Active shooter - DC Navy yard

[kallend 1,623]

turtlespeed

************For those who want to ban AR-15s, it sure seems to matter, even though rifles are rarely used for crime.

With the exception, of course, of mass shootings in the last few years. So frequent it's almost boiler plate to report their use, which is precisely what happened in this case.

more people get beaten to death by hand than with rifles. Again, you're trying to make public policy on statistical outliers, which is nearly always stupid policy. Even Kallend seems to get this now.



Now? Please pay attention. I have never advocated for a ban on "assault weapons". In fact, I wrote as much in a response to JohnRich when he was still around.

AH, so you want a ban on ALL weapons then.

As I have previously written, only in the hands of convicted felons or nutjobs. However, if the shoe fits....

...

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

[rushmc 18]

I am not shutting up
And I stand by my position

As do many others

the solutions you were brave enough to post once, would have been a ban

YOU have to live with that

And now you will not repeat what your detailed solutions were

Why it that?

Your are a banner and you (and most of the rest of us) know it

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

[Bignugget 0]

Backintothesky

Obviously that's the extreme position I'm talking about

In all seriousness, it is clear that guns (amongst many other things) kill a lot of people worldwide.

So, if you are being serious on here, what do you hope to achieve with a total gun ban and what makes you think it is achievable?

***I think that. But I want to see them executed summarily by firing squad. Specifically a firing squad armed with cordless drills.

It isn't achievable. It's idealistic. You weren't wrong in your original post. The idea that the USA would be gun free IS utopian.

What would I hope to achieve? Less gun violence.

Sure its idealist, but what is so bad about that?


In reality there is never going to be a solution with the gun lobby and our current political system that leads to fewer guns around. Its not profitable. Doesn't mean I wouldn't like to see it.

[Bignugget 0]

You having access to guns scares the shit out of me.

[rushmc 18]

Bignugget

You having access to guns scares the shit out of me.

And you having a voice scares the shit out of everyone

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

[kallend 1,623]

rushmc

I am not shutting up

So, just as before, you can't find a shred of evidence to support your false claim despite the existence of a very effective search function on DZ.COM

Not one shred.

At this point your repeatedly lying about me rises to the point of being personal attack.

...

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

[rushmc 18]

kallend

***I am not shutting up

So, just as before, you can't find a shred of evidence to support your false claim despite the existence of a very effective search function on DZ.COM

Not one shred.

At this point your repeatedly lying about me rises to the point of being personal attack.

State your plan then
Prove me wrong

But I will not wait
You have been asked many times by many here

You
Will
Not
Answer


Because it exposes you

Stop hiding
Prove me wrong
you told me your plan once
why not do it 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

[turtlespeed 212]

kallend

***************For those who want to ban AR-15s, it sure seems to matter, even though rifles are rarely used for crime.

With the exception, of course, of mass shootings in the last few years. So frequent it's almost boiler plate to report their use, which is precisely what happened in this case.

more people get beaten to death by hand than with rifles. Again, you're trying to make public policy on statistical outliers, which is nearly always stupid policy. Even Kallend seems to get this now.



Now? Please pay attention. I have never advocated for a ban on "assault weapons". In fact, I wrote as much in a response to JohnRich when he was still around.

AH, so you want a ban on ALL weapons then.

As I have previously written, only in the hands of convicted felons or nutjobs. However, if the shoe fits....

LOL - Pilfly . . . is that you? Calm down brutha!

I'm not usually into the whole 3-way thing, but you got me a little excited with that. - Skymama
BTR #1 / OTB^5 Official #2 / Hellfish #408 / VSCR #108/Tortuga/Orfun

[masterrig 1]

Bignugget

******
Now do you acknowledge that it is harder to kill 12 people with a cordless drill than it is a shotgun?

stop being obtuse. Of course it's harder. (unless you use a high quality carbide bit and a drill with high torque)

But can you also understand that the same place you buy that cordless drill sells all the materials needed to make a pipe bomb?

The problem isn't with the tools used, it's the violence that is accepted in our society as an acceptable way to get acknowledgement.

Reduce the reporting about individuals that do these things. (cut off their 15min of fame even if it's posthumous) Work to reduce violence in cities across the country (start with highest concentrations of all violent crime). Bring back personal accountability. All these are steps that would help more than further firearms restrictions.


there we go, a reasonable answer.

Of course it is MUCH MUCH MUCH harder to mass kill with a cordless drill than a gun.

Of course pipe bombs are bad, and they are already banned.

No pipe bombs allowed for "home defense"
No "right to bear pipe bombs"

I agree pipe bombs are also tools that make killing easy. They are banned, and should stay banned.

Guns should be banned also.

Will people still use pipe bombs even though they are banned? Sure. Is that a reason to NOT BAN them? No.

Just how, do you propose to get guns out of the hands of gangs, the 'mob' and other bad guys? Banning guns from good, law abiding citizens would make them easy targets.


Chuck

[Bignugget 0]

No more than banning pipe bombs from 'good, law abiding citizens'.

[rhaig 0]

Bignugget

I agree pipe bombs are also tools that make killing easy. They are banned, and should stay banned.

Guns should be banned also.

Will people still use pipe bombs even though they are banned? Sure. Is that a reason to NOT BAN them? No.

how many pipe bombs are used in a defensive manner to prevent violent crimes (including murder) each year??

What about guns? The CDC says “almost all national survey estimates indicate that defensive gun uses by victims are at least as common as offensive uses by criminals, with estimates of annual uses ranging from about 500,000 to more than 3 million per year.”

so in the context of 2012 UCR, the right to use firearms for self defense prevented between 6100 and 36000 murders, between 34000 and 208000 rapes, between 145000 and 875000 robberies and between 313000 and 1.8M aggrivated assaults. This in the context of about 8800 firearms murders in the US in 2012.

So even if you ignore the survey that said 3M defensive gun uses, and go with the 500K to 1.2M numbers, that's still an median of 850000 DGU across surveys, leading to an estimated 10,375 murders prevented by defensive firearms uses.

That right there looks like a good reason NOT to ban guns.

Show me pipe bomb defensive use statistics and I'll be happy to do a similar calculation.

--
Rob

[Bignugget 0]

rhaig

***
I agree pipe bombs are also tools that make killing easy. They are banned, and should stay banned.

Guns should be banned also.

Will people still use pipe bombs even though they are banned? Sure. Is that a reason to NOT BAN them? No.

how many pipe bombs are used in a defensive manner to prevent violent crimes (including murder) each year??

What about guns? The CDC says “almost all national survey estimates indicate that defensive gun uses by victims are at least as common as offensive uses by criminals, with estimates of annual uses ranging from about 500,000 to more than 3 million per year.”

so in the context of 2012 UCR, the right to use firearms for self defense prevented between 6100 and 36000 murders, between 34000 and 208000 rapes, between 145000 and 875000 robberies and between 313000 and 1.8M aggrivated assaults. This in the context of about 8800 firearms murders in the US in 2012.

So even if you ignore the survey that said 3M defensive gun uses, and go with the 500K to 1.2M numbers, that's still an median of 850000 DGU across surveys, leading to an estimated 10,375 murders prevented by defensive firearms uses.

That right there looks like a good reason NOT to ban guns.

Show me pipe bomb defensive use statistics and I'll be happy to do a similar calculation.

Can't use pipe bombs to defend the house.....They are banned.....just like if guns were banned you wouldn't have that statistic....

Of course it gets coupled with the offensive uses.

Just like pipe bomb stats would.

[kallend 1,623]

rushmc

******I am not shutting up

So, just as before, you can't find a shred of evidence to support your false claim despite the existence of a very effective search function on DZ.COM

Not one shred.

At this point your repeatedly lying about me rises to the point of being personal attack.

State your plan then
Prove me wrong



You made the claim. The burden of proof is on you to substantiate it.

It is clear that you can't find a shred of evidence to support your lying claim.

I refer you to my posts of Aug. 30, 2004 and May 10, 2012 (among many others) which support my position.

...

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

[rhaig 0]

Bignugget

Can't use pipe bombs to defend the house.....They are banned.....just like if guns were banned you wouldn't have that statistic....

that's right. If guns were banned, there would be another 10K people killed by them every year(in the context of the 2012 FBI crime reports) because they wouldn't be around to be used for defense.

I'm not surprised you didn't address the facts. It seems to be your MO in this thread. (and for that matter, the MO of most anti-gun folks)

--
Rob

[kelpdiver 2]

kallend

*********For those who want to ban AR-15s, it sure seems to matter, even though rifles are rarely used for crime.

With the exception, of course, of mass shootings in the last few years. So frequent it's almost boiler plate to report their use, which is precisely what happened in this case.

more people get beaten to death by hand than with rifles. Again, you're trying to make public policy on statistical outliers, which is nearly always stupid policy. Even Kallend seems to get this now.


Now? Please pay attention. I have never advocated for a ban on "assault weapons". In fact, I wrote as much in a response to JohnRich when he was still around.

Not usually my style to repost the entirety, but...

Is this proof that Quade and Kallend are the same people? Or is someone acting overly defensively to cover up what has been obvious for years?

[masterrig 1]

That's your answer? for one thing, Law abiding citizens don't keep pipe bombs. They know they are illegal. Why, are you adding 'pipe bombs' into this topic. How often are pipe bombs used in home invasions, car-jackings, robberies, rapes, kid nappings... Looks like you're comparing apples to hand grenades.


Chuck

[linebckr83 3]

Bignugget

Can't use pipe bombs to defend the house.....They are banned.....just like if guns were banned you wouldn't have that statistic....

No shit, you could use a pipe bomb to protect your house, but who would? Of the people who didn't kill themselves making them, many others would kill themselves while using them. Even then, exploding a bomb in your house isn't exactly defending your house... Then the attacker's parents will take you to court for using illegal weapons to kill their pos son. Sounds like a lose-lose all the way around.

"Stop right there! There is a pipe bomb somewhere in this incredibly dark room and trip wires everywhere!"

"Are you coming to the party?
Oh I'm coming, but I won't be there!"
Flying Hellfish #828
Dudist #52

[Backintothesky 0]

Quote

What would I hope to achieve? Less gun violence.

What evidence is there to support that a ban on guns would achieve less gun violence?

And if there was indeed less gun violence, what do you believe would be the effect (or non-effect) on other forms of violence?

Quote

Sure its idealist, but what is so bad about that?

Could there be circumstances where being an idealist is a bad thing?

A kind of "road to hell paved with good intentions" kind of deal?

[rhaig 0]

in all fairness. I was the one that originally brought up pipe bombs.

If we're forced to use cordless drills for self defense as in Bignugget's wet dream, then he needs to recognize that the same store selling his defense weapon of choice also sells components for construction of a pipe bomb.

--
Rob

[Gravitymaster 0]

Backintothesky

Quote

What would I hope to achieve? Less gun violence.

What evidence is there to support that a ban on guns would achieve less gun violence?

And if there was indeed less gun violence, what do you believe would be the effect (or non-effect) on other forms of violence?

***
Sure its idealist, but what is so bad about that?

Could there be circumstances where being an idealist is a bad thing?

A kind of "road to hell paved with good intentions" kind of deal?

Gee, after all, making drugs illegal stopped people from using drugs. No reason to think that outlawing guns would reduce their usage, also.

[masterrig 1]

I think, that's pretty 'stand-up' of you. I appreciate it. I would take a wild guess that every hardware store throughout the country sells the components for a pipe bomb. I was bum-fuzzled by the comment because guns seem to be the weapon of choice and we don't hear that often of pipe-bombs being used.
Personally, I am a big supporter of our second amendment and love the smell of gunsmoke in the morning. This must've been a big thing to our fore-fathers, in that it was listed second after freedom of speech. The thing that really gets me is the way people give knee-jerk reactions to this subject. I wonder... where is the sanity? Banning guns for 'good guys', when the 'bad guys' will still have guns just doesn't make sense. I think, we need to pay more attention to crazy talk or actions of people who just might be a 'problem'. Reporting it after something happens doesn't work.


Chuck

[Bignugget 0]

rhaig

***
Can't use pipe bombs to defend the house.....They are banned.....just like if guns were banned you wouldn't have that statistic....

that's right. If guns were banned, there would be another 10K people killed by them every year(in the context of the 2012 FBI crime reports) because they wouldn't be around to be used for defense.

I'm not surprised you didn't address the facts. It seems to be your MO in this thread. (and for that matter, the MO of most anti-gun folks)


Huh?

The comparison isn't valid.

I am not disputing the statistic that 10k crimes were prevented by using guns.....

You can only have guns used to prevent shit if they are legal.

Just like you can only have guns used to commit crimes if they are illegal.

The 2 are substitutes.

Conversely you can never have a pipe bomb used prevent crime, they are illegal.

Pipe bombs can only be used commit crime.



Removing guns could very well mean those 10k crimes are no longer prevented with guns.

It could also very well mean the 10k murders with guns a year that already happen would have a harder chance of happening.



You are the one not addressing the facts.

The fact is a pipe bomb is ALREADY illegal, for good reason.

Guns need to join.

[Bignugget 0]

masterrig

That's your answer? for one thing, Law abiding citizens don't keep pipe bombs. They know they are illegal. Why, are you adding 'pipe bombs' into this topic. How often are pipe bombs used in home invasions, car-jackings, robberies, rapes, kid nappings... Looks like you're comparing apples to hand grenades.


Chuck

I didn't add them.

One of your gun loving friends did, to show me that murderous people will just use pipe bombs that are easy to make instead of guns when all the guns are gone.

Pipe bombs, cordless drills, and ping pong balls. All equally as deadly, plentiful, and likely to be used in homicide as a gun. Just ask Gravitymaster.


You ban guns for ALL GUYS, not just the good guys.

Hard to tell the good guys from the bad guys when they walk into the store and can buy whatever they want to go massacre 12 people.

You nip it in the bud by not selling to ANYONE.

[Bignugget 0]

rhaig

in all fairness. I was the one that originally brought up pipe bombs.

If we're forced to use cordless drills for self defense as in Bignugget's wet dream, then he needs to recognize that the same store selling his defense weapon of choice also sells components for construction of a pipe bomb.

Again, thats a gun loving friend of yours' wet dream.

gravitymaster is the one who thinks cordless drills are as useful as guns are in killing things.

[masterrig 1]

rhaig and I got that worked-out.

All I can say is, God forbid you are ever the victim of a home invasion or some other violent crime and don't have something to defend yourself with. Hint: never take a knife to a gun fight.


Chuck