Gun control debate (merged)

#28,351
#28,351
hog88 said:
I hardly step foot in Nashville anymore, it's not because of crime or anything other than I don't like crowds. Been to NYC numerous times and for the life of me I can't understand why anyone would want to live there.
Click to expand...
There's that 2-dimensional thinking again (if you honestly can't understand why millions would choose to live in NYC).

I can easily understand why people would choose to live in NYC, Boston, Atlanta, Nashville, or any city, or on a ranch in Montana, or in a small town in TN, or on the coast, or on a mountain, or on an island.
Different strokes for different folks. I personally love all of those places.
 
#28,353
#28,353
luthervol said:
There's that 2-dimensional thinking again (if you honestly can't understand why millions would choose to live in NYC).

I can easily understand why people would choose to live in NYC, Boston, Atlanta, Nashville, or any city, or on a ranch in Montana, or in a small town in TN, or on the coast, or on a mountain, or on an island.
Different strokes for different folks. I personally love all of those places.
Click to expand...

It's not 2 dimensional thinking, I don't understand why people want to live in crowded cities. I know that many do and love it, I don't see why they do.
 
  • Like
Reactions: InVOLuntary, Tnslim1 and SpaceCoastVol
#28,355
#28,355
luthervol said:
I think shotguns are great for hunting, trap and skeet, home protection.
Click to expand...
I would agree with your opinion of shotguns here.
But I’m interested in what your position says about shotguns here.

luthervol said:
The less lethal the available weapon the better.
Click to expand...

In this scenario the assault weapons are gone. The shotgun is now the “most lethal available” weapon.
 
  • Like
Reactions: GroverCleveland
#28,356
#28,356
85SugarVol said:
I would agree with your opinion of shotguns here.
But I’m interested in what your position says about shotguns here.



In this scenario the assault weapons are gone. The shotgun is now the “most lethal available” weapon.
Click to expand...
This argument is so lame. A shotgun is SIGNIFICANTLY more legal in close quarters. By Luther's "x in y" logic, a 12 gauge can shoot 8-12 roughly 9mm 00 Buck projectiles per every pull of the trigger and requires very little aim.
 
  • Like
Reactions: InVOLuntary
#28,357
#28,357
85SugarVol said:
I would agree with your opinion of shotguns here.
But I’m interested in what your position says about shotguns here.



In this scenario the assault weapons are gone. The shotgun is now the “most lethal available” weapon.
Click to expand...
It seems rational and reasonable that a shotgun would be the most lethal weapon easily and legally available.
As you said, no matter what you do there will always be something that is most lethal. It seems the only way to draw that line is rationally and reasonably.
 
#28,358
#28,358
kiddiedoc said:
This argument is so lame. A shotgun is SIGNIFICANTLY more legal in close quarters. By Luther's "x in y" logic, a 12 gauge can shoot 8-12 roughly 9mm 00 Buck projectiles per every pull of the trigger and requires very little aim.
Click to expand...
Odd that they are not used in mass shootings by people intent on creating as much carnage as possible.
 
#28,359
#28,359
luthervol said:
It seems rational and reasonable that a shotgun would be the most lethal weapon easily and legally available.
As you said, no matter what you do there will always be something that is most lethal. It seems the only way to draw that line is rationally and reasonably.
Click to expand...
why?

I would like to hear this rational and reasonable break down on what makes a shotgun acceptable.
 
#28,361
#28,361
luthervol said:
Because it has legitimate uses in hunting, sport, and adequately serves as home security and protection.
Click to expand...
so do the weapons you want to ban.

I think typically the only thing one hunts with a shotgun is birds, or maybe something small. but typically peppering something you plan on eating is not a good idea, as there is a good chance you will be ingesting lead. large animals you want something with some reach, power, and no reload.

Plenty of sport for the weapons you want banned, you just pretend it doesn't exist/count.

and the weapons you want banned are good home defense as well. just like you don't want a solid shotgun slug for home defense, you don't want an armor piercing round for a rifle in home defense. but that doesn't mean they aren't good home defense.

your rational and reasonable is arbitrary and not based on actual facts. which is why there is a worry about you slippery sloping the shotguns away.
 
  • Like
Reactions: SpaceCoastVol and kiddiedoc
#28,363
#28,363
LouderVol said:
so do the weapons you want to ban.

I think typically the only thing one hunts with a shotgun is birds, or maybe something small. but typically peppering something you plan on eating is not a good idea, as there is a good chance you will be ingesting lead. large animals you want something with some reach, power, and no reload.

Plenty of sport for the weapons you want banned, you just pretend it doesn't exist/count.

and the weapons you want banned are good home defense as well. just like you don't want a solid shotgun slug for home defense, you don't want an armor piercing round for a rifle in home defense. but that doesn't mean they aren't good home defense.

your rational and reasonable is arbitrary and not based on actual facts. which is why there is a worry about you slippery sloping the shotguns away.
Click to expand...
I was under no delusion that you would agree with what I said.
I have no issue with a rifle intended for hunting, target shooting, or home defense. You just do not the capability of firing 20 rounds in seconds for any of those things.......so back to the x rounds per y seconds part of my position.
 
#28,366
#28,366
luthervol said:
I was under no delusion that you would agree with what I said.
I have no issue with a rifle intended for hunting, target shooting, or home defense. You just do not the capability of firing 20 rounds in seconds for any of those things.......so back to the x rounds per y seconds part of my position.
Click to expand...
Is there a reason you aren't applying that idiotic position to shotguns?
 
#28,368
#28,368
LouderVol said:
why?

I would like to hear this rational and reasonable break down on what makes a shotgun acceptable.
Click to expand...
I have one that can shoot 80 bullets in 10 pulls of the trigger. Not sure what value "y" would be, as I've never tried a rapid mag dump (for the sake of my shoulder).
 
#28,370
#28,370
luthervol said:
It seems rational and reasonable that a shotgun would be the most lethal weapon easily and legally available.
As you said, no matter what you do there will always be something that is most lethal. It seems the only way to draw that line is rationally and reasonably.
Click to expand...
But the shotgun would be the “most lethal” weapon available.

Which brings us back to your stated position -
luthervol said:
The less lethal the available weapon the better.
Click to expand...

In this scenario the shotgun is the “most lethal”. Your position clearly states something less lethal would be “better”.

So are we to believe that in a world without assault weapons, “shotgun mass attacks” will be excused on the grounds that the line has already been reasonably and rationally drawn?
 
  • Like
Reactions: McDad, VOLS INC., LouderVol and 1 other person
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.
Advertisement





Back
Top