Your stance on gun control?

[Empire of Demonia]

This makes no sense at all.

I don't see how it doesn't make sense unless you are under the assumption that possessing a firearm is the only way to protect yourself.

So you are saying if a crimanal has a gun and is trying to kill you, you are sopost run at him with a knife and get shot in the face dead or run away and probaly get shot in the back and bleed to death !!!

[Empire of Demonia]

1. She is 130 pounds facing against as what she describes a man thats bigger and stronger than her, being slighly muscular, and actually snatching the purse from her.

2. Kick him in the face? Really? Dude, she was a 19 yr old on her junior year. Not a goddamn blackbelt. And I've seen street thugs get arrested for stupid shit on TruTV but I know that none of them would leave themselves exposed like that, not even for a few dollar bills lying on the floor.

3. Yes, I gave her sufficient training. Not just with handguns but with a rifle and a shotgun. She now uses a Glock 34 that she bought herself.

4. You cant deny it. Guns are another efficient way of protecting your life when the need arises.

One doesn't need to be a blackbelt to sufficiently defend themselves bare-handed. Soccer-kicking somebody requires no effort at all. And it might not be bent over, but odds are the mugger will be looking at the cash on the ground, if that's what they're really after.

And I'll concede that a firearm is the most lethal and final form of self-defense. Efficient? Best? That's debatable given the circumstances.

And I've trained a few people how to shoot properly, how about you walk me through how you trained your friend, step by step. What did you go over, what drills, maintenance tips, stuff like that. Assume that I've had no experience with firearms at all and go from there.

What about crimanals who are on substances like PCP and bath salts you realy expect to keep some one down whos on that kind of drugs with out either 1 puting them down permanatly with a gun of sorts or 2 being a blackbelt grade martal artist!!!

[Our Most Resplendent Goddess Sen]

I would sleep with a loaded handgun or shotgun at my side

I would sleep with a loaded handgun

with a loaded

loaded

Yeah, sure! I'd TOTALLY leave the bullets in the chamber of a weapon when I'm not using it, especially when ITS SO CLOSE TO ME!

Honestly, that is extremely dangerous, life-threatening to say the least. DO NOT DO THAT.

There is this device on firearms known as a "safety", which prevents the firing mechanism from operating. If the firing mechanism is mechanically prevented from striking the primer, the gun won't discharge. Additionally, you can keep a weapon loaded without a round being chambered or the firing mechanism charged.

We keep a few loaded firearms at various places in the house. Keeping a firearm around for emergencies is kind of completely useless if it's not actually ready to go when you need it.

[Northern Dominus]

One doesn't need to be a blackbelt to sufficiently defend themselves bare-handed. Soccer-kicking somebody requires no effort at all. And it might not be bent over, but odds are the mugger will be looking at the cash on the ground, if that's what they're really after.

And I'll concede that a firearm is the most lethal and final form of self-defense. Efficient? Best? That's debatable given the circumstances.

And I've trained a few people how to shoot properly, how about you walk me through how you trained your friend, step by step. What did you go over, what drills, maintenance tips, stuff like that. Assume that I've had no experience with firearms at all and go from there.

What about crimanals who are on substances like PCP and bath salts you realy expect to keep some one down whos on that kind of drugs with out either 1 puting them dow permanatly with a gun of sorts or 2 being a blackbelt grade martal artist!!!

And are you willing to put the range time in to get familiar with not only your weapon but your natural shooting position and to compensate for heartrate, respiration, muscle drift and other factors which could compromise your aim? Are you willing to intentionally raise your heartrate and respiration, mimic the physiological symptoms of adrenaline in order to experience firing under those conditions?

And if you're unwilling to truly familiarize yourself with your firearm and what it takes to shoot quickly and accurately, are you willing to submit to the consequences if you get it horribly wrong? For example if you get accosted, draw, and panic-fire, and end up killing not only the hypothetical PCP-enhanced criminal but a child in the apartment building across the street that was hit when a bullet from your gun went through their window and into his chest, piercing his heart?

[Vareiln]

What about crimanals who are on substances like PCP and bath salts you realy expect to keep some one down whos on that kind of drugs with out either 1 puting them dow permanatly with a gun of sorts or 2 being a blackbelt grade martal artist!!!

And are you willing to put the range time in to get familiar with not only your weapon but your natural shooting position and to compensate for heartrate, respiration, muscle drift and other factors which could compromise your aim? Are you willing to intentionally raise your heartrate and respiration, mimic the physiological symptoms of adrenaline in order to experience firing under those conditions?

And if you're unwilling to truly familiarize yourself with your firearm and what it takes to shoot quickly and accurately, are you willing to submit to the consequences if you get it horribly wrong? For example if you get accosted, draw, and panic-fire, and end up killing not only the hypothetical PCP-enhanced criminal but a child in the apartment building across the street that was hit when a bullet from your gun went through their window and into his chest, piercing his heart?

That is the most unlikely of unlikely scenarios.

[Veceria]

Yeah, sure! I'd TOTALLY leave the bullets in the chamber of a weapon when I'm not using it, especially when ITS SO CLOSE TO ME!

Honestly, that is extremely dangerous, life-threatening to say the least. DO NOT DO THAT.

There is this device on firearms known as a "safety", which prevents the firing mechanism from operating. If the firing mechanism is mechanically prevented from striking the primer, the gun won't discharge. Additionally, you can keep a weapon loaded without a round being chambered or the firing mechanism charged.

We keep a few loaded firearms at various places in the house. Keeping a firearm around for emergencies is kind of completely useless if it's not actually ready to go when you need it.

Sig Sauer P-series cannot into safety, though, for example .__.

[Northern Dominus]

And are you willing to put the range time in to get familiar with not only your weapon but your natural shooting position and to compensate for heartrate, respiration, muscle drift and other factors which could compromise your aim? Are you willing to intentionally raise your heartrate and respiration, mimic the physiological symptoms of adrenaline in order to experience firing under those conditions?

And if you're unwilling to truly familiarize yourself with your firearm and what it takes to shoot quickly and accurately, are you willing to submit to the consequences if you get it horribly wrong? For example if you get accosted, draw, and panic-fire, and end up killing not only the hypothetical PCP-enhanced criminal but a child in the apartment building across the street that was hit when a bullet from your gun went through their window and into his chest, piercing his heart?

That is the most unlikely of unlikely scenarios.

Is it? How many kids have been senselessly killed in gangland shootings because nobody was really aiming and hit the 7 year old down the block when somebody didn't compensate for recoil? How many hunters per year are killed because somebody shot at movement before confirming? And how many people buy five or six shot revolvers every year for "protection" in built-up areas without any sort of training do you suppose?

Humans are screwups, plain and simple. And when handed a device intended to make killing effortless, the price of screwing up os far too high.

[Empire of Demonia]

And are you willing to put the range time in to get familiar with not only your weapon but your natural shooting position and to compensate for heartrate, respiration, muscle drift and other factors which could compromise your aim? Are you willing to intentionally raise your heartrate and respiration, mimic the physiological symptoms of adrenaline in order to experience firing under those conditions?

And if you're unwilling to truly familiarize yourself with your firearm and what it takes to shoot quickly and accurately, are you willing to submit to the consequences if you get it horribly wrong? For example if you get accosted, draw, and panic-fire, and end up killing not only the hypothetical PCP-enhanced criminal but a child in the apartment building across the street that was hit when a bullet from your gun went through their window and into his chest, piercing his heart?

That is the most unlikely of unlikely scenarios.

You know what i give up, I dont even know why I try to talk sence into thease anti gun fanaticts its like trying to pull teeth from a headless chicken even if it had a head theres no teeth to be found so im don with this forum!!!

[Empire of Demonia]

That is the most unlikely of unlikely scenarios.

Is it? How many kids have been senselessly killed in gangland shootings because nobody was really aiming and hit the 7 year old down the block when somebody didn't compensate for recoil? How many hunters per year are killed because somebody shot at movement before confirming? And how many people buy five or six shot revolvers every year for "protection" in built-up areas without any sort of training do you suppose?

Humans are screwups, plain and simple. And when handed a device intended to make killing effortless, the price of screwing up os far too high.

So why dont your genes spliced so you can proudly call your self somthing else you dip shit!!!

[Bafuria]

There seems to be some level of misunderstanding on both sides of the gun control argument. Allow me to dispel some myths using not only reason, but unbiased statistics.

1. More guns = More murders

That's not entirely true.

If we rank the Top 5 countries by household gun ownership rate it breaks down as follows:

United States: 39%
Norway: 32%
Canada: 29.1%
Switzerland: 27.2%
Finland: 23.2%
http://www.allcountries.org/gun_ownership_rates.html

These are the most recent numbers I could find, they are from the early 1990's
Let's compare the household gun ownership rates to the murder rate of each country the year the earlier statistics were found

1st United states: 9.5
5th Norway: 1.0
3rd Canada: 2.6
4th Switzerland: 1.16 (1995)
2nd Finland: Finland: 2.9

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_co ... cade#1990s

Yes this is a small sample, but it does tell us that the relationship between guns and homicide rates is not linear.
So why does America have such a high homicide rate?
The reason is actually well known among Criminologists, but is for some reason not known to the general public.

High Income inequality, great cultural diversity and poor social cohesion.

Firearms homicide rates are strongly correlated with income inequality levels as well as social cohesion.



http://ac.els-cdn.com/S0277953698000975 ... a6dc6e005d
http://urbanpolicy.berkeley.edu/pdf/HQ_SF82.pdf
http://www.firearmsresearch.org/content ... e_id=3953#

There is however a strong link between household gun ownership rates and domestic homicide and rates. This risk is still practically low however, and unlikely to result in a high homicide rate by itself.
http://aje.oxfordjournals.org/content/160/10/929.full

tl;dr
Guns make killing easier, but if no one has the will to commit murder thanks to progressive social policies that point is moot.

2. I need my gun to defend my family from home invaders!

In 2010 there were 278 justifiable homicides committed by civilians.

During the same year, 1336 people murdered their intimate partner, often with firearms.
You are more likely to kill a family member than to kill the ones who are going to hurt them.

http://www.fbi.gov/about-us/cjis/ucr/cr ... micidemain

3. We need to ban Assault rifles and Assault weapons to prevent postal killings.

This is unlikely work for 2 reasons.

1. The vast majority of mass shootings are committed with Handguns, not self-loading rifles

2. Although self-loading rifles and select-fire rifles can fire up to 40 accurate rounds per minute for a brief period, this rate of fire cannot be sustained due to overheating and is rarely useful to the mass shooter.

If we look at the rate of fire of most mass shootings it is clear that in the vast majority of cases, the perpetrators did not fire any faster with their self-loading rifles than they could have done with a manually operated rifle or shotgun.

Anders Behring Breivik fired 186 rounds over a period of 90 minutes, just over 2 rounds per minute.
Cho Sheung Hui fired 14.5 rounds per minute during his 12 minute shooting. Killing 32
George Hennard shot 44 people, 24 fatally, over a period of 16 minutes during the Luby's massacre in killeen texas, 3 people per minute
Columbine: 0.73 people hit per minute.
etc.
A typical hunting weapon can fire roughly 15-20 accurate rounds per minute.

In other words, the type of gun doesn't matter.
So what makes mass shootings deadly?

1. Location: An enclosed, crowded area ssuch as a classroom, restaurant or a small Island camp have few exits for victims to use and a lot of people for a mass shooter to kill.

2. Response time: The faster the police gets to the scene the better. CHL carriers are unlikely to be there when needed because they don't have the 911 dispatcing them and future mass shooters are likely to wear body armor, making them virtually immune to handgun rounds.

4. Concealed carry will prevent mass shootings and give me the upper hand in a gunfight.

1. Mass shooters adapt to new gun laws, whether they are stricter or less strict.
Both the Aurora and Connecticut shooters were wearing body armor. The only way to penetrate body armor is to use a centerfire rifle. Good luck carrying one in your purse.

2. Your stand a far better chance hauling your ass out of a firefight than sticking around and shooting back.

http://gunstuff-jd.blogspot.com/2012/03 ... ks-in.html

5. Machine guns and anti-materiel rifles are super-dangerous weapons that must be banned. Big guns = Dangerous guns

If criminals preferred more firepower they would use shotguns and rifles rather than handguns and knives.

They don't.

Criminals will pick a compact weapon with poor wounding characteristics, like a knife or a handgun rather than a big powerful weapon like an M60 general-purpose machine gun or an Anti-Materiel rifle.
You just can't walk around with a rifle in your waistband unnoticed and you are certainly not going to walk around with a 60 kilogram M2 .50 cal. machine gun in your waistband.

[Frisbeeteria]

So why dont your genes spliced so you can proudly call your self somthing else you dip shit!!!

*** Warned for flaming. *** Attack the argument, not the player.

[Northern Dominus]

That is the most unlikely of unlikely scenarios.

You know what i give up, I dont even know why I try to talk sence into thease anti gun fanaticts its like trying to pull teeth from a headless chicken even if it had a head theres no teeth to be found so im don with this forum!!!

Except I'm not anti-gun. Banning guns outright is silly and fraught with all sorts of difficulties.

I am however in favor of more comprehensive regulation and requirements upon firearms holders, such as the scenario I posed to you. And since you didn't address it the first time, I shall pose it again:

And are you willing to put the range time in to get familiar with not only your weapon but your natural shooting position and to compensate for heartrate, respiration, muscle drift and other factors which could compromise your aim? Are you willing to intentionally raise your heartrate and respiration, mimic the physiological symptoms of adrenaline in order to experience firing under those conditions?

And if you're unwilling to truly familiarize yourself with your firearm and what it takes to shoot quickly and accurately, are you willing to submit to the consequences if you get it horribly wrong? For example if you get accosted, draw, and panic-fire, and end up killing not only the hypothetical PCP-enhanced criminal but a child in the apartment building across the street that was hit when a bullet from your gun went through their window and into his chest, piercing his heart?

[Aglrinia]

I believe that people frankly need to pass some sort of intelligence tests before they're allowed to purchase a gun for their safety and for the safety of others. Sure even a teenager can operate a gun, clean it, and perhaps even know how it operates; however, they may not be able to maintain emotional stability in their daily day to day routine. While with easy access to a weapon as dangerous as a firearm, that's just asking for trouble. Sadly the second amendment, and NRA have made it so firearms are so deep rooted into American Culture that something like an intelligence and psychoanalytic test are more than unlikely to happen anytime soon.

[The USOT]

I find myself mixed on gun control... Last year I was firmly in the "pro gun" camp. I think though ive inadvertantly become more authoritarian over the last year though (not in the sense of being an authoritarian... just that ive gone up the scale since my semi-anarchistic state ).

Im probably more on the side of banning guns... but im willing to be convinced by either side and thus will be paying attention to this thread carefully

[Bafuria]

I believe that people frankly need to pass some sort of intelligence tests before they're allowed to purchase a gun for their safety and for the safety of others. Sure even a teenager can operate a gun, clean it, and perhaps even know how it operates; however, they may not be able to maintain emotional stability in their daily day to day routine. While with easy access to a weapon as dangerous as a firearm, that's just asking for trouble. Sadly the second amendment, and NRA have made it so firearms are so deep rooted into American Culture that something like an intelligence and psychoanalytic test are more than unlikely to happen anytime soon.

Many people here seem to be very prejudiced against the mentally ill.

Intelligence and mental illness have nothing to do with violence.

[Aglrinia]

I find myself mixed on gun control... Last year I was firmly in the "pro gun" camp. I think though ive inadvertantly become more authoritarian over the last year though (not in the sense of being an authoritarian... just that ive gone up the scale since my semi-anarchistic state ).

I'm probably more on the side of banning guns... but I'm willing to be convinced by either side and thus will be paying attention to this thread carefully

I don't believe I would ever be for completely banning guns (I'm for restrictions.) Simply due to the fact that I believe that, that the government derives it power from the people, and sadly every couple decades some random government in the world will believe that it's citizens derive their power from the government and not the other way around.

I do not own a gun, nor do I ever plan to; however, this thought always rears it's ugly head in the back of my mind whenever the gun control argument comes about.

[Aglrinia]

I believe that people frankly need to pass some sort of intelligence tests before they're allowed to purchase a gun for their safety and for the safety of others. Sure even a teenager can operate a gun, clean it, and perhaps even know how it operates; however, they may not be able to maintain emotional stability in their daily day to day routine. While with easy access to a weapon as dangerous as a firearm, that's just asking for trouble. Sadly the second amendment, and NRA have made it so firearms are so deep rooted into American Culture that something like an intelligence and psychoanalytic test are more than unlikely to happen anytime soon.

Many people here seem to be very prejudiced against the mentally ill.

Intelligence and mental illness have nothing to do with violence.

They do; however, correlate with ones emotional stability and their ability handle stress. You don't often see happy, perfectly sane intelligent people running into a highly populated area shooting up the place.

[The USOT]

I find myself mixed on gun control... Last year I was firmly in the "pro gun" camp. I think though ive inadvertantly become more authoritarian over the last year though (not in the sense of being an authoritarian... just that ive gone up the scale since my semi-anarchistic state ).

I'm probably more on the side of banning guns... but I'm willing to be convinced by either side and thus will be paying attention to this thread carefully

I don't believe I would ever be for completely banning guns (I'm for restrictions.) Simply due to the fact that I believe that, that the government derives it power from the people, and sadly every couple decades some random government in the world will believe that it's citizens derive their power from the government and not the other way around.

I do not own a gun, nor do I ever plan to; however, this thought always rears it's ugly head in the back of my mind whenever the gun control argument comes about.

See that is where I get very mixed oppinions. On one hand I see it as neccesary for a population to be able to defend themselves in case a government ever does go crazy.
On the other hand, I feel I would rather people not need the guns in the first place and have more checks and balances on power...

[Bafuria]

Many people here seem to be very prejudiced against the mentally ill.

Intelligence and mental illness have nothing to do with violence.

They do; however, correlate with ones emotional stability and their ability handle stress. You don't often see happy, perfectly sane intelligent people running into a highly populated area shooting up the place.

Yeah, but tens of millions of mentally ill people did not shoot up a school that day, so it's hardly something that can be clearly linked with mental illness.

Background checks should look for criminal indictments, history of substance abuse and mental disability

[Myglplyx]

[

Should we outlaw bats, bludgeons, knives, and bare fists, too? Because all of those lead to more murders annually than firearm proliferation in the United States. And at that rate, .22 rifles (the most accessible in this country) are among the most commonly used. Mother Jones is a crock.[/quote]


The problem with these kind of analogies is that the primary purpose of a gun is to inflict severe impact damage to a target... living or non-living... there aren't very many other non-destructive uses you can adapt them to do...

Most, if not all, of the other murder weapons used to kill have some other primary purpose and just happen to be adaptable to being killing devices... so the aguement against banning guns because these other items can potentially be used to kill is absurd... you can kill a person with oxygen if you really wanted... anything could potentially be used to kill...

The difference is these other murder weapons the gun cult want to divert attention with have some other legitimate use... and guns don't really...


It's interesting that you actually state that the most commonly used gun to shot people is the easiest to get... which backs the arguement that if guns were harder to obtain there would be fewer shootings... and The American Rifleman has a bias so it's a crock also...

[Our Most Resplendent Goddess Sen]

I don't think that neurotypicals should be allowed to use guns. Look at all the horrible things they've done!

I love how seemingly every time a mass shooting occurs people bring up "mental illness/
disability" as something that should prevent people from owning/using firearms, without even attempting to define what specific conditions should apply. And goddess forbid you mention the inherently murky and subjective nature of the diagnostic process, or the incredible variety of people that end up grouped undee a single one of those fuzzily-defined labels.

Maybe we should prevent poor people from owning firearms. At least you can give concrete statistical evidence for their being far more likely to misuse them.

[Spreewerke]

Bayonets!

You call those bayonets?

These are bayonets!

[Spreewerke]

Plus, there's this:

I would sleep with a loaded handgun or shotgun at my side

I would sleep with a loaded handgun

with a loaded

loaded

Yeah, sure! I'd TOTALLY leave the bullets in the chamber of a weapon when I'm not using it, especially when ITS SO CLOSE TO ME!

Honestly, that is extremely dangerous, life-threatening to say the least. DO NOT DO THAT.

It's not a "would" for me.

Muzzle up for photographic purposes: http://i.imgur.com/ABCcE.jpg

[Bafuria]

I don't think that neurotypicals should be allowed to use guns. Look at all the horrible things they've done!

I love how seemingly every time a mass shooting occurs people bring up "mental illness/
disability" as something that should prevent people from owning/using firearms, without even attempting to define what specific conditions should apply. And goddess forbid you mention the inherently murky and subjective nature of the diagnostic process, or the incredible variety of people that end up grouped undee a single one of those fuzzily-defined labels.

Maybe we should prevent poor people from owning firearms. At least you can give concrete statistical evidence for their being far more likely to misuse them.

I don't know how mental disability is defined in America, but here, people are considered mentally disabled when they are no longer capable of taking care of themselves because of severe mental health problems and are placed under conservatorship.

[Paddy O Fernature]

Bayonets!

You call those bayonets?

These are bayonets!

Pfft, please.