What's new
By:

Las Vegas: Worst Mass Shooting in US History

fishonjazz said:
What's inane about it?
Cappy_Smurf was saying that a suppressor could help a shooter kill more people. I'm confident that real life common scenarios exist when that would be the case.
Agree to disagree.
I said nothing about imaginary beings or magic or anything like that. I will wait and see if you offer up an apology. Doubtful though.
Click to expand...


Hey Fish, I used the giant dragon as an exaggerated form of a strawman. Call it hyperbole if you may, I used it to make a point. I wasn't suggesting that you were invoking imaginary creatures. I have nothing to apologize for.

I can't believe I just had to explain that.

When it comes to your average citizen, in an average environment, having a suppressor would not enable you to kill more. We have no factual basis to suggest that. I can come up with a possibility where a highly trained individual with excellent equipment could do so, but that's not realistic. That would be a strawman.

Fish, I'm not the only person who has pointed this out to you. It's not a vendetta I have against you. It's just a habit you have. Trying to help you bud.
 
Earlier today franklin compared killing people with guns to using gasoline or knives.
If I would have used a comparison like that I would have been said to have used a straw man.

I don't see how it's bad to look at other, differing examples of things in a discussion to see other possibilities.
 
fishonjazz said:
Do you think that maybe if you were in a bathroom and thought you might hear gun shots outside that you maybe would stay in the bathroom or at least exit the bathroom in a more careful way?
I think I would.
Click to expand...

I don't think you understand how much impact a suppressor has.
 
JustTheTip said:
Hey Fish, I used the giant dragon as an exaggerated form of a strawman. Call it hyperbole if you may, I used it to make a point. I wasn't suggesting that you were invoking imaginary creatures. I have nothing to apologize for.

I can't believe I just had to explain that.

When it comes to your average citizen, in an average environment, having a suppressor would not enable you to kill more. We have no factual basis to suggest that. I can come up with a possibility where a highly trained individual with excellent equipment could do so, but that's not realistic. That would be a strawman.

Fish, I'm not the only person who has pointed this out to you. It's not a vendetta I have against you. It's just a habit you have. Trying to help you bud.
Click to expand...
Define strawman.
 
fishonjazz said:
Define strawman.
Click to expand...
This is what I found: an intentionally misrepresented proposition that is set up because it is easier to defeat than an opponent's real argument.
I didn't intentionally misrepresent anything and wasn't trying to defeat anyone's arguement.

I was trying to find out if jtp thought that in a particular, real life scenario, a suppressor could aid a shooter in killing more people.

It seems like it could to me. Especially at a loud event if the shooter was far away and wanted to go undetected for as long as possible that maybe there is a chance a suppressor could help.

Am I crazy to that could be possible? I don't think I am.
 
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