Why the Anti Gun Mentality?

[Wild Cobra]

Seriously. I am a person who grew up with guns. I learned to respect them, and how to use use them responsibly.

Why? Why do people think they should be eliminated from society?

Is is the ignorance of people who never learned their responsibly?

Is it that criminal element want to keep guns out of legal owners?

What is it?

[Blake]

Hey straw, who exactly wants to get rid of guns?

[Th'Pusher]

Eliminated from society :lol

[Oh, Gee!!]

Is is the ignorance of people who never learned their responsibly?



Is English your first language? Serious question.

[silverblk mystix]

OP seemed sincere - why all the instant bs?


I can't answer the op's question - because I don't want guns banned - but it seems like a sincere and legitimate thread topic. Why the instant shitty treatment?

[silverblk mystix]

OP seemed sincere - why all the instant bs?


I can't answer the op's question - because I don't want guns banned - but it seems like a sincere and legitimate thread topic. Why the instant shitty treatment?

[TeyshaBlue]

OP seemed sincere - why all the instant bs?


I can't answer the op's question - because I don't want guns banned - but it seems like a sincere and legitimate thread topic. Why the instant shitty treatment?

Serendipity stopped by to provide us with our daily supplement of Vitamin I. Sometimes that makes us giddy.

[ChumpDumper]

The OP was made entirely of straw.

[mrsmaalox]

Serendipity stopped by to provide us with our daily supplement of Vitamin I. Sometimes that makes us giddy.

:lol

[silverblk mystix]

Serendipity stopped by to provide us with our daily supplement of Vitamin I. Sometimes that makes us giddy.

Always us against them - what is the purpose anymore in this place- every section has someone vs. someone and as soon as someone posts something the other group can only see through their prejudiced lenses.

Clique vs. clique.

[Woo Bum-kon]

Always us against them - what is the purpose anymore in this place- every section has someone vs. someone and as soon as someone posts something the other group can only see through their prejudiced lenses.

Clique vs. clique.

And sbm brings out his faux-enlightenment schtick again. Now he will go back to SA210 thread and call Chump a homo and Blake a cuck.

[TeyshaBlue]

Always us against them - what is the purpose anymore in this place- every section has someone vs. someone and as soon as someone posts something the other group can only see through their prejudiced lenses.

Clique vs. clique.

lol always.
lol cliques.

Hint: A forum about politics and religion, etc, will engender debate. You don't debate because you agree with something. http://homerecording.com/bbs/images/smilies/facepalm.gif

[silverblk mystix]

And sbm brings out his faux-enlightenment schtick again. Now he will go back to SA210 thread and call Chump a homo and Blake a cuck.


Relax snapperhead - Just look around - someone posts anything - and all that matters is which team he is on and let the sniping begin.

Maybe it is confirming what I said - programming. You can never see what anyone says - just what your memory and pre-judgement of him/her tells you - BEFORE - even reading anything. So all we have is little flame wars - cliques vs cliques.

Boring.

[jjktkk]

I grew up with guns as well. But the gov. needs to find some way to make it tougher for anyone to obtain assault weapons. easier said than done though.

[silverblk mystix]

lol always.
lol cliques.

Hint: A forum about politics and religion, etc, will engender debate. You don't debate because you agree with something. http://homerecording.com/bbs/images/smilies/facepalm.gif


Precisely my point - how can there be a debate?

Take this thread for example - a legitimate question/topic is raised - but no-one has even bothered to state their p.o.v - all anyone did was flame away...

This isn't even the beginning of a political debate....

[silverblk mystix]

I grew up with guns as well. But the gov. needs to find some way to make it tougher for anyone to obtain assault weapons. easier said than done though.


Hey, there is one. Excellent point. I agree - now as far as what the OP said - anyone that wants guns banned -- what is the thinking there?

Just curious...

[Woo Bum-kon]

and all that matters is which team he is on and let the sniping begin.


Which is exactly what you did in the other thread, hypocrite. You should just stop posting, because your schtick is getting tired.

[LnGrrrR]

Hey, there is one. Excellent point. I agree - now as far as what the OP said - anyone that wants guns banned -- what is the thinking there?

Just curious...

I'm guessing that it's to prevent an easy way to kill a large amount of people in a short amount of time. I'm guessing that if bazookas were legal and widespread, we'd be hearing about people with anti-bazooka mentalities. (Except, you know, guns are easier to hide.)

[jjktkk]

Hey, there is one. Excellent point. I agree - now as far as what the OP said - anyone that wants guns banned -- what is the thinking there?

Just curious...

Op probably sees all the recent tragedies involving guns, and overreacts about gun control. Not realizing that the bad guys will still have all the access to any kind of guns.

[Blake]

Hey, there is one. Excellent point. I agree - now as far as what the OP said - anyone that wants guns banned -- what is the thinking there?

Just curious...


Hey straw, who exactly wants to get rid of guns?

I know this whole civil debate thing is foreign to you, but you have to cut through the crap first in order to actually debate something.

Wild Cobra propped up what is called a "straw man" to attack. This particular straw man is wearing a t shirt knitted by WC that says "I am anti-gun."

Since the straw man can't talk, and nobody here is anti-gun, there is no debate.

Pretty neat, huh.

[Th'Pusher]

Precisely my point - how can there be a debate?

Take this thread for example - a legitimate question/topic is raised - but no-one has even bothered to state their p.o.v - all anyone did was flame away...

This isn't even the beginning of a political debate....
The op did not have a legitimate question/topic. There are no fewer than 5 different threads debating the merit of gun control. If the op wanted to know why some members are for additional gun control, all he needs to do is read those threads to derive his answer.

[Th'Pusher]

Hey, there is one. Excellent point. I agree - now as far as what the OP said - anyone that wants guns banned -- what is the thinking there?

Just curious...
Not even buttons wants guns banned.

[silverblk mystix]

Op probably sees all the recent tragedies involving guns, and overreacts about gun control. Not realizing that the bad guys will still have all the access to any kind of guns.

I agree with maybe some people thinking that - I can't speak for the OP or assume this is his - but there must be other valid reasons why someone thinks banning is the answer.

[silverblk mystix]

The op did not have a legitimate question/topic. There are no fewer than 5 different threads debating the merit of gun control. If the op wanted to know why some members are for additional gun control, all he needs to do is read those threads to derive his answer.


So just shit on any thread that doesn't meet YOUR criteria. Isn't that tiring?

Oh well - you can have this one - I will go elsewhere.

[TeyshaBlue]

Precisely my point - how can there be a debate?

Take this thread for example - a legitimate question/topic is raised - but no-one has even bothered to state their p.o.v - all anyone did was flame away...

This isn't even the beginning of a political debate....

You need to revisit the concept of legitimate quesion/topic. Generally, these are not made of straw as was WC's ascertation that *somebody* wants weapons eliminated from society.
The bonus was labeling people as ignorant while simultaneously mangling the English language.
Boutonesque in the layers and quirky duality of vapidity.

[silverblk mystix]

You need to revisit the concept of legitimate quesion/topic. Generally, these are not made of straw as was WC's ascertation that *somebody* wants weapons eliminated from society.
The bonus was labeling people as ignorant while simultaneously mangling the English language.
Boutonesque in the layers and quirky duality of vapidity.


Fair enough. I didn't read that much into any motives - I took it on the surface - and didn't feel it was that loaded.

[Blake]

I agree with maybe some people thinking that - I can't speak for the OP or assume this is his - but there must be other valid reasons why someone thinks banning is the answer.

so you still want to ask the straw man why he is anti gun.

Of course you do.

[silverblk mystix]

so you still want to ask the straw man why he is anti gun.

Of course you do.

I am asking IF there are people who want guns banned - THEN - I wouldn't mind hearing some GOOD reasons why they think banning is a solution - or whatever...

Who cares if there is a straw man - if SOMEONE wants to step up and give some solid reasons - what is the harm in hearing them?

Nothing - you just like to bitch about something.

[ElNono]

talk about jumping the gun :lol

[Blake]

I am asking IF there are people who want guns banned - THEN - I wouldn't mind hearing some GOOD reasons why they think banning is a solution - or whatever...

Who cares if there is a straw man - if SOMEONE wants to step up and give some solid reasons - what is the harm in hearing them?

Nothing - you just like to bitch about something.

The OP didn't say "if there are". He said there are.

I asked him to clarify right from the start. The only one bitching here is you, pussy.

[Blake]

talk about jumping the gun :lol

I'm definitely against pun control

[spursncowboys]

I grew up with guns as well. But the gov. needs to find some way to make it tougher for anyone to obtain assault weapons. easier said than done though.
There is no such thing as assault weapons

[jjktkk]

There is no such thing as assault weapons

Oops. Good catch. Meant to say automatic assault rifles.

[Blake]

There is no such thing as assault weapons

silly semantics.

[FuzzyLumpkins]

silly semantics.

They have to use semantic games because they don't want to use the word semi-auto.

Ban semi-autos. Make selling a gun without a background check a felony without exception. Require registration of all firearms purchases.

[spursncowboys]

If you are for banning semi automatics, fine. Your opinion. But atleast understand what a semi automatic is. Also look into the percentage of semi automatic models being sold right now. I would agree it is semantics. but assault rifles is a media made idea of what ar stands for. Now it has been coined.

[FuzzyLumpkins]

If you are for banning semi automatics, fine. Your opinion. But atleast understand what a semi automatic is. Also look into the percentage of semi automatic models being sold right now. I would agree it is semantics. but assault rifles is a media made idea of what ar stands for. Now it has been coined.

I think it was the 1994 act that codified it. That is because they didn't want to use the word 'semi-auto' which cuts through all the bullshit. I am of the school of thought that if you are going to do something then you need to do it right. The way they do shit now, you might as well do nothing at all. The gunshow exception is a travesty.

[spursncowboys]

I think it was the 1994 act that codified it. That is because they didn't want to use the word 'semi-auto' which cuts through all the bullshit. I am of the school of thought that if you are going to do something then you need to do it right. The way they do shit now, you might as well do nothing at all. The gunshow exception is a travesty.
But try and look at it from my POV. I bought a $400 glock off a buddy for $200. What you want is for him to sell the gun for $100 and I would buy it for $600. Meanwhile criminals would still be buying guns on the black market. I carry a gun for the 'just in case' but mostly just like going out and shooting them. Why should I pay more so some people can pat themselves on the back and not even follow it to see if it was successful?
Feingold wants to put in a provision that law enforcement and ex law enforcement gets to have all guns that no one else will... Now why?? Well it's so her rich friends and herself can pay for security that will be able to have those weapons. You seem sincere about this. But you should really focus more on what they are creating rather than the fact that they are making a law.

Most guns are semiautomatic.

[TSA]

Ban semi-autos. Make selling a gun without a background check a felony without exception. Require registration of all firearms purchases.
Agree with your second two suggestions but the first is laughable. You realize your proposed semi-auto ban would include just about every shotgun, rifle, pistol and revolver currently in production correct?

[TSA]

But try and look at it from my POV. I bought a $400 glock off a buddy for $200. What you want is for him to sell the gun for $100 and I would buy it for $600. Meanwhile criminals would still be buying guns on the black market. I carry a gun for the 'just in case' but mostly just like going out and shooting them. Why should I pay more so some people can pat themselves on the back and not even follow it to see if it was successful?
Feingold wants to put in a provision that law enforcement and ex law enforcement gets to have all guns that no one else will... Now why?? Well it's so her rich friends and herself can pay for security that will be able to have those weapons. You seem sincere about this. But you should really focus more on what they are creating rather than the fact that they are making a law.

Most guns are semiautomatic.

You realize you're debating a guy who own a firearm yet wants to ban everyone else's right?

[FuzzyLumpkins]

But try and look at it from my POV. I bought a $400 glock off a buddy for $200. What you want is for him to sell the gun for $100 and I would buy it for $600. Meanwhile criminals would still be buying guns on the black market. I carry a gun for the 'just in case' but mostly just like going out and shooting them. Why should I pay more so some people can pat themselves on the back and not even follow it to see if it was successful?
Feingold wants to put in a provision that law enforcement and ex law enforcement gets to have all guns that no one else will... Now why?? Well it's so her rich friends and herself can pay for security that will be able to have those weapons. You seem sincere about this. But you should really focus more on what they are creating rather than the fact that they are making a law.

Most guns are semiautomatic.

As someone that is familiar with the 'black market' from my younger days, it's not as easy as people like you would make it out to be. It's why you do not see a rash of automatic weapons coming off the black market.

Do you think you could not protect yourself with a pump action shot gun, revolver, bolt action or breachload? Honestly?

And gmb. Making up shit about the intention of Feinstein or anyone else is laughable. Why not complain about cops being able to use automatics? or tear gas?

I understand what they are creating. I don't think it will work because its halfassed. Like I said: if you are going to do something then you should do it right. I t may take decades like it did in England and other locations in post ww2 europe to get all of the guns out of circulation but I believe it is worth doing.

[FuzzyLumpkins]

You realize you're debating a guy who own a firearm yet wants to ban everyone else's right?

You still fantasizing about me with you on a beach and what possessions I have? You really should stop, it's obsessive at this point.

[TSA]

You still fantasizing about me with you on a beach and what possessions I have? You really should stop, it's obsessive at this point.

I'm just saving spursncowboys time in this debate by letting him know you are a hypocritical gun owner, Mr. Kundu.

[spursncowboys]

As someone that is familiar with the 'black market' from my younger days, it's not as easy as people like you would make it out to be. It's why you do not see a rash of automatic weapons coming off the black market. Well I bought a sk for $300 as a 16 year old and could of bought a mac 11 but didn't have $600. The "black market" isn't an actual market. It's the idea of people buying and selling stolen stuff.


Do you think you could not protect yourself with a pump action shot gun, revolver, bolt action or breachload? Honestly? I love revolvers. Yes I could carry a revolver. bolt action? Do you know what that means? Bolt action is for rifles for accuracy and range. The point is 1. I don't think these laws will fix the problems being brought up for the law 2. Think the unintended consequences are far worse than any projected amount of positive gain 3. Think banning semi automatics is a violations of the 2nd Amendment


And gmb. Making up shit about the intention of Feinstein or anyone else is laughable. Why not complain about cops being able to use automatics? or tear gas? Feinstein carried a gun. Chances are she would want to have it around for protection. The law states that ex cops are allowed. Not just cops. When Cornyn wanted to put veterans and military, she didn't want to because of PTSD.


I understand what they are creating. I don't think it will work because its halfassed. Like I said: if you are going to do something then you should do it right. I t may take decades like it did in England and other locations in post ww2 europe to get all of the guns out of circulation but I believe it is worth doing.
What does 'do it right' mean? Go after all guns?

[FuzzyLumpkins]

It's funny. At least half the arguments currently by the NRA propaganda machine are about trying to paint proponents as hypocrites. Show pictures of Feinstein and Obama's security details and the like. It's a red herring. The argument for gun control efficacy is the argument for gun control efficacy. Ad hominem is ad hominem.

I don't see much in the department of empirical studies. What I see are roadblocks to empirical studies and anti-intellectualism.

And there have been all types of weapons bans held up. What is illegal is confiscation without use of the gun in crime. If this was not the case we could have artillery and LAWs. They can ban weapons types and as I said you can protect yourself without semi-automatic weapons.

And do it right means make meaningful definitions based on industry standards as to what is banned ie semi-automatic. Do not give room for loopholes and certainly do not legislate loopholes. Commit to the policy long term.

[TSA]

If you want to talk the talk, walk the walk. Turn your firearm in, Kundu.

[Wild Cobra]

For those you you who want to mandate registration.

Do you also agree with the people who say it's a right for everyone to know which residences have guns?

[Latarian Milton]

the fact of the matter is that a proposed gun prohibition will not make zero influence on the group of people who're most likely to commit crimes with their guns, since the thugs can always get their guns from illegal sources and commit crimes all they want. instead, gun prohibition will only disarm the innocent people, depriving them of the ability to protect themselves and leaving them more vulnerable to gun crimes. the only feasible way to reduce gun crimes is by giving more guns to good people, not taking their guns away imho

[Wild Cobra]

For those you you who want to mandate registration.

Do you also agree with the people who say it's a right for everyone to know which residences have guns?

[Drachen]

^^^ Isn't this info already freely available?

[Wild Cobra]

^^^ Isn't this info already freely available?
It shouldn't be. It makes their residences targets for crimes, to steal weapons.

[Drachen]

It shouldn't be. It makes their residences targets for crimes, to steal weapons.

Or it wards thieves off from their residences because they would rather not deal with a gun owner. I would think that this is far more likely since a thief can avoid getting shot steal some other stuff and sell it and if he needs one it is pretty easy to get a gun.

[Wild Cobra]

Or it wards thieves off from their residences because they would rather not deal with a gun owner. I would think that this is far more likely since a thief can avoid getting shot steal some other stuff and sell it and if he needs one it is pretty easy to get a gun.
It depends on how much a residence can be covertly monitored and consistency of the residences being away. Such information shouldn't be available to others.

[spurraider21]

OP has a valid point, not sure what all the bitching is about.

Adding additional screens/filters/background checks, etc would be better than banning the sale of guns altogether. Some jackoff crazy enough to go on a killing spree isn't going to avoid guns because they're illegal lol. The last thing he cares about is legality

[101A]

lol always.
lol cliques.

Hint: A forum about politics and religion, etc, will engender debate. You don't debate because you agree with something. http://homerecording.com/bbs/images/smilies/facepalm.gif

Yes, you do.

[TeyshaBlue]

No, you don't.

[TeyshaBlue]

http://i3.photobucket.com/albums/y64/teyshablue/arguing2.gif:lol

[101A]

YES, YOU DO!!!