Big Blitz Posted May 16, 2022 Posted May 16, 2022 6 minutes ago, 716er said: This forum is full of replacement theory. It’s a shame. Where? Nowhere. But this board is full of posts by conservatives touting how "red pilled" the minority vote is becoming - and why they should. Where is the white Nationalism? Have a border? Is that white Nationalism? Oh my bad yes, it obviously is. Ban CRT because it's anti American and Communist? Oh absolutely.
K D Posted May 16, 2022 Posted May 16, 2022 6 minutes ago, Gugny said: Well, for one (and at top of mind), mass shootings would be far less severe. That nutjob could go to Tops with a pump shotgun and shoot 10 people easy. Most pumps are 5+1 and then pretty quick to reload. I don't see how that would solve anything unfortunately, especially what happened in this situation 1 1 1
Demongyz Posted May 16, 2022 Posted May 16, 2022 Just now, KDIGGZ said: That nutjob could go to Tops with a pump shotgun and shoot 10 people easy. Most pumps are 5+1 and then pretty quick to reload. I don't see how that would solve anything unfortunately, especially what happened in this situation Perhaps we should get rid of lever action as well. Not much slower than semi-auto. Henry rifle "Load on Sunday shoot all week" Lots of ammo in a Henry Banning semi-autos is not going to fix a thing. 1
Gugny Posted May 16, 2022 Posted May 16, 2022 (edited) 30 minutes ago, KDIGGZ said: I think banning semi-autos is not a realistic outcome. I think other things can be done like needing to take training courses, proving you are not a physical threat by keeping a clean criminal record, ongoing education, common sense laws around background checks and waiting periods, registration, etc. Banning this or that is too extreme and will just cause division between both sides. I think there is middle ground but how can we get there if one side is saying ban and the other side is saying no? Sounds like we are still pretty far apart I agree that banning semi-automatic weapons is a bit of a pipe dream, but I do believe it's what is necessary. And (this is not pointed toward you) to all the people who like to beat the "CRIMINALS ARE GONNA GET THESE WEAPONS EVEN IF THEY'RE ILLEGAL" drum ... no effin sh!t. We all know that. But it's too goddamn easy for any joe schmo to purchase one. Mental illness is one of .. if not the .. biggest plagues our nation faces. And it's also not being addressed properly. Background checks need to be extensive. Applicants' social media activity needs to be reviewed/monitored. As you mentioned, waiting times need to be be appropriately long. There is so much more that can be done if these weapons continue to be available to the general public. But I will always maintain that eliminating them is the answer. Edited May 16, 2022 by Gugny
Niagara Bill Posted May 16, 2022 Posted May 16, 2022 2 minutes ago, KDIGGZ said: That nutjob could go to Tops with a pump shotgun and shoot 10 people easy. Most pumps are 5+1 and then pretty quick to reload. I don't see how that would solve anything unfortunately, especially what happened in this situation The gun type is about power, and hate, and spells success for these nuts. Your simple view is ridiculous, and fails to even consider reality. Russia can kill Ukrainians with hand guns, but they are much bolder with powerful weapons, n-bombs, chems, tanks etc
K D Posted May 16, 2022 Posted May 16, 2022 1 minute ago, Niagara Bill said: The gun type is about power, and hate, and spells success for these nuts. Your simple view is ridiculous, and fails to even consider reality. Russia can kill Ukrainians with hand guns, but they are much bolder with powerful weapons, n-bombs, chems, tanks etc I'm not sure I get your point. Russians don't kill Ukrainians with handguns because close quarters combat is not an ideal attack strategy during an invasion. If you want to limit casualties you will bomb from a distance and then only after the threat is mostly eliminated will you send in ground troops to secure the area. I don't think it has anything to do with power or boldness it's just military strategy. If this guy wanted to kill minorities he would do it with a pump shotgun, a car, a sword, a baseball bat, a knife, whatever he could get his hands on. His AR-15 was already banned by NY state and that clearly didn't stop him 2
Demongyz Posted May 16, 2022 Posted May 16, 2022 5 minutes ago, Niagara Bill said: The gun type is about power, and hate, and spells success for these nuts. Your simple view is ridiculous, and fails to even consider reality. Russia can kill Ukrainians with hand guns, but they are much bolder with powerful weapons, n-bombs, chems, tanks etc If Ukraine didn't give up their nukes, do you think Russia would have crossed the border? I think not. Now we should all give up our guns? 1
Albwan Posted May 16, 2022 Posted May 16, 2022 47 minutes ago, Demongyz said: There are a lot of political movements based on the color of skin. I think everyone should be able to own guns until they shouldn't. This says a lot about me, where I don't give a ***** about color, I care about the health of the nation. The nation is sick. Go somewhere else. plenty of illegals will fill your spot graciously, ya whiner.
ArdmoreRyno Posted May 16, 2022 Posted May 16, 2022 20 minutes ago, Niagara Bill said: The gun type is about power, and hate, and spells success for these nuts. Your simple view is ridiculous, and fails to even consider reality. Russia can kill Ukrainians with hand guns, but they are much bolder with powerful weapons, n-bombs, chems, tanks etc Russians are killing Ukrainians with handguns? What? lol and he’s 100% right. A Mossberg 500 with 00 shot would do more damage than an AR in a room.
Demongyz Posted May 16, 2022 Posted May 16, 2022 2 minutes ago, Albwan said: Go somewhere else. plenty of illegals will fill your spot graciously, ya whiner. I work with lots of undocumented immigrants. that's not what I'm talking about
K D Posted May 16, 2022 Posted May 16, 2022 1 minute ago, ArdmoreRyno said: Russians are killing Ukrainians with handguns? What? lol and he’s 100% right. A Mossberg 500 with 00 shot would do more damage than an AR in a room. i think people watch too many movies where they think a clean shot with .223 will automatically kill someone. a smaller high powered round like that will go right through you and not hit any major organs and 10 seconds later you will be like why am i bleeding? did i get shot? lol. hit someone with some buck shot in close range and you will have a closed casket for sure. now which one is the "assault weapon?" 1
ArdmoreRyno Posted May 16, 2022 Posted May 16, 2022 18 minutes ago, KDIGGZ said: i think people watch too many movies where they think a clean shot with .223 will automatically kill someone. a smaller high powered round like that will go right through you and not hit any major organs and 10 seconds later you will be like why am i bleeding? did i get shot? lol. hit someone with some buck shot in close range and you will have a closed casket for sure. now which one is the "assault weapon?" You mean the subway station in John Wick 2 where they’re shootings at each other with suppressors and no one blinks due to ZERO noise... it’s not true? lol The same people who think movie guns are real life are the ones who want bans on things like silencers. 1
TH3 Posted May 16, 2022 Posted May 16, 2022 6 hours ago, KDIGGZ said: Firearm advocate here. The problem is that if you give an inch they take a mile and neither side trusts each other. Most people are for common sense laws like background checks and waiting periods. The problem is that it doesn't stop there. They have already said they want to ban certain types of guns which by law would then give precedent to ban all guns. The 2nd amendment was put in place for a reason. The government works for us, not the other way around. Government should fear a strongly armed militia and it's supposed to be a balance of power. You want to give the government all of the power? How do you know they will do the right thing when history shows otherwise? This kid had mental problems clearly. Maybe focus on that. A gun is just a tool. A crazy person can do just as much or more damage with a bomb which is much easier to get than a gun The concept that 2A was put in place to let citizens rise up against their government at some point is a myth. 1
K D Posted May 16, 2022 Posted May 16, 2022 Just now, ArdmoreRyno said: You mean the subway station in John Wick 2 where they’re shootings at each other with suppressors and no one blinks due to ZERO noise... it’s not true? lol The same people who think movie guns are real life are the ones who want bans on things like silencers. I was shocked when I was a kid when I found out if you punch someone they don't lie on the ground unconscious for 20 minutes. Now I can't watch John Wick or Fast and Furious movies anymore without saying "oh come on!!!" It's tough getting old 1
K D Posted May 16, 2022 Posted May 16, 2022 7 minutes ago, TH3 said: The concept that 2A was put in place to let citizens rise up against their government at some point is a myth. how so? "A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed." seems pretty straightforward to me. i think there is a myth that 2A supports creation of independent armed militias where as the term "militia" was used to refer to all armed citizens. is that what you are referring to? but 2A definitely was put in place as a check and balance of power. the colonies were fighting the greatest army in the world at the time. they wanted their new government to be a government by the people and for the people, not one that the citizens would fear. a balance of power is crucial to a functioning democracy
muppy Posted May 16, 2022 Posted May 16, 2022 (edited) I've read this and the off the wall thread and this is an observation and reply to @extrahammer who stated this Quote Yeah let's not pretend there hasn't been a rise in these cases and we actually care about it when nothing gets done. Both sides will politick the hell out of this and we will be lucky if there are any real solutions. I think people actually DO care an want to see these attacks stop but the gun lobbies are so strong and pushback from them make any changes in laws very difficult. The part I bolded I agree with. I read this clutching their pearls errrr Guns "but they want to take ALL our guns if we give even an inch" "if we give an inch they will take a mile. This is the part that frustrates me so. Because I don't buy it. To me this is a rote reply to ANY talk of change that stonewalls any meaningful discourse /change between he opposing sides. AS IF there would ever be a law taking all guns away PLEASE @-@ Edited May 17, 2022 by muppy
K D Posted May 16, 2022 Posted May 16, 2022 1 minute ago, muppy said: I've read this and the off the wall thread and this is an observation and reply to @extrahammer who stated this I think people actually DO care an want to see these attacks stop but the gun lobbies are so strong and pushback from them make any changes in laws very difficult. The part I bolded I agree with. I read this clutching their pearls errrr Guns "but they want to take ALL our guns if we give even an inch" This is the part that frustrates me so. Because I don't buy it. To me this is a rote reply to ANY talk of change that stonewalls any meaningful discourse /change between the 2 sides. I personally dont believe this "if we give them an inch they'll take a mile" rhetoric either. AS IF there would ever be a law taking all guns away PLEASE @-@ What makes you so sure that they wouldn't take away guns if given the legal precedent to do so? They have in other countries. One side is saying ban guns so of course the other side is going to dig their heels in. It's the expected response to such rhetoric
muppy Posted May 16, 2022 Posted May 16, 2022 (edited) 3 minutes ago, KDIGGZ said: What makes you so sure that they wouldn't take away guns if given the legal precedent to do so? They have in other countries. One side is saying ban guns so of course the other side is going to dig their heels in. It's the expected response to such rhetoric Because Gun Culture is too ingrained in America and even politically moderate gun owners would rebel and there might well be a civil war. Which would be worse than what we have now. 3 minutes ago, KDIGGZ said: What makes you so sure that they wouldn't take away guns if given the legal precedent to do so? They have in other countries. One side is saying ban guns so of course the other side is going to dig their heels in. It's the expected response to such rhetoric Its expected but I dont buy it...not one bit. I thnk its histrionic and alarmist rhetoric meant to scare gun owners IN AMERICA Edited May 16, 2022 by muppy
Tiberius Posted May 16, 2022 Posted May 16, 2022 1 hour ago, KDIGGZ said: That nutjob could go to Tops with a pump shotgun and shoot 10 people easy. Most pumps are 5+1 and then pretty quick to reload. I don't see how that would solve anything unfortunately, especially what happened in this situation Doubt that. That makes no sense. Next you are going to be sating frisbees could kill that many 3 hours ago, ArdmoreRyno said: Why? What's their culpability in this? Let the jury decide of they provide a product that hurt people or is unsafe. Do mentally ill people seek these products out? Do the gun manufacturers know this? Of course. Gun manufacturers are profiting right now off of this massacre. 11 minutes ago, KDIGGZ said: What makes you so sure that they wouldn't take away guns if given the legal precedent to do so? They have in other countries. One side is saying ban guns so of course the other side is going to dig their heels in. It's the expected response to such rhetoric Dems are not saying ban guns, maybe a few, but most, like most Americans, are for better gun laws to at least keep weapons out of insane people's hands
K D Posted May 16, 2022 Posted May 16, 2022 7 minutes ago, muppy said: Because Gun Culture is too ingrained in America and even politically moderate gun owners would rebel and there might well be a civil war. Which would be worse than what we have now. Its expected but I dont buy it...not one bit. I thnk its histrionic and alarmist rhetoric meant to scare gun owners IN AMERICA And I'm a pretty center of the road guy on most issues but I see a growing anti-gun sentiment from people who probably don't have much experience with guns and just see them as bad because all they know is what they see on the news. if they set a legal precedent to be able to ban guns it would only take one whack-job far left administration to try it and like you said there will be resistance which would not end well for anybody. 6 minutes ago, Tiberius said: Doubt that. That makes no sense. Next you are going to be sating frisbees could kill that many Let the jury decide of they provide a product that hurt people or is unsafe. Do mentally ill people seek these products out? Do the gun manufacturers know this? Of course. Gun manufacturers are profiting right now off of this massacre. Dems are not saying ban guns, maybe a few, but most, like most Americans, are for better gun laws to at least keep weapons out of insane people's hands you doubt he could shoot 10 people with a shotgun? the US army who has access to any guns in the world still certifies and trains with pump shotguns because they don't jam and are more adverse to poor conditions. of course you can kill lots of people with pump shotguns. check out the mossberg 590 a1 or m or the kel-tec KSG among others
Recommended Posts