What's new
By:

The Non-Jazz NBA Thread in the Jazz Section

Rubashov said:
Honestly you do not need to own an assault rifle, it is a tool for killing humans and nothing else. People hunted very effectively with rifles and shot guns.

People still hunt here, you have to do a gun safety course and pass a police check to get a licence. Its not too hard to get a long arm licence, hand gun licences are much harder to get and should be. Again guns are a tool, a friend of mine is a professional shooter who does pest control for farmers and is a nationally ranked target shooter he does not need automatic weapons to do his job.

I personally see no reason why firearms in metropolitan areas can't be stored at police stations or government owned armouries and signed in and out by their owners (farmers need them, especially if you own animals, guns have to be on hand to destroy animals if necessary). I suppose since Port Arthur we've managed things fairly well, most gun related deaths are from suicide and it is predominately in rural areas because guns are at hand.
Click to expand...
The right to firearm ownership in the U.S. is not tied to hunting. The right is specifically linked to self-defense including the defense of citizens against an unjust or illegitimate government. That means that the most effective tools for that purpose are these semi-automatic "sporting" rifles.

A gun held at the police station cannot help to protect you from something like a home invasion robbery, which as far as I can tell is the cornerstone fantasy most gun fanatics believe they are prepared to counter. No need to consider that home invasion robberies are exceedingly rare and when they do happen they are carried out by people who know the victims and are typically for drugs or large amounts of other valuables or cash, not usually for you VCR and Plasma TV.

AR-15s are not automatic. They are semi-automatic.
 
Wholesale gun rights reform would require either a constitutional amendment or a supreme court that has a different view of the 2nd amendment than our current supreme court has.

While you can find polls where a majority of people support "reasonable" regulation, that's only true so long as you don't specify what you mean by "reasonable" because the second you start to define it your majority support fractures into oblivion.

A significant portion of democrats do not support significant gun reform. There is no path to significant reforms right now. That's the facts.
 
Gameface said:
The right to firearm ownership in the U.S. is not tied to hunting. The right is specifically linked to self-defense including the defense of citizens against an unjust or illegitimate government. That means that the most effective tools for that purpose are these semi-automatic "sporting" rifles.

A gun held at the police station cannot help to protect you from something like a home invasion robbery, which as far as I can tell is the cornerstone fantasy most gun fanatics believe they are prepared to counter. No need to consider that home invasion robberies are exceedingly rare and when they do happen they are carried out by people who know the victims and are typically for drugs or large amounts of other valuables or cash, not usually for you VCR and Plasma TV.

AR-15s are not automatic. They are semi-automatic.
Click to expand...
This.

AR does not stand for "assault rifle". It stands for "armalite rifle". People get it in their heads that the "AR" is simply fully automatic death unequaled by any firearm known to man. It just isn't like that. They choose it because it makes them feel like a "soldier" carrying out an important mission. But a pistol would be every bit as effective.
 
Gameface said:
Wholesale gun rights reform would require either a constitutional amendment or a supreme court that has a different view of the 2nd amendment than our current supreme court has.

While you can find polls where a majority of people support "reasonable" regulation, that's only true so long as you don't specify what you mean by "reasonable" because the second you start to define it your majority support fractures into oblivion.

A significant portion of democrats do not support significant gun reform. There is no path to significant reforms right now. That's the facts.
Click to expand...
I think you could tax the eff out of it or put extreme liability on manufacturers and retailers and owners for crimes their guns are used to commit.

I certainly don’t have all the answers but it feels like there are ways to help control this stuff without a huge change to the constitution. Greed is undefeated… taxes and financial loss might have private companies making some of these decisions for us…
 
LogGrad98 said:
This.

AR does not stand for "assault rifle". It stands for "armalite rifle". People get it in their heads that the "AR" is simply fully automatic death unequaled by any firearm known to man. It just isn't like that. They choose it because it makes them feel like a "soldier" carrying out an important mission. But a pistol would be every bit as effective.
Click to expand...
Are pistols as accurate as semi-automatic rifles? I thought longer barrels improved accuracy.
 
One Brow said:
Are pistols as accurate as semi-automatic rifles? I thought longer barrels improved accuracy.
Click to expand...


Much less accuracy and stopping power, the shorter barrel effects both accuracy and velocity of the projectile. A hand gun in close quarters is still very effective tho, so is a knife.
 
One Brow said:
Are pistols as accurate as semi-automatic rifles? I thought longer barrels improved accuracy.
Click to expand...
Most of these shootings are taking place within 50 feet. At that point the improvement in accuracy is negligible.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page
Back
Top