Ban military-style semi-auto firearms?

[rushmc 18]

Quote

Quote

>Who's representing the "large number of Americans" here? You and your
>comrades, Mikey.

Keep in mind that the gun nuts represent a small fraction of the US.

Oh really? And here on board, too?

Some of those "gun nuts" on SC are in law enforcement mam.

I own three guns. A shot gun, a 9mm semi auto S&W and a 5.56 AR15

I may get them out three or four times a year and hunt, plink or play. Does that make me a gun nut? I also strongly support all parts of our constitution. Which, by the way, says I have the right to bear arms. Does that make me a gun nut?

"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

[kelpdiver 2]

Quote

>Who's representing the "large number of Americans" here? You and your
>comrades, Mikey.

Keep in mind that the gun nuts represent a small fraction of the US.

Well, if one defined gun nut as a dues paying member of the NRA (or one of the others), there are several million Americans, though this would translate to 1-2%. However, dues paying is only a subset of those of similar inclination.

[kelpdiver 2]

Quote

Nice attempted diversion. The FACT is that in a number of previous threads, which you can easily find with a search, the pro-gunners claimed that the reason for calls for assault weapons bans was NOT functionality (contrary to what you just claimed) but just because they look "scary". It seems that you and kelpdiver both are prone to making up "facts" to suit the moment.

So this is Kallend's newest dirty tricks technique. Call us liars without any actual reference. That way if we attempt to engage, he'll continually claim that he didn't say anything of the sort.

It would appear to be yet another case of him misrepresenting reality. Just like with the Texas shooting.

[Ron 7]

Quote

Reading your posts (and the comrade's ones) leaves a strong impression that weapons are THE part of American life.

And reading your posts show that you have relly no idea what American life is like.... I am reminded of some work I did with some European SF guys. After a week of training we started talking and one of the first questions I was asked was, "Where is all the gunfire?" It seems they (and clearly you) think the US has gun fights all the time.

They were smart enough to listen to the truth and ask questions... you just continue to throw BS accusations.

Quote

Show and convince me of the contrary. I'm prepard to believe you.......

*You* allow every idiot to carry a gun. That, Mike, makes the difference.

This shows you have not listened one bit at all. We have background checks to just BUY a gun in a store, and to carry we have to go through ANOTHER background check, fingerprints...ect. AND WE HAVE DISCUSSED THIS BEFORE. So it is clear you are NOT willing to listen.

"No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." -- Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334

[kelpdiver 2]

Quote

Men, if your laws do not work, it needs a profound constitutional revision.

We've managed to last over 220 years with our constitution. Your country's latest iteration is just turning 20, the western half can perhaps claim to be 60some years old. Those in the eastern side had virtually no freedoms until the fall of the Soviet Union.

Meanwhile, the greater EU is still trying to come up with something lasting. In short, you're in no position to lecture on constitutions, unless you're Swiss.

[Ron 7]

Quote

The FACT is that in a number of previous threads, which you can easily find with a search, the pro-gunners claimed that the reason for calls for assault weapons bans was NOT functionality (contrary to what you just claimed) but just because they look "scary".

Dude... you clearly don't bother to read what I actually write... Preferring to make up things I never said.

I already said that Senator Feinstein ADMITTED to using the pictures in a catalog to ban specific weapons and that Pro gun people latched on to that to make fun of people like you.

Then you took off on a tear saying that anyone that wanted a "scary" looking rifle was immature. I said that most people that want those types of weapons are for functionality.

So you took A, ignored B, and came up with Z. Pretty normal for you, but still pathetic.

Quote

It seems that you and kelpdiver both are prone to making up "facts" to suit the moment.

And yet you do it so much more often than we could learn a thing or two about making up stuff from you.... You truly are the BullS*it master.

"No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." -- Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334

[FastRon 0]

Well- I don't know much about stuff like canopy relative work, and wing loading, but I do know some about guns and law enforcement (24 years.) More laws do not make people more law abiding- it only makes the law abiding, abide more laws... Criminals do not fear the cops much- they know unless they really make a serious mistake- we will not shoot them. They fear the armed homeowner for example, who is NOT held to the same standards of training and behavior.

[christelsabine 1]

Quote

Quote

Reading your posts (and the comrade's ones) leaves a strong impression that weapons are THE part of American life.

And reading your posts show that you have relly no idea what American life is like.... I am reminded of some work I did with some European SF guys. After a week of training we started talking and one of the first questions I was asked was, "Where is all the gunfire?" It seems they (and clearly you) think the US has gun fights all the time.

They were smart enough to listen to the truth and ask questions... you just continue to throw BS accusations.

Quote

Show and convince me of the contrary. I'm prepard to believe you.......

*You* allow every idiot to carry a gun. That, Mike, makes the difference.

This shows you have not listened one bit at all. We have background checks to just BUY a gun in a store, and to carry we have to go through ANOTHER background check, fingerprints...ect. AND WE HAVE DISCUSSED THIS BEFORE. So it is clear you are NOT willing to listen.

Ron, I lived in Northern America for years and am willing to listen. How many years did you spent in Europe?

Your *background check* means what? A quick police check or what? After 24 hrs *you* hand over a deadly weapon to someone who supplied wrong informations - I bought a hand gun in Fort Lauderdale in '00 by just by showing my credit card ...

I listened, dear Ron. Especially to the quality of those background checks. A joke.

It's not accusing the US or its folks. It's just the easiness you guys seem to handle deadly weapons on a daily basis.

OK, I'm German. For me it's unbelievable to carry any weapon in daily life. Sue me.

Christel

dudeist skydiver # 3105

[mnealtx 0]

Quote

OK, I'm German. For me it's unbelievable to carry any weapon in daily life. Sue me.

Christel

So why is it that WE aren't supposed to say anything about European gun ownership, but YOU can say whatever you like about American gun ownership?

Mike
I love you, Shannon and Jim.
POPS 9708 , SCR 14706

[billvon 2,413]

>Oh really? And here on board, too?

Here they might be a little more numerous but are a LOT more vocal.

[christelsabine 1]

Quote

Quote

OK, I'm German. For me it's unbelievable to carry any weapon in daily life. Sue me.

Christel

So why is it that WE aren't supposed to say anything about European gun ownership, but YOU can say whatever you like about American gun ownership?

Mike, *you* do. At every given chance. Joker

Christel

dudeist skydiver # 3105

[Ron 7]

Quote

Ron, I lived in Northern America for years and am willing to listen.

Clearly you are not. We have discussed this many times, yet you still think we just hand out guns like Halloween candy.

My living or not living in Europe has ZERO relevance to US gun laws and US social knowledge. You do notice that I don't spend a great deal of my time with German society? This is 100% opposite of you. I only bring up German gun crimes in relation to you trying to claim Germany does not have any.

Quote

Your *background check* means what? A quick police check or what? After 24 hrs *you* hand over a deadly weapon to someone who supplied wrong informations

If you supplied wrong information, YOU committed a felony. That is already against the law.

Quote

It's not accusing the US or its folks. It's just the easiness you guys seem to handle deadly weapons on a daily basis.

Your posts do not support that statement.

Who do you think knows more about firearms... those that handle them daily or those that have them locked up hundreds of miles away and only shoots them a few times per year?

Quote

OK, I'm German. For me it's unbelievable to carry any weapon in daily life. Sue me.

I have no issue with that.... I DO have an issue when you try to act like the choices WE make are wrong. I don't care if someone NEVER shoots a gun. But they do not have the right to say I can't own one and shoot it.

I don't think anyone that does not want to have one should be forced to have one. However you want to prevent others from owning something you personally don't like.

Which is the more evolved position? Allowing people to choose, or forcing your views on them?

"No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." -- Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334

[christelsabine 1]

Quote

....
Ron, I lived in Northern America for years and am willing to listen.
....
Which is the more evolved position? Allowing people to choose, or forcing your views on them?

Ron, there is a difference. Choose as long as you like - you did not live here and it seems don't know what it means to walk the streets w/o beeing armed - even at midnight. Some teenagers might try to challenge you, they'll use thier fists ... You rarely will hit anyone with a gun.

dudeist skydiver # 3105

[mnealtx 0]

Quote

Some teenagers might try to challenge you, they'll use thier fists ...

So, it's better for the old and weak to be at the mercy of the young and strong?

Mike
I love you, Shannon and Jim.
POPS 9708 , SCR 14706

[rushmc 18]

Quote

Quote

Quote

OK, I'm German. For me it's unbelievable to carry any weapon in daily life. Sue me.

Christel

So why is it that WE aren't supposed to say anything about European gun ownership, but YOU can say whatever you like about American gun ownership?

Mike, *you* do. At every given chance. Joker

Christel

you avoided his point. care to try again?

"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

[rushmc 18]

Quote

Quote

Quote

Reading your posts (and the comrade's ones) leaves a strong impression that weapons are THE part of American life.

And reading your posts show that you have relly no idea what American life is like.... I am reminded of some work I did with some European SF guys. After a week of training we started talking and one of the first questions I was asked was, "Where is all the gunfire?" It seems they (and clearly you) think the US has gun fights all the time.

They were smart enough to listen to the truth and ask questions... you just continue to throw BS accusations.

Quote

Show and convince me of the contrary. I'm prepard to believe you.......

*You* allow every idiot to carry a gun. That, Mike, makes the difference.

This shows you have not listened one bit at all. We have background checks to just BUY a gun in a store, and to carry we have to go through ANOTHER background check, fingerprints...ect. AND WE HAVE DISCUSSED THIS BEFORE. So it is clear you are NOT willing to listen.

Ron, I lived in Northern America for years and am willing to listen. How many years did you spent in Europe?

Your *background check* means what? A quick police check or what? After 24 hrs *you* hand over a deadly weapon to someone who supplied wrong informations - I bought a hand gun in Fort Lauderdale in '00 by just by showing my credit card ...

I listened, dear Ron. Especially to the quality of those background checks. A joke.

It's not accusing the US or its folks. It's just the easiness you guys seem to handle deadly weapons on a daily basis.

OK, I'm German. For me it's unbelievable to carry any weapon in daily life. Sue me.

Christel

You still have not answered my question as to whether or not you consider me a gun nut. Please do so.

"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

[kelpdiver 2]

Quote

Your *background check* means what? A quick police check or what? After 24 hrs *you* hand over a deadly weapon to someone who supplied wrong informations - I bought a hand gun in Fort Lauderdale in '00 by just by showing my credit card ...

Seems improbable, though I'm interested to hear from residents there. In CA, ignoring the 10 day wait, you would need to be a resident of the state with documentation to support that. Resident aliens do have ability to purchase, but I can't speak to the specifics.

what wrong information did you supply?

[kallend 1,635]

Quote

Quote

Nice attempted diversion. The FACT is that in a number of previous threads, which you can easily find with a search, the pro-gunners claimed that the reason for calls for assault weapons bans was NOT functionality (contrary to what you just claimed) but just because they look "scary". It seems that you and kelpdiver both are prone to making up "facts" to suit the moment.

So this is Kallend's newest dirty tricks technique. Call us liars without any actual reference. That way if we attempt to engage, he'll continually claim that he didn't say anything of the sort.

You lost all credibility when you accused me of cherry picking the year 1959 when the evidence of the thread is that JohnRich and Quade chose it, and when given the opportunity to admit your error, you just came on with insults.

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[kallend 1,635]

Quote

Quote

Quote

Quote

Nice attempted diversion. The FACT is that in a number of previous threads, which you can easily find with a search, the pro-gunners claimed that the reason for calls for assault weapons bans was NOT functionality (contrary to what you just claimed) but just because they look "scary". It seems that you and kelpdiver both are prone to making up "facts" to suit the moment.

That's correct - the gun bans ARE largely based on looks and not functionality. Do you have evidence of anything different?

Why do you think I believe anything different?

You said Ron claimed it was due to functionality - I haven't seen that.

.

Here

He just did it again www.dropzone.com/cgi-bin/forum/gforum.cgi?post=3759327#3759327

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[kelpdiver 2]

Quote

You lost all credibility when you accused me of cherry picking the year 1959 when the evidence of the thread is that JohnRich and Quade chose it, and when given the opportunity to admit your error, you just came on with insults.

You engaged in 100% academic fraud there. There's really no getting around it. Cherry picking is looking at the data, seeing the values for 1959 and 2008, and ignoring all the information in between (I doubt you found a source that only listed those two values), but still going on to making a false statement about the trend line.

That someone else picked the baseline doesn't change this. The only defense you've managed to come up with is the claim you didn't cherry pick the dates, ignore the far more important issue about misrepresenting the direction that homicide rates have been taking.

[mnealtx 0]

Quote

Here

He just did it again www.dropzone.com/cgi-bin/forum/gforum.cgi?post=3759327#3759327

Quote

***I think "assault" weapons bans are silly, just as I think people are immature who want to own "scary" looking weapons.

Your ignorance is showing. For Pro gunners, it is not how they look, it is a matter of functionality. For Anti's it is "scary looking" issues based on fear.

And:

Quote

I already said that Senator Feinstein ADMITTED to using the pictures in a catalog to ban specific weapons and that Pro gun people latched on to that to make fun of people like you.

Then you took off on a tear saying that anyone that wanted a "scary" looking rifle was immature. I said that most people that want those types of weapons are for functionality.

I think you read something that wasn't there, John. Ron clearly states that the ban was cosmetics and that pro-gunners choose functionality over looks.

Mike
I love you, Shannon and Jim.
POPS 9708 , SCR 14706

[rushmc 18]

Quote

Quote

You lost all credibility when you accused me of cherry picking the year 1959 when the evidence of the thread is that JohnRich and Quade chose it, and when given the opportunity to admit your error, you just came on with insults.

You engaged in 100% academic fraud there. There's really no getting around it. Cherry picking is looking at the data, seeing the values for 1959 and 2008, and ignoring all the information in between (I doubt you found a source that only listed those two values), but still going on to making a false statement about the trend line.

That someone else picked the baseline doesn't change this. The only defense you've managed to come up with is the claim you didn't cherry pick the dates, ignore the far more important issue about misrepresenting the direction that homicide rates have been taking.

And the trend must be continuing. I heard a news report today that spoke to the declining of crime rates. This at a time when (because of the current admin) weapon (gun) and ammunition sales have reached record levels.

More guns less crime. Courtesy of John Lott. Got any comments on John, Dr.?

"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

[FastRon 0]

O.K. people- relax, pour your favorite adult beverage and simmer down. Looks are deceiving...
Just about anything is a deadly weapon in the hands of someone with the training, ability, opportunity, and intent to use it. 8 years ago some madmen used razor knive to highjack 4 airliners. Everyone aboard... died. So did a lot of others.
Guns are an effective deterrent to being victimized. Cops don't carry them just to balance the radio and make their backs ache.

[brenthutch 388]

during the rodny king riots in LA a Korean shopkeeper protected his property by meerly brandishing a scary looking ar15. No shots fired no one hurt.

[georgerussia 0]

Quote

Ok - what's your experience with being in a close range, self-defense shootout where you can make that estimation?

I took a couple of classes in military. What I'm talking is reaction time which is needed to:

- Understand what's happening, i.e. it is not explosion or fireworks, and not a bunch of cops shooting a dangerous criminal. It is not enough just to hear the sound, you need to look.
- Find cover, or drop to the ground. If you have Army training, this will be a reflex.
- Locate a shooter. This is easy only in movies, and depending on how many other gun owners are around with the guns, it might not be that easy. In fact you might not be able to find him at all.

Five seconds sounds like very good estimation. If you disagree - show me yours.

* Don't pray for me if you wanna help - just send me a check. *