wvugurl26
Distinguished Associate
Joined: Dec 19, 2010 15:25:30 GMT -5
Posts: 21,730
|
Post by wvugurl26 on Dec 14, 2012 14:22:10 GMT -5
Problem is I might be perfectly sane when I purchase the gun, but not 5-10-15 years down the road. I believe it was the V-tech killer that they said passed all the requirements to obtain a weapon, but he still went and shot up the place. Everything was above board according to the law. So I don't see how making them stircter would help. The really bonkers people already get screened out. It's the ones that are silent and can pass the screening that you have to worry about. You're not going to catch them. Personally I think that what needs to be done is quit giving these f-ers their 15 minutes of fame. We interview their familes, their friends, their neighbors, their psychologists. WEEKS were spent on the V-tech killer. You are sending these people the message that this is a way to get attention, this is a way to get your 15 minutes of fame. You're name will be remembered forever if you do this. I agree 100% with a psychologist on GMA after V-tech. Say the kid's name, if he is dead or alive and that is IT. The person ceases to exist after that. Focus on the victims and their families. Quit with the unlimited coverage of the killer. You're making it look glamorous to the other kooks out there. You're making it obvious to people who feel the same way that they too will finally get the attention they want from others. If they know the only thing their going ot get out of it is "good riddance you bastard" they aren't going to see much appeal in it. You're probably still going to have someone do it, you can't prevent all the crazy in the world, but it'd probably go a long way to stop the copy cats. That would probably cut down on copy cats. They should treat all of them the same way. Quit giving them attention, they don't deserve it.
|
|
swamp
Community Leader
Don't be a fool. Call me!
Joined: Dec 19, 2010 16:03:22 GMT -5
Posts: 45,345
|
Post by swamp on Dec 14, 2012 14:23:45 GMT -5
|
|
Deleted
Joined: May 18, 2024 4:18:40 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 14, 2012 15:49:26 GMT -5
They are saying that most of the shooting took place in a kindergarten classroom. My heart is breaking and I really want to run home and hug my kid. -------------- I know, eh? Evidently the shooter fired off more than 100 rounds. Can't do that with a handgun. Uh huh. Clearly, more assault weapons and semi-automatics are the answer. What could possibly go wrong? Clearly you are wrong as handguns are exactly what were used. It's really not that difficult to load a clip into a handgun. Perhaps if you weren't so "anti-anything you don't agree with" then you'd have a clue.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: May 18, 2024 4:18:40 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 14, 2012 15:52:01 GMT -5
The movie theater, the spa, the mall, now a school. Not counting the shooters, that is 44 people in just a few months. I don't think you can call it a media concoction. The guy today used handguns...not assault rifles.
|
|
NomoreDramaQ1015
Community Leader
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 14:26:32 GMT -5
Posts: 47,331
|
Post by NomoreDramaQ1015 on Dec 14, 2012 15:58:12 GMT -5
I do believe technically a hand gun is a semi-automatic. DH explained to me the difference between an automatic and semi-automatic once and it has to do pulling the trigger. Automatics you only have to squeeze the trigger once and you can keep going virtually forever. A semi-auto I have to keep pulling the trigger.
I might have that wrong though, so please feel free to correct.
|
|
Tiny
Senior Associate
Joined: Dec 29, 2010 21:22:34 GMT -5
Posts: 13,373
|
Post by Tiny on Dec 14, 2012 16:05:36 GMT -5
I think there's something like 700 or so gun related deaths in Chicago each year (population of 3 million people)... Basically, the newspaper reports another death (or two) and a bunch of people hurt by gun fire every morning. They aren't always related to each other or even in the same area's of the city.
I suspect Chicago isn't any more 'gun' violent than any other US city with over a million people... so there's lots of people being shot and killed in America on a daily basis.
Are we just complacent about gang violence and routine domestic violence? If a teen or little kid gets shot in gang cross fire - no one really seems to be overly upset. When an estranged lover/husband shoots his wife (and maybe a couple two three of her coworkers or friends or other relatives) there's a bunch of tskking and head shaking. How come the whole 'gun control' thing only gets everybodies undies in a bunch when someone opens fire on a crowd? There are plenty of people dying daily from gunfire - do we just 'not see' them because it's assumed they got what they deserved (knowing/hanging with gang members or having pissed off their spouse or family member)?? Do we feel that those victims are somehow responsible for their own deaths? While the people killed in a crowd are innocent victims?
Does that make a difference when it comes to how one feels about gun controls?
|
|
Sum Dum Gai
Senior Associate
Joined: Aug 15, 2011 15:39:24 GMT -5
Posts: 19,892
|
Post by Sum Dum Gai on Dec 14, 2012 16:05:39 GMT -5
That's the idea behind training, but it's not a hard and fast reality. The military trains with live rounds being shot over their heads, actual explosions going off in their vicinity, etc. Their training is realistic enough that some of them die participating every year. They still aren't perfect when they see real combat. We still have friendly fire casualties. We still have some soldiers that freeze up, or panic, when it's no longer training and they're actually putting their life on the line.
Being an internet Rambo is easy. Being Rambo in your own head is easy. Actually handling yourself in a fire fight is not. It goes against nearly every human instinct. It takes a lot of training to be able to overcome those instincts, and even if you go through a lot of training you still won't know how you'll react when it's the real thing unless you have the misfortune of actually having to use your weapon.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: May 18, 2024 4:18:40 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 14, 2012 16:06:10 GMT -5
in my opinion, it isnt the regular guns it is the semi/auto weapons Can you define "regular guns"? Is a pistol a regular gun in your scenario?
|
|
Deleted
Joined: May 18, 2024 4:18:40 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 14, 2012 16:10:02 GMT -5
I do believe technically a hand gun is a semi-automatic. DH explained to me the difference between an automatic and semi-automatic once and it has to do pulling the trigger. Automatics you only have to squeeze the trigger once and you can keep going virtually forever. A semi-auto I have to keep pulling the trigger. I might have that wrong though, so please feel free to correct. You are correct.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: May 18, 2024 4:18:40 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 14, 2012 16:15:36 GMT -5
I think Swamp is right, anytime anyone brings up gun control people start freaking the hell out, but my guess is that none of those people have had their five year old killed in a class room, or a movie theater or the mall by some crazy with a gun. I've been robbed and had a gun pointed at my head by some crazy with a gun. I know exactly what emotions and feelings are potentially going through their minds. Yet, I don't think that guns need to be banned or limited to law enforcement because the guys that were pointing guns at my wife, sister, friends and myself were 3+ time felons so obviously they could still find a gun.
|
|
movingforward
Junior Associate
Joined: Sept 15, 2011 12:48:31 GMT -5
Posts: 8,363
|
Post by movingforward on Dec 14, 2012 16:20:08 GMT -5
I think Swamp is right, anytime anyone brings up gun control people start freaking the hell out, but my guess is that none of those people have had their five year old killed in a class room, or a movie theater or the mall by some crazy with a gun. I've been robbed and had a gun pointed at my head by some crazy with a gun. I know exactly what emotions and feelings are potentially going through their minds. Yet, I don't think that guns need to be banned or limited to law enforcement because the guys that were pointing guns at my wife, sister, friends and myself were 3+ time felons so obviously they could still find a gun. I haven't heard anyone say they wanted to ban guns completely.
|
|
NomoreDramaQ1015
Community Leader
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 14:26:32 GMT -5
Posts: 47,331
|
Post by NomoreDramaQ1015 on Dec 14, 2012 16:20:37 GMT -5
Yay, I learned something. Pretty much every gun on the market is a semi-automatic. We'd have to go back to muskets to get rid of semi-automatics.
|
|
midjd
Administrator
Your Money Admin
Joined: Dec 18, 2010 14:09:23 GMT -5
Posts: 17,719
|
Post by midjd on Dec 14, 2012 16:23:09 GMT -5
|
|
DVM gone riding
Senior Member
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 23:04:13 GMT -5
Posts: 3,383
Favorite Drink: Coffee!!
|
Post by DVM gone riding on Dec 14, 2012 16:24:54 GMT -5
"To me one of the questions is what type of gun do you need to protect your home? Do you need an assault rifle to do it? " What is the difference between a rifle and an assault rifle? Is there a different kind than an assault rifle? Assault rifles are usually classified as being fully automatic. If you don't have full auto, it's probably not classified as an assault rifle (but could still be an assault weapon which is based on a whole different set of criteria). And the gunman in Oregon didn't use an assault rifle, just an FYI. His was apparently a semi-auto from the story. Generally speaking FULL auto is illegal but it can still be sold as an semi auto assault weapon--its the type of gun--then there are conversion kits--probably also borderline illegal that gun enthusiasts use to make them into auto weapons but it is CURRENTLY illegal in most (all???) of the US for normal citizens to buy FULL auto weapons. Semi auto Fyi (for everyone not just you) means you have to pull the trigger and release for each shot but don't have to re-cock the gun.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: May 18, 2024 4:18:40 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 14, 2012 16:35:19 GMT -5
And it's a hell of a lot easier to inflict damage when you can fire off 200 rounds without having to stop and reload. There are very few guns out there that aren't fully automatic that have this capability. It's this kind of asinine argument from people who have no clue what they are talking about is why most responsible gun owners are tired of hearing this anti-gun BS.
|
|
midjd
Administrator
Your Money Admin
Joined: Dec 18, 2010 14:09:23 GMT -5
Posts: 17,719
|
Post by midjd on Dec 14, 2012 16:38:56 GMT -5
Where did I mention anything about automatic v semiautomatic?
And calling others' arguments asinine doesn't add much to the discourse, particularly when there is nothing about my statement that was false. You can disagree without calling names.
|
|
hoops902
Senior Associate
Joined: Dec 22, 2010 13:21:29 GMT -5
Posts: 11,978
|
Post by hoops902 on Dec 14, 2012 16:41:10 GMT -5
::We'd have to go back to muskets to get rid of semi-automatics.::
You don't have to go THAT far back. You don't have to go back to guns that you manually load with powder, you just have to go back to guns that need to be cocked back before each shot.
|
|
midjd
Administrator
Your Money Admin
Joined: Dec 18, 2010 14:09:23 GMT -5
Posts: 17,719
|
Post by midjd on Dec 14, 2012 16:44:43 GMT -5
The horror!
|
|
movingforward
Junior Associate
Joined: Sept 15, 2011 12:48:31 GMT -5
Posts: 8,363
|
Post by movingforward on Dec 14, 2012 16:45:34 GMT -5
|
|
Deleted
Joined: May 18, 2024 4:18:40 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 14, 2012 16:51:48 GMT -5
Yay, I learned something. Pretty much every gun on the market is a semi-automatic. We'd have to go back to muskets to get rid of semi-automatics. You are correct. There are a few old revolvers that are "single-action"...but most today are "double-action"
|
|
Deleted
Joined: May 18, 2024 4:18:40 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 14, 2012 16:53:13 GMT -5
Where did I mention anything about automatic v semiautomatic? And calling others' arguments asinine doesn't add much to the discourse, particularly when there is nothing about my statement that was false. You can disagree without calling names. You said something about shooting 200 rounds without reloading...did you not? Now...can you find where one of these mass murders recently has had a weapon that could fire 200 rounds...or anywhere close to that without reloading?
|
|
Deleted
Joined: May 18, 2024 4:18:40 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 14, 2012 16:53:43 GMT -5
in my opinion, it isnt the regular guns it is the semi/auto weapons Can you define "regular guns"? Is a pistol a regular gun in your scenario? i dont know enough to probably give a great answer, but here is my short one regular gun = gun that has to be reloaded after 15-20 shots max, and that only fires one shot for every pull of the trigger hope that helps
|
|
Deleted
Joined: May 18, 2024 4:18:40 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 14, 2012 16:53:57 GMT -5
Where did I mention anything about automatic v semiautomatic? And calling others' arguments asinine doesn't add much to the discourse, particularly when there is nothing about my statement that was false. You can disagree without calling names. Saying your argument is asinine is not calling names.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: May 18, 2024 4:18:40 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 14, 2012 16:57:03 GMT -5
Can you define "regular guns"? Is a pistol a regular gun in your scenario? i dont know enough to probably give a great answer, but here is my short one regular gun = gun that has to be reloaded after 15-20 shots max, and that only fires one shot for every pull of the trigger hope that helps Okay. The reason I asked that simple question is because you made a point to say you don't think semi/automatic weapons should be allowed. As has been pointed out, most pistols are semi-automatic. All that means is that you have to pull the trigger to continue firing. People hear "semi-automatic" and think "machine gun". This is not even close to reality.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: May 18, 2024 4:18:40 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 14, 2012 16:57:35 GMT -5
Where did I mention anything about automatic v semiautomatic? And calling others' arguments asinine doesn't add much to the discourse, particularly when there is nothing about my statement that was false. You can disagree without calling names. You said something about shooting 200 rounds without reloading...did you not? Now...can you find where one of these mass murders recently has had a weapon that could fire 200 rounds...or anywhere close to that without reloading? how many rounds do the big clips hold for the assault guns? how many rounds per second are released? i am pretty sure that THOSE are the guns most of us have issues with....or anything that can be easily converted to do that machine pistols is think is the term they use for them
|
|
Deleted
Joined: May 18, 2024 4:18:40 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 14, 2012 17:01:19 GMT -5
You said something about shooting 200 rounds without reloading...did you not? Now...can you find where one of these mass murders recently has had a weapon that could fire 200 rounds...or anywhere close to that without reloading? how many rounds do the big clips hold for the assault guns? how many rounds per second are released? i am pretty sure that THOSE are the guns most of us have issues with....or anything that can be easily converted to do that machine pistols is think is the term they use for them Clip size and rounds fired per "minute" are 2 different things. For example: an AK-47 can fire 600 rounds/minute but has a general clip size of 30 rounds. The M-16 can fire 700-950 rounds/minute and has a general clip size of 30. Nowhere near 200 round clip size. Now with a "drum" type clip you can get around 100 rounds but that's still only half of the 200 mentioned.
|
|
midjd
Administrator
Your Money Admin
Joined: Dec 18, 2010 14:09:23 GMT -5
Posts: 17,719
|
Post by midjd on Dec 14, 2012 17:02:12 GMT -5
Now... did I say anything about any mass murderers? Or give any specific examples?
All I said is that it's pretty easy to cause some major damage if you can fire off 200 rounds without reloading. I haven't ever personally DONE that, but I'm pretty sure it's true. If not, my apologies. (PS - I never said that's what these people did.)
|
|
Deleted
Joined: May 18, 2024 4:18:40 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 14, 2012 17:05:41 GMT -5
Now... did I say anything about any mass murderers? Or give any specific examples? All I said is that it's pretty easy to cause some major damage if you can fire off 200 rounds without reloading. I haven't ever personally DONE that, but I'm pretty sure it's true. If not, my apologies. (PS - I never said that's what these people did.) Of course it's easy to do some major damage with a weapon that can fire 200 rounds without reloading. The issue is that most weapons that the general public can get (including semi and fully automatic weapons) do not have this capability UNLESS they are purchasing something like a .50cal machine gun that goes on top of a Humvee. Edit: Weapons that are "belt-fed" can have this 200+ round capability but you're not going to see anyone just carrying this around because of the weight it would require.
|
|
midjd
Administrator
Your Money Admin
Joined: Dec 18, 2010 14:09:23 GMT -5
Posts: 17,719
|
Post by midjd on Dec 14, 2012 17:06:32 GMT -5
Okey doke. But next time you're going to call my argument asinine, try to stick to what I actually said and not what you infer.
My original statement was a bit hyperbolic - but the point remains. If you can fire off, say, 30 rounds without reloading - that has a hell of a lot more deadly potential than a 6-chambered Colt. I don't know many who are lobbying for the elimination of handguns, and I don't think eliminating handguns, hunting rifles, etc. is the right choice.
But I don't really understand why the Average Joe feels the need to own a weapon that is designed SOLELY to kill as many people as quickly as possible.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: May 18, 2024 4:18:40 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 14, 2012 17:08:47 GMT -5
Okey doke. But next time you're going to call my argument asinine, try to stick to what I actually said and not what you infer. Try to be more clear on what you're saying. We are talking about murders that have happened recently by crazy people with guns and you talk about weapons that can fire 200 rounds without being reloaded. Can't imagine how I made that inference.
|
|