Gun control debate (merged)

#18,876
#18,876
Rickyvol77 said:
It’s only deadly if the thing you are shooting at is alive and accuracy is about the shooter not the weapon. The intended purpose of a firearm is to fire ammunition out of its barrel. Nothing more. Nothing less. Again
Click to expand...

eyeroll.gif

The intellectual dishonesty and coyness about the intended use of a firearm is breathtaking.

I'm a 1A advocate and have a locker full of handguns, shotguns and rifles. But ANYONE pretending guns aren't generally designed to maim, disable or kill are being disingenuous.

Yes, firearms can be used to plink cans and in most cases, collect dust but that doesn't mean they aren't lethal with unbelievable efficiency. Which is the point of being able to have them for personal protection and incase we'd need to take up arms against the .gov.

Yes a gun is an inanimate object and is only as deadly as the person wielding it. But again, there's a reason why we don't send our troops into battle with pool noodles and pillows and instead with handguns and rifles.
 
  • Like
Reactions: OHvol40
#18,878
#18,878
Rickyvol77 said:
90-95% of the total usage of firearms aren’t deadly or even cause injuries
Click to expand...
It's really like 99.99999%.

Half a million gun related hospitalizations from 2000 to 2016. That's a little over 31k a year. Go ahead and double it with total gun deaths, and then round up to 100k.

That would be 0.03% of civilian guns used, assuming every incident is a unique gun, and assuming a very very conservative estimate of only 330 million civilian owned guns, and also including government owned gun incidents in with civilians.

I would post a link but apparently I am too dumb to work the link function anymore.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 0nelilreb
#18,879
#18,879
LouderVol said:
It's really like 99.99999%.

Half a million gun related hospitalizations from 2000 to 2016. That's a little over 31k a year. Go ahead and double it with total gun deaths, and then round up to 100k.

That would be 0.03% of civilian guns used, assuming every incident is a unique gun, and assuming a very very conservative estimate of only 330 million civilian owned guns, and also including government owned gun incidents in with civilians.

I would post a link but apparently I am too dumb to work the link function anymore.
Click to expand...
If it wasn’t for suicides and gang violence, shootings in this country would be nearly non existent
 
  • Like
Reactions: GroverCleveland
#18,893
#18,893
CagleMtnVol said:
Name one?

Click to expand...

What he fails to mention is these companies are held accountable if their products malfunction in a catastrophic manner. Inanimate objects require a user to make a cognitive decision. It is the user of these items who are to blame. An inanimate object cannot be good or bad by itself. For as many people who are harmed by guns, even more are saved by their use in self defense or as a deterrent.
 
  • Like
Reactions: NurseGoodVol, hog88, NorthDallas40 and 2 others
#18,898
#18,898
Now tell us why they all had to pay . Did they lie , hide the truth from test results , advertise in a way that was unlawful , not tell their intended customers about the dangers they had found in their products ?
 
  • Like
Reactions: NorthDallas40
#18,900
#18,900
luthervol said:
Different reasons; but all reasons that are relatable to the gun issue.
Click to expand...

Nope completely different and we know it . Do you know any gun mfg that doesn’t warn their customers about their product ? You should read all the literature that comes with a firearm .
 
  • Like
Reactions: joevol33
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.
Advertisement





Back
Top