What's new
By:

Las Vegas: Worst Mass Shooting in US History

JustTheTip said:
They are legal.

They have accounted for exactly zero problems so far (as far as I know).

I fail to see the issue.
Click to expand...

You fail to see the issue in making guns harder to hear?

If the argument for people to be armed is self-defense, then why do we need silencers? Cmon now.
 
Ron Mexico said:
Because crimes are punished on the state level. They work hand in hand with local authorities and prosecutors.
Click to expand...

Ron Mexico said:
I understand not wanting to ban semi automatic guns. Many people use them for hunting including myself but I don't think they are necessary and are too easy to modify. Maybe better enforcement of the current laws banning modifications and going after people and companies who make them would be enough. I don't know. Probably the right step is to start taking small steps and see. I don't know.

Better enforcement of felons with guns would be enough for me. I don't know about length of time, it is complicated. But I think a reasonable system could be put in place. Yes, some people might get screwed a little but I think it would be worth it.

Ultimately I think if the world was perfect everyone could own a gun and no regulation would be needed. Unfortunately we are at the point where people's rights might have to be restricted because too many people can't handle those rights and the rest of us might have to minorly suffer.
Click to expand...


Thanks for the info. I've been trying to read up on this and apparently even the NRA has been lobbying for current laws to be enforced much more stringently (obviously a pro-gun for law abiding citizens stance).

We need to enforce the thousands of gun laws that are currently on the books... Prosecuting criminals who misuse firearms works... Unfortunately, we've seen a dramatic collapse in federal gun prosecutions in recent years.
Click to expand...
 
JustTheTip said:
The latter part of your statement is false. Unless it's a really crappy homemade one, and then you're probably not even getting one shot.
Click to expand...

From what I understand, and the pictures I have seen, he basically had automatic rifles (through mods). Silencers on those do warp and eventually melt after so many shots in short succession. Look it up. The faster the shots the faster they are useless.

This isn't the normal scenario where it's on a hand gun or something.

Edit: I was wrong in the number of bullets it would take. It can still happen fairly fast but it appears it's a higher rate than this guy was shooting.
 
fishonjazz said:
So we agree I didn't do any strawman.
Right on
Click to expand...

Fish, I can find a situation where anything can be used to an advantage for killing.

I could use boiling hot coffee to scald a persons face and then jab a spork in their eye until I kill them. But nobody should use that argument to ban those things.

So you trying to find random situations to fit your viewpoint isn't helping anybody. Can we just try to be logical?

In general, a suppressor used by a common person will not help you kill more, or less, people. There is no factual backing to suggest otherwise.
 
Stoked said:
From what I understand, and the pictures I have seen, he basically had automatic rifles (through mods). Silencers on those do warp and eventually melt after so many shots in short succession. Look it up. The faster the shots the faster they are useless.

This isn't the normal scenario where it's on a hand gun or something.

Edit: I was wrong in the number of bullets it would take. It can still happen fairly fast but it appears it's a higher rate than this guy was shooting.
Click to expand...

They would warp at the same rate his barrel would.
 
JustTheTip said:
Fish, I can find a situation where anything can be used to an advantage for killing.

I could use boiling hot coffee to scald a persons face and then jab a spork in their eye until I kill them. But nobody should use that argument to ban those things.

So you trying to find random situations to fit your viewpoint isn't helping anybody. Can we just try to be logical?

In general, a suppressor used by a common person will not help you kill more, or less, people. There is no factual backing to suggest otherwise.
Click to expand...
Random viewpoints? I spoke of being at a concert. How is that random? I thought that is what this thread was referencing that happened in vegas.

Dragons and coffee vs shootings at a concert lol.
 
you wanna know who is stupid and does not know what they ar etlaking about when it comes gun.

watch tv and p[eople claiming we need to ban semi-automatic guns!

then when you aks them how many smei automatic guns their are they dont have a clue!
A semi-automatic firearm is a gun that, after firing ONE round, automatically loads the next round from the magazine into the chamber, ready to be fired only when the trigger is pressed AGAIN. That is, a semi-automatic gun is one trigger pull = one round fired. You have to pull the trigger again to fire another round.
Click to expand...

basically every modern firarm is a semi automatic!

except msuket and 1 shot guns.

even revolvers and glocks are semi-automatic! the people calling for ban guns dont know **** about it.


just like hillary doenst know **** about silencers yet she opens her mouth and want to influence regulations!
 
JustTheTip said:
But nobody should use that argument to ban those things.
Click to expand...

Strawman. (an intentionally misrepresented proposition that is set up because it is easier to defeat than an opponent's real argument.)
I never said anything about banning anything.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page
Back
Top