Gun Control

[KenMcCoy]

I didn't move the talk to fireworks -- but here we are.

Do you still stand with your proposal to limit/license guns like we do cars?

[pgardn]

There is no constitutional right to fireworks...cities are allowed to enact these bans.

Are 50 caliber machine guns, guns?
Are battle ships guns, guns.
Are cannons guns? Mortars?

[pgardn]

Do you still stand with your proposal to limit/license guns like we do cars?

So you could own a tank. It's got a gun of sorts. Just need what kinda license...

[KenMcCoy]

Are 50 caliber machine guns, guns?
Are battle ships guns, guns.
Are cannons guns? Mortars?

I'm pretty sure you can still own a .50 cal machine gun if it was manufactured before 1986.

[Pavlov]

Do you still stand with your proposal to limit/license guns like we do cars?No. I propose we limit and license them like the killing instruments they are since they are so unlike cars the comparison is laughable.

Thanks for changing my mind.:tu

[pgardn]

I'm pretty sure you can still own a .50 cal machine gun if it was manufactured before 1986.

Mortar?
Cannon?

[KenMcCoy]

So you could own a tank. It's got a gun of sorts. Just need what kinda license...

Tank cannons are classified different...as a destructive device instead of "arms."

But...you can own a tank with an inoperable cannon if you want :)

http://www.guns.com/2015/08/25/want-to-buy-a-tank/

[Blake]

Mortar?
Cannon?

Nuke?

[Blake]

There is no constitutional right to fireworks...cities are allowed to enact these bans.

Oh look who moved the goalpost now

[pgardn]

Tank cannons are classified different...as a destructive device instead of "arms."

But...you can own a tank with an inoperable cannon if you want :)

http://www.guns.com/2015/08/25/want-to-buy-a-tank/


So who gets to decide a 50 caliber machine gun is classified as arms?
You understand the point of going thru the same basic device. A weapon that uses pressure to fire a projectile. Where is the line drawn...

[ElNono]

There's actually no constitutional impediment to regulating weapons, as long as it doesn't deprive the individual from personal protection (according to the SCOTUS).

The SCOTUS specifically singled out certain shotguns that are popular for personal protection, but that was the bar they set.

That's why nukes are indeed banned.

Just like any other constitutional right, they're not absolute (something I discussed with DMC, IIRC). Even the 1st amendment has certain regulations applied to it.

[KenMcCoy]

Oh look who moved the goalpost now

So are you OK with a ban of AR15s only within city limits of major metropolitan areas which adopt the ban? People living outside the jurisdictional limits of a city could still own operate on their own land? Or on a gun range outside the City?

[Pavlov]

I'm pretty sure you can still own a .50 cal machine gun if it was manufactured before 1986.Well that isn't like owning a car at all!

Wow!

[Pavlov]

So are you OK with a ban of AR15s only within city limits of major metropolitan areas which adopt the ban? People living outside the jurisdictional limits of a city could still own operate on their own land? Or on a gun range outside the City?If it's really dry and windy just ban guns altogether.

[pgardn]

There's actually no constitutional impediment to regulating weapons, as long as it doesn't deprive the individual from personal protection (according to the SCOTUS).

The SCOTUS specifically singled out certain shotguns that are popular for personal protection, but that was the bar they set.

That's why nukes are indeed banned.

Just like any other constitutional right, they're not absolute (something I discussed with DMC, IIRC). Even the 1st amendment has certain regulations applied to it.

Bar? Certain shot guns... because they spray projectiles... It's basically a mess.

[Blake]

So are you OK with a ban of AR15s only within city limits of major metropolitan areas which adopt the ban? People living outside the jurisdictional limits of a city could still own operate on their own land? Or on a gun range outside the City?

No, the point was sensible people regulated fireworks.

Unless you were actually trying to directly compare guns to fireworks.

[KenMcCoy]

Well that isn't like owning a car at all!

Wow!

How is that not like a car? All cars manufactured today have to meet certain requirements, but you can still own older cars that don't meet those requirements.

The gov't didn't ban civilians owning machine guns, they just banned gun makers from making them for civilian use after 1986.

Do you still want guns to be licensed/registered the same as cars?

[AaronY]

974363527216541698

[spurraider21]

regulating guns like we regulate cars doesn't necessarily mean that they have to be identical regulations

[Pavlov]

How is that not like a car? All cars manufactured today have to meet certain requirements, but you can still own older cars that don't meet those requirements.

The gov't didn't ban civilians owning machine guns, they just banned gun makers from making them for civilian use after 1986.We can just get the government to ban the making of all new guns?

That's a start.

You're full of great gun control ideas!


Do you still want guns to be licensed/registered the same as cars?Asked and answered.

[Blake]

regulating guns like we regulate cars doesn't necessarily mean that they have to be identical regulations

Yeah but dem vehicle bump stocks tho

[KenMcCoy]

Asked and answered.

Missed that. :tu

Glad I could change your mind. My work is done :)

[boutons_deux]

regulating guns like we regulate cars doesn't necessarily mean that they have to be identical regulations

Nope, gun regs to be more severe than cars but plenty of similariry

[DMC]

So you could own a tank. It's got a gun of sorts. Just need what kinda license...

You actually can own a tank. It's just a vehicle.

[pgardn]

People do not own 50 caliber machine guns for personal protection. Unless they own them before 1980 something. So now we got automatics of any type bought because people want to collect stuff.

Its still a mess. The gun people know.

Ask them if they wanted to do as "well" as Vegas guy, what type of weapon(s) they would buy currently available and how they would use them? Then we get a response of renting a gasoline transport truck and driving it off a bridge onto traffic stacked on a freeway below at rush hour.

[AaronY]

A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.

"Arms" is pretty vague, tbh, unless specifically pointing to the human body. I mean, outside of fresh air, almost anything can be used as a weapon under the right circumstances.

Would be cool to see somebody challenge car insurance/registration/titles under a 2nd Amendment claim, just as sort of reverse test of the 2nd Amendment.
"well regulated"

http://christiantietze.de/posts/2016/05/emoji-bytes-lost/201605031815_hmm.png

[DMC]

Yeah but dem vehicle bump stocks tho

Search for the term "bump stock" on this site prior to the Vegas shooting. None of you ever heard of it. Now it's the most evil thing ever. You can do the same thing just by wrapping a finger from the trigger hand around a belt loop while shooting the gun.

[DMC]

People do not own 50 caliber machine guns for personal protection. Unless they own them before 1980 something. So now we got automatics of any type bought because people want to collect stuff.

Its still a mess. The gun people know.

Ask them if they wanted to do as "well" as Vegas guy, what type of weapon(s) they would buy currently available and how they would use them? Then we get a response of renting a gasoline transport truck and driving it off a bridge onto traffic stacked on a freeway below at rush hour.

Oh that's easy: Nerve gas. Just set it off in the middle of that crowd and no one leaves. Or one person with Ebola virus making physical contact with everyone they come into contact with at a concert.

The gas truck would kill maybe 20 people, maybe.

[pgardn]

You actually can own a tank. It's just a vehicle.

Then this is the vehicle you want to ram/smash crowds with. A fast one.

[pgardn]

Oh that's easy: Nerve gas. Just set it off in the middle of that crowd and no one leaves.

And there ya go.
Only thing is procuring the right stuff. You try to get the right chemicals to even make one and you will get a visit from ATF. Chemists know this. Or kids that wanna play on the Internet. Their parents gonna get a surprise.

[TSA]

"well regulated"

http://christiantietze.de/posts/2016/05/emoji-bytes-lost/201605031815_hmm.png

https://www.lectlaw.com/files/gun01.htm

[DMC]

Then this is the vehicle you want to ram/smash crowds with. A fast one.

No. You don't have the ability to get there undetected and it's too expensive for the type of person who is willing to die to kill a few people.

You just use a big panel truck, and you have some explosives rigged in cars nearby. When the initial event has come to a conclusion and the emergency response guys are onsite along with news and bystanders, you detonate the next wave. That will bring more emergency folks. Then you snipe.

Of course, you'd have to be better at planning than the seemingly spur of the moment shit we see these days. The 911 attack is a good example of a plan to kill a lot of people, except the buildings were basically empty, sort of.

[Blake]

Search for the term "bump stock" on this site prior to the Vegas shooting. None of you ever heard of it. Now it's the most evil thing ever. You can do the same thing just by wrapping a finger from the trigger hand around a belt loop while shooting the gun.

That sounds inconvenient.

let's help the shooter out that's having to wrap fingers around belt loops by manufacturing easy to use bump stocks

[DMC]

And there ya go.
Only thing is procuring the right stuff. You try to get the right chemicals to even make one and you will get a visit from ATF. Chemists know this. Or kids that wanna play on the Internet. Their parents gonna get a surprise.

It's a byproduct. Any decent chemist can make it.

[Blake]

No. You don't have the ability to get there undetected and it's too expensive for the type of person who is willing to die to kill a few people.

You just use a big panel truck, and you have some explosives rigged in cars nearby. When the initial event has come to a conclusion and the emergency response guys are onsite along with news and bystanders, you detonate the next wave. That will bring more emergency folks. Then you snipe.

Of course, you'd have to be better at planning than the seemingly spur of the moment shit we see these days. The 911 attack is a good example of a plan to kill a lot of people, except the buildings were basically empty, sort of.

Too complicated.

Let's get these guys some bump stocking ar15's instead.

[pgardn]

Oh that's easy: Nerve gas. Just set it off in the middle of that crowd and no one leaves. Or one person with Ebola virus making physical contact with everyone they come into contact with at a concert.

The gas truck would kill maybe 20 people, maybe.

So you visit Africa and pick a guy up and pay him? Dont you think you could get or make an automatic weapon easier and do Vegas guy?

[pgardn]

It's a byproduct. Any decent chemist can make it.

So you got a decent chemist to buy to help you? Or maybe you just look it up on the Internet and give it a go alone? I think you can get a gun easier and be far more effective.

[DMC]

So you visit Africa and pick a guy up and pay him? Dont you think you could get or make an automatic weapon easier and do Vegas guy?

People can run, and that will reduce your numbers significantly if you're going to use bullets.

Most of you have never fired an automatic weapon. Go do so, tell me how accurate you were. There's a reason teams use single fire or burst fire instead of full auto for actual targets. Dude in Vegas fired how many rounds and hit how many people? One RPG down the middle probably does as much damage if not more.

[DMC]

So you got a decent chemist to buy to help you? Or maybe you just look it up on the Internet and give it a go alone? I think you can get a gun easier and be far more effective.

Are you saying the perp cannot be a decent chemist?

[pgardn]

Its still a mess. The gun people know.

Ask them if they wanted to do as "well" as Vegas guy, what type of weapon(s) they would buy currently available and how they would use them? Then we get a response of renting a gasoline transport truck and driving it off a bridge onto traffic stacked on a freeway below at rush hour.

And I predicted this.
All the other hypotheticals that are much more difficult to obtain the equipment and carry out the act.

[pgardn]

Are you saying the perp cannot be a decent chemist?

I am saying you personally are not a decent chemist.
You have to do better than Vegas guy.
What weapon and how? You have taken the most difficult paths, by far.

[pgardn]

People can run, and that will reduce your numbers significantly if you're going to use bullets.

Most of you have never fired an automatic weapon. Go do so, tell me how accurate you were. There's a reason teams use single fire or burst fire instead of full auto for actual targets. Dude in Vegas fired how many rounds and hit how many people? One RPG down the middle probably does as much damage if not more.

So how do you get an RPG?

And this is exactly why I am asking the gun people. Because you guys have the easiest way. You know this stuff. You don't know chemistry, you don't know biology, you know guns. Because people that do know chemistry, physics, and biology understand the difficulty of what you are proposing.

And then think of cases with people in a barrel. This is how our protection, police etc... must think. I hope they are anyway.

[Chris]

974387658469163008

[RandomGuy]

Oh that's easy: Nerve gas. Just set it off in the middle of that crowd and no one leaves. Or one person with Ebola virus making physical contact with everyone they come into contact with at a concert.

The gas truck would kill maybe 20 people, maybe.

http://archive.gosanangelo.com/Services/image.ashx?domain=www.gosanangelo.com&file=photo-propanefatal1205_6140140_ver1.0_640_480.jpg&resize=

Gasoline, or natural gas, if rigged to explode, would kill more than 20 on a crowded freeway. Flash burns reported from such things happen at large distances. If I remember correctly like 3rd degree burns over a block away.

HIGHLY exothermic reactions.

[RandomGuy]

Are you saying the perp cannot be a decent chemist?

Most terrorists tend to not be the stable type. One saving grace about terrorism. Hard to get a good education for people like that.

Not impossible, just unlikely.

[RandomGuy]

https://www.google.com/search?q=2nd+amendment+doest+mean+what+you+think+i t+does

Up until the NRA and gun manufacturers started pushing guns as the Solution To All Problems, we didn't used to think that unrestricted gun rights were what the framers intended.

The second amendment was put in place to allow states to have militias, to augment the Continental army.

That's it.

It doesn't give you the right to own guns, especially outside those militias.

[AaronY]

https://www.lectlaw.com/files/gun01.htm
Lol that was a waste of time. I see zero "well regulated" militias of private citizens in the us. Try and pretend you know of any now.

I see a bunch of kooks with guns tho

[boutons_deux]

https://www.google.com/search?q=2nd+amendment+doest+mean+what+you+think+i t+does

The second amendment was put in place to allow states to have militias, to augment the Continental army.

It doesn't give you the right to own guns, especially outside those militias.

no, the militias were in the 2nd Amendment to satisfy the fucking slave states and their slave-hunting, slave-oppressing posses.

Keller decision by the oligarchy SCOTUS 5 ACTIVIST-ly overrode, divorced "militias" and "rights to bear arms".

[FuzzyLumpkins]

... but they, and nothing else, are not sacredly protected by perversion of the 2nd Amendment.

There are regulations on speech and due process too.

[pgardn]

Most terrorists tend to not be the stable type. One saving grace about terrorism. Hard to get a good education for people like that.

Not impossible, just unlikely.

What a good education does in Science is to understand how difficult these things are and probability. Personally, I would use some sort of pipe bomb. No... And probably create a dud or blow myself apart first. And not meaning to brag, I know the biology-chemistry physics it would take for all this crazy shit people think they can do. You need experts. People can goof around and such but actually getting good at creating this stuff is hard. Most of the chemists I know are hydrocarbon guys. They know how to do hydrocarbon stuff. They could read up on how to make a decent nerve agent I'm sure, but even if crazy I know they would be more likely to kill themselves. Right now any of us could very easily create a chlorine gas device. But the amount of material, where you would place it, where it would disperse????? Very difficult. The bio stuf is hugely difficult. The guys who work with the really nasty viruses, bacteria are on a list. As are the chemists. And they ARE NOT necessarily experts in dispersal. You gotta be good and practiced. That's why killing the terrorist behind the bomb making is so important. They have experience and can teach others who must be capable. Knowlege, capability, materials, will... That's a very rare combination.

The point:

The guys on this site that know and have a lot of experience with guns could get something together much better than a noob like myself or most others. They would be the most effective at killing large numbers of people. Because they know the best devices, guns. You can just walk into a supermarket and buy ammonia and Chlorox. You can't go kill a large and large group of people with it. I doubt most people could even kill their wife with it. You can go into Home Depot and buy pipe fitting, nails (shrapnel) obtain elsewhere gunpowder and diesel, look on the Internet and then go try this. But, It's difficult. Practice, recipe, and then most likely hurt yourself. How to hide it? The noise.... The car examples are definitely the easiest for those who don't use a gun. But you run into bodies and other things. It's guns.

So again I ask the gun guys, what weapons and how? You guys know the best devices well. And they are available, already prepared. Piercing bodies with pieces of metal is much more effective than ramming people with a large hunk of metal plastic (car). "Put her in forward/reverse so we can run them down multiple times just to be sure"

Last attempt, I've asked this before.

[AaronY]

974387658469163008
Look everybody a rightwinger scoured the news and found something to be upset about!

[DMC]

I am saying you personally are not a decent chemist.
You have to do better than Vegas guy.
What weapon and how? You have taken the most difficult paths, by far.

Given same crowd, you could drive a semitruck through it at full speed.

Easy peasey

I thought you mean real shit.

[Chris]

Look everybody a rightwinger scoured the news and found something to be upset about!

That's right, keep scrolling. Doesn't affect you right?

[DMC]

So how do you get an RPG?

And this is exactly why I am asking the gun people. Because you guys have the easiest way. You know this stuff. You don't know chemistry, you don't know biology, you know guns. Because people that do know chemistry, physics, and biology understand the difficulty of what you are proposing.

And then think of cases with people in a barrel. This is how our protection, police etc... must think. I hope they are anyway.

lol I know chemistry and biology, not just HS teacher level shit.

[DMC]

http://archive.gosanangelo.com/Services/image.ashx?domain=www.gosanangelo.com&file=photo-propanefatal1205_6140140_ver1.0_640_480.jpg&resize=

Gasoline, or natural gas, if rigged to explode, would kill more than 20 on a crowded freeway. Flash burns reported from such things happen at large distances. If I remember correctly like 3rd degree burns over a block away.

HIGHLY exothermic reactions.

Sure, and if it was rigged with other caveats, even more. Crowded freeways don't hold nearly as many people per radius as a concert crowd or subway station.

[DMC]

What a good education does in Science is to understand how difficult these things are and probability. Personally, I would use some sort of pipe bomb. No... And probably create a dud or blow myself apart first. And not meaning to brag, I know the biology-chemistry physics it would take for all this crazy shit people think they can do. You need experts. People can goof around and such but actually getting good at creating this stuff is hard. Most of the chemists I know are hydrocarbon guys. They know how to do hydrocarbon stuff. They could read up on how to make a decent nerve agent I'm sure, but even if crazy I know they would be more likely to kill themselves. Right now any of us could very easily create a chlorine gas device. But the amount of material, where you would place it, where it would disperse????? Very difficult. The bio stuf is hugely difficult. The guys who work with the really nasty viruses, bacteria are on a list. As are the chemists. And they ARE NOT necessarily experts in dispersal. You gotta be good and practiced. That's why killing the terrorist behind the bomb making is so important. They have experience and can teach others who must be capable. Knowlege, capability, materials, will... That's a very rare combination.

The point:

The guys on this site that know and have a lot of experience with guns could get something together much better than a noob like myself or most others. They would be the most effective at killing large numbers of people. Because they know the best devices, guns. You can just walk into a supermarket and buy ammonia and Chlorox. You can't go kill a large and large group of people with it. I doubt most people could even kill their wife with it. You can go into Home Depot and buy pipe fitting, nails (shrapnel) obtain elsewhere gunpowder and diesel, look on the Internet and then go try this. But, It's difficult. Practice, recipe, and then most likely hurt yourself. How to hide it? The noise.... The car examples are definitely the easiest for those who don't use a gun. But you run into bodies and other things. It's guns.

So again I ask the gun guys, what weapons and how? You guys know the best devices well. And they are available, already prepared. Piercing bodies with pieces of metal is much more effective than ramming people with a large hunk of metal plastic (car). "Put her in forward/reverse so we can run them down multiple times just to be sure"

Last attempt, I've asked this before.

You can buy tannerite online. Simple detonator, some ball bearings...

It's not magic.

[koriwhat]

This is so fucking retarded. Tylenol is a drug with an actual purpose.

retarded comparison you say? an actual purpose you say?

tylenol was invented because we needed an easier way to cope with fever, aches, & pains. i'm sure we coped with all 3 prior to tylenol's inception.

Acetaminophen overdose is actually the leading cause for calls to Poison Control Centers across the US—more than 100,000 instances per year—and, each year, is responsible for: More than 56,000 emergency room visits. 2,600 hospitalizations. An estimated 458 deaths due to acute liver failure.Mar 26, 2014
Acetaminophen: More Dangerous Than You Ever Suspected
https://articles.mercola.com/sites/articles/archive/2014/.../acetaminophen-overdose.aspx


Guns were invented specifically because we needed an easier way to kill stuff.

do you eat with your hands? drink water from bottles? buy meat from the grocery store? etc... advancements of society are just that and the same goes for guns.

last time i checked they didn't have courses on how not to OD on tylenol, how not to plow over a crowd of people in your van, etc... but gun courses exist, licensing exists, safety's on guns exist, and good & bad people exist as well.

the gun debate isn't going anywhere until we start really looking at our mental makeup here in the states. we're so quick to jump on guns because that's the weapon the mentally ill choose more often to use in their murders. take the guns away and you still got fuck ups like below... BAMN!

http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/newpix/2018/03/13/21/4A29FB0000000578-0-image-a-26_1520977011058.jpg

[pgardn]

lol I know chemistry and biology, not just HS teacher level shit.

So you understood what you were proposing was ridiculously inefficient.

What type of gun?

Ar-15 or something else? And I suppose more than in case of jamming?

[DMC]

So you understood what you were proposing was ridiculously inefficient.

What type of gun?

Ar-15 or something else? And I suppose more than in case of jamming?

What did I propose that included a gun?

[pgardn]

You can buy tannerite online. Simple detonator, some ball bearings...

It's not magic.

Thats not even close to what you could do with a gun
Anyone? Help?

What gun? Multiple guns in case 1 jams?

[pgardn]

What did I propose that included a gun?

Nothing.

And none of them come close to a gun.

[Chris]

Here Are 8 Stubborn Facts on Gun Violence in America


http://dailysignal.com/wp-content/uploads/GunShop-1250x650.jpg



In the wake of the tragic murder of 17 innocent students and teachers at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, Florida, students, educators, politicians, and activists are searching for solutions to prevent future school shootings.

As emotions morph from grief to anger to resolve, it is vitally important to supply facts so that policymakers and professionals can fashion solutions based on objective data rather than well-intended but misguided emotional fixes.

Are there ways to reduce gun violence and school shootings? Yes, but only after objectively assessing the facts and working collaboratively to fashion commonsense solutions.

Here are eight stubborn facts to keep in mind about gun violence in America:

1.)Violent crime is down and has been on the decline for decades.

2.)The principal public safety concerns with respect to guns are suicides and illegally owned handguns, not mass shootings.

3.)A small number of factors significantly increase the likelihood that a person will be a victim of a gun-related homicide.

4.)Gun-related murders are carried out by a predictable pool of people.

5.)Higher rates of gun ownership are not associated with higher rates of violent crime.

6.)There is no clear relationship between strict gun control legislation and homicide or violent crime rates.

7.)Legally owned firearms are used for lawful purposes much more often than they are used to commit crimes or suicide.

8.)Concealed carry permit holders are not the problem, but they may be part of the solution.


Each of these facts is firmly based on empirical data. Here’s a deeper look.


1. America is relatively safe, and the trend is toward becoming safer.

According to the National Crime Victimization Survey, violent crime has been declining steadily since the early 1990s.

The 2011 homicide rate was almost half of the rate in 1991, and according to the Pew Research Center, the 2013 gun-related death rate was half of the rate in 1993.
The number of nonfatal firearm crimes committed in 2011 was one-sixth the number committed in 1993.

In the past few years, there have been minor increases in certain types of violent crimes, mainly in large metropolitan areas. However, these increases are nowhere near those seen in the 1990s and are largely related to gang activity.
It should be remembered that it takes at least three to five years of data to show true trend lines. It appears that the collective homicide toll for America’s 50 largest cities decreased modestly in 2017 after two consecutive years of increases.

2. The principal public safety concerns are suicides and illegally owned handguns.

According to the Pew Research Center, almost two-thirds of America’s annual gun deaths are suicides. Since 1981, when the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention began publishing data, gun suicides have outnumbered gun homicides. In 2010 alone, 19,392 Americans used guns to kill themselves.

Most gun-related crimes are carried out with illegally owned firearms—as much as 80 percent according to some estimates.

The FBI’s Uniform Crime Reports prove that the overwhelming majority of gun-related homicides are perpetrated with handguns, with rifles of any kind accounting for less than 3 percent of gun-related homicides. In 2013, 5,782 murders were committed by killers who used a handgun, compared to 285 committed by killers who used a rifle. The same holds true for 2012 (6,404 to 298); 2011 (6,251 to 332); 2010 (6,115 to 367); and 2009 (6,501 to 351).
More people are stabbed to death every year than are murdered with rifles.

A person is more likely to be bludgeoned to death with a blunt object or beaten to death with hands and feet than to be murdered with a rifle.

3. A small number of factors significantly increase the likelihood that a person will be a victim of a gun-related homicide.

Where do you live? Murders in the United States are very concentrated. According to the Crime Prevention Research Center, over 50 percent of murders occur in 2 percent of the nation’s 3,142 counties. Moreover, gun-related homicides are heavily concentrated in certain neighborhoods within those counties: 54 percent of U.S. counties had zero murders in 2014.

Who is your partner? According to a recent scholarly article in the Hastings Law Journal, people recently or currently involved in an abusive intimate relationship are much more likely to be victims of gun-related homicide than is the rest of the population, especially if the abuser possesses firearms.

Are you in a gang? According to the Department of Justice’s National Gang Center, particularly in urban areas, significant percentages of gun-related homicides (15 percent to 33 percent) are linked with gang and drug activity. Gang-related homicides are more likely to involve firearms than non-gang-related homicides are.

Are you a male between 15 and 34? The majority of standard gun murder victims are men between the ages of 15 and 34. Although black men make up roughly 7 percent of the population, they account for almost two-thirds of gun murder victims every year.

Women and children are more likely to be the victims of mass shootings and homicide-suicide shootings than they are to be the victims of a “typical” gun-related homicide.

4. The perpetration of gun-related murders is often carried out by predictable people.

According to studies, almost all mass public shooters have extensive histories of mental health issues (whether delusional/psychiatric or depression/anger), disturbing behaviors, or interpersonal violence.
Intimate partner conflict and domestic violence history are major risk factors for homicide-suicides, even for those not involving intimate partners.

Especially in urban areas, a small number of recidivist violent offenders are typically responsible for the majority of gun violence.

5. Higher rates of gun ownership are not associated with higher rates of violent crime.

Switzerland and Israel have much higher gun ownership rates than the United States but experience far fewer homicides and have much lower violent crime rates than many European nations with strict gun control laws.
While some will argue that the guns carried by Swiss and Israeli citizens are technically “owned” by the government in most cases, this does little to negate the fact that many citizens in those countries have ready access to firearms.

Canada is ranked 12th in the world for the number of civilian-owned guns per capita and reports one of the world’s lower homicide rates—but even then, some provinces have higher homicide rates than U.S. states with less restrictive laws and higher rates of gun ownership have.

Although many gun control advocates have noted that “right to carry” states tend to experience slight increases in violent crime, other studies have noted the opposite effect.

Higher rates of concealed carry permit holders are even more strongly associated with reduction in violent crime than are right-to-carry states. The probable reason for this is that right-to-carry studies often include “open carry” states, which have not been shown to correlate with more people actually carrying or even owning firearms. Rates of concealed carry permit holders are better indicators of the number of people who actually possess and carry firearms within a given population.

Further, as with most correlations, there are many other factors that can account for increases in concealed carry permits—including the fact that people who live in already dangerous neighborhoods seek out means of self-defense. The Huffington Post noted that the rate of concealed carry permit requests in Chicago has soared in recent years after the city loosened restrictions, in large part, according to the Chicago Tribune, because law-abiding residents are increasingly worried about rising rates of violent crime in the city.

The rate of gun ownership is higher among whites than it is among African-Americans, but the murder rate among African-Americans is significantly higher than the rate among whites.
Similarly, the rate of gun ownership is higher in rural areas than in urban areas, but urban areas experience higher murder rates.

6. There is no clear relationship between strict gun control legislation and homicide or violent crime rates.

The Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence ironically makes this clear with its ratings for states based on gun laws. “Gun freedom” states that score poorly, like New Hampshire, Vermont, Idaho, and Oregon, have some of the lowest homicide rates. Conversely, “gun control-loving” states that received high scores, like Maryland and Illinois, experience some of the nation’s highest homicide rates.

The Crime Prevention Research Center notes that, if anything, the data indicate that countries with high rates of gun ownership tend to have lower homicide rates—but this is only a correlation, and many factors do not necessarily support a conclusion that high rates of gun ownership cause the low rates of homicide.

Homicide and firearm homicide rates in Great Britain spiked in the years immediately following the imposition of severe gun control measures, despite the fact that most developed countries continued to experience a downward trend in these rates. This is also pointed out by noted criminologist John Lott in his book “The War on Guns.”

Similarly, Ireland’s homicide rates spiked in the years immediately following the country’s 1972 gun confiscation legislation.

Australia’s National Firearms Act appears to have had little effect on suicide and homicide rates, which were falling before the law was enacted and continued to decline at a statistically unremarkable rate compared to worldwide trends.
According to research compiled by Lott and highlighted in his book “The War on Guns,” Australia’s armed and unarmed robbery rates both increased markedly in the five years immediately following the National Firearms Act, despite the general downward trend experienced by other developed countries.

Great Britain has some of the strictest gun control laws in the developed world, but the violent crime rate for homicide, rape, burglary, and aggravated assault is much higher than that in the U.S. Further, approximately 60 percent of burglaries in Great Britain occur while residents are home, compared to just 13 percent in the U.S., and British burglars admit to targeting occupied residences because they are more likely to find wallets and purses.

It is difficult to compare homicide and firearm-related murder rates across international borders because countries use different methods to determine which deaths “count” for purposes of violent crime. For example, since 1967, Great Britain has excluded from its homicide counts any case that does not result in a conviction, that was the result of dangerous driving, or in which the person was determined to have acted in self-defense. All of these factors are counted as “homicides” in the United States.

7. Legally owned firearms are used for lawful purposes much more often than they are used to commit crimes or suicide.

In 2013, President Barack Obama ordered the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention to assess existing research on gun violence. The report, compiled by the Institute of Medicine and the National Research Council, found (among other things) that firearms are used defensively hundreds of thousands of times every year.

According to the CDC, “self-defense can be an important crime deterrent.” Recent CDC reports acknowledge that studies directly assessing the effect of actual defensive uses of guns have found “consistently lower injury rates among gun-using crime victims compared with victims who used other self-protective strategies.”

Semi-automatic rifles (such as the AR-15) are commonly used as self-defense weapons in the homes of law-abiding citizens because they are easier to control than handguns, are more versatile than handguns, and offer the advantage of up to 30 rounds of protection. Even Vox has published stories defending the use of the AR-15.

AR-15s have been used to save lives on many occasions, including:

Oswego, Illinois (2018)—A man with an AR-15 intervened to stop a neighbor’s knife attack and cited the larger weapon’s “intimidation factor” as a reason why the attacker dropped the knife.

Catawba County, North Carolina (2018)—A 17-year-old successfully fought off three armed attackers with his AR-15.
Houston, Texas (2017)—A homeowner survived a drive-by shooting by defending himself with his AR-15.

Broken Arrow, Oklahoma (2017)—A homeowner’s son killed three would-be burglars with an AR-15 (the man was later deemed to have acted in justifiable self-defense).

Ferguson, Missouri (2014)—African-American men protected a white man’s store from rioters by standing outside armed with AR-15s.

Texas (2013)—A 15-year-old boy used an AR-15 during a home invasion to save both his life and that of his 12-year-old sister.

Rochester, New York (2013)—Home intruders fled after facing an AR-15.

8. Concealed carry permit holders are not the problem, but they may be part of the solution.

Lott found that, as a group, concealed carry permit holders are some of the most law-abiding people in the United States. The rate at which they commit crimes generally and firearm crimes specifically is between one-sixth and one-tenth of that recorded for police officers, who are themselves committing crimes at a fraction of the rate of the general population.

Between 2007 and 2015, murder rates dropped 16 percent and violent crime rates dropped 18 percent, even though the percentage of adults with concealed carry permits rose by 190 percent.
Regression estimates show a significant association between increased permit ownership and a drop in murder and violent crime rates. Each percentage point increase in rates of permit-holding is associated with a roughly 2.5 percent drop in the murder rate.

Concealed carry permit holders are often “the good guy with a gun,” even though they rarely receive the attention of the national media. Concealed carry permit holders were credited with saving multiple lives in:

Rockledge, Florida (2017);
Antioch, Tennessee (2017);
Arlington, Texas (2017);
Lyman, South Carolina (2016);
Winton Hills, Ohio (2015);
Conyers, Georgia (2015);
New Holland, South Carolina (2015);
Chicago, Illinois (2015);
Philadelphia, Pennsylvania (2015);
Darby, Pennsylvania (2015);
Chicago, Illinois (2014);
Portland, Oregon (2014);
Spartanburg, South Carolina (2012).

http://dailysignal.com/2018/03/14/here-are-8-stubborn-facts-on-gun-violence-in-america/


https://media0.giphy.com/media/3o7aCSDsne2usTBRwA/giphy.gif

[TeyshaBlue]

Guns are for lazy shits who don't want to be informed and involved. The best defense against tyranny is simply taking part in Democracy in an informed way.

This is not a mutually exclusive scenario, RG. Gun owners take part in Democracy in an informed way as well. You simply disagree with them and immediately raise the enlightened progressive derision force field.

"Captain, we've encountered a region of cognitive dissonance!"

"Quick, raise the "Lazy Shits" force field!"

[pgardn]

Thats not even close to what you could do with a gun
Anyone? Help?

What gun? Multiple guns in case 1 jams?

Where are CC and TSA?
I think these were gun dudes.
Just want to see if it aligns with what my gun dudes say.

[AaronY]

That's right, keep scrolling. Doesn't affect you right?
Lmao it doesnt affect you either!

Just like the trannies in the bathrooms and 90% of the other stuff you get upset about

[Blake]

"Quick, raise the "Lazy Shits" force field!"

Lol

[spurraider21]

Chris

1.)Violent crime is down and has been on the decline for decades.

would never have guessed this after watching the republican national convention before the election

[Chris]

Chris

1.)Violent crime is down and has been on the decline for decades.

would never have guessed this after watching the republican national convention before the election

I knew you would like that article.

[TSA]

Where are CC and TSA?
I think these were gun dudes.
Just want to see if it aligns with what my gun dudes say.

Renting a large truck and plowing into a festival or street fair is cheaper, easier, and more efficient IMO. Having the same truck rigged with an explosive in case it’s stopped up on some bodies would take out first responders once they arrived.

If you had multiple people involved in a situation like Las Vegas where there were also people set up to shoot where everyone was fleeing to the exits I’d say a guns would do more harm.

Single person = truck
Multiple people = guns

[Chris]

Look at Bernie go! :lol


974425035392913410

[pgardn]

Renting a large truck and plowing into a festival or street fair is cheaper, easier, and more efficient IMO. Having the same truck rigged with an explosive in case it’s stopped up on some bodies would take out first responders once they arrived.

If you had multiple people involved in a situation like Las Vegas where there were also people set up to shoot where everyone was fleeing to the exits I’d say a guns would do more harm.

Single person = truck
Multiple people = guns

The given is we have a packed "audience" , that's easy to find in the US. But because the majority of high density humans are inside accompanied by physical barriers... it's clear a gun gives you inside and outside targets. And people bounce off trucks, especially packed or you just run over them, it does not penetrate internally like a slug.You gotta be able to get up to speed... clearly can't beat Vegas dude.

And, You don't have to get away.

Of course it's a gun, except for our nuclear scientist DMC; Cause he can rig Ebola and shit.

So what kind of gun(s) and how many if you had to carry on your person?

(Night club dude used a jacket and somehow got passed security.) Take your ammo into account. The goal is to beat Vegas dude. It might not be possible but you gotta give it a go.

[KenMcCoy]

Vegas dude was clearly beaten by dude in Nice, France driving a truck. 86 > 58.

[CosmicCowboy]

I vote for bombs for mass casualties. Clearly the first choice of the semi-pros in Afghanistan, Iraq, etc. And they all have guns.

[TSA]

Vegas dude was clearly beaten by dude in Nice, France driving a truck. 86 > 58.

Spent a hell of a lot less money too.

[KenMcCoy]

Put a bomb on an off the shelf drone and you can do it from 3-5 miles away. That's my vote.

[TSA]

The given is we have a packed "audience" , that's easy to find in the US. But because the majority of high density humans are inside accompanied by physical barriers... it's clear a gun gives you inside and outside targets. And people bounce off trucks, especially packed or you just run over them, it does not penetrate internally like a slug.You gotta be able to get up to speed... clearly can't beat Vegas dude.

And, You don't have to get away.

Of course it's a gun, except for our nuclear scientist DMC; Cause he can rig Ebola and shit.

So what kind of gun(s) and how many if you had to carry on your person?

(Night club dude used a jacket and somehow got passed security.) Take your ammo into account. The goal is to beat Vegas dude. It might not be possible but you gotta give it a go.

There are plenty of packed outdoor venues with no physical barriers. 1 person, 1 truck, burning man festival. Would beat Vegas dude every time.

[pgardn]

Vegas dude was clearly beaten by dude in Nice, France driving a truck. 86 > 58.

You are absolutely correct.


Did you get the stats on injured? 300 or what?
And was that at some festival or just a normal shopping day. Did he do like 5 miles of damage?

And those long pedestrian streets in France. That works only outside. That works in NYC maybe... Guns give you more options.

What type of gun(s) and how many?

[pgardn]

There are plenty of packed outdoor venues with no physical barriers. 1 person, 1 truck, burning man festival. Would beat Vegas dude every time.

Maybe; limited to festivals, concerts, I have no idea what the burning man festival is like? Just in the middle of the field? I'm seeing the majority getting run over, not killed. You get down I guess if their is no where to go.

[TSA]

Maybe; limited to festivals, concerts, I have no idea what the burning man festival is like? Just in the middle of the field? I'm seeing the majority getting run over, not killed. You get down I guess if their is no where to go.

Would still kill more than Vegas dude and cost a fraction of money spent on guns/ammo.

[TSA]

You shouldn’t have to put restrictions on where the attack takes place to prove your point.

[Blake]

Renting a large truck and plowing into a festival or street fair is cheaper, easier, and more efficient IMO.

"According to its website,*Home Depot requires*that truck renters be at least 21 years old, possess a current American or Canadian driver's license and leave a $50 deposit. Additionally, proof of automobile insurance is required for*Home Depot's "Load 'N Go" rentals........"

https://www.wcpo.com/news/national/home-depots-truck-rental-policy-is-tougher-than-gun-restrictions-in-many-states

[pgardn]

You shouldn’t have to put restrictions on where the attack takes place to prove your point.

Yeah. My point is simply what type of gun(s) and how many because you guys know guns.

Gun gives you outdoor and indoor options for those rushed without the skill for all the crazy shit, drones, bombs, Ebola.... You are a lone wolf, not tied to some Afghani killing expert sending you parts.

We like options.

[KenMcCoy]

Cheapest of them all...start a fight or yell bomb in a crowded area.

74 killed/500 injured at a soccer game because a fight broke out: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Port_Said_Stadium_riot

[pgardn]

Cheapest of them all...start a fight or yell bomb in a crowded area.

74 killed/500 injured at a soccer game because a fight broke out: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Port_Said_Stadium_riot

That actually is really bad, stampedes.
But you got no idea if it catches.
In the US there is more decorum usually. Cops and such. Exit ramps...
Guns are clearly gonna beat going to Portland and starting a fight during a Timbers game.

[TSA]

Yeah. My point is simply what type of gun(s) and how many because you guys know guns.

Gun gives you outdoor and indoor options for those rushed without the skill for all the crazy shit, drones, bombs, Ebola.... You are a lone wolf, not tied to some Afghani killing expert sending you parts.

We like options.

I thought you just wanted a way to see Vegas dude beaten?

[TSA]

"According to its website,*Home Depot requires*that truck renters be at least 21 years old, possess a current American or Canadian driver's license and leave a $50 deposit. Additionally, proof of automobile insurance is required for*Home Depot's "Load 'N Go" rentals........"

https://www.wcpo.com/news/national/home-depots-truck-rental-policy-is-tougher-than-gun-restrictions-in-many-statesdid you quote the wrong person? None of this refutes my statement.

[CosmicCowboy]

Yeah. My point is simply what type of gun(s) and how many because you guys know guns.

Gun gives you outdoor and indoor options for those rushed without the skill for all the crazy shit, drones, bombs, Ebola.... You are a lone wolf, not tied to some Afghani killing expert sending you parts.

We like options.
Under 50 yards probably cant beat an AK variant for reliability. Cheap and efficient, never jam.

[TSA]

Yeah. My point is simply what type of gun(s) and how many because you guys know guns.

Gun gives you outdoor and indoor options for those rushed without the skill for all the crazy shit, drones, bombs, Ebola.... You are a lone wolf, not tied to some Afghani killing expert sending you parts.

We like options.You want to know what gun to use at a venue where only a gun is the best option? Am I following you correctly?

[pgardn]

I thought you just wanted a way to see Vegas dude beaten?

With full options available.
Guns work inside as well. Lots o people go inside. And you probably don't best Vegas Dude. You try. I think a gun gets you closer than a truck for the spontaneous type of maniac. And it seems they are used more in the US. It's our preferred method because of options.

So what kind of gun(s). Anything better than an ar-15? And why did these guys also carry other arms as well. Smaller arms when the ar-15 gives out and easy to transport? What would the preferred smaller gun be?

[boutons_deux]

In 50 years in America guns have killed more Americans than all American wars combined

Trucks as weapons? :lol

[pgardn]

You want to know what gun to use at a venue where only a gun is the best option? Am I following you correctly?

No.

I have reasonably established for myself it's gun(s) in the US.
But I don't know which ones. Or how many. I don't know the features.

[KenMcCoy]

That actually is really bad, stampedes.
But you got no idea if it catches.
In the US there is more decorum usually. Cops and such. Exit ramps...
Guns are clearly gonna beat going to Portland and starting a fight during a Timbers game.

Yeah...a lot worse than I had thought. From my mental count ~ 6800 killed in stampes worldwide since year 2000. We should ban all mass gatherings!

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_human_stampedes

[pgardn]

In 50 years in America guns have killed more Americans than all American wars combined

Trucks as weapons? :lol

They work iat outdoor venues fairly well it seems.
I don know the burning man festival, but TSA says a truck with one driver could get him closest to Vegas dude.

[pgardn]

Yeah...a lot worse than I had thought. From my mental count ~ 6800 killed in stampes worldwide since year 2000. We should ban all mass gatherings!

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_human_stampedes

But it requires too much cooperation in panic.
Its like a butterfly effect thing, not like a nuclear weapon. It's a rogue wave, too many things have to go right(wrong).
Its not gonna do for lone wolf.

You are alt for _______?

[TSA]

With full options available.
Guns work inside as well. Lots o people go inside. And you probably don't best Vegas Dude. You try. I think a gun gets you closer than a truck for the spontaneous type of maniac. And it seems they are used more in the US. It's our preferred method because of options.

So what kind of gun(s). Anything better than an ar-15? And why did these guys also carry other arms as well. Smaller arms when the ar-15 gives out and easy to transport? What would the preferred smaller gun be?

Just because it’s preferred doesn’t mean it’s the best option. Arson is very effective but seems to have fallen out of style.

Vegas dude wasn’t a spontaneous type of maniac. You keep adding more qualifiers to try and make your point. Burning Man festival and a truck triples the deaths in half the time.

With your restrictions put in place Vegas dude gets beaten at the same venue with an actual automatic rifle. He had the money to purchase them too not sure why he didn’t.

[TSA]

In 50 years in America guns have killed more Americans than all American wars combined

Trucks as weapons? :lol

Can you break that down by race for us k thx.

[TSA]

They work iat outdoor venues fairly well it seems.
I don know the burning man festival, but TSA says a truck with one driver could get him closest to Vegas dude.

Google a picture of the venue.

[pgardn]

In 50 years in America guns have killed more Americans than all American wars combined

Trucks as weapons? :lol

But they are here to stay.

So it's trucks for some who would plan on beating Vegas guy.

Im trying to figure out which guns for loan wolf.
Stampedes are out as well as to spontaneous and requiring a set of fairly perfect events. Cause a lot of sports in the US have seemed to lack stampedes. Although there have been some concerts. But lone wolf... He does not work IMO for a stampede.

[Chris]

https://scontent-dfw5-1.xx.fbcdn.net/v/t1.0-9/29258241_2003616402999170_5095705636543554078_n.jp g?oh=fb2742998f111eb0f0ae666f2f818db6&oe=5B036770

All Blue cities :tu

[pgardn]

Google a picture of the venue.

K

What guns would you use?
I don't know guns well enough but I've got opinions of two people who have shot ar-15 and all kinds of other weapons. Said it was a blast. One even put some sort of fire explosive in a old car on his ranch and took video of it as they all fired at it. It worked. I do have suggestions on a better fire "ball" though after watching the video.

[TSA]

K

What guns would you use?
I don't know guns well enough but I've got opinions of two people who have shot ar-15 and all kinds of other weapons. Said it was a blast. One even put some sort of fire explosive in a old car on his ranch and took video of it as they all fired at it. It worked. I do have suggestions on a better fire "ball" though after watching the video.

If forced to choose a gun an M4 would do just fine. Truck is still cheaper and easier to obtain.

[pgardn]

Under 50 yards probably cant beat an AK variant for reliability. Cheap and efficient, never jam.

Is this the gun with the bullet that "tumbles"?

[TSA]

K

What guns would you use?
I don't know guns well enough but I've got opinions of two people who have shot ar-15 and all kinds of other weapons. Said it was a blast. One even put some sort of fire explosive in a old car on his ranch and took video of it as they all fired at it. It worked. I do have suggestions on a better fire "ball" though after watching the video.

Instead of asking here you should do a bunch of google searches on what guns kill people at venues most effectively.

[pgardn]

If forced to choose a gun an M4 would do just fine. Truck is still cheaper and easier to obtain.

The burning man festival says no driving allowed?
How do they all get there?
And Is this rule only when one starts to illustrate one's unique abilities?

[TSA]

The burning man festival says no driving allowed?
How do they all get there?
And Is this rule only when one starts to illustrate one's unique abilities?

I’m sure the Vegas concert said no shooting people dead allowed too.

[pgardn]

Instead of asking here you should do a bunch of google searches on what guns kill people at venues most effectively.

Any place where people are dense. Easier Church, bar, ....

Difficult: airports, sports events, concerts,

I kinda got that. With a variant of an AK.

So do we ban AKs; and large trucks at the burning man festival?
Bump stock, what? How do we handle the most efficient kill-awhole-lotta-peeps-quickly guns?
Leave em alone?

[pgardn]

I’m sure the Vegas concert said no shooting people dead allowed too.

Actually it did not.
The driving thing was enacted because oddly, people were run over... Go figure out in that flat sand. All those people. Spring break they don't allow driving on some beaches for the same thing. Which could be a really bad spot for 2 paired wolves, one driving and crushing, and one AK shooting. But I'm thinking the guy shooting does a "better" job. Low tide would be preferable as well. Or maybe not... high tide might smash more beach goers together.

[FuzzyLumpkins]

There's actually no constitutional impediment to regulating weapons, as long as it doesn't deprive the individual from personal protection (according to the SCOTUS).

The SCOTUS specifically singled out certain shotguns that are popular for personal protection, but that was the bar they set.

That's why nukes are indeed banned.

Just like any other constitutional right, they're not absolute (something I discussed with DMC, IIRC). Even the 1st amendment has certain regulations applied to it.

SCOTUS was also quite clear on confiscating someone's legally obtained weapon.

[KenMcCoy]

"According to its website,*Home Depot requires*that truck renters be at least 21 years old, possess a current American or Canadian driver's license and leave a $50 deposit. Additionally, proof of automobile insurance is required for*Home Depot's "Load 'N Go" rentals........"

https://www.wcpo.com/news/national/home-depots-truck-rental-policy-is-tougher-than-gun-restrictions-in-many-states

If you're under 21 you could buy a cheap truck off of Craigslist or at a used car lot. No restrictions on that.

[DMC]

So you understood what you were proposing was ridiculously inefficient.

What type of gun?

Ar-15 or something else? And I suppose more than in case of jamming?


What did I propose that included a gun?


Nothing.

And none of them come close to a gun.

:nope

[DMC]

Actually it did not.
The driving thing was enacted because oddly, people were run over... Go figure out in that flat sand. All those people. Spring break they don't allow driving on some beaches for the same thing. Which could be a really bad spot for 2 paired wolves, one driving and crushing, and one AK shooting. But I'm thinking the guy shooting does a "better" job. Low tide would be preferable as well. Or maybe not... high tide might smash more beach goers together.

You really are a weird motherfucker

[pgardn]

You really are a weird motherfucker

And you.... You... overstarch your shirts.

[pgardn]

Lighten up Francis.

- Seargeant Hulka

[Blake]

did you quote the wrong person? None of this refutes my statement.

Other than "cheaper", the title of the article very literally refutes your statement almost word for word.

[Blake]

If you're under 21 you could buy a cheap truck off of Craigslist or at a used car lot. No restrictions on that.

How do you kill the kids inside the school building with your truck

[DMC]

And you.... You... overstarch your shirts.

No, I just have them pressed, light starch.

[DMC]

How do you kill the kids inside the school building with your truck

Don't they ever come outside?

[TSA]

Other than "cheaper", the title of the article very literally refutes your statement almost word for word.

Yes because Home Depot is the only place to rent a truck in the USA.

[DMC]

With full options available.
Guns work inside as well. Lots o people go inside. And you probably don't best Vegas Dude. You try. I think a gun gets you closer than a truck for the spontaneous type of maniac. And it seems they are used more in the US. It's our preferred method because of options.

So what kind of gun(s). Anything better than an ar-15? And why did these guys also carry other arms as well. Smaller arms when the ar-15 gives out and easy to transport? What would the preferred smaller gun be?

Stop pretending you know shit about any of it. You're just pulling guesses out of your ass.

[DMC]

Lol that was a waste of time. I see zero "well regulated" militias of private citizens in the us. Try and pretend you know of any now.

I see a bunch of kooks with guns tho

The 2nd Amendment isn't about militias. It's about the pre-existing right to keep and bear arms. It simply stated a condition for making that statement, it didn't say the right hinged on needing a militia. The 2nd Amendment didn't grant the right to bear arms. It existed already.

[pgardn]

Stop pretending you know shit about any of it. You're just pulling guesses out of your ass.

These are not guesses starch fella, they are questions because I don't know guns. Your F'N rigid brain... You think cars and trucks work well indoors to kill people? I did not think you were a monster truck kinda guy that went to the Alamodome and got sprayed with dirt. Do they even do this anymore?

[pgardn]

Don't they ever come outside?

Yes.

And surprisingly, they disperse. Especially after school.
Im an expert.
This was a tough one.

[Isitjustme?]

If you're under 21 you could buy a cheap truck off of Craigslist or at a used car lot. No restrictions on that.

Wanna compare international murders by vehicle versus intentional murders by firearms worldwide?

I wanna.

[ElNono]

https://www.lectlaw.com/files/gun01.htm

It's a weak argument, IMO. Just like "militia" at the time of the founder's has little resemblance to militia today.

[AaronY]

The 2nd Amendment isn't about militias.

Except for the part where it explicitly mentions militias right in the first half of the first sentence!

C'mon bro I mean seriously. It even says regulated right there! not "A nutty group of disparate gun nut kooks, being necessary for the security of a free state the right of the kooks with firearm fetishes to have home arsenals.."

[TSA]

Speaking of gun control

974388822749229056

[Pavlov]

Speaking of gun control

974388822749229056Sounds a lot less nefarious when you actually find out what the memo is about.

But you never will.

[lebomb]

Again.................give me one good reason an ordinary citizen needs an AR or high capacity rifle? For protection a handgun will do. Hunting, a standard rifle, or shotgun will do. In these 13 pages I have not heard one yet.


I'm waiting.

[KenMcCoy]

Wanna compare international murders by vehicle versus intentional murders by firearms worldwide?

I wanna.

Since this thread is about banning assault rifles, let's compare vehicular homocides in the US to homocides with a rifle, which would include rifles that are not semi auto/high capacity:

2013 vehicular homocides: 300 (https://m.dailykos.com/stories/2013/2/18/1188022/-Accurately-Comparing-Death-Rates-from-Motor-Vehicle-and-Firearm-Use)

2012 homocides by "rifle" : 322 (https://mobile.nytimes.com/2014/09/14/sunday-review/the-assault-weapon-myth.html?referer=https://www.google.com/)

Pretty close if you ask me...

[lebomb]

Since this thread is about banning assault rifles, let's compare vehicular homocides in the US to homocides with a rifle, which would include rifles that are not semi auto/high capacity:

2013 vehicular homocides: 300 (https://m.dailykos.com/stories/2013/2/18/1188022/-Accurately-Comparing-Death-Rates-from-Motor-Vehicle-and-Firearm-Use)

2012 homocides by "rifle" : 322 (https://mobile.nytimes.com/2014/09/14/sunday-review/the-assault-weapon-myth.html?referer=https://www.google.com/)

Pretty close if you ask me...

First of all, you are using old ass data...... 2012 and 2013???

You can take out many more people in 5 minutes in a single spot with a high cap rifle vs all off the vehicular homicides all over the nation at the same time. Bad argument homie.

[KenMcCoy]

You can take out many more people in 5 minutes in a single spot with a high cap rifle vs all off the vehicular homicides all over the nation at the same time. Bad argument homie.

Sorry...this statement has already proven untrue. Using a vehicle is much more efficient at killing in a crowded situation than a semi-auto AR type rifle in a crowd.

[lebomb]

Sorry...this statement has already proven untrue. Using a vehicle is much more efficient at killing in a crowded situation than a semi-auto AR type rifle in a crowd.

Why does the typical american need an AR or high capacity rifle? Still have not given me a good reason. Not even close to a good reason.

[KenMcCoy]

Why does the typical american need an AR or high capacity rifle? Still have not given me a good reason. Not even close to a good reason.

Why does the typical American need four wheeled transportation? Half of the cars I see on the road only have one person in them. For the times you need to move multiple people, millions of average people in countries like India have proven that you can move 3-4 people around on a 50cc moped.

[RandomGuy]

[incoherent word vomit]

Dude, the grownups are talking.

[RandomGuy]

Repeal the Dickey Amendment.

We need data.

[RandomGuy]

You really are a weird motherfucker

Is the Dickey amendment a good policy?

[lebomb]

Why does the typical American need four wheeled transportation? Half of the cars I see on the road only have one person in them. For the times you need to move multiple people, millions of average people in countries like India have proven that you can move 3-4 people around on a 50cc moped.

OMG.......... really, really not a good reason at all. It is a stupid reason though.

[KenMcCoy]

What kind of car do you have? And why do you NEED it?

[Quadzilla99]

What kind of car do you have? And why do you NEED it?

People dont ride guns to work

[KenMcCoy]

People dont ride guns to work

Why do you need a car to get to work? Why can't you ride a moped like the vast majority of people in the world?

[Pavlov]

Why do you need a car to get to work? Why can't you ride a moped like the vast majority of people in the world?Still on cars?

:lol the murder fantasies of the gun owners here.

[KenMcCoy]

Still on cars?

Just showing that the average American doesn't actually NEED half the crap they own.

[spurraider21]

Just showing that the average American doesn't actually NEED half the crap they own.
sure. i dont need netflix. but netflix isn't helping me murder people. my subscription isn't hurting society to the point where action needs to be taken

if you want to go back to cars... yes, cars can be used to murder people. but then you weight the cost/benefit of cars. how many people rely on cars to go about their business, etc. it's a silly comparison because gun owners dont require guns to go about their daily business.

when it comes to gun ownership, and particularly if we focus on, say, semi auto rifles, the benefit is next to nothing.

[Pavlov]

Just showing that the average American doesn't actually NEED half the crap they own.And what does this have to do with guns?

[Pavlov]

sure. i dont need netflix. but netflix isn't helping me murder peopleKen had his dining room set delivered by moped.

[KenMcCoy]

And what does this have to do with guns?

People don't NEED cars, yet people still die from their usage. Do you think we could eliminate most vehicular deaths if only government controlled entities were allowed to operate them?

[Pavlov]

People don't NEED cars, yet people still die from their usage. Do you think we could eliminate most vehicular deaths if only government controlled entities were allowed to operate them?What does this have to do with guns?

[KenMcCoy]

Gun owners are asked to justify their NEED for certain models.

Would you support a ban on civilian owned vehicles to help save lives?

[Pavlov]

Gun owners are asked to justify their NEED for certain models.

Would you support a ban on civilian owned vehicles to help save lives?Cars have nothing to do with guns.

[KenMcCoy]

Answer the question.

[Pavlov]

Answer the question.No need. It's a faulty premise.

[KenMcCoy]

No need. It's a faulty premise.

People die from guns = ban guns.

People die from cars = nothing to see here.

[Pavlov]

People die from guns = ban guns.

People die from cars = nothing to see here.guns < > cars

faulty comparison

[lebomb]

People die from guns = ban guns.

People die from cars = nothing to see here.

I didnt say ban guns, I said ban AR's. The point your are trying to prove is DUMB. You can kill someone with a toothbrush, so we shouldnt buy them? Dude, you are seriously a quack.

[Chris]

Again.................give me one good reason an ordinary citizen needs an AR or high capacity rifle? For protection a handgun will do. Hunting, a standard rifle, or shotgun will do. In these 13 pages I have not heard one yet.


I'm waiting.

Already posted.


Here Are 8 Stubborn Facts on Gun Violence in America

In the wake of the tragic murder of 17 innocent students and teachers at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, Florida, students, educators, politicians, and activists are searching for solutions to prevent future school shootings.

As emotions morph from grief to anger to resolve, it is vitally important to supply facts so that policymakers and professionals can fashion solutions based on objective data rather than well-intended but misguided emotional fixes.

Are there ways to reduce gun violence and school shootings? Yes, but only after objectively assessing the facts and working collaboratively to fashion commonsense solutions.

Here are eight stubborn facts to keep in mind about gun violence in America:

1.)Violent crime is down and has been on the decline for decades.

2.)The principal public safety concerns with respect to guns are suicides and illegally owned handguns, not mass shootings.

3.)A small number of factors significantly increase the likelihood that a person will be a victim of a gun-related homicide.

4.)Gun-related murders are carried out by a predictable pool of people.

5.)Higher rates of gun ownership are not associated with higher rates of violent crime.

6.)There is no clear relationship between strict gun control legislation and homicide or violent crime rates.

7.)Legally owned firearms are used for lawful purposes much more often than they are used to commit crimes or suicide.

8.)Concealed carry permit holders are not the problem, but they may be part of the solution.


Each of these facts is firmly based on empirical data. Here’s a deeper look.


1. America is relatively safe, and the trend is toward becoming safer.

According to the National Crime Victimization Survey, violent crime has been declining steadily since the early 1990s.

The 2011 homicide rate was almost half of the rate in 1991, and according to the Pew Research Center, the 2013 gun-related death rate was half of the rate in 1993.
The number of nonfatal firearm crimes committed in 2011 was one-sixth the number committed in 1993.

In the past few years, there have been minor increases in certain types of violent crimes, mainly in large metropolitan areas. However, these increases are nowhere near those seen in the 1990s and are largely related to gang activity.
It should be remembered that it takes at least three to five years of data to show true trend lines. It appears that the collective homicide toll for America’s 50 largest cities decreased modestly in 2017 after two consecutive years of increases.

2. The principal public safety concerns are suicides and illegally owned handguns.

According to the Pew Research Center, almost two-thirds of America’s annual gun deaths are suicides. Since 1981, when the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention began publishing data, gun suicides have outnumbered gun homicides. In 2010 alone, 19,392 Americans used guns to kill themselves.

Most gun-related crimes are carried out with illegally owned firearms—as much as 80 percent according to some estimates.

The FBI’s Uniform Crime Reports prove that the overwhelming majority of gun-related homicides are perpetrated with handguns, with rifles of any kind accounting for less than 3 percent of gun-related homicides. In 2013, 5,782 murders were committed by killers who used a handgun, compared to 285 committed by killers who used a rifle. The same holds true for 2012 (6,404 to 298); 2011 (6,251 to 332); 2010 (6,115 to 367); and 2009 (6,501 to 351).
More people are stabbed to death every year than are murdered with rifles.

A person is more likely to be bludgeoned to death with a blunt object or beaten to death with hands and feet than to be murdered with a rifle.

3. A small number of factors significantly increase the likelihood that a person will be a victim of a gun-related homicide.

Where do you live? Murders in the United States are very concentrated. According to the Crime Prevention Research Center, over 50 percent of murders occur in 2 percent of the nation’s 3,142 counties. Moreover, gun-related homicides are heavily concentrated in certain neighborhoods within those counties: 54 percent of U.S. counties had zero murders in 2014.

Who is your partner? According to a recent scholarly article in the Hastings Law Journal, people recently or currently involved in an abusive intimate relationship are much more likely to be victims of gun-related homicide than is the rest of the population, especially if the abuser possesses firearms.

Are you in a gang? According to the Department of Justice’s National Gang Center, particularly in urban areas, significant percentages of gun-related homicides (15 percent to 33 percent) are linked with gang and drug activity. Gang-related homicides are more likely to involve firearms than non-gang-related homicides are.

Are you a male between 15 and 34? The majority of standard gun murder victims are men between the ages of 15 and 34. Although black men make up roughly 7 percent of the population, they account for almost two-thirds of gun murder victims every year.

Women and children are more likely to be the victims of mass shootings and homicide-suicide shootings than they are to be the victims of a “typical” gun-related homicide.

4. The perpetration of gun-related murders is often carried out by predictable people.

According to studies, almost all mass public shooters have extensive histories of mental health issues (whether delusional/psychiatric or depression/anger), disturbing behaviors, or interpersonal violence.
Intimate partner conflict and domestic violence history are major risk factors for homicide-suicides, even for those not involving intimate partners.

Especially in urban areas, a small number of recidivist violent offenders are typically responsible for the majority of gun violence.

5. Higher rates of gun ownership are not associated with higher rates of violent crime.

Switzerland and Israel have much higher gun ownership rates than the United States but experience far fewer homicides and have much lower violent crime rates than many European nations with strict gun control laws.
While some will argue that the guns carried by Swiss and Israeli citizens are technically “owned” by the government in most cases, this does little to negate the fact that many citizens in those countries have ready access to firearms.

Canada is ranked 12th in the world for the number of civilian-owned guns per capita and reports one of the world’s lower homicide rates—but even then, some provinces have higher homicide rates than U.S. states with less restrictive laws and higher rates of gun ownership have.

Although many gun control advocates have noted that “right to carry” states tend to experience slight increases in violent crime, other studies have noted the opposite effect.

Higher rates of concealed carry permit holders are even more strongly associated with reduction in violent crime than are right-to-carry states. The probable reason for this is that right-to-carry studies often include “open carry” states, which have not been shown to correlate with more people actually carrying or even owning firearms. Rates of concealed carry permit holders are better indicators of the number of people who actually possess and carry firearms within a given population.

Further, as with most correlations, there are many other factors that can account for increases in concealed carry permits—including the fact that people who live in already dangerous neighborhoods seek out means of self-defense. The Huffington Post noted that the rate of concealed carry permit requests in Chicago has soared in recent years after the city loosened restrictions, in large part, according to the Chicago Tribune, because law-abiding residents are increasingly worried about rising rates of violent crime in the city.

The rate of gun ownership is higher among whites than it is among African-Americans, but the murder rate among African-Americans is significantly higher than the rate among whites.
Similarly, the rate of gun ownership is higher in rural areas than in urban areas, but urban areas experience higher murder rates.

6. There is no clear relationship between strict gun control legislation and homicide or violent crime rates.

The Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence ironically makes this clear with its ratings for states based on gun laws. “Gun freedom” states that score poorly, like New Hampshire, Vermont, Idaho, and Oregon, have some of the lowest homicide rates. Conversely, “gun control-loving” states that received high scores, like Maryland and Illinois, experience some of the nation’s highest homicide rates.

The Crime Prevention Research Center notes that, if anything, the data indicate that countries with high rates of gun ownership tend to have lower homicide rates—but this is only a correlation, and many factors do not necessarily support a conclusion that high rates of gun ownership cause the low rates of homicide.

Homicide and firearm homicide rates in Great Britain spiked in the years immediately following the imposition of severe gun control measures, despite the fact that most developed countries continued to experience a downward trend in these rates. This is also pointed out by noted criminologist John Lott in his book “The War on Guns.”

Similarly, Ireland’s homicide rates spiked in the years immediately following the country’s 1972 gun confiscation legislation.

Australia’s National Firearms Act appears to have had little effect on suicide and homicide rates, which were falling before the law was enacted and continued to decline at a statistically unremarkable rate compared to worldwide trends.
According to research compiled by Lott and highlighted in his book “The War on Guns,” Australia’s armed and unarmed robbery rates both increased markedly in the five years immediately following the National Firearms Act, despite the general downward trend experienced by other developed countries.

Great Britain has some of the strictest gun control laws in the developed world, but the violent crime rate for homicide, rape, burglary, and aggravated assault is much higher than that in the U.S. Further, approximately 60 percent of burglaries in Great Britain occur while residents are home, compared to just 13 percent in the U.S., and British burglars admit to targeting occupied residences because they are more likely to find wallets and purses.

It is difficult to compare homicide and firearm-related murder rates across international borders because countries use different methods to determine which deaths “count” for purposes of violent crime. For example, since 1967, Great Britain has excluded from its homicide counts any case that does not result in a conviction, that was the result of dangerous driving, or in which the person was determined to have acted in self-defense. All of these factors are counted as “homicides” in the United States.

7. Legally owned firearms are used for lawful purposes much more often than they are used to commit crimes or suicide.

In 2013, President Barack Obama ordered the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention to assess existing research on gun violence. The report, compiled by the Institute of Medicine and the National Research Council, found (among other things) that firearms are used defensively hundreds of thousands of times every year.

According to the CDC, “self-defense can be an important crime deterrent.” Recent CDC reports acknowledge that studies directly assessing the effect of actual defensive uses of guns have found “consistently lower injury rates among gun-using crime victims compared with victims who used other self-protective strategies.”

Semi-automatic rifles (such as the AR-15) are commonly used as self-defense weapons in the homes of law-abiding citizens because they are easier to control than handguns, are more versatile than handguns, and offer the advantage of up to 30 rounds of protection. Even Vox has published stories defending the use of the AR-15.

AR-15s have been used to save lives on many occasions, including:

Oswego, Illinois (2018)—A man with an AR-15 intervened to stop a neighbor’s knife attack and cited the larger weapon’s “intimidation factor” as a reason why the attacker dropped the knife.

Catawba County, North Carolina (2018)—A 17-year-old successfully fought off three armed attackers with his AR-15.
Houston, Texas (2017)—A homeowner survived a drive-by shooting by defending himself with his AR-15.

Broken Arrow, Oklahoma (2017)—A homeowner’s son killed three would-be burglars with an AR-15 (the man was later deemed to have acted in justifiable self-defense).

Ferguson, Missouri (2014)—African-American men protected a white man’s store from rioters by standing outside armed with AR-15s.

Texas (2013)—A 15-year-old boy used an AR-15 during a home invasion to save both his life and that of his 12-year-old sister.

Rochester, New York (2013)—Home intruders fled after facing an AR-15.

8. Concealed carry permit holders are not the problem, but they may be part of the solution.

Lott found that, as a group, concealed carry permit holders are some of the most law-abiding people in the United States. The rate at which they commit crimes generally and firearm crimes specifically is between one-sixth and one-tenth of that recorded for police officers, who are themselves committing crimes at a fraction of the rate of the general population.

Between 2007 and 2015, murder rates dropped 16 percent and violent crime rates dropped 18 percent, even though the percentage of adults with concealed carry permits rose by 190 percent.
Regression estimates show a significant association between increased permit ownership and a drop in murder and violent crime rates. Each percentage point increase in rates of permit-holding is associated with a roughly 2.5 percent drop in the murder rate.

Concealed carry permit holders are often “the good guy with a gun,” even though they rarely receive the attention of the national media. Concealed carry permit holders were credited with saving multiple lives in:

Rockledge, Florida (2017);
Antioch, Tennessee (2017);
Arlington, Texas (2017);
Lyman, South Carolina (2016);
Winton Hills, Ohio (2015);
Conyers, Georgia (2015);
New Holland, South Carolina (2015);
Chicago, Illinois (2015);
Philadelphia, Pennsylvania (2015);
Darby, Pennsylvania (2015);
Chicago, Illinois (2014);
Portland, Oregon (2014);
Spartanburg, South Carolina (2012).
http://dailysignal.com/2018/03/14/here-are-8-stubborn-facts-on-gun-violence-in-america/


https://media0.giphy.com/media/3o7aCSDsne2usTBRwA/giphy.gif

[spurraider21]

the self defense statistics of guns pale in comparison to the unlawful damage tbh

[lebomb]

Self defense can be handled with a handgun. The general public does not need an AR period.

[KenMcCoy]

Self defense can be handled with a handgun. The general public does not need an AR period.

Half the people in SA driving half and 3/4 ton trucks don't need them, but they have them.

[Pavlov]

Half the people in SA driving half and 3/4 ton trucks don't need them, but they have them.Guns aren't trucks either.

[KenMcCoy]

I didnt say ban guns, I said ban AR's. The point your are trying to prove is DUMB. You can kill someone with a toothbrush, so we shouldnt buy them? Dude, you are seriously a quack.

Rifles account for less than 400 deaths per year in the US. Why is it so important to ban something that would have such a small impact on the general safety of US citizens?

[Pavlov]

Rifles account for less than 400 deaths per year in the US. Why is it so important to ban something that would have such a small impact on the general safety of US citizens?Why not?

[spurraider21]

Rifles account for less than 400 deaths per year in the US. Why is it so important to ban something that would have such a small impact on the general safety of US citizens?
you think its worthwhile to address senseless mass shootings?

[Chris]

Rifles account for less than 400 deaths per year in the US. Why is it so important to ban something that would have such a small impact on the general safety of US citizens?

Because kids died and we need to do something. (besides arming teachers and better security) also DRUMPF

[Pavlov]

Because kids died and we need to do something. (besides arming teachers and better security) also DRUMPFLet's not do everything we can to prevent more school shootings.

[Chris]

Let's not do everything we can to prevent more school shootings.

Nope you want it your way or the highway.

[KenMcCoy]

Guns aren't trucks either.

You're right...an unoperated vehicle still has the capacity to kill someone: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/08/07/girl-aged-23-months-killed-runaway-range-rover-rolled-hill/

[Pavlov]

Nope you want it your way or the highway.You're the one trying to shut down free speech on the internet.


You're right...an unoperated vehicle still has the capacity to kill someone: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/08/07/girl-aged-23-months-killed-runaway-range-rover-rolled-hill/Yep, they aren't guns at all so there's no reason to be talking about them here.

[KenMcCoy]

Let's not do everything we can to prevent more school shootings.

Why nothing to protect the 5 kids that died here?
https ://nypost.com/2016/11/22/bus-driver-asked-kids-if-they-were-ready-to-die-before-crash/

[lebomb]

Why nothing to protect the 5 kids that died here?
https ://nypost.com/2016/11/22/bus-driver-asked-kids-if-they-were-ready-to-die-before-crash/

Why dont we drop you off in Compton with the Crips and their AKs and ARs.

[Pavlov]

Why nothing to protect the 5 kids that died here?
https ://nypost.com/2016/11/22/bus-driver-asked-kids-if-they-were-ready-to-die-before-crash/What does this have to do with preventing school shootings?

You're just trying to change the subject.

[Chris]

Big win for Hive Mind


974734423227752448

[Chris]

974643643389706240

[lebomb]

What does this have to do with preventing school shootings?

You're just trying to change the subject.

You have been changing it constantly. Talking about cars and posting old news from other countries. I asked a question you never answered. Why does the common citizen need an AR? Gansters in compton can buy them at will, just like a serial shooter.

[spurraider21]

all four of them

[lebomb]

Im not for repealing the 2nd ammendment, maybe revise it to exclude high capacity military firearms (assault rifles).

[KenMcCoy]

Why dont we drop you off in Compton with the Crips and their AKs and ARs.

Sorry...most gang related shooting deaths are from handguns. Drop me off in middle America...I'll do fine with the AR owners.

[KenMcCoy]

You have been changing it constantly. Talking about cars and posting old news from other countries. I asked a question you never answered. Why does the common citizen need an AR? Gansters in compton can buy them at will, just like a serial shooter.

What does NEED have to do with it? Why don't we place restrictions on everyone in the US to owning only those items that are necessary to survival?

The Constitution does not say "the right to bear NEEDED arms"

[KenMcCoy]

Im not for repealing the 2nd ammendment, maybe revise it to exclude high capacity military firearms (assault rifles).

Why only that type? Statistically, you aren't solving much/saving a significant amount of people.

[lebomb]

Why only that type? Statistically, you aren't solving much/saving a significant amount of people.

I said the type, so if you dont get it Im very sorry. Have a great weekend.

[KenMcCoy]

I said the type, so if you dont get it Im very sorry. Have a great weekend.

Was a slow week at work. Thanks for making it fun!

[DMC]

These are not guesses starch fella, they are questions because I don't know guns. Your F'N rigid brain... You think cars and trucks work well indoors to kill people? I did not think you were a monster truck kinda guy that went to the Alamodome and got sprayed with dirt. Do they even do this anymore?

"No that would be too hard"

"No that wouldn't work"

"Guns would be easier"

You're full of shit. Just state your narrative so everyone knows where you're funneling your convo to.

[DMC]

Look at Bernie go! :lol


974425035392913410

https://images-na.ssl-images-amazon.com/images/M/MV5BMGMyMDdmY2MtOTAwOC00MTY3LThlM2UtMDJkOGM4YWIxMz E3XkEyXkFqcGdeQXVyNTk1NTMyNzM@._V1_.jpg

[DMC]

Except for the part where it explicitly mentions militias right in the first half of the first sentence!

C'mon bro I mean seriously. It even says regulated right there! not "A nutty group of disparate gun nut kooks, being necessary for the security of a free state the right of the kooks with firearm fetishes to have home arsenals.."

The 2nd doesn't say that militias shall always exist. It says the right to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed upon.

Also, the "outdated" claims I see people making over and over are short sighted. Anytime the 2nd is reaffirmed by our highest courts and defended by such, it has no expiration date.

[spurraider21]

The 2nd doesn't say that militias shall always exist. It says the right to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed upon.

Also, the "outdated" claims I see people making over and over are short sighted. Anytime the 2nd is reaffirmed by our highest courts and defended by such, it has no expiration date.
the notion that the citizens bearing arms will prevent tyranny is outdated

[Chucho]

Why dont we drop you off in Compton with the Crips and their AKs and ARs.


Why don't you get dropped off in Compton and regale them with your homosexual tales of eating ass? You'd be in more trouble than whitey.

[Chucho]

L0L, Ken making queers and rabbit hole diggers tap out. Good stuff.

[spurraider21]

Why don't you get dropped off in Compton and regale them with your homosexual tales of eating ass? You'd be in more trouble than whitey.
its only homo if its a man's ass, imo

[Chucho]

its only homo if its a man's ass, imo

I'm not convinced his "wife" is female.

[koriwhat]

Dude, the grownups are talking.

i wouldn't doubt if i am older than you so go sit in the corner kid.

[pgardn]

"No that would be too hard"

"No that wouldn't work"

"Guns would be easier"

You're full of shit. Just state your narrative so everyone knows where you're funneling your convo to.

Car and gun equivalency Inspector Clousseau.
And it was a funny ride.
Oh they may sew your mouth shut, but they ain't prying that gun from yer hand... Comedy.
And you call me full of bovine residue...

[DMC]

the notion that the citizens bearing arms will prevent tyranny is outdated

"Might as well lay back and enjoy it" -Clayton Williams

[DMC]

Car and gun equivalency Inspector Clousseau.
And it was a funny ride.
Oh they may sew your mouth shut, but they ain't prying that gun from yer hand... Comedy.
And you call me full of bovine residue...

You lost at every turn, and you struggled to funnel the choices so they would eventually fit your narrative, but you lost.

[Nathan89]

https://alcoholprohibitionfair.weebly.com/causes-and-effects.htmlhttps://alcoholprohibitionfair.weebly.com/causes-and-effects.htmlhttp://alcoholprohibitionfair.weebly.com/uploads/2/5/1/2/25125057/872463.jpg?193

On Nov. 11, 1938, the German minister of the interior issued "Regulations Against Jews Possession of Weapons." Not only were Jews forbidden to own guns and ammunition, they couldn’t own "truncheons or stabbing weapons."

Because the appeal to feels disregards history. There is no reason to ban these more powerful guns for statistical anomalies. Having guns isn't about hunting.

Appeal to feels also disregards the fact that in the future it's going to be easy to 3d print guns.

Appeal to feels also likes to lump in suicides by guns as if that changes after gun control to mislead and feed a narrative.

Appeal to feels also disregards that these suggested changes for gun control don't have significant impact.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/i-used-to-think-gun-control-was-the-answer-my-research-told-me-otherwise/2017/10/03/d33edca6-a851-11e7-92d1-58c702d2d975_story.html?utm_term=.c370257ab172

If it's all about safety then let's ban alcohol. For that matter let's set a curfew for the nation so people have to be at home by 10 p.m. because crime spikes at night. Let's ban all unhealthy food. Let's ban swimming pools. Let's ban cars. Not all of those perfectly fit but alcohol certainly does given how many lives are lost because of drunk driving.

[Nathan89]

Still on cars?

:lol the murder fantasies of the gun owners here.

So you are for banning alcohol because it causes an massive amount of casualties every year? No?

:lol the murder fantasies of alcohol drinkers.

[pgardn]

You lost at every turn, and you struggled to funnel the choices so they would eventually fit your narrative, but you lost.

Lots o' losing when you are the judge.
So do you ever feel like shooting the monitor because your 1st amendment rights are tittering on the brink of collapse?

[pgardn]

So you are for banning alcohol because it causes an massive amount of casualties every year? No?

:lol the murder fantasies of alcohol drinkers.

Are bars still getting sued for over serving clients? I have Not kept up?

[Nathan89]

Are bars still getting sued for over serving clients? I have Not kept up?

Point?

If we are for protecting innocent lives then we for damn sure need to be begging for alcohol to be banned. Otherwise your argument is just from selfish perspective. "I like alcohol(it's dangerous) so we'll keep it." "I dislike alcohol(it's dangerous) so let's ban it." Tired of people acting like their opinion based on their morals for the greater good when it's just them being selfish.

[pgardn]

Point?

If we are for protecting innocent lives then we for damn sure need to be begging for alcohol to be banned. Otherwise your argument is just from selfish perspective. "I like alcohol(it's dangerous) so we'll keep it." "I dislike alcohol(it's dangerous) so let's ban it." Tired of people acting like their opinion based on their morals for the greater good when it's just them being selfish.

Oh. So you don't know.

So me being ok with guns but looking into what guns are really used for causing outrageous damage is a bad thing. As is my belief you should not be driving a giant machine when one can't walk. Or serving pure ethanol thinking it's beer. See, I can make bad anologies as well.

We as a society are willing to take the death toll from cars and trucks for the sake of transportation.
That's quite obvious.
And it is also Obvious there is not the same willingness for some type of arms. Yet. The drug thing... THC is still illegal for recreational use in Texas. So... We will see.

[Nathan89]

Oh. So you don't know.

So me being ok with guns but looking into what guns are really used for causing outrageous damage is a bad thing. As is my belief you should not be driving a giant machine when one can't walk. Or serving pure ethanol thinking it's beer. See, I can make bad anologies as well.

We as a society are willing to take the death toll from cars and trucks for the sake of transportation.
That's quite obvious.
And it is also Obvious there is not the same willingness for some type of arms. Yet. The drug thing... THC is still illegal for recreational use in Texas. So... We will see.


Guns are very rarely used for causing "outrageous damage". Your methods of protection haven't been shown to prevent gun crime per 538's research.

"When I looked at the other oft-praised policies, I found out that no gunowner walks into the store to buy an “assault weapon.” It’s an invented classification that includes any semi-automatic that has two or more features (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Federal_Assault_Weapons_Ban), such as a bayonet mount, arocket-propelled grenade-launcher mount, a folding stock or a pistol grip. But guns are modular, and any hobbyist can easily add these features at home, just as if they were snapping together Legos."

"By the time we published our project, I didn’t believe in many of the interventions I’d heard politicians tout. I was still anti-gun, at least from the point of view of most gun owners, and I don’t want a gun in my home, as I think the risk outweighs the benefits. But I can’t endorse policies whose only selling point is that gun owners hate them. "


Yeah, because people being pushed a narrative and eating it up. Appeals to feels and misleading people into thinking "x" change will make the difference even though it won't. All in an effort to erode gun rights over time. Let's do "X" even though it doesn't change anything. After the next happens, oh let's do "y" which is another ineffective policy. Before long you fear mongered a significant portion of the population into giving up their rights.

Welcome to your new vulnerable state.

On Nov. 11, 1938, the German minister of the interior issued "Regulations Against Jews Possession of Weapons." Not only were Jews forbidden to own guns and ammunition, they couldn’t own "truncheons or stabbing weapons."

[pgardn]

Guns are very rarely used for causing "outrageous damage". Your methods of protection haven't been shown to prevent gun crime per 538's research.

"When I looked at the other oft-praised policies, I found out that no gunowner walks into the store to buy an “assault weapon.” It’s an invented classification that includes any semi-automatic that has two or more features (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Federal_Assault_Weapons_Ban), such as a bayonet mount, arocket-propelled grenade-launcher mount, a folding stock or a pistol grip. But guns are modular, and any hobbyist can easily add these features at home, just as if they were snapping together Legos."

"By the time we published our project, I didn’t believe in many of the interventions I’d heard politicians tout. I was still anti-gun, at least from the point of view of most gun owners, and I don’t want a gun in my home, as I think the risk outweighs the benefits. But I can’t endorse policies whose only selling point is that gun owners hate them. "


Yeah, because people being pushed a narrative and eating it up. Appeals to feels and misleading people into thinking "x" change will make the difference even though it won't. All in an effort to erode gun rights over time. Let's do "X" even though it doesn't change anything. After the next happens, oh let's do "y" which is another ineffective policy. Before long you fear mongered a significant portion of the population into giving up their rights.

Welcome to your new vulnerable state.

On Nov. 11, 1938, the German minister of the interior issued "Regulations Against Jews Possession of Weapons." Not only were Jews forbidden to own guns and ammunition, they couldn’t own "truncheons or stabbing weapons."

So present day Germany is really vulnerable.
But we are only semi vulnerable.
And Fckn Norway, France, England...

Oh shit, I forgot, they are held hostage by a socialist government they can vote in or out. Which they do.

If you don't mind, I can do without your Bundy Militia defending me from vulnerability with an ar-15. You have a shotgun so we can eat some quail together, they are delicious. And white tail doe and Axis deer. When do we eat?

[Nathan89]

So present day Germany is really vulnerable.
But we are only semi vulnerable.
And Fckn Norway, France, England...

Oh shit, I forgot, they are held hostage by a socialist government they can vote in or out. Which they do.

If you don't mind, I can do without your Bundy Militia defending me from vulnerability with an ar-15. You have a shotgun so we can eat some quail together, they are delicious. And white tail doe and Axis deer. When do we eat?

"Bundy Militia" is a nice deflection to reality. Why did they prohibit Jews from having guns if they didn't have any value? Uh...uh... let deflect that reality with a "Bundy Militia" remark.

Yes, those countries are vulnerable. Especially the countries like England that seem to have thought police for the internet.

But...but... I have pretend that millions of people being wiped out with ease is impossible for my argument to be relevant. Otherwise the handfuls of people that die in the statistical anomalies that we call "mass murders" wouldn't be something to rally behind for ineffective gun laws in the hopes prevent said anomalies.

Yes, a country of citizens armed with butter knives is significantly more vulnerable than a country armed with firearms. You are required to delude yourself of that to push narrative based on an inconsequential amount of deaths though.

[pgardn]

"Bundy Militia" is a nice deflection to reality. Why did they prohibit Jews from having guns if they didn't have any value? Uh...uh... let deflect that reality with a "Bundy Militia" remark.

Yes, those countries are vulnerable. Especially the countries like England that seem to have thought police for the internet.

But...but... I have pretend that millions of people being wiped out with ease is impossible for my argument to be relevant. Otherwise the handfuls of people that die in the statistical anomalies that we call "mass murders" wouldn't be something to rally behind for ineffective gun laws in the hopes prevent said anomalies.

Yes, a country of citizens armed with butter knives is significantly more vulnerable than a country armed with firearms. You are required to delude yourself of that to push narrative based on an inconsequential amount of deaths though.

The Bundys thought the federal government had done them wrong while illegally grazing their cattle on MY land. You think I should go in and give them a what fer?

You have built yourself a survivalist shelter. You must have.

England, France and Germany are all vulnerable because their citizens don't have guns?
We see totally different threats. Most significant Western revolutions have been caused by unequal distribution of wealth due to corrupt dictatorships. Then the army pledges to either their neighbor's or their government. You would have citizens fighting citizens as well. Excellent. All hell breaks lose either way. So think about a healthy middle class before pledging allegiance to the subdivision you live in.

[DMC]

Lots o' losing when you are the judge.
So do you ever feel like shooting the monitor because your 1st amendment rights are tittering on the brink of collapse?

It's easy to see you build a 3 sided room and ask someone to choose a direction in which to exit. That's a sign of a weak argument. Dunning Kruger suits you perfectly.

[DMC]

The Bundys thought the federal government had done them wrong while illegally grazing their cattle on MY land. You think I should go in and give them a what fer?

You have built yourself a survivalist shelter. You must have.

England, France and Germany are all vulnerable because their citizens don't have guns?
We see totally different threats. Most significant Western revolutions have been caused by unequal distribution of wealth due to corrupt dictatorships. Then the army pledges to either their neighbor's or their government. You would have citizens fighting citizens as well. Excellent. All hell breaks lose either way. So think about a healthy middle class before pledging allegiance to the subdivision you live in.

How much acid did you drop in your younger days?

[Pavlov]

So you are for banning alcohol because it causes an massive amount of casualties every year? No?Actually I wouldn't mind stricter laws concerning alcohol tbh.

How would you feel about that?

[pgardn]

How much acid did you drop in your younger days?

Is your OCD overwhelming or just bothersome?

It not easy for you to see anything.
You got instruments that measure things allowing you to smell numbers.
That was neat.

[pgardn]

It's easy to see you build a 3 sided room and ask someone to choose a direction in which to exit. That's a sign of a weak argument. Dunning Kruger suits you perfectly.

"Im being trodden on, where's muh gun", rates weak arguments?
You just lost.
Mark that down.

[DMC]

"Im being trodden on, where's muh gun", rates weak arguments?
You just lost.
Mark that down.

I've not once claimed anyone is trying to take my gun. I'm a bowhunter. You going to take my bow?

Your need to divide people into two extreme positions is another indication that you're short on scope.

[spurraider21]

It's easy to see you build a 3 sided room and ask someone to choose a direction in which to exit. That's a sign of a weak argument. Dunning Kruger suits you perfectly.
says the guy who says the only options are to ban all guns or do nothing at all

[DMC]

says the guy who says the only options are to ban all guns or do nothing at all

Where did I say those are the only options?

Cue...."you didn't use those exact words but..."

[DMC]

1. You don't have to be a gun expert to have a valid opinion on whether or not they should be legal to own.
2. However if you don't know anything about guns, you're going to get into a quagmire if you try to discuss technical legislation like "evil features".
3. Comparing guns to anything else used to kill people is a valid argument as long as the argument is about saving lives instead of limiting or avoiding certain types of deaths.
4. "Designed purpose" is a poor argument especially coming from folks who are gun ignorant.
5. Recency bias makes you think mass shootings are rampant, and media coverage of those vs other incidents where multiple people are killed creates the false sense of urgency.

[pgardn]

I've not once claimed anyone is trying to take my gun. I'm a bowhunter. You going to take my bow?

Your need to divide people into two extreme positions is another indication that you're short on scope.

You claiming your first amendment goes before your 2nd...
I don't care what you hunt with buster.

[Nathan89]

The Bundys thought the federal government had done them wrong while illegally grazing their cattle on MY land. You think I should go in and give them a what fer?

You have built yourself a survivalist shelter. You must have.

England, France and Germany are all vulnerable because their citizens don't have guns?
We see totally different threats. Most significant Western revolutions have been caused by unequal distribution of wealth due to corrupt dictatorships. Then the army pledges to either their neighbor's or their government. You would have citizens fighting citizens as well. Excellent. All hell breaks lose either way. So think about a healthy middle class before pledging allegiance to the subdivision you live in.

You sure do like to focus statistical outliers. Even more so in this comment.

If they aren't more vulnerable then the Nazis made the law prohibiting jews to own guns for nothing. Did they? I don't think so. They are either more vulnerable or at the very least perceived as more vulnerable which makes them more vulnerable. They are especially more vulnerable when you combine them being armed with butter knives with their limited free speech rights.

"You would have citizens fighting citizens as well. Excellent. All hell breaks lose either way."

Citizens being able to fight citizens in what can be framed as a revolution to fix a broken system is significantly different than eating bullets on your knees from those in power trying maintain/gain even greater power. Newsflash nobody is coming our rescue if something that unfortunate was to ever happen. So moving policy based on statistical anomalies labeled as "mass murders" (meanwhile thousands die from alcohol accidents and silence), just because the news bombards you with it, doesn't seem favorable to me. It lacks foresight and historical perspective. It appeals to feels in the moment without regards to anything else. It literally requires you to believe that history can't possibly repeat itself.

[Pavlov]

You sure do like to focus statistical outliers.Isn't Nazi Germany a statistical outlier?

[pgardn]

You sure do like to focus statistical outliers. Even more so in this comment.

If they aren't more vulnerable then the Nazis made the law prohibiting jews to own guns for nothing. Did they? I don't think so. They are either more vulnerable or at the very least perceived as more vulnerable which makes them more vulnerable. They are especially more vulnerable when you combine them being armed with butter knives with their limited free speech rights.

"You would have citizens fighting citizens as well. Excellent. All hell breaks lose either way."

Citizens being able to fight citizens in what can be framed as a revolution to fix a broken system is significantly different than eating bullets on your knees from those in power trying maintain/gain even greater power. Newsflash nobody is coming our rescue if something that unfortunate was to ever happen. So moving policy based on statistical anomalies labeled as "mass murders" (meanwhile thousands die from alcohol accidents and silence), just because the news bombards you with it, doesn't seem favorable to me. It lacks foresight and historical perspective. It appeals to feels in the moment without regards to anything else. It literally requires you to believe that history can't possibly repeat itself.

You still don't get it.

As a society, if we were merely interested in death to US citizens we would end transportation by individuals. No driving big machines. But, we as a society have decided the deaths due to the inevitable accidents, is worth the price of freedom of transportation. We attempt to make cars safer and roads safer (God forbid government mandated in many places "I hate my Fckn seatbelt"), but this will not stop the carnage because lots of the US is open and without public mass transportation. People will die. Many people will die.

People in the US have not decided that past and recent mass shootings due to people with weapons that can kill many people very rapidly is just part of the price of freedom to bear arms. We have guns everywhere, they will never go away, it's too much apart of our heritage IMO. But, weapons that are used to kill people very rapidly are not okay with the majority of Americans where as death due to transportation, is accepted.

Now what are you having problems understanding?

Because the majority of people don't see this happening on any significant scale in the US:


Is significantly different than eating bullets on your knees from those in power trying maintain/gain even greater power.

[Nathan89]

Isn't Nazi Germany a statistical outlier?

Yeah, it's an outlier with significantly more damage though. He uses outliers with minimal damage.

outlier*low damage= nothing(but he's pushing policy on it)
outlier*high damage= something(certainly something to factor in to policy decisions)

The problem is the high damage outlier is far more rare so people don't even consider it even though the damage far out weighs the other scenario. Meanwhile the low damage outlier happens frequently enough for the news to bombard the nation and appeal to feels. Of course there will be zero perspective. They want change and any change even if it erodes our rights will do. Even if it's proven to be ineffective the change is fine.

[Nathan89]

You still don't get it.

As a society, if we were merely interested in death to US citizens we would end transportation by individuals. No driving big machines. But, we as a society have decided the deaths due to the inevitable accidents, is worth the price of freedom of transportation. We attempt to make cars safer and roads safer (God forbid government mandated in many places "I hate my Fckn seatbelt"), but this will not stop the carnage because lots of the US is open and without public mass transportation. People will die. Many people will die.

People in the US have not decided that past and recent mass shootings due to people with weapons that can kill many people very rapidly is just part of the price of freedom to bear arms. We have guns everywhere, they will never go away, it's too much apart of our heritage IMO. But, weapons that are used to kill people very rapidly are not okay with the majority of Americans where as death due to transportation, is accepted.

Now what are you having problems understanding?

Because the majority of people don't see this happening on any significant scale in the US:


Is significantly different than eating bullets on your knees from those in power trying maintain/gain even greater power.


Majority Americans lack foresight so the appeal to feels of the present is more compelling than being secure in the long-term. If the News showed the majority of Americans perspective then that will quickly change.

Yes, automobiles are clearly 100% necessary. When you compare guns to alcohol which is not necessary you realize that it really all boils down to a selfish perspective.

There are 3 factors here: lack of foresight, lack of historical perspective, and a selfish perspective.

Source for you majority of Americans claims? Just want to look at it.

[Pavlov]

Yeah, it's an outlier with significantly more damage though. He uses outliers with minimal damage.

outlier*low damage= nothing(but he's pushing policy on it)
outlier*high damage= something(certainly something to factor in to policy decisions)

The problem is the high damage outlier is far more rare so people don't even consider it even though the damage far out weighs the other scenario. Meanwhile the low damage outlier happens frequently enough for the news to bombard the nation and appeal to feels. Of course there will be zero perspective. They want change and any change even if it erodes our rights will do. Even if it's proven to be ineffective the change is fine.Well, if the US starts taking guns fom Jews you can say "I told ya so."

[Nathan89]

It's not that they don't see that happening they don't even consider it happening. One should certainly consider it and I'm not sure why it so difficult to see it happening.

"Those who cannot learn from history are doomed to repeat it."

[Nathan89]

Well, if the US starts taking guns fom Jews you can say "I told ya so."

Are you lost?

In that scenario the American populace is Jews.

There will be the news and a "you" fear mongering till every gun is taken away. These guns are too "dangerous" (even though this is a irrelevant statistical outlier and making this change doesn't change anything about deaths by guns) so let's take them away. Government takes them away. Something happens with other guns. The goal posts move. The very same argument you made about the high power guns can still be made about virtually any gun. Rinse repeat. Fear monger. Rinse repeat. The population is now gunless and more vulnerable.

[Nathan89]

The unfortunate thing is when guns are gone and American populace is vulnerable to the whims of those in power nobody is going to come to their rescue. If America isn't a risk to the World then everybody is going to let us get fucked.

Of course that couldn't possibly happen. History doesn't repeat at all. So here have my guns even though they don't move the needle at all(they are just too scary and I lack all perspective).

[Nathan89]

Guns are checks and balances for the entire system. Without them you are vulnerable. Period.

[Pavlov]

Are you lost?

In that scenario the American populace is Jews.

There will be the news and a "you" fear mongering till every gun is taken away. These guns are too "dangerous" (even though this is a irrelevant statistical outlier and making this change doesn't change anything about deaths by guns) so let's take them away. Government takes them away. Something happens with other guns. The goal posts move. The very same argument you made about the high power guns can still be made about virtually any gun. Rinse repeat. Fear monger. Rinse repeat. The population is now gunless and more vulnerable.This is your confiscation fantasy?

It's kind of lame tbh.

Let me know when you make your brave armed stand against the tyrannical gubmit, OK? I want to have popcorn handy.

[pgardn]

It's not that they don't see that happening they don't even consider it happening. One should certainly consider it and I'm not sure why it so difficult to see it happening.


"Those who cannot learn from history are doomed to repeat it."

And you have not learned that the scenario that leads to most revolutions (that you are going to lead when the government tries to rule you) comes from dictatorial type government's where wealth is unequally distributed and the government tries to take even more. We already have that established government here, we are not a colony anymore. Are you waiting for Texas to violently break away from the US? Read about the most recent large scale revolutions from within. French, Britian, even Russian.

So what are you doing from preventing a family or king or ruling class to unfairly take the peasants money and then move into the middle class creating a naked division? You need to get together with Boutons and do something.

[pgardn]

Guns are checks and balances for the entire system. Without them you are vulnerable. Period.

Branch Davidianesque...

Ok.

Guns are checks and balances, Fk the 3 branches.
Eventually artillery will be useful as well. Seriously. Just take a look at how important artillery is today when fighting must take place on the ground.

We got a nut.
Done.

[Nathan89]

This is your confiscation fantasy?

It's kind of lame tbh.

Let me know when you make your brave armed stand against the tyrannical gubmit, OK? I want to have popcorn handy.

Yeah, because that's giant leap and not just a continuation of natural steps. If you get what you want and the inevitable "mass murder" happens I'm sure there will zero cries for gun control. No, the exact same conversation will happen. The exact same narrative will be pushed.

[koriwhat]

more guns in responsible hands is the answer! background checks need to be more thorough and licensing must exclude those who are on psychoactive meds or have a history of psychosis.

[TarantinoRezDog]

more guns in responsible hands is the answer! background checks need to be more thorough and licensing must exclude those who are on psychoactive meds or have a history of psychosis.

So you won't be getting a firearm then?

[koriwhat]

So you won't be getting a firearm then?

i don't take meds at all and don't need to. meds are for those who have a fear of the unknown. i already know what the unknown is and i'm not scared of crossing over in due time. a spine helps as well and i hope everyone gets one one of these days.

[TarantinoRezDog]

i don't take meds at all and don't need to. meds are for those who have a fear of the unknown. i already know what the unknown is and i'm not scared of crossing over in due time. a spine helps as well and i hope everyone gets one one of these days.

But you medicate with cheap beer and weed, no?

[koriwhat]

But you medicate with cheap beer and weed, no?

i don't even drink but once or twice every few months and even then it's like a beer if i can stomach it and that's it. go watch some more cnn you fucking lemming.

[koriwhat]

as well, if you believe weed is psychoactive then i have news for you; you're a pussy!

[TarantinoRezDog]

i don't even drink but once or twice every few months and even then it's like a beer if i can stomach it and that's it. go watch some more cnn you fucking lemming.

Weed isn't good for you either. It can potentially harm employment opportunities, as I'm sure you know (by that, I mean all the janitor and male secretary jobs you've lost due to failed drug tests and/or coming into work high).

No judgment. Just trying to help.

[koriwhat]

Weed isn't good for you either. It can potentially harm employment opportunities, as I'm sure you know (by that, I mean all the janitor and male secretary jobs you've lost due to failed drug tests and/or coming into work high).

No judgment. Just trying to help.

so funny... the loser brigade is out and about today spreading their fake news as usual.

fuck employment, i am my own boss. lmao! as if i have to worry about trying to gain employment some place atm.

boohoo weed isn't good for you... blah blah blah!

i've never applied for either a secretary nor janitorial job in my life homie. nor have i ever failed a drug test because i have never needed one. as well, i don't smoke all day and def not during working hours.

fake news much?

[Pavlov]

Yeah, because that's giant leap and not just a continuation of natural steps. If you get what you want and the inevitable "mass murder" happens I'm sure there will zero cries for gun control. No, the exact same conversation will happen. The exact same narrative will be pushed.That's the end game -- you fighting the government with your gun.

Tell me what your battle plan is.

[DMC]

You claiming your first amendment goes before your 2nd...
I don't care what you hunt with buster.

I am predicting it will.

It should stand to reason that if I hunt only with a bow, I am not a gun enthusiast.

[pgardn]

I am predicting it will.

It should stand to reason that if I hunt only with a bow, I am not a gun enthusiast.

So you predict boards like this will be nixed like in China? Before what?

And...No it does not at all.

The progression of hunting deer hunting since bow hunting and rifle/scopes technology is so good. IMO south Texas:

1. Kid - rifle "my first one dad"
2. Adult - rifle to bow "rifle too easy, bow hunting is sporty"
3. Old - bow to camera " lm tired of field dressing. I'll show the kid and we will get meat"


forgot:

You got you own land or lease with others or both?
And whatever the above, don't you/they want to try and kill at least a few pigs?

[Nathan89]

973997318193209345

Wait white men want protection from a demographic that commits a lot of crime?

"“These are men who are anxious about their ability to protect their families..."

How dare they want to protect their family.

[Nathan89]

973982172242685953

We don't live in an ideal world. Those deaths are minimal price to pay. They are statistical outliers.

[Pavlov]

We don't live in an ideal world. Those deaths are minimal price to pay. They are statistical outliers.Dead kids are A-OK because I have to fight off the government with my arsenal.

[Nathan89]

Dead kids are A-OK because I have to fight off the government with my arsenal.

Small price to pay considering the alternative.

Meanwhile dead kids are fine from alcohol related traffic accidents apparently. Dead kids from swimming pools are fine. The list goes on and on.

Even if you exclude any government argument and are blind to history and just focus on the recreational aspect of guns vs the recreational aspect of swimming or drinking I still wouldn't agree with you perspective. And in fact I think that perspective as I mentioned is purely a selfish perspective.

[Pavlov]

Small price to pay considering the alternative.

Meanwhile dead kids are fine from alcohol related traffic accidents apparently. Dead kids from swimming pools are fine. The list goes on and on.

Even if you exclude any government argument and are blind to history and just focus on the recreational aspect of guns vs the recreational aspect of swimming or drinking I still wouldn't agree with you perspective. And in fact I think that perspective as I mentioned is purely a selfish perspective.Describe your plan to fight the government to justify the deaths of all the kids.

[koriwhat]

Small price to pay considering the alternative.

Meanwhile dead kids are fine from alcohol related traffic accidents apparently. Dead kids from swimming pools are fine. The list goes on and on.

Even if you exclude any government argument and are blind to history and just focus on the recreational aspect of guns vs the recreational aspect of swimming or drinking I still wouldn't agree with you perspective. And in fact I think that perspective as I mentioned is purely a selfish perspective.

:clap

[Nathan89]

Describe your plan to fight the government to justify the deaths of all the kids.

You can't even fathom the possibility of history repeating and I need a full blown plan to defeat the government?

Anyways guerrilla tactics are effective. Proven time and time again. Here is a little snippet from quora. I imagine that covers probably the most effective strategy for any coming unfortunate situations.

"I'd say the American War of independence - where British generals began referring to Patriot forces as engaging them in 'little warfare', noting that the Patriots stood no chance against King's men, in open ground, but became lethal when drawing the British into dense cover. Principle attributes that mark this out as one of the first examples of modern guerilla warfare, are things like the Patriot emphasis on employing well trained marksmen, with truly accurate, rifled weapons, and using them to take out British officers, by choice (to the extent that edicts were eventually issued, throughout the British army, forbidding men from open displays of deference towards their superior officers, lest those officers immediately take a bullet, as the cost of it)."

[Pavlov]

You can't even fathom the possibility of history repeating and I need a full blown plan to defeat the government?Of course you do. It's your scenario, not mine.

:lmao the American Revolution

Doesn't fit your scenario at all.

[Nathan89]

Of course you do. It's your scenario, not mine.

:lmao the American Revolution

Doesn't fit your scenario at all.

I quoted that to show you an effective strategy. That was an example given on the topic guerilla warfare. One of many but I quoted that to display the strategy. Also I disagree that it doesn't fit my scenario. They revolution would have not happened with butter knives. They were outnumbered and overpowered so that required other tactics to defeat them. I repeat it would not have happened with butter knives. Regardless there are many example of guerilla tactics working.

Guerilla warfare is proven to be effective it's not on me to formulate a plan for you. It's proven to be effective. Perhaps not when all you have is butter knives though.

[KenMcCoy]

We as a society are willing to take the death toll from cars and trucks for the sake of transportation.

CNN has spotted a trend of vehicles being used as weapons, so now we just need to wait for the calls to ban vehicles: https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.cnn.com/cnn/2017/03/22/world/vehicles-as-weapons/index.html

Yep... there's the call to ban vehicles from US cities: https://www.buzzfeed.com/jessesinger/ban-cars?utm_term=.qfY5EqYAj#.whpxL3Wp4

Might as well follow Europe's lead and ban cars since they are so great and don't allow guns: http://www.businessinsider.com/cities-going-car-free-ban-2017-8

[Bill_Brasky]

Small price to pay considering the alternative.

Meanwhile dead kids are fine from alcohol related traffic accidents apparently. Dead kids from swimming pools are fine. The list goes on and on.

Even if you exclude any government argument and are blind to history and just focus on the recreational aspect of guns vs the recreational aspect of swimming or drinking I still wouldn't agree with you perspective. And in fact I think that perspective as I mentioned is purely a selfish perspective.

Kids dying in accidents isn't even close to the same thing as kids being murdered in a fucking school.

[Bill_Brasky]

"Welp, the world isn't ideal! We just have to accept that because certain people have a gun fetish, kids being murdered in cold blood by their classmates is a reality!"

[Bill_Brasky]

You can't even fathom the possibility of history repeating and I need a full blown plan to defeat the government?

Anyways guerrilla tactics are effective. Proven time and time again. Here is a little snippet from quora. I imagine that covers probably the most effective strategy for any coming unfortunate situations.

"I'd say the American War of independence - where British generals began referring to Patriot forces as engaging them in 'little warfare', noting that the Patriots stood no chance against King's men, in open ground, but became lethal when drawing the British into dense cover. Principle attributes that mark this out as one of the first examples of modern guerilla warfare, are things like the Patriot emphasis on employing well trained marksmen, with truly accurate, rifled weapons, and using them to take out British officers, by choice (to the extent that edicts were eventually issued, throughout the British army, forbidding men from open displays of deference towards their superior officers, lest those officers immediately take a bullet, as the cost of it)."



You realize that they have drones and bombs, right?