***OFFICIAL GUN CONTROL DEBATE*** (4 Viewers)

[Borat]

I think the answer is not to "arm the teachers/movie theater folks, etc", but to not dis-arm them. If a teacher is properly trained, why not allow them to carry at their discretion?

BECAUSE I DON'T WANT MY 6 YEAR OLD LEARNING CURSIVE WITH A DEADLY WEAPON NEXT TO HER EAR.Forget common sense, do you people have children? We're the ones who aren't living in reality?

Any particular reason other than you simply dislike guns?Schlzm

Kids can theoretically get the gun.The gun can go off accidentally,

I haven't decided how I feel about teachers carrying guns, but I don't think your examples are all that comparable. For one, teachers would not be using muzzle loaders, and for two, they wouldn't/shouldn't be demonstrating with and/or handling the gun at all, except in emergency situations that called for it.Having said that, we all know that kids are punks and teachers aren't always the most intelligent people, so I'm sure it would only be a matter of time before something disastrous happened.

 

[Borat]

Absolutely people should be compensated for turning in guns that were legal when they were purchased.There should probably be an extra incentive like free NASCAR tickets or dinner at Cracker Barrel.

 

[Chaos Commish]

Fellas, I'm being honest here when I say that I had no idea "assault rifles" carried such a wide net in definition.

The term "assault weapons" was a huge mistake by Feinstein (hate her) and Clinton (he cool by me). Just call them semi automatics. Making them sound extra scary rallied the left to ban them in 94. It just pissed off the right so much it started a craze of purchases that's made them the most popular guns to purchase. Thanks, Di. You $#@!!Quick history. The military switched from "battle rifles" to "assault rifles" in Nam to better negotiate close quarters combat in the Asian jungles. M1s and M14s got replaced by M16s which have a civilian semi auto version called the AR 15. An M16 assault rifle is select fire with an option for full auto machine gun. An AR 15 is semi auto. Tagging the AR as an assault weapon was a mistake. So let's try to stop using the word assault unless we discuss machine guns. Simple enough?

 

[Schlzm]

I think the answer is not to "arm the teachers/movie theater folks, etc", but to not dis-arm them. If a teacher is properly trained, why not allow them to carry at their discretion?

BECAUSE I DON'T WANT MY 6 YEAR OLD LEARNING CURSIVE WITH A DEADLY WEAPON NEXT TO HER EAR.Forget common sense, do you people have children? We're the ones who aren't living in reality?

Any particular reason other than you simply dislike guns?Schlzm

Kids can theoretically get the gun.The gun can go off accidentally,

People like to try and treat guns as some sort of evil entity in itself. It is an inanimate object incapable of doing anything on its own. It doesn't hold sway over the conscious mind of anyone within a certain vicinity and it does not sway ones moral compass or destroy logical thought. Any psychological predisposition to excess bravado because of possession of a weapon is a pre-existing condition of that individual. The mere existence of guns does not cause loss of life. Schlzm

 

[BigSteelThrill]

Holy ####... some of you dolts are seriously pursuing bringing guns into the classroom on the teachers?

 

[BigSteelThrill]

It doesn't hold sway over the conscious mind of anyone within a certain vicinity and it does not sway ones moral compass or destroy logical thought.

Yes it does. People mind-sets change when having or being near a gun.It also happens with things like boobies and stacks of cash.

 

[Schlzm]

Holy ####... some of you dolts are seriously pursuing bringing guns into the classroom on the teachers?

Looking like some teachers are going to do it on their own, might as well make sure they are trained and legal. Or do you suppose we start arresting teachers for wanting to protect themselves and their students instead?Schlzm

 

[Schlzm]

It doesn't hold sway over the conscious mind of anyone within a certain vicinity and it does not sway ones moral compass or destroy logical thought.

Yes it does. People mind-sets change when having or being near a gun.It also happens with things like boobies and stacks of cash.

We can correct the logical thought part. Some people are simply terrified of guns and it triggers the fear centers of their brains, so I guess yes that can happen. However anyone who is going to get violent, run their mouth a little too much, or steal huge stacks of cash already had that built into them. The object doesn't suddenly create that.Schlzm

 

[Glass Joe]

Holy ####... some of you dolts are seriously pursuing bringing guns into the classroom on the teachers?

Looking like some teachers are going to do it on their own, might as well make sure they are trained and legal. Or do you suppose we start arresting teachers for wanting to protect themselves and their students instead?Schlzm

Absolutely arrest.

 

[RCon]

I just don't think a full understanding of all the different laws in place (both federal and state) is required to be against the sale of certain (if not all) firearms in this country. To me, it sounds like the pro-gun side wants to use the various laws and the vast array of different firearm categories as a shield to their argument that nothing significant should be done in the wake of the tragic events in this country. I mean...look a few posts up. I'm being challenged to describe what an assault rifle is. Well hell, I can't do that and the guy asking me KNOWS I can't do that because I couldn't explain the difference between a 9 millimeter, a glock, a .38 or a shot gun. What I do know is that it has become far too easy for mentally unstable people to get a hold of weapons that kill a lot of people in a short amount of time and whatever type of weaponry that is and whatever laws are currently in place, I'm against because this crap should not happen in America (or anywhere). Does is it really matter if I know more about the different gun designs or different state laws to be outspoken about my feelings? Would it change if I read up on some material and then made some posts? I'll do it if you have some links for me to read. I have been known to change my mind.

You're being challenged to define "assault rifle" because you want to ban "assault rifles".If I propose a ban on "Category A gambling" or "Category B foods and drinks", you cool with that? Of course you wouldn't be, unless I first told you what would be covered under the terms "Category A" and "Category B". For all you know, I might decide that Category A gambling includes fantasy football. It's not unreasonable at all for you to ask for a definition before agreeing to the ban.

Fellas, I'm being honest here when I say that I had no idea "assault rifles" carried such a wide net in definition. You have to at least appreciate the fact that a man who has never owned a gun, never shot anything more than a .22 and doesn't read literature related to guns isn't going to know that there are so many differences in the amount of firearms for sale in this country. To me, it sounds pretty flippant for people with vast knowledge of guns to challenge those of us with no knowledge at all to define what is and what is not an assault rifle. I think YOU know the difference. I think a few of the people in this thread know the difference. But can you not understand a public outcry for a ban on the type of weapons used in the murder of all those people in CT, CO and OR? Do all of us who want change need to know everything about guns to want new rules and legislation to help prevent these massacres in the future? Kids are dead at the hands of an assault rifle. I can't tell you the type or the maker or the size or the caliber or anything else you might be able to tell me. But should that sort of rifle be available for public consumption? I think not. If you think so, tell me why? Again, I'm ignorant, but willing to learn something.

I think the animosity on this comes from the last "assault weapon" ban, the criteria of which seemed to be based on nothing more than "how scary" a gun looked rather than the actual capabilities.

 

[RCon]

Kids can theoretically get the gun.

The gun can go off accidentally,

I think "correlation does not equal causation" applies to the study about 4 times more likely to be shot when carrying, especially when we're talking about a study that took place inside a large city. I would imagine that a high percentage of those who carry guns in Philadelphia are involved in the drug trade, and I would imagine a high percentage of those who get shot are involved in the drug trade, such that it's the involvement in drugs that causes both things.

 

[badmojo1006]

Kids can theoretically get the gun.

The gun can go off accidentally,

The Gun can go off accidentially

 

[badmojo1006]

And another thing I want to get rid of is the "Stand your Ground" laws. Or more stuff like this is going to happen

 

[Mr Two Cents]

This is what you guys are causing.

Dear Customer,This past week has seen an unprecidented spike in sales. If you have purchased or plan on purchasing, please know that if it is listed on our website, it is in stock. Due to this dramatic increase in demand, please allow at least 10 to 14 extra days for us to process, ship and email your tracking information.As always, we are here to serve your ammunition needs, and again, we thank you for your patronage. We wish you all a very happy holiday season and a very Merry Christmas. Stay true, stay safe, and STAY LOCKED & LOADED!Sincerely,AmmunitionDepot.com

 

[Sweet Feet]

I live in metro NY and have never had any need to defend myself with a gun. Now, if I lived in TX, where EVERYONE has a cache of guns... I just might decide I might need one.

You should get out more

 

[Borat]

And another thing I want to get rid of is the "Stand your Ground" laws. Or more stuff like this is going to happen

So you seriously believe that this would not have happened if that law hadn't been on the books? Be honest now.

 

[Borat]

I live in metro NY and have never had any need to defend myself with a gun. Now, if I lived in TX, where EVERYONE has a cache of guns... I just might decide I might need one.

You should get out more

He lives in metro NY and has heard lots of Internet people say lots of crazy things about Texas. How dare you question him?

 

[Borat]

Kids can theoretically get the gun.

The gun can go off accidentally,

 

[Otis]

The problem GM, is that our law makers who will try, or have banned assault rifles before have no idea either. It's not that something doesn't need to change, it's that you need to know what you are changing for there to be a difference.

Okay, I can certainly get behind that line of logic. I will hope that the lawmakers who are charged with the task of enacting new laws will do their duty to the entire country by arming themselves with as much information as possible before casting a vote. That is absolutely fair. And were I a lawmaker and not just some moronic message board loud mouth, that is a promise I would make my constituents, no matter how emotional this matter is to me.

Otis? :Hold hands: Can we put our differences behind us and see the root of the problem?

I'm fine with this. But I hope not to see another snide repeat in this thread of the question "what do you mean by assault rifle."Let's get educated, but let's not split hairs purely so Johnny Rascal can do POW-POW-POW-POW-POW really fast instead of just POW... POW.... POW.

By the way, I posed the question earlier about what makes a 5 shot or 10 shot semi auto weapon better in a practical sense. I still haven't got an answer. (I'm aware that it's better in "better for swiftly killing multiple people," but I mean beyond that).

Single action only.

No handguns.

Gun deaths drop.

America: gets a little better.

I know you don't give a damn about any honest debate here, but for others wanting to learn, "Single Action only" has an entirely different meaning in the world of firearms than your intended usage here. A firearm can be single action only and still be semi-automatic. A 1911 pistol would be a good example.

If you know what I mean, what's the difference what I call it? Unfortunately the gun manufacturers weren't too concerned with making one class of guns entitled "guns for slaughtering large masses of human beings quickly and efficiently" vs. "guns that could kill ya but probably are less good for slaughtering innocents quickly."

 

[Borat]

This is what you guys are causing.

Dear Customer,This past week has seen an unprecidented spike in sales. If you have purchased or plan on purchasing, please know that if it is listed on our website, it is in stock. Due to this dramatic increase in demand, please allow at least 10 to 14 extra days for us to process, ship and email your tracking information.As always, we are here to serve your ammunition needs, and again, we thank you for your patronage. We wish you all a very happy holiday season and a very Merry Christmas. Stay true, stay safe, and STAY LOCKED & LOADED!Sincerely,AmmunitionDepot.com

When horrible tragedies happen, people feel powerless, and this makes them feel compelled to find someone/something to blame. Then they can "fix" this person/thing so they will feel like they've done something to help prevent a similar incident from happening in the future. It makes them feel a bit better about the state of the world, their place in it, and their security within it. Will it truly prevent a similar incident in the future? Probably not, but next time, they will feel better about themselves since they will be able to at least say "I tried;" they can then point the finger of blame at others for not being extreme enough in their knee-jerk reactions to said tragedy.We of course saw a very similar reaction to 9/11 and the resulting TSA screenings. Interestingly, the liberals and the conservatives have sort of reversed roles from that to this.

 

[Novice2]

And another thing I want to get rid of is the "Stand your Ground" laws. Or more stuff like this is going to happen

Sounds like the law isn't the problem but idiots using it as an excuse. Guy got arrested. Let me know when he gets off for shooting a guy complaining about pizza who wanted to kick his ###.

 

[BigSteelThrill]

And another thing I want to get rid of is the "Stand your Ground" laws. Or more stuff like this is going to happen

Sounds like the law isn't the problem but idiots using it as an excuse. Guy got arrested. Let me know when he gets off for shooting a guy complaining about pizza who wanted to kick his ###.

Because some people have no foresight or thoughtfulness to realize the eventual outcome of such a stupid law.That was the problem. The idiots who implemented it.

 

[ATC1]

Any assault weapons ban will be so narrowly scoped that it will be pointless, meaningless effort. So yeah, it won't matter to you.If there was a required surrendering of guns, it'd have to probably include large fines and jail time for noncompliance.

I'm guessing that any point that I might try to make here has already been hashed over in this thread, so let me take this in a slightly different direction.If a requirement was passed to force people to surrender their guns, how would it work? Would town police go door-to-door to collect them? If not, who would be tasked with this? Who would pay for all the overtime? Would gun owners be compensated for the their financial losses (some of the guns cost several thousands of dollars)? What would we do with all of the guns? How would we handle states like New Hampshire, where you don't even need to register your guns (handguns excluded) in the first place?I know that you probably don't have answers to all of these questions... just food for thought.

The simplest method of enforcement would probably be to make it such that voluntary surrendering of such guns is "no penalty", while any other discovery by law enforcement of such guns (after a suitable grace period, of course) results in heavy fine and/or jail time. Basically, you have two months to turn these in, and if we catch you with them after, you'll be in for it. No need to go door to door.

Okay, fair answer. So to "catch" people with them later, how would this happen? If someone's house just happened to be subject to an unrelated search warrant, or something like that?Serious question; I'm trying to understand your take here.

To add to the above question. Would it be a "hey there Mr. AR owner, sorry you just lost ~$1200.00, better luck next time." or do you agree that there might be some sort of compensation for a turn in other than "good job you don't go to jail now."?Schlzm

In return they will give us body armor for defense.

 

[BigSteelThrill]

And another thing I want to get rid of is the "Stand your Ground" laws. Or more stuff like this is going to happen

Sounds like the law isn't the problem but idiots using it as an excuse. Guy got arrested. Let me know when he gets off for shooting a guy complaining about pizza who wanted to kick his ###.

Because some people have no foresight or thoughtfulness to realize the eventual outcome of such a stupid law.That was the problem. The idiots who implemented it.

Truth is though... those idiots knew it was going to make a perfect excuse. That's how they wanted it.

 

[Sweet Feet]

In return they will give us body armor for defense.

body armor is pretty expensive so...

 

[Otis]

STAY LOCKED AND LOADED!!!!

 

[timschochet]

This is what you guys are causing.

Dear Customer,This past week has seen an unprecidented spike in sales. If you have purchased or plan on purchasing, please know that if it is listed on our website, it is in stock. Due to this dramatic increase in demand, please allow at least 10 to 14 extra days for us to process, ship and email your tracking information.As always, we are here to serve your ammunition needs, and again, we thank you for your patronage. We wish you all a very happy holiday season and a very Merry Christmas. Stay true, stay safe, and STAY LOCKED & LOADED!Sincerely,AmmunitionDepot.com

When horrible tragedies happen, people feel powerless, and this makes them feel compelled to find someone/something to blame. Then they can "fix" this person/thing so they will feel like they've done something to help prevent a similar incident from happening in the future. It makes them feel a bit better about the state of the world, their place in it, and their security within it. Will it truly prevent a similar incident in the future? Probably not, but next time, they will feel better about themselves since they will be able to at least say "I tried;" they can then point the finger of blame at others for not being extreme enough in their knee-jerk reactions to said tragedy.We of course saw a very similar reaction to 9/11 and the resulting TSA screenings. Interestingly, the liberals and the conservatives have sort of reversed roles from that to this.

Liberals after 9/11 never displayed anything close to the obstinacy, cotemptuousness, and undeserved arrogance that some conservatives are showing here.

 

[parasaurolophus]

How about a ten round maximum, but an authorized facility can still have high capacity magazines to be rented and used in those facilities?

 

[RCon]

Liberals after 9/11 never displayed anything close to the obstinacy, cotemptuousness, and undeserved arrogance that some conservatives are showing here.

The unhinged crazy posters in this thread are decidedly tilted towards the ban gun crowd. Of course, a lot of that has to do with the sheer number of Otis posts, but still, I've found a higher percentage of the gun rights posters to be level headed and reasonable.

 

[BigSteelThrill]

I sent you a pm, just so ya know.

 

[Glass Joe]

Liberals after 9/11 never displayed anything close to the obstinacy, cotemptuousness, and undeserved arrogance that some conservatives are showing here.

The unhinged crazy posters in this thread are decidedly tilted towards the ban gun crowd. Of course, a lot of that has to do with the sheer number of Otis posts, but still, I've found a higher percentage of the gun rights posters to be level headed and reasonable.

I support at a minimum a major curtailing of guns and gun rights, along with most Americans. Does that make unhinged, crazy, or unreasonable?Maybe you're referring to the gun owners.

 

[Glass Joe]

Liberals after 9/11 never displayed anything close to the obstinacy, cotemptuousness, and undeserved arrogance that some conservatives are showing here.

The unhinged crazy posters in this thread are decidedly tilted towards the ban gun crowd. Of course, a lot of that has to do with the sheer number of Otis posts, but still, I've found a higher percentage of the gun rights posters to be level headed and reasonable.

Is it reasonable or level headed to suggest we bring loaded weapons into schools? That turd of an idea has been thrown around a lot by you guys...

 

[timschochet]

Liberals after 9/11 never displayed anything close to the obstinacy, cotemptuousness, and undeserved arrogance that some conservatives are showing here.

The unhinged crazy posters in this thread are decidedly tilted towards the ban gun crowd. Of course, a lot of that has to do with the sheer number of Otis posts, but still, I've found a higher percentage of the gun rights posters to be level headed and reasonable.

Um no. I can't agree. But I wasn't speaking about that anyhow. I was speaking about the "We know so much more about guns than you do, you idiots don't understand anything" line that has been so prevalent.

 

[Mister Martie]

Liberals after 9/11 never displayed anything close to the obstinacy, cotemptuousness, and undeserved arrogance that some conservatives are showing here.

The unhinged crazy posters in this thread are decidedly tilted towards the ban gun crowd. Of course, a lot of that has to do with the sheer number of Otis posts, but still, I've found a higher percentage of the gun rights posters to be level headed and reasonable.

I believe this is referred to as confirmation bias.

 

[timschochet]

How about a ten round maximum, but an authorized facility can still have high capacity magazines to be rented and used in those facilities?

I think this is a great idea. Do you think pro-gun types would go for it? It's a great compromise.

 

[parasaurolophus]

Why does body armor need to be legal?

Is that what the response should be to anything that has ever been used in a crime?Make that thing illegal.It is an odd item for sure but I hate the idea of just making stuff illegal because people do illegal things with them.

I didn't say it should be illegal. I was wondering why it needed to be legal. You have not been helpful in answering that question.

Luckily our society doesn't require a justification for why everything should be legal. The burden is typically on why it should be illegal. There are countless items that serve no legitimate purpose other than people like them.Why should huge car stereo systems be legal?Leather jackets with spikes on them?Green hair dye?High fructose corn syrup?

 

[Otis]

How about a ten round maximum, but an authorized facility can still have high capacity magazines to be rented and used in those facilities?

I think this is a great idea. Do you think pro-gun types would go for it? It's a great compromise.

 

[Borat]

How about a ten round maximum, but an authorized facility can still have high capacity magazines to be rented and used in those facilities?

I think this is a great idea. Do you think pro-gun types would go for it? It's a great compromise.

No, because I'd have to give up my 13 round Glock.

 

[BigSteelThrill]

Why does body armor need to be legal?

Is that what the response should be to anything that has ever been used in a crime?Make that thing illegal.It is an odd item for sure but I hate the idea of just making stuff illegal because people do illegal things with them.

I didn't say it should be illegal. I was wondering why it needed to be legal. You have not been helpful in answering that question.

Luckily our society doesn't require a justification for why everything should be legal. The burden is typically on why it should be illegal. There are countless items that serve no legitimate purpose other than people like them.Why should huge car stereo systems be legal?Leather jackets with spikes on them?Green hair dye?High fructose corn syrup?

The "intent".

 

[Jobber]

How about a ten round maximum, but an authorized facility can still have high capacity magazines to be rented and used in those facilities?

I think this is a great idea. Do you think pro-gun types would go for it? It's a great compromise.

No, because I'd have to give up my 13 round Glock.

They'd be able to manufacture 10 round magazines to replace the 13, 15 or whatever round magazines out there now.

 

[Slingblade]

How about a ten round maximum, but an authorized facility can still have high capacity magazines to be rented and used in those facilities?

I think this is a great idea. Do you think pro-gun types would go for it? It's a great compromise.

No, because I'd have to give up my 13 round Glock.

They'd be able to manufacture 10 round magazines to replace the 13, 15 or whatever round magazines out there now.

#### that.

 

[Slingblade]

Why have cars that go over 70 mph? Let's limit them all.

Why should Corvette's do 0-60 in under 4 seconds? Let's limit them to at least 6 seconds.

Everyone will be safer. Amiright?

 

[moleculo]

Liberals after 9/11 never displayed anything close to the obstinacy, cotemptuousness, and undeserved arrogance that some conservatives are showing here.

The unhinged crazy posters in this thread are decidedly tilted towards the ban gun crowd. Of course, a lot of that has to do with the sheer number of Otis posts, but still, I've found a higher percentage of the gun rights posters to be level headed and reasonable.

Um no. I can't agree. But I wasn't speaking about that anyhow. I was speaking about the "We know so much more about guns than you do, you idiots don't understand anything" line that has been so prevalent.

how does that compare to the "I don't know anything about what I want to completely ban, and anyone who doesn't agree with me is a southern redneck" schtick? How does that rate in terms of obstinacy, contemptousness, and arrogance?

 

[RCon]

Liberals after 9/11 never displayed anything close to the obstinacy, cotemptuousness, and undeserved arrogance that some conservatives are showing here.

The unhinged crazy posters in this thread are decidedly tilted towards the ban gun crowd. Of course, a lot of that has to do with the sheer number of Otis posts, but still, I've found a higher percentage of the gun rights posters to be level headed and reasonable.

I support at a minimum a major curtailing of guns and gun rights, along with most Americans. Does that make unhinged, crazy, or unreasonable?Maybe you're referring to the gun owners.

I was referring to the tone of the posts rather than the content. Along the lines of the "OMG YOU GUN NERDS ARE MORONS" posts, usually in bold and extra large fonts. There are a significantly higher number of those types of posts on that side.You may think allowing teachers to carry is a terrible idea, but for the most part, those who've suggested it have done so in a respectful, level-headed way. There have been a few jackasses on the gun rights side too, but not nearly as many as the "OMG Ban Guns" group.

 

[Dvorak]

Liberals after 9/11 never displayed anything close to the obstinacy, cotemptuousness, and undeserved arrogance that some conservatives are showing here.

The unhinged crazy posters in this thread are decidedly tilted towards the ban gun crowd. Of course, a lot of that has to do with the sheer number of Otis posts, but still, I've found a higher percentage of the gun rights posters to be level headed and reasonable.

Um no. I can't agree. But I wasn't speaking about that anyhow. I was speaking about the "We know so much more about guns than you do, you idiots don't understand anything" line that has been so prevalent.

Yes, your complete lack of knowledge about laws that were on the books all of 8 years ago makes you the level headed, reasonable expert to formulate "new" legislation.I guess it is too much to ask for those concerned to have an elementary understanding of the current state of affairs before we go about re-writing the Constitution.Tell us all again how criminals will obey these new laws of yours.

 

[Novice2]

Why have cars that go over 70 mph? Let's limit them all.Why should Corvette's do 0-60 in under 4 seconds? Let's limit them to at least 6 seconds.Everyone will be safer. Amiright?

Yes you are right and maybe CNN will tell us this is what should be done after a few mass car killings happen.

 

[Otis]

The republican party = the "me" party. MY guns. MY money. MY rights. MY freedom. Me me me.

 

[Borat]

How about a ten round maximum, but an authorized facility can still have high capacity magazines to be rented and used in those facilities?

I think this is a great idea. Do you think pro-gun types would go for it? It's a great compromise.

No, because I'd have to give up my 13 round Glock.

They'd be able to manufacture 10 round magazines to replace the 13, 15 or whatever round magazines out there now.

Cool. You buying?

 

[moleculo]

The republican party = the "protect me" party. PROTECT MY guns. PROTECT MY money. PROTECT MY rights. PROTECT MY freedom. PROTECT Me me me.

I'm cool with that.

 

[Limp Ditka]

The republican party = the "me" party. MY guns. MY money. MY rights. MY freedom. Me me me.

my safety.