News:

Welcome to week4paug.net 2.1 - same as it ever was! Most features have been restored, but please keep us posted on ANY issues you may be having HERE:  https://week4paug.net/index.php/topic,23937

Main Menu

Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?

Started by emay, July 20, 2012, 09:35:53 AM

Previous topic - Next topic

0 Members and 2 Guests are viewing this topic.

gah

Quote from: McGrupp on July 25, 2012, 02:06:36 PM
Quote from: goodabouthood on July 25, 2012, 02:04:41 PM
Quote from: mirthbeatenworker on July 25, 2012, 01:51:06 PM
Quote from: runawayjimbo on July 25, 2012, 01:33:14 PM
Quote from: goodabouthood on July 25, 2012, 01:01:52 PM
Quote from: V00D00BR3W on July 25, 2012, 09:48:54 AM
Quote from: aphineday on July 24, 2012, 10:30:29 PM
Quote from: rowjimmy on July 24, 2012, 08:56:49 PM
http://wap.myfoxdfw.com/w/main/story/68234137/
But he wasn't being RESPONSIBLE! Responsible gun owners don't do this!





But if the gun wasn't present, it wouldn't have fired. Facts hurt.

Since I think APD is trying to argue with me in abstentia here  :wink:, I guess I'll check back in.

Putting any other objects in the same pocket as a firearm is asking for trouble, and is not something you're supposed to do. And why wasn't the trigger covered? I submit to you that it wasn't the mere presence of the gun in his pocket that caused it to fire; it was his own stupidity and, yes, irresponsibility. This guy was dumb and irresponsible and I imagine he will be charged in connection with wounding those bystanders, as he should be.

Remember when Plaxico Burress shot himself in the leg? Dude had a Glock 23 (not exactly a lightweight pistol) tucked in the waistband of his sweatpants. C'mon man! As long as there are guns (even the most idealistic concede they aren't going anywhere), stupid people will do stupid things with them. I wish that weren't the case but it is.

Neither of which we can control. If only there were something we could control, maybe their access to them? No, no, that's much to rational....ah well.

Heart disease kills 60x more people than guns, why aren't we talking about banning McDonald's or (perish the thought, McGrupp) Wendy's? Cigarettes directly kill hundreds of thousands of people a year; should we ban them? How many lives has alcohol ruined? Well we can't control people being stupid with their consumption so let's just get rid of that too. What if we begin to find out earbuds are leading to an increase in deafness; would you be alright with giving up your iPod?

It's easy to force others to give up a right if you don't agree with it; it's a lot different when they want to take away something you enjoy. And it's almost impossible to get your rights back once you give them up.

should people be allowed to own rocket launchers?  grenades?  tanks? nuclear weapons?

Yes. Yes. NO. Yes.

Only said No to the Tanks because they'd mess with our streets, cause pot holes, require us to widen lanes, etc. The gov't already takes too much of my money for that bullshit. Streets, huh! BULLSHIT! No one needs that nonsense. Last I checked we did just fine with dirt roads.

Streets! Ain't nobody got time for that!

Sweet Brown knows that I'm talking bout! What What!  :hereitisyousentimentalbastard
Sometimes we live no particular way but our own.

mbw

Quote from: mirthbeatenworker on July 25, 2012, 01:51:06 PM
Quote from: runawayjimbo on July 25, 2012, 01:33:14 PM
Quote from: goodabouthood on July 25, 2012, 01:01:52 PM
Quote from: V00D00BR3W on July 25, 2012, 09:48:54 AM
Quote from: aphineday on July 24, 2012, 10:30:29 PM
Quote from: rowjimmy on July 24, 2012, 08:56:49 PM
http://wap.myfoxdfw.com/w/main/story/68234137/
But he wasn't being RESPONSIBLE! Responsible gun owners don't do this!





But if the gun wasn't present, it wouldn't have fired. Facts hurt.

Since I think APD is trying to argue with me in abstentia here  :wink:, I guess I'll check back in.

Putting any other objects in the same pocket as a firearm is asking for trouble, and is not something you're supposed to do. And why wasn't the trigger covered? I submit to you that it wasn't the mere presence of the gun in his pocket that caused it to fire; it was his own stupidity and, yes, irresponsibility. This guy was dumb and irresponsible and I imagine he will be charged in connection with wounding those bystanders, as he should be.

Remember when Plaxico Burress shot himself in the leg? Dude had a Glock 23 (not exactly a lightweight pistol) tucked in the waistband of his sweatpants. C'mon man! As long as there are guns (even the most idealistic concede they aren't going anywhere), stupid people will do stupid things with them. I wish that weren't the case but it is.

Neither of which we can control. If only there were something we could control, maybe their access to them? No, no, that's much to rational....ah well.

Heart disease kills 60x more people than guns, why aren't we talking about banning McDonald's or (perish the thought, McGrupp) Wendy's? Cigarettes directly kill hundreds of thousands of people a year; should we ban them? How many lives has alcohol ruined? Well we can't control people being stupid with their consumption so let's just get rid of that too. What if we begin to find out earbuds are leading to an increase in deafness; would you be alright with giving up your iPod?

It's easy to force others to give up a right if you don't agree with it; it's a lot different when they want to take away something you enjoy. And it's almost impossible to get your rights back once you give them up.

should people be allowed to own rocket launchers?  grenades?  tanks? nuclear weapons?

this was a ser question posed to jimbo, btw.

runawayjimbo

Quote from: mirthbeatenworker on July 25, 2012, 08:49:09 PM
Quote from: mirthbeatenworker on July 25, 2012, 01:51:06 PM
Quote from: runawayjimbo on July 25, 2012, 01:33:14 PM
Quote from: goodabouthood on July 25, 2012, 01:01:52 PM
Quote from: V00D00BR3W on July 25, 2012, 09:48:54 AM
Quote from: aphineday on July 24, 2012, 10:30:29 PM
Quote from: rowjimmy on July 24, 2012, 08:56:49 PM
http://wap.myfoxdfw.com/w/main/story/68234137/
But he wasn't being RESPONSIBLE! Responsible gun owners don't do this!





But if the gun wasn't present, it wouldn't have fired. Facts hurt.

Since I think APD is trying to argue with me in abstentia here  :wink:, I guess I'll check back in.

Putting any other objects in the same pocket as a firearm is asking for trouble, and is not something you're supposed to do. And why wasn't the trigger covered? I submit to you that it wasn't the mere presence of the gun in his pocket that caused it to fire; it was his own stupidity and, yes, irresponsibility. This guy was dumb and irresponsible and I imagine he will be charged in connection with wounding those bystanders, as he should be.

Remember when Plaxico Burress shot himself in the leg? Dude had a Glock 23 (not exactly a lightweight pistol) tucked in the waistband of his sweatpants. C'mon man! As long as there are guns (even the most idealistic concede they aren't going anywhere), stupid people will do stupid things with them. I wish that weren't the case but it is.

Neither of which we can control. If only there were something we could control, maybe their access to them? No, no, that's much to rational....ah well.

Heart disease kills 60x more people than guns, why aren't we talking about banning McDonald's or (perish the thought, McGrupp) Wendy's? Cigarettes directly kill hundreds of thousands of people a year; should we ban them? How many lives has alcohol ruined? Well we can't control people being stupid with their consumption so let's just get rid of that too. What if we begin to find out earbuds are leading to an increase in deafness; would you be alright with giving up your iPod?

It's easy to force others to give up a right if you don't agree with it; it's a lot different when they want to take away something you enjoy. And it's almost impossible to get your rights back once you give them up.

should people be allowed to own rocket launchers?  grenades?  tanks? nuclear weapons?

this was a ser question posed to jimbo, btw.

MBW, don't you know me well enough by now to know that I respond to all questions, serious and otherwise, whether you want me to or not? But I have 3 kids and a wife and I just upgraded to Mountain Lion so I have things to do and sometimes these things just take time. But, since you asked...

No, of course those weapons are not acceptable for civilians because they are used to defend from armies, not intruders. And civilians are not responsible for protecting themselves from invading armies, that is job of the federal gov't (one of the few legitimate ones, IMO). But if a person thinks they need an AR-15 to protect their home and their family and (once again) they are not using it to mass murder people, I believe they are well within their rights to have one. And in case I haven't been clear enough - do I understand or think it's desirable for people to have these weapons? No, and I would never own one for the potential for danger that you all have so adamantly spoken about. But I also recognize that people should decide for themselves what their level of acceptance is when it comes to the unalienable right of protecting yourself. And I do think that guns go much further in preventing violence than anyone opposed to legal gun ownership would care to admit.

And now a serious question to you: do we really have such an epidemic of "assault weapon" violence in this country that we need to be so fearful of guns? Are there legions of people terrorizing the public with their evil "assault weapons"? Or are these atrocities simply extremely infrequent acts by deranged individuals who would likely find another way to terrorize people whether "assault weapons" were legal or not?

Do I like defending the fact that people feel the need to carry weapons with them to feel safe? Absolutely not. But I firmly believe we are all safer when liberty is protected, so that is what I do.

I'll get to Hicks/GAH's point once I get this stupid baby to sleep.
Quote from: DoW on October 26, 2013, 09:06:17 PM
I'm drunk but that was epuc

Quote from: mehead on June 22, 2016, 11:52:42 PM
The Line still sucks. Hard.

Quote from: Gumbo72203 on July 25, 2017, 08:21:56 PM
well boys, we fucked up by not being there.

Hicks

That's the thing though nobody needs a sub-machine gun to defend their home, a rifle or a handgun should be plenty for any sane person.  In terms of the amount of people you can kill per unit time an AR-15 isn't that far off from a rocket launcher, hell it may even be more efficient since you have to reload less frequently.   

As to your second point, if we don't need to be fearful then we don't need guns to defend ourselves. 
Quote from: Trey Anastasio
But, I don't think our fans do happily lap it up, I think they go online and talk about how it was a bad show.

mbw

#199
Quote from: runawayjimbo on July 25, 2012, 09:50:43 PM
MBW, don't you know me well enough by now to know that I respond to all questions, serious and otherwise, whether you want me to or not? But I have 3 kids and a wife and I just upgraded to Mountain Lion so I have things to do and sometimes these things just take time. But, since you asked...

dont give me your excuses. this question was posed hours ago and this delay is unacceptable   :-P

Quote from: runawayjimbo on July 25, 2012, 09:50:43 PM
No, of course those weapons are not acceptable for civilians because they are used to defend from armies, not intruders. And civilians are not responsible for protecting themselves from invading armies, that is job of the federal gov't (one of the few legitimate ones, IMO). But if a person thinks they need an AR-15 to protect their home and their family and (once again) they are not using it to mass murder people, I believe they are well within their rights to have one.

where do you draw the line with what should be used to defend armies and what should be used to defend a home?  what if a whole bunch of people are trying to kill your family.  why can't you toss a grenade at these fuckers?  what if someone is attacking your house from a plane, can't a god fearing responsible american shoot a rocket at it? and i thought were were supposed to have militia in case we need to overthrow our govenment?  what kind of rag tag militia doesn't have a tank?
the 2nd amendment only mentions "arms."  as far as i can tell a rocket launcher is a type of armament.  who are you to say i can't have one?

i say everyone should and can own guns, as long as they are the same single-shot, lead ball, muzzle loaded flintlock rifles which existed in 1791 when the 2nd amendment was adopted.

Quote from: runawayjimbo on July 25, 2012, 09:50:43 PM
And now a serious question to you: do we really have such an epidemic of "assault weapon" violence in this country that we need to be so fearful of guns? Are there legions of people terrorizing the public with their evil "assault weapons"? Or are these atrocities simply extremely infrequent acts by deranged individuals who would likely find another way to terrorize people whether "assault weapons" were legal or not?

yes, we do.  assault weapon and otherwise.  10,000 or so firearm murders isn't enough?  these are everyday acts and not infrequent.
not to mention how many others are shot at, hit but but not killed, or otherwise intimidated with a gun. (52,447 deliberate and 23,237 accidental non-fatal gunshot injuries in the United States during 2000).  how about the 17,352 gun deaths by suicide in 2007?  scary stuff indeed.

now, these may not be at the hands of these 'responsible gun owners,' but where do gang bangers and other such criminals get guns?
they buy them from gun shows from responsible gun sellers who don't care who they are selling to, they have straw men easily buy them for them if they cannot, from licensed gun dealers in shady alleys, or stolen from other responsible owners who don't have them stored safely.

i cant find the number of assault weapons you said have been sold that are out there, but i guarantee a large percentage of them are not stored safely in some "responsible" nut-jobs' doomsday/revolution/race-war gun closet.

phil

Quote from: mirthbeatenworker on July 25, 2012, 10:40:23 PM
but i guarantee a large percentage of them are not stored safely in some "responsible" nut-jobs' doomsday/revolution/race-war gun closet.

Don't knock my zombpocalypse gun closet. I read enough Walking Dead to know that that shit is invaluable when your undead neighbor Tom starts trying to eat you.
Quote from: guyforget on November 15, 2010, 11:10:47 PMsure we tend to ramble, but that was a 3 page off topic tangent on crack and doses for breakfast?

sls.stormyrider

#201
as for your major theoretical point - nobody likes to be told what to do.
but, people are assholes. All of us, at one time or other, are total fucking assholes that can potentially do bad things to other people. Unfortunately, there need to be rules to protect us from the assholes.

Personally, I think I know how fast I can drive my car on the interstate, and have never been in a car accident on the highway by going 80mph or faster. But, there are rules for a reason, I get it, and I comply (most of the time)
I work in a highly regulated industry. We need regulation. Some of the regulations suck and need to be changed. That doesn't mean we should get rid of all regulations, but should work to change the bad ones.

Specifically, for this debate, I agree that assault weapons attacks are rare, and maybe "only" 10 lives per year will be saved. maybe less. But if I was related to one of those 10 people, I'd be much happier if they were alive than if they were dead.
Like everything, there is a "risk:benefit" ratio. The risk of assault weapons is fairly obvious. I haven't heard of a benefit to assault weapons other than the govt has no right to judge if I should have one or not.

Sorry, that doesn't cut it.
"toss away stuff you don't need in the end
but keep what's important, and know who's your friend"
"It's a 106 miles to Chicago. We got a full tank of gas, half a pack of cigarettes, it's dark and we're wearing sunglasses."

mbw

and who ever just smote me, y'all best be thinking twice for you step on my propertee.

VDB

Let me be devil's advocate for a sec. (I mean that seriously, because I haven't decided 100% whether I care if people have legal access to military-style "assault" weapons or not.)

Clearly there are more of these weapons out there in people's hands than are used in crimes during any given year or other time period. The majority of assault weapon owners don't use them for mass murder. They may be collectors or enjoy the act of shooting them at a range (not so rare a thing).

So if most people can and do own these and do not commit havoc, what is the threshold of violent incidents that would compel us to outlaw something because a small number of dumbfucks ruined it for everyone? Before you respond, think of other "dangerous objects" that can harm other people and upon which society has had to make judgments: fast cars, pocket knives, fireworks, mortgage derivatives...

It comes down to people (i.e. their reps) deciding how much risk to accept in exchange for the freedom to do (or own) certain things. An open debate, to be sure.
Is this still Wombat?

sls.stormyrider

yep
everyone has their own line, it moves over time, gets crossed, etc.
"toss away stuff you don't need in the end
but keep what's important, and know who's your friend"
"It's a 106 miles to Chicago. We got a full tank of gas, half a pack of cigarettes, it's dark and we're wearing sunglasses."

mbw

and just so runawayjimbo doesn't accuse me of going a whole thread about guns without posting something from michael moore, i give you......


phil

Quote from: mirthbeatenworker on July 25, 2012, 11:05:58 PM
and who ever just smote me, y'all best be thinking twice for you step on my propertee.

I got smoted too (too many bad jokes?)

People need to re-lax
Quote from: guyforget on November 15, 2010, 11:10:47 PMsure we tend to ramble, but that was a 3 page off topic tangent on crack and doses for breakfast?

runawayjimbo

Quote from: phil on July 26, 2012, 09:20:52 AM
Quote from: mirthbeatenworker on July 25, 2012, 11:05:58 PM
and who ever just smote me, y'all best be thinking twice for you step on my propertee.

I got smoted too (too many bad jokes?)

People need to re-lax

Wasn't me (I'm a lover, not a fighter), but I made you guys whole anyway. MBW for FINALLY getting a MM clip in here (took you long enough :wink:) and phil because he's so cute he thinks the Redskins are actually gonna be good this year. I mean, he's already gonna suffer such crushing disappointment, why you gotta smite him on top of that?
Quote from: DoW on October 26, 2013, 09:06:17 PM
I'm drunk but that was epuc

Quote from: mehead on June 22, 2016, 11:52:42 PM
The Line still sucks. Hard.

Quote from: Gumbo72203 on July 25, 2017, 08:21:56 PM
well boys, we fucked up by not being there.

phil

Thx, Jimbo. Was kind of kidding (unless we can trade in our karma points for swag) but appreciate the love. And hail to the redskins.

In other news, this is a thing that people can buy:

http://www.hornady.com/ammunition/zombiemax/

Might stock up on these for my zombie defense/paranoia closet. I mean, the bullets have green tips which I think means they home in on zombies?
Quote from: guyforget on November 15, 2010, 11:10:47 PMsure we tend to ramble, but that was a 3 page off topic tangent on crack and doses for breakfast?

mattstick