The Gun debate sandbox

Search
Go

Discussion Topic

Return to Forum List
Post a Reply
Messages 3141 - 3160 of total 5837 in this topic << First  |  < Previous  |  Show All  |  Next >  |  Last >>
TradEddie

Trad climber
Philadelphia, PA
Mar 1, 2013 - 12:30pm PT

Just another ignorant person spouting hate and lies for what they don't understand or know.

Classy. I don't hate guns, or gun owners, I know how much fun guns are, and how dangerous they are. I owned guns for many years and joined the military primarily to shoot guns that were illegal where I lived. Two of the guns I owned were used in the insurgent revolution that gave my country independence. I acknowledge a right to self defense. I don't want to outlaw all guns, just sensible limitations on dealers and owners which would reduce the immoral level of gun violence in this country.

Lies? You call me a liar, show evidence to the contrary, but the first twenty google pages will support my statement. The US supplies a good chunk of the world's illegal handguns, and yes, some of those not manufactured in the US do indeed get shipped here, diverted from the legal market and re-exported.

I did find one case of someone smuggling guns into the US - it was easier for the Zetas to smuggle guns into Texas then back to Mexico again rather than cross the territory of a rival gang.

Ignorance? Priceless.

TE







the Fet

climber
Tu-Tok-A-Nu-La
Mar 1, 2013 - 01:14pm PT
I don't hate guns, or gun owners, I know how much fun guns are, and how dangerous they are. I owned guns for many years

Same here. I think that easy access to high capacity military weapons and handguns isn't as important as keeping them away from dangerous people who kill innocent people with them. But then I'm not a right wing ideologue or a gun nut.
ontheedgeandscaredtodeath

Social climber
SLO, Ca
Mar 1, 2013 - 01:22pm PT
I suppose one should consider non-cartel related gun deaths in Mexico in order to accurately consider whether that country's gun ban works or not. Sort of a dumb comparison otherwise.


Dave Kos

Social climber
Temecula
Mar 1, 2013 - 01:28pm PT
I owned guns for many years and joined the military primarily to shoot guns that were illegal where I lived.


There is a very clear correlation in these debates between those who have served in the military and a position supporting reasonable regulations of weapons designed for military purpose.

One one side we have the Ted Nugents.

On the other side we have Americans who have demonstrated a genuine commitment to the defense of our nation against actual threats.

It is comical that some here claim extraordinary credibility because of their amateur experience.

Why let our veterans have a voice in such an important issue as firearms regulations?

We must defer to the wisdom of the PLINKERS!
Ksolem

Trad climber
Monrovia, California
Mar 1, 2013 - 01:31pm PT
I suppose one should consider non-cartel related gun deaths in Mexico in order to accurately consider whether that country's gun ban works or not. Sort of a dumb comparison otherwise.

That's fine. The corrolary would be to separate out gang and non gang violence in the US. From FBI.gov:

"There are approximately 1.4 million active street, prison, and OMG gang members comprising more than 33,000 gangs in the United States. Gang membership increased most significantly in the Northeast and Southeast regions, although the West and Great Lakes regions boast the highest number of gang members. Neighborhood-based gangs, hybrid gang members, and national-level gangs such as the Sureņos are rapidly expanding in many jurisdictions. Many communities are also experiencing an increase in ethnic-based gangs such as African, Asian, Caribbean, and Eurasian gangs.

Gangs are responsible for an average of 48 percent of violent crime in most jurisdictions and up to 90 percent in several others, according to NGIC analysis. Major cities and suburban areas experience the most gang-related violence. Local neighborhood-based gangs and drug crews continue to pose the most significant criminal threat in most communities. Aggressive recruitment of juveniles and immigrants, alliances and conflict between gangs, the release of incarcerated gang members from prison, advancements in technology and communication, and Mexican Drug Trafficking Organization (MDTO) involvement in drug distribution have resulted in gang expansion and violence in a number of jurisdictions."
Chaz

Trad climber
greater Boss Angeles area
Mar 1, 2013 - 01:33pm PT
Everybody supports sensible limitations and reasonable regulations. Not just military vets.
Dave Kos

Social climber
Temecula
Mar 1, 2013 - 01:37pm PT
Everybody supports sensible limitations and reasonable regulations.


Does "everybody" include you?

Let's hear about the regulations that you support.

Soldiers of the plinker army, sound off!
ontheedgeandscaredtodeath

Social climber
SLO, Ca
Mar 1, 2013 - 01:38pm PT
Fair enough, Ksolem.

I think the best gun control would be strict tort liability. One can purchase whatever gun one wants (with in reason), but if that gun ends up out of your hands and is involved in a crime, then you are strictly liable for the resulting wrongful death / personal injury damages. I bet folks would be much more careful about to whom they sell guns.
Ron Anderson

Trad climber
Soon to be Nipple suckling Liberal
Mar 1, 2013 - 01:49pm PT
let me ask a couple of obvious questions.

The govt is buying and storing massive amounts of hollow point,, NON-target loads at such locations as IRS and SS offices. They are also buying weapons of the FULLY auto variety. This is being done for a reason. WHAT is that reason?

Why have they now come up with new laws that can be used against our own citizens?

Why do we now discuss DRONES flying over US soil??


Why does mainstream media IGNORE this all???



Why are LEOs and Military/Natl guard members TALKING about NOT engaging in ANY actions against the good citizens of this country now!????



In my time ive never seen any of the like. Never thought i would. But its here, now.


Across the country , local LEOs are speaking out about this, and NONE of them will support any "confiscation" of weapons from law abiding citizens.
Many go further by saying they will not allow any such actions by the FEDS either. Some states already have laws on the books prohibiting the FED govt from enforcing any gun laws, while others have petitions to withdraw from the Union.

In Cali,, they have proposals to confiscate countless weapons from law abiding citizens, and dont think for one teensie moment that they will do so voluntarily. Cali is FULL of dedicated shooters and hunters by the tens of thousands, and NOT ONE will ever give up weapons they legally acquired.

Even worse is the using of such tragedies as Sandy Hook, which weve NOT been told the truth about. Within 24 hours of that incident, there was a concentrated effort to begin removing guns from LAW ABIDING CITIZENS. Guns and folks who had nothing to do with any such incident.

Why would a GOVT seek such blanket policy AGAINST the Constitution and its people? And DONT tell me its over concern for the people. The govt has been using the people as guinea pigs for decades.. "You will see a large flash,, do not be alarmed"...


Why is it that LEOs and Military are saying HELL NO to all those confiscation suggestions?


new world order2

climber
Mar 1, 2013 - 01:57pm PT
Very good questions, Ron.

Alls I can say is...So goes the new world order.
Most everyone is living in the Matrix. They've been dupped into believing everything the media and government tells us, is the truth. Far from it.

photo not found
Missing photo ID#269454
TradEddie

Trad climber
Philadelphia, PA
Mar 1, 2013 - 02:11pm PT
Everybody supports sensible limitations and reasonable regulations. Not just military vets.

Gun owners apparently don't, because their de facto mouthpiece opposes background checks, so unless gun owners find a new way to express themselves, letting the NRA do the talking is going to hand the next election to the democrats.

TE


TGT

Social climber
So Cal
Mar 1, 2013 - 02:20pm PT
That's fine. The corrolary would be to separate out gang and non gang violence in the US. From FBI.gov:

Already sorta did that way up thread.


Non Hispanic Caucasian gun death rates for the US are about the same as Belgium.
hillrat

Trad climber
reno, nv
Mar 1, 2013 - 02:41pm PT
Huh... Im a gun owner and I happen to think the NRA opposition to background checks is idiotic. I also disagree with their stance on putting armed guards in schools, and let my membership lapse so long ago its fuzzy in my memory.
So dont automatically assume they,re the defacto mouthpiece for all firearm ownership.
TradEddie

Trad climber
Philadelphia, PA
Mar 1, 2013 - 08:19pm PT
So dont automatically assume they,re the defacto mouthpiece for all firearm ownership.
Until another organization with 5 million members exists to give a political voice (i.e campaign donations) to moderate gun owners, the only organized mouthpiece gun owners have is through the extremism of the NRA.

TE
Ron Anderson

Trad climber
Soon to be Nipple suckling Liberal
Mar 1, 2013 - 08:28pm PT
The NRA is simply abiding by the constitution. We already have a brady back ground check. They are being no more extreme than idgets like Fienstien or Bloomberg- mr. "i outlawed 20 0z cokes"...
hillrat

Trad climber
reno, nv
Mar 1, 2013 - 08:35pm PT
Yes, we do have a brady background. It actually prevents quite a number of prohibited persons from legally acquiring firearms. So for the NRA to come out with some crap about how background checks don't work is about on par with the VP advising his wife to shoot randomly into the dark with a shotgun. In neither case do I want these people leading the decisions in matters of importance in this country.
Ignorance and extremism are some great quality trademarks of the militant Muslim faction as well.
TGT

Social climber
So Cal
Mar 1, 2013 - 08:41pm PT
From a professionally oriented blog, a few comments to a post that speak for themselves.

I am very concerned about the domestic threat and domestic response language that is appearing in our doctrine and CONOPS documents. We are openly building a capability to counter this perceived threat and we are apparently putting into place the institutional mechanism to execute it without question when the time comes. This goes way beyond the Support to Civil Authorities (Garden Plot) missions that we have had for years. Army officers are now writing about this in outside publications and our doctrinal manuals are being crafted to include this as an integral part of Army 2020. We should all be worried, because once we have trained a generation of leaders that this is a legitimate use of military power, the politicians will be able to wield a big stick at their whim.



The stunning numbers and incredible spread of different armed federal law enforcement agencies and officers (and to a lesser extent, large municipal police forces) are the very standing Army that our founders feared.

The long US paranoia against domestic standing armies has long held the actual US Army in check. But government, being government, found a way to outflank that traditional aversion.
Ron Anderson

Trad climber
Soon to be Nipple suckling Liberal
Mar 1, 2013 - 08:50pm PT
Hill rat, here in NV we also have the dept of public safety. We have redundancy in our checks. We DONT need a brady check to BUY AMMO. Ill be dang if im gonna pay an extra 25.00 and wait for an hour to buy a box..
TradEddie

Trad climber
Philadelphia, PA
Mar 1, 2013 - 10:25pm PT
VP's suggestion wasn't the best, but certainly not the worst. Unless you're expecting someone specifically intent on murdering you, a gun fired in the air is likely to convince 99% of burglars to leave, maybe if Oscar Pistoris had tried that approach he'd still be a free man with a beautiful girlfriend now (where's the sarcasm emoticon?). The only person I know who's ever drawn a gun to tackle a burglar found himself muzzle to muzzle with his own father, neither expected anyone else at home, luckily both learned an important lesson.

When I had guns at home, my plan if I had heard an intruder downstairs was to fire one barrel down the stairs, and if the MF kept coming upstairs after hearing a 12 gauge fired indoors, use the second barrel to shoot out the bedroom window and jump! Anyone who's experienced a shotgun fired indoors without ear protection will know what I mean. Of course that was in a country where the chance of a burglar carrying a gun was zero.

Finally, complete BS claiming that firing in the air to alert others of an intruder in your home would result in felony charges. Cops would be much happier dealing with an attempted burglary than the mess of a dead burglar or dead homeowner.

TE






Chaz

Trad climber
greater Boss Angeles area
Mar 1, 2013 - 10:29pm PT
Can you name just one self-defense expert who recomends firing "warning" shots? At any time, or for any reason?

It's a felony here in California. You'll get three years in The Joint for doing it. We're pretty lenient, by comparison. In Florida, people get 20 years for firing off warning shots.
Messages 3141 - 3160 of total 5837 in this topic << First  |  < Previous  |  Show All  |  Next >  |  Last >>
Return to Forum List
Post a Reply
 
Our Guidebooks
Check 'em out!
SuperTopo Guidebooks


Try a free sample topo!

 
SuperTopo on the Web

Review Categories
Recent Trip Report and Articles
Recent Route Beta
Recent Gear Reviews