The Firing Line Forums

Go Back   The Firing Line Forums > The Conference Center > General Discussion Forum

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old June 7, 2013, 09:12 PM   #26
Senior Member
Join Date: December 20, 2007
Location: S.E. Minnesota
Posts: 4,295
The world has changed alot since the 50s, 60s, and 70s and gun control issues are a part of the adjustment to the change. Not all the anti-gun people are after our guns and against concealed carry. Personally, the few I know largely target high capacity mags and insufficient background checks on private sales. I know there are others that would like to go much further, but the "anti-gun" crowd I know pretty much all own guns and don't have what I would call a irrational or illogical position toward them.
No, it really hasn't. From Ecclesiastes 1, written about 3000 years ago:

9 What has been will be again,
what has been done will be done again;
there is nothing new under the sun.
10 Is there anything of which one can say,
“Look! This is something new”?
It was here already, long ago;
it was here before our time.
11 No one remembers the former generations,
and even those yet to come
will not be remembered
by those who follow them.
"The only way to stop a bad guy with a gun is with a good guy with a gun"
zxcvbob is offline  
Old June 8, 2013, 07:48 AM   #27
Senior Member
Join Date: October 1, 2010
Posts: 393
I'd support the position on high capacity mags and definitely support better background checks on private sales but I don't know how to do these things in a way that prevents the bad guys from obtaining guns. There's tons of high capacity mags out there already and I see no way to police the background checks on private sales. Such laws would make lawbreakers out of some otherwise law abiding people and still not prevent the bad guys from obtaining guns.

In all groups, there are the law-abiders, law-breakers, and the indifferent. No different with gun owners. If there's a federal law requiring background checks on all private sales, that's a good step in the right direction. I don't care if its policed 100%, just one additional check is better than no check.

You're being facetious, right?
Nope, not one bit.
twins is offline  
Old June 8, 2013, 08:30 AM   #28
Senior Member
Join Date: September 20, 2011
Location: Alabama
Posts: 329
an unenforced law is the same as no law. Expanding the law (in this case, to include private sales) and yet choosing not to enforce it doesn't make it any better.

Until the Federal government chooses to pursue cases of attempted illegal purchases (e.g. lying on form 4473 and being denied at point of sale) then I do not support broadening background checks and making the system more onerous than it already is.

gun control does not equal crime control.
Tom68 is offline  
Old June 8, 2013, 12:09 PM   #29
Senior Member
Join Date: August 19, 2004
Posts: 6,380
The Alta View Hospital incident here in Utah several years ago proved how well such logic works.
Irate man with deer rifle was encountered early on BEFORE killing a nurse by an UNARMED security guy who could do nothing to prevent anything the shooter wanted to do.

So-called "gun free" zones merely create fish-in-a-barrel scenarios for anybody who wants to shoot people bad enough to ignore laws & signs.

Un-armed hospital security is no security at all against such people.
DPris is offline  
Old June 8, 2013, 03:08 PM   #30
Senior Member
Join Date: May 17, 2013
Location: Middle TN
Posts: 165
+1, I would not be an unarmed security guard. They should be called "targets."
glh17 is offline  
Old June 8, 2013, 04:00 PM   #31
Senior Member
Join Date: March 10, 2011
Posts: 197
In my home town, the Westroads Mall used to have armed security in the 1990's. The Powers That Be decided it was too much of a liability to have armed security and made the guards go unarmed. Then a few years ago, some nut walked into Van Mauer with an AK-47 and shot up the place. I'm sure some anti gunner said "It's a good thing security didn't have guns, someone might have been hurt"

Logic and facts have no place in the mind of an anti.
Frasier is offline  
Old June 8, 2013, 09:11 PM   #32
Senior Member
Join Date: July 1, 2001
Posts: 3,786
Many people feel it is better for you and themselves to be killed by a criminal than to take the steps or have the means to defend themselves. This mindset feels that to own a gun for defense is uncivilized. They are willing to pay other people to manage the super human power of the gun and protect them, but never would they protect themselves.

These same people eat meat, but would refuse to kill and butcher an animal...go figure...
Nathan is offline  
Old June 8, 2013, 10:50 PM   #33
Tom Servo
Join Date: September 27, 2008
Location: Foothills of the Appalachians
Posts: 12,154
Then a few years ago, some nut walked into Van Mauer with an AK-47 and shot up the place.
Actually, it was an SKS. Ironically, Westroads was posted as a gun-free zone at the time.
Sometimes it’s nice not to destroy the world for a change.
--Randall Munroe
Tom Servo is offline  
Old June 9, 2013, 09:39 AM   #34
Senior Member
Join Date: December 22, 2004
Posts: 1,978
The world has changed alot since the 50s, 60s, and 70s
No, it really hasn't. From Ecclesiastes 1, written about 3000 years ago..
there is nothing new under the sun.
Things have changed quite a lot from the days when kids were encouraged by their dads to carry pocket knives to school, common sense seemed to prevail most of the time in those days.
Zero tolerance and similar stupidity was not yet invented.

Everything under the sun is new now - The world would be absolutely unrecognizable to those who wrote the Bible.
What hasnt changed since then is us.. we're still the same old flawed species that routinely defies logic and acts in despicable ways towards each other while running rampant across our planet.

Fortunately for us lately, and despite several recent mass shootings, our population as a whole does seem to understand that guns really arent the problem.
The problem is the same as always... some of us are just messed up.
We're not going to fix this - our right to protect ourselves from criminals and our government comes at a cost.
Similarly, some pedestrians who dont own a car will be run over by one being driven by a drunk.

It seems for the most part, we're responding to a small-but-loud minority who just doest accept reality, therefore their arguments become illogical and no amount of effort will bring them around.

Last edited by Dashunde; June 10, 2013 at 09:18 AM.
Dashunde is offline  

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump

All times are GMT -5. The time now is 04:00 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
This site and contents, including all posts, Copyright © 1998-2017 S.W.A.T. Magazine
Copyright Complaints: Please direct DMCA Takedown Notices to the registered agent:
Contact Us
Page generated in 0.08218 seconds with 7 queries