February 22, 2018, 06:34 PM | #226 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: April 10, 2008
Location: Alaska
Posts: 7,014
|
Quote:
Except BP then went and violated them all and blew out the Madonda well. You can't necessarily prove a negative but you can gather data and do some analysis. Like breaking down regulating, high capacity magazines were overturned, they were not overturned based on they did not work, they were overturned because people wanted to sell high capacity magazine and hitched onto the gun movement to do so. How many legal machine guns have been used in committing crimes? They are severely restricted and people keep them under lock and key because they are worth big bucks. The Vegas shooter could have bought as many as he wanted. He would also have attracted attention. So he went with the current alternative. Any single item is not going to stop this. Combined they likely would reduce it. But then of course someone says, well they got around it and X number of people died, so it doesn't work and everyone should be armed. What if 66% of the population does not want to be armed? When conscripts (your general and male population) were the military, about 10% of them were combat effective. The other 90% to varying degrees were not. So if you are lucky, maybe 10% of the population would be capable of handling a gun in a crisis. It may very well not be the ones that currently own or want to own a gun.
__________________
Science and Facts are True whether you believe it or not |
|
February 22, 2018, 06:44 PM | #227 | |||||
Senior Member
Join Date: April 10, 2008
Location: Alaska
Posts: 7,014
|
Quote:
Quote:
In both cases it was the organized Army that Jefferson was so against that kicked them out. So far all our wars have been fought by that Army that Jefferson so loathed. Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Well we don't. I can't buy a 20mm 6 barrel cannon, I can buy a mortar. I can't own a number of guns that were declared illegal back in the 30s (short barreled shotgun pistols)
__________________
Science and Facts are True whether you believe it or not |
|||||
February 22, 2018, 06:46 PM | #228 | ||||
Senior Member
Join Date: December 13, 2005
Posts: 4,463
|
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Do you believe that the 2d Am. describes a valid and current individual right? If so, what is the scope of that right, i.e. who has the right and what does it guarantee him?
__________________
http://www.npboards.com/index.php Last edited by zukiphile; February 22, 2018 at 06:54 PM. |
||||
February 22, 2018, 07:02 PM | #229 | |
member
Join Date: June 12, 2000
Location: Texas and Oklahoma area
Posts: 8,462
|
Quote:
|
|
February 22, 2018, 07:21 PM | #230 |
Senior Member
Join Date: December 22, 2015
Posts: 887
|
I always found the idea of magazine limits silly. Even with a 6 rounder and a few extra mags a nut job could easily kill eight or ten unarmed people. No one wants a school shooting with eight deaths either. Same could happen without a semi auto; with a six shot revolver and a few speedloaders.
It's amazing how short sighted some can be. |
February 22, 2018, 08:26 PM | #231 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: April 8, 2013
Location: US
Posts: 455
|
Quote:
The caveat of this argument is that the assumption is being made that the shooter is trained to efficiently and effectively use the weapon, and reload it. Some nut job like in Florida, who I highly doubt was ever trained in optimizing the effective firing rate of an AR is always going to run for a higher capacity mag. I'd say if you were thoroughly trained in the use of an AR and had developed muscle memory then to your point it wouldn't matter if it were 10,20, or 30 round mags, either way a lot of lead is coming down the barrel. I'm not advocating for restrictions, not at all. Just fleshing out two different sides to a point of view. The issue at hand, mass shootings is far more complex than just guns, or just mental illness. It's not black and white unfortunately, if it were we'd have had a solution in place long ago. Obviously I think we can all agree that we want ourselves and our loved ones to come home every night. Until this country can boil down the issues and discuss things in a civil manner, on both sides of the aisle we'll continue to see these things pop up. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk |
|
February 22, 2018, 08:47 PM | #232 |
Senior Member
Join Date: September 15, 2010
Posts: 1,850
|
RC20 you use tactics that are very popular with anti-gun folks. You claim to support the right to arms, while advocating for changes that would gut our 2A. You dismiss our Founding Fathers, Constitution and our system of government as the flawed and imperfect compromise of a different time. You rail against the tyranny of Wall Street and big corporations. You assert that most of us who carry guns are incompetent and too dangerous to ourselves and others to have them.
You are confident that a standing army makes any talk of protection from tyranny by armed citizens nonsense, while at the same time claiming that you know and understand history. You can claim to be pro-gun, but your rhetoric doesn't support your claim.
__________________
"Any fool can criticize, condemn and complain and most fools do." Benjamin Franklin |
February 22, 2018, 08:54 PM | #233 |
Senior Member
Join Date: February 28, 2013
Location: Detroit
Posts: 435
|
Why does this have to start to boil down into finger pointing? People are beginning to throw around the title of anti-gunner like "witch" and "communist."
There's a broad spectrum of beliefs when it comes to the subject of guns and the second amendment, and different reasons for those beliefs. Lets not paint those with differing opinions as traitors.
__________________
“Peace is that brief glorious moment in history when everybody stands around reloading".” ― --Thomas Jefferson |
February 22, 2018, 08:58 PM | #234 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: December 13, 2005
Posts: 4,463
|
Quote:
No one painted him as a traitor.
__________________
http://www.npboards.com/index.php |
|
February 22, 2018, 08:59 PM | #235 | |
Staff
Join Date: September 25, 2008
Location: CONUS
Posts: 18,477
|
Quote:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Hgdq1FBYTUE https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8d2VdaiIodo |
|
February 22, 2018, 09:01 PM | #236 | |
member
Join Date: June 12, 2000
Location: Texas and Oklahoma area
Posts: 8,462
|
Quote:
|
|
February 22, 2018, 09:31 PM | #237 |
Moderator Emeritus
Join Date: June 29, 2000
Location: Rupert, Idaho
Posts: 9,660
|
I'm still waitng to hear of any proposal that somehow will at least slow down these maniacs from attacking our kids!
Not may.... Not might... WILL Until then, I'll entertain ways to fix what is so obviously broken. A fix, might I remind you, that will not add more red tape or other silly complexity to the current laws. No amount of fist pounding, screaming or hand-wringing will convince me that something has already been proposed in this thread that meets the criteria above. |
February 22, 2018, 10:03 PM | #238 | ||
Senior Member
Join Date: February 28, 2013
Location: Detroit
Posts: 435
|
Quote:
Quote:
However you can also turn this around. There is no proposal that is going to be a 100% guarantee that a positive outcome will be reached. Not arming teachers, not increased training, not GVRO's, not improving mental health care, not fixing the NICS system... Nothing is certain. You can pick any one of these ideas and it's still going to be trial and error. What's important is that we at least try one of them. I've already made my arguments for what I think needs to be done and why some things shouldn't be done, so I'm not going to reiterate. I think most of them were on page 4 and 5. I will say though that I think it's a bad idea to arm teachers, which is the current thing the leadership seems to be harping on. On paper it would work, but it assumes the teachers would ensure that they are trained and remain trained well enough to accurately exercise force around crowds of panicking people. Someone also made a point at the CNN debate last night that introducing another person with a weapon, could confuse SWAT teams. Teachers too as a group are more often liberal or Democratic leaning than not so many wouldn't take advantage of the ability to be armed even if they could. Also, didn't the school already have an armed patrolman? Didn't seem to matter. That is evidence. Another point is that a productive society cannot be centered around and worry about the preservation of their own lives. Arming schools, proposing that kids be issued body armor, metal detectors, armed guards, increased patrols... All of this skews the center of daily life towards violent conflict which I think is perverted; this isn't a third world country. We carry guns to deal with outlier negative situations when they arise but they're not a solution to the problem, they are a temporary salve to help remedy specific problems. They don't solve an issue, they resolve a conflict. The focus shouldn't be on escalation. What was it that Montesquieu thought, "government should be set up so that no man need be afraid of another?" I think that's a good case idea against escalation.
__________________
“Peace is that brief glorious moment in history when everybody stands around reloading".” ― --Thomas Jefferson Last edited by NateKirk; February 22, 2018 at 10:43 PM. |
||
February 22, 2018, 10:37 PM | #239 | |||||
Senior Member
Join Date: August 9, 2007
Location: Oregoncoast
Posts: 1,793
|
Quote:
Frankly I doubt that many of the founding fathers would have agreed with the liberals imposition of the FED in 1913 and the fiat currency we have now, but that's a Whole different matter! Having said that I personally know in my bones that socialism is based on envy and theft, while true marketpace capitalism is based on industry and saving, and competition that benefits everyone. Quote:
But are you implying that liars on CNN deserve our attention or sympathy? I know who is under attack sir, the Patriotic America gun owner, that's who! Did any of the readers here murder a school full of kids? No? Then Why are we being punished? Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
But it sounds to me like you have no respect for the second amendment. Why not be honest and admit that?
__________________
CNC produced 416 stainless triggers to replace the plastic triggers on Colt Mustangs, Mustang Plus II's, MK IV Government .380's and Sig P238's and P938's. Plus Colt Mustang hardened 416 guide rods, and Llama .32 and .380 recoil spring buttons, checkered nicely and blued. |
|||||
February 22, 2018, 10:54 PM | #240 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: August 9, 2007
Location: Oregoncoast
Posts: 1,793
|
Quote:
All a kid who carefully plans ways around safety measures to enter a school and murder kids deserves is a body full of bullets. That is the correct result, and that is what Mr. Trump is proposing. That little beast should have had to pass a background check to buy a rifle,,,,,oh, yeah, he did! It didn't stop him, How about we fix That? The little beast should have been taken into a mental facility, but again, it didn't happen, so I should lose my rights? That piece of garbage shouldn't have been able to get into the school with a backpack, but he did! The police had to go to his house 39 times, shouldn't that have had some effect on his purchase of a firearm? We need as many armed good guys as it takes inside schools to stop these outrageous. I don't understand what the objection is to that. Depriving the many of their rights for the violations of a few is not right! And it's not the answer.
__________________
CNC produced 416 stainless triggers to replace the plastic triggers on Colt Mustangs, Mustang Plus II's, MK IV Government .380's and Sig P238's and P938's. Plus Colt Mustang hardened 416 guide rods, and Llama .32 and .380 recoil spring buttons, checkered nicely and blued. |
|
February 22, 2018, 10:58 PM | #241 |
Senior Member
Join Date: February 28, 2013
Location: Detroit
Posts: 435
|
Hissoldier,
My personal opinion of the president aside, the rest of my statements still stand. If you want to discuss the arming teachers then offer a rebuttal to my reasoning above. For the sake of convenience however here is the rest of what I said without searching for it: "On paper it would work, but it assumes the teachers would ensure that they are trained and remain trained well enough to accurately exercise force around crowds of panicking people. Someone also made a point at the CNN debate last night that introducing another person with a weapon, could confuse SWAT teams. Teachers too as a group are more often liberal or Democratic leaning than not so many wouldn't take advantage of the ability to be armed even if they could. Also, didn't the school already have an armed patrolman? Didn't seem to matter. That is evidence."
__________________
“Peace is that brief glorious moment in history when everybody stands around reloading".” ― --Thomas Jefferson |
February 22, 2018, 11:03 PM | #242 | |
Staff
Join Date: March 11, 2006
Location: Upper US
Posts: 28,860
|
Quote:
Registered NFA weapons are not banned. Heavily restricted, but not completely banned. "Might as well be" is true, in the practical sense for most of us without huge amounts of disposable income, but its not true in the legal sense. If you're willing to pay $40,000 for a Tommy Gun, you can legally own one. I'm not in the crowd that thinks doing something means passing a new law. I'd rather see NO new law than a bad new law. And a bad new law is almost guaranteed to be what's our representatives will be voting on, if/when it comes to that.
__________________
All else being equal (and it almost never is) bigger bullets tend to work better. |
|
February 22, 2018, 11:39 PM | #243 | |
Staff
Join Date: September 25, 2008
Location: CONUS
Posts: 18,477
|
Quote:
Prior to our entry into World War 1, the strength of our standing Army was just 98,000 (plus 27,000 National Guard). Source At the height of our involvement in WW1, our troop strength went up to 4 million -- 2.7 million of whom were draftees. In 1939, two years prior to our entry into World War 2, our army numbered just 187,000 and was only the 19th largest army in the world. At the peak of our involvement in WW2, our troop strength went up to 12.2 million. By 1947 we were back down to 1.6 million. I think it's fair to argue that, while the U.S. did technically have a standing army, both world wars were fought by men who could rightly be considered to have been called up from the militia (since that's what they were). |
|
February 22, 2018, 11:40 PM | #244 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: October 23, 2005
Location: US
Posts: 3,657
|
Quote:
On to the SWAT team shooting the teacher argument... Well this is a risk. It can be mitigated. For one, said armed teacher could immediately drop their weapon when they see LEO presence. That's what everyone else who encounters police and doesn't want to die does. There could be discreet identifying cues utilized, known only by local LOEs, to also help identify the teacher. The SRO was a coward. So what!?!? I've been to Iraq and Afghanistan as an infantry marine. I've seen folks that most doubted respond well under fire, and I've seen "hard chargers" hide out. The Sutherland springs shooter was engaged by a neighbor to the church and apparently hit at least once by him. One lone police officer with barely a years experience, the only one on duty in southern pines, nc, stopped a mass shooting in a rest home about 7 years ago. There are numerous examples of teachers, coaches, and other staff sacrificing themselves to save students, tackling gunmen, and committing other acts of bravery. Do you think they would act differently? Yeah in this case the "good guy with a gun" hid outside. Doesn't mean that is the norm. Lastly, I will agree that many teachers may be slightly more liberal, but that's painting with a broad brush. Are you sure the Ag teacher, mechanics teacher, every janitor, football coaches, and every other staff member is so liberal that they couldn't imagine using violence to stop a threat against their students? I dont believe it. |
|
February 22, 2018, 11:55 PM | #245 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: October 23, 2005
Location: US
Posts: 3,657
|
Quote:
|
|
February 23, 2018, 01:13 AM | #246 |
Senior Member
Join Date: January 16, 2013
Posts: 280
|
The idea that because a person being armed could confuse a SWAT is ridiculous IMO. I mean yes, there's a risk, but I'd much rather take that risk and be armed so I can shoot back at the mass shooter as opposed to be disarmed and thus at the mercy of the mass shooter and thus probably get killed all so that I don't maybe get shot by a SWAT team.
As for the term "high-capacity" magazine, that was made up by gun control proponents. No where in the world of firearms was it ever considered that anything over ten rounds constituted "high-capacity." What they are really talking about is banning what are standard-capacity magazines and limiting people to what are arbitrarily-determined reduced capacity magazines. As for why people would use standard-capacity magazines outside of fighting a tyranny, well a few reasons: 1) Criminal or criminals who break into your home who are on a drug-fueled rage and need multiple shots to bring down 2) Due to adrenaline, you could miss a lot more easily 3) There could be multiple criminals Regarding resistance to tyranny, the idea that an armed populace couldn't stop a tyranny is nonsensical too IMO. If you had a tyranny form that had a military of the same capability as the U.S. military, and it was tasked with oppressing the entire United States, that would be virtually impossible. Some people say, "Your AR-15 is not going to make a difference against an Abrams tank/Apache helicopter/drone/etc...yeah, well if it's a small force of people, then yes, they will get clobbered. But if it's the whole country, or a massive portion of the country, then the government is going to be SOL. Because there are only so many places that you can send tanks, troops, aircraft, drones, etc...and only a portion of your military are the actual infantry troops. The rest of it are not going to be a whole lot better trained than ordinary civilians in the usage of firearms. And those civilian forces will be able to do things like mess up supply lines, attack military bases, and so forth. Tanks and helicopters can't move without fuel. |
February 23, 2018, 04:52 AM | #247 | |
Moderator Emeritus
Join Date: June 29, 2000
Location: Rupert, Idaho
Posts: 9,660
|
Quote:
Seems to me that common sense would dictate enforcing current law, before adding more untried law. I mean, if the current laws aren't being enforced, how do we know if they work or not? And what makes anyone think adding a new law, or laws, would be enforced, if we aren't enforcing what we have now? So again, how do we go about fixing the current broken system? |
|
February 23, 2018, 06:28 AM | #248 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: November 12, 2012
Location: Lometa, Texas
Posts: 347
|
Quote:
|
|
February 23, 2018, 06:50 AM | #249 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: November 12, 2012
Location: Lometa, Texas
Posts: 347
|
Quote:
|
|
February 23, 2018, 07:23 AM | #250 | |||||
Senior Member
Join Date: February 28, 2013
Location: Detroit
Posts: 435
|
Quote:
Quote:
My point is that even if those who elected to use the new option of carrying to school decided to go through rigorous, repeated training, I don't think they would be prepared, even if they had the mental discipline to ensure that they stayed practiced. Personally, were I a teacher I would carry to work to defend myself if need be and those around me. But I would not expect myself or any other non professional to be effective in actually seeking and engaging the killer. Carrying in a school might save the one carrying, but it doesn't make the overall situation any better. And, to repeat something I said earlier: "Another point is that a productive society cannot be centered around and worry about the preservation of their own lives. Arming schools, proposing that kids be issued body armor, metal detectors, armed guards, increased patrols... All of this skews the center of daily life towards violent conflict which I think is perverted; this isn't a third world country. We carry guns to deal with outlier negative situations when they arise but they're not a solution to the problem, they are a temporary salve to help remedy specific problems. They don't solve an issue, they resolve a conflict. The focus shouldn't be on escalation." Quote:
http://verdantlabs.com/politics_of_professions/ Quote:
Quote:
Personally, I would add background checks for all transactions and transfers (UBC,) raising the age to purchase to 21, requiring training and education before ownership, etc, but I already went over what I would add in pages 4,5,6
__________________
“Peace is that brief glorious moment in history when everybody stands around reloading".” ― --Thomas Jefferson Last edited by NateKirk; February 23, 2018 at 07:32 AM. |
|||||
|
|