Gun control myths and info

[Stoked]

There are also many people who care about wild animals, know a lot about them, keep them at home treating well and responsibly yet I think you will agree not everyone should be allowed to keep a tiger in his backyard. There are laws which discourage people from getting the exotic animals which could be of danger for themself and people around them.

So, instead of generalities, what specific ideas do you have?

Confining the discussion to generalities leads nowhere. Let’s widen the scope

 

[Safetydan]

So, instead of generalities, what specific ideas do you have?

Confining the discussion to generalities leads nowhere. Let’s widen the scope

I agree with him that society is better off without them.

Its important that this establishing principle be agreed upon before moving forward with proposals and solutions. I agree with you too. Like you said, just saying that they suck doesn't solve the problem.

But still, a lot of people still disagree that guns are a net negative on modern society.

 

[Stoked]

I agree with him that society is better off without them.

Its important that this establishing principle be agreed upon before moving forward with proposals and solutions. I agree with you too. Like you said, just saying that they suck doesn't solve the problem.

But still, a lot of people still disagree that guns are a net negative on modern society.

You are right they do. And those two sides are unlikely ever agree on that specific point. But that doesn’t mean we should stop delving I to other areas to improve. Not that you’re implying such a thing.

Guns won’t leave American society short of confiscation and my thoughts on what happens then are well known.

I just get tired of reading another version of the same generalized point.

 

[Safetydan]

You are right they do. And those two sides are unlikely ever agree on that specific point. But that doesn’t mean we should stop delving I to other areas to improve. Not that you’re implying such a thing.

Guns won’t leave American society short of confiscation and my thoughts on what happens then are well known.

I just get tired of reading another version of the same generalized point.

Good post. Agreed.

 

[Jazzmix]

So, instead of generalities, what specific ideas do you have?

Confining the discussion to generalities leads nowhere. Let’s widen the scope

I am responding with generalities because I see people here who try to convince everybody that the arguments against free posession of arms are myths. They think that the law to carry the arms are of general benefit to the society.
If that thread was named "how to solve the guns problem" I would be writing differently. I do not see any miracoulous solution. Of course it would have to be confiscation and I imagine that it s unrealistic. But I think the first step in finding a solution is trying to change people's mentality. First step in solving any problem is admitting that you have it.

 

[Stoked]

I am responding with generalities because I see people here who try to convince everybody that the arguments against free posession of arms are myths. They think that the law to carry the arms are of general benefit to the society.
If that thread was named "how to solve the guns problem" I would be writing differently. I do not see any miracoulous solution. Of course it would have to be confiscation and I imagine that it s unrealistic. But I think the first step in finding a solution is trying to change people's mentality. First step in solving any problem is admitting that you have it.

Most of America admits their is a problem. But a significant portion does not think complete removal of guns is the answer. Feel free to keep beating that horse but you’ll be stuck exactly where you are on that point instead of making progress.

Just my .02

 

[Jazzmix]

Most of America admits their is a problem. But a significant portion does not think complete removal of guns is the answer. Feel free to keep beating that horse but you’ll be stuck exactly where you are on that point instead of making progress.

Just my .02

Ok. Got your point and respect it.

 

[lauriandres]

Since when do gun nuts care about facts or common sense.

I would guess that there are plenty of simple folks who simply believe that auto>semiauto so give the good guys autos.


Sent from my iPad using JazzFanz mobile app

Doesn't all the high end military grade automatic rifles also support semi-automatic mode so if you are like a Wilhelm Tell with a civilian AR-15, then you can also use a military grade assault rifle without problems assuming the semi-auto mode is enough for your purpose?

 

[Gameface]

Doesn't all the high end military grade automatic rifles also support semi-automatic mode so if you are like a Wilhelm Tell with a civilian AR-15, then you can also use a military grade assault rifle without problems assuming the semi-auto mode is enough for your purpose?

Yeah, pretty much. Semi-auto is a better way to use a gun 99% of the time.

 

[lauriandres]

Yeah, pretty much. Semi-auto is a better way to use a gun 99% of the time.

What is the point of having the full-auto mode on the military grade assault rifles assuming that 99% of the shots fired in a combat should be either by burst fire (a la 3 shots per pulling the trigger) and single shots? Or is the full-auto mode kind of a free feature when designing an assault rifle?
Even in somewhat realistic videogames the full auto seems to be useless .

 

[Gameface]

What is the point of having the full-auto mode on the military grade assault rifles assuming that 99% of the shots fired in a combat should be either by burst fire (a la 3 shots per pulling the trigger) and single shots? Or is the full-auto mode kind of a free feature when designing an assault rifle?
Even in somewhat realistic videogames the full auto seems to be useless .

In the military sometimes you're firing in a defensive manner to keep the enemy down. Other times you're firing with a large number of other people into a large number of other people. Also, in the military you will often have essentially no limit on how much ammo is available, and cost is not a concern, so might as well just keep shooting.

But I heard something interesting about the experience of soldiers facing enemies with AK47s, after the first shot the rest almost always went high as the AK47 with it's much larger round had terrible muzzle rise in full auto.

 

[jimmy eat jazz]

I mean, we had over two hundred years before the second amendment was interpreted to guarantee a private right to gun ownership. It's certainly possible, likely even, it will be interpreted differently in the future. I wouldn't be so confident as to invoke Heller as the final word on the matter. It's not like Supreme Court decisions are unassailable.

So then, it appears that all that is needed to refute anti-abortion arguments from the right is to simply say "Roe v. Wade" and that will/should shut them up?