Gun control debate (merged)

#22,351
#22,351
lawgator1 said:
Certainly you realize that one person's experience with that is anecdotal and just not reflective of thr national issue.
Click to expand...
Except the national experience is the same. An article was posted earlier stating that fentanyl was the number cause of death of my age group, 18-45. Even when compared to Covid.

I dont remember you calling out any Covid death anecdotes while that was all going down.
 
#22,357
#22,357
LouderVol said:
Except the national experience is the same. An article was posted earlier stating that fentanyl was the number cause of death of my age group, 18-45. Even when compared to Covid.

I dont remember you calling out any Covid death anecdotes while that was all going down.
Click to expand...


Pointless point. Just because we should do more to curb Fenanyl deaths is not reason not to also work to curb gun violence.
 
#22,358
#22,358
85SugarVol said:
Ricky gunned down 17 2nd graders in 3 minutes with 2 semi automatic pistols.

Thank god he didn’t have an AR-15, could have been 19 2nd graders in 3 minutes.

Is this the argument against “assault weapons”?
Click to expand...


As I understand it, a large part of the issue here is the appeal to machismo of assault style weapons. They are built to "look" militaristic and cool.. Appeals to those 18 and 19 year old disaffected males looking to make a statement.
 
#22,359
#22,359
lawgator1 said:
As I understand it, a large part of the issue here is the appeal to machismo of assault style weapons. They are built to "look" militaristic and cool.. Appeals to those 18 and 19 year old disaffected males looking to make a statement.
Click to expand...

You don't understand much if you think a certain type of gun should be subject to more regulation because of aesthetics.
 
  • Like
Reactions: InVOLuntary, -GiveHim6-, AM64 and 3 others
#22,360
#22,360
luthervol said:
I don't think we are a more violent society.
In EL's link, the guy (British) talks about how the UK is much more violent, but that there violence is in the form of a fist fight at the pub. In the UK, you are much more likely to be in a fight but much less likely to be shot dead.
From my experience, school fights were far more common in when I was in school than they are today, Fights are comparatively very rare today. The difference is that 40 years ago maybe 1 in a 1000 fights ended in gunfire. Today it's probably 1 in 10.
I think things were much better when anger and aggression could be released through a quick and relatively inconsequential fist fight, than it is now where guns are so frequently the go-to response.
Obviously, the proliferation of guns has made this worse.
Click to expand...
So what is your standard? I have asked for some number that would be acceptable for the proliferation.
Gun Ownership in America

TN went from just under 60 to under 50% gun ownership.
Texas went from just under 60 to under 40%. And that's where this last shooting that people cared about happened.

If you believe we are in worse shape in regards to society and guns the data says that is there is an inverse correlation, at least, with ownership percentages. You could also add in gun control measures and compare to our relative safety.

Even if you want to argue it's just the number of guns in fewer hands that's the issue, that's not who is doing the shooting, and your proposed solutions dont even target those people. When was the last shooting shooting by an NRA member with a huge arsenal? Most of them are like the recent Oklahoma and Texas shootings with new owners buying and quickly going on a rampage. One or two guns used in a shooting is drop of water compared to the total number, so there is no reason to believe the pure number matters.
 
  • Like
Reactions: GroverCleveland
#22,361
#22,361
lawgator1 said:
It is true, but if we limit guns then the destructive power in such a short period of time will be lessened. And. So that's what we should do.
Click to expand...
Bombs. You get rid of guns they will go to bombs. These are mentally unstable people bent on destruction.

Instead of giving them a peaceful or healthy out, you want to push them into more dangerous territory. The water is already boiling, holding the lid down is not the solution.
 
  • Like
Reactions: InVOLuntary and AM64
#22,363
#22,363
luthervol said:
I don't think we are a more violent society.
In EL's link, the guy (British) talks about how the UK is much more violent, but that there violence is in the form of a fist fight at the pub. In the UK, you are much more likely to be in a fight but much less likely to be shot dead.
From my experience, school fights were far more common in when I was in school than they are today, Fights are comparatively very rare today. The difference is that 40 years ago maybe 1 in a 1000 fights ended in gunfire. Today it's probably 1 in 10.
I think things were much better when anger and aggression could be released through a quick and relatively inconsequential fist fight, than it is now where guns are so frequently the go-to response.
Obviously, the proliferation of guns has made this worse.
Click to expand...
Having lived in the UK for a bit, I can attest that bars are much more violent than in the US. I regularly saw bar fights. And when soccer was on, forget about it. There would be blood in the streets.
 
#22,367
#22,367
lawgator1 said:
As I understand it, a large part of the issue here is the appeal to machismo of assault style weapons. They are built to "look" militaristic and cool.. Appeals to those 18 and 19 year old disaffected males looking to make a statement.
Click to expand...
I thought you all were worried about the supposed increased rate of fire.

You’re worried about how they look?
 
  • Like
Reactions: GroverCleveland, AM64, LouderVol and 1 other person
#22,368
#22,368
lawgator1 said:
Pointless point. Just because we should do more to curb Fenanyl deaths is not reason not to also work to curb gun violence.
Click to expand...
Never said it wasnt. Was pointing our your logical fallacy.

His anecdote matches the national trend so your argument was bs.

However your focus on guns goes to show you dont care about deaths in general. Only those caused by guns. You and your arguments are quick to dismiss drugs and cars, wont even acknowledge abortions, and yet guns are the things to fix despite being lower on the risk of death than the other items.

And then you have the common logical fallacy of believing just because you did something things will be better. When history in this country shows things will keep getting worse. You are going after the wrong piece of the puzzle, have been since at least the 1984 assault weapons ban. That's why things keep getting worse. You ignore the real problem, just like you ignore the more prolific deaths. So the real problem festers on, and will keep getting worse, no matter what laws you enact to go after law abiding gun owners.
 
#22,370
#22,370
85SugarVol said:
I thought you all were worried about the supposed increased rate of fire.

You’re worried about how they look?
Click to expand...
I have no problem being concerned with both.

If they are marketed as mass killing machines (sure they are), it increases the odds that they will be used that way.
 
#22,371
#22,371
luthervol said:
I have no problem being concerned with both.

If they are marketed as mass killing machines (sure they are), it increases the odds that they will be used that way.
Click to expand...
I won’t argue that if given the choice, some random 18 year old will probably reach for the AR before he reaches for the Glock - but it won’t increase his lethality in any meaningful way.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Orangeslice13
#22,372
#22,372
Not a single limit on firearm feature on type in the proposed framework. Womp womp gun grabbers 😂

Only scary part is the bribing of states on red flag laws but it appears they are leaving the specifics up to each state. Money made available for hardening schools also just hope it isn’t tied to the red flag bribe and they are separate slush buckets.
 
#22,373
#22,373
DancingOutlaw said:
It’s too easy to get a gun today. Unlike before when you could have them mailed to your house with no background check and every hardware store had barrels of rifles.
Click to expand...
I long for the days when I could order them out of the back of magazine the way my grandpa got several sweet Saturday Night Specials for like $20 a pop back in the day!
 
  • Like
Reactions: GroverCleveland, AM64 and SpaceCoastVol
#22,374
#22,374
NorthDallas40 said:
Not a single limit on firearm feature on type in the proposed framework. Womp womp gun grabbers 😂

Only scary part is the bribing of states on red flag laws but it appears they are leaving the specifics up to each state. Money made available for hardening schools also just hope it isn’t tied to the red flag bribe and they are separate slush buckets.
Click to expand...

Patience grasshopper. Our sticky fingers are still coming for your manhood compensating toys .....
 
#22,375
#22,375
evillawyer said:
Patience grasshopper. Our sticky fingers are still coming for your manhood compensating toys .....
Click to expand...
Oh if you somehow manage to pull that off we will both be long gone sister. Even Murphy pointed out it wasn’t a consideration this time.

Read the room sister. More states keep approving constitutional carry, in fact right now it’s a majority, and when Congress finally did act all focus is on the individual and not the implement.

You can dream. But it looks like that’s all it will ever be a dream. Womp womp.
 
  • Like
Reactions: InVOLuntary
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.
Advertisement





Back
Top