Gun control debate (merged)

#24,453
#24,453
luthervol said:
To me it's more like the people on here who comment on public education without ever having spent a minute working in public education.
I know as much, if not more, about the working of guns as most on here know about the workings of public education. The only difference is that I admit it. And our opinions are equally valid.....however you wish to access that.
Click to expand...
Most of them have spent at least 12 years in public education. Many also have children in public schools, and others are engaged going to meetings and other public events of the school systems. I am betting that is far more exposure than your time with guns, it's more than mine.
 
  • Like
Reactions: GroverCleveland, Rickyvol77 and hog88
#24,455
#24,455
hndog609 said:
I pretty much never bother to address you directly anymore, it's generally a waste of time, but this is a fantastic example of what I referenced earlier.

It'd be a daunting task to figure out exactly how many semi's were actually in circulation at any specific point but I do know between the 1905 & 1907 Winchesters (JUST those two by the way) approached 100K back when the nation was a couple hundred million less in population.

But even that's not your real failing in that retort. My express observation in the post to which you originally replied was the extraordinary amount of ignorance many people, particularly on the left/anti side of the equation, have about the very thing they're discussing. You trying to push some extrapolation about number of units* at any given time in circulation does absolutely jack all to refute the observation that was made, which remains just as accurate. Thanks for proving MY point.

*You might want to consider that the proliferation of semi-autos is nothing more than the wholly normal and understandable progression of simple improvements. We aren't driving Model T's anymore and firearms can self-load. And for a long, long time now. Autos have become (again, for a long time now) utterly ubiquitous as their cost has come down and reliability and utility have gone up. This is at the core of why the antis are such easy marks for being made fun of with the whole "weapons of war" or "deer don't wear kevlar"/etc. They simply can't get it through their poor little pointy heads that a modern semi-auto is literally, literally, just a modern rifle.
Click to expand...
And you once again prove my point. You, and other self proclaimed experts, throw out pieces of data that in isolation is relatively meaningless and do not have the additional knowledge needed to make it meaningful.
 
#24,456
#24,456
luthervol said:
And you once again prove my point. You, and other self proclaimed experts, throw out pieces of data that in isolation is relatively meaningless and do not have the additional knowledge needed to make it meaningful.
Click to expand...

What? All you have have to do is look at the cities with the strictest gun laws and see what the results are. It’s that simple. You can deny can those facts but it just further proves how deranged and ignorant you are on the subject and pretty much everything else you chime in on.
 
  • Like
Reactions: InVOLuntary
#24,457
#24,457
luthervol said:
And you once again prove my point. You, and other self proclaimed experts, throw out pieces of data that in isolation is relatively meaningless and do not have the additional knowledge needed to make it meaningful.
Click to expand...
Facts like those most deadly guns ever, semi auto rifles, including the AR15, kill about 200 people a year in the states.

And that no matter how much the number of semi auto rifles go up the number of associated deaths dont actually rise with it proportionally.

That's the type of fact that should matter to you, but it gets brushed off.
 
  • Like
Reactions: kiddiedoc
#24,460
#24,460
luthervol said:
And you once again prove my point. You, and other self proclaimed experts, throw out pieces of data that in isolation is relatively meaningless and do not have the additional knowledge needed to make it meaningful.
Click to expand...

Oh, please enlighten us with your wealth of knowledge on the subject. $hi++ing your pants while sucking your thumb in the parking lot is not a valid response.
 
  • Like
Reactions: StarRaider and hog88
#24,461
#24,461
luthervol said:
And you once again prove my point. You, and other self proclaimed experts, throw out pieces of data that in isolation is relatively meaningless and do not have the additional knowledge needed to make it meaningful.
Click to expand...

I'm proving nothing other than apparently you can't even read. The post to which you originally replied clearly and unambiguously laid out how profound ignorance on a firearm related topic (semi auto rifles) directly translates into huge swaths of ignorance in addressing those items. There is no "piece of data" you dishonest cretin. Literally anything and everything uttered by you or anyone else that presents X non-NFA rifle as some kind of newfangled device of mass destruction/weapon of war/you can't hunt with it/etc is, AT BEST, flaunting exactly the kind of ignorance I and others have been discussing. The only other option is outright lying.

I will say again (and for the last time as I've now remembered why it's such a waste of time to engage with you) any semi auto you name, regardless of platform, is as a matter of general (detachable magazine fed semi auto) function no different than what we've had in the civilian market here for over a century. That's no "data point". That's an all inclusive/across the board fact that makes a liar of any person/anywhere/anytime that tries to portray them as anything else.
 
  • Like
Reactions: McDad
#24,462
#24,462
hndog609 said:
I'm proving nothing other than apparently you can't even read. The post to which you originally replied clearly and unambiguously laid out how profound ignorance on a firearm related topic (semi auto rifles) directly translates into huge swaths of ignorance in addressing those items. There is no "piece of data" you dishonest cretin nimrod. Literally anything and everything uttered by you or anyone else that presents X non-NFA rifle as some kind of newfangled device of mass destruction/weapon of war/you can't hunt with it/etc is, AT BEST, flaunting exactly the kind of ignorance I and others have been discussing. The only other option is outright lying.

I will say again (and for the last time as I've now remembered why it's such a waste of time to engage with you) any semi auto you name, regardless of platform, is as a matter of general (detachable magazine fed semi auto) function no different than what we've had in the civilian market here for over a century. That's no "data point". That's an all inclusive/across the board fact that makes a liar of any person/anywhere/anytime that tries to portray them as anything else.
Click to expand...

FIFY
 
  • Like
Reactions: hndog609
#24,465
#24,465
Chicago used to be a peaceful cosmopolitan utopia until all the bumpkins from Peoria and Springfield brought guns to town. They didn’t want to shoot each other but the hillbillies made them do it. Sad!
 
  • Like
Reactions: NCFisher and Rickyvol77
#24,466
#24,466
What Luther is doing is not identifying the actually problem, matter of fact, he doesn't even want to acknowledge it as he clearly said. Well, being an expert on something that isn't the problem, isn't going to solve the problem.

Its like people complaining that lack of housing is putting people on the streets, when the reality is something completely different.

San Francisco right now (Homeless/Drugs)
 
#24,468
#24,468
luthervol said:
And you once again prove my point. You, and other self proclaimed experts, throw out pieces of data that in isolation is relatively meaningless and do not have the additional knowledge needed to make it meaningful.
Click to expand...

So now we are not supposed to believe the science because we don’t have a degree in a specific field and blindly follow the ones that study the subject , write articles on it , paid for by the Feds and gun grabbing leftist organizations ? LOL .. ill pass .
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: VOLS INC.
#24,469
#24,469
bnhunt said:
Apples to oranges comparison. And you actually think arming more people will create less gun violence? That seems completely counter-intuitive to me.
Click to expand...

Yet, after a three year peak in the early 1980s and then a last four year peak in the early 1990s, the murder rate halved. Murder does not rise and fall in a vacuum and was accompanied by large decline in all violent crime. We literally have murder & robbery rates not seen since the 1960s, burglary rates much lower than any in the period, and steadily declining rates of rape, agg. assault, larceny/theft, etc. United States Crime Rates 1960 t0 2019

It's estimated that about 80 million guns were in circulation in 1960, and nearly 350 million in 2012. How Many Guns Are There in America? - The Truth About Guns Today the estimate is more than 400 million, with between 40-50 million being acquired in just the last three years.

In the last three decades concealed carry laws have become ubiquitous nationally. Counter-intuitive or not, more guns have not resulted in more murder or violent crime; obviously we have much less of both.
 
  • Like
Reactions: hog88 and StarRaider
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.
Advertisement





Back
Top