Ban military-style semi-auto firearms?

[georgerussia 0]

Quote

They've seen TV. If someone made light sabers, I'd want one of them too.

Would you seriously consider getting one for a massacre, or you'd likely use something you already know and familiar with?

Quote

Nonsense.
http://www.thisislondon.co.uk/standard/article-23419742-i-bought-a-sub-machinegun-within-24-hours.do

I'd call bullshit. Could you verify through other sources that this guy indeed was arrested for illegally buying a gun? He admitted the guilt, so he should be serving time already, right?

Quote

More nonsense. It's not that difficult to use a handgun, and it's trivially easy when your intended use is to shoot defenseless lambs at point blank range.

It is not that difficult to drive either. You probably forgot your first attempts on a range.

Quote

Criminals, by and large, do not go to gun ranges to train. Ranges typically ask for ID, have cops around. As you suggest, just shooting in the back alley gets attention. So they get their practice while committing crimes. It doesn't make them less of a threat. It does contribute to the number of bystanders that get shot.

You must be kidding.

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

[kelpdiver 2]

Quote

I'd call bullshit. Could you verify through other sources that this guy indeed was arrested for illegally buying a gun? He admitted the guilt, so he should be serving time already, right?

No, bullshit is your claim that it is hard for people to find guns in a country like England, and that it is too expensive to buy them. It took me 30 seconds to see this obvious counterexample. The best response you got is to go ostrich? There are millions of guns in the UK despite the ban.

Quote

It is not that difficult to drive either. You probably forgot your first attempts on a range.

For a guy who claims to have been trained, this is baffling stuff. I've trained people at the range (typically Canadians). It's just not that hard to get people to decent proficiency at the 7yard range. One session, < 2 hours.

Ron has it right - you have no idea, apparently.

[PeteDSM 0]

Trying to convince antigun zealots the errors of their ways is a waste of time,. they wont change their opinion (religion) no matter what facts you throw at them. In fact they dont mind if countless people are raped, robbed or murdered as long as they can hold on to their ideology, so obiviously these people are not worth reasoning with.

Save your energy!

[georgerussia 0]

Quote

No, bullshit is your claim that it is hard for people to find guns in a country like England, and that it is too expensive to buy them. It took me 30 seconds to see this obvious counterexample.

It took me a little longer to find any other articles about it - and they all pointed to the same source, which doesn't sound very credible, and provides very little information.

Quote

The best response you got is to go ostrich? There are millions of guns in the UK despite the ban.

How many millions?

Quote

For a guy who claims to have been trained, this is baffling stuff. I've trained people at the range (typically Canadians). It's just not that hard to get people to decent proficiency at the 7yard range. One session, < 2 hours.

Depends on a gun, and what you consider "decent proficiency". And I won't believe everyone became proficient in less than 2 hours.

Quote

Ron has it right - you have no idea, apparently.

Then you might want to talk to Ron instead of me.

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

[Ron 7]

Quote

I suppose next you'll be telling us that someone making a straw purchase is a law abiding citizen.

Nope, and I said that until they actually do it, they are not guilty of it. You want to punish based on thinking about doing it. But hey.... Don't let facts and real data influence your own little world.

It is really sad the levels of lying you do. I like you personally, but when it comes to gun topics any personal integrity you have seems to vanish.

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

[Ron 7]

BTW still waiting:

Care to explain to the group how many crimes have been committed with a bayonet?

Care to explain to the group how a flash suppressor on a semi auto makes any difference?

Care to explain to the group why a grenade launcher ban seemed to make sense when Grenades are HIGHLY regulated and care to tell the class how many crimes were committed with GRENADES?

Maybe you could explain how the DOJ said that even before the ban only 3-4% of crimes were committed with the types of weapons banned meant that they should be banned?

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

[Ron 7]

Quote

Now regarding your "proof" and your "facts", please scroll down through all your posts on this page where you replied to me, and point out those where you provided a single reference to a creditable source?

I have provided links and reference REAL world situations. For example you tried to claim that kids like Harris and Klebold would not be able to drive far away and practice using a banned item.... Yet they DID EXACTLY that with explosives.

Then you made that stupid comment about how you could identify the people with CHL's and shoot them first.

You just make up stuff and hope it sticks. All of it 100% wrong.

Quote

Really? This is kinda how you "correct my errors"? So tell me please, what your statement is based on? Have you bought any illegal guns on a black market? Did you follow gun prices in the countries, where they were legalized recently (Estonia, Latvia)?

You keep bitching about facts.... you didn't provide any sources either.

Quote

Looking on the countries where guns are banned you can see that this stops enough people.

Sources? Links? Facts? See you don't provide ANY, yet once you realize you don't have any you bitch the others don't.

Quote

You didn't even understand what I'm talking about. This is CULTURE, there were people who brought up and never seen a real gun in their life. A probability for them to consider a massacre with a gun is much lower just because of that.

Changing your tune? First you said they would have to LEARN to use it.... Now it is about culture? You keep changing your talking points when you are shown to be wrong.

Quote

So are you saying that having a website when an abstract nickname discusses things like a suicide or massacre is basically the same as the real Bobby asking various crooks to find a real illegal arms dealer? You must be kidding.

Actually the police knew it was them.. .AGAIN MAYBE YOU SHOULD KNOW WHAT YOU ARE DISCUSSING BEFORE YOU MAKE CLAIMS OF FACT!

The police were told it was them when they made a threat to another kid. Really, maybe you should know what you are talking about before you start talking.

Quote

In this case you're not paying extra for the gun, you're paying extra for legalization. I wonder why can't you understand this with all your experience.

Well you are 100% wrong. I am amazed you still think you know what you are talking about. I am not paying for legalization, I am paying higher prices based on basic supply/demand curves. Since they can't be made for civilians anymore the supply is fixed, so demand goes up.

Really. You just keep showing you have no idea of what you are talking about.

Quote

C'mon, you should do better than that. Parachute is not a complex device either, nor is a car, but apparently you need training for both.

Please CITE and provide a valid link to back your claim that you need training to operate a firearm.

Quote

They might have been, but since it is legal to drive with a propane tank in a trunk, it wouldn't matter. Second, how many explosives did they explode during preparation versus how many bullets would they have been shot during preparation?

All that information is available IF YOU DO SOME READING. I already know, it is clear you don't.

Besides, you made the claim they would get caught if they tried to travel a distance (since teenagers get into more accidents) to train with illegal weapons... Yet they did and they didn't get caught. So basically you are wrong.

Quote

Just to make it clear: so far you did not prove anything.

I have provide actual proof... You have not provided A SINGLE piece of data. So for you to claim *I* have not done anything when I have and YOU have done nothing is ironic.

Quote

Don't start bragging about something "being proven" just because you wrote a reply. Nobody put you as a judge here, and your opinion worth no more than mine, no matter what you think about it.

It has been proven since I referenced real world examples that proved your theory wrong. Sorry, you are clearly wrong.

I have referenced real world examples.... You have not.

You have made claims without data, I took real world examples and showed your example was wrong.

It is pretty clear you are going to continue to spout crap without data, and when I prove you wrong you are going to continue to claim I didn't provide references.... And like I have said all along... you need to read up on Harris and Klebold and see how stupid your arguments are.... Cause everything you have said is wrong.


But please, don't take my word for it.... Read it for yourself. Then you will see how stupid your arguments are.

You are free to continue this.. but since it is clear you are not capable of providing any data (while bitching at me, when I HAVE) and you will continue to make claims that have already been shown to be BS.... You can continue this on your own.

I have better things to do on Xmas even than try to discuss a topic with a person who is ignorant on the topic, and chooses to remain ignorant while claiming to know it already.

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

[georgerussia 0]

Quote

I have provided links and reference REAL world situations. For example you tried to claim that kids like Harris and Klebold would not be able to drive far away and practice using a banned item.... Yet they DID EXACTLY that with explosives.
Then you made that stupid comment about how you could identify the people with CHL's and shoot them first.

You just make up stuff and hope it sticks. All of it 100% wrong.

Dude, you did not provide a single link in at least last three posts at all. And nothing you provided could even be considered a reference. Same as if I mention Marx, it will not be a reference as well. Nor did I say that they would not be able to drive far away, nor you seem to understand the difference between driving with an illegal gun and driving with a legal propane tank.

Quote

You keep bitching about facts.... you didn't provide any sources either.

I'm not the one who claimed here that he "provided facts and data that proved I am wrong". You said it more than once, and when I asked you to show all those facts and data, you're trying to turn the question back instead?

So far as I see it, gun nuts are not different from Brady types at all, and they definitely deserve each others.

Quote

Sources? Links? Facts? See you don't provide ANY, yet once you realize you don't have any you bitch the others don't.

That's my opinion, which is based on personal experience - I actually lived in some of those countries for over 20 years. And unlike you I do not claim my opinion to be facts.

Quote

Changing your tune? First you said they would have to LEARN to use it.... Now it is about culture? You keep changing your talking points when you are shown to be wrong.

Dude, so far you have never shown me being wrong, you only bragging about it. And read my post again, you're now arguing with your interpretation of my words, which is just silly.

Quote

Actually the police knew it was them.. .AGAIN MAYBE YOU SHOULD KNOW WHAT YOU ARE DISCUSSING BEFORE YOU MAKE CLAIMS OF FACT!
The police were told it was them when they made a threat to another kid. Really, maybe you should know what you are talking about before you start talking.

*sigh* this becomes boring. What is your point here? Anyone who has a website discussing suicide or massacre, should be immediately arrested?

Quote

Besides, you made the claim they would get caught if they tried to travel a distance (since teenagers get into more accidents) to train with illegal weapons... Yet they did and they didn't get caught. So basically you are wrong.

I suggest you practice your reading first, and then you may understand the difference between what I wrote, and what you're writing here. Then we might talk. Have a nice day.

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

[georgerussia 0]

A short summary so far:

1. Despite some gun owner claims about "plenty" of cases when an armed average Joe stopped a school shooting, the total number of references provided so far was 4 (four). Only two of those cases would qualify as shooting was actually stopped, two others don't. Four out of 45 school shootings during last ten years does not sound impressive at all. The only case it describes when a gun owner actually shoot the attacker (i.e. used a gun) happened in Israel.

2. Apparently some gun owners (Ron notably) tend to believe than if anti-gun laws do not prevent 100% of gun crime, then those laws are useless, and should be lifted. Somehow they do not want to consider in a similar way other "anti" laws, banning a specific behavior like DUI or rape. Using their logic, it is obvious the laws against rape or DUI "do not work" - there are still rapes and drunk drivers - so those laws should be repealed as well.

3. There seems to be little or even no difference between gun nuts and anti-gun nuts (aka Brady). Same arguments, some logic (actually lack of).

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

[brenthutch 388]

Clearly you are making this up as you go along. You have no idea of what you are talking about.

[georgerussia 0]

Quote

Clearly you are making this up as you go along. You have no idea of what you are talking about.

Very clever and informative post, full of facts and references.

This is exactly what I mean when I say you're no different from Brady guys.

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

[brenthutch 388]

I am sorry, you just sound like a lot of posers I have met in my time. "Yeh I was a Navy SEAL and I rappeled out of a c130 into a ch47" Fill me in on your background and you qualifications and we can go from there.

[georgerussia 0]

Quote

Fill me in on your background and you qualifications and we can go from there.

Why? Such a request typically comes from someone who cannot or does not want discuss the posts, and would like to discuss the poster instead.

And just out of curiosity - I listed three items in the post you initially replied to. What kind of background you're looking for regarding those three items? Ability to search Internet or read Wikipedia?

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

[brenthutch 388]

As for me. My dad took me hunting from before I can recall, I carried a stiick as if it was a gun for years before I got my first Red Ryder BB gun. I had to treat it as if it were loaded all of the time. WHen I joined the Army those practices were validated and reinforced. Ranger school and other classes in close quarters combat reinforced that understanding. Now I understand that a gun is just a tool. There is nothing special about a 30 round mag in an m4 with a nvd and a supressor. (as cool as it is) It is just a tool to influance the situation. Anyone who gets rapped around bayonets, flash supressors and the like is an amature that has no idea what they are talking about. Truth be told, the bummper of a car and my Jboots influanced a conflict much more then my m16 ever did. The Human brain is much more deadly that any machine gun or assult rifle.
Case in point: 50 cal. sniper rifle = o people killed in the US. Box cutters = more than 3000 people killed in the US. And to drive the point home the dudes that caused 9/11 also caused Iraq and Afganistan, resulting in many more deaths and the lose of treasure and standing in the world. Look at the big picture folks, dont major in the minors

[brenthutch 388]

Ok Iraq was bush's wet dream. But he would never have been able to do it if it was not for 911.

[georgerussia 0]

Quote

As for me. My dad took me hunting from before I can recall, I carried a stiick as if it was a gun for years before I got my first Red Ryder BB gun.
...

So how exactly this is relevant to the post you replied? It requires zero experience with guns to compare the numbers of shootings in USA versus Europe, which serves as a proof that gun ban works to reduce gun crime. Of course, Ron would claim it does not work at all, since the number of gun crimes Europe is not zero, but for any reasonable person a 10x reduction in the number of crimes means that the ban works. It also requires zero experience with guns to see that only few of those school shootings were stopped by an armed average Joe with a gun. That was the main point of my post you replied, and I do not see how your personal gun experience could be relevant there.

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

[Amazon 7]

Quote

Quote

As for me. My dad took me hunting from before I can recall, I carried a stiick as if it was a gun for years before I got my first Red Ryder BB gun.
...

So how exactly this is relevant to the post you replied? It requires zero experience with guns to compare the numbers of shootings in USA versus Europe, which serves as a proof that gun ban works to reduce gun crime. Of course, Ron would claim it does not work at all, since the number of gun crimes Europe is not zero, but for any reasonable person a 10x reduction in the number of crimes means that the ban works. It also requires zero experience with guns to see that only few of those school shootings were stopped by an armed average Joe with a gun. That was the main point of my post you replied, and I do not see how your personal gun experience could be relevant there.

Does the gun "crime" in Europe in the 90's count in the overall count?

Last I checked...Slovenia .... Croatia... Serbia... Bosnia... Kosovo.. Chechnya...Georgia. All of those are in Europe. Seems like a whole lot of people died of lead poisioning there that needs to be added. Personally.... I think they have us beat in raw numbers of dead people.

[brenthutch 388]

So lets be clear you are baffeled by fire armes and have now idea what you are talking about. Thank you for clearing that up.

Let me take the example of my little state of PA. In the city of Phillidelphia guns are not allowed and the murder rate by guns is the highest in the state. In the counties of south western PA guns out number people by 3 to 1 and the crime rate is the lowest in the state. Guns are just a tool. Just becaus you are confused by and dont understand that tool dont take it out on those that do.

[georgerussia 0]

Quote

Does the gun "crime" in Europe in the 90's count in the overall count?

Sure, as long as the period is not fine-tuned to include or exclude something.

Quote

Last I checked...Slovenia .... Croatia... Serbia... Bosnia... Kosovo.. Chechnya...Georgia. All of those are in Europe.

I don't exactly know the situation in some of those places, but in Chechnya (and some surrounding regions) the guns were, and are de-facto legal. This means you can go around with armed AK, and if the local police knows you, they will just ignore you. In Georgia they had pretty much a civil war, and the government actually mobilized the people, and gave them guns, and obviously nobody enforced any laws against guns. Nor I believe those laws were enforced in Serbia or Kosovo when they had a civil war.

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

[Amazon 7]

Quote

Quote

Does the gun "crime" in Europe in the 90's count in the overall count?

Sure, as long as the period is not fine-tuned to include or exclude something.

Quote

Last I checked...Slovenia .... Croatia... Serbia... Bosnia... Kosovo.. Chechnya...Georgia. All of those are in Europe.

I don't exactly know the situation in some of those places, but in Chechnya (and some surrounding regions) the guns were, and are de-facto legal. This means you can go around with armed AK, and if the local police knows you, they will just ignore you. In Georgia they had pretty much a civil war, and the government actually mobilized the people, and gave them guns, and obviously nobody enforced any laws against guns. Nor I believe those laws were enforced in Serbia or Kosovo when they had a civil war.

Seems to me.. that trying to tout how safe it is in Europe with all the controls they have on guns.. sort of flies in the face of some of the reality of recent history.

[georgerussia 0]

Quote

So lets be clear you are baffeled by fire armes and have now idea what you are talking about. Thank you for clearing that up.

If it makes you feel better - your pleasure. The point you just made is as ridiculous as Christians saying that you cannot discuss the Bible if you're not following Jesus.

Quote

Let me take the example of my little state of PA. In the city of Phillidelphia guns are not allowed and the murder rate by guns is the highest in the state.

There tend to be more crimes in large cities, so no wonder. If you, however, look for example here (scroll down for "murders"), you'd see that Philadelphia is surrounded by Oklahoma City and Oakland. And the worst one is New Orleans. Aren't guns allowed there too? :)

In the counties of south western PA guns out number people by 3 to 1 and the crime rate is the lowest in the state. Guns are just a tool.

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

[georgerussia 0]

Quote

Seems to me.. that trying to tout how safe it is in Europe with all the controls they have on guns.. sort of flies in the face of some of the reality of recent history.

That's what I've said - there is, or was no gun control in those regions you mentioned. I don't even know if guns were, or are, banned at all in former Yugoslavia.

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

[brenthutch 388]

You are making my point, it is not the guns. it is the situation. The variable is not who has guns and who does not, it is the underlying social economic political that drives the violence.

[georgerussia 0]

Quote

You are making my point, it is not the guns. it is the situation. The variable is not who has guns and who does not, it is the underlying social economic political that drives the violence.

And what "underlying social economic political" (what's that?) drives that in USA? It's not like all shootings happen in Detroit.

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

[rushmc 18]

Quote

Quote

You are making my point, it is not the guns. it is the situation. The variable is not who has guns and who does not, it is the underlying social economic political that drives the violence.

And what "underlying social economic political" (what's that?) drives that in USA? It's not like all shootings happen in Detroit.

You could answer this question yourself very easily. Inner city, gan murders and drug murder are the largest part of those dieing here (no, not all)

Do a little digging. You may come to understand the point better.

And school shooting in reality have declined. The reporting of those that do happen have just become more sensationalistic in nature.

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