The Gun debate sandbox

Search
Go

Discussion Topic

Return to Forum List
This thread has been locked
Messages 1 - 4988 of total 4988 in this topic
bullfrog

Trad climber
Topic Author's Original Post - Jul 20, 2012 - 11:00pm PT
Okay folks. This is your space to talk about all pro and anti gun issues.

I am not the moderator. I probably won't even show up here that often.

keep it civil, and on topic. :-)
adatesman

climber
philadelphia, pa
Jul 20, 2012 - 11:54pm PT
is it even fair to do this without Fatty?

In any event, probably too soon.
Captain...or Skully

climber
Jul 20, 2012 - 11:57pm PT
Make anything you like illegal. If I possess the knowledge, I'll just make more. You lose.
A device is a device is a device. Are you going to ban knowledge?
GhoulweJ

Trad climber
El Dorado Hills, CA
Jul 20, 2012 - 11:58pm PT
bullfrog

Trad climber
Topic Author's Reply - Jul 21, 2012 - 12:00am PT
toadgas,

If you'd like I can fork off a bullfrog and toadgas stink it up thread. Not sure how popular that would be though...
bullfrog

Trad climber
Topic Author's Reply - Jul 21, 2012 - 12:03am PT
Ghoulwej,

You instantly made me think of this:

http://blog.riflegear.com/archive/2007/12/26/hello-kitty-ar-15---evil-black-rifle-meets-cute-and.aspx
TGT

Social climber
So Cal
Jul 21, 2012 - 12:07am PT

I think my wife would prefer an EBR.
Salamanizer

Trad climber
The land of Fruits & Nuts!
Jul 21, 2012 - 12:18am PT
How about we just ban psychos?


You will never remove all guns from criminals hands. EVER!
So why don't we put another one (or two) in the hands of a sane person in that theater. It would have changed the outcome significantly.
zBrown

Ice climber
chingadero de chula vista
Jul 21, 2012 - 12:32am PT
^ I doubt it.
Jaybro

Social climber
Wolf City, Wyoming
Jul 21, 2012 - 12:33am PT
Actually I thought Shack asked a good question at the turning point in that other thread.

In an ideal situation, someone like he mentioned ( armed And qualified to be so) could possibly be beneficial. But would an armed person in that situation be more likely to possess those qualifications, and nerve under fire, or more likely to be a further danger?

Spock could do it. So could Jules, or Harry Calihan. I suspect Cragman could decide at the moment the viability of acting. And of course there are others.

If all potential do gooders were of their um, caliber, we'd be in good hands. But is that likely to be the case?

In which direction do you want to err?

Also, related, doesn't someone shooting back at an armored thug in a darkened room, make themselves and those close by, targets themselves?
bullfrog

Trad climber
Topic Author's Reply - Jul 21, 2012 - 12:33am PT

How about we just ban psychos?
The individual in the thread this was split from passed a background check. He had all his guns legally.

This also begs the question: assuming mental illness as all us arm chair psychologists are doing, perhaps we need to focus more on mental heath care?

So why don't we put another one (or two) in the hands of a sane person in that theater. It would have changed the outcome significantly.


I'm not so sure there weren't a couple there already. Maybe there weren't but it sounds like you are making a heck of a lot of assumptions about a situation we all have spotty details on and you were not directly privy to.
(More armchair sports...)
bullfrog

Trad climber
Topic Author's Reply - Jul 21, 2012 - 12:41am PT
jaybro,

Wish my post had come in slightly before yours. Yours are all good points and more worth discussing.
Shack

Big Wall climber
Reno NV
Jul 21, 2012 - 01:08am PT
Jaybro, everyone I know that actually carries, takes it very seriously and trains/practice more than most cops.
Not kidding.

As far as how would anyone react or perform under fire...
You never know until it happens...
Even most cops have never been under fire in those circumstances so you can't assume anything.

What could possibly be done by someone with a gun?
Worst case scenario...nothing.

Best case scenario, the citizen is carrying a handgun with a flashlight.
The flashlights sold for guns are super f-ing bright (between 150 and 220 lumens) and will blind the bad guy long enough to blow his head off. There is no way to look at someone when they are pointing it at you.


BTW, my brother in law was the training officer for a while, on the LA Sheriffs "live fire" shoot/don't shoot training simulator.
Basically you watch video scenarios on a giant screen and you react to the situations. When you shoot back at the screen, you are using live ammo!
I got to do this and I did pretty well, but it is still all academic until real lead is coming back at you.

Binks

climber
Uranus
Jul 21, 2012 - 01:17am PT
How does one argue with someone convinced that the routine massacre of our children is the price we must pay for our freedom to have guns, or rather to have guns that make us feel free?
Ken M

Mountain climber
Los Angeles, Ca
Jul 21, 2012 - 01:43am PT
Okay folks. This is your space to talk about all pro and anti gun issues.

I am not the moderator. I probably won't even show up here that often.

keep it civil, and on topic. :-)

Why on earth are you starting this thread, if you have no interest in partipating in the topic?

This is called trolling.
bullfrog

Trad climber
Topic Author's Reply - Jul 21, 2012 - 01:53am PT
Why on earth are you starting this thread, if you have no interest in partipating in the topic?

This is called trolling.

1: I clearly have some interest as I have commented several times already on this thread. Please read the whole thread before posting. ;-)

2: This thread was forked from another where some felt the gun debate was a bit tired and insensitive.

3: I'm not sure where you pulled your definition of trolling from but I am guessing this doesn't fit it. How does going off topic and attacking the thread author about saying he might be disinterested in his own thread sound for a definition of "trolling" though?

Have a good weekend...
Reilly

Mountain climber
The Other Monrovia- CA
Jul 21, 2012 - 01:56am PT
Once you've played with real guns you don't mind not having some wimpy surrogate...

Jan

Mountain climber
Okinawa, Japan
Jul 21, 2012 - 01:56am PT
It takes both the restriction of weapons and the will of the citizens to live in a cooperative and peaceful society for gun bans to work. The reality is, Americans love violence at every level, from movies to video games to shock and awe in other people's countries. Until we change that mindset, it is useless to ban guns although we can tweak the situation for the better by outlawing assault weapons for example.

Every Swiss man has a weapon in his house and a state mandated amount of ammunition along with it. He is also required to do a specific amount of target practice every year from the age of 18-52. Yet there is not more than one gun murder every ten years in Switzerland, with these weapons. The difference is in the minds of Swiss people, not the weapons. Likewise, the rest of western Europe, Canada, Australia, New Zealand, Japan and Asia east of Pakistan.

The real question then, is what in our culture causes us to tolerate violence at every level, at the same time we regulate every other safety issue to the nth and often ridiculous degree? Until Americans figure out that strange dichotomy, we won't get very far. It's always easier though, to shout slogans than deconstruct our national mythologies of which we have so many.
Salamanizer

Trad climber
The land of Fruits & Nuts!
Jul 21, 2012 - 02:00am PT
Hillrat has said it better than I.

Yes, we must ban everything. To be safer. More regulation, more control!

People were safer 50 years ago, we had less laws 50 years ago. How can this be?

There is no utopia. You people don't get it... THERE IS NO UTOPIA!!!
What is the meaning of life? Choice!!! Without choice, there is nothing.



Edit; Jan, you're a delusional idiot. Sorry to be harsh, but in this instance it is what it is.

Shack

Big Wall climber
Reno NV
Jul 21, 2012 - 02:01am PT
Yet there is not more than one gun murder every ten years in Switzerland, with these weapons.
Jan, not according to Wikipedia...

Gun crime

Further information: Gun violence and Crime in Switzerland
Police statistics for the year 2006[14] records 34 killings or attempted killings involving firearms, compared to 69 cases involving bladed weapons and 16 cases of unarmed assault. Cases of assault resulting in bodily harm numbered 89 (firearms) and 526 (bladed weapons). As of 2007, Switzerland had a population of about 7,600,000. This would put the rate of killings or attempted killings with firearms at about one for every quarter million residents yearly. This represents a decline of aggravated assaults involving firearms since the early 1990s. The majority of gun crimes involving domestic violence are perpetrated with army ordnance weapons, while the majority of gun crime outside the domestic sphere involves illegally held firearms.[15]
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gun_politics_in_Switzerland
healyje

Trad climber
Portland, Oregon
Jul 21, 2012 - 02:04am PT
Yeah, after a year of six-on, six-off as an integral cog in one of these the appeal of small arms pretty much went to zero.


The idea that gun control somehow isn't the topic of the Dark Knight thread tells you how f*#ked up gun advocates are.
John M

climber
Jul 21, 2012 - 02:13am PT
Jan, you're a delusional idiot. Sorry to be harsh, but in this instance it is what it is.

could you expand on what you think she said that is delusional or idiotic rather then just calling her names? I thought what she said was reasonable.

attack the argument.. not the person.

Toker Villain

Big Wall climber
Toquerville, Utah
Jul 21, 2012 - 07:02am PT
Americans are intrepid.

They all came here from a long way, rather than hole up in high mountain valleys.
The Swiss are to be complemented for their democracy and learning to get along, but it is much easier to do in an entrenched homogeneous society than on the frontier.


Yes. There are cultural differences.
couchmaster

climber
pdx
Jul 21, 2012 - 09:49am PT
Jan said:
"It takes both the restriction of weapons and the will of the citizens to live in a cooperative and peaceful society for gun bans to work"

Yup, the swiss gun laws make people have weapons, peaceful society with low gun violence. But lots of weapons in everyones hands.

Mexico has strong gun laws and lot and lots of gun violence. The 2nd part of your statement which I bolded is right.

We have lots of laws here that people just disregard and we don't need more laws. Check the drug laws. Why pass more laws that only serve to make honest people criminals and do nothing? Look at Mexican drug/gun violence as an example. The mexicans have gotten the guns out of the hands of honest folks, the criminals (and police) ignore the laws and run rampant. We'd be better served banning violence on TV. Anyone going to take on the first amendment? You can't yell "FIRE" in a crowded theater, and their are restrictions on speech. The government restricts a man and a woman getting naked on tv to make passionate love, but let violence of all sorts be shown all day long.

1st amendment amendment?
Prod

Trad climber
Jul 21, 2012 - 10:04am PT
Gun laws are not the issue here. We currently live in a system where people are permitted to live their lives out in nice instirutions after committing extremely violent acts. Insanity? Duh! So f*#king what, get the insane wackos off the books by killing them fast. You don't see this sh#t in Singapore.

Prod.
couchmaster

climber
pdx
Jul 21, 2012 - 10:08am PT
...or Switzerland either. Spending less money on mental health care was something that started during the Reagan era. Part of the question was "don't crazy people have rights too"?. And where do those rights end and ours begin? Thus, they let out some folks who could care for themselves and were deemed non-violent. Lots of them as it turned out.

Not sure that would have made a bit of difference in this shooting. Even in societies with strong gun control and significant spending on therapeutic clinics, and have restrictions on TV violence there are issues. Recent example A: http://www.supertopo.com/climbing/thread.php?topic_id=1560775&tn=0&mr=0
Jan

Mountain climber
Okinawa, Japan
Jul 21, 2012 - 10:28am PT
You may call me a delusional idiot if you wish, and there are certainly more gun murders in Switzerland than when I lived there, but the statistics are not favorable to the U.S.

Some examples of murders per 100,000.
U.S. 5.0
Canada 1.81
U.K. 1.17
Switz. .66
Japan .40
Iceland .31

etc. etc.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_intentional_homicide_rate

And yes, Ron is right. We have unique problems but one of the reasons Switzerland is a better country to compare ourselves to than Japan for instance, is that they are divided ethnically, linguistically, and religiously with no less than four official languages.

ATS

climber
Mountain Project
Jul 21, 2012 - 10:37am PT
There should be full-body scanners at all movie theaters. This should include pat downs as well.
jstan

climber
Jul 21, 2012 - 10:58am PT
Thank you Jan for your level headed contribution. The problem is very deep seated and will not soon go away. Perhaps someday we will not get today's overheated emotional responses to issues accompanied by overt lack of respect for others.

Americans have been described as lonely and ignorant but dominant. Dominant largely due to our expending our once vast energy resources in just 100 years and because our country did not have to be rebuilt following Wars I and II. We seem to be set upon a course to reverse the great good fortune we experienced in the past.
rottingjohnny

Sport climber
mammoth lakes ca
Jul 21, 2012 - 11:26am PT
Ron...You idiot.....The Swiss have sledz...! No one f*#kz with the sledz...! RJ
Jaybro

Social climber
Wolf City, Wyoming
Jul 21, 2012 - 11:41am PT
Being that this was in Urban/Suburban Colorado, a state with higher than average gun ownership, both legal and illegal, it seems unlikely that in a crowded theatre like this there weren't other guns in that room. Of course we the public can never know about that unless someone who was there with a gun steps forward.

It's interesting to speculate why an armed person wouldn't shoot back and all kinds of reasons they wouldn't. Discretion, fear, common sense, other reasons we probably can't grasp without being there.

Perhaps there were guns and cool heads. Who knows?

I wonder if we'll ever know.
rincon

Trad climber
SoCal
Jul 21, 2012 - 11:47am PT
This is why Cragman wants his guns...

Cragman:
^^Silver's post is right on the money.

One only has to study the history of Socialist governments to see that our country is going down that road under Obama....and he is only getting started with his agenda.

I suspect that should Obama get re-elected, within his term there will likely be another civil war.....and not just because of these 2nd Amendment issues.
jstan

climber
Jul 21, 2012 - 12:00pm PT
That post is in the wrong thread. An obvious rejoinder.

and George Bush was only getting started with his agenda when the whole thing fell apart. The unassailable conclusion is we need to go back and try it again. The result will be different the next time.

When someone tells you this ask them one simple question.

Where are you keeping your own money? Here?

Or somewhere else?
rottingjohnny

Sport climber
mammoth lakes ca
Jul 21, 2012 - 12:00pm PT
So if one of the movie goer's started shooting at the bullet-proof vested nut job , would the bullets have had any effect , for example , knocking the killer down...? I put on a down jacket and face shield and had a fellow worker shoot finish nails at me to test the impact of a pin nailer...It didn't hurt...Okay , never mind...
Jaybro

Social climber
Wolf City, Wyoming
Jul 21, 2012 - 12:07pm PT
That sounds like a segment from one of those jack ass movies ;)

So, another question. Given that it was dark and smokey and that these things are actually over relatively fast, would it be likely to be apparent that this guy wore body armor? Would you know that from across the theatre? In the training for carry permits are you taught to expect, or look for that?
Jaybro

Social climber
Wolf City, Wyoming
Jul 21, 2012 - 12:36pm PT
Seems odd they didn't ask you that question,maybe not if they'd already accounted for the shots fired....
donini

Trad climber
Ouray, Colorado
Jul 21, 2012 - 01:24pm PT
There is no rational reason that assault rifles should be legal in modern society.
beef supreme

climber
the west
Jul 21, 2012 - 02:25pm PT
Been following both of these threads, interesting commentary on a terrible event; and naturally this would turn into a political gun debate- look at the news, it's not just sTopians that have taken it there.

I have to ask the gun control crowd though: if you found yourself in that situation- would you rather there be a chance of someone else having a firearm or would you rather know, without a doubt, that no one else in the room had a gun aside from the crazy fuk shooting everyone? Think about it, because when you preach gun control, especially concealed carry, that is what you're potentially creating.

I, for one, would much rather know that at least there was a chance of someone being able to put a stop to or deter the event- many of you have said the chances of that are slim to none- but there would be a chance no?

The discussion about 'automatic weapons' or 'assault rifles' has no bearing here- there isn't anything special about a .223 that looks like a full auto if it isn't.

Reading some of the comments on the original thread about gun control makes me really wonder about some of you people. I mean, for fuks sake, we're climbers to varying degree right? Doesn't that involve some sort of risk/decision making process? Isn't it rooted, in some degree, in freedom of choice? Ok, free soloing is dangerous... should it be illegal? I always wonder why it's against the law to kill yourself, or not wear a seatbelt- it's my fukin body, fuk you. How about personal responsibility!?

I am of the opinion that govt control is part of the reason our society is finding itself in the situation it is: I would argue that because of restrictive rules 'to protect people' that people have stopped thinking for themselves, stopped looking for cars at crosswalks, and stopped looking out for their own well being because it's been ingrained that 'the man' will protect you. There seems to be, in my own twisted perspective of reality, an almost orchestrated attempt to get people to become 'un-responsible', to depend on the govt/the man/ big brother/ whatever.

Also to blame: a culture of violence, I don't think anyone would refute that.

Just my thoughts, best wishes to the victims and their families; I hope that society doesn't waste too much on the perp.





Jaybro

Social climber
Wolf City, Wyoming
Jul 21, 2012 - 02:40pm PT
Beef, I would MUCH rather know there was only one wacko with a gun in a given situation like that. Only one shooter to keep an eye on. Yes it is theoretically possible that another gunner could save the day like a superhero, but given human falibity I have to think the odds would be that it would put more people at greater danger.
beef supreme

climber
the west
Jul 21, 2012 - 02:45pm PT
I understand your reasoning for being afraid of another person shooting in a situation like that, but, what I don't understand is why you imply that another person would be a 'wacko' as well.
Jaybro

Social climber
Wolf City, Wyoming
Jul 21, 2012 - 02:53pm PT
Law of averages.

For every Cragman or Shack, how many wannabe 'gangstas' or rox' are there?
beef supreme

climber
the west
Jul 21, 2012 - 03:02pm PT
I dunno how many wanna be gangsters there may be, perhaps you have a point. But if you want to use the 'law of averages' then I'd apply it to someone being of use in a situation like that.

Most of the people that I've met that have anything to do with guns are responsible with their firearms, those that do/have a concealed carry aren't 'wanna be gansters' either. Doesn't mean that they're not out there, wanna be 'heros' or whatever, but I'm more concerned about the real gangsters/ people of violence/ criminals/ etc.
beef supreme

climber
the west
Jul 21, 2012 - 03:03pm PT
totally, 100% agree with you Tami
rottingjohnny

Sport climber
mammoth lakes ca
Jul 21, 2012 - 03:06pm PT
Donnini....You just crapped in the gun deabte litter box...go get a rake and cover it.......RJ
beef supreme

climber
the west
Jul 21, 2012 - 03:14pm PT
toadgas, maybe you're onto something about crazy genetics. didn't malcom gladwel write about that in blink or (drawing a blank on the other book i've read of his)- anyway, about the violent portions of appalacia and family feuds?

rottingjohnny

Sport climber
mammoth lakes ca
Jul 21, 2012 - 03:22pm PT
Donnini was in special forces..? I retract the litter box remark...Was just joking.......RJ
Jaybro

Social climber
Wolf City, Wyoming
Jul 21, 2012 - 03:23pm PT
Okay, I'm sure they do too. But like Shack said, you dont know how someone will react until they are in the situation. I, for one, do not care to be part of their learning curve,

And btw, I dont think the socio-ethnic cleansing of gang members that you implied is the answer either
rottingjohnny

Sport climber
mammoth lakes ca
Jul 21, 2012 - 03:25pm PT
Maybe the solution is for Americans to wear flak jackets in public just like the Israelis being issued Gas Masks by their government...?
Ken M

Mountain climber
Los Angeles, Ca
Jul 21, 2012 - 03:31pm PT
1: I clearly have some interest as I have commented several times already on this thread. Please read the whole thread before posting. ;-)

2: This thread was forked from another where some felt the gun debate was a bit tired and insensitive.

3: I'm not sure where you pulled your definition of trolling from but I am guessing this doesn't fit it. How does going off topic and attacking the thread author about saying he might be disinterested in his own thread sound for a definition of "trolling" though?


Simply doesn't fit with your original post.
Josh Higgins

Trad climber
San Diego
Jul 21, 2012 - 03:37pm PT
A couple of things I've heard on NPR over the past couple of days:

1. There are roughly two dozen shootings annually in the US where 4 or more people are killed.

2. One man interviewed reported conducting research into such shootings and found that gun control did reduce the number of shootings. It would be interesting to see if that was peer-reviewed scientific research, but it sounded like it probably was.

If gun control does reduce such shootings, I view that as a good thing. I don't think that elimination of guns is realistic, or a even a goal to strive for at all, but some sort of screening or delay in receiving a purchased firearm would be great if proven scientifically to reduce violence and murder rates.

A question for those who oppose gun control, would some gun control be acceptable if research showed that it would reduce violence?

Josh
Jaybro

Social climber
Wolf City, Wyoming
Jul 21, 2012 - 03:37pm PT
That's cause its a Trick question toad, neither gun control or arming the population from
Montessori on can eliminate this threat. (Life is like that) And you know that. Gotta set your rhetorical traps better than that.

Chaz

Trad climber
greater Boss Angeles area
Jul 21, 2012 - 03:38pm PT
I think trolling is more along the lines of saying you chose climbing as the ideal activity for a bunch of developmentally disabled children you're working with because of all the sports, climbing is the one that requires the least intelligence to do.

That one was a classic, and a good definition of the term.
tarek

climber
berkeley
Jul 21, 2012 - 03:39pm PT
You have a super bright scientist in training who decided to use guns to kill people in a theater. Seems to me the key issue is mental health--not guns. You think this guy was not smart enough to figure out another way? Look at his apartment. The scary thing to me is that this person was very capable of bioterrorism. It's a waste of time talking about guns. How does someone like Holmes get this way?

Let's say there was ideal gun control (i.e., the impossible: good guys have guns, bad/unstable guys don't). One of these nut jobs is going to use a car, or a bomb (oh, yeah, that already happened) or much worse. The only hopeful thing about this case is that we might learn something about how the alleged killer thinks.
Marlow

Sport climber
OSLO
Jul 21, 2012 - 03:40pm PT
Pina Bausch and Wim Wenders: http://www.dailymotion.com/video/xh49es_pina-3d-bande-annonce_shortfilms

Les novices de Pina Bausch : rencontre avec Jo-Ann Endicott: http://www.dailymotion.com/video/xfllmf_les-novices-de-pina-bausch-rencontre-avec-jo-ann-endicott_shortfilms
Josh Higgins

Trad climber
San Diego
Jul 21, 2012 - 03:56pm PT
Fascinating:

"The findings of this study that gun control is ineffective in reducing crime rates are consistent with the vast majority of other studies that use state data."

Moorehouse, J.C., Wanner, B. (2006). Does Gun Control Reduce Crime or does Crime Increase Gun Control? Cato Journal 26(1) pg 103-124.

A little bit of poking around shows that the Cato Institute is libertarian and possibly political. I'm not 100% sure this journal article is 100% reliable, but interesting to skim...

Anyone know if the Cato Institute's data is reliable and impartial? Or do they have a strong enough agenda that it may not be trustworthy?

Josh
Ken M

Mountain climber
Los Angeles, Ca
Jul 21, 2012 - 04:11pm PT
Beef you ask:

I have to ask the gun control crowd though: if you found yourself in that situation- would you rather there be a chance of someone else having a firearm or would you rather know, without a doubt, that no one else in the room had a gun aside from the crazy fuk shooting everyone? Think about it, because when you preach gun control, especially concealed carry, that is what you're potentially creating.


Beef, the only thing I'd find worse that being in a target-rich environment as one of the targets, is to be in a CROSS-FIRE between two people firing. Or how about 10 people firing, in poor visibility?

How would I like to have one of those guns?

When the SWAT team comes in and sees people firing guns, they have been converted into targets....as almost happened to a gun carrying person at the Giffords shooting.
Shack

Big Wall climber
Reno NV
Jul 21, 2012 - 05:07pm PT
Why do non gun owners think no one could have helped by returning fire?
They have no tactical knowledge yet say things like "the chance that it would have made any difference was small."
How do you know?
Is that based on any actual knowledge or experience?
Shooting a pistol is not rocket science.
I could teach anyone here in an afternoon to hit what they aim at....no problem.

BTW..a "bullet proof" vest or "body armor" does not keep the bullets that hit you from causing severe internal injuries, broken bones, knocking the wind out of you, knocking you down, causing extreme pain and the feeling that you have been shot...nor does it protect your head, arms, or legs.
All they do is keep bullets from penetrating the body cavity (usually).
Being hit by multiple rounds even with a vest on is gonna f*ck you up, period.

beef supreme

climber
the west
Jul 21, 2012 - 05:19pm PT
Ken M: I agree with what you're suggesting about being in crossfire. I'm only saying that the situation is obviously f*#ked from the get go, could it have been worse if people were shooting back at the guy? Sure. Could it have turned out better if someone had gotten a shot off? Sure could.
Point is, we don't know, never will know, and it's all speculation by the likes of us on the peanut gallery. I'm saying that I'd rather someone had the chance to help instead of not.
beef supreme

climber
the west
Jul 21, 2012 - 05:21pm PT
and Mighty Hiker:
why do you phrase pro-gun/ violence people the way that you did? Do you really think that pro-gun people are people of violence? I wouldn't be so general in your a*#umptions. People of violence may absolutely use a gun (or their fists or a club or knife, etc)
I wouldn't equate a person that claims to be pro-gun to be a person of violence.

Edit: but I would concede the point that perhaps people who are armed don't help out much in these types of situations statistically. I really don't know what the numbers are and like other people have made point of, you really don't hear about many of those stories. At least I don't. Hopefully they don't happen that often really.
I would, personally, rather have a chance to defend myself/ others or have another person acting to that end.
Shack

Big Wall climber
Reno NV
Jul 21, 2012 - 05:33pm PT
a) Of course you'd have to be there, and nobody carries unloaded..whats the point?

b)yes, you would have to be in range and I'm sure anyone would be able to tell where the shooter was from the muzzle flash

c) can't guarantee that no one else would be injured, but if you were able to stop the shooter from continuing to execute people, the reward far out weighs the risk.

d)not even in the equation once you decide to shoot back

e)? who is going to mistake who? the cops are 10 minutes away...

While it is rare, it happens way more than you think.

So what if the odds are not good...The bad guy is already killing people right and left, how could it get any worse?
You wouldn't need ideal circumstances to have made a difference...even if you only saved one life, it's worth trying.


John M

climber
Jul 21, 2012 - 05:37pm PT
You have a super bright scientist in training who decided to use guns to kill people in a theater. Seems to me the key issue is mental health--not guns. You think this guy was not smart enough to figure out another way? Look at his apartment. The scary thing to me is that this person was very capable of bioterrorism. It's a waste of time talking about guns.

Not true that it is a waste of time. The guy may have been smart enough but was he organized enough mentally to make it happen. Mental health has all kinds of variations..

An example.. For those who are extremely depressed and suicidal, the most dangerous time for a suicide isn't usually at the worst part of the depression because by then they don't even have the energy to get out of bed. The most dangerous time is often as they are coming out the depression. Then they have enough energy to go through with it. So a person get suicidal, they start thinking about how to kill themselves, then they might buy a guy, then if the depression worsens they might not even have the wherewithal to pull the trigger until they are starting to come out of the depression. It takes more energy they you might realize to actually go through with killing yourself and it take mental organization to build a biological weapon and then use it.

I only post that to point out that mental illness has stages and it has different dangers at different stages. A person like this could be smart enough to build a biological weapon, but not motivated to do it. Then as the mental illness progresses he might get the motivation to do something violent but then he might not have the mental organization to build that biological weapon. So then he looks for something simpler. Such as a gun.

If the gun were harder to get he might still go through with plan, but he might have less weapons or he might progress through his mental illness until he doesn't even have the energy to do anything but kill himself.

So guns and the ease with which a person can get them do play a role. Although it is not the only thing which plays a part in this. It was mentioned in the other thread that our mental health system was taken apart so help is more difficult to obtain.

Then there are the organized psychotics.. which is a whole other variation but which I believe is more rare. those are the crazies that kill lots of people over a bunch of years. One at a time. Their mind is organized enough to keep them from getting caught immediately.

So the type of mental illness plays a role. How far along the mental illness is plays a role. And how prone the person is to violence plays a role.
beef supreme

climber
the west
Jul 21, 2012 - 05:50pm PT
Something that crossed my mind, not really making a point of anything, but it's in regard to the 'mental stability' of the perp. Remember in the first batman (ok, not the first, but like the first one of late- the one with heath ledger as joker or whatever) so, anyway, I remember a part in the movie where Michael Cain/Cane (spelling? whatever).. So anyway, he says something like "some people just want to see the world burn" in the movie.
Makes me wonder if people who act out these atrocities really are mentally ill. Look at the guy in Norway who did worse- there's no way that guy is 'insane', he's perfectly sane!. I wonder if it's the same with this guy.
Jaybro

Social climber
Wolf City, Wyoming
Jul 21, 2012 - 06:21pm PT
"some people just want to see the world burn"
Bingo!
donini

Trad climber
Ouray, Colorado
Jul 21, 2012 - 06:22pm PT
Three things you can't have real discussion about:
gun control
abortion
religion
Given that, this will be my last comment on the subject.
If you ever experience a REAL firefight (not talking paintball here) your opinion concerning assault weapons in the hands of the general public might undrego a metamorphosis.
crankster

Trad climber
South Lake Tahoe, CA
Jul 21, 2012 - 06:29pm PT
NRA is mostly responsible for the body count. Most radical and dangerous organization in the U.S.
Jorroh

climber
Jul 21, 2012 - 06:33pm PT
The problem is clearly that there weren't enough people in the theatre packing guns. We should probably have a law mandating that everyone carry AK 47's or equivalent at all times.
Purely for the sake of safety of course....because more guns = safer right?

zBrown

Ice climber
chingadero de chula vista
Jul 21, 2012 - 06:39pm PT
Is someone going to put up the actual statistics documenting how many instances of lethal attacks have been prevented by gun-carrying citizens who are not cops?

Zimmerman killing Martin and the like will not be counted in the tally.
Shack

Big Wall climber
Reno NV
Jul 21, 2012 - 06:43pm PT
"assault weapons" is simply an over used phrase intended to demonize any gun that looks dangerous.

What is it that makes people think they are any more capable of killing people than other types of guns?

Do you think they shoot faster?
How fast do you need to shoot when no one is shooting back?
Hold more ammo?
How many bullets does it take to kill 12 people?

The gun type makes no difference if someone is intent on killing people.

Even if you banned all auto loading guns...
Here is what a 12 year old kid can do with a lever action rifle, 2 single action revolvers and a breach loading double barreled shotgun in under 11 seconds...all delivered on target.
[Click to View YouTube Video]
Ed Hartouni

Trad climber
Livermore, CA
Jul 21, 2012 - 08:06pm PT
with the number of guns carried legally,

how many have been used in self-defense in a gun fight?

I haven't heard of any, which certainly seems to be evidence that they are not used in that manner.
crankster

Trad climber
South Lake Tahoe, CA
Jul 21, 2012 - 08:17pm PT
They are only used in the imaginations of NRA members
Shack

Big Wall climber
Reno NV
Jul 21, 2012 - 08:22pm PT
They happen all the time Ed, but rarely reported on the news.
This one happened a few days ago...
[Click to View YouTube Video]
Ed Hartouni

Trad climber
Livermore, CA
Jul 21, 2012 - 08:23pm PT
They happen all the time Ed, but rarely reported on the news.

and not reported to the police? I doubt that... where are you stats?

Shack

Big Wall climber
Reno NV
Jul 21, 2012 - 08:28pm PT
Stats? I don't have stats i just hear about them all the time,
and I just posted a very recent example.

Where is your evidence to the contrary? Oh wait...
I haven't heard of any, which certainly seems to be evidence that they are not used in that manner.

You call THAT evidence? I thought you were a scientist.

Look here for many examples...
http://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=gun+stops+robbery&oq=gun+stops+robbery&gs_l=youtube.3...3400.11969.0.12447.21.19.2.0.0.0.159.1952.11j8.19.0...0.0...1ac.nuHF1l-Lae
Ed Hartouni

Trad climber
Livermore, CA
Jul 21, 2012 - 08:32pm PT
http://www.vpc.org/studies/myth.htm

with regard to women,
it seems that, in 1998, for 12 women who used a gun in self defense, 1209 were murdered with a hand gun...

crankster

Trad climber
South Lake Tahoe, CA
Jul 21, 2012 - 08:33pm PT
Ed, the NRA bullies will never see the insanity of their argument, more guns = more safety. Especially when they have their own cable channel.
Ed Hartouni

Trad climber
Livermore, CA
Jul 21, 2012 - 08:39pm PT
http://www.guncite.com/gun_control_gcdguse.html

seems to be a bit of a discrepancy the NCVS survey in 1993 estimated 108,000 defensive gun uses (DGUs) where as other stats estimated 1,500,000 DGUs.

Maybe crimpergril can weigh in here...

in this report: http://bjs.ojp.usdoj.gov/content/pub/pdf/fidc9397.pdf

in 1993
104,000 firearm injuries from all causes
64,100 nonfatal assaults, 18,253 homicides, 18,200 unintentional, 15,100 undertermined...


John M

climber
Jul 21, 2012 - 08:39pm PT
Ed, I'm not particularly pro gun, but that study seems to be full of holes.

Edit: your first post...

It doesn't state how many times women used a gun to keep from being attacked or murdered.

It doesn't state how many of those women who were murdered didn't' own a gun, and thus were not able to protect themselves.

thats just what I found after a quick scan. I could be wrong. your result may vary..

Ed Hartouni

Trad climber
Livermore, CA
Jul 21, 2012 - 08:41pm PT
put your stats up John M...

http://www.nap.edu/openbook.php?record_id=10881&page=53

"U.S. Rates
Across the population as a whole, neither homicide nor suicide is one of the 10 leading causes of death in the United States. However, for 15- to 24-year-olds, homicide is the second leading cause of death, and suicide is the third. The rankings are reversed for 25- to 34-year-olds. Considering these data by race, homicide is the leading cause of death for blacks ages 15 to 24 and 25 to 34. And it is the sixth leading cause of death for blacks at all ages."
John M

climber
Jul 21, 2012 - 08:43pm PT
I don't have any stats.. I was just looking at your first link and found some holes in it. I prefer that studies be as fair as possible.

I would rather have the facts be clear, then I can draw my own conclusions.
Ed Hartouni

Trad climber
Livermore, CA
Jul 21, 2012 - 08:49pm PT
"Firearms and Self-Harm
Historically, the number of successful suicides in the United States has far exceeded the number of homicides. In 1999, the number of suicides was nearly double the number of murders. In contrast, nonfatal injuries resulting from suicide attempts are much less common than injuries caused by violent assaults, regardless of weapons used. In this section, we describe the patterns and trends for death and nonlethal injuries resulting from self-inflicted, firearm-related harm."

"Firearms and Accidents
Firearm-related accidental deaths represent a small fraction of all firearm-related deaths, but unintentional injuries represent a sizable proportion of all nonfatal injuries resulting from firearms—behind only the number caused by violent assaults."

Ed Hartouni

Trad climber
Livermore, CA
Jul 21, 2012 - 08:52pm PT
http://www.nap.edu/openbook.php?record_id=10881&page=102

"Case-control sampling schemes matching homicide victims to non-victims with similar characteristics have also been used to infer whether owning a firearm is a risk factor for homicide and the utility of firearms for self-defense (see Chapter 7 for a discussion of the case-control methodology). Kellermann et al. (1993) found that persons who had a firearm in the home were at a greater risk for homicide in their home than persons who did not have a firearm (adjusted odds ratio of 2.7). Cummings et al. (1997) found that persons who purchased a handgun were at greater risk for homicide than their counterparts who had no such history (adjusted odds ratio of 2.2)."

"The literature on right-to-carry laws summarized in this chapter has obtained conflicting estimates of their effects on crime. Estimation results have proven to be very sensitive to the precise specification used and time period examined. The initial model specification, when extended to new data, does not show evidence that passage of right-to-carry laws reduces crime. The estimated effects are highly sensitive to seemingly minor changes in the model specification and control variables. No link between right-to-carry laws and changes in crime is apparent in the raw data, even in the initial sample; it is only once numerous covariates are included that the negative results in the early data emerge. While the trend models show a reduction in the crime growth rate following the adoption of right-to-carry laws, these trend reductions occur long after law adoption, casting serious doubt on the proposition that the trend models estimated in the literature reflect effects of the law change. Finally, some of the point estimates are imprecise. Thus, the committee concludes that with the current evidence it is not possible to determine that there is a causal link between the passage of right-to-carry laws and crime rates."

Shack

Big Wall climber
Reno NV
Jul 21, 2012 - 09:06pm PT
and thousands of people a year die in slip and fall accidents...
Thousands die each year choking on something...
So the fact accidents happen to some people who own guns, is no surprise,it's like saying chain saw owners have accidents.

how many have been used in self-defense in a gun fight?

I haven't heard of any, which certainly seems to be evidence that they are not used in that manner.

So I'm confused Ed, obviously I'm not as smart as you, but do your stats support your "evidence" or no?
Ed Hartouni

Trad climber
Livermore, CA
Jul 21, 2012 - 09:10pm PT
Well Shack, you might assume I have a point of view on this...
but I'm working it through too..

"Punishment enhancements for firearm-related crimes seem to be justified in sentencing by seriousness considerations, since firearms use in violent crimes increases the likelihood of the victim’s death (Cook and Nagin, 1979). Moreover, there is some evidence to suggest that there should be an incapacitation effect, since gun offenders usually persist in their choice of using a firearm in subsequent crimes (Cook and Nagin, 1979). However, the available research evidence on the deterrent effects of firearms sentencing enhancements on firearm-related crime is mixed, with city-level studies suggesting reductions in firearm-related homicides and possibly other types of firearm-related crime in urban settings (McDowall et al., 1992), as well as nationwide studies suggesting no crime prevention effects at the state level (Marvell and Moody, 1995)."

Shack

Big Wall climber
Reno NV
Jul 21, 2012 - 09:10pm PT
Fair enough Ed.


My favorite ones are the old lady's who pack heat..
[Click to View YouTube Video]

Ed Hartouni

Trad climber
Livermore, CA
Jul 21, 2012 - 09:20pm PT
seems there is no good supporting evidence for one point-of-view or the other, at least that's the conclusion of the National Academy...

and they suggest better studies with better reporting...

who could argue with that?

Jon Beck

Trad climber
Oceanside
Jul 22, 2012 - 12:13am PT
A story just came across the internet about a new York cop who just shot his son, mistakenly thought he was an intruder. Killed him, wonder if that changes his view on handguns as protection
zBrown

Ice climber
chingadero de chula vista
Jul 22, 2012 - 12:55am PT
All the arguments advanced in favor of citizens carrying around guns apply equally to flame throwers, yet in California it's almost impossible for me to get my FT license. It's enough to make you want to exercise your second amendment rights.

I wonder if Hitler would have taken away my right to burn baby burn?
beef supreme

climber
the west
Jul 22, 2012 - 01:01am PT
zBrown, why would you want a flamethrower in CA- isn't the cost of fuel just too prohibitive?
Ken M

Mountain climber
Los Angeles, Ca
Jul 22, 2012 - 01:47am PT
Still wondering how many of you called for the ban on fertilizer and diesel after the OKC
blast?

Like I said on the other thread we need to deal with mental health here and find ways for people to make sure people struggling with mental health do do not get guns and or have the guns they own taken away until stability is restored.

So again I ask you to consider taking a stand and being more pro active in mental health issues in your community.

How many are killed by fert/diesel each year? I think few. I certainly don't feel endangered that someone is going to rob me with a fert/diesel bomb.

In contrast is the rather impressive number killed by guns.

I think there is a reasonable difference in priorities.
Ken M

Mountain climber
Los Angeles, Ca
Jul 22, 2012 - 01:54am PT
and thousands of people a year die in slip and fall accidents...
Thousands die each year choking on something...
So the fact accidents happen to some people who own guns, is no surprise,it's like saying chain saw owners have accidents.


You are obviously not a chain saw user. If you were, you would know that there have been dramatic changes in the design of such saws, making them far far safer to use.

For professional users, there are now required certification training, designed to cut down on accidents.

In contrast is the gun lobby, which wants NOTHING done that might improve safety, and fights it all.

What I can't understand it the violent opposition to meaningful purchase checks that would screen out felons and nuts.

I don't have a problem with citizens owning guns. I have a problem with them owning military equipment, that has only one purpose.
zBrown

Ice climber
chingadero de chula vista
Jul 22, 2012 - 01:54am PT
bSupreme:

Costs be damned, happiness is a warm thrower. I'll ride a bike to lower my carbon footprint, may even install a spark-arrestor if forced.

Shack

Big Wall climber
Reno NV
Jul 22, 2012 - 02:28am PT
You are obviously not a chain saw user. If you were, you would know that there have been dramatic changes in the design of such saws, making them far far safer to use.

For professional users, there are now required certification training, designed to cut down on accidents.

Wow, I'm obviously not up on my chainsaw current events...
So I guess there are no more chainsaw accident now? or just among the non-professionals?

Ken, what law would you propose that is going to keep guns out of the hands of felons and nutjobs?...cuz I'm pretty sure they won't obey it anyways.
BTW, it is already a felony to sell a gun to a felon or anyone who is prohibited from possessing a gun.
Have you ever even read any of the thousands of existing gun laws?
Sierra Ledge Rat

Mountain climber
Old and Broken Down in Appalachia
Jul 22, 2012 - 09:03am PT
Blood on the hands of Obama, Romney and NRA

http://www.nydailynews.com/opinion/blood-hands-obama-mitt-nra-article-1.1119049

I love how they refer to America’s gun lovers as "conscienceless."

How true.
donini

Trad climber
Ouray, Colorado
Jul 22, 2012 - 09:39am PT
Guns are an important part of our culture.....they are the only way male caucasians can deal with small penis syndrome.
jstan

climber
Jul 22, 2012 - 09:50am PT
AURORA, Colo.—The semiautomatic assault rifle used by the gunman in a mass shooting at a midnight showing of the latest Batman movie jammed during the attack, a federal law enforcement official told The Associated Press, which forced the shooter to switch to another gun with less fire power.


The official, who spoke on condition of anonymity to in order to discuss the investigation, said the disabled weapon had a high-capacity ammunition magazine. Police have said that a 100-round drum magazine was recovered at the scene and that such a device would be able to fire 50 to 60 rounds a minute.

The argument that fewer people are killed by guns than by cars, can be turned another way.

Since there are so few shooters using semiautomatic weapons with large magazines our national system of justice will not be affected much if in every case where three officers see someone firing such a weapon with deadly threat, when apprehended, those officers are authorized to shoot the person on the spot with that same weapon.
Spider Savage

Mountain climber
The shaggy fringe of Los Angeles
Jul 22, 2012 - 09:53am PT
Hey, anyone ever notice that we used to NOT have psycho's flip out and shoot everyone up?


30+ years ago or so, this type thing, school shooters, etc. NEVER happened.



Captain...or Skully

climber
Jul 22, 2012 - 09:55am PT
Hey, Jim...Some deal with SPS by buying a convertible or a monster truck.
donini

Trad climber
Ouray, Colorado
Jul 22, 2012 - 09:58am PT
Come to think of it, some of us cope by rockclimbing.....heading out the door for a three week roadtrip....ciao!

Depends on your perspective Silver.
rick d

climber
ol pueblo, az
Jul 22, 2012 - 10:10am PT
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8i35UQC1pks
-flamethrowers
My friend Bob trying to down an RC plane with a flamethrower. They use diesel because safety and clean up is easy. Napalm is sticky and dangerous.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E7_M4ejKJV0
-90mm gun
The guys in Globe (Bob, et al) reconditioned this gun (a war movie prop for 50 years) and then traded it for a mini gun. I was invited the first day they shot this.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LZQpR888QuU
-3" deck gun
I got to fire this!

Some guns are made by last great machining and engraving masters in this country. There are over and under shotguns that cost $200,000+ and are works of art.

Some actually enjoy hunting and eat the game they take.

Others have fun shooting full-auto NFA machine guns (11 states do not allow ownership). Having 10,000 rounds on hand for a belt fed is a 2 year supply at best. (understanding of 1934, 1968, and 1986 gun laws and the NFA/form 4 process is essential)

But then,
There are yahoos who go out to the national forest (or blm) and shoot tv's and computers and clean nothing up. They have been known here to shoot saguaros and range cattle.


And there are those who feel the work is crumbling and the only way to preserve their life is possessions of many guns, body armor, ammo, food, etc etc. These guys concealed carry all the time for the once in a lifetime opportunity to plink at a bad guy.

The penis argument is a bad analogy.
rick d

climber
ol pueblo, az
Jul 22, 2012 - 10:15am PT
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bath_School_disaster

1927 school bombing

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/University_of_Texas_massacre

1966 shooting, which was 46 years ago
Ken M

Mountain climber
Los Angeles, Ca
Jul 22, 2012 - 10:47am PT
Wow, I'm obviously not up on my chainsaw current events...
So I guess there are no more chainsaw accident now? or just among the non-professionals?

Ken, what law would you propose that is going to keep guns out of the hands of felons and nutjobs?...cuz I'm pretty sure they won't obey it anyways.
BTW, it is already a felony to sell a gun to a felon or anyone who is prohibited from possessing a gun.
Have you ever even read any of the thousands of existing gun laws?

I agree.....you are not up on chain saw safety.

No, chain saw accidents are not eliminated, but they are DRAMATICALLY reduced. The safety gear that professionals wear has largely eliminated certain classes of accidents altogether. The actual mechanics of modern chain saws and chains dramatically reduces some others. Kickback is vastly less likely.

>BTW, it is already a felony to sell a gun to a felon or anyone who is prohibited from possessing a gun.

REALLY? So I, as a gun owner, commit a felony by selling a gun to someone who is prohibited. And how am I to make that good faith determination?
Ken M

Mountain climber
Los Angeles, Ca
Jul 22, 2012 - 10:52am PT
That said we need not to lose our right to own guns we need to control who gets guns better.

Exactly!
Ken M

Mountain climber
Los Angeles, Ca
Jul 22, 2012 - 10:58am PT
Tell me how you would like me to defend myself against these individuals
a) idiot with a gun who thinks it's fun to cause mayhem
b) meth addict with knife intending to rob me
c) gang of 3 looking to subdue me and rape my wife
d) insane person shooting at me while I'm hiking through the woods

I've personally faced one of these. Can you guess which and how I responded? I don't want to hear a lie-down-and-die option. Sorry, I'm not that passive.

a. call the police
b. call the police
c. call the police
d. call the police

You need to arm yourself, in your dangerous life, with a cell phone. Maybe a sat phone.

In most of your scenarios, you are describing someone (yourself), with an astonishing lack of situational awareness of what is going on around you, and allow yourself to end up in a situation that is bad.

Perhaps some good martial arts training would be in order. Not to learn how to beat the crap out of people (which good martial arts won't do anyway), but how to learn to read situations and people, and AVOID problems.

Introducing a gun into these 4 scenarios has the very real possibility of your gun being used on you. Consider that being IMPOSSIBLE if you don't have a gun.
the kid

Trad climber
fayetteville, wv
Jul 22, 2012 - 11:04am PT
I think Chris Rock had it right.
Let people have the guns they want, but charge $5000 per Bullet.
kurt
Roger Breedlove

climber
Cleveland Heights, Ohio
Jul 22, 2012 - 11:11am PT
On the first page, Hillrat posted this:

As was posted in another topic, we are lucky that here in this country the vast majority of those bent on harming others don't know and/or use explosives.


I am not taking a position on the effectiveness of gun control, since there seems to be evidence that it does not work. But the quote above is interesting: below is a summary of the Federal laws governing explosives.

Federal laws provide criminal sanctions for offenses involving the manufacture and sale of explosives. Such laws include the Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996, which Act was enacted in response to the Oklahoma City bombing in 1995. Federal laws also provide regulatory controls over interstate and foreign commerce in explosives. The regulatory controls are designed to assist states in regulating the manufacture, sale, transfer, and storage of explosives within their borders. The regulatory controls also require certain records to be kept with regard to transactions involving explosives and prohibit the making of false statements or false entries with regard to such transactions. The regulatory controls further require a theft of explosives to be reported to the federal government.

The Department of the Treasury is the licensing authority for explosives. The Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, and Firearms is responsible for enforcing the regulatory provisions of the federal laws regarding explosives.

A person commits a federal criminal offense if he or she imports, manufactures, or deals in explosive materials without a license. The terms "explosive materials" include explosives, blasting agents, and detonators. Although the term "deals" is not defined in the federal statutes, a single sale of explosives is sufficient for a conviction of the offense. A person also commits a federal criminal offense if he or she withholds information or makes any false oral or written statement for the purpose of obtaining explosive materials.

A person commits a federal criminal offense if he or she engages in the knowing interstate shipment, transportation, or receipt of explosive materials without a license. A person also commits a federal criminal offense if he or she knowingly distributes explosive materials to a non-licensed person who does not reside in the same state.

A person commits a federal criminal offense if he or she receives, possesses, transports, ships, conceals, stores, sells, or disposes of stolen explosive materials in interstate or foreign commerce and knows or has reasonable cause to believe that the explosive materials were stolen.

A licensee commits a federal criminal offense if he or she willfully fails to keep appropriate records of transactions involving explosive materials. This offense is a specific intent crime. In other words, the government is required to prove that the licensee acted willfully and not just knowingly.

The Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996 makes it unlawful for any person to manufacture plastic explosives without a detection agent. The Act also makes it unlawful to import or to otherwise bring into the United States or to export from the United States any plastic explosives. The manufacture, importation, and possession of unmarked plastic explosives are considered to be federal crimes of terrorism if the offense was calculated to influence or to affect the conduct of the government by intimidation or coercion or if the offense was in retaliation against the government's conduct. Federal crimes of terrorism are investigated by the Federal Bureau of Investigation.

If a person violates any of the above federal laws, he or she may be subject to imprisonment for up to ten years, to a fine of up to $250,000, or both.

Our constitution is silent on private ownership of explosives. (We lucked out in this regard.) As far as I know there is no National Explosives Associations promoting the ownership of explosives. I have never heard anyone say: "If explosives are outlawed, only outlaws will have explosives," but this truism seems to be beside the point. It is hard to purchase materials to build explosives without the Feds finding out about it and investigating.

So why doesn't this model apply to guns?

jstan

climber
Jul 22, 2012 - 11:19am PT
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nhlHzYt4xRM

How can anyone not love guns?

But then suppose your assailant has an assault rifle or, as Roger opines, explosives.

To give one that so desired certainty and ease, you have be packing something bigger than what the other guy has.

Man portable and concealable nukes!
Ken M

Mountain climber
Los Angeles, Ca
Jul 22, 2012 - 12:17pm PT
Calling the police is not an effective deterrent in most cases, as is obviously proven.

Undoubtedly the reason that most businesses have alarm systems that call police. Undoubtedly the reason that wealthy people have the same. OBVIOUSLY are of no value.....NOT.


I agree, situational awareness does add some level of personal safety, and many bad things can be avoided by being aware of your surroundings. Some, however, are not. IHOP was not. Colorado was not. Victims of home invasions mostly are not avoidable. Martial arts would definitely add to your ability to protect yourself and your loved ones. Not in all cases though. You must be in contact range, which is not always possible. You must be physically capable of overcoming your attacker.

You missed the point about martial arts, totally. You simply think of it at a close up gun, and that was NOT my point. You must not have the training.

Victims of home invasions are DEFINITELY avoidable. Open your door appropriately. Have appropriate locks. etc.
crankster

Trad climber
South Lake Tahoe, CA
Jul 22, 2012 - 12:17pm PT
Yes, we should all carry handguns on our side. Just like the 'ol West. We will all be safer then. I'm going to get a nice holster for my climbing harness.
Ken M

Mountain climber
Los Angeles, Ca
Jul 22, 2012 - 12:19pm PT
Tell me, what would YOU have done? Please don't say I shouldn't have been there. You simply cannot avoid everything.

You were safe. Wait til he's out of ammo.

did you call the police after the fact?

Been shot at, by people who knew what they were doing.
Ken M

Mountain climber
Los Angeles, Ca
Jul 22, 2012 - 12:21pm PT
By the way, I do think some gun control is reasonable. Background checks to prevent prohibited persons from having them is a good idea.

Why do I think that you will do whatever the NRA says you should do? Protect your right to own a bazooka and flamethower, for "sport" hunting.
crankster

Trad climber
South Lake Tahoe, CA
Jul 22, 2012 - 12:23pm PT
We have a constitutional right to these types of massacres.
Roger Breedlove

climber
Cleveland Heights, Ohio
Jul 22, 2012 - 12:33pm PT
Ron,

I am guessing that if you did stock up on explosives, you would get a visit from the Feds. The laws since Oklahoma are very strict.
Marlow

Sport climber
OSLO
Jul 22, 2012 - 01:06pm PT
Using the more-guns-means-better-security-logic of Americans:

Why isn't it a duty for Americans to carry at least two weapons when they are boarding airplanes just to be prepared for madmen and terrorists. Just think how much safer Americans would feel carrying two weapons than without a single one. And what a success that would be for the weapon-selling industry. I am sure there is an institute in America that can show that there is a correlation between carrying weapons during flights and terrorism, the more weapons - the less terrorism.

Why on earth are weapons forbidden on airplanes in America?
Ken M

Mountain climber
Los Angeles, Ca
Jul 22, 2012 - 01:40pm PT
KenM, LOCKS were made to keep HONEST people HONEST. IF someone wants in to just about ANY building or home, they will indeed get in. Ive had freinds shoot burglars coming in through their bedroom windows.

And since most crimes seem to be one criminal against another, we know what that says about your "friends". Probably other friends breaking in to get their drugs.

Oddly, what you describe has never happened to many hundred of my police friends.
Ken M

Mountain climber
Los Angeles, Ca
Jul 22, 2012 - 01:49pm PT
What point did I miss regarding martial arts? What training are you referring to... guns or martial arts?

The point that said that what martial arts teaches you to do, is to AVOID conflicts, not how to beat the crap out of people.


Why do you assume I follow the NRA? Do you also assume I'm conservative? do you make a lot of assumptions?

You are singing the company song. word for word, line by line.


Point is, you want to restrict my rights because you're afraid of becoming the victim of a legal gun owner.


If you are a felon or a nut, yes. If you want military weapons, yes.


I think of guns as giving you the ability to fight back from a distance and/or against a much stronger opponent. Not necessarily up close and personal. Not appropriate for every situation.

That's what makes you dangerous, when someone else would walk away.

You want the government to protect you from me.

If you are a felon, a nut, or want military hardware, yes.


There are published cases of individuals successfully defending themselves with firearms; but you act like those don't exist. Will you acknowledge them or are you too biased?

Of course they exist, but just by the way you are phrasing it, YOU KNOW they are miniscule, compared to the number of people killed by them.

Fear seems to be a constant refrain from you. Clearly, you need weapons because you are afraid, and think about it a lot.

I own a number of weapons, but purchased none of them because I felt the need to defend myself with them. Mainly for demonstration purposes, a tool.
Wade Icey

Trad climber
www.alohashirtrescue.com
Jul 22, 2012 - 02:38pm PT
A study in the Journal of Trauma and Acute Care Surgery found that the gun murder rate in the U.S. is almost 20 times higher than the next 22 richest and most populous nations combined.
Among the world’s 23 wealthiest countries, 80 percent of all gun deaths are American deaths and 87 percent of all kids killed by guns are American kids.
Sierra Ledge Rat

Mountain climber
Old and Broken Down in Appalachia
Jul 22, 2012 - 02:42pm PT
Hey! Wade stop posting left-wing biased propoganda!
I HAVE A CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHT TO MY GUNS!

Makes me wanna go live somewhere else, under a different constitution...
Marlow

Sport climber
OSLO
Jul 22, 2012 - 02:47pm PT
Thanks Wade,

Facts are welcome. This discussion is dominated by anectdotal subjectivity jumping to conclusions. I wonder if Hillrat is hired by someone to spin on this thread - interesting to take a look at his posts until now.
bluering

Trad climber
Santa Clara, CA
Jul 22, 2012 - 02:54pm PT
In WadeIcey's stat's you guys are forgetting a couple of things;

1. Many of those gun-slayings are gang-bangers, no doubt, using illicit weapons. Even if they are legal, it;s idiots shooting idiots.

2. How many lawful owners have accidents that you guys infer happen to children all the time?

You have to break this sh#t down before you start categorizing. I hate to use this overused saying, but it's people that kill people, one way or another.

Me, I just like shooting guns at targets. It's fun.
Wade Icey

Trad climber
www.alohashirtrescue.com
Jul 22, 2012 - 03:08pm PT
A study in the Journal of Trauma and Acute Care Surgery


not my stats to spin...bluey..got anything to support your contention that many of these are 'gang related?"
bluering

Trad climber
Santa Clara, CA
Jul 22, 2012 - 03:22pm PT
not my stats to spin...bluey..got anything to support your contention that many of these are 'gang related?"


Um, no. But I could probably find some if I wanted to.

The point is, that by definition, lawful gun owners are just that! They only use guns in self-defense, range-shooting, or hunting.

They also tend to exhibit extraordinary gun discipline, aka gun safety.

Do you find it weird that the Chicago killings 2 weeks ago (and this week too) get no attention but we are focused on a whitey in Colorado???

There were 30 shootings ( and I think kills) in Chicago, bro? That's more than Aurora. WTF?

Norton

Social climber
the Wastelands
Jul 22, 2012 - 03:28pm PT
AURORA, Colo.—Aurora shooting suspect James Holmes applied to join a Colorado gun range but never became a member after the owner became concerned over his "bizarre" message and behavior.

Owner Glenn Rotkovich says Holmes emailed an application to join the Lead Valley Range in Byers on June 25 and there were no overt warning signs in that form.

Holmes said he was not a user of illegal drugs or a convicted felon, so Rotkovich followed up by calling Holmes' apartment to invite him to a mandatory orientation the following week.

Rotkovich got Holmes' answering machine and says "it was bizarre -- guttural, freakish at best."

Rotkovich left two other messages but eventually told his staff to watch for Holmes at the July 1 orientation and not to accept him into the club.
bluering

Trad climber
Santa Clara, CA
Jul 22, 2012 - 03:31pm PT
Exactly, Norton, a responsible shooter questioned the sanity of this asshat.

bluering

Trad climber
Santa Clara, CA
Jul 22, 2012 - 03:32pm PT
No, ron.
Marlow

Sport climber
OSLO
Jul 22, 2012 - 03:40pm PT
"A study in the Journal of Trauma and Acute Care Surgery found that the gun murder rate in the U.S. is almost 20 times higher than the next 22 richest and most populous nations combined. Among the world’s 23 wealthiest countries, 80 percent of all gun deaths are American deaths and 87 percent of all kids killed by guns are American kids."

To me it is a weird experience to see men in their best age doing what they can to explain this alarming statistics away instead of taking it seriously. Some Americans are very strange to me.
bluering

Trad climber
Santa Clara, CA
Jul 22, 2012 - 03:45pm PT
What people keep failing to understand is that the're evil people and that evil exists.

There are also very well armed good people who stand guard.

This rat piece-of-shit chose to prey upon innocent women/children/men when they were defenseless. He is a coward and a predator.

That's it!

God will judge him harshly, I'm sure. He will rot in hell. But the lesson for us is not that guns caused this, but that evil men did this. I stand guard over my family.

Another thing, I really need to go climbing~~
Shack

Big Wall climber
Reno NV
Jul 22, 2012 - 03:50pm PT
REALLY? So I, as a gun owner, commit a felony by selling a gun to someone who is prohibited. And how am I to make that good faith determination?

Yes REALLY!
Apparently you've never heard of a background check.
You could also ask to see a CCW permit or hunting license and if you're not sure, don't sell it.
It's pretty simple really.
Norton

Social climber
the Wastelands
Jul 22, 2012 - 03:58pm PT
Someone please explain to me why a background check is required to buy from a dealer

and no background check is required to buy from your neighbor or from an ad in the newspaper?


what's the difference? Is it because one gun is sold for the first time as new and we don't then care who buys the same gun again as used shortly afterwards?

or is it purely to get the new gun sale into the computer system, serial number, etc
to help track it back if used illegally?

Gun laws seem to not mean anything in terms of stopping criminals from getting and using guns to commit crimes, given how easy it is to buy a gun instantly.

Are they ANY gun laws that make sense?
Should we all be able to buy any grade military weapon because the bad guys can?

The NRA seems to believe we should all be able to have an Abrams M1 tank in our back yard.

As a multiple gun own and CCL holder, I don't know what if any the answer is.
Shack

Big Wall climber
Reno NV
Jul 22, 2012 - 04:05pm PT
The simple fact is, laws don't stop anyone that is intent on breaking them.
I vote for harsher penalties and longer term jail sentences.
Norton

Social climber
the Wastelands
Jul 22, 2012 - 04:12pm PT
Do we have a constitutional right to have clips that hold 50 rounds?

If yes, is the argument because:

if a criminal can have a 50 round clip, therefore everyone else in America should also?

So, do we end up with no gun laws of any kind, because the bad guys don't follow any laws?

Is that the reasoning?
Shack

Big Wall climber
Reno NV
Jul 22, 2012 - 04:25pm PT
Why would anyone think that someone who is willing to commit murder is going to obey a high cap magazine ban?


BTW in 2007 there were roughly 30,000 gun related deaths in the US...(actually over 50% of those deaths were suicide)
the same number of people died from accidental poisoning that same year.
Why is no one concerned about poison?

There were over 40,000 automobile related deaths in 2007...should we ban cars? or limit how fast they can go?
Norton

Social climber
the Wastelands
Jul 22, 2012 - 04:52pm PT
Well, I have been cruising the gun death statistics and the facts seem to contradict the notion that the cities with the toughest gun control laws with the least armed population would have the highest gun death rates.

In fact, the opposite appears to be true:




States with Strong Gun Laws and Low Rates of Gun Ownership Have Lowest Firearm Death Rates



Washington, DC—States with low gun ownership rates and strong gun laws have the lowest rates of gun death according to a new analysis by the Violence Policy Center (VPC) of 2009 national data (the most recent available) from the federal Centers for Disease Control and Prevention’s National Center for Injury Prevention and Control.

The analysis reveals that the five states with the lowest per capita gun death rates were Massachusetts, Hawaii, New Jersey, New York, and Connecticut. Each of these states had a per capita gun death rate far below the national per capita gun death rate of 10.19 per 100,000 for 2009. Each state has strong gun laws and low gun ownership rates. By contrast, states with weak gun laws and higher rates of gun ownership had far higher rates of firearm-related death. Ranking first in the nation for gun death was Louisiana, followed by Wyoming, Alabama, Montana, and Mississippi. http://www.vpc.org/press/1204death.htm
Norton

Social climber
the Wastelands
Jul 22, 2012 - 05:19pm PT
studies are studies Norton


don't know what you mean by that, Ron

my guess is that because the facts, the truth, the "studies" directly contradict the "theory" that a fully armed population will have the least gun deaths, and that is not what you personally want to, or do in fact, believe

and so you try to minimize, lessen, these "studies" as things to not be believed?

Now, I may be all wrong, Ron, so forgive me if that is not where you are coming from

If studies and research and facts and what we test to be true are NOT to be trusted, Ron
then what is to be trusted as the truth?

is it what we "want" to believe, and tested factual stuff is "just studies"?

Not trying to start any argument here, just trying to find out what is really true and what is made up
Ken M

Mountain climber
Los Angeles, Ca
Jul 22, 2012 - 05:48pm PT
6) Ive been RECENTLY been threatened because of an official Border patrol hat on the dash of my vehicle given to me by a cousin.



And people rag on officers because they don't wear uniforms to diners, making themselves targets?
Ken M

Mountain climber
Los Angeles, Ca
Jul 22, 2012 - 05:53pm PT
Hillrat
Havent hit the crag yet. Im.scared by having a gun? So then nobody neefs martial arts just avoidance training and that guarantees nothing bad will happen... Everything is avoidable? Where did i say i want military hardware? im not a felon. The feds licenced me for hazmat and other things so i must not be a nut despite your opinion. Youve been shot at by people who knew what theyre doing why didnt you avoid it?

Your argument seems driven purely by emotion not logic and you sound incapable of self evolution. my views on gun control have evolved. Some of the things ive posted here conflict with NRA ideals but youve ignored that. What weapons do you own and why with your avoidance theory did you not avoid being shot at?


Ah, as I thought. You have no clue about martial arts.

Like all extremists, you state things in extreme ways. no, you cannot avoid everything. But you can avoid a lot of things.

But you are not reading my posts carefully. You SAY you are not a nut, a felon, and are not seeking military hardware. Good enough for me. You pass a background check, and I'm fine with you or anyone like you owning guns.

The weapons I own is immaterial to the discussion. The people who shot at me were being paid to do so.

enough of your 3rd degree.
Marlow

Sport climber
OSLO
Jul 22, 2012 - 05:53pm PT
Norton,

To me that's obvious. It's a mystery how anyone is able to ignore it.
Norton

Social climber
the Wastelands
Jul 22, 2012 - 06:09pm PT
To me that's obvious. It's a mystery how anyone is able to ignore it.

I am not saying Ron or anyone else is ignoring

just suggesting that people believe what they want to believe is true, and then when confronted with direct evidence that says otherwise, then instead of changing their own minds because of the evidence, they dig in harder and say the facts are somehow wrong

we see this a lot of the political threads
Marlow

Sport climber
OSLO
Jul 22, 2012 - 06:11pm PT
Ron

There is a study showing:

"A study in the Journal of Trauma and Acute Care Surgery found that the gun murder rate in the U.S. is almost 20 times higher than the next 22 richest and most populous nations combined. Among the world’s 23 wealthiest countries, 80 percent of all gun deaths are American deaths and 87 percent of all kids killed by guns are American kids."

Is there another study showing the opposite? If you can not show us the study showing the opposite, you are just proving Norton's point.

How is the link you provided proving the opposite? It does not.
Norton

Social climber
the Wastelands
Jul 22, 2012 - 06:12pm PT
Norton, for every study there is an equal and opposite one done

nope

if this is true, and I have presented a recently dated study
then can I invite you to also present a recent credible study that refutes it?


better yet, how about you show more than one?

just to prove me, and all those other studies I did not bother showing, wrong


edit: show the exact language as I did, not just the broad link, that shows you actually read what you posted

thanks
Marlow

Sport climber
OSLO
Jul 22, 2012 - 06:20pm PT
Ron

You just proved Norton's point. Thanks!
Norton

Social climber
the Wastelands
Jul 22, 2012 - 06:40pm PT
Ron

You just proved Norton's point. Thanks!


yep
Chaz

Trad climber
greater Boss Angeles area
Jul 22, 2012 - 07:08pm PT
"•An estimated 41% of gun-related homicides and 94% of gun-related suicides would not occur under the same circumstances had no guns been present"


Huh?

Shouldn't it be in 100% of gun homicides, there's a gun present?

And how exactly do the other 6% of gun suicides do it without a gun?

That study - like all the others - is just crap.
zBrown

Ice climber
chingadero de chula vista
Jul 22, 2012 - 08:01pm PT
It's interesting that all the support-your-local-gun folks and their n(ra)ational brothers, were so quick to support the rights of the Black Panther Party for Freedom and Self-Defense to carry weapons and protect themselves.


climbski2

Mountain climber
Anchorage AK, Reno NV
Jul 22, 2012 - 08:06pm PT
http://www.cdc.gov/Injury/wisqars/pdf/10LCD-Age-Grp-US-2009-a.pdf

Death by gunshot does not even make the CDC top 10 causes of death in America.

Get real folks.

There are much higher priorities for our government in it's DUTY to safeguard it's citizens than gun regulation.


Absolute undeniable fact ..

Lets take care of the real problems first



monolith

climber
albany,ca
Jul 22, 2012 - 08:25pm PT
Guns, Babies, and Jesus. Not sure about the order.
zBrown

Ice climber
chingadero de chula vista
Jul 22, 2012 - 08:36pm PT
Yet over a million babies are murdered every year, and people call that a choice.....not for the baby.

That guy oughta be arrested.

Are you sure about that number? A baby is a free-standing human living outside it's mother's body. If you're talking about abortions, that's a significantly more complex issue that cannot be well addressed in your one-liner, nor in a forum such as this.

Mind you, I'm in favor of you making your anti-abortion stance (if you have one) known as a reminder that horrible (in the eye of the viewer) things go on all the time. I throw up a photo of Nagasaki/Hiroshima every once in a while myself. These folks were free-standing people all living outside their mother's bodies (some of whom I imagine were expecting).





Ken M

Mountain climber
Los Angeles, Ca
Jul 22, 2012 - 08:57pm PT
The point is, that by definition, lawful gun owners are just that! They only use guns in self-defense, range-shooting, or hunting.

They also tend to exhibit extraordinary gun discipline, aka gun safety.

Yeah!

Like George Zimmerman.
Like Theodore Kaczynski
Like Timothy McVey.

EXTRAORDINARY gun discipline.

By definition.
Ken M

Mountain climber
Los Angeles, Ca
Jul 22, 2012 - 09:18pm PT
Yet, you yourself have been shot at by people who know what they were doing and paid to do so. Paid? To shoot at YOU? Just what were you doing at the time? Why is it that they would be paid to shoot at such a rational and pacifist guy like yourself?

There's a lot of life experiences involving guns that you haven't had, little hilltroll.

My favorite person who described themselves as a pacificist was Norman Schwarzkopf. My favorite person who lived as a pacificist was Desmond Doss. More brave on the bottom of his boot than you have in your body.

I imagine your heroes are the likes of Lt. Calley and Jim Jones, good gun users both.
Ken M

Mountain climber
Los Angeles, Ca
Jul 22, 2012 - 09:20pm PT
Yet over a million babies are murdered every year, and people call that a choice.....not for the baby.

Where's the outrage over that? Shameful.

They aren't babies, baby.
Bowser

Social climber
Durango CO
Jul 22, 2012 - 10:55pm PT
I have carried a 9mm in my vehicle for over 25 years. It is just another tool in my emergency kit, bottle jack, tire iron, tool set, first aid kit, flares and a 9mm.

In all of these years I have never even come close to thinking a firearm was needed. We have always vacated any confrontational situations, and yes there have been a few.

But you can bet your ass that I will protect my family and unarmed bystanders in a dangerous or deadly situation.

I am sure not going to lay down and hope for the cops to come save me. I and my family will have a fighting chance.

TB
Jon Beck

Trad climber
Oceanside
Jul 22, 2012 - 11:15pm PT
It is interesting how the right to bear arms people are so eager to regulate a woman's uterus.
zBrown

Ice climber
chingadero de chula vista
Jul 22, 2012 - 11:29pm PT
In all of these years I have never even come close to thinking a firearm was needed.

If you'd have invested the money spent on the gun (or the money you could have earned selling it) for 25 years, then you could hire your own private army of flame thrower soldiers. Regulation is much less strict in Colorado than California.

666 days on the road, but I'm gonna see my baby tonight.






Bowser

Social climber
Durango CO
Jul 22, 2012 - 11:30pm PT
I am a "Right to Bear Arms People" and regulating a woman's uterus sounds pretty disgusting.

No thanks

Peace of mind is well worth the $350.00 investment.



TB
rottingjohnny

Sport climber
mammoth lakes ca
Jul 22, 2012 - 11:58pm PT
Zbrown...If someone uses a flame thrower in a theater , is it kosher to yell fire....?
beef supreme

climber
the west
Jul 23, 2012 - 12:52am PT
amen to that bowser

edit:
and it's not even remotely a coherent argument to lump 'pro-gun' people in with those who wish to 'control the uterus' or however tastefully it was put.
Shack

Big Wall climber
Reno NV
Jul 23, 2012 - 01:01am PT
Ken has "many hundreds of police friends". ha.
Why don't you ask them if they carry a gun while off duty.

Why is it that the people who are posting stats in order show the huge number of gun deaths, are for the most part the same ones who say that the odds of using a gun in self defense are so minuscule?
Seems a bit contradictory.
monolith

climber
albany,ca
Jul 23, 2012 - 01:12am PT
I guess we won't know for sure unless everyone carries a gun.
beef supreme

climber
the west
Jul 23, 2012 - 01:15am PT
KenM, you wrote:
Like George Zimmerman.
Like Theodore Kaczynski
Like Timothy McVey.

EXTRAORDINARY gun discipline.

By definition.

First off, jury's still out on Zimmerman, you may be right in your a*#umption, maybe not. And Teddy and Timmy were bombers if you don't remember. Unless I'm mixing up the uni-bomber and the ok city bomber guy, but I'm pretty sure those names stand out.

If you want to talk gun control, talk gun control. If you want to talk crazy sociopath control, talk crazy sociopath control. Just saying. There really isn't an argument to be made when you compare the fukin unibomber to someone that owns a firearm.

apogee

climber
Technically expert, safe belayer, can lead if easy
Jul 23, 2012 - 01:19am PT
"Why don't you ask them if they carry a gun while off duty."

I know of at least one 20+ year veteran with the Medford Sheriff Dept who would tell you 'no'.
WBraun

climber
Jul 23, 2012 - 01:20am PT
monolith -- "I guess we won't know for sure unless everyone carries a gun."

Everyone already has a gun.

It's in our body mind and soul .......
beef supreme

climber
the west
Jul 23, 2012 - 01:27am PT
Ok, hypothetical question:
Lets say that we all woke up tomorrow with no guns, everybody- the 'good' guys and the 'bad' guys, hell, even the cops. So... no guns.. question is- would we still have incidents like what happened in CO? Obviously without the guns, duh; I'm talking about the intention- would it still be there and acted out in another way by the people that do this stuff?

I guess, I'm wondering about symptoms vs cause of this societal disease.
WBraun

climber
Jul 23, 2012 - 01:29am PT
A gun is just an external extension of ones consciousness.
Shack

Big Wall climber
Reno NV
Jul 23, 2012 - 01:32am PT
I know of at least one 20+ year veteran with the Medford Sheriff Dept who would tell you 'no'.

I might expect that in Medford.

I don't know any that don't.
In fact, most are required to carry while off duty.
monolith

climber
albany,ca
Jul 23, 2012 - 11:25am PT
What's so unreasonable about limiting the purchase of assault rifles to 1 per month?

Hundreds of these guns go into Mexico each day via straw purchases. Be a responsible owner and accept an assault rifle purchase limitation.
kennyt

climber
Woodfords,California
Jul 23, 2012 - 11:36am PT
Will somebody please take Cragmans guns away?
Mark Hudon

Trad climber
Hood River, OR
Jul 23, 2012 - 11:45am PT
I can't believe how you guys shred on each other! It makes my skin crawl.
kennyt

climber
Woodfords,California
Jul 23, 2012 - 11:48am PT
I rest my case.
rottingjohnny

Sport climber
mammoth lakes ca
Jul 23, 2012 - 11:56am PT
I can't belive how Ron shreds on his sledz....makes my hair stand on end....Dude is insane...!
rottingjohnny

Sport climber
mammoth lakes ca
Jul 23, 2012 - 12:10pm PT
kennyt...If your daughter was as good looking as Cragman's , you'd be carrying a shotgun to...!
kennyt

climber
Woodfords,California
Jul 23, 2012 - 12:13pm PT
Cragman, I assume that you are probably a good guy with totally different beliefs than me.
kennyt

climber
Woodfords,California
Jul 23, 2012 - 12:15pm PT
R.J., I'll keep that in mind.
Mark Hudon

Trad climber
Hood River, OR
Jul 23, 2012 - 12:21pm PT
I have quite a few wing nut, right wing, lunatic friends that I get along real well with. Hell, a few of them I actually admire! I'm never going to change their minds and they'll never change mine but I'm proud to have them call me their friend. (I'm a total bleeding heart liberal)
Ken M

Mountain climber
Los Angeles, Ca
Jul 23, 2012 - 12:30pm PT
Ken M, they are every much a baby as you are.

Really?

I can breath, they cannot.
kennyt

climber
Woodfords,California
Jul 23, 2012 - 12:32pm PT
I definately appreciate the threads that are actually about climbing! But one thing I'm sure we can all agree on. Is that it's a Sad world we live in when we feel theneed to carry a gun into a theatre to protect are families
Ken M

Mountain climber
Los Angeles, Ca
Jul 23, 2012 - 12:34pm PT
Though I'm certain we haven't had the same life experiences, I'm mildly curious why you choose not to expand on yours. Maybe you're ashamed. Maybe you're still concocting a good story. Maybe the fear of reliving those experiences here is simply more than you can bear.

This from a person who doesn't have the balls to post using his own name?

ha!
Ken M

Mountain climber
Los Angeles, Ca
Jul 23, 2012 - 12:37pm PT
Ken has "many hundreds of police friends". ha.
Why don't you ask them if they carry a gun while off duty.

Why is it that the people who are posting stats in order show the huge number of gun deaths, are for the most part the same ones who say that the odds of using a gun in self defense are so minuscule?
Seems a bit contradictory.

Certainly many cops carry when off duty.

But ask them further. Generally, they are petrified at the thought of amateurs carrying in a tense situation.

Amateurs are not experienced with such situations, and they tend to shoot all over the place, shooting, for example, off-duty cops because they have drawn a gun......

I don't understand why the stats are contradictory?
Ken M

Mountain climber
Los Angeles, Ca
Jul 23, 2012 - 12:41pm PT
KenM, you wrote:
Like George Zimmerman.
Like Theodore Kaczynski
Like Timothy McVey.

EXTRAORDINARY gun discipline.

By definition.

First off, jury's still out on Zimmerman, you may be right in your a*#umption, maybe not. And Teddy and Timmy were bombers if you don't remember. Unless I'm mixing up the uni-bomber and the ok city bomber guy, but I'm pretty sure those names stand out.

If you want to talk gun control, talk gun control. If you want to talk crazy sociopath control, talk crazy sociopath control. Just saying. There really isn't an argument to be made when you compare the fukin unibomber to someone that owns a firearm.


The assertion I was addredding was

The point is, that by definition, lawful gun owners are just that! They only use guns in self-defense, range-shooting, or hunting.

They also tend to exhibit extraordinary gun discipline, aka gun safety.


Ken M

Mountain climber
Los Angeles, Ca
Jul 23, 2012 - 12:44pm PT
What's so unreasonable about limiting the purchase of assault rifles to 1 per month?

Hundreds of these guns go into Mexico each day via straw purchases. Be a responsible owner and accept an assault rifle purchase limitation.

How about 1/year?
kennyt

climber
Woodfords,California
Jul 23, 2012 - 12:47pm PT
Thank's for the offer Cragman I will take you up on that one day. I would much rather talk building and climbing than this stuff. Now it's drying up and I'm off to pound nails.
Ken M

Mountain climber
Los Angeles, Ca
Jul 23, 2012 - 12:48pm PT
Ken, let me help ya out here a bit....

When a seed of grass germinates, it becomes a blade of grass. When it gets poison sprayed on it, it dies.

When a lunatic comes into a theater and shoots a grown human being in a vital area, they die.

When a doctor, in a variety of possible ways, terminates a baby, it dies.

What part of that is a mystery to you?

the part where you make up the baby part.
When you go outside to cut the grass, does that mean you are going to move a sack of seed? No, seeds are not the same as grass.

When a lunatic comes into a theater and shoots an ungrown human being (a little girl), she dies too.
Ken M

Mountain climber
Los Angeles, Ca
Jul 23, 2012 - 12:58pm PT
Ken M, amatures you say? A PD ivocled shooting a few years back involved about eight washoe county sheriffs, reno pd and NHP. The victim tried a suicide by cop deal, and 115 rounds later he had been hit three times. I know many "amatures" that shoot a thousand percent better than that.

PERFECT EXAMPLE!!!

NO, you don't!!!!

Shooting at clay pigeons or paper targets is NOT like shooting at people, although amateurs always think it is.

When in a crowd of shooters, what do you think your primary issue is in firing your gun?

NOT HITTING THE OTHER OFFICERS and potential bystanders, as opposed to shooting the target, as you might think.

Rarely in such situations would police be lined up shoulder-to-shoulder, execution squad style, blasting away at a target sitting in front of a bullet-proof wall. They are all over the place, behind shelter...and the perp may be in front of other people, or buildings with other people inside.

Idiot amateurs think only of the target. They RARELY think about what is BEHIND the target. They rarely think about what the ammo they are shooting may do to other places that may be hit. Professionals are very aware.

So in your scenario, if it had been a bunch of amateurs, I'll bet they'd have pumped in about twice as many bullets, have hit the perp more times, and hit a few cops and bystanders, as well.
apogee

climber
Technically expert, safe belayer, can lead if easy
Jul 23, 2012 - 01:07pm PT
"The human will is the root cause of incidents like this. The tools are a footnote."

"fear...agreed. ^"


So if that's the case, why aren't mental health programs more broadly supported by the same party that supports unfettered access to any and all types of guns?
Chaz

Trad climber
greater Boss Angeles area
Jul 23, 2012 - 01:12pm PT
What makes you think mental health isn't supported by everybody?
rottingjohnny

Sport climber
mammoth lakes ca
Jul 23, 2012 - 01:14pm PT
Because the mental health sector doesn't contribute enough campaign dollars and the NRA , i'm guessing , donates lots of cash to the Pro Gun Republican party...?
Norton

Social climber
the Wastelands
Jul 23, 2012 - 01:15pm PT
So if that's the case, why aren't mental health programs more broadly supported by the same party that supports unfettered access to any and all types of guns?


answer: because mental "health" is seen by that party as a "social issue"

and social issues are to be dealt with without societal help as in without needing tax dollars

this is where "personal responsibility" comes in

mentally sick people should remain quietly sick and deal with their own problems

blahblah

Gym climber
Boulder
Jul 23, 2012 - 01:17pm PT
Ken M wrote:
Amateurs are not experienced with such situations, and they tend to shoot all over the place, shooting, for example, off-duty cops because they have drawn a gun......

Ken, if that happened frequently, or even now and then, I agree it would be a valid concern.
Can you identify either statistics or anecdotes where citizens lawfully carrying guns attempting self-defense shot off duty cops by mistake? I've never heard of that happening. Plenty of times that cops have shot people under very questionable circumstances, however.
rottingjohnny

Sport climber
mammoth lakes ca
Jul 23, 2012 - 01:19pm PT
Two off-duty cops in Orange County got into a shooting match with each other on the freeway via a road rage incident...Oops...!
frank wyman

Mountain climber
helena montana
Jul 23, 2012 - 01:23pm PT
When seconds count, Police are only minutes away...
Don Paul

Big Wall climber
Colombia, South America
Jul 23, 2012 - 01:29pm PT
I don't think this guy meets the standard, either legal or DSM-IV, for mental illness. I think he just didn't want to live anymore and wanted to get as much revenge on the evil world as he could on the way out.
Don Paul

Big Wall climber
Colombia, South America
Jul 23, 2012 - 01:32pm PT
The weird thing is that he almost got away with it. He was out back in the parking lot when one of the police who'd arrived noticed the gas mask he was carrying. Probably would have caught him eventually, due to all the bizarre gun and ammo purchases.
beef supreme

climber
the west
Jul 23, 2012 - 01:36pm PT
DonPaul, I agree with you. I think this guy is probably perfectly 'sane' (whatever sane really means, it's gotta be some kind of average). Just because we cant comprehend the actions and we see it as insane, in my opinion, doesn't make the person doing it insane. Pretty deliberate and thought out best I can tell. Same w/ the norway guy.
Norton

Social climber
the Wastelands
Jul 23, 2012 - 01:43pm PT
the "same party"?? uhhmm Apogee, Obama has been fairly SILENT on any gun control issue not to mention incresing our abilities to carry in Natl parks. hrmmff hrmff..


Ron, you are referring to the wrong political party

Apogee was referring to the Republican Party, not the Dems
apogee

climber
Technically expert, safe belayer, can lead if easy
Jul 23, 2012 - 01:54pm PT
The really aggravating thing about you gun-rights nutz is that you rant and lobby loud, effectively and will not compromise on anything that even remotely resembles a limitations or procedural requirements for obtaining any & all firearms, no matter how extreme....

...while out of the other side of your mouth, you acknowledge that the perps of these extreme events are clearly mentally ill, and that the source of the mayhem is the people, not the guns....and then go on to fight any & all efforts to develop social programs that would address that mental issue.

It's a frustratingly childish dichotomy.
rottingjohnny

Sport climber
mammoth lakes ca
Jul 23, 2012 - 02:27pm PT
Who needs an Kalishnikoff when your packin sledz...Know what a mean...?
Wade Icey

Trad climber
www.alohashirtrescue.com
Jul 23, 2012 - 02:34pm PT
Don Paul

Big Wall climber
Colombia, South America
Jul 23, 2012 - 02:49pm PT
If I saw someone selling machine guns in the back room of a bar, I'd have gone straight to the cops.
Norton

Social climber
the Wastelands
Jul 23, 2012 - 02:54pm PT
No,

suicides by gun were THE highest percentage of gun related deaths

There were 52,447 deliberate and 23,237 accidental non-fatal gunshot injuries in the United States during 2000.[4] The majority of gun-related deaths in the United States are suicides,[5] with 17,352 (55.6%) of the total 31,224 firearm-related deaths in 2007 due to suicide, while 12,632 (40.5%) were homicide deaths.[6]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gun_violence_in_the_United_States
Wade Icey

Trad climber
www.alohashirtrescue.com
Jul 23, 2012 - 02:58pm PT
80% of "our" killings were gang related

source for that?
Norton

Social climber
the Wastelands
Jul 23, 2012 - 03:06pm PT
my wiki leak is interesting

in that more people killed themselves, suicide, with guns than killed other people
Norton

Social climber
the Wastelands
Jul 23, 2012 - 03:08pm PT
what?

I did NOT BLAME anyone or anything, Ron

all i did was show a link from wiki showing how the percentage of gun deaths break down

what the hell are you mad at me for?
jstan

climber
Jul 23, 2012 - 03:12pm PT
A gun is just an external extension of ones consciousness.

That's a great idea. Let's switch to discussing consciousness.

Oh before I forget. Somewhere back there is a thread discussing which makers of knock-off AK47's make the best AK47's, the most accurate, and the least likely to fail/jam.

Chris you might want to go and delete that whole thread.
Mighty Hiker

climber
Vancouver, B.C.
Jul 23, 2012 - 03:15pm PT
In the Aurora shooting and almost every other mass shooting, there are a couple of things they all had in common. The bad guy was the ONLY one with a gun

In a theatre in suburban Colorado containing 400 or more people, that seems rather unlikely. What are the odds that not a single other person in a crowd of 400 had a gun?
pazzo

climber
Vancouver BC
Jul 23, 2012 - 03:27pm PT
^^^^^^


WHY is Canada so violent?

Canada is not that violent. And to put things into perspective, the US has ~10x the population of Canada, so in a sense they are 10x more likely to have a violent situation, making them look 10x worse than Canada.
There are lots of people here on ST who are from all over the US, and who will also tell you that they have never in their lives felt threatened or have been around a hostile scenario. I have travelled extensively in the US since childhood and have yet to see a "situation," and that includes visiting big-name cities with known crime problems. But they do happen.

The problem is not the guns. If we decide to ban guns, then some crazy guy who decides to kill a bunch of students will lock the kids in a gymnasium, chain the door shut, douse the place in gasoline and light it.
Now what? Do we ban chain, jerrycans, gasoline and lighters? Where does it end?

How about booze? Something like 40-50 people die each day in North America from drinking-driving related accidents (~15,000 deaths each year in the US alone!). I don’t hear anybody lobbying to "regulate" or "register" alcohol.
pazzo

climber
Vancouver BC
Jul 23, 2012 - 03:31pm PT
In a theatre in suburban Colorado containing 400 or more people, that seems rather unlikely. What are the odds that not a single other person in a crowd of 400 had a gun?

Anders, I am completely dumfounded as to why NOBODY else in that theatre had a CCW on them. When seconds count the police are only minutes away.
michaeld

Sport climber
Sacramento
Jul 23, 2012 - 03:44pm PT
Whoa, did someone say guns?




Those are those things that kill people all the time right?




So, this may be kind of f*#ked up, but just follow me here.


AIDS kill people too. During 2009, there were an estimated 42,959 new diagnoses of HIV infection in the 40 states and five dependent areas.

Yet, people rejoice Obama lifted the ban on HIV+ travelers into the U.S.

HIV/AIDS kill people.

Why do guns get the spotlight?

AIDS and guns are similar. It's all the who controls it. You can keep your pants on, you can keep your trigger finger calm. You can go out an infect, very easily, or you can go into a theater, a school, a bar, and shoot it up.


Oh before I forget. Somewhere back there is a thread discussing which makers of knock-off AK47's make the best AK47's, the most accurate, and the least likely to fail/jam.


Why not just get a real one, for the same price? Amateurs.


Wade Icey

Trad climber
www.alohashirtrescue.com
Jul 23, 2012 - 03:46pm PT
considering that probably close to 80% of "our" killings were gang related, those figure hardly represent a tally of the citizens here..I killed NO ONE,, last year.

cherry picker, i said"PROBABLY"...;-) got "link" for yours?

You're right Ron. I didn't catch the 'probably' or the 'ours.' So you're guessing about Reno Area?I did note that it's probably lefty paranoia. Should probably note the shooter was neither a gang member or a Nevada resident
Not debating just throwing some info on the fire. no source for the graphic but here are some supporting facts.

2011 populations:
Finland 5,401,267 - 1 in 317,721 murdered by gun
Austrailia 22,620,600 - 1 in 646,302 murdered by gun
England 56,075,900 - 1 in 1,437,843 murdered by gun
Spain 47,190,497 - 1 in 786,508 murdered by gun
... Germany 81,726,000- 1 in 421,268 murdered by gun
Canada 34,482,779 - 1 in 172,413 murdered by gun
USA 311,591,917 - 1 in 32,854 murdered by gun


and here's some info from that commie rag Small arms Magazine...


blahblah

Gym climber
Boulder
Jul 23, 2012 - 03:48pm PT
In the Aurora shooting and almost every other mass shooting, there are a couple of things they all had in common. The bad guy was the ONLY one with a gun

In a theatre in suburban Colorado containing 400 or more people, that seems rather unlikely. What are the odds that not a single other person in a crowd of 400 had a gun?

Guns weren't allowed in the movie theater. What are the odds that someone in the crowd was illegally carrying a gun? Who knows--but I'd guess not that high--a "lawful" gun owner would, well, follow the law, and an illegal gun carrier probably wouldn't feel a need to carry a gun into a movie theater.
Mighty Hiker

climber
Vancouver, B.C.
Jul 23, 2012 - 03:52pm PT
Okay then MH, why didn't they use it?

Assuming that someone(s) in the theatre had a gun, she/he may not have used it for any of a wide variety of reasons:

1. Not sure who/what to shoot at.
2. Inadequate training.
3. Too busy escaping, helping others, etc.
4. Too far for an accurate shot and/or likelihood of hitting others.
5. Affected by tear gas, others stampeding, etc.
6. Worred that he/she might then become a target, either of gunman or of police.
7. Not enough time.
8. Intimidated by weaponry of shooter.

As for the theatre, it may have had a sign prohibiting concealed weapons. In a crowded multiplex theatre late at night, would it be enforced in any real way, or just on the honour system?
michaeld

Sport climber
Sacramento
Jul 23, 2012 - 03:57pm PT
Or, if you are concealing, and you're in a theater, and someone obviously prepared to the teeth comes in shooting up the place...

You'll notice the body armor immediately after the 5.56x45 flying into your stands.

So before that whole argument "If someone with a CCW was there, this wouldn't of happened" bullsh#t, think about it.


Body armor, might be hyped up on pcp, big guns, lots of ammo, tear gas.


Concealer = lets pretend he had a .357.... Still gotta somehow manage to aim without hitting people in the crowd, while bullets are flying at you, going through chairs, women, men, children, etc.


If I had a goddamn gun, i'd of played dead.
apogee

climber
Technically expert, safe belayer, can lead if easy
Jul 23, 2012 - 04:20pm PT
Alona Day, huh?

10...9...8...7...
michaeld

Sport climber
Sacramento
Jul 23, 2012 - 04:53pm PT
Simple enough:

You can't prepare for these. They're just too rare. Too unfathomable.

You can't stop them.

They're terrible, even when it doesn't affect you one bit.

Jaybro

Social climber
Wolf City, Wyoming
Jul 23, 2012 - 05:07pm PT
What are the odds that someone in the crowd was illegally carrying a gun?

100%
michaeld

Sport climber
Sacramento
Jul 23, 2012 - 05:19pm PT
Everything is the government's fault.

Where have you been?
Crimpergirl

Sport climber
Boulder, Colorado!
Jul 23, 2012 - 05:29pm PT
What are the odds that someone in the crowd was illegally carrying a gun?

100%. Agreed Jaybro. Along with those who were legally carrying.
pazzo

climber
Vancouver BC
Jul 23, 2012 - 05:47pm PT
You'll notice the body armor immediately after the 5.56x45 flying into your stands…

Body armor, might be hyped up on pcp, big guns, lots of ammo, tear gas…


Concealer = lets pretend he had a .357.... Still gotta somehow manage to aim without hitting people in the crowd, while bullets are flying at you, going through chairs, women, men, children, etc.

So he had body armour on. Yes, that would prevent core shots, but that doesn’t prevent head shots. If someone has their CCW and is actually carrying, there is a 100% chance they are trained to the point of making the police look like gangster robbers holding their guns sideways. I’m not saying that under stress they would be able to shoot the guy in the face, but the odds go up drastically. Furthermore, I doubt that the CCW carrier will be worried about hitting too many people in the crowd, as they would have ran AWAY from the bad guy (i.e. shooter).
And I wouldn’t expect the CCW guy to necessarily incapacitate the shooter with a head-shot. I would expect the return fire would distract the shooter from aiming at the crowd, and put his focus on either taking cover, shooting back at the CCW guy, and/or fleeing the scene (think self preservation - after all, he DID surrender (as opposed to suicide)).

So, I stand behind my CCW call. It can, has and will continue to save many lives. Just look at the robbery attempt in Florida:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9YffbN29XOs

If the 71 year-old had of pulled out something bigger than his .380 then those fools wouldn’t be around to tell their story. But regardless his CCW did the trick. Beat that.
michaeld

Sport climber
Sacramento
Jul 23, 2012 - 05:51pm PT
two thugs with backs turned away.... clear shot.


One guy, spraying bullets at you. People running around frantic. I dunno about you, but every theater I've been to, exits in the front.

Head shots under stress are a lot harder then target practice after warming up.
Norton

Social climber
the Wastelands
Jul 23, 2012 - 05:55pm PT
If someone has their CCW and is actually carrying, there is a 100% chance they are trained to the point of making the police look like gangster robbers holding their guns sideway


you are obviously not aware of the shooting skills required to get a CCW?

I have a Concealed Carry License from the State of New Mexico

Here is the shooting "test"

A large target is placed SEVEN feet away, fire five rounds and hit it ANYWHERE

A large target is then placed FIFTEEN feet away, fire five round and hit it ANYWHERE

Oh, and take all day aiming and reloading if you want, no time tables on anything

25 people took my class, all "passed", including an 82 year old woman in a wheel chair
whose arthritis was so bad the instructor actually reloaded her 22 pistol for her

A CCL is a joke, I actually MISSED 2 of the five shots from 15 feet and they still passed me
pazzo

climber
Vancouver BC
Jul 23, 2012 - 05:58pm PT
I’m definitely not saying head-shots are easy or even doable in that stressful scenario, but the actually return-fire is a great means of a distraction. NO crazy shooter will just stand there and ignore a civilian shooting back at them, body armour or not.
Chaz

Trad climber
greater Boss Angeles area
Jul 23, 2012 - 06:00pm PT
Norton,

A lot of the people exercising their First Amendment rights can't pass a spelling test.
pazzo

climber
Vancouver BC
Jul 23, 2012 - 06:03pm PT
Norton, it is probably best that you do everybody a favour and train yourself to be a better shooter. I am aware of the requirements, I guess I’m used to conversing with people that are highly trained in this area, not commoners who shouldn’t be carrying a weapon. Look how many goofballs have their driver’s licenses.
You should not be carrying your CCW unless you are trained to properly use it.
Chaz

Trad climber
greater Boss Angeles area
Jul 23, 2012 - 06:06pm PT
Who do you think professional criminals are more afraid of:

-a highly trained police officer?

-or an armed - and untrained - citizen?
pazzo

climber
Vancouver BC
Jul 23, 2012 - 06:16pm PT
Does it matter who? The criminal has no idea the civilian is untrained. He only knows he’s being shot at and has to take cover or keep moving, in turn distracting him.
When the police show up it’s suicide time (or turn yourself in time like the Colorado guy).
Norton

Social climber
the Wastelands
Jul 23, 2012 - 06:23pm PT
Norton, it is probably best that you do everybody a favour and train yourself to be a better shooter. I am aware of the requirements, I guess I’m used to conversing with people that are highly trained in this area, not commoners who shouldn’t be carrying a weapon. Look how many goofballs have their driver’s licenses.
You should not be carrying your CCW unless you are trained to properly use it.

well pazzo, sorry but you don't get to make the rules

The State does, and you are naive to believe that even a fair minority of CCL holders have any real handgun proficiency

The get the CCL so you can carry concealed LEGALLY, no other reason, none

Anyone who is not a felon or prohibited legally can carry openly in my state

Yes, an 18 year old kid can be right in front of you at McDonalds with q 45 strapped to his side

Given open carry, why would a State bother issuing CC licenses?

Because at least it requires 18 hours of classroom discussion, gets us fingerprinted and "known" to law enforcement

That's why, and it has damn near nothing to do with how good you shoot

Oh, and don't lecture me about my shooting, I could give a damn what you think
The fact is that I lied about my shooting just get to get a prissy lecture shows it.

In fact, I scored the highest in my class in marksmanship.
And I practice and shoot very regularly.

or do I?

Ya just don't know what to believe is true on the internet do you?
pazzo

climber
Vancouver BC
Jul 23, 2012 - 06:25pm PT
we know and see time and time again gun nuts dont do sh#t when it really matter - they slither away like the pussies they are. Just like they did in this most recent case

Nope. There are hundreds of accounts of CCW carriers defending themselves and others, not to mention preventing many situations from arising. The only people who slithered away from this Colorado situation were either gangsters, or people illegally carrying in a theatre that has a strict "no gun" policy (regardless of CCW status).

monolith

climber
albany,ca
Jul 23, 2012 - 06:33pm PT
LoL Pazzo, I highly doubt that anyone carrying illegally in that theater thought to himself during the mayhem, "hum, it's not legal, I'd better not use my gun to save my life".
michaeld

Sport climber
Sacramento
Jul 23, 2012 - 06:40pm PT
Pazzo, i'm REALLY not trying to be a d*ck when I say this.


You can have ANY gun you want, that's legally concealable in CO.

And I'll take an ar-15. You get to hide behind a theater chair, and i'll give you a 6'5, 324lb guy sitting in front of you.

Now, you shoot at me, and MISS. Guess who I'm gonna shoot at?

After about 30 rounds, I guarantee, you wouldn't feel like a hero.
pazzo

climber
Vancouver BC
Jul 23, 2012 - 06:47pm PT
Wow this is like debating the prohibition or regulation of booze, with a bunch of people who have never drank in their lives. A downhill battle.

Anyways………….
My movie The Neverending Story is about to start…….
michaeld

Sport climber
Sacramento
Jul 23, 2012 - 06:48pm PT
Pazzo. Who says I'm not a "drinker" as your analogy puts it?

Because I'm on a climbing forum, I'm not allowed to have any clue how guns work, how to shoot, etc?

You must be really good at life.
michaeld

Sport climber
Sacramento
Jul 23, 2012 - 06:55pm PT
We fly high, no lie, you know thiss....
Norton

Social climber
the Wastelands
Jul 23, 2012 - 07:08pm PT
Norton did you get the tank today? I wanna ride and like I said it would be awesome to shoot that thing at a target 3 miles away while gong 50mph.

let me know when we're going for a ride.

Silver, I am pretty darn convinced that the people who wrote that one sentence 2nd Amendment over 200 years ago were:

1) concerned that the future United States would be able to easily round up "well regulated militias" to defend against another invasion from say, England.

2) IF those guys 200 years wanted to make it real clear that every American should be able to own a gun, then they would NOT have bothered to put in that sentence a qualifier

3) that "qualifier" they put in was "a well regulated militia" being "necessary"


so, I disagree that the founding fathers thought it was ok to have an Abrams M1 tank in your back yard, or NO restrictions as the NRA cheers for

The Second Amendment I feel is horribly written, confusing, vague.
They could have done a lot better job writing it back then, they had the ability.

I suspect they were in somewhat of a rush to finish the constitution, realized they could not deal with every eventuality, and so left a lot of things "sufficiently vague" for the future to deal with
pazzo

climber
Vancouver BC
Jul 23, 2012 - 07:16pm PT
Michael, I wasn’t referring to your post specifically. Just the topic as a whole (where’s that flogging horse icon). It’s a losing battle trying to debate the whole gun thing. I am definitely not the hero type, and it is really easy to sit here at home and think about being one, or what I would do in a situation like the theatre one. But truth be told, unless someone was there to prevent the shooter from shooting, then we will never really know.
Back to TNS.
Chaz

Trad climber
greater Boss Angeles area
Jul 23, 2012 - 07:36pm PT
"Regulated" did not mean "controlled" in The Constitution.

Your big clue is right there in that sentance. A state can not be both free and controlled at the same time.

"Regulated" meant what we would say today is "well drilled" - in other words get out and shoot on a regular basis.
Shack

Big Wall climber
Reno NV
Jul 23, 2012 - 07:59pm PT
we know and see time and time again gun nuts dont do sh#t when it really matter - they slither away like the pussies they are. Just like they did in this most recent case.

Any actual evidence or just talking out of your ass?

some estimates suggesting just over 100,000 defensive gun uses per year and others suggesting 2.5 million or more defensive gun uses per year.
While even the smallest of the estimates indicates that there are hundreds of defensive uses every day
http://www.nap.edu/openbook.php?record_id=10881&page=102

Just talking out of your ass obviously.

BTW, Who you calling a pussy?
You must mean the citizens who do nothing or call 911 and let someone else handle it.
michaeld

Sport climber
Sacramento
Jul 23, 2012 - 08:10pm PT
I like you Hillrat.
beef supreme

climber
the west
Jul 23, 2012 - 08:11pm PT
pizza and beer?!?!?! oh man. it's been 6 weeks w/o a beer. had a few pizzas here in camp, but alas, it's dry, thus making pizza only half as good as it really can be. good on ya, I'll get mine in 24.5 hrs weather permitting....

edit: to keep it on topic- we have guns. we shoot them at an old door with a vicious looking bear with red eyes drawn on it.
monolith

climber
albany,ca
Jul 23, 2012 - 08:11pm PT
"Well regulated" means more like what the National Guard does. Train together once a month or so. Not who's the best shot at the gun range.

The National Guard is considered a subset of the militia.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Guard_of_the_United_States
Shack

Big Wall climber
Reno NV
Jul 23, 2012 - 08:12pm PT
so, I disagree that the founding fathers thought it was ok to have an Abrams M1 tank in your back yard, or NO restrictions as the NRA cheers for

The Second Amendment I feel is horribly written, confusing, vague.
They could have done a lot better job writing it back then, they had the ability.

I suspect they were in somewhat of a rush to finish the constitution, realized they could not deal with every eventuality, and so left a lot of things "sufficiently vague" for the future to deal with

That's a load of crap.
Why didn't they say, "no cannons"? they existed at the time.
In fact, there were no limitations on types of weapons at all.
What good would a militia do if it couldn't have at least military hardware similar to a potential invading army?

You guys obviously don't remember the story of Paul Revere. You know..."The British are coming" etc.

Do you know why the British were coming and what they were coming for?
Probably not, but I suggest you all look it up.
michaeld

Sport climber
Sacramento
Jul 23, 2012 - 08:25pm PT
But you can't ban all guns. So I'm keeping mine.
Shack

Big Wall climber
Reno NV
Jul 23, 2012 - 08:41pm PT
As for the AK-47 debate...

A "real" AK-47 is full auto and made in Russia by Kalashnikov and they are super rare.
Many other countries made their own version of it.
They were banned in 1968.

In 1989, even the semi-auto versions were banned from importation.
AK style guns are still available, but they have to be made in the USA or have less than 10 imported parts to be considered made in the US and therefore legal to sell and own.

BTW, the Russians use the AK-74 now...it uses a 5.45 x 39 round instead of the 7.62 x 39 used in the AK-47.


And from what I can tell from the reports, the guy had an AR15 style gun (M&P15) and probably a 100 round Beta Mag.
There are no 100 round drum mags for AK's....75 is as big as they get.



pazzo

climber
Vancouver BC
Jul 23, 2012 - 08:43pm PT
Fact is we'd all probably be safer if guns were banned. They are an instrument for killing. Period.

Wow that is hands down the dumbest sentence I’ve read all week. Could I interest you in a bowl of granola? Gosh.

Who would be safer if guns were banned? NOBODY would. Why? Because you can only ban guns from LAW ABIDING CITIZENS as they are the only ones the government knows has them and the only ones willing to turn them in. You see, your sentence really was silly and made no sense.

Criminals love unarmed citizens.

Just look at the UK and Australia for reference if you don’t believe me.

Oh wait, I bet you haven’t read this yet…
http://ca.news.yahoo.com/blogs/canada-politics/ban-guns-won-t-help-curb-violence-canada-204404216.html


A ban on guns won’t curb violence in Canada’s cities

'Stop the senseless killings by banning all the handguns' seems like a reasonable thesis.
It's a theory being renewed by Canadians across the country after a week of shootings in Scarborough, downtown Toronto and even Colorado.
But is gun control in Canada even possible? According to the Toronto Star, there are almost 700,000 legally registered handguns in this country. Toronto police estimate that about a third of the guns they seize come from domestic sources. The other two-thirds are smuggled into Canada from the United States — and therein lies the problem.
The National Post's Matt Gurney recently wrote that a gun ban would not slow the inflow of illegal firearms coming from the U.S..
"Canada shares a 5,000 km undefended, and generally unpatrolled, border with the one of the most heavily armed countries in the world, a border that has proven entirely impervious to efforts to stop the flow of contraband, mainly drugs, previously," he wrote.
"It is ironic that during an era of increasing calls for drug law reform, driven by the complete failure of any North American government to interdict the flow of banned narcotics, that some still profess to believe that banning a handgun will work out better than banning drugs has."
In another column, Gurney adds that bans haven't worked in other jurisdictions.
"Chicago and Washington both banned handguns and saw increases in gun violence, as criminal enterprises did not hesitate to simply illegally acquire their pistols elsewhere," he wrote.
"And Australia, the only country in the world to have an entire continent to itself, saw no appreciable change its levels on gun crime after a sweeping ban on firearms."
On Monday, Toronto mayor Rob Ford, Ontario premier Dalton McGuinty, several of his government ministers and Toronto police chief Bill Blair will all meet at Queen's Park, the Ontario legislature, for a meeting on how to tackle gun crime.
It's expected that Ford will be asking the premier for more money for police officers assigned to the Toronto Anti Violence Intervention Strategy.
More policing, tougher sentences for repeat offenders and even investments in low-income communities might be worthwhile tactics in the battle against gun crime.
But a ban on handguns is simply an exercise in futility.
WBraun

climber
Jul 23, 2012 - 08:55pm PT
The material body is the source of all miseries .......
crankster

Trad climber
South Lake Tahoe, CA
Jul 23, 2012 - 09:47pm PT
Body count in Aurora was way too low. We get up around 200-300 dead and we'll maybe limit the opportunity for unstable people to assemble an arsenal with no questions asked. Oh yeah, the NRA will fight it, but if we can get the body count up it just might pass. Just a matter of time before the gun doesn't jam.
Shack

Big Wall climber
Reno NV
Jul 23, 2012 - 09:54pm PT
Body count in Aurora was way too low. We get up around 200-300 dead and we'll maybe limit the opportunity for unstable people to assemble an arsenal with no questions asked. Oh yeah, the NRA will fight it, but if we can get the body count up it just might pass. Just a matter of time before the gun doesn't jam.

Is that right out of the liberal prayer book? The official Democratic viewpoint?
or just your personal opinion?
apogee

climber
Technically expert, safe belayer, can lead if easy
Jul 23, 2012 - 10:31pm PT
Shack

Big Wall climber
Reno NV
Jul 23, 2012 - 10:43pm PT
Too bad they don't make .50 cal DU rounds. :(

BTW all the fuss made over depleted uranium is a crock.
http://hps.org/publicinformation/ate/q746.html
rottingjohnny

Sport climber
mammoth lakes ca
Jul 23, 2012 - 11:01pm PT
Dr. F.....I'm thinking of the basement scene in Tremors...


zBrown

Ice climber
chingadero de chula vista
Jul 23, 2012 - 11:12pm PT
I think everybody (yes everybody) should carry one pistol, in a holster, hung round the waist (or maybe from the shoulder), should dress all in black, should have a knight symbol on the holster, should adopt the ethos of Paladin, should memorize the catch-phrase 'have gun will travel" (or have business cards printed up), and then learn to talk their asses off like the loquacious Richard Boone did. ... And, become proficient with explosives in case the talk is cheap approach fails.


jstan

climber
Jul 23, 2012 - 11:16pm PT
Recently people trying to control the population of mosquitos took the rather common approach of releasing a lot of males in which a fatal genetic mutation had been implanted. Perhaps a similar control measure is needed here. Manufacture and sell defective ammunition. Every tenth bullet causes the weapon to explode. Worth a try anyway.
Shack

Big Wall climber
Reno NV
Jul 23, 2012 - 11:34pm PT
Is this a gun law you guys actually favor? The first Bush enacted it. Apparently he had no difficulties in deciding what an assault weapon was.

That ban is for importation. They just make them here now.
Much better for our economy but makes them more expensive.
tornado

climber
lawrence kansas
Jul 24, 2012 - 12:05am PT
[Click to View YouTube Video]
ontheedgeandscaredtodeath

Trad climber
San Francisco, Ca
Jul 24, 2012 - 12:54am PT
Tornado, have you climbed in Pakistan and visited some of those gun store spots?
apogee

climber
Technically expert, safe belayer, can lead if easy
Jul 24, 2012 - 01:15am PT
GhoulweJ

Trad climber
El Dorado Hills, CA
Jul 24, 2012 - 01:19am PT
Great Gun ad... You should watch
http://s127.photobucket.com/albums/p122/ghoulwej/?action=view¤t=GunControlcopy.mp4

[url=http://s127.photobucket.com/albums/p122/ghoulwej/?action=view¤t=GunControlcopy.mp4]{{img}}h~~p://i127.photobucket.com/albums/p122/ghoulwej/th_GunControlcopy.jpg[/img][/url]
crankster

Trad climber
South Lake Tahoe, CA
Jul 24, 2012 - 01:57am PT
Is that right out of the liberal prayer book? The official Democratic viewpoint?
or just your personal opinion?

Are you expressing your viewpoint or an irrational fear inbred by Fox News and the NRA mailings that land in your mailbox every week asking for money?
Shack

Big Wall climber
Reno NV
Jul 24, 2012 - 02:16am PT
Crankster, are you even trying to make sense?
Don Paul

Big Wall climber
Colombia, South America
Jul 24, 2012 - 09:37am PT
Silver, the Afghans do not manufacture AK-47s. I have been in a gun shop in Peshawar, on the Pak-Afghan border and have seen the quality of their home-made weapons. There are thousands of AK's in both Afghanistan and Pakistan and anyone can buy one in the bazaar. I assume they are soviet-made but don't really know. They are not Afghan made. Any respectable business in Kabul has a guard with an AK. They also have heavy weapons left over from the war with the Soviet Union. I believe there is a machine gun factory in Rawalpindi, Pakistan, but they are not exactly on good terms with Afghanistan now.

Here's a picture of me in a tank on the Shomali plains. I was told never to do this again, since the wrecked tanks everywhere in Afghanistan are sometimes booby trapped.
crankster

Trad climber
South Lake Tahoe, CA
Jul 24, 2012 - 09:52am PT
Shack, it isn't possible to make sense to someone can't see the obvious need to limit the ability of a deranged citizen to amass an arsenal that would allow him or her to assassinate dozens - or hundreds - of his fellow citizens.
If you are not calling for increased gun control, you are insane.
fear

Ice climber
hartford, ct
Jul 24, 2012 - 11:05am PT
I think it's high time we start changing the laws about gasoline and small jars too.

This psycho had TEN gallons of gasoline in small jars all around his apartment. Why didn't the gas station attendant take notice?

FWIW, I went through about 2,500 rounds of various calibers of ammunition last month. Probably go through ~10k a year. I own several AR-style rifles too! The horror! Boy, I must be a nut and a scary guy. I've never shot anyone and hope never to have to. You're falling for the media sensationalism. Who cares how many rounds of ammunition one person has? Big numbers scare Sheeple. That's why. The media loves it.

Ask yourselves, everyday drunk drivers alone murder around 30 people in this country. Probably double that permanently disabled. Every day around the clock all year long. Women, children, fathers. Murdered. Figure around 11k+ murdered every year.

Where's the outrage against booze? Where's the media coverage of those 90 corpses since the shooting? Hmmm?

Learn critical thinking people. Turn off the TV just for a few minutes.
Chaz

Trad climber
greater Boss Angeles area
Jul 24, 2012 - 12:07pm PT
The NRA magazine has a real good article about that Liberator this month.

Someone is even making new ones - with rifled barrels - but they don't advise shooting the new ones more than a few times, just like the originals.

http://vintageordnance.homestead.com/Liberator.html
aspendougy

Trad climber
Los Angeles, CA
Jul 24, 2012 - 12:15pm PT
We already have restrictions on private citizens owning hand grenades, tanks, artillery, missiles and nuclear weapons. It is a question of extending such restrictions to automatic weapons which are capable of being used for mass killings.

If the only guns we were allowed to own were big, cumbersome, old fashioned single action rifles, where you have to pull back the lever and recock the gun for each shot, we would have considerably fewer gun deaths.
It is much harder to kill en masse with such weapons, plus, unlike hand guns, they are difficult to conceal.

This guy killed or wounded about 70 people. The guy in Norway killed a lot more. Both Norway and the U.S. have liberal gun ownership policies. In England, they had 19 deaths total from guns in one entire year.

They restrict gun ownership in England, but paying for sex is legal, so they have, in some respects, better ideas on where to be more liberal and where to be more restrictive.
ontheedgeandscaredtodeath

Trad climber
San Francisco, Ca
Jul 24, 2012 - 12:59pm PT
It seems a strict constitutional view would compel the conclusion that we only have the right to bear muzzle loaders?
fear

Ice climber
hartford, ct
Jul 24, 2012 - 01:05pm PT
And if we banned alcohol nobody would drink and drive. We'd save well over 11 thousand people a year! After all nobody needs to drink alcohol right? And if we pass laws forbidding the ownership or consumption if it then people would, of course, follow them.

I don't drink. I can't see why anyone would. You don't hunt with booze. Therefore none of you should be able to drink. That's the logic you present.

This event, although tragic, is a statistical non-issue compared to much larger threats to society at large. How many tens of thousands of AR's were sold last year and used every day without incident? One was used to kill people in a theater one tragic night and everyone clamors for the laws to be changed? He also used a shotgun. We should ban those too I guess.

Again, the human WILL is the issue here. Not the tools.

Wade Icey

Trad climber
www.alohashirtrescue.com
Jul 24, 2012 - 01:14pm PT
Again, the human WILL is the issue here. Not the tools.

in a thread titled 'The Gun debate sandbox' I imagine that the tools are the issue.


crankster

Trad climber
South Lake Tahoe, CA
Jul 24, 2012 - 01:20pm PT
About 2 or 3 times a year some wacko goes off and goes on a killing spree with a high powered gun. Sometimes it's a pistol, usually it's a combination of a semiautomatic pistol and an assault rifle. Yet, the pro-gun crowd stll proclaims that we don't need to talk about gun control. These are the people who ran to the ammo store when President Obama came into office because the NRA scared them into thinking that legislation was coming that would place limits on ammo purchases. Didn't happen. Now they have shelves of ammo alongside their Y2K supplies and Ted Nugent albums.

Hey, you gunsters have won the day, there's no arguement about that. It will take a body count higher than 12 before the public finally gets tired of it and politicians begin to stand up to the paranoid bullies at the NRA.
Don Paul

Big Wall climber
Colombia, South America
Jul 24, 2012 - 01:21pm PT
The Magna Carta was signed in 1215. Guns were not invented then. There is also no "human right" - ie, principle of international law that recognizes a right to have guns. Finally, it is useless for us to make our own interpretations of the Consitution. They are meaningless. Only the courts' interpretations have any weight. So, if you want to make constitutional law arguments, the way to do it is to cite case law.
Norton

Social climber
the Wastelands
Jul 24, 2012 - 01:36pm PT
crankster said:

there's no arguement about that. It will take a body count higher than 12 before the public finally gets tired of it and politicians begin to stand up to the paranoid bullies at the NRA.

probably true

kind of like seat belts, took tens of thousands of deaths before laws were passed

are guns different, exempt because our constitution includes ownership as a right?

it would take a massive change in public opinion to cause our Supreme Court to overturn the 2nd Amendment purely out of public outrage

seems very unlikely

maybe after a huge number of mass murders and 50 years in the future?

Chaz

Trad climber
greater Boss Angeles area
Jul 24, 2012 - 01:42pm PT
Norton writes:

"are guns different, exempt because our constitution includes ownership as a right?"


Nope. Since when has The Constitution ever gotten in the way of Big Government?

Guns are different because government tools ( laws ) cannot possibly make a difference. About half of elected officials know this, and understand they are powerless to do anything effective.

Prohibition has never worked. Not once. Everything that has ever been *banned* is still available right now. For reference, see The War On Drugs.
zBrown

Ice climber
chingadero de chula vista
Jul 24, 2012 - 01:44pm PT


Get outa the line of fire and back in the frying pans - dudes

the Fet

climber
Tu-Tok-A-Nu-La
Jul 24, 2012 - 01:53pm PT
Didn't happen. Now they have shelves of ammo alongside their Y2K supplies and Ted Nugent albums.

LOL. I own and appreciate guns but find gun NUTS very funny. You see them all the time at the shooting range. I have at least a dozen things I'd rather spend my time and money on than more guns. But to each his own I guess. I'd rather spend my time climbing or doing something else personally challenging or rewarding. Guns give some a feeling of power that can be pretty pathetic.

I think the limitation of 10 round capacity magazines is probably the best thing to reduce the ability of psychos to cause mass destruction but not impede on the right to bear arms too much.
Don Paul

Big Wall climber
Colombia, South America
Jul 24, 2012 - 02:14pm PT
Here's the text of the magna carta. I dont see any part about swords or other medieval weapons. I am quite sure there is no international consensus on the right to bear arms, which is the definition of human rights (universally agreed legal concepts).
crankster

Trad climber
South Lake Tahoe, CA
Jul 24, 2012 - 02:18pm PT
This happens more than someone using a gun to defend themselves against a criminal..

(07-24) 08:43 PDT RICHMOND -- A Richmond man died after he was shot while struggling with his son over a gun, police said Tuesday.

James Morris, 41, was shot dead at a home on the 3000 block of Sun Court about 7 p.m. Monday, said police Lt. Bisa French.

Morris and his son were arguing and struggling over a gun when the weapon fired, killing the father, French said.

Police were investigating the shooting as a possible homicide but were also exploring the possibility that Morris died accidentally, French said.

The son's name has not been released. He has not been arrested.
apogee

climber
Technically expert, safe belayer, can lead if easy
Jul 24, 2012 - 02:23pm PT
Ron, it's about gun-nut whackery, that's what it's about.
Gary

climber
"My god - it's full of stars!"
Jul 24, 2012 - 02:34pm PT
Its about the mockery the lega system has made of our abiltites to function as a society. ITs about the NEVER ending defense that will now ensue over this jackwagon. It will be about the new movie of the week- probably already in planning. Its about condoning the hundreds of thousand of known gang members here.( that in itself is a MAJORITY of homicides yearly here.) Its about the coddling of convicted murderers and their never ending "rights". By "right" this guy should have had his due process two days ago- which should have taken all of an hour in the view of overwhelming evidence, and he should have been quietly hung w/o fan fare.

If you don't like America, leave. Sounds like you'd be happier in Communist China or Russia, or Iran, where they don't bother with things like "Bill of Rights".

The Constitution and our Bill of Rights demands more than lip service from us.
apogee

climber
Technically expert, safe belayer, can lead if easy
Jul 24, 2012 - 02:45pm PT
Maybe they do, Ron. I'm just really sick of all the rationalizing whackery that you gun-nutz spew while we await the next gun-related tragedy.

You guys seem to pretty much shrug your shoulders and make trite comments like 'freedom ain't free', and it's the person, not the gun. You don't accept, promote or advance any effort to make any changes to either the person or the gun.

Not to be overly-harsh, but I'd love to hear your view if one of your close family members had been killed in Aurora (or any other such tragedy). Betcha the spewing would take an about-face.
Chaz

Trad climber
greater Boss Angeles area
Jul 24, 2012 - 02:45pm PT
These guys are rarely captured alive. Usually they off themselves as soon as it starts looking bad for them - or they're shot by the first person who shows up with a gun.

Having one in captivity will make for an interesting study, and so will his defense.
stevep

Boulder climber
Salt Lake, UT
Jul 24, 2012 - 02:49pm PT
Alona, if you are going to lecture on historical documents, at least get the name right. Its Magna Carta, not Carter.

I'm not sure I follow the reasoning for high-capacity mags or auto weapons. You don't need them for hunting, and it is pretty hard to justify them for self defense. You can't carry them regularly, and realistically how often is your home going to be attacked by multiple well-armed assailants(about as often as zombies)?
Gary

climber
"My god - it's full of stars!"
Jul 24, 2012 - 03:06pm PT
so Gary,, your saying yur going to agree with the circus of waste that is now starting over this person? Youll agree he deserves hundreds of thousands of dollars of free represntation? That WE will have to spend even more to convict him, then jail him and feed him for the next fourty plus years? Youll agree with yet another BS movie of the week commemorating HIM and his act?

Yes, I agree. We have a Constitution and a Bill of Rights that guarantees these rights to everyone. It's easy to sit back and bray "patriotism" and "Americanism", but it's not always so easy to live up to those ideas.


Me, im going to stick with his due process taking 1 hour and sentence carried out the following day. That will start the CLOSURE for ALL of the victims and families involved.

That's the price of freedom. If you don't like it, there's plenty of work in the People's Republic of China. They don't f*#k around there. Trial and a bullet to the back of the head all in one day. You'd love it.
apogee

climber
Technically expert, safe belayer, can lead if easy
Jul 24, 2012 - 03:10pm PT
"...since youve labeled me a gun nut, so be it. "

Ron, given your prolific response on the subject, how could anyone mistake you for anything else?
atchafalaya

Boulder climber
Jul 24, 2012 - 03:40pm PT
Alright, a brief recap of this thread for those just joining.
1.guns suck
2. Idiots suck
3. Idiots with guns definately suck

Lesson, the only way to control the damage caused by idiots with guns is to enact gun control laws banning assault weapons.

The kids shot dead in colorado didnt give a f*#k that some ignorant moron from moundhouse (hi ron!) or other inbred nevadans think they have some historical right to possess weapons that did not exist at the time the constitution was written. They just didnt want to get massacred while watching a movie with friends. Oh btw, gun lovers and nra supporters, gfys.
Binks

climber
Uranus
Jul 24, 2012 - 03:49pm PT
down with the NRA!!!

so sick of gun whacktards pretending that the solution is absolutely everyone everywhere should be carrying guns... this argument is too stupid for words
fear

Ice climber
hartford, ct
Jul 24, 2012 - 03:54pm PT
I'm pretty sure nobody suggested that, but you go on with your generalizations....

It amuses me.
apogee

climber
Technically expert, safe belayer, can lead if easy
Jul 24, 2012 - 03:58pm PT
Crimpergirl

Sport climber
Boulder, Colorado!
Jul 24, 2012 - 04:04pm PT
Ron-

Genuine question raised by your Willy Wonka poster. The shooter in this massacre was no criminal. Had only a speeding ticket in his past and bought his guns and ammo legally. Not a criminal.

I mean, it seems clear that having guns in our community simply means we will have gun violence in our community to some degree.

So what to do in response to this shooting? Nothing? Or if you think something should be done in response to this, what should that something be?

Curious about your thoughts.

edit: And sorry if I missed your response to the questions earlier. Been buried in work. Hope you'd repost them if you already shared.
Don Paul

Big Wall climber
Colombia, South America
Jul 24, 2012 - 04:06pm PT
Alona - it is not my personal definition of human rights, it is the legal definition of the term as understood by lawyers. The rights considered universal are enshrined in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, the ICCPR, the IESCR, and various other treaties, as well as some rights established by customary international law, which is analogous to the common law in the US. The document you quote may have had some impact on English law with respect to arms, but is not a basis of human rights law, as the magna carta. Also the fact that the Brits don't get too excited about guns makes me question what historical influence that law had in Britain.
Binks

climber
Uranus
Jul 24, 2012 - 04:16pm PT
Genuine question raised by your Willy Wonka poster. The shooter in this massacre was no criminal. Had only a speeding ticket in his past and bought his guns and ammo legally. Not a criminal.

I mean, it seems clear that having guns in our community simply means we will have gun violence in our community to some degree.

Yup that's it in a nutshell. This stuff should be illegal, much harder to obtain, at the very least.
FGD135

Social climber
Colorado
Jul 24, 2012 - 04:26pm PT
So, um, you folks that want to ban all firearms and ammunition in the US, umm, have you thought exactly how you would accomplish this? Like a voluntary turn-in to the police, or the national guard, or ?
Or, what, a mandatory surrender of firearms and ammunition on threat of death or imprisonment for those of us who would never ever comply? It would certainly be necessary to call up all police, the national guard, the reserves, even the regular army perhaps, to enforce some kind of draconian tactics like--registration/confiscation. Assuming even that those organizations would assist in the first place.That would criminalize most of the US population.
Personally, I think that would end up being even more a violation of civil rights than anything that has ever happened--and would take heavy handed tactics that would probably result in many more deaths of innocents than any theatre massacre...and who among you would stand up for that? Would you be in favor of house-to-house searches of your friends and neighbors, buses full of "suspects" being carted off to ?? "camps"? Are you gonna be turning in your friends and neighbors and co-workers?
And as long as you were taking away 2nd amendment rights, why not suspend habeas corpus, muzzle the press, and appoint someone in charge, to avoid having to actually vote and risk losing an election that would overturn such a bad decision as ---confiscation or registration.
Binks

climber
Uranus
Jul 24, 2012 - 04:33pm PT
I disagree completely that if the weapons were illegal he could have just as easily obtained them. Not true.

Does your argument extend to drugs? abortion? anything regulated whatsoever?

We can just obtain it anyway, so why not make EVERYTHING legal?

And of course, your argument doesn't apply... to kids. Why can't they just carry guns to school? I mean, there might be one kid with a gun so they should all carry them, and the teachers too.

What an insane society and world view..
Don Paul

Big Wall climber
Colombia, South America
Jul 24, 2012 - 04:38pm PT
We need to get the ATF involved and send in Ron wearing a wire.
jstan

climber
Jul 24, 2012 - 04:38pm PT
One of the very reasons more werent KILLED was his poor calibur choices.That MAY have very well been a factor in the plus column believe it or not. He could have used several other way more damaging rounds that are commonly sold.

Clearly our citizenry needs more guidance from the experts among us, if we are effectively to defend ourselves. Everyone in the US needs to become a weapons expert.

This thread has finally demonstrated something.

Crimpergirl

Sport climber
Boulder, Colorado!
Jul 24, 2012 - 04:40pm PT
Crimper, the point is that his PLANNED ACT was CRIMINAL. So there fore could have just as easily aquired ILLEGAL black market guns. Or he could have used a lesser capacity gun with more magazines on him and done the exact same- he could have doen that with someones deer hunting 30-06. He could have done that with just semi auto pistols and magazines for those, or he could have done that with a hundred different poisons/explosives etc etc. the POINT is he WAS going to do that- and NO LAWS current nor future would have prevented it. One of the very reasons more werent KILLED was his poor calibur choices.That MAY have very well been a factor in the plus column believe it or not. He could have used several other way more damaging rounds that are commonly sold.


NO LAWS EVER PREVENTED:

the Mansons, Bundy, Dahmer, Columbine, IHOP, Chicago, hundreds of thousands of gang members now here, crazy people.

Ron - Is it wrong for me to assume based on your response that it was just going to happen so nothing (laws or otherwise) should be changed based on this event? I'm not preaching a right or wrong answer. Just curious as to whether you think something should be changed as a result of this event. I ask you because you are willing to engage in dialogue (as is Bluey - but he's not here). I appreciate that you are willing to do so.
Binks

climber
Uranus
Jul 24, 2012 - 04:40pm PT
So, um, you folks that want to ban all drugs in the US, umm, have you thought exactly how you would accomplish this? Like a voluntary turn-in to the police, or the national guard, or ?
Or, what, a mandatory surrender of drugs on threat of death or imprisonment for those of us who would never ever comply? It would certainly be necessary to call up all police, the national guard, the reserves, even the regular army perhaps, to enforce some kind of draconian tactics like--registration/confiscation. Assuming even that those organizations would assist in the first place.That would criminalize most of the US population.
Personally, I think that would end up being even more a violation of civil rights than anything that has ever happened--and would take heavy handed tactics that would probably result in many more deaths of innocents than any theatre massacre...and who among you would stand up for that? Would you be in favor of house-to-house searches of your friends and neighbors, buses full of "suspects" being carted off to ?? "camps"? Are you gonna be turning in your friends and neighbors and co-workers?
And as long as you were taking away 2nd amendment rights, why not suspend habeas corpus, muzzle the press, and appoint someone in charge, to avoid having to actually vote and risk losing an election that would overturn such a bad decision as ---confiscation or registration.

seems like we aleady do this for .... weed. Hardly a death dealing substance.
Norton

Social climber
the Wastelands
Jul 24, 2012 - 05:00pm PT
Why can't they just carry guns to school? I mean, there might be one kid with a gun so they should all carry them, and the teachers too.

correct, if the students and teachers were armed, they could take out a trouble maker

For example, regarding Colleges:

25 two- and four-year schools across the country now allow the carrying of firearms on their premises (i.e., campus grounds, classrooms, dormitories, etc.). These schools can be found in Colorado, Utah, Virginia and Michigan.
http://www.armedcampuses.org/

and then why not high schools?
We all remember the Columbine massacre, if teachers and students were armed, they could have killed those kids

What about grade schools, kindergarten through 8th grade?
We could put those kids through extensive firearm training too


The solution is MORE guns in trained hands, OBVIOUSLY

and "laws" don't do any good, criminals just ignore laws
therefore we might as well repeal all the gun laws for all the supposed "good" they do


Crimpergirl

Sport climber
Boulder, Colorado!
Jul 24, 2012 - 05:11pm PT
Thanks much for your thoughts Ron! I really appreciate them.
Norton

Social climber
the Wastelands
Jul 24, 2012 - 05:13pm PT
edit" as to Nortons comments, we had enough COMMON SENSE gun laws by the early 1900s to function perfectly well, had it NOT been for lawyers and politicians Do you not agree?

as my thoughts got bumped, I will post them again below

and Ron, what do you think of my comments?
Norton

Social climber
the Wastelands
Jul 24, 2012 - 05:14pm PT
Why can't they just carry guns to school? I mean, there might be one kid with a gun so they should all carry them, and the teachers too.
correct, if the students and teachers were armed, they could take out a trouble maker

For example, regarding Colleges:

25 two- and four-year schools across the country now allow the carrying of firearms on their premises (i.e., campus grounds, classrooms, dormitories, etc.). These schools can be found in Colorado, Utah, Virginia and Michigan.
http://www.armedcampuses.org/

and then why not high schools?
We all remember the Columbine massacre, if teachers and students were armed, they could have killed those kids

What about grade schools, kindergarten through 8th grade?
We could put those kids through extensive firearm training too


The solution is MORE guns in trained hands, OBVIOUSLY

and "laws" don't do any good, criminals just ignore laws
therefore we might as well repeal all the gun laws for all the supposed "good" they do
ontheedgeandscaredtodeath

Trad climber
San Francisco, Ca
Jul 24, 2012 - 05:25pm PT
Society has accepted that every other year or so there will be a mass killing by a gunman. Same as society has accepted there will be a certain amount of deaths caused by alcohol, texting drivers, or other negligent/criminal behavior. We could prevent these deaths if we really wanted but have chosen not to do so.

I doubt more guns/texting/negligence would lead to less death. I conclude that the population for better or worse can just live with a certain number of innocent victims in exchange for the ability to participate in certain activities or to have certain perceived “freedoms."


Wade Icey

Trad climber
www.alohashirtrescue.com
Jul 24, 2012 - 05:27pm PT
Norton

Social climber
the Wastelands
Jul 24, 2012 - 05:30pm PT
reedom isnt free. Never has been.

well said
Don Paul

Big Wall climber
Colombia, South America
Jul 24, 2012 - 05:33pm PT
You've got a point there, ontheedge. A few dozen deaths a year from psycho killers is not a lot, regardless of the impact on the press. My biggest fears are cancer and other diseases, or dying in a traffic accident. Those are the real risks to my life. However, someone has posted statistics showing tens of thousands of gun accidents every year. That sounds like a very significant problem.
FGD135

Social climber
Colorado
Jul 24, 2012 - 05:42pm PT
"seems like we aleady do this for .... weed. Hardly a death dealing substance. "

Yep, and gun control would be about as (in)effective as the war on drugs.
Reilly

Mountain climber
The Other Monrovia- CA
Jul 24, 2012 - 07:29pm PT
Yeah, but most Swiss have a pretty good life without too many worries.
Chaz

Trad climber
greater Boss Angeles area
Jul 24, 2012 - 07:57pm PT
Wade Icey is right.

LEGALIZE CHEESE!
michaeld

Sport climber
Sacramento
Jul 24, 2012 - 08:06pm PT
Switzerland is very strict on it's laws too. No flippy floppy bullsh*t like here in America.
Wade Icey

Trad climber
www.alohashirtrescue.com
Jul 24, 2012 - 08:07pm PT
cheese doesn't kill people. People with swiss cheese and guns kill people.
Chaz

Trad climber
greater Boss Angeles area
Jul 24, 2012 - 08:09pm PT
There's a locally-made Mexican bathtub cheese that does.
rottingjohnny

Sport climber
mammoth lakes ca
Jul 24, 2012 - 08:23pm PT
Only pussy's carry a piece...I pack a bow staff and nunchuks..Nobody has ever f*#ked with me...!
Don Paul

Big Wall climber
Colombia, South America
Jul 24, 2012 - 08:43pm PT


They're starting to SURGE.
sandstone conglomerate

climber
sharon conglomerate central
Jul 24, 2012 - 08:54pm PT
The Swiss aren't going around waging unwinnable wars in Muslim countries. Could be a reason why they have it good.
Norton

Social climber
the Wastelands
Jul 24, 2012 - 09:00pm PT
CORRECTION:

Obama has signed not one but TWO laws expanding gun rights, one allowing people to take guns on Amtrak trains, and another allowing guns to be taken into national parks. He hasn't tried to renew the assault-weapons ban, or proposed a national system of gun licensing, or adopted any of the other changes advocated by those who oppose gun proliferation.

The NRA has President Obama in their back pocket.

They own him.

giggle

http://prospect.org/comment/13272
the Fet

climber
Tu-Tok-A-Nu-La
Jul 24, 2012 - 09:38pm PT
It seems the guy in CO gave very little evidence that he was going to go off. We won't ever be able to stop all the crazy lone gunmans that pop up every once in a while. But yes it is just as if not more important to try to control the crazy people as it is to control guns.

But it's a simple fact that if there are less guns with devastating potential around there will be less deaths when the psychos go off. Sure criminals can get them (drug gangs) but for the psychos who often obtain their guns legally and if they have 10 round capacity magazines there will be less deaths than 30 capacity magazines. Over time there are just fewer and fewer large capacity magazines available so that means less in the hands of people who shouldn't have them. I'm willing to have to load more often to save even just a few lives when these tragedies happen.

Luckily the guy in COs gun jammed or there would have been a lot more deaths. If a psycho has to reload it gives people a chance to run, it gives someone else with a gun or the cops and opportunity to shoot, or even someone brave enough to take him out with his fists a chance.
Shack

Big Wall climber
Reno NV
Jul 24, 2012 - 09:50pm PT
so sick of gun whacktards pretending that the solution is absolutely everyone everywhere should be carrying guns... this argument is too stupid for words

Yeah that would be crazy.
Who said that? Anyone on this thread? Or maybe just the little voice in your head?
Crimpergirl

Sport climber
Boulder, Colorado!
Jul 24, 2012 - 09:51pm PT
everyone starts screaming about gun laws....not the problem.

No, EVERYONE is not screaming about gun laws.

edit: Funny I posted this at the same time Shack posted his message above. Lots of little voices in people's heads saying different things it seems.
Binks

climber
Uranus
Jul 24, 2012 - 09:51pm PT
http://news.yahoo.com/3-arrested-separate-dark-knight-incidents-080930278.html

More reasons for gun control
Shack

Big Wall climber
Reno NV
Jul 24, 2012 - 10:02pm PT
Amen to that Cragman.
rottingjohnny

Sport climber
mammoth lakes ca
Jul 24, 2012 - 10:04pm PT
Dean...Safe guns is an oxymoron...
Crimpergirl

Sport climber
Boulder, Colorado!
Jul 24, 2012 - 10:07pm PT
FACT: Legally carrying a firearm is NOT for MOST people, because MOST people are not willing to take the appropriate training to make carrying a sidearm SAFE.


I also offer:

FACT: Legally carrying a firearm is NOT for many people, because many people would threaten or shoot someone's arse for an inappropriate reason.

I include myself in that category. :)
Crimpergirl

Sport climber
Boulder, Colorado!
Jul 24, 2012 - 10:09pm PT
Question - what guarantees someone who buys a gun today, one who is not deemed a whacko today, won't become a whacko tomorrow? So is this policy of don't allow whackos guns any good?
Shack

Big Wall climber
Reno NV
Jul 24, 2012 - 10:12pm PT
No, you wouldn't Crimpie. No way...
you might think you "want" to but you wouldn't, any more than you would beat someone with the tire iron you undoubtedly have in your car.

If that were true, I would have left a trail of bodies in my wake. ;)

Your morals, judgement, common sense and rationality do not cease to exist when you buy a gun.

Norton

Social climber
the Wastelands
Jul 24, 2012 - 10:21pm PT
After the Gabrielle Giffords shooting last year, no less a gun enthusiast than Dick Cheney said it was probably time to ban the kind of high-capacity magazine that allowed Jared Loughner to kill and wound 20 people and have figured in so many other mass shootings. Yet the NRA would have politicians believe that if they support even the most modest and thoughtful limits on guns, they will inevitably be defeated at the polls.
http://prospect.org/comment/13272
pazzo

climber
Vancouver BC
Jul 24, 2012 - 10:50pm PT
"High capacity" magazines are not the problem. That’s like saying that the government will restrict the total amount of gasoline a vehicle can fill up on JUST in case he decides to run from police.

Here in Canada our semi-auto rifle (AR-15 for example) magazines are limited to 5-rounds, and handguns are limited to 10-rounds (keeping in mind that the magazines come from the factory made for 30 rounds for the rifles and about 17 for the handguns, depending on calibre). The only thing (besides the law and your guilty conscience) that prevents us from loading up to 30 rounds, is a small, insignificant aluminum rivet, which can be popped out in about…2 seconds. Does the government know this? Yes. Does every single Canadian gun owner know this? Yes.
So why do we legally have to have our magazines pinned to 5 rounds? To pacify soccer mum’s and elementary school principals and other people who have absolutely NO clue how these things really work. They just think it’s safer cause the government says "but they can only carry 5 bullets in one magazine." So the commoners think it’s less lethal. HAHA.

Furthermore, how many bad guys are going to shoot up a school with a 5-round magazine? NONE. They are going to shoot the school up with a stolen weapon which comes with the illegal 30-round mags. And if for some strange reason the bad guy were to use a registered weapon with a magazine pinned to 5-rounds, he would have punched the rivet out first (remember, it takes 2-seconds to punch it out).

Besides, limiting magazine capacity will only cause people to get reeeally good at mag changes:
[Click to View YouTube Video]
[Click to View YouTube Video]


apogee

climber
Technically expert, safe belayer, can lead if easy
Jul 24, 2012 - 10:58pm PT
"It's the unsafe hands that are the problem."

Seems like there's more and more 'unsafe' hands out there these days, don't it?

And they have all the access they want to anything.

Thanks, NRA!

apogee

climber
Technically expert, safe belayer, can lead if easy
Jul 24, 2012 - 11:04pm PT
Cragman, your ACLU argument is specious at best, but just to entertain it for a moment...

Even if the ACLU hadn't had the purported influence on the legal/defense process, how would that have had any significant influence on reducing such tragedies?

Please don't say that stricter penalties = reduced crime....that's been proven pretty much bogus. Besides....whackjobs who shoot up a theatre really don't give a shite about penalties.
Shack

Big Wall climber
Reno NV
Jul 24, 2012 - 11:13pm PT
This is my idea of "gun control"....

[Click to View YouTube Video]
rottingjohnny

Sport climber
mammoth lakes ca
Jul 24, 2012 - 11:24pm PT
Cragman..I'm just saying that regardless of who is handling them , guns are dangerous...Read about the lady in detroit who was fatally shot by an off duty cop who's pistol was holstered...I don't own a piece but have always been tempted to buy one just in case i come across some nut job ...
ontheedgeandscaredtodeath

Trad climber
San Francisco, Ca
Jul 24, 2012 - 11:42pm PT
What precisely did the ACLU do?
TGT

Social climber
So Cal
Jul 24, 2012 - 11:44pm PT
Guns are to violence as forks are to obesity.

Spoons too.

and if denied that they'll use their fingers.
zBrown

Ice climber
chingadero de chula vista
Jul 24, 2012 - 11:45pm PT
i CAN'T FINGER IT OUT

Jaybro

Social climber
Wolf City, Wyoming
Jul 24, 2012 - 11:48pm PT
He's blaming Governor Reagan's closing of the Ca state mental health facilities, a move that would spread nationally, on the ACLU.
Gary

climber
"My god - it's full of stars!"
Jul 24, 2012 - 11:54pm PT
McVeigh didn't use a gun.

Good point. We should imprison conservatives and anyone who registers as Republican. Sorry, Norton.
zBrown

Ice climber
chingadero de chula vista
Jul 24, 2012 - 11:56pm PT
The Sims-Dudley Dynamite Gun

ontheedgeandscaredtodeath

Trad climber
San Francisco, Ca
Jul 25, 2012 - 12:01am PT
I don't look to supertaco for logic, facts or accurate history but I'm at a loss at what the ACLU has to do with any of this.
zBrown

Ice climber
chingadero de chula vista
Jul 25, 2012 - 12:01am PT
Black NRA


zBrown

Ice climber
chingadero de chula vista
Jul 25, 2012 - 12:10am PT
ISN'T HAPPINESS JUST A WARM GUN AWAY?

zBrown

Ice climber
chingadero de chula vista
Jul 25, 2012 - 12:12am PT
ALL WHITE POWER

zBrown

Ice climber
chingadero de chula vista
Jul 25, 2012 - 12:13am PT
FIRE POWER TO THE PEOPLE (RIGHT ON!)

Jaybro

Social climber
Wolf City, Wyoming
Jul 25, 2012 - 12:14am PT
NRA member for life, Michael Moore on CNN right now. Interesting stuff, though unpopular with numerous members of this alleged "left slanted" forum.
monolith

climber
albany,ca
Jul 25, 2012 - 12:16am PT
It was primarily the mental health professionals and advocacy groups who wanted to get the functional mentally ill into community settings.

The libs blame Reagan and the conservatives blame the ACLU.
Norton

Social climber
the Wastelands
Jul 25, 2012 - 12:20am PT
It was primarily the mental health professionals and advocacy groups who wanted to get the functional mentally ill into community settings.

what's wrong with that?

I don't get it, and how was the ACLU involved in that?
zBrown

Ice climber
chingadero de chula vista
Jul 25, 2012 - 12:20am PT
100 ROUND MAGAZINE AS BRITISH AS AMERICAN PIE AND CIGARS

zBrown

Ice climber
chingadero de chula vista
Jul 25, 2012 - 12:22am PT
ACLU IS A BUNCH OF PUSSIES (YOU CAN'T TAKE 'EM CLIMBING OUTSIDE)

zBrown

Ice climber
chingadero de chula vista
Jul 25, 2012 - 12:23am PT

zBrown

Ice climber
chingadero de chula vista
Jul 25, 2012 - 12:26am PT
UP AGAINST THE WALL RED-NECK MOTHER


zBrown

Ice climber
chingadero de chula vista
Jul 25, 2012 - 12:34am PT

monolith

climber
albany,ca
Jul 25, 2012 - 12:35am PT
Norton, google "reagan aclu mental health". It's a complex history so the simple minded on both sides can find what they want.

Here's a good link:

http://www.nytimes.com/1984/10/30/science/how-release-of-mental-patients-began.html?pagewanted=all
Mighty Hiker

climber
Vancouver, B.C.
Jul 25, 2012 - 12:38am PT
I hope that all you gun nuts know that the government - the one you have paranoid fantasies about, that is - is keeping careful watch on the internet especially this thread, so when the time comes it knows who to round up? They have a little list, you never will be missed.
zBrown

Ice climber
chingadero de chula vista
Jul 25, 2012 - 12:40am PT
GAY GUN POWER IN THE SANDBOX


Wade Icey

Trad climber
www.alohashirtrescue.com
Jul 25, 2012 - 12:42am PT
pazzo

climber
Vancouver BC
Jul 25, 2012 - 12:47am PT
Benelli hotness…

Shack

Big Wall climber
Reno NV
Jul 25, 2012 - 02:24am PT
The gun-totin' equivalent of a weekend warrior is more likely to make a situation like that worse than they are to make it better.

Just shows what you know. You obviously have no facts to back that up.
Can you even cite one instance where that has happened?
Binks

climber
Uranus
Jul 25, 2012 - 03:15am PT
guns are lame, losers who tote them everywhere and fetishize them are lame...


you guys are lame
philo

Trad climber
Somewhere halfway over the rainbow
Jul 25, 2012 - 08:37am PT
Crimpergirl

Sport climber
Boulder, Colorado!
Jul 25, 2012 - 09:24am PT
If guns aren't dangerous. Then nuclear weapons aren't dangerous either. Why do we care which countries have them then?
monolith

climber
albany,ca
Jul 25, 2012 - 09:55am PT
Even some conservatives want assault weapon ban.

http://www.therightperspective.org/2012/07/24/some-conservatives-favor-assault-weapons-ban/
the Fet

climber
Tu-Tok-A-Nu-La
Jul 25, 2012 - 10:29am PT
The anti-gun control folks often say if you ban high capacity magazines, assault rifles, etc. that crazies will just use something else. And yest that's true. We'll never eliminate these senseless acts but reducing the amount of weapons that can cause massive loss of life means when people do go crazy they will cause less loss of life.

Why do you need a magazine capacity over 10? Are you really willing to have more people die so you can have fun and not change clips more often?

And as mentioned previously 30 round clips modified to hold 10 that can be easily restored to 30 are dumb. They should be constructed in a way that is impossible. Over time less and less people will have access to high capacity clips. And it's not just the crazies, the gang bangers etc. will also end up with less potent weapons.

Of course someone could just buy 10 pistols and have them loaded and ready even quicker than changing clips, but the point is the harder you make it to have massive killing power the less the bad guys will have. A crazy is less likely to afford to buy 10 pistols or search out illegal high capacity clips, than to just go down to the local wal mart and buy what he can.

Yes they can make IEDs, but we ban hand grenades, and regulate high explosives just like we regulate firearms. the more dangerous something is the more is should be regulated or possibly banned.

I'm not sure if banning assault rifles makes any sense. I don't see much difference between a shotgun that holds 5 rounds of 12 gauge where each round is like shooting 9 shots with a pistol, i.e. 45 projectiles shot in under 5 seconds and an assault rifle. However I would think the police would want them banned because of the danger to them in shoot out.

I see the appeal of shooting a fully automatic out in the desert and blowing something to bits. But is it really possible once you allow these weapons to keep them out of the hands of the bad guys?

To me I'm willing to sacrifice my ability to get my hands on very dangerous guns because it means there are less of them around and so less end up in the hands of the crazies and gang bangers.

Seriously why do you need a magazine with over 10 round capacity?
Norton

Social climber
the Wastelands
Jul 25, 2012 - 10:45am PT
Seriously why do you need a magazine with over 10 round capacity?


WHY?

Because the NRA and those who support would say you do not want to be "outgunned" in an assault situation

for example: If a bad guy had 20 round clip and you only had a 10 round clip, then by the time you shot your 10 bullets he would have ammo left to kill you (assuming you both fired an equal number of bullets from a starting point)

See, it's quite simple, it all about the bad guys having more ammo than you do
fear

Ice climber
hartford, ct
Jul 25, 2012 - 10:53am PT
Yawn
Crimpergirl

Sport climber
Boulder, Colorado!
Jul 25, 2012 - 11:05am PT
Not surprising to me Ron.

Politicians are political. They politicize things to their advantage. They have one (two?) goals: to gain and maintain power in an elected office. They will do what it takes to accomplish that.

They don't talk about all the 'normal' shootings because there is no political power to be gained by politicizing them. 1,000s of people become homicide victims each year. Few people are aware of the vast majority of them. They are (sadly) normal.

Totally normal and to be expected. Been happening for eons. Don't have to like it, but it's not extraordinary - at least to me.

Just ignore them. :)
fear

Ice climber
hartford, ct
Jul 25, 2012 - 11:22am PT
I'd wager more people were blugeoned to death last year with tire-irons and the like than were murdered with EBR(evil black rifles).
Norton

Social climber
the Wastelands
Jul 25, 2012 - 11:37am PT
Ron said:
so does anyone else think it dispicable that the various political sides now USE this incident as a political selling point? While the same politicians IGNORE the MANY shootings since the theatre??

Ron, what should those politicians you criticize for IGNORING should be doing?

specifically?
Norton

Social climber
the Wastelands
Jul 25, 2012 - 11:50am PT
Edit: Norton the SHOULD be doing things to control the UNWANTED and illegal invasion of very violent peoples for one. Not even my own Sheriff is "allowed" to do much of anything other that REACT after the fact. We have a 1000 or more "known gang members" here now..Take these out of the figures and our homicide rates would plummet.

thank you

and my guess is that your sheriff has to wait for a crime to be committed to act

because our constitution says we can't arrest people until they commit a crime

Ron, you seem to suggest law enforcement do what? arrest them before they commit a crime? how should LE be more what you think it should be?
Don Paul

Big Wall climber
Colombia, South America
Jul 25, 2012 - 01:37pm PT
I think he could be charged with terrorism, which actually does have a legal definition. It's the use of violence to intimidate or coerce a civilian population. Basically, the motive has to be to have an effect on public opinion. He probably intended that but it would have to be proven.
philo

Trad climber
Somewhere halfway over the rainbow
Jul 25, 2012 - 01:47pm PT
If guns aren't dangerous. Then nuclear weapons aren't dangerous either. Why do we care which countries have them then?

Thank You Crimps! I have been wanting to express that exact sentiment.
Chaz

Trad climber
greater Boss Angeles area
Jul 25, 2012 - 01:54pm PT
Philo,

You'd have to believe the .45 that Grandpa brought back from The War and is now owned by his widow is equally likely to be used for something bad as the .45 carried by a convicted felon with gang tattoos on his face.
michaeld

Sport climber
Sacramento
Jul 25, 2012 - 02:35pm PT
This is still going on? Why?

People will love guns.

People will hate guns.

People will use guns to commit crime.

People will use guns to stop crime.

You can argue it any which way. Guns will stay legal.

A lot of the people who argue about why guns should be illegal, don't argue about who should be able to get into this country. Most are open for open immigration.

Yet they don't want anyone to have guns. See where this is going?
Norton

Social climber
the Wastelands
Jul 25, 2012 - 02:58pm PT
A lot of the people who argue about why guns should be illegal, don't argue about who should be able to get into this country. Most are open for open immigration.

Michael, I have never read anyone here or even know anybody, who argues for open immigration.

I assume you mean come on in illegally, we won't stop you.

And you say that people who
want that kind of open immigration are the same people that want guns to be illegal?

Can you point me to any links, sources, names to look up their posts, etc showing this?

not saying you are wrong here as I may have missed that, just hard for me to believe!

thanks
fear

Ice climber
hartford, ct
Jul 25, 2012 - 02:58pm PT
I'm not sure.....


I think we've moved onto the discussion of low-yield nuclear weapons now for home protection.
philo

Trad climber
Somewhere halfway over the rainbow
Jul 25, 2012 - 03:11pm PT
^^^ I want one. ^^^


Hell I want two, one with an extended yield.
michaeld

Sport climber
Sacramento
Jul 25, 2012 - 03:11pm PT
Yeah, arguing that "Well if guns are okay, why can't I have nukes?"
You're obviously, f*cking retarded.



Open Immigration? I googled it and found this marvel.

http://www.thefreemanonline.org/features/coming-to-america-the-benefits-of-open-immigration/
the Fet

climber
Tu-Tok-A-Nu-La
Jul 25, 2012 - 03:16pm PT
Is anyone here actually advocating for NO guns or NO gun control?
it seems most reasonable people are expressing their feeling of the appropriate level of gun control.

Still no answer why anyone needs a high capacity magazine, let alone why that's more important than saving even one life.
philo

Trad climber
Somewhere halfway over the rainbow
Jul 25, 2012 - 03:18pm PT
Well, if " Guns Don't Kill People" Then Nukes don't either.


michaeld

Sport climber
Sacramento
Jul 25, 2012 - 03:19pm PT
What's wrong with Hi-Cap mags? Aside from being a bit heavier than a 10 rounder, they hold 3x as much ammo though! Less reloading.


If someone wanted to go on a mass killing, they'd do it the most efficient way, or however they see it would work best in their mind, LEGAL OR NOT.


You guys ask these questions without thinking...

"What would criminals do?"

Well, if " Guns Don't Kill People" Then Nukes don't either.

That's a good argument, irrational, but good.

How many nukes have gone off outside testing sites?

K, sweet.
Norton

Social climber
the Wastelands
Jul 25, 2012 - 03:25pm PT
Michael said:
[quote]Open Immigration? I googled it and found this marvel.

http://www.thefreemanonline.org/features/coming-to-america-the-benefits-of-open-immigration/[/quote]

Michael, I read that link and there is nothing in there supporting your contention that people who want open immigration are the same people who want to make guns illegal,
as you put it,


Try again?

I am not arguing with you, just trying to see where you got the information for your contention.

thanks
Norton

Social climber
the Wastelands
Jul 25, 2012 - 03:27pm PT
The Fet again asked:
Still no answer why anyone needs a high capacity magazine,

WHY?

Because the NRA and those who support would say you do not want to be "outgunned" in an assault situation

for example: If a bad guy had 20 round clip and you only had a 10 round clip, then by the time you shot your 10 bullets he would have ammo left to kill you (assuming you both fired an equal number of bullets from a starting point)

See, it's quite simple, it all about the bad guys having more ammo than you do
michaeld

Sport climber
Sacramento
Jul 25, 2012 - 03:27pm PT
Sigh. I'm over it.
I'm gonna keep my awesome "assault weapons" and "hand guns" and not commit mass murder, murder, armed robbery, etc.
paul roehl

Boulder climber
california
Jul 25, 2012 - 03:31pm PT
The fact is everyone on this thread will agree there are some weapons that must be illegal to use or own. Period.

Everyone on this thread believes in the absolute necessity of some kind of weapons control.

The question is really just one of where do you draw the line?
michaeld

Sport climber
Sacramento
Jul 25, 2012 - 03:34pm PT
With the people who can own them.
philo

Trad climber
Somewhere halfway over the rainbow
Jul 25, 2012 - 03:35pm PT
Where do you draw the line?




How about here for a start?
Norton

Social climber
the Wastelands
Jul 25, 2012 - 03:46pm PT
Paul said:

The fact is everyone on this thread will agree there are some weapons that must be illegal to use or own. Period.

Everyone on this thread believes in the absolute necessity of some kind of weapons control.

boy, that is not the impression that I got from reading this thread

seems to me that there are many here who advocate for NO regulation

and their reasoning always comes back to; If the bad guys can buy ANY weapon, than we law abiding people need to be legally free to buy ANY weapon, so we can defend against them as we should never be in a position of being unequal in fire power
the Fet

climber
Tu-Tok-A-Nu-La
Jul 25, 2012 - 04:05pm PT
No michael its not that we haven't thought through the idea it's that you are avoiding the point of the idea. If there are less high capacity magazines around less bad people will get them and less people will be killed. You can try to avoid that all you want but that's the reality.

Is it really more important to you that you dont have to reload as much if it means more high capacity magazines end up in the hands of bad guys and kill innocent people or police officers?
Shack

Big Wall climber
Reno NV
Jul 25, 2012 - 04:13pm PT
...let alone why that's more important than saving even one life.

In the interest of saving more lives, I propose we ban swimming pools, tall ladders, all motor vehicles, alcohol, cigarettes, fatty foods, free soloing, etc etc....

Just think of all the lives we could save!

If that asshat had only blown up the movie theater with a gasoline bomb, we could be arguing about banning gasoline instead.
philo

Trad climber
Somewhere halfway over the rainbow
Jul 25, 2012 - 04:17pm PT
Yeah it's just such a bummer for the NRA that all the real whackos use guns to do their slaughtering.
paul roehl

Boulder climber
california
Jul 25, 2012 - 04:23pm PT
Which weapons are/should be banned from public ownership or use? Can you think of any? Does such a ban violate the second amendment?

Why are those weapons banned or illegal in the first place?

the Fet

climber
Tu-Tok-A-Nu-La
Jul 25, 2012 - 04:25pm PT
Shack instead of trying to change the subject with a strawman why not answer the question?

And explosives are regulated. You can buy gasoline but things like TNT or c4 are more regulated. Just like you should be able to buy a shogun that holds 5 shells but not one that takes replaceable clips IMO.
Shack

Big Wall climber
Reno NV
Jul 25, 2012 - 04:26pm PT
Yeah it's just such a bummer for the NRA that all the real whackos use guns to do their slaughtering.

Right....like McVeigh or Kaczynski.
Marlow

Sport climber
OSLO
Jul 25, 2012 - 04:28pm PT
[Click to View YouTube Video]
[Click to View YouTube Video]
Norton

Social climber
the Wastelands
Jul 25, 2012 - 04:34pm PT
Well, if bad guys can obtain fertilizer components then I too should be free to do so

they should not have an unfair advantage over law abiding citizens

therefore: fertilizer components should not be regulated
michaeld

Sport climber
Sacramento
Jul 25, 2012 - 04:35pm PT
Fet, you think it's that easy to eliminate hi-cap magazines?

They're illegal in California. But they're everywhere.

You can get them easier than you can get 10 rounders sometimes.

How often is there a gun related crime, where there was more than 10 shots fired from the same magazine/gun, compared to a .22, 9mm, .40, a few shots fired?

It's VERY RARE.
Shack

Big Wall climber
Reno NV
Jul 25, 2012 - 04:36pm PT
Shack instead of trying to change the subject with a strawman why not answer the question?

Not a strawman argument. Are you denying that banning pools would relult in less drownings?

The answer, Fet, is that guns are already regulated too and even an immediate ban on hi-cap mags will not REDUCE the number that already exist.
It will not prevent anyone who is already willing to murder, from breaking the law and obtaining anything they want illegally.
If there was some way to magically make that happen, I just might agree with you.


therefore: fertilizer components should not be regulated
Do you think Ammonium Nitrate is not widely available? then you don't know where to look. Want to take a guess what the main ingredient in instant "cold Paks" is? Do you think large quantities couldn't be stolen very easily from a farm or supply house?

But if it makes you feel safer to believe that, then go right ahead.
Norton

Social climber
the Wastelands
Jul 25, 2012 - 04:44pm PT
true, Shack

but does not a ban on new sales of high cap clicks reduce their total number?

over time of course?

of course it will, if you don't make them, there will be less of them


but Shack, given that you personally are presumably well armed by now and no one will be coming to take away your armament,

I am interested to hear your own proposals for lessening gun related deaths in America?

and if you don't have any ideas, that's ok too
Shack

Big Wall climber
Reno NV
Jul 25, 2012 - 04:46pm PT
but does not a ban on new sales of high cap clicks reduce their total number?

over time of course?

only if they rusted away or dissolved by themselves.
How would it reduce the number at all. There just wouldn't be any more new ones made....except of course they would still be made for LE and Military and we all know those would never find there way to the black market.
michaeld

Sport climber
Sacramento
Jul 25, 2012 - 04:48pm PT
Pools are regulated.


Pools are property. Pools are insured. Pools are easy to sue.
Gun insurance, hmmm.
philo

Trad climber
Somewhere halfway over the rainbow
Jul 25, 2012 - 04:49pm PT
Howzit sailin' on DNile?
michaeld

Sport climber
Sacramento
Jul 25, 2012 - 04:50pm PT
Who's in denial? About what?

Norton

Social climber
the Wastelands
Jul 25, 2012 - 04:51pm PT
what are your own thoughts on reducing the number of gun deaths, Shack?

again, its ok to say if you don't have any ideas
michaeld

Sport climber
Sacramento
Jul 25, 2012 - 04:52pm PT
First Amendment is too hardcore for me.

Shack will take this
the Fet

climber
Tu-Tok-A-Nu-La
Jul 25, 2012 - 04:57pm PT
you think it's that easy to eliminate hi-cap magazines?

No you can't and won't eliminate them. Usually when things are banned old ones are grandfathered in. The idea is to reduce the number available over time vs. how many more would exist if you did nothing.

How do you get them easier than 10 rounders? I can go buy 10 rounders anywhere. It's illegal to sell higher capacity.




Shack that is a strawman argument. To "attack a straw man" is to create the illusion of having refuted a proposition by replacing it with a superficially similar yet unequivalent proposition (the "straw man"), and refuting it, without ever having actually refuted the original position Pools are not guns. Even though pools aren't weapons they are regulated too, e.g. you have to have a fence around a pool so the neighborhood kids don't fall in and drown.

an immediate ban on hi-cap mags will not REDUCE the number that already exist. It will not prevent anyone who is already willing to murder, from breaking the law and obtaining anything they want illegally.

Yes it won't reduce those that already exist but it will mean less are available in the future. And yes anyone who really wants one will be able to get one. But the crazy guys like the CO guy will be less likely to have one if they are illegal vs. if you can buy them legally at wal mart. A lot of guns and clips illegals have come from people that bought them legally, the harder you make it to get highly destructive weapons the less the will end up in the hands of bad guys.

I really don't think it makes any difference to my self defense capability if I have a 5 shot semi-automatic 12 gauge vs. a rifle with 30 rounds. But I don't want some psycho going off with a 30 or 100 round mag.

It is a challenge because personally I'd like to go out in the desert and blow things to bits with a fully automatic uzi with a 100 round clip, but policy wise I know not having those around means less chance of a bad guy getting them.
philo

Trad climber
Somewhere halfway over the rainbow
Jul 25, 2012 - 04:57pm PT
Bare arms
bear arms
arm bears
arm bares
armadillos
armored dildos

A bike lock won't stop a determined thief but it will deter a joy rider.
Shack

Big Wall climber
Reno NV
Jul 25, 2012 - 05:06pm PT
Norton,

There is no idea that is going to stop crazy people from doing crazy things.
That said, the best way in my opinion to reduce the number of preventable deaths and injuries from guns is education.
Teach young people about the proper handling of guns, about the dangers of guns, and they will see with their own eyes what destruction guns are capable of.

By imparting real experience with guns and eliminating the curiosity factor,
I believe many accident would be prevented.

Otherwise, to most people that are unfamiliar with guns, that maybe never even touched one much less shot one, they are mysterious and they only know what they've seen on tv. The inexperienced might consider using a gun without knowing the full implications of that choice.
Similar to educating people about drug use.


michaeld

Sport climber
Sacramento
Jul 25, 2012 - 05:06pm PT

This guy has the right to BEAR arms, get it? :D
philo

Trad climber
Somewhere halfway over the rainbow
Jul 25, 2012 - 05:10pm PT
Looks like he couldn't bear the bear but he does have bare arms bearing arms.
Shack

Big Wall climber
Reno NV
Jul 25, 2012 - 05:20pm PT
I really don't think it makes any difference to my self defense capability if I have a 5 shot semi-automatic 12 gauge vs. a rifle with 30 rounds.

Unless your first 5 shots miss.

BTW Fet, I was not intending to make a strawman argument.
My point was that there are many things that if banned would indeed save lives and yet we don't even consider banning them...
So that is obviously not the only criteria we use to determine if something should or should not be banned.
michaeld

Sport climber
Sacramento
Jul 25, 2012 - 05:22pm PT
Or, the 30 rounds go through the wall your hiding behind. Lol


It's okay to own guns. You don't need to use them.
I can drive, but I choose to ride my bike.
I could choose to go to college, but I work.

I can choose to be a thug, criminal, but i'd rather not.
Speigl

climber
Jul 25, 2012 - 05:55pm PT
Pools are regulated.

The fence that is required around a pool is kind of like the trigger locks the NRA fought against.
Norton

Social climber
the Wastelands
Jul 25, 2012 - 06:09pm PT
The fence that is required around a pool is kind of like the trigger locks the NRA fought against.

seriously? The NRA fought AGAINST trigger locks?


WHY?
Chaz

Trad climber
greater Boss Angeles area
Jul 25, 2012 - 06:40pm PT
The NRA gives away trigger locks.

"against trigger locks" is just not true.
monolith

climber
albany,ca
Jul 25, 2012 - 06:49pm PT
They are for them, after they were against them. LOL!
Norton

Social climber
the Wastelands
Jul 25, 2012 - 06:49pm PT
Actually, the NRA opposed the legislation requires all firearms sold by dealers to come WITH a trigger lock.

The NRA wanted a trigger lock to be "available" for purchase, but not necessary to buy a gun.


So, while the NRA may be "giving away" trigger locks nowadays, the NRA opposed the bill

6102 of Title 18, the Uniform Firearms Act. NRA would have preferred this provision to require only that licensed dealers make trigger-locking devices available for sale to firearm purchasers.
http://www.keepandbeararms.com/newsarchives/XcNewsPlus.asp?cmd=view&articleid=189
zBrown

Ice climber
chingadero de chula vista
Jul 25, 2012 - 06:49pm PT
Airplane travel is regulated. People get searched all the time before getting to board, yet they have a constitutional right not to be searched unreasonably.

Fourth Amendment

The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated,

The whole problem then is that the drafters of the constitution ran out of reasonableness when they got to guns?

Even Paladin wouldn't throw dynamite in your pool or lake. How unreasonable would that be?
michaeld

Sport climber
Sacramento
Jul 25, 2012 - 06:51pm PT
You don't have to fly...

Therefore your 4th amendment wouldn't be violated.

Chaz

Trad climber
greater Boss Angeles area
Jul 25, 2012 - 06:52pm PT
I got a box full of trigger locks I never wanted and have no use for.

You want 'em?
Norton

Social climber
the Wastelands
Jul 25, 2012 - 06:57pm PT
I
got a box full of trigger locks I never wanted and have no use for.

You want 'em?

yeah, I got a box of them too


Chaz, why do you suppose the NRA is now giving out trigger locks?

see any purpose for them?
Chaz

Trad climber
greater Boss Angeles area
Jul 25, 2012 - 06:59pm PT
Maybe they don't want them either.
michaeld

Sport climber
Sacramento
Jul 25, 2012 - 07:04pm PT
Psh. Trigger lock.
Norton

Social climber
the Wastelands
Jul 25, 2012 - 07:09pm PT
yeah, I just can't see any good reason for trigger locks

children?

nay, that can't be it

real men don't need trigger locks

michaeld

Sport climber
Sacramento
Jul 25, 2012 - 07:11pm PT
Hide yer guns. Or put them in a safe.
Shack

Big Wall climber
Reno NV
Jul 25, 2012 - 07:11pm PT
To me, it would be like puting a padlock on a fire extinguisher.
Norton

Social climber
the Wastelands
Jul 25, 2012 - 07:16pm PT
trigger locks are like seat belt laws

drive responsibly and you don't need seat belts

teach your young children early about auto safety and they don't need to wear them

just more big government overreaching into our lives

socialism

Cletus
michaeld

Sport climber
Sacramento
Jul 25, 2012 - 07:18pm PT
Yeah, drive really good, so you don't wear seat belts.


So what about a drunk driver coming out of nowhere? Or someone running a stop sign/light and T boning you?



Norton, your world sounds nice, but it's not practical for everyone.

paul roehl

Boulder climber
california
Jul 25, 2012 - 07:24pm PT
The question is still where do you draw the line?

Should anyone be allowed to purchase any weapon/gun?

What are the criteria? Do you need to be over a certain age? Have an IQ over 50?

I'm sure reasonable people will agree there is a need for regulation in this regard.

I wouldn't regulate the speech of someone with a 34 IQ but I think i'd hesitate to sell them a gun.

If it has been established that some weapons can be declared illegal doesn't that set a precedent

against the second amendment? If some weapons can be declared illegal can't all weapons?
michaeld

Sport climber
Sacramento
Jul 25, 2012 - 07:27pm PT
Alona Day, I like you.



My friend is scared of the people he sells guns to.

But what's gonna stop them from getting a gun?

I'm all for regulation. As long as I can keep mine.



Ah, but there lays the problem.
StahlBro

Trad climber
San Diego, CA
Jul 25, 2012 - 07:29pm PT
The statistics on justifiable self-defense shootings vs. accidents, homicides and suicides are pretty lobsided. The risk/reward of having guns in the house is hard to reconcile (at least for me).

I think people should be allowed to have guns, but it seems like we could do more to reduce the collateral damage. Modern weapons have really changed the dynamics.

I don't own a gun, but I have shot several different varieties. There is something to be said for education and first hand knowledge of what guns are capable of. They are a very serious responsibility.

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/9715182
Norton

Social climber
the Wastelands
Jul 25, 2012 - 07:34pm PT
Michael, I was being sarcastic

I agree with you
zBrown

Ice climber
chingadero de chula vista
Jul 25, 2012 - 07:38pm PT
You don't have to fly...

Therefore your 4th amendment wouldn't be violated.


You don't have to own a gun ...

Therefore your 2nd amendment wouldn't be violated.


michaeld

Sport climber
Sacramento
Jul 25, 2012 - 07:40pm PT
The second amendment would still be violated, even if I didn't own a gun.

Your arguments are kinda whack.
Crimpergirl

Sport climber
Boulder, Colorado!
Jul 25, 2012 - 07:47pm PT
To be clear - I'm not advocating for anything (e.g., anyone have nuclear weapons). My last post was merely posing a question. I'm curious about the nuance of it all.
Shack

Big Wall climber
Reno NV
Jul 25, 2012 - 07:52pm PT
Best post of this thread goes to Alona Day.

Every point was right on target.
Shack

Big Wall climber
Reno NV
Jul 25, 2012 - 07:56pm PT

You mean this Crimpie?

If guns aren't dangerous. Then nuclear weapons aren't dangerous either. Why do we care which countries have them then?...

Guns ARE dangerous...in the wrong hands.

Just like nukes.
paul roehl

Boulder climber
california
Jul 25, 2012 - 07:56pm PT
I'm sitting here considering the ramifications of my ignorance and contemplating going out to my garage and beginning the process of preventing cholera, however the problem remains that some careful balance has to be struck between the protection offered by weapons and the inherent danger they create in a civilized society.

Arming the incompetent, the foolish and the mentally ill is at least as tragic as disarming the general public.

Guns in the hands of good people is probably a good thing but doesn't that require regulation, licensing and training?
Crimpergirl

Sport climber
Boulder, Colorado!
Jul 25, 2012 - 08:07pm PT
Guns ARE dangerous...in the wrong hands.

Just like nukes.

Yes, Shack, you noted the comment I posted. I could be clearer if I wrote it again.

I am curious about those who state that guns are not dangerous (and understand many do not feel that way). If one feels that way, I am curious if that thought extends to nuclear weapons. I ask out of genuine curiosity.

michaeld

Sport climber
Sacramento
Jul 25, 2012 - 08:12pm PT
Guns in the hands of good people is probably a good thing but doesn't that require regulation, licensing and training?


Over 18? go in, tell them you want this rifle, write down your name, and Driver's License number.

Come back in 10 days if you're in california.

New rifle. Go play.
paul roehl

Boulder climber
california
Jul 25, 2012 - 08:41pm PT
Why on earth does the government require somebody to get a "license" to drive?! Now that's some government intrusion. Hate the nanny state.
crankster

Trad climber
South Lake Tahoe, CA
Jul 25, 2012 - 09:57pm PT
I've already forgotten about the Colorado massacre. Let's start this up again when the body count exceeds 12.
Emon

Trad climber
Jul 25, 2012 - 10:14pm PT

http://harvardmagazine.com/2004/09/death-by-the-barrel.html

Forgive me if this is a repost. I haven't read the entire thread, but figure this informative piece is worth injecting into the conversation.
aspendougy

Trad climber
Los Angeles, CA
Jul 25, 2012 - 10:56pm PT
Even if statistically, gun control doesn't lead to a measurable decrease in murders, suppose it prevents even one murder? Wouldn't it be worth it? If the guy had not been allowed to purchase semi or fully automatic weapons, it would have been much harder to do mass killings.

I would not prohibit gun ownership, not possible, but put automatic and semi-automatic weapons in the same category as hand grenades, artillery, missiles and nukes.
zBrown

Ice climber
chingadero de chula vista
Jul 25, 2012 - 10:59pm PT
Second amendment?

Your arguments are kinda whack.

YOU ARE STUPID.

I wondered who this was made for, now I know who.

Only problem is, it might not fit in there with you brain.




Crimpergirl

Sport climber
Boulder, Colorado!
Jul 25, 2012 - 11:44pm PT

Excellent post Emon.
zBrown

Ice climber
chingadero de chula vista
Jul 26, 2012 - 12:43am PT

He's gonna take all the guns and put a shotgun in your bigass!



Marlow

Sport climber
OSLO
Jul 26, 2012 - 04:46am PT
From the Harvard Magazine article:

"Though assault weapons have attracted lots of publicity from Hollywood and Washington, and NRA stands for National Rifle Association, these facts mask the reality of the gun problem, which centers on pistols. "Handguns are the crime guns," Hemenway says. "They are the ones you can conceal, the guns you take to go rob somebody. You don’t mug people at rifle-point."

And America is awash in handguns. Canada, for example, has almost as many guns per capita as the United States, but Americans own far more pistols. "Where do Canadian criminals, and Mexican criminals, get their handguns?" asks Hemenway. "From the United States." Gang members in Boston and New York get their handguns from other states with permissive gun laws; the firearms flow freely across state borders. Interstate 95, which runs from Florida to New England, even has a nickname among gun-runners: "the Iron Pipeline."

"We have done four surveys on self-defense gun use," Hemenway says. "And one thing we know for sure is that there’s a lot more criminal gun use than self-defense gun use. And even when people say they pulled their gun in ‘self-defense,’ it usually turns out that there was just an escalating argument—at some point, people feel afraid and draw guns."

Hemenway has collected stories of self-defense gun use by simply asking those who pulled guns what happened. A typical story might be: "We were in the park drinking. Drinking led to arguing. We ran to our cars and got our guns." Or: "I was sitting on my porch. A neighbor came up and we got into a fight. He threw a beer at me. I went inside and got my gun." Hemenway has sent verbatim accounts of such incidents to criminal-court judges, asking if the "self-defense" gun use described was legal. "Most of the time," he says, "the answer was no."

Ask criminals why they carried a gun while robbing the convenience store and frequently the answer is, "So I could get the money and not have to hurt anyone." But as Hemenway explains, "Then something happens. Maybe somebody unexpectedly walks in, or the storeowner draws a gun. Your heart is racing. Next thing you know, somebody is dead."

Researchers have interviewed adolescents in major urban centers, where many inner-city kids carry guns. When asked why, the reason they most often give is "self-defense," adding that getting a gun is easy, something one can often do in less than an hour. Yet when researchers asked a group of teenagers, more than half of whom had already carried guns, what kind of world they would like to live in, Hemenway says that almost all of them replied, "One where it’s difficult or impossible to get a gun."
fear

Ice climber
hartford, ct
Jul 26, 2012 - 09:56am PT
I now have to clean coffee off my keyboard and monitor....

You have to love non-biased 'articles' like that.

"Ask criminals why they carried a gun while robbing the convenience store and frequently the answer is, "So I could get the money and not have to hurt anyone."

hehehehehe....
Gary

climber
"My god - it's full of stars!"
Jul 26, 2012 - 10:37am PT
That magazine article is very interesting. This bit from the article is off topic, but revealing in its own way:
Many suicides, similarly, are impulsive acts. Follow-up interviews with people who survived jumping off the Golden Gate Bridge reveal that few of them tried suicide again. One survivor volunteered this epiphany after jumping: "I realized that all the problems I had in life were solvable—except one: I’m in midair."

Oopsie!
the Fet

climber
Tu-Tok-A-Nu-La
Jul 26, 2012 - 11:11am PT
http://www.vpc.org/studies/gunsvscars.pdf

This is disturbing in 10 states gun deaths exceed car accident deaths.
Don Paul

Big Wall climber
Colombia, South America
Jul 26, 2012 - 11:43am PT

Handguns are the obvious problem, not assault rifles.
monolith

climber
albany,ca
Jul 26, 2012 - 12:15pm PT
And the post deleting continues...

One of the gunboyz is bailing out.

...and we're done. So long hillrat.
Toker Villain

Big Wall climber
Toquerville, Utah
Jul 26, 2012 - 12:45pm PT
The 3 most successful gun control activists;

Hitler
Mao
Stalin
paul roehl

Boulder climber
california
Jul 26, 2012 - 01:42pm PT
Are there any "arms" a citizen should not be allowed to own/use?

Isn't it implicit in the 2nd A. that there shall be no restrictions in that regard and yet common sense tells us that restrictions of some kind are absolutely necessary?
Bowser

Social climber
Durango CO
Jul 26, 2012 - 02:02pm PT
Just took this picture out my back window.

Yup, I am packing!

hillrat

Trad climber
reno, nv
Jul 26, 2012 - 02:21pm PT
Ignore evrything i say about compromise and simply label me a gun nut? I bet the other side thinks i want unreasonable controls and restrictions too. Yeah, way to marginalize me...that,ll bring me to your cause! Piss off.

Frankly, i hope they ban something, which wont be evrything then the lot of you,both sides, can all bitch and scream and whine about how it was all wrong and youre rights werent upheld. Yay for you.

And yeah, i,m done here. Y,all keep on thinkin yer winnin though...
michaeld

Sport climber
Sacramento
Jul 26, 2012 - 02:29pm PT
Second amendment?

Your arguments are kinda whack.

YOU ARE STUPID.

I wondered who this was made for, now I know who.

Only problem is, it might not fit in there with you brain.


Like I stated, you're not really proving points. And this, kinda proves it.

So I like guns, believe they should be strictly regulated, and my head is up my ass, but I should shove a shotgun in there, because . . . ?
stevep

Boulder climber
Salt Lake, UT
Jul 26, 2012 - 02:43pm PT
Handguns are certainly responsible for most of the issues. But they do have legit use in self-defense, there's alot more of them around, and I think you would get a lot more yelling about taking them away.

One the other hand, it's hard for me to come up with a legit use for >20 round mags. The self-defense situations where you would need this would have to be approaching zero. Now I recognize that outlawing these doesn't get rid of the ones out there. Nor does it probably mean that a determined criminal can't get one. But if it prevent the impulse nut case from getting one and doing worse damagae (like in this case), then I'd argue that it would be worth it to take that step.
Don Paul

Big Wall climber
Colombia, South America
Jul 26, 2012 - 02:53pm PT
Are there any "arms" a citizen should not be allowed to own/use?

What about poison, like cyanide? Dynamite? Anthrax smuggled out of a military lab. Anyone want these things to be legal? If not then how does this square with the 2nd Amendment?
Marlow

Sport climber
OSLO
Jul 26, 2012 - 02:54pm PT
stevep

Of course you will get a lot of yelling if you restrict the access to handguns. People will be upset. There will be a lot more yelling than the restrictions to smoking caused. That's because a lot of americans have their identity partly attached to carrying a handgun for self-defence. It will probably take a generation or two before the matter settles.

The situation is that a lot of people are carrying a handgun because they believe other people are carrying a handgun, and then they feel safer when carrying a gun. When they are drunk, angry, feel that they are ridiculed, feel threatened (with or without reason) things escalate, someone pulls a "self-defence" handgun and suddenly someone is dead. This is the situation that the Harvard magazine article is describing.

The handgun-producing and handgun-selling industry is living of this fear. They are feeding it. Self-defence is their best marketing concept.
michaeld

Sport climber
Sacramento
Jul 26, 2012 - 02:59pm PT
All you anti-gun people are ridiculous. Arguing that nuclear weapons, biological weapons, chemical weapons should be legal too, if guns are. Really? Is that what this has come down to?

Then you guys really don't have a case. Go buy a gun, fools.
Don Paul

Big Wall climber
Colombia, South America
Jul 26, 2012 - 03:02pm PT
The question is where the line should be drawn. Currently its just below machine guns (AR-15s but not M-16s). Maybe handguns are on the other side of the line.
michaeld

Sport climber
Sacramento
Jul 26, 2012 - 03:05pm PT
Not by the guns but by the people.

It's easy to kill someone with a .22. If it wasn't, there'd be a lot less people in prison for murder.


The line isn't so strait anymore.
Don Paul

Big Wall climber
Colombia, South America
Jul 26, 2012 - 03:15pm PT
Then its about people. So only some people should have guns and the others are disqualified. The ones who can have guns can also have dynamite, anthrax, machine guns, land mines and so on. I doubt that's what you're arguing.
michaeld

Sport climber
Sacramento
Jul 26, 2012 - 03:17pm PT
You're correct. It's not.
Every household should have a gun.
To protect the household.


Conceal Permits should only be given to those the Sheriff of that county sees fit to carry.


Nobody should own land mines, rocket launchers, anthrax, tear gas...
jstan

climber
Jul 26, 2012 - 03:22pm PT
A year or so ago newspapers reported Yvon had been visited by a burglar. The same thing happened to his neighbor who had the poor judgment to leave the bedroom and was shot dead. Burglars now apparently go armed so they can defend themselves. It is an arms race. When you hear someone in the house stay in the bedroom but get out your night vision gear. When the prowler enters the master bedroom door you will know it is not your mom coming to recover something she forgot. You can blast away. As long as the burglar has not also gotten night vision gear you will the only one who can see what they are shooting at.

Have your wife in the walk-in closet with her own weapon. Be sure to have agreed beforehand on an all clear signal. If she does not hear the all clear she will know to blast anyone who tries to enter the closet.

Then to hedge the case where the burglar gets you both you can have a 500 pound bomb in the cellar that your wife can time to have go off a minute or two after the burglar tries to enter the walk-in closet.

That should about do it.

The 500 pound bomb may not be legal yet. But hey, we can't have burglars be the only ones with 500 pound bombs.
Don Paul

Big Wall climber
Colombia, South America
Jul 26, 2012 - 03:22pm PT
michaeld - your position is reasonable, but some have been arguing that the 2nd Amendment is supposed to put military weapons into the hands of the public, so when the big day comes, the people will be able to out-gun the military when they throw off the tyrannical government. That's the part that sounds ludacris.
michaeld

Sport climber
Sacramento
Jul 26, 2012 - 03:25pm PT
Yeah, that'd be ludacris.

I'd sh#t myself daily if i knew my neighbors had m16 assault rifles.

But our founding father's couldn't imagine the weapons now days.

Obama:
Two months later, he wrote an op-ed outlining a plan that included enforcing existing laws and rewarding states that provide the best data about gun owners. But until Wednesday, he had mostly refrained from making public comments about the issue.

Crimpergirl

Sport climber
Boulder, Colorado!
Jul 26, 2012 - 03:34pm PT
Every household should have a gun.
To protect the household.

Even convicted felons?
michaeld

Sport climber
Sacramento
Jul 26, 2012 - 03:35pm PT
No. Law Abiding Citizens.

Pay attention.

Christ. You people.
Norton

Social climber
the Wastelands
Jul 26, 2012 - 03:42pm PT
Well, don't expect President Obama to speak out or encourage more gun control legislation.

This is a President who signed laws allowing people to carry on Amtrak Trains and in National Parks, providing of course they have a Concealed Carry License.

He has stated his support for the Constitution's Second Amendment.

And while he may not be in the NRA's back pocket, he actions speak clearly in support of American citizens legally arming themselves.


Mitt Romney now says he also would not support more gun control legislation.

Look for nothing to change on the Federal level.
Crimpergirl

Sport climber
Boulder, Colorado!
Jul 26, 2012 - 04:20pm PT
No. Law Abiding Citizens.

Pay attention.

Christ. You people.

Geez. I get a nasty response to a simple question trying to understand your position and you wonder why some people aren't listening to you? Thanks for the clarification. I was just curious.
Toker Villain

Big Wall climber
Toquerville, Utah
Jul 26, 2012 - 04:41pm PT
What is funny is how many people think full auto M-16s, even belt fed full on machine guns are totally illegal.

Wrong.

Same with suppressors.





And suddenly you have all these self-appointed personal defense experts saying that super hi-cap clips have no legitimate application.
Never been in a dust up, mind you. Never had an armed creep come around in the wee hours.

But they JUST KNOW that these tools are invalid for any civilian.


I guess it is too much to hope for that they have an experience that might have changed their minds.
michaeld

Sport climber
Sacramento
Jul 26, 2012 - 04:50pm PT
Picking up a g19 tomorrow.


Holler.
Crimpergirl

Sport climber
Boulder, Colorado!
Jul 26, 2012 - 04:52pm PT
Enjoy!
Toker Villain

Big Wall climber
Toquerville, Utah
Jul 26, 2012 - 04:52pm PT
Anybody who only has 6000 rds is not ready for the next election.
fear

Ice climber
hartford, ct
Jul 26, 2012 - 04:53pm PT
I think a lot of the anti-gunners are just scared quite frankly of what they don't know.

Kinda like everyone 'else' calling us climbers crazy.

I've "converted "a lot of previous gun-haters over to the darkside with a few trips to the range.

It's seriously fun as Hell shooting pumpkins full of water with a variety of firearms. There's just nothing like it! Or being able to accurately put a bullet through a Quarter at 250 yards. Or hitting 25 out of 25 clay pigeons handicapped with a short-barreled coach gun. Just awesome. I have never seen a man fire a machinegun for the first time and not have a HUGE smile after.

I get the feeling anti-gun folks just think we're all seething with some raging internal desire to kill something or someone when nothing could be further from the truth. Most of the people I shoot with competitions around here don't even hunt.

In reality it's a huge sport with a large amount of diversity. Pistol, rifle, shotgun, competitions of all different kinds and just good times. I have never, even once, felt threatened by anyone I've shot with.

The self-defense aspect of it is just a tiny part of it. Anyone I know who has ever been combat or shooting sports for more than a few years has a damn healthy respect for the firearms we use since we know the damage they can cause.
atchafalaya

Boulder climber
Jul 26, 2012 - 05:19pm PT
I own guns and used to hunt growing up. I am now "anti-gun", but understand that idiots like shooting them at targets, animals and people. I wouldn't think of advocating that people cannot own handguns, rifles or shotguns. Has a legitimate argument been made that people should be allowed to own assault weapons? I have not seen one yet in this thread...

michaeld

Sport climber
Sacramento
Jul 26, 2012 - 05:21pm PT
Because we can. It's a tool. It does the same job as any other gun, but better.


There, I said it. I'm an idiot.
stevep

Boulder climber
Salt Lake, UT
Jul 26, 2012 - 05:32pm PT
And suddenly you have all these self-appointed personal defense experts saying that super hi-cap clips have no legitimate application.
Never been in a dust up, mind you. Never had an armed creep come around in the wee hours.

But they JUST KNOW that these tools are invalid for any civilian.

Piton Ron,
I'm certainly no expert, but it is pretty hard for me to think of very many "dust-ups" where a hi-cap mag would be necessary. Maybe if you're a gang-banger or drug lord fighting off an equally well-armed foe. You're probably not going to carry a big mag to the movie, so even though it might help in a situation like the CO one, you probably won't have it. And in a home invasion/burglarly situation, I'd think a shotgun or handgun would be plenty in most cases.

What sort of examples do you have that are likely to occur to the average Joe in the real world?
michaeld

Sport climber
Sacramento
Jul 26, 2012 - 05:35pm PT
Because the aurora shooter had a 100rnd drum mag, a shotgun, and hand gun.


So what's a 30rnd hi-cap mag to that?


Norton

Social climber
the Wastelands
Jul 26, 2012 - 05:35pm PT
far from an idiot, Michael!

People are just frustrated and angry with the widespread prevalence and destruction caused by hand guns in this country.

And when they read posts here extolling how much fun guns are to own and shoot,
in addition to firmly rejecting ideas put forth to limit the ease of access, smaller clip sizes, etc, well then people react naturally, by posting angrily in response.

Chaz

Trad climber
greater Boss Angeles area
Jul 26, 2012 - 05:38pm PT
The high-capacity magazine is what caused his semi-auto rifle to jam and stop working.

The hi-cap magazine was a hell of a lot more effective at stopping the slaughter than the cops ended up being.
michaeld

Sport climber
Sacramento
Jul 26, 2012 - 05:39pm PT
It's hard to explain to them Norton. Kind of like it's hard for me to understand their point of view, they don't understand mine.

I likely shoot less then any of the other pro gun people here. But I'm a firm believer in owning guns, for protection, and recreation.

I understand what a gun can do to someone on the other end of the barrel. It's no joke. They should be taken seriously. Some crack head was waving a gun around and muzzle swept my face about 15-20 times in a matter of about 2 minutes. It didn't register to him when I asked him to stop doing that.


Some people just don't know.