Gun Control

[SaltyDawg]

Like i said in my other post..... my military trained brother in law said that the way the man is carrying his rifle is unsafe and not the correct way to carry a gun.
So you say that if you see the guy carrying the gun on his back then it doesn't concern you, but a man carrying the gun in his hands does concern you.
Well my brother in law might get concerned by the man carrying the gun on his back, and think that the man carrying the gun in his hands is much safer.
See some people would see this man as a threat, and some people would not see him as a threat.... which is why i think the best thing to do would be to just not carry rifles into malls.
If you are worried about your safety when you go to buy shoes at jc penneys then i think you should just carry a 9 milli, a .45, a .357 ect.

From what I'm gathering, your brother in law is comparing how you are supposed to carry a gun during a war, to this guy who is walking around in a mall.

I don't think your brother in law would think the guy is a threat just because his rifle is on his back. He'd probably think he wasn't trained for combat, or he isn't carrying it properly for combat. That doesn't mean he's a threat.

 

[Stoked]

Well maybe the next guy who wants to go on a shooting spree at all mall should carry his rifle with a shoulder strap hanging around his back so everyone will feel comfortable with him as he walks around trying to see who has a gun on thier hip..... Then once he has determined who he thinks might have a gun he can take them out first and then get to the unarmed after..... Since everyone should just feel fine with a guy walking around at the mall with a rifle on his back.

I wonder how you would feel stoked, if you were at the movies with your family and a guy walked in with an assault rifle on strapped to his back. Would you have a tinge of worry about the safety of your family? Or just ignore him?

The same way I feel any time I encoutner a man with a weapon in a place I did not expect. I take a good look at him. Is he with his kids or a spouse? Does he look or is acting threatening? If he did or was doing soemthing that concerned me we would leave the theater, notify management and call the police.

Just because someone else does not use common sense does not mean I have to stop using it at well.

 

[Stoked]

Well maybe the next guy who wants to go on a shooting spree at all mall should carry his rifle with a shoulder strap hanging around his back so everyone will feel comfortable with him as he walks around trying to see who has a gun on thier hip..... Then once he has determined who he thinks might have a gun he can take them out first and then get to the unarmed after..... Since everyone should just feel fine with a guy walking around at the mall with a rifle on his back.

I wonder how you would feel stoked, if you were at the movies with your family and a guy walked in with an assault rifle on strapped to his back. Would you have a tinge of worry about the safety of your family? Or just ignore him?

Worthless hypothetical.

Maybe next time a guy wants to drunk drive he should wear his seat belt to appear responsible.

 

[Stoked]

No i did not....i do think that was a good thing.

However someone else with a concealed weapon that is at the mall with thier family might not know if the gun was loaded or not and might feel like that man could be a threat.

At the worst, bullets get fired.
At the least, people take pictures of the guy and it causes a big fuss on facebook and causes us to get into these types of discussions/arguements.

I would rather that the guy just goes to the store and purchases his merchandise and goes home without me ever even hearing of the dude.

Again, there are over 100 million gun owners in the US. There are roughly 330 million Americans. So almost 1 in 3 is a gun owner. You have been in the situation you described far more times than you know. How many times has a shootout happened over a misconception like your hypothetical situation?

You are using a very unlikely hypothetical in an attempt to show something as a real threat. It is NOT. The simple facts prove that it is not. Even if it was, and again it is NOT, than creating laws against that is still only treating the symptom and not the disease.

 

[DutchJazzer]

fishonjazz is just a suffers from gunofobia.
and is creating entirely stupid hypothetical to justify his fobia.
and misinterprets his brother in laws expertise to justify his "hypotethical".

THERE IS NO WAY IN HELL THAT GUY WAS A THREAT(JUDGING FROM PICTURE AND WHAT I HAVE READ IN THE ARTICLE)

 

[fishonjazz]

The same way I feel any time I encoutner a man with a weapon in a place I did not expect. I take a good look at him. Is he with his kids or a spouse? Does he look or is acting threatening? If he did or was doing soemthing that concerned me we would leave the theater, notify management and call the police.

Just because someone else does not use common sense does not mean I have to stop using it at well.

but the problem with you saying "does he look or act threatening" is that A: someone can look completely calm and then start shooting. B. What if the guy is pro-environment so he rides his bike everywhere he goes. He is late for the movie so he was pedalling really hard. So now you have a guy coming late into the movie and you look back and see this guy with an assault rifle sweating profusely and breathing hard (from his bike ride). Now he might look like a threat, but he still isn't a threat.

There is now way to tell who is a threat or not... but one thing is for sure: A guy walking into a mall with an assault rifle will scare some people, and cause alot of people to look at him and wonder just what his intent is. Now alot of people are like you and would look him over and try to determine whether he is a threat or not.... Thats great. And alot of people are going to think he is a threat because of recent events.... thats not so great.
I wish that everyone was like yourself, but they are not.

Also i remember you saying that what he did was extreme and probably not the best idea, so im not quite sure what your point really is.

My point was just that maybe he should not have done what he did at this time.... That was all i was trying to say, and i thought that you agreed.

 

[fishonjazz]

fishonjazz is just a suffers from gunofobia.
and is creating entirely stupid hypothetical to justify his fobia.
and misinterprets his brother in laws expertise to justify his "hypotethical".

THERE IS NO WAY IN HELL THAT GUY WAS A THREAT(JUDGING FROM PICTURE AND WHAT I HAVE READ IN THE ARTICLE)

Actually i dont have any gun phobia at all..... i own a couple of guns myself, as does every single member of my family.
I grew up hunting just about everything you can think of. (pheasants, chuckers, pronghorn, deer, rabbits, doves, ducks) I have handled guns many times and have no phobia..... But i have this amazing ability being able to see and empathize with how someone else might feel about things.
I dont think this world revolves around me and my feelings.
I have compassion for those who might be frightened while at the mall with thier children and they see a man with an assault rifle right after a big time shooting that left lots of kids dead..... Maybe those people didn't get raised around guns like i did.

 

[DutchJazzer]

Actually i dont have any gun phobia at all..... i own a couple of guns myself, as does every single member of my family.
I grew up hunting just about everything you can think of. (pheasants, chuckers, pronghorn, deer, rabbits, doves, ducks) I have handled guns many times and have no phobia..... But i have this amazing ability being able to see and empathize with how someone else might feel about things.
I dont think this world revolves around me and my feelings.
I have compassion for those who might be frightened while at the mall with thier children and they see a man with an assault rifle right after a big time shooting that left lots of kids dead..... Maybe those people didn't get raised around guns like i did.

well people with guns know that guy aint a threat.
the people who think he is a threat are the ones without guns.

so nothing to see move along

 

[Stoked]

Slate recently published an article on gun violence. In that article it estimates that there are 1.5 million assault rifles.

There are roughly 3,000 deaths a year in America from all rifles (not just assault rifles and not just homicides but suicides and accidents as well).

Time for math. 3,000 / 1,500,000 = .002%. So .002% of assault rifles are involved in a shooting. That is EXTREMELY good. That is also being extremely liberal in laying the blame on assault rifles.

If the goal is to end gun violence then they should, logically, be going after handguns and not assault riffles. There are far more hand guns, that kill far more people in far more shootings every year.

 

[fishonjazz]

well people with guns know that guy aint a threat.
the people who think he is a threat are the ones without guns.

so nothing to see move along

Im not saying that he was a threat.

The problem i have is that if you read the article he says that he was doing it to prove a point, not because he felt like he needed his assault rifle to feel safe at the mall.
Then also when you read the article you find that some people were scared and wanted to get away from him.

So I know that you are not afraid of people with guns dutch. And i know that scat and stoked are not either. And neither am I.

But now look at it from someone elses eyes.... What if there was a woman shopping at the mall with her kids, and this woman or her kids had never taken gun safety classes, and never fired a gun and never been around guns before..... The only thing she knows about guns is what she sees in the movies and on the news. Dont you think she might be frightened?

Now if he really felt that he needed that assault rifle for his safety while shopping at the mall, then i might say "who cares if that woman is frightened by him, he needs his gun for his safety".
But he didn't have his rifle to feel safe, he only had it to promote his agenda.
So he caused people to be afraid and feel uncomfortable, when it was not even neccessary.

I just think what he did was unneccessary and not a very good idea...... and im done discussing this anymore.

 

[Stoked]

Im not saying that he was a threat.

The problem i have is that if you read the article he says that he was doing it to prove a point, not because he felt like he needed his assault rifle to feel safe at the mall.
Then also when you read the article you find that some people were scared and wanted to get away from him.

So I know that you are not afraid of people with guns dutch. And i know that scat and stoked are not either. And neither am I.

But now look at it from someone elses eyes.... What if there was a woman shopping at the mall with her kids, and this woman or her kids had never taken gun safety classes, and never fired a gun and never been around guns before..... The only thing she knows about guns is what she sees in the movies and on the news. Dont you think she might be frightened?

Now if he really felt that he needed that assault rifle for his safety while shopping at the mall, then i might say "who cares if that woman is frightened by him, he needs his gun for his safety".
But he didn't have his rifle to feel safe, he only had it to promote his agenda.
So he caused people to be afraid and feel uncomfortable, when it was not even neccessary.

I just think what he did was unneccessary and not a very good idea...... and im done discussing this anymore.

Of that I think we can all agree. Maybe not Dutch but he is Dutch. What do you expect?

 

[fishonjazz]

Slate recently published an article on gun violence. In that article it estimates that there are 1.5 million assault rifles.

There are roughly 3,000 deaths a year in America from all rifles (not just assault rifles and not just homicides but suicides and accidents as well).

Time for math. 3,000 / 1,500,000 = .002%. So .002% of assault rifles are involved in a shooting. That is EXTREMELY good. That is also being extremely liberal in laying the blame on assault rifles.

If the goal is to end gun violence then they should, logically, be going after handguns and not assault riffles. There are far more hand guns, that kill far more people in far more shootings every year.

You are 100% correct, but the fact is as long as people are more afraid of assault rifles than handguns, then that is what the government will try to limit.

 

[fishonjazz]

I honestly think that banning assault rifles is just the flavor of the month right now because everyone is reacting to the sandy hook thing.

I think that either they will not get banned at all, or they will be banned for a few years and then eventually the ban will be lifted just like what happened before.

 

[Stoked]

You are 100% correct, but the fact is as long as people are more afraid of assault rifles than handguns, then that is what the government will try to limit.

I agree. To bad it is all a publicity game to them. DC has no true interest in fixing problems. They simply want popularity so they can maintian their position.

 

[BabyPeterzz]

do I call homosexual men holding hands and kissing in the park jackasses?
no so shut up.
if homosexuals have the right to kiss and hold hands in public, people should be allowed to have their weapons.

not because you disagree with the guy he is a jackass.
you are the jackass.

if that guy makes you feel uncomfortable. and therefore should not be allowed to have a gun in public. lets ban everything that makes people uncomfortable.
did you know black guys with hoodies make certain people uncomfortable.
lets ban them.


anyway you sir are now the biggest jackass on jazzfanz.
and thats saying a lot. because i thought i was the biggest jackass round these here parts

Ha! Oh no, Dutchrudder thinks I'm a jackass. *shudder*

I'm of the opinion that anyone who caries a semi-automatic rifle into a JCPenney is ****ing stupid. My opinion. Welcome to America!

 

[One Brow]

i always feel safe in a well armed society. it is a society of peace and wonder. you dont have to look over your shoulder.
unlike here always looking over my shoulder.

One time, when not looking over my shoulder, I got hit from behind. Of course, if I had had a gun, that person would never have struck me from behind, right?

 

[One Brow]

Maybe it had to do with the comments and actions they were reported to have said and taken.

Jesus, One brow come on.

Really? They were reported to have hit someone? They said they were going to hit people? I could be recalling it wrong, but to my recollection no such threats were made.

 

[Stoked]

Ha! Oh no, Dutchrudder thinks I'm a jackass. *shudder*

I'm of the opinion that anyone who caries a semi-automatic rifle into a JCPenney is ****ing stupid. My opinion. Welcome to America!

I tend to agree with that basic arguement. Dumb thing to do.

 

[Stoked]

Really? They were reported to have hit someone? They said they were going to hit people? I could be recalling it wrong, but to my recollection no such threats were made.

They were reported to be threatening people with them and verbal abusing people from what I understand. Plus weren't they wearing badges/insignia and telling people they were from the NBPP (a hate group).

That is what I am basing my arguement off of. Plus it is a federal offense to intimidate voters. It is not an offense to wear an assault rifle to JC Pennys. Even if it is stupid.

 

[BabyPeterzz]

I tend to agree with that basic arguement. Dumb thing to do.

That's all I'm saying. I fully support peoples right to own and openly carry guns. I just think those that choose to do so look retarded. Again, just my opinion.