What is better, no guns, or more guns?

[Chef Jim]

2 hours ago, Tiberius said:

I'd say that a rifle is much more powerful, dangerous and lethal than a pistol. 

 

As to your second point, I just think you get frustrated very easily with people that counter your usual spew of nonsense, so don't blame me for being a better thinker than you. See "Lake Ontario" thread for an example 

 

Damn you are so right on when you think. How do you do it?  

[Tiberius]

1 minute ago, Chef Jim said:

 

Damn you are so right on when you think. How do you do it?  

Thanks 

[Big Gun]

1 hour ago, Justice said:

Let’s just keep track of the Sudafed. That’s far more dangerous than guns. 

What's your answer to all the gun violence that goes on in Chicago every day?

Edited February 15, 2018 by PeterGriffin

[row_33]

11 minutes ago, PeterGriffin said:

What's your answer to all the gun violence that goes on in Chicago every day?

 

That's a Dem stronghold, nothing to see here, nothing to be brought to account for...

 

[gatorbait]

51 minutes ago, row_33 said:

 

i thought it was practically impossible to ban assault weapons any further.

 

each time they bring up a specific item it is already banned?

 

 

They aren’t banned though. Neither are extended clips or armor piercing ammo. They are actually pretty easy to get if you aren’t a felon and have the cash.

[Justice]

10 minutes ago, PeterGriffin said:

What's your answer to all the gun violence that goes on in Chicago every day?

I don’t have one. I’m not against the 2nd amendment either. 

 

My issue is with ammunition and clips. Those need to be treated like guns. Background checks and maybe even create a database like I suggested earlier to restrict people from buying too many bullets. 

Edited February 15, 2018 by Justice

[LeviF]

2 minutes ago, gatorbait said:

They aren’t banned though. Neither are extended clips or armor piercing ammo. They are actually pretty easy to get if you aren’t a felon and have the cash.

 

See, here's the problem.  "Assault weapon" is a leftist media/politician creation.  As is "extended clip" and "armor piercing ammo."  They're terms used to scare people into complying with gun-grabbing.

[Big Gun]

8 minutes ago, Justice said:

I don’t have one. I’m not against the 2nd amendment either. 

 

My issue is with ammunition and clips. Those need to be treated like guns. Background checks and maybe even create a database like I suggested earlier to restrict people from buying too many bullets. 

and that stops the illegal criminals who don't follow laws how?

[IDBillzFan]

 

18 minutes ago, PeterGriffin said:

What's your answer to all the gun violence that goes on in Chicago every day?

 

Justice blames much of this whites (see below) because they're more violent than any other race. So the immense number black-on-black murders in Chicago really don't count as part of this because, apparently, that's an outlier.

 

3 hours ago, Justice said:

That’s cool. I get it. I really do. But you want to know what? I’m down with that if white people are down with it too. You like to sit up on your high horse and act like you’re the good guys. Newsflash bro. There isn’t a more violent race than the whites. 

[gatorbait]

8 minutes ago, LeviF91 said:

 

See, here's the problem.  "Assault weapon" is a leftist media/politician creation.  As is "extended clip" and "armor piercing ammo."  They're terms used to scare people into complying with gun-grabbing.

The class of gun is an assault rifle, hence the term assault weapons. I have 5 guns. Walther ppx with critical defense rounds in my nightstand at all times for home defense. A shotgun for skeet and birds, rifle for deer, .22 for gators, and my glock .40 in my car because I have a concealed. Don’t talk down to me like you’re the only person who owns or shoots guns.  

[Justice]

2 minutes ago, PeterGriffin said:

and that stops the illegal criminals who don't follow laws how?

They have to buy their ammo somehow, right? My plan won’t completely stop them from getting their hands on it, but I’ll tell you what it will do. It will create loose ends and at the bare minimum at least make it more difficult to purchase them. 

1 minute ago, LABillzFan said:

 

 

Justice blames much of this whites (see below) because they're more violent than any other race. So the immense number black-on-black murders in Chicago really don't count as part of this because, apparently, that's an outlier.

 

I’m not blaming anyone. Simply stating a fact. History backs my contention. 

[Bob in Mich]

20 minutes ago, TakeYouToTasker said:

No, Bob, it's not a problem rising to the level that requires the forfeiture of rights by every US citizen.

 

Again,  one death per 110,000 Americans over the course of their entire lives.

 

That's roughly 400 deaths per year on the very high end.

 

To put that in perspective, somewhere around 100 people die in the US every year from bee stings.  Roughly 45 people die every year from skiing and snowboarding.  The CDC reports that roughly 45 people die per year from tap water that is too hot.  Roughly 200 people die per year falling off of chairs.  Being constipated accounts for approximately 150 deaths per year.

 

Are these also circumstances requiring the suspension of rights?  Where is your outrage, Bob, you cold hearted jerk!

 

If any of the numbers you quoted could easily be lessened by legislation, it would be worth considering.  It is a preventable vs unpreventable issue at the heart of it.  Of course, voluntary risks such as sports are not worth talking about unless those sports are killing non participants.  Most of what you mention otherwise, are not preventable.  Some future shooting may be preventable however if we, as a society, could come up with some reasonable changes...short of confiscating all guns.

 

Those non gun problems you mention are not terrorizing our society either.  Ever increasing shootings are and will do that.  More guns, as we will no doubt have going forward, will likely make things worse.  Again, to say there is no problem here worth considering legislation is extremely cold.

[IDBillzFan]

5 minutes ago, PeterGriffin said:

and that stops the illegal criminals who don't follow laws how?

 

I'd also like someone to explain to me what constitutes "too many bullets."

 

Three? Three hundred? Is this like saying "At some point, I do believe you've made enough money"? 

[LeviF]

1 minute ago, gatorbait said:

The class of gun is an assault rifle, hence the term assault weapons. I have 5 guns. Walther ppx with critical defense rounds in my nightstand at all times for home defense. A shotgun for skeet and birds, rifle for deer, .22 for gators, and my glock .40 in my car because I have a concealed. Don’t talk down to me like you’re the only person who owns or shoots guns.  

 

Oh good, another fudd.  So in order for a rifle to be an assault rifle, it has to be selective fire.  How difficult is it to obtain a selective fire weapon?

 

"Assault weapon" is still a term invented by politicians.  Hence why it's different in different jurisdictions.

[Justice]

2 minutes ago, LABillzFan said:

 

I'd also like someone to explain to me what constitutes "too many bullets."

 

Three? Three hundred? Is this like saying "At some point, I do believe you've made enough money"? 

That’s a good question and one I don’t have an answer for. All I know is it’s hard to reload without extra clips, but I’m sure you’ll have a problem with that too. 

[gatorbait]

1 minute ago, LeviF91 said:

 

Oh good, another fudd.  So in order for a rifle to be an assault rifle, it has to be selective fire.  How difficult is it to obtain a selective fire weapon?

 

"Assault weapon" is still a term invented by politicians.  Hence why it's different in different jurisdictions.

An assault rifle is any rifle used by infantry. Doesn’t matter if they have autos and we have semi’s they are still assault weapons. You come across as extremely ignorant and condescending just so you know. 

[Big Gun]

6 minutes ago, Justice said:

That’s a good question and one I don’t have an answer for. All I know is it’s hard to reload without extra clips, but I’m sure you’ll have a problem with that too. 

You can buy extra anything from anywhere not just a brick and mortar  store. Internet comes to mind, no?

Edited February 15, 2018 by PeterGriffin

[Bob in Mich]

The overall divide in this discussion is that many see these mass shootings as a problem and are hoping a discussion might uncover some ideas to improve the situation.  The other half don't see this as a big problem.   That half is satisfied with the status quo apparently.

[LeviF]

2 minutes ago, gatorbait said:

An assault rifle is any rifle used by infantry. Doesn’t matter if they have autos and we have semi’s they are still assault weapons. You come across as extremely ignorant and condescending just so you know. 

 

Ignorant?  No.  Condescending?  Yes, because you're just another in a long line of fudds who have no real interest in 2nd amendment rights as long as they can shoot durr and try to zero in their .30-06 for 6 hours taking up 3 benches at the range.

[Justice]

Just now, PeterGriffin said:

You can buy extra anything from anywhere not just a brick and more store. Internet comes to mind, no?

Yes and they’d have to follow the guidelines as well. It isn't that hard.