VA shooting

[Jhony5]

And if your daughter is one of the thousands killed each year because she touched your gun, or it malfunctioned, or it went off while you were transporting it/changing bullets/cleaning it etc?

It really doesn't work like that. It's not all that difficult to prevent all these scenarios from coming true.

I'm not going to use freak mishaps as a reason to leave myself vulnerable to attack. Fact is, more people are shot on purpose, than by accident. Thousands of people ARE NOT killed annually by accidental shooting. I'd google the stats myself, but I already know better. When you consider the millions and millions of gun owners in America, the relatively low amount of accidental shootings are well in check. I'm not an alarmist.

 

My 7 year old daughter is a heck of a shot with a .22 cal rifle. I have been trained to use weapons responsibly and to respect the fact that a gun is a dangerous tool, as has my daughter. The real danger by gun owners is when the gun becomes a dirty little secret, hidden in the back of a drawer. She knows what a gun can do to a living thing, therefor she respects its power.

 

 

Perhaps - but what kind of world is it you're creating?

I'm not creating jack or shit. I'm living with the realities of my world. Until I can watch the news and not see so much random violence and victimization, I will continue to carry a weapon.

 

Did you ever consider that an unarmed assailant might be much easier to stop than one that's armed?

Yes I have. But I don't know Karate. Nor am I willing to take the chance that I can repel an unknown quantity with my street fighting skills.

Chances are that guy breaking in has a gun too. Now your whole family is at risk from both your erratic shooting to stop the intruder, and his blasting away at anything that moves. Great solution.

Wait a minute. Which is it? Is the intruder armed or not?

 

First you assert that I should consider the fact that the intruder might not be armed, than you claim that an intruder probably is armed. In both cases you attempt to portray my ability to defend as making the situation worse. Thats fucking bullocks! Your struggling to create a situation in which the victim is wrong for defending him/her self. Blame the victim. Thats great.

 

Fact is, if a man breaks into my home, he is going up against an experienced shooter with considerable armaments. As well I have a big ol fuckin dog. The intruder is about to have a real fucking bad night.

 

Good news! I live in Australia! So there's very little chance the intruder has a gun.

BAD NEWS! I don't. Even if guns were outlawed, the criminals would still have stolen/smuggled guns or knifes or whatever.

 

First priority - get my family out. Second - call the Police. Third - stop the guy

First problem:Leaving your room to access your children without alarming the intruder.

Second problem: You don't know if the criminal has a gun or a knife. Since you're in Australia, only criminals have guns. You're fucked. You can't get your family out without the intruder knowing. If hes just there for a burglary, than he would run off. If hes there for something else, you just fucked up real bad. Call the police first, than attempt to get your family out. Either way, your chicken shit society has removed your best defense. Self Defense

 

Most burglaries are by druggies looking for cash, or things they can sell. If one breaks into your house, give them what you have, and they'll move on.

Oh I'll give him what I have alright. "Here ya go Mr robber man. You can have these buckshots". Thats the only thing free here. If he wanted a stereo and jewels, he shoulda picked the faggot anti-gun victims down the street.

 

If guns were against the law, than he could enter my home with a far greater degree of confidence.

 

Yes! These people are trained to use their weapons - trained not to over-react. Trained to use other methods before using their weapons. Trained to be level-headed in a crisis. Yes - the police are the right people to deal with criminals.

 

I would only consider that if a police officer was in my home while I slept. Reality shows this is not the case. Remember, the police are seven minutes away. Most cops will tell you, the best line of defense is self-defense. Police are often card carrying NRA members and they understand the power of a gun.

 

That's correct. I don't see anyone arguing for greater gun control simply because of school shootings.

Thats about all I've heard post VA tech. Thats about all I heard after columbine. People are alarmist. They don't look at the big picture.

 

Well...yeah. Let the people decide though - there needs to be a free debate in the US, and it's a democracy. If given all the facts and figures, the American people decide that 30,000 dead Americans is a reasonable price to pay so that some people can hunt...then so be it.

We have. Its been this way since the creation of our nation. The people have spoken. If the majority felt that guns should be outlawed, than guns would be outlawed. Its that simple. The NRA doesn't make our laws. We do.

[snafu]

My son knows where my guns are.

He knows not to play with them.

He considers all weapons loaded.

He knows to never put his finger on or pull the triger of a gun unless he intends to shoot something.

He knows to never point a gun at anything unless he intends to shoot it.

 

These are very simple rules of safety that should be taught to everybody.

[hugo]

Yep, the ole university study. As if universities, are not , by and large, centers of modern liberalism, as oppossed to the classical liberalism of our founding fathers.

 

Basic statistics: an initial sample size of a mere 500 is a bit small to conclusively conclude anything.

[cybacaT]

jhony5

 

My 7 year old daughter is a heck of a shot with a .22 cal rifle.

 

Wow - that's really sad man. I wonder what permanent damage you do to the psyche of a child teaching them to kill things at such a young age? Nothing wrong with hunting mind you (although 7yo??), but if you're teaching her about shooting and killing people then you have some issues to deal with - I'd call it parental abuse personally.

Given that you feel a need to carry weapons there is some case on the grounds of safety for teaching your kid where the weapons are, and that they are never to touch them - ever. But beyond that? At 7 years of age?

Time to check yourself dude.

 

 

 

Quote:

Originally Posted by CybacaT

Perhaps - but what kind of world is it you're creating?

I'm not creating jack or shit. I'm living with the realities of my world. Until I can watch the news and not see so much random violence and victimization, I will continue to carry a weapon.

You are part of the problem - not the solution. It's precisely BECAUSE people think they need to pack guns that there are people packing guns!! I mean this isn't rocket science. Get rid of the guns, and you don't need guns to defend against guns. Sheesh!

 

 

 

Quote:

Chances are that guy breaking in has a gun too. Now your whole family is at risk from both your erratic shooting to stop the intruder, and his blasting away at anything that moves. Great solution.

Wait a minute. Which is it? Is the intruder armed or not?

 

I gave 2 examples. Where you are at the moment, chances are the intruder has a gun...you have a gun...and death is quite likely.

Move to a more educated/civilised society where guns are in the hands of people who actually need them, and chances are the intruder doesn't have a gun, and neither do you. Far less likely for deaths to result.

 

 

 

Quote:

Good news! I live in Australia! So there's very little chance the intruder has a gun.

BAD NEWS! I don't. Even if guns were outlawed, the criminals would still have stolen/smuggled guns or knifes or whatever.

I think we dispelled that myth earlier. In Australia we were told EXACTLY the same thing by the gun lobby. We outlawed guns, and guess what? Gun crimes have dropped, gun deaths have dropped - we don't have criminals armed with guns out roaming the streets.

Time to apply some grey matter to the propoganda slogans you've had rammed into your head from birth. You'll find many of them (like this one) could be better used to fertilise your garden.

 

 

 

First problem:Leaving your room to access your children without alarming the intruder.

The children are already alerted. I am big on home security - every door and window has an alarm sensor which is regularly tested. So if someone breaks in, the cops know about it immediately, and the alarm in the house alerts my family and neighbours (who do respond). This is a peaceful way of ensuring that an intruder won't stick around long - if they dare enter at all.

 

 

Second problem: You don't know if the criminal has a gun or a knife.

Actually, since I live in a country where guns are outlawed, there's very little chance at all that he has a gun. Most I'd have to contend with is a knife, but remember the police are already on their way.

 

 

 

 

Quote:

Most burglaries are by druggies looking for cash, or things they can sell. If one breaks into your house, give them what you have, and they'll move on.

So you'd kill someone who wanted to steal your stereo?

I don't see it like that. Chances are the dude is messed up on drugs, and simply trying to pay for his habit. He doesn't want violence, doesn't want to hurt anyone, just wants the quickest easiest cash source he can find.

Does he deserve death for being a junkie? I don't think so.

I'd rather give him the stereo and wave him goodbye. Insurance works well.

But you'd shoot someone over a simple theft? Bravo.

 

 

 

Quote:

That's correct. I don't see anyone arguing for greater gun control simply because of school shootings.

Thats about all I've heard post VA tech. Thats about all I heard after columbine. People are alarmist. They don't look at the big picture.

The big picture isn't VA Tech - the big picture is 30,000 dead Americans which you're smugly prepared to write-off as acceptable losses because you like to pack a gun.

[Jhony5]

Wow - that's really sad man. I wonder what permanent damage you do to the psyche of a child teaching them to kill things at such a young age?

I haven't taken her hunting, yet. I have spent considerable time training her to load, unload, and maintain a .22 Cal rifle. As well we go shooting about every two weeks. She loves it. First time we went I asked her if she wanted to go, I did not push this on her. Now, she bugs the shit outta me to take her shooting.

if you're teaching her about shooting and killing people then you have some issues to deal with

Thats quite a leap ain't it?

 

I'd call it parental abuse personally.

So would Rosie O'Donnell.

 

Where you are at the moment, chances are the intruder has a gun...you have a gun...and death is quite likely.

I want to concentrate on this particular statement, because I feel it is at the heart of the matter.

 

I am simply living with the reality that I am presented with. If the intruder has a gun, I am powerless to do anything effective to defend myself. If I have a gun, than I can defend myself very effectively. If I find that an intruder is in my home, I will not presume his intentions. I will presume the worst case, and attempt to kill him, shooting him quietly in the back if possible. Then again in the head to kill the threat. No questions will be asked. No mercy granted. He took the chance, he pays the price.

 

In Australia we were told EXACTLY the same thing by the gun lobby. We outlawed guns, and guess what? Gun crimes have dropped, gun deaths have dropped - we don't have criminals armed with guns out roaming the streets.

Declined but not done away with. In Australia only criminals have guns. The reality of the situation is apparent. Guns still exist, and only the criminals have them.

America is different. Realize this. Guns deaths would drop if we outlawed guns, however, the statistics would most certainly reflect a frightening trend. Less suicides, less deaths from self-defense (i.e. lawfully armed citizens shooting assailants in protection of serious bodily harm or death), and more deaths from violent criminals shooting unarmed homeowners/citizens.

 

This is a peaceful way of ensuring that an intruder won't stick around long - if they dare enter at all.

You seem awful preoccupied with the safety and well being of intruders. Why is this? Fucking pussy. Coward. Chicken shit motherfucker. Afraid to kill someone that treads upon your turf? Break into my home and you might as well start shooting, cuz lead is about to come flying at 'cha. My choice in home defense is a Remington 870 12 gauge pump action, loaded with double O buckshot. A weapon and round that can easily travel through doors and drywall.

 

Actually, since I live in a country where guns are outlawed, there's very little chance at all that he has a gun. Most I'd have to contend with is a knife, but remember the police are already on their way.

You like to gamble with your life? Take the chance? You have seven minutes. It takes seconds to get stuck like a pig and bleed to death.

 

What your statements have declared, is that you are willing to bet on your life and the lives of your children. I am not the gambling type. Like I said, check the stats of your, how is it you put it, "educated/civilized society", regarding the unheard of, over 200% increase in stabbing deaths in the years following the gun ban. I FUCKING DARE YOU to post those stats. If you do not, I will. Or you could stick your cowardly head back in the fucking Australian sand. Yes gun deaths went down, but violent deaths are still cruising along, now undeterred.

 

So you'd kill someone who wanted to steal your stereo?

It would depend on how secure I felt the situation was at the time. However, I would not hesitate at all to kill him/her if they didn't obey instructions, or that I felt the situation was insecure. The law can prosecute homeowners for this. Think ahead, and prepare for this. Before the police arrive, place one of your kitchen knifes in his hand if he was unarmed. Explain to the cops that you were in fear for your life.

 

Personally it would give me a raging hard-on to shoot some scum fuck dead and get away with it. Fuck ya, followed by regular visits to his grave to piss upon his rotting corpse.

 

You know why I don't worry about being shot dead while breaking into someones home? Because I don't break into peoples homes. Thats why.

 

the big picture is 30,000 dead Americans which you're smugly prepared to write-off as acceptable losses because you like to pack a gun.

Yep. If my child was shot dead today by a gunman, I would blame the gunman, not the gun. Same if she was run over by a drunk driver, I would not blame the automobile manufacturer. Same as if she was stabbed with a boyscout knife, I would not blame the current laws that allow for knifes to be legal.

[cybacaT]

jhony

 

Quote:

In Australia we were told EXACTLY the same thing by the gun lobby. We outlawed guns, and guess what? Gun crimes have dropped, gun deaths have dropped - we don't have criminals armed with guns out roaming the streets.

Declined but not done away with. In Australia only criminals have guns. The reality of the situation is apparent. Guns still exist, and only the criminals have them.

Did you know that repeating a lie - however many times - still doesn't make it true?

The BS "if guns are outlawed, only criminals will have guns" has obviously been tatooed on your brain. Hence I encouraged you to check your facts. I live in Australia - gun crime are virtually unheard of. Can you even imagine what that's like - living in a country where guns deaths are a very rare occurence?

 

 

America is different. Realize this. Guns deaths would drop if we outlawed guns, however, the statistics would most certainly reflect a frightening trend. Less suicides, less deaths from self-defense (i.e. lawfully armed citizens shooting assailants in protection of serious bodily harm or death), and more deaths from violent criminals shooting unarmed homeowners/citizens.

Short term you might be right. It will take a time to get all the guns in, and criminals will hold onto theirs the longest. Give it 10-20 years, and you'll have a completely different culture though. One where nancy-boys don't need to hide behind guns because the criminals don't have guns. One where a gun death is a major deal because they're such a rare event.

 

 

 

You seem awful preoccupied with the safety and well being of intruders. Why is this? Fucking pussy. Coward. Chicken shit motherfucker. Afraid to kill someone that treads upon your turf?

HANG ON...aren't you the coward, pussy, chicken shit MF that's HIDING behind a gun?!??!? Bwahahahahahah - you make me laugh dude. Only someone weak needs a weapon, and when you need to revert to a gun then you're just a little girl in my eyes.

As for killing someone - no...even if they broke into my house, I see no need to kill someone. The last 2 times someone tried to get into my house, I confronted them man-to-man, and both situations ended peacefully. How would my life be now if I was a scared little coward who pulled out a gun and killed those 2 people? I'd be a lower form of scum than them.

 

 

 

You like to gamble with your life? Take the chance? You have seven minutes.

There's a chance of a nuclear weapon hitting my city too...but I'm no bunker-builder. My life is focused on living, not obsessed with panic, fear, insecurity and trying to plan for the rarest of situations that might happen.

 

A fully alarmed house means the police might be 7 minutes away, but I'm about 30 seconds away from the break-in, and my neighbours (baseball-bat wielding Romanians and Italians) are about 2 minutes away. The intruder has no chance, and no-one will die. That's just fear-mongering to try and justify why you feel the need to hide behind a gun in your house.

 

 

 

Quote:

the big picture is 30,000 dead Americans which you're smugly prepared to write-off as acceptable losses because you like to pack a gun.

 

Yep. If my child was shot dead today by a gunman, I would blame the gunman, not the gun. Same if she was run over by a drunk driver, I would not blame the automobile manufacturer.

 

Purpose of a car: Transport.

Importance to the country, citizens, economy: Huge.

Relative deaths to utility value: Low.

 

Purpose of a gun: To kill things.

Importance to the country: Beyond police and army, very low importance.

Relative deaths to utility value: Off the scale.

 

Compare apples with apples dude.

[Jhony5]

Purpose of a car: Transport.

Importance to the country, citizens, economy: Huge.

Relative deaths to utility value: Low.

 

Purpose of a gun: To kill things.

Importance to the country: Beyond police and army, very low importance.

Relative deaths to utility value: Off the scale.

 

It is what it is.

 

 

 

Car crashes — also called road traffic accidents (RTAs), traffic collisions, auto accidents, road accidents, personal injury collisions, motor vehicle accidents (MVAs), — kill an estimated 1.2 million people worldwide each year, and injure about forty times this number (

 

Using your logic against guns, I could say to you, is it worth 1.2 million lives a year just so people can drive?

 

HANG ON...aren't you the coward, pussy, chicken shit MF that's HIDING behind a gun?!??!? Bwahahahahahah - you make me laugh dude. Only someone weak needs a weapon, and when you need to revert to a gun then you're just a little girl in my eyes.

Next you're gonna tell me I'm compensating for a small phallus. My fists are for punks with loud mouths. My guns are for cowards that depend on their victims being unarmed. Defending yourself with deadly force is hardly indicative of cowardice. Are you tellin me that you would bring your fists to a knife fight? Answer that honestly.

[cybacaT]

Quote:

Car crashes

[Jhony5]

Nothing at all like guns. Having guns in the hands of citizens doesn't offer 1 iota of benefit to society...

You don't think saving lives by way of self defense is beneficial to citizens? People use guns to thwart violence everyday in America. These stories aren't reported by the media because they lack the sensational value of the successful execution of violent crime.

I've carried a gun for over 15 years and only once have I drawn it, and that was to remove a threat. A guy got so pissed at me in traffic over something so minor, he stopped his car and got out, opened my door and wanted to have a fucking fight right there in the middle of the road. One peek at my sidearm sent his ass running back to his car. Violence evaded by show of force.

 

 

Some crims in the US have fully automatic weapons - don't tell me you're going to bring a shotgun to the party and get mowed down!

I'll be straight up with ya. Despite the fact that I carry a sidearm, and the fact that I keep a fully loaded 12 gage in my home, I go against the grain on the issue of assault riffles. They are completely unnecessary in the hands of citizens and should be outlawed. Illegal and impractical for hunting. Illegal and impractical for carrying on ones self, for defensive purposes. The only legal outlet for them is for target shooting, which is not worth the risk. Assault riffles are too fucking dangerous in the hands of a madman.

 

My brothers good friend on the IPD was killed a few years back by a mentally defective asshole with an assault riffle. He had just gotten his riffles back from a judges order.

 

There is a big 'ol fucking difference between a 45 cal semi auto pistol, and an AK-47. Huge difference.

I met this officer. He attended my brothers wedding. This is one of those cases in which there was plenty of external blame for this tragic shooting, other than the gun itself.

http://www.indygov.org/eGov/IMPD/About/Memoriam/tlaird.htm

 

Read this. This fucking nutjob was given his weapons back after unbelievable circumstances. A diagnosed schizophrenic with a violent past was given back his SKS rifle, a .357-caliber pistol, and a .22-caliber derringer. Un-fucking-believable

 

Again, I'm all for strict gun control. Not for gun abolishment, however.

[hugo]

1991 9.8

1992 9.3

1993 9.5

1994 9.0

1995 8.2

1996 7.4

1997 6.8

1998 6.3

1999 5.7

2000 5.5

 

Homicide rates US from 1991 -2000 notice a greater than 40% decline despite no federal gun buyback program. Assuming the gun buyback program was responsible for Australia's similar drop in homicides is just that--an assumption.

 

Let us remember that 55+% of them 30K gun deaths are suicides and that Australia has a higher suicide rate than the US and Japan (which has few guns) a much higher suicide rate than either the US or Australia.

 

Hitler confiscated the Jews guns before he rounded them up into concentration camps. The purpose of the 2nd Amendment (as is the rest of the Bill of Rights) is protection from federal tyranny

[cybacaT]

jhony

 

Sounds like we're finding some middle ground. Given the entrenched gun culture in the US, and the massive number of weapons, probably the best that can be hoped for is a minimisation of damage by tighter regulations on the types of weapons available.

 

A ban on assault rifles, automatic weapons etc would be a good start, and might help stop some of mass killings that society wants stopped.

[cybacaT]

hugo

 

Homicide rates US from 1991 -2000 notice a greater than 40% decline despite no federal gun buyback program. Assuming the gun buyback program was responsible for Australia's similar drop in homicides is just that--an assumption.

Actually no. Australia had a declining rate of gun deaths - that was rapidly accelerated the year the gun laws were introduced.

 

 

Let us remember that 55+% of them 30K gun deaths are suicides and that Australia has a higher suicide rate than the US and Japan (which has few guns) a much higher suicide rate than either the US or Australia.

Australia has one of the highest rates of suicide in the world - and has for years. Not sure why people revert to guns when there are far easier, less-violent methods. Yet it does bring up the point that someone who is considering suicide, and has ready access to a gun, can top themselves quickly. Someone who doesn't have easy access to a gun has to put some thought into how they'll do it - and by the time they've put that thought in, there's a chance they'll have reconsidered, or the immediate cause of their angst may have passed.

Ditto for any number of other situations - car incidents, domestic clashes etc - if there's a gun involved, instantly someone can be killed without thought or consideration - in the heat of the moment.

 

 

 

Hitler confiscated the Jews guns before he rounded them up into concentration camps. The purpose of the 2nd Amendment (as is the rest of the Bill of Rights) is protection from federal tyranny

I don't buy into that scaremongering. There'll be no repeat of Hitler so long as we have freedom of the press. You'll get ample warning before there could be another Hitler, and be able to take action to stop it.

[Jhony5]

Hitler confiscated the Jews guns before he rounded them up into concentration camps. The purpose of the 2nd Amendment (as is the rest of the Bill of Rights) is protection from federal tyranny

This notion is outdated and no longer has an applicable purpose. Our society has developed far beyond the need for a citizen militia as a means of countering the American military. I will not be a fool enough to use this tired old excuse as a means to bear arms. I take a far more realistic approach. I want to protect myself from real threats, not ones contrived by paranoid gun nuts.

 

Thats all I ask. Allow me to keep my sidearm as long as I don't produce good reason to be disarmed.

[hugo]

This notion is outdated and no longer has an applicable purpose. Our society has developed far beyond the need for a citizen militia as a means of countering the American military. I will not be a fool enough to use this tired old excuse as a means to bear arms. I take a far more realistic approach. I want to protect myself from real threats, not ones contrived by paranoid gun nuts.

 

 

 

I am sure the Germans felt the same way in 1928.

[Jhony5]

I am sure the Germans felt the same way in 1928.

Are you equating the current political atmosphere in America to that of circa 1920's Germany? Please say yes.

[snafu]

Are you equating the current political atmosphere in America to that of circa 1920's Germany? Please say yes.

 

 

Well the folks at Ruby Ridge seem to think so.

[Jhony5]

Well the folks at Ruby Ridge seem to think so.

 

Thats a bit of a stretch.

Fact is Ruby Ridge could have been stopped before it started if Randy Weaver had just turned himself in on his warrant. A warrant that should never had been issued, granted. They changed his court date and suspiciously "forgot" to tell him. When his new court date passed, a warrant was issued. However he knew of the warrant and the authorities had communicated with him threw his lawyer. If he had turned himself in like he was told to, his wife and child would still be alive.

That doesn't make what happened right, but it was avoidable.

 

What I said about the original purpose of citizen armament, and the formation of militia, being an outdated ideal was true. We cannot, as citizens, arm ourselves to a point whereas we can pose a substantial defense against our government. To combat American government forces we would need rocket launchers, tanks, ground to air missiles, hundreds of thousands of rounds of armor piercing bullets, gas masks, .50 cal machine guns, fighter jets, helicopters and so on.

 

All of these things did not exist when the right to bear arms was extended.

 

In those days it was not only conceivable for a citizen militia to effectively combat the government. We (meaning the revolutionist) had just done exactly that.

 

Ruby ridge was a shining example of abuse of power by the local and federal authorities. That being said, do you honestly fucking think ruby ridge could have been anything but a tragedy for the victims, no matter what armaments they had at their disposal?

 

In the spirit of the original post topic of this thread, lets think about what happened at VA tech. If the gunman had spent more time, effort and money investing in his slaughter, he would have been smart (smart in this case meaning crazy) to acquire several 50 round clips to load into an SKS or AK-47. Had he done this, which could have been done under the current laws with 100% legality, he would have made the body count soar into astounding numbers. 32 people woulda been a slow start with a weapon and round like that.

 

Assault weapons SHOULD be banned. The people that try to say otherwise, and that own these weapons, in reality only like them as a toy, and they don't want their toy taken away. No matter what the risk.

 

If I went nutty I could go to the mall on a Saturday afternoon and kill 30 people with my 45 cal handgun. If I went all nutty and grabbed my dads AK-47, I could go to that same mall, on the same day, at the same time and kill 200 people no fucking problem. Frankly, I'm shocked that a tragedy of this magnitude hasn't occurred yet.

[hugo]

What I said about the original purpose of citizen armament, and the formation of militia, being an outdated ideal was true. We cannot, as citizens, arm ourselves to a point whereas we can pose a substantial defense against our government.

 

Someone needs to tell the insurgents in Iraq this.

[Jhony5]

Someone needs to tell the insurgents in Iraq this.

 

Here we go with the paranoid ideas that are responsible for flooding our streets with countless thousands of military grade weapons. Weapons that will never be needed to crush our oppressive government. Its thinking like this that has blurred the line between whats proper for self-defense, and whats needed for waging war against our own government.

 

Ironically its thinking like this that has drawn a hard line with two sides. One side for the full legalization of any and all firearms. One side for an all out abolishment of firearms altogether. No happy medium. Because there is no middle ground, it is inevitable that what will prevail is the further weakening of our society, as we continue this trend toward the left.

 

If both sides fight a reasonable approach toward gun legislation, we will inevitably have an unreasonable approach toward gun legislation. By fighting the banishment of unnecessary assault rifles and the like, the end result will be no guns at all. Just like Australia.

 

If you push too hard for too much, you will end up with nothing. Its like the fable of the dog that saw his reflection in the water below, and dropped his bone, hoping to grab the bigger one.

 

So go ahead. Join the NRA. Join the fight to keep assault riffles legal so we can defend ourselves from the government. The end is near, or at least thats what people like you have been saying for over 200 years. Any day now we will need these weapons to fight our oppressive government. Any day now, they've said, for over 200 years.

 

 

 

.........and BTW, most, and I mean MOST of the casualties inflicted upon the occupying forces in Iraq, are by way of improvised explosives. Not assault riffles.

[hugo]

Yes, amazing how Iraqi insurgents are having so much succes mainly with guns and improvised explosives. I am sure Americans, under the stress of a tyrannical government, could do the same. Jhony seems to think we have no need for a constitution. Our society is so advanced that we no longer need a constitution. Actually, we have been losing rights for nearly a hundred years thanks to unconstitutional laws. We had to pass an amendment to prohibit alcohol... why are federal drug laws constitutional? The simple answer is they are not under any rational interpretation of our constitution. Due to the destruction of our constitution no longer is a man free to choose what he does with his own body. Due to the destruction of the constitution..no longer do whites and asians have equal protection under the law. Due to the destruction of the constitution...your home can be taken on a whim. Government tyranny is already here. Let us keep our weapons.

[Jhony5]

Jhony seems to think we have no need for a constitution.

You made quite a jump there. I said we have no need for assault rifles. Should we be allowed to carry hand grenades and rocket launchers too? I mean, we could really use them for the impending revolution.

 

Actually, we have been losing rights for nearly a hundred years thanks to unconstitutional laws. We had to pass an amendment to prohibit alcohol... why are federal drug laws constitutional?

All true. None of this has any bearing on the subject of assault riffles. Like I said above, is the ban on private ownership of rocket launchers and grenades unconstitutional in your purview? There has to be a limit to what power the average joe can wield.

 

I fully agree with you on several of these issues regarding the molestation of our inherent rights. Flat out, they didn't have assault riffles and surface to air missiles when the Constitution was drafted. When they insisted upon our right to bear arms, I don't think they would have thought it wise for schizophrenics to own AK-47's.

[hugo]

I suspect our founders would have locked the nutcases up and allowed the rest of us to have our assault rifles. There is a point where a significant state interest exists to allow infringement on individual rights guaranteed in the constitution. I believe laws prohibiting child porn are constitutional despite their infringement on freedom of the press. I can support banning grenades, rocket launchers and WMD's in the hands of individuals.There have been very few incidences involving assault rifles, banning lightening strikes would save more lives.

[RegisteredAndEducated]

jhony

 

Sounds like we're finding some middle ground. Given the entrenched gun culture in the US, and the massive number of weapons, probably the best that can be hoped for is a minimisation of damage by tighter regulations on the types of weapons available.

 

A ban on assault rifles, automatic weapons etc would be a good start, and might help stop some of mass killings that society wants stopped.

 

 

I don't remember hearing anything about assault weapons used in the mass killings. If I recall, most people just use regular weapons with some sort of skill or control. I agree that assault weapons should probably not be allowed in the hands of the general public, but I also dont see any facts that prove that they are used in the mass murder of American lives.

[snafu]

If I want a full auto weapon I see no reason that I can't. We have strong laws for this in place already. They don't need to be any stronger. And they need to get educated about what an assault rifle is. I can't put a bayonet om my mini 14 or it becomes an assault rifle. This shows you the level of intelligence here.

[hugo]

I modified my cell phone to turn it into an assault cell phone.