This is insanity plus

All that yadda yadda about .3% of this & within 7 yards of that, is just deflection from the real point, which is that guns lead to shooting & violence. The more guns that are floating around & the more available those guns are, the more shooting, violence & gun related deaths there will be. One can obfuscate & hide behind a bunch of statistics all day long, but it doesn't change the fact that, where guns are, violence & death eventually show up too.

Guns = death.
 

My bad you should have mentioned all the excitement previously.

Death shows up on freeway, hospital, everyday Mr. Jim you should get out more, your age is showing. Your just trying to sanitize it. I'm (and several million other gun owners) are just there to make sure it happens to the bad guys. I really do respect your opinion, but it is only that, and like anatomical parts, everybody has at least one, including the one that causes constipation.
 

Sifu, the protective bell in Tai Chi, the ability for a samurai to hit with a bow and arrow blindfolded, and the philosophy of Bushido are not diminished by tactical superiority, merely shifted in time. Todays gun martial artists are into this very deep. Check out Brian Enos, Zen and shooting.

Handguns shooting, according to FBI and Dept. of Justice statistics have something like a 90% survival rating, while knife wounds are something like 60%. I would hate to see sword stats. The successful engagement of multiple targets with a handgun is far beyond the capabilities of even the police. Most hand gun rounds can be deflected by any flat hard surface if the contact angle is 45 or greater degrees, which offers defense shield in many environments-- the one keeps their kool.
 
rt3 said:
My bad you should have mentioned all the excitement previously.

Death shows up on freeway, hospital, everyday Mr. Jim you should get out more, your age is showing. Your just trying to sanitize it. I'm (and several million other gun owners) are just there to make sure it happens to the bad guys. I really do respect your opinion, but it is only that, and like anatomical parts, everybody has at least one, including the one that causes constipation.
Click to expand...

As I've pointed out before... automobiles are a necessity in today's world. One cannot lead a normal life without one. Just because accidents happen while operating them, does not put them on an equal par with guns, whose #1 purpose in life is to shoot other people.

It's a false comparison.
 
MrJim said:
As I've pointed out before... automobiles are a necessity in today's world. One cannot lead a normal life without one. Just because accidents happen while operating them, does not put them on an equal par with guns, whose #1 purpose in life is to shoot other people.

It's a false comparison.
Click to expand...

What you are saying is only true to the extent of CRIMINALS having guns, Jim.
The guns that belong to legitimate gun owners are (for the most part) being used by them for legal and non-lethal purposes; such as hunting, protecting their family and livestock from predators; and only used against another human being when necessary for defending their life, or the life of their loved ones.

Criminals, on the other hand, use weapons to rob people, or just to shoot them because they are angry. For criminals with guns, your statement is pretty true.
I think that if the gun-control people would focus on taking the guns away from the CRIMINALS, and not the law-abiding citizens; they would have a lot more support; and if that were ever done, more people would actually be safe, and fewer would be killed with guns.
Accidents would still happen with guns, just like they do with automobiles; but once the criminals were not carrying guns everywhere, the deliberate shootings would be almost non-existant.
It is not the gun that is the issue, it is WHO has the gun, that is the problem.
 
I think that if the gun-control people would focus on taking the guns away from the CRIMINALS, and not the law-abiding citizens; they would have a lot more support; and if that were ever done, more people would actually be safe, and fewer would be killed with guns.
Click to expand...
To do that you need to know where the guns are, whether or not there is a legitimate reason for having one and the power to search homes and other premises of people "known to the police".
 
Happyflowerlady said:
What you are saying is only true to the extent of CRIMINALS having guns, Jim.
The guns that belong to legitimate gun owners are (for the most part) being used by them for legal and non-lethal purposes; such as hunting, protecting their family and livestock from predators; and only used against another human being when necessary for defending their life, or the life of their loved ones.

Criminals, on the other hand, use weapons to rob people, or just to shoot them because they are angry. For criminals with guns, your statement is pretty true.
I think that if the gun-control people would focus on taking the guns away from the CRIMINALS, and not the law-abiding citizens; they would have a lot more support; and if that were ever done, more people would actually be safe, and fewer would be killed with guns.
Accidents would still happen with guns, just like they do with automobiles; but once the criminals were not carrying guns everywhere, the deliberate shootings would be almost non-existant.
It is not the gun that is the issue, it is WHO has the gun, that is the problem.
Click to expand...

Very true Happyflowerlady, I agree completely.

Ina said:
HFL, I wouldn't want to see what would happen if all the law abiding citizens turned in their guns at command. You know the criminal element would have a big belly laugh, just before they came at us.
Click to expand...

You've got that right Ina, hope I'm long gone before any of that insanity happens!
 
AS I HAVE SAID before, gunaphobics cannot deal with the issues, and choose to make what issues THEY think are correct. I am not asking you do accept mine, but when yours infringes, (OMG that word) on mine, keep your hands where I can see them. Self defense is a daily basic need just as any automobile, swimming pool, or any other modern convenience.
 
Happyflowerlady said:
What you are saying is only true to the extent of CRIMINALS having guns, Jim.
Click to expand...
Happyflowerlady said:
The guns that belong to legitimate gun owners are (for the most part) being used by them for legal and non-lethal purposes; such as hunting, protecting their family and livestock from predators; and only used against another human being when necessary for defending their life, or the life of their loved ones.
Click to expand...

First of all, I think you're talking about something different than I was. What I was talking about is not whether or not guns should be allowed, but whether or not guns are a good or bad thing for society as a whole.

IOW, has the presence of all these guns in the US overall, had a good effect or a bad effect?

I say their presence has had an extremely bad effect. If nowadays, you have to walk around with a gun strapped to yourself, just to feel safe from all the other people walking around with guns, then something has gone very, very wrong.

Also, these "legitimate gun owners" you speak of, are often the ones who end up becoming "criminal gun owners" too. It has become more & more of a common occurrence, that people who started out being the "responsible, law abiding gun owners" who the gun rights crowd tout as the "good guys", either snap because of some pressure or personal crisis in their lives like a divorce, loss of a job or a business, etc., etc. Or... they allow some other person to get hold of their guns due to carelessness. Nancy Lanza, the mother of Adam Lanza, the Sandy Hook shooter, was an experienced target shooter who knew all about gun safety as well as anyone. She also knew her son had serious emotional & psychological issues. Yet she allowed a situation to occur, in which her mentally disturbed son was able to get his hands on her guns. And the rest is history. So much for "responsible gun ownership".

Every so-called "legitimate gun owner" is just one misstep away from becoming responsible, either directly or indirectly, for a tragedy.
Happyflowerlady said:
Criminals, on the other hand, use weapons to rob people, or just to shoot them because they are angry. For criminals with guns, your statement is pretty true.
Click to expand...
Happyflowerlady said:
I think that if the gun-control people would focus on taking the guns away from the CRIMINALS, and not the law-abiding citizens; they would have a lot more support; and if that were ever done, more people would actually be safe, and fewer would be killed with guns.
Accidents would still happen with guns, just like they do with automobiles; but once the criminals were not carrying guns everywhere, the deliberate shootings would be almost non-existant.
It is not the gun that is the issue, it is WHO has the gun, that is the problem.
Click to expand...


The only way the police can take guns away from criminals is to apprehend them AFTER they commit some sort of crime with them, or to be caught in possession of them during the commission of some other crime. And that is exactly what is happening. You really can't do anymore within the framework of the constitution. Everybody has privacy rights protecting them against illegal search & seizure, & you cannot arrest someone just for thinking about doing something illegal.

There is no legitimate way anyone can stop criminals from getting guns because of all the different ways there are to get them. They often times either steal them during burglaries from these "responsible gun owners" who weren't responsible enough to keep them locked away in a gun safe, or they get them from someone else on the street, or they weren't criminals at the time they obtained the gun.

What you are suggesting would involve some sort of mind reading ability.

The best way to have nipped this problem in the bud decades ago, I feel, would have been to put more restrictions on manufacturers & sellers than on the end users. Gun supporters complain about how there are thousands of regulations on the books regarding gun ownership, but the vast majority of those regulations pertain to gun owners. Once somebody owns a gun, it's impossible to stop them from doing whatever they decide to do with it. All the authorities can do, is come in after the fact & arrest them, then let the courts punish them. But by then, the damage has been done. The restrictions need to be on the manufacturers & sellers of them.

What I actually advocate, is putting heavy restrictions on the amount of ammunition that can be manufactured & sold in the US. Make the penalty for illegally possessing more than a set allowance similar to drug possession. Make the penalty for illegally selling it or transferring ownership, similar to the penalties for drug dealing or trafficking. If that were to happen, I believe, all these legitimate, law abiding gun owners who are only interested in self protection, would buy their limit, then lock it away until they (hopefully never) needed it. Recreational target shooters could buy bullets to use for one session from the shooting range, who would make sure they used them all up while there & not leave with them.

But, as I said, gun control or changing gun laws was never the point of anything I've been saying here. My point has always been that guns have had a detrimental effect on our society.

Guns = death = bad.

My opinion.


 
rt3 said:
AS I HAVE SAID before, gunaphobics cannot deal with the issues, and choose to make what issues THEY think are correct. I am not asking you do accept mine, but when yours infringes, (OMG that word) on mine, keep your hands where I can see them. Self defense is a daily basic need just as any automobile, swimming pool, or any other modern convenience.
Click to expand...

And if it weren't for all the guns floating around to begin with, guns for self defense would not be a daily basic need.

See how that works?
 
Now, now, Dame Warrigal, not everything honkey-dorey here in Australia, either.
Lots of assaults, burglaries, rape, thieving in cities like Melbourne and Sydney.
And even if you manage to inflict injury in self defense, guess who's the one most likely to be hauled into court?
 
I would love to know, just out of curiosity, what was going through the minds of that kid's parents, training her to use an Uzi. There's gotta be some totally irresponsible adults in back of this.
 
I do blame the parents first, then the instructor for not knowing better. This wasn't training, as someone that young shouldn't be trained with an automatic weapon as their introduction gun. It was just a silly cheap thrill thing, that should have never been allowed for someone so young. Like I said, she can blame her parents for that memory that will haunt her for the rest of her life.
 
I think some pro-gun people enjoy doing what they perceive as rubbing their love & adoration of guns in the rest of society's faces. It's almost like some of them go out of their way to flaunt & show off to everyone else how much they love their guns & the 2nd amendment.

I think this "burgers & bullets" kind of gun tourism is just another example of that.

I recall one instance of guns being given away like toasters, as an incentive for opening up a bank account.

I think these are all just certain members of the 2nd amendment crowd's way of trying to shock or make people mad.

And of course, when something like this tragedy happens then... oh well.
 
For my 27th birthday my then-fiancé bought me a half-hour on an indoor shooting range with a vintage Thompson Model 21 sub-machine gun, the kind you used to see Elliot Ness and his boys running around with and cutely referred to as a "Chicago Typewriter".

penn gangster 550.jpg

First off, I already had owned and fired handguns, rifles and shotguns for many years, so I wasn't a total newcomer to firearms, but this thing was different - VERY different. The weight, first of all, was far heavier than anything I had ever shot, especially with a full drum of .45 cartridges. I thought this would help to stabilize the firearm, but as I found out it only helped add momentum to the recoil.

I'm not a weakling by any means, but when I went full rock-'n'-roll with this thing I felt like I was riding a pogo stick powered by a Saturn V rocket. I cannot claim that I lost control of it, but it certainly gave me a start and a very sore arm afterwards. After half an hour of firing that thing - and realizing that the cost of the .45 cartridges I went through cost more than the rental itself - I was glad to go back home to my Mossburg 500 short-barreled shotgun and my S&W .45.

I realize that an Uzi is generally light-weight plated steel compared to the Thompson, but I can also understand how the recoil can be a tricky, unpredictable thing.
 
Susie said:
Now, now, Dame Warrigal, not everything honkey-dorey here in Australia, either.
Lots of assaults, burglaries, rape, thieving in cities like Melbourne and Sydney.
And even if you manage to inflict injury in self defense, guess who's the one most likely to be hauled into court?
Click to expand...
Of course not but guns are supposed to be registered. Long before Port Arthur all hand guns in NSW at least were required to be registered and properly secured. After Port Arthur the requirement was extended to all firearms. People who do not register are probably up to no good, and should they be found to have unregistered guns, they will be confiscated.

A sensible approach which does help the police perform their duties.
 
can't control the amount of ammo manufactured because of a thing called reloading, same of the more socialist states such as Mass. and California have limits purchases. Obviously it doesn't work, (no way to enforce it, cops have better things to do).

Most indoor gun ranges these day have select fire weapons, and you can rent one for shooting at the range. They can't leave the premises. The number of rounds fired, the diverse age group shooting them/vs. the number of incidents (AD's accidental discharges) makes it safer than riding an ATV. Tragedies happen in both sports.


most Thompson run about 13-15 lbs almost 2 times as heavy as a hunting rifle. an uzi bolt which causes the momentum your talking about weighs almost 2x a Thompson bolt.


most gunaphobics are control freaks, and anyone not buying into there utopic society causes extreme stress to them
 

You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top