Gun control debate (merged)

[TheDeeble]

Let them ban all black modern sporting rifles. The gun they had to use to put an image to evil.

I have a solution for that......

 

[hog88]

I have a solution for that......

View attachment 458658

Might have to get one of those for my granddaughter, flattop of course.

 

[Vol Main]

It’s insane how many idiots I keep hearing talk about how “no one needs semi automatic rifles” or calling an AR a “weapon of war”. You can tell that they are so uninformed and ignorant that they think semi auto means someone can just hold the trigger down and spray. They are 100% clueless on the subject.

I see a lot of comments from individuals who obviously do not know much about guns. But you seem to be over reacting, in order to feel superior. How many times do people need to say semi-automatic, high powered rifles with detachable high capacity magazines?

 

[Vol8188]

I see a lot of comments from individuals who obviously do not know much about guns. But you seem to be over reacting, in order to feel superior. How many times do people need to say semi-automatic, high powered rifles with detachable high capacity magazines?

How many times do you need to be shown that there’s no correlation between states having more guns and homicide?

 

[Vol Main]

How many times do you need to be shown that there’s no correlation between states having more guns and homicide?

You can start with one.

 

[Vol8188]

You can start with one.

There was your false view on Wyoming earlier which I provided data on, and I can bump the scatter plot I made showing gun ownership and homicide and how they’re not even slightly correlated

 

[KB5252]

I'm still waiting for the facts to be sorted, but there are reports that people outside the school urged the police to go into the school, instead of standing around for an hour. My point is, and I don't care who you are, that police armed with a handgun are seriously disadvantaged when confronting a shooter armed with an AR-15, and they know that. It appears that the law enforcement officers waited for SWAT to do it. The situation needs to be reversed. Stop selling those weapons to the general public and do arm school guards with something more effective than a handgun.

Eh, in confined areas like buildings the handgun can be much more effective unless the opponent is barracaded with a clear site line and choke point.

 

[LouderVol]

They are more available because there are 400 million in circulation and 20 million more are added each year.
Maybe they aren't more destructive and guns are the one thing where the design doesn't improve over time.

They improve almost daily. But I cant think of anything that makes them more destructive.

Better/lighter polymers. Better ergonomics, ambidextrous. Typically now the modern design is to shorten the barrel, trading muzzle velocity and accuracy for weight and portability. Or bullpups if you are into that, getting longer barrels on shorter platforms by moving the action further back, that's not new, but becoming more popular. Slap a couple rails on that sucker for lights or grips.

I guess you could maybe say optics are improving and making guns more accurate but I havent seen too much reporting on these shooters running some multiple optic rig with NVG or anything of the sort.

 

[loggervol]

I'm always truthful.

That’s the problem with using someone else’s truth as your own.

 

[LouderVol]

I'm still waiting for the facts to be sorted, but there are reports that people outside the school urged the police to go into the school, instead of standing around for an hour. My point is, and I don't care who you are, that police armed with a handgun are seriously disadvantaged when confronting a shooter armed with an AR-15, and they know that. It appears that the law enforcement officers waited for SWAT to do it. The situation needs to be reversed. Stop selling those weapons to the general public and do arm school guards with something more effective than a handgun.

Or the cops need to be trained that the kids have even less of a chance than they do, and they need to be federally obligated to PROTECT and serve. Even if they just engage the guy they keep him away from kids.

If they have shotguns with slugs those arent going to care a whole lot about most armor.

 

[GroverCleveland]

I'm in no position to set that limit. I wear my ignorance of guns as a badge of honor.

Fair enough, Luther. That is good answer. Believe it not, I was not trying to set a trap for you specifically, but to demonstrate another way that gun control advocates lack enough knowledge to support their arguments.

Earlier, you and someone else were arguing how the gun made the difference not the person using it or something along those lines. The guns I provided the x and y for were, in fact the same one. Bolt-action, 10 round magazine .30 caliber rifles, SMLE .303 specifically. Nothing particular fancy. But the British Regular Army of 1914 was full of men who at the minimum could do 15 rounds on a 300 yard target within a minute. It was a qualification requirement. The record for such fire was 35 rounds. For 35 rounds, that soldier had to reload a minimum of three times. How the tool is operated definitely makes a difference.

Again, thank you for a very honest answer.

 

[luthervol]

That’s the problem with using someone else’s truth as your own.

I can't really control other people using my truth.

 

[hndog609]

They improve almost daily. But I cant think of anything that makes them more destructive.

Better/lighter polymers. Better ergonomics, ambidextrous. Typically now the modern design is to shorten the barrel, trading muzzle velocity and accuracy for weight and portability. Or bullpups if you are into that, getting longer barrels on shorter platforms by moving the action further back, that's not new, but becoming more popular. Slap a couple rails on that sucker for lights or grips.

I guess you could maybe say optics are improving and making guns more accurate but I havent seen too much reporting on these shooters running some multiple optic rig with NVG or anything of the sort.

Once a bullet is fired there is literally nothing about from what platform it left that makes any difference. As you say maybe that more modern platform was more reliable, modular, lighter and ergonomic and had improved optics from what was available decades before but that's not a particularly compelling argument for demonstrably greater deadliness or destructive capability. Improved? OK, acceptable premise...more destructive? That doesn't hold up as well.

 

[loggervol]

I can't really control other people using my truth.

I know you probably think you’re being truthful but when you parrot someone else’s talking points and forget to find the truth for yourself. It usually means you’re just spreading horseshit.

 

[Rickyvol77]

It’s insane how many idiots I keep hearing talk about how “no one needs semi automatic rifles” or calling an AR a “weapon of war”. You can tell that they are so uninformed and ignorant that they think semi auto means someone can just hold the trigger down and spray. They are 100% clueless on the subject.

Luther is one of those

 

[luthervol]

Fair enough, Luther. That is good answer. Believe it not, I was not trying to set a trap for you specifically, but to demonstrate another way that gun control advocates lack enough knowledge to support their arguments.

Earlier, you and someone else were arguing how the gun made the difference not the person using it or something along those lines. The guns I provided the x and y for were, in fact the same one. Bolt-action, 10 round magazine .30 caliber rifles, SMLE .303 specifically. Nothing particular fancy. But the British Regular Army of 1914 was full of men who at the minimum could do 15 rounds on a 300 yard target within a minute. It was a qualification requirement. The record for such fire was 35 rounds. For 35 rounds, that soldier had to reload a minimum of three times. How the tool is operated definitely makes a difference.

Again, thank you for a very honest answer.

I just saw on the most recent timeline from the Uvalde shooting..............
11:32 a.m.: The suspect fires at the school.

11:33 a.m.: The suspect enters the school and begins shooting into a classroom. He shot more than 100 rounds.

11:35 a.m.: A total of seven officers are on the scene, and three officers enter the school, later followed by an additional team of three more officers and a sheriff. Two of the initial officers received grazing wounds from the suspect while the classroom door was closed.

..................and that he shot more than 100 rounds in about a two minute period. (I'm sure it could have been more)

Personally, that meets my definition of an automatic weapon. I think that type of capability is pointless and should and could be restricted without one bit of infringement on anybody's 2a rights.

 

[luthervol]

I know you probably think you’re being truthful but when you parrot someone else’s talking points and forget to find the truth for yourself. It usually means you’re just spreading horseshit.

I hope everyone realizes that, because you see it constantly.

 

[0nelilreb]

I just saw on the most recent timeline from the Uvalde shooting..............
11:32 a.m.: The suspect fires at the school.

11:33 a.m.: The suspect enters the school and begins shooting into a classroom. He shot more than 100 rounds.

11:35 a.m.: A total of seven officers are on the scene, and three officers enter the school, later followed by an additional team of three more officers and a sheriff. Two of the initial officers received grazing wounds from the suspect while the classroom door was closed.

..................and that he shot more than 100 rounds in about a two minute period. (I'm sure it could have been more)

Personally, that meets my definition of an automatic weapon. I think that type of capability is pointless and should and could be restricted without one bit of infringement on anybody's 2a rights.

You are wrong . Your personal, subjective opinion of what something is doesn’t matter .



This is 8 sots in 1 second with a revolver . Let me say that again .. 8 shots off in one second using a wheel load revolver.

 

[LouderVol]

I just saw on the most recent timeline from the Uvalde shooting..............
11:32 a.m.: The suspect fires at the school.

11:33 a.m.: The suspect enters the school and begins shooting into a classroom. He shot more than 100 rounds.

11:35 a.m.: A total of seven officers are on the scene, and three officers enter the school, later followed by an additional team of three more officers and a sheriff. Two of the initial officers received grazing wounds from the suspect while the classroom door was closed.

..................and that he shot more than 100 rounds in about a two minute period. (I'm sure it could have been more)

Personally, that meets my definition of an automatic weapon. I think that type of capability is pointless and should and could be restricted without one bit of infringement on anybody's 2a rights.

Lol. An automatic would have laid out thousands of rounds in a tenth that time. Heck even something with a really slow cyclic rate would absolutely decimate a couple hundred rounds in a couple minutes.

 

[GroverCleveland]

I just saw on the most recent timeline from the Uvalde shooting..............
11:32 a.m.: The suspect fires at the school.

11:33 a.m.: The suspect enters the school and begins shooting into a classroom. He shot more than 100 rounds.

11:35 a.m.: A total of seven officers are on the scene, and three officers enter the school, later followed by an additional team of three more officers and a sheriff. Two of the initial officers received grazing wounds from the suspect while the classroom door was closed.

..................and that he shot more than 100 rounds in about a two minute period. (I'm sure it could have been more)

Personally, that meets my definition of an automatic weapon. I think that type of capability is pointless and should and could be restricted without one bit of infringement on anybody's 2a rights.

Was not automatic. Automatic weapons would exceed 500-600 rpm. Automatic weapons require VERY extensive documentation of the potential owner and probably looking at a minimum of $15k-$20k for the weapon itself.

I admit, I do ponder if some kind of licensing should be required, but that goes against my belief in why the 2A exists: as the ultimate check on government.

 

[CagleMtnVol]

You are wrong . Your personal, subjective opinion of what something is doesn’t matter .



This is 8 sots in 1 second with a revolver . Let me say that again .. 8 shots off in one second using a wheel load revolver.

What was the name of the guy who did trick shooting on one of those gun tv shows in the 90's/early 2000's?

 

[LouderVol]

You are wrong . Your personal, subjective opinion of what something is doesn’t matter .



This is 8 sots in 1 second with a revolver . Let me say that again .. 8 shots off in one second using a wheel load revolver.

How bad does his argument have to be where he admits to literally changing the definitions to have an argument?

I mean that is a new level, well not for luther or the anti gun nuts, of bad arguing skills.

 

[GroverCleveland]

Have probably mentioned this before, but did some shooting with a one-time Georgia quick-draw champion. Saw him draw and put five of six shots on a target at about 20 yards in a couple of seconds, with a snub-nose S&W .38. I was impressed.

 

[0nelilreb]

Was not automatic. Automatic weapons would exceed 500-600 rpm. Automatic weapons require VERY extensive documentation of the potential owner and probably looking at a minimum of $15k-$20k for the weapon itself.

I admit, I do ponder if some kind of licensing should be required, but that goes against my belief in why the 2A exists: as the ultimate check on government.

I may have known someone once with a 1967 AK. It might have been original , it could have been untouched mechanically , I know nothing about guns , but it looked like the pictures I see on tv of them , I’ll bet that thing was AMAZING to fire on full auto . That being said I have quite the imagination, so it was probably all just a dream .

 

[0nelilreb]

How bad does his argument have to be where he admits to literally changing the definitions to have an argument?

I mean that is a new level, well not for luther or the anti gun nuts, of bad arguing skills.

You know how he is . when you push him hard enough he will default to the ole “ grey area / continuum / well in my opinion “ stance .