Page 50 of 157 FirstFirst ... 40484950515260100150 ... LastLast
Results 491 to 500 of 1566

Thread: Gun Control

  1. #491
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    Metro East, St. Louis
    Posts
    9,590
    Mentioned
    2 Post(s)
    Total Rep Points
    11039
    Rep Adjustment Power
    65
    Quote Originally Posted by Gameface View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    This isn't a matter of statistics. A person has the right to defend their self and therefore the means to do so. Psychos going on killing sprees have nothing to do with my right to self defense.
    Everyone agrees the right to self defense has limitations and trade-offs. It's not a trump card that wins an argument simply by pulling it out.
    http://lifetheuniverseandonebrow.blogspot.com/

    Isaiah 1:18 -- Come now, and let us reason together

    Any habitual action, such as eating or dressing, may be performed on the appropriate occasion, without any need of thought, and the same seems to be true of a painfully large proportion of our talk. -- Bertrand Russell

  2. # ADS
    Circuit advertisement
    Join Date
    Always
    Location
    Advertising world
    Posts
    Many
     

  3. #492
    Premium Member fishonjazz's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Location
    K-TOWN
    Posts
    42,983
    Mentioned
    126 Post(s)
    Total Rep Points
    94729
    Rep Adjustment Power
    100
    Quote Originally Posted by Gameface View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    This isn't a matter of statistics. A person has the right to defend their self and therefore the means to do so. Psychos going on killing sprees have nothing to do with my right to self defense.
    So according to this post, it sounds like civilians should be able to purchase tanks, stealth bombers, rocket launchers, grenades, flamethrowes, land mines..... i mean you never know what you are going to need when the time comes that you may have to protect yourself right?

  4. #493
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Posts
    2,831
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Total Rep Points
    1092
    Rep Adjustment Power
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by One Brow View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    Also, it's very aqmusing to hear the same group of people say that, one the one hand, criminals without guns will still be capable of massive attacks, but on the other hand, people without guns can't defend themselves.
    And that seems to be v the main point that gun control enthusiasts just can't comprehend.

    Restrictive laws only affect people that don't break the law. It's already illegal to go on a mass shooting spree, and most of the people doing it got their guns illegally.

    So yes, restricting guns will absolutely limit the right of self defense for law abiding citizens. It will not necessarily hinder a criminal's ability to go on a mass killing spree. They'd have to respect and follow the law in order for it to affect them.

  5. #494
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Posts
    2,831
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Total Rep Points
    1092
    Rep Adjustment Power
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by fishonjazz View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    So according to this post, it sounds like civilians should be able to purchase tanks, stealth bombers, rocket launchers, grenades, flamethrowes, land mines..... i mean you never know what you are going to need when the time comes that you may have to protect yourself right?
    Sure, why not?

  6. #495
    Fire Controlman
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    Underway
    Posts
    17,662
    Mentioned
    62 Post(s)
    Total Rep Points
    33236
    Rep Adjustment Power
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by One Brow View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    Everyone agrees the right to self defense has limitations and trade-offs. It's not a trump card that wins an argument simply by pulling it out.
    Sure, but to say something should be banned because it's only useful in rare situations isn't very convincing, imo. You are aware that more people are killed by lightning every year than in mass shootings, right?

  7. #496
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    Metro East, St. Louis
    Posts
    9,590
    Mentioned
    2 Post(s)
    Total Rep Points
    11039
    Rep Adjustment Power
    65
    Quote Originally Posted by SaltyDawg View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    And that seems to be v the main point that gun control enthusiasts just can't comprehend.
    Thank you for taking a contradiciton and saying it was your main point. I did laugh.

    Quote Originally Posted by SaltyDawg View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    Restrictive laws only affect people that don't break the law. It's already illegal to go on a mass shooting spree, and most of the people doing it got their guns illegally.
    Restrictive laws can also be used to squeeze off supply chains, or affect purchasing decisions. If the only gun you can buy legally buy has a 10-round magazine and requires 30 seconds for an expert to change the clip, then when you steal guns, you'll be stealing a gun that has a 10-round magazine and requires 30 seconds to change the clip.

    Quote Originally Posted by SaltyDawg View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    So yes, restricting guns will absolutely limit the right of self defense for law abiding citizens. It will not necessarily hinder a criminal's ability to go on a mass killing spree. They'd have to respect and follow the law in order for it to affect them.
    At a minimum, all the guns used at Sandy Hook were legally acquired. Which shooting sprees featured black-market guns, that had not been legally purchased?
    http://lifetheuniverseandonebrow.blogspot.com/

    Isaiah 1:18 -- Come now, and let us reason together

    Any habitual action, such as eating or dressing, may be performed on the appropriate occasion, without any need of thought, and the same seems to be true of a painfully large proportion of our talk. -- Bertrand Russell

  8. #497
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    Metro East, St. Louis
    Posts
    9,590
    Mentioned
    2 Post(s)
    Total Rep Points
    11039
    Rep Adjustment Power
    65
    Quote Originally Posted by Gameface View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    Sure, but to say something should be banned because it's only useful in rare situations isn't very convincing, imo. You are aware that more people are killed by lightning every year than in mass shootings, right?
    I agree. When you have time to discuss it in more detail (said in recognition that you do have a life), I'd be interested in any evidence you had that the utility of a 30-round clip (i.e., the frequency of occasions where having 30 rounds easily available, as opposed to 6 or 10, is a life-or-death situation) outweighs the harm caused by people taking advantage of such clips. Mass shootings are more common that riots, for example.
    http://lifetheuniverseandonebrow.blogspot.com/

    Isaiah 1:18 -- Come now, and let us reason together

    Any habitual action, such as eating or dressing, may be performed on the appropriate occasion, without any need of thought, and the same seems to be true of a painfully large proportion of our talk. -- Bertrand Russell

  9. #498
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Posts
    2,831
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Total Rep Points
    1092
    Rep Adjustment Power
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by One Brow View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    At a minimum, all the guns used at Sandy Hook were legally acquired. Which shooting sprees featured black-market guns, that had not been legally purchased?
    No they weren't, nor was the shooter even legal to buy them (not considering any background issues, he was too young). He stole them, and used them to kill the legal owner.

  10. #499
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    Metro East, St. Louis
    Posts
    9,590
    Mentioned
    2 Post(s)
    Total Rep Points
    11039
    Rep Adjustment Power
    65
    Quote Originally Posted by SaltyDawg View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    No they weren't, nor was the shooter even legal to buy them (not considering any background issues, he was too young). He stole them.
    That was my point. Thgey were legally acquired by his mother, and he stole them. If his mother had only been able to buy guns with reduced ammunition loads and that were difficult to reload, the shooter would have been able to fire fewer bullets. They were not black-market guns. Limiting the types of legal guns will, eventually, limit the capabilities of such shooters.
    http://lifetheuniverseandonebrow.blogspot.com/

    Isaiah 1:18 -- Come now, and let us reason together

    Any habitual action, such as eating or dressing, may be performed on the appropriate occasion, without any need of thought, and the same seems to be true of a painfully large proportion of our talk. -- Bertrand Russell

  11. #500
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    Houston, Tx
    Posts
    2,949
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Total Rep Points
    3097
    Rep Adjustment Power
    38
    Quote Originally Posted by One Brow View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    Restrictive laws can also be used to squeeze off supply chains, or affect purchasing decisions. If the only gun you can buy legally buy has a 10-round magazine and requires 30 seconds for an expert to change the clip, then when you steal guns, you'll be stealing a gun that has a 10-round magazine and requires 30 seconds to change the clip.
    Two points on the 30 round magazines- first there are literally thousands that are legally owned. I can't see the them being taken out of circulation. Cutting off the 'supply chain' would take decades if it is even possible. For example I am sure that police weapons will maintain the 30 round mags. If someone really wants one they could steal that.

    2nd a magazine is fairly simple to make. So I believe we would be creating a black market for 30 round mags. Additionally how can you tell a pre-ban mag from an old one?

    I would estimate it would take me at most 3 seconds to change a 10 round magazine in any circumstances. If I practiced it would take much less than that probably about 1 second. What are you talking about -taking an expert 30 seconds to change? Do you mean 30 seconds to load an empty magazine?

    If we are talking about pistols I would just carry multiple pistols and skip the reloading.
    The pen is mightier than the sword. I keep the sword for the day I run out of ink. - Unknown

    People demand freedom of speech to make up for the freedom of thought which they avoid. - Soren Kierkegaard

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
About Us
We are a community of Utah JazzFanz that are passionate about our team. We celebrate the highs that come with last second heroics and (some of us) cry in defeat. Welcome to our community. Be respectful of others and join in to the conversation...
Join us