes and originally had fully automatic capability. It was designed for accuracy in war time situations. Our constitution protects our rights to this type of fire arm. These specifications also make it very good for sports, competition , and in some places can be used to hunt as well. In my state you can hunt with them but i think there is a magazine limit. 

 

So yes these rifles were originally designed to kill people in war time situations but what we have now isn't what the military has. It only looks like what the military has. It falls in line with ferderal regulations for the private citizen. The problem we are having in america is that we have raised generations of people who lack respect for life or have compassion for their fellow man. We have failed as a society to instill good values in our children. Faith doesn't hold a monopoly on teaching our children right from wrong but we as a whole have failed to do that. A few ass whoppins would probably have helped in some of these. But even without "ass whoppins" discipline can be achieved without corporal punishment. People are no longer afraid of consequences and are no longer taught respect.

 

Also children aren't taught about fire arms. My children wont touch a fire arm without permission and when they do they know to respect the fire arm and to use it safely. We started teaching them at a young age and they were taught what happens at the other end of the barrel and that if you shoot someone they dont come back. That it is something that should only be done if you need to save your own life in self defense or another persons life. In my famliy guns are common place and ingrained in our culture.

 

DB

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, DarkBishop said:

 

really Florduh? I thought you fact checked stuff before you said it..... The only thing that makes an AR-15 more deadly than a ordinary deer rifle is the magazine capacity. The frame that the AR-15 is built upon is the same frame as that of the military but we do not have the 3 round burst capability that the military has. Just as any other SEMI automatic deer rifle only one round is fired per trigger pull. It is not fully automatic (meaning it fires over and over again until you let off the trigger) and it doesn't have 3 round burst (meaning it fires three rounds with each pull of the trigger). We can buy these weapons if we want to pay the price. One it takes a special license and a tax stamp which costs $$$ that most people cant afford. I could probably afford it but here is the other problem. You have to give up your right to privacy. If you want those types of weapons you have to allow the ATF into your house at any point in time they want to come inspect your guns. It also has to be secured a certain way or you lose them.  I"m not willing to give my rights up so I will never have that type of weapon unless it is de-regulated

 

I need to get some time and make a video for you with another type of rifle other than an AR with multiple lower capacity magazines and show you that with enough practice it wouldn't be much of a difference. 

 

But hunting isn't a right. You have to buy a license to hunt or its illegal. The constitution isn't protecting our right to hunt. It is protecting our right to fight other people for our freedom. An AR was designed for military purposes and originally had fully automatic capability. It was designed for accuracy in war time situations. Our constitution protects our rights to this type of fire arm. These specifications also make it very good for sports, competition , and in some places can be used to hunt as well. In my state you can hunt with them but i think there is a magazine limit. 

 

So yes these rifles were originally designed to kill people in war time situations but what we have now isn't what the military has. It only looks like what the military has. It falls in line with ferderal regulations for the private citizen. The problem we are having in america is that we have raised generations of people who lack respect for life or have compassion for their fellow man. We have failed as a society to instill good values in our children. Faith doesn't hold a monopoly on teaching our children right from wrong but we as a whole have failed to do that. A few ass whoppins would probably have helped in some of these. But even without "ass whoppins" discipline can be achieved without corporal punishment. People are no longer afraid of consequences because and are no longer taught respect.

 

Also children aren't taught about fire arms. My children wont touch a fire arm without permission and when they do they know to respect the fire arm and to use it safely. We started teaching them at a young age and they were taught what happens at the other end of the barrel and that if you shoot someone they dont come back. That it is something that should only be done if you need to save your own life in self defense or another persons life. In my famliy guns are common place and ingrained in our culture.

 

DB

 

So I must wonder why the mass shooters always choose the AR-15 over the deer rifle. Any ideas? Maybe because it is so efficient at getting off rounds in large quantity extremely fast, something not needed for hunting. Hunting deer or boar, I mean. 

 

I won't argue the point that society has deteriorated and there are lots of angry people with no normal coping skills. Given that fact, why make weapons of mass destruction so easily available to them? Sure, some nut job might start attacking students or other groups with a pistol or deer rifle, but his casualty rate would be cut by 90%. If he only has a knife he might kill or injure one or two on his best day. It's a matter of degree. I believe there is no reason we need a bunch of AR-15 style weapons flooding a peaceful civilian society since you can protect your home and loved ones with a shotgun or Glock and not run the risk of someone getting hold of your weapon and spraying dozens of people with a hail of bullets. Guns do get stolen, you know.

 

I am a carrying gun owner, but not a gun nut or NRA zombie.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
49 minutes ago, florduh said:

I believe there is no reason we need a bunch of AR-15 style weapons flooding a peaceful civilian society since you can protect your home and loved ones with a shotgun or Glock and not run the risk of someone getting hold of your weapon and spraying dozens of people with a hail of bullets. Guns do get stolen, you know.

once again. self defense wasn't the only intent of the second amendment. Not even the main intent. But at least you are familiar with guns and want to protect your own home and family. I respect that. 

 

Here is how I view the second amendment so maybe that will shed some light from my perspective. Take all of the bill of rights (except the 2nd amendment) and view them as a door. A door to freedom that much of the world will never enjoy. 

 

1. Freedom of religion, speech, press, and petition

3. No quartering of soldiers

4.freedom from unreasonable search and seizures

5. freedom to due process of law, freedom from self incrimination, double jeopardy 

6. rights of accused persons e.g. right so a speedy and public trial

7. right of trial by jury in civil cases

8. freedom from excessive bail, cruel and unusual punishment

9. other rights of the people

10.powers reserved to the states

 

So there is the door for pretty much all of our inalienable rights. There is one problem with this door. It doesn't have hinges or a door know. The right to bear arms are those hinges and that door knob. The right to bear arms continually gives the american people the opportunity to fight for these above rights if they are ever at risk. Without those hinges and that knob it is just a framed board on the wall that you cant go through. They look nice but our govt can limit those rights as they feel without fear of retaliation because there would be no way (especially in this day in time when even weapons such as the AR-15 pale in comparison to our military's capabilities) to fight for those rights. 

     Our forefathers didn't go to war because they were happy with the freedoms they had. They went to war because they had a vision of a free america that wouldn't have to endure some of the things they endured. Or the things they saw. Sure at the time it wasn't perfect. In tho I think we can all agree that we have built upon that foundation. As long as we keep the right to bear arms we at least have a fighting chance if a country invades or our govt goes rogue. That right keeps our govt in check and others at bay so that the door to freedom stays open for american citizens. 

 

DB

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, DarkBishop said:

 

really Florduh? I thought you fact checked stuff before you said it..... The only thing that makes an AR-15 more deadly than a ordinary deer rifle is the magazine capacity.  (snip)

 

Unless, of course, you put a bump stock on that semi-automatic AR-15.  But the magazine is bad enough.  Shoot 30 times, spend two seconds changing clips and then you are ready to shoot 30 more times.  That is what really stacks up the bodies in a theater.

 

But don't loose your cool and assume anybody is trying to infringe on your rights.  We are only suggesting that guns should be as well regulated as driving a car.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, DarkBishop said:

 

Ok yes I agree. your not trying to infringe so If we shall not infringe on american rights to bear arms in order to defend against other countries military or our own if need be. We should change laws so that it allows us to have any weapons that the military can use for warfare. Fully automatic capability, apache heliopters, spy drones, tanks, etc etc. Your right we should not be infringed upon so lets get this ball rolling. please write your legislators and let them know you want us to have our rights back like the fore fathers intended, PLEASE :-)

 

 

None of that follows from what I wrote.   You seem to have confused the second amendment for some kind of omnipotent guarantee.  That doesn't make any sense.  However I think it would be cool if you were limited to owning only black powder muskets just like the founding fathers intended.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, DarkBishop said:

 If we keep letting it happen then they will slowly chip away at our gun rights until we are like australia.

 

That isn't how Australia got their guns banned.  You and Skip are going to get US guns banned because you refuse to compromise.  What else will decent people do when they have finally had enough?  Some day we will have a shooting that has a death toll over 200 . . . or over 500 . . . or over 1000 or however big the number has to be when we finally decide enough.  That is when your nightmare will finally come true and people will actually talk gun bans.  It is completely avoidable but for that you would have to be willing to compromise.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, DarkBishop said:

 

I dont think your done with step 5 just yet. Keep trying.

 

Like skipping church said. our rights have already been restricted in the past and we have given more than was ever desired by our founding fathers. If we keep letting it happen then they will slowly chip away at our gun rights until we are like australia.

 

The post gun ban apocalypse of Australia. It's a bloody affair down under.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, mymistake said:

 

 

None of that follows from what I wrote.   You seem to have confused the second amendment for some kind of omnipotent guarantee.  That doesn't make any sense.  However I think it would be cool if you were limited to owning only black powder muskets just like the founding fathers intended.

That would be fine if war was still fought with muskets. But it isn't. You dont understand that our rights have been infringed upon already and every time it was due to the few that misused them rather than the majority that didn't. The way the second amendment reads, it is clear that our right to bear arms is to insure  our ability to wage war against oppressors. As weapons developed as well should our access to ALL of those weapons have developed. But that isn't what happened. Our rights are regulated enough already. we already have laws in place that would have prevented most of the massacres we have seen in recent years but our govt has failed to enforce laws already on the books. More laws are not going to help. 

 

I will admit that I asked my german friend if they ever have the mass shooting problems that we have. he said no never. but the govt also does what they want. half of their pay goes to taxes and they are giving tons of money to refugees and telling the german people that they cant raise their retirement check or build new schools. They are at the mercy of their govt. 

 

DB

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, midniterider said:

 

The post gun ban apocalypse of Australia. It's a bloody affair down under.

 

 

I've seen all the Mad Max documentaries on what life in Australia is like since the gun ban took effect.  How can you live like that?  :D

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, mymistake said:

 

That isn't how Australia got their guns banned.  You and Skip are going to get US guns banned because you refuse to compromise.  What else will decent people do when they have finally had enough?  Some day we will have a shooting that has a death toll over 200 . . . or over 500 . . . or over 1000 or however big the number has to be when we finally decide enough.  That is when your nightmare will finally come true and people will actually talk gun bans.  It is completely avoidable but for that you would have to be willing to compromise.

if this happened any time in the near future i'm afraid it would be a war. Like it or not. If you will notice tho. democrats always start to lose when they push gun control. I dont even think a good majority of democrats what stricter laws. The vote has spoken IMHO. 

 

DB

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, DarkBishop said:

You dont understand that our rights have been infringed upon already and every time it was due to the few that misused them rather than the majority that didn't.  

 

I fully understand your opinion.  However I recognize that it is wrong.

 

2 minutes ago, DarkBishop said:

The way the second amendment reads, it is clear that our right to bear arms is to insure  our ability to wage war against oppressors. 

 

It's not a suicide pact.

 

4 minutes ago, DarkBishop said:

 Our rights are regulated enough already.  

 

 

You don't care about the people who died so you are not qualified to make this claim.  

 

 

 

7 minutes ago, DarkBishop said:

More laws are not going to help. 

 

Let's try it and see.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, DarkBishop said:

if this happened any time in the near future i'm afraid it would be a war. Like it or not. If you will notice tho. democrats always start to lose when they push gun control.  

 

Democrats lose because they don't cheat.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, mymistake said:

 

That isn't how Australia got their guns banned.  You and Skip are going to get US guns banned because you refuse to compromise.  What else will decent people do when they have finally had enough?  Some day we will have a shooting that has a death toll over 200 . . . or over 500 . . . or over 1000 or however big the number has to be when we finally decide enough.  That is when your nightmare will finally come true and people will actually talk gun bans.  It is completely avoidable but for that you would have to be willing to compromise.

no it isn't how australia lost their rights. their govt did it in one huge movement after a mass shooting if i'm not mistaken. But it is how america will get there if we give an inch. America cant do it the way australia did it. It wont work here. They will have to do it here in increments. And all of those small increments will be an infringement on top of all of the past infringements already in place. Then someone will kill a bunch of people with a semi automatic rifle with smaller magazines and they will ban them, then someone will kill a bunch of people with a revolver or lever action and they will ban them, then the only thing we will have is a shotgun to protect our house and muzzle loaders like you said. Then we will also be at the mercy of our govt once again just like Australia or Germany.

 

Once again I do not give a damn what australia did. Last I check this isn't australia.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, mymistake said:

 

Democrats lose because they don't cheat.

PLEASE!!! damn you libs need to get over it. LOL you lost because america doesn't want what you want. They saw something different from the normal democrat/republican bullshit in trump. And trump isn't even your biggest problem. You guys lost the house and the senate as well. HELLO OPEN YOUR EYES!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, DarkBishop said:

Then we will also be at the mercy of our govt once again just like Australia or Germany

 

You are already helpless against the government.  You think your AR-15 can do anything against a drone?  Are you going to use your marksmanship skills to destroy M-1A3 tanks?  Your arguments are based on a fantasy.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, mymistake said:

You don't care about the people who died so you are not qualified to make this claim.  

No it's not that I dont care about them. It's that I care about my rights more.

 

6 minutes ago, mymistake said:

Let's try it and see.

No, refer to step 5 once again.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, mymistake said:

 

You are already helpless against the government.  You think your AR-15 can do anything against a drone?  Are you going to use your marksmanship skills to destroy M-1A3 tanks?  Your arguments are based on a fantasy.

Its better than a shotgun. ahh fuckit. this is turning into another circular argument. you dont revere our rights like i do. I understand. Your willing to give them up so you may or may not save some lives. thats your prerogative. and it is your right to voice your opinion and I respect that. All I can say man is vote the way you feel. Thats what I do.

 

DB

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, DarkBishop said:

No it's not that I dont care about them. It's that I care about my rights more.

 

If you care more about your rights then a murdered child then you do not care about the murdered child.

 

 

5 minutes ago, DarkBishop said:

No, refer to step 5 once again.

 

What does that even mean?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, mymistake said:

 

If you care more about your rights then a murdered child then you do not care about the murdered child.

 

 

 

What does that even mean?

The first is your opinion and not a fact. You can not know how I feel when someone gets murdered as you are not me. That is something you derive from being raised or influenced differently through your life than i was, which leads you to a false conclusion based on your personal bias.

 

The second is referencing my first post on this thread where on the fifth point I said all liberals can kiss my constitutionalist ass. and repeatedly kiss my ass until we  can coexist once again. 

 

:-)

 

DB

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, DarkBishop said:

you dont revere our rights like i do. I understand. Your willing to give them up so you may or may not save some lives.  

 

I cherish our rights.  And I really miss the ones we have lost recently.  But the very last one we will ever lose is our right to arms because that one feeds the propaganda machine that drives the destruction of all our other rights.

 

Today we have no privacy, our drinking water is poisoned and our government represents business rather than voters.  I didn't choose any of that.  Being forced to buy 10 round magazines instead of 30 isn't an infringement of your rights.  But I realize I'm not going to change your mind.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, mymistake said:

 

I cherish our rights.  And I really miss the ones we have lost recently.  But the very last one we will ever lose is our right to arms because that one feeds the propaganda machine that drives the destruction of all our other rights.

 

Today we have no privacy, our drinking water is poisoned and our government represents business rather than voters.  I didn't choose any of that.  Being forced to buy 10 round magazines instead of 30 isn't an infringement of your rights.  But I realize I'm not going to change your mind.

I agree completely with most of this except my opinion of your view on our rights is drastically different. and my right as a law abiding citizen is to military weaponry if i so choose. so any regulation that takes it further away from what the military has is an infringement. 

 

a well regulated militia (military of the people) being necessary to the security of a free state (state as in a state of being not one of the fifty states, and no it isn't referring to federal military) The right of the people (all american citizens) to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed. (to violate or break, to encroach or trespass).

 

seems pretty cut n dry. simple and easy to read.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have a question that might be interesting to see responses to:

 

Those who are against increased gun control - what, if anything, would convince you to change your position?

 

Those who are for increased gun control - what, if anything, would convince you to change your position?

 

 

Thanks

LF

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, LogicalFallacy said:

I have a question that might be interesting to see responses to:

 

Those who are against increased gun control - what, if anything, would convince you to change your position?

 

Those who are for increased gun control - what, if anything, would convince you to change your position?

 

 

Thanks

LF

 

For me Nothing. I know that some people change their position if they have a loved one killed or murdered due to gun violence. But I know that if the american revolution were fought today with current gun laws in great britain and the world wide political policies being mostly against guns in general, we would probably not win our independence. We wouldn't have support from other countries and we wouldn't the weapons needed to fight. 

 

I feel like giving up or even limiting this one right is giving up what our forefather died for. because it puts everything else that they fought for at an even greater risk. like @mymistake already said. Our govt now spies on us openly and americans have cowed down. both sides of the political parties (republican/democrat) have overstepped their bounds. They both Lie to the american people to fulfill their agendas and line their pockets. Both parties try to limit freedom of speech at times it is just according to who is trying to talk. Both parties were instrumental in establishing the HSA and giving them the authority to go around the constitution. Both parties voted and made it even more difficult for the US citizens to hear what other parties have to say during elections. A candidate of another party cant even win the presidency unless they got a certain percentage of the vote in the prior presidential election. We never here them in the debates. The two party system in america is corrupted and are on power trips. 

 

They want to keep america split like it is so for one we dont all team up against them and vote them out. And for two so we focus on wedge issues and always vote for either one or the other even tho what most americans want is something in the middle. 

 

DB

  • Sad 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Guidelines.