Post Apocalyptic World
03-23-2020, 08:55 AM
#101
Prime Minister/Moderator
Joined APC: Jan 2006
Position: Engines Turn Or People Swim
Posts: 39,322
Originally Posted by contrails12
But there is a limit.
no one is arguing about a total ban on weapons in this country.
the debate is about where’s the line. The vast majority agree that the line needs to be moved to a more conservative location than it is currently
no one is arguing about a total ban on weapons in this country.
the debate is about where’s the line. The vast majority agree that the line needs to be moved to a more conservative location than it is currently
The problem is PEOPLE, not guns. Everybody brought (hunting) guns to school when I was in HS. Some stayed in the pickup truck, some folks brought them in to their lockers so they would be more secure. There was never any sort of threatening event involving weapons, any fights were with fists out back. Eventually the school did ask us to leave the guns in our trucks (accidental discharge liability).
So any solutions really need to focus on people who are the problem (mostly younger people), NOT infringe on the constitutional rights of the rest of us.
Background checks are appropriate, but it has to be QUICK... if it's just a mechanism for the state to circumvent the constitution by stalling that's not acceptable.
Age limits are appropriate... you can't rent a car under age 25. You can't drink under 21. You can't hold an ATP under 23.
So maybe possession by those under some age (21-25) should require supervision. The supervision does not have to be physically invasive, kind of like a co-signer to a loan, someone who accepts responsibility to vouch for the person's maturity and stability. The supervisor might need to own a gun and have completed a safety course (to prevent irresponsible idiots from signing off anyone and everyone). The supervisor might need to be a family member.
Limitations on weapons are mostly silly. Limit full-automatic weapons to hobbyist/collectors with a permit and more involved background check (yes bump-stocks are full auto mechanisms). But stop wasting time debating what kind of vented carbon handguard somebody wants on their gun. For home defense (or defense against tyranny) tactical modifications are legit. Full auto is almost never a legit tactical choice unless it's a heavy crew-served weapon in a military unit... I think we can get our constitutional bang-for-the-buck without full auto, it has more utility for mass-murder than for tactical ops.
03-23-2020, 08:56 AM
#102
Banned
Joined APC: Mar 2018
Posts: 1,358
Originally Posted by Qotsaautopilot
im not really concerned about products people use to self destruct. I’m talking about 5 year olds not being gunned down trying learn to read. How can the all or nothing gun lobby not have a shred of empathy for an entire class of kindergarteners? No solutions offered. None. Kids get murdered and it’s immediate protectionism for the weapons that people hoard in a closet or safe or occasionally shoot at a range. Common sense doesn’t exist at the NRA. No protectionism for the innocent children.
Or high schoolers, or people enjoying a Friday night at a movie or concert.
Being crazy and having to walk into a school with a semi auto handgun doesnt have nearly the glamor as going down in a hail of bullets with an AR in hand.
I am a gun owner but not an enthusiast but have shot several different guns and rifles and shotguns. Anyone that has shot an AR type rifle already knows it has the potential to be much more lethal of any handgun, which is exactly why it’s the weapon of choice for mass shootings.
Or high schoolers, or people enjoying a Friday night at a movie or concert.
Being crazy and having to walk into a school with a semi auto handgun doesnt have nearly the glamor as going down in a hail of bullets with an AR in hand.
I am a gun owner but not an enthusiast but have shot several different guns and rifles and shotguns. Anyone that has shot an AR type rifle already knows it has the potential to be much more lethal of any handgun, which is exactly why it’s the weapon of choice for mass shootings.
03-23-2020, 08:59 AM
#103
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Oct 2010
Posts: 4,603
Originally Posted by O Face
Look Man, I hate Mass shootings as much as anybody. Unfortunately, the “solutions” being offered will not stop a thing. Oklahoma City bombing - performed with fertilizer. Does that mean we should all have brown yards? Sept 11th attacks - performed with airliners. Maybe those should be grounded immediately? (Ok maybe that’s gonna happen anyway). The mental health issue aside, the common thread to all these “but jobs” (your words, not mine) and their attacks is cowardice by the perpetrator. The assaults are always made against soft targets. They are clearly afraid of a defense. I think the discussion we should be having is making the punishment fit the crime. How about letting the families of those affected administer justice. I would wager some of these ****s might think twice if they had to ponder the unspeakable torture they would suffer at the hands of grieving loved ones!
the major plotters like in Oklahoma or Boston or 9/11 or vegas will be hard or impossible to stop through any legislation. The school shooters would imo been deterred or stopped if obtaining their weapon was impossible or extremely difficult.
03-23-2020, 09:08 AM
#104
Banned
Joined APC: Mar 2019
Posts: 229
Originally Posted by Itsajob
You obviously don’t like guns, so don’t buy them. The odds of getting killed driving on the highway, drowning in a swimming pool, or medical malpractice far exceeded your chances of getting shot. If you don’t like something, don’t participate, but don’t use the force of law to force others into compliance with your personal beliefs. Both sides of the aisle should practice this.
As far as not participating I have made a decision not to own certain types of weapons. I only own those intended for hunting. The problem is that i'd like to participate in general societal activities such as sending my kids to school and going to the movies without fearing that any tom dick and harry can buy a reduced recoil AR with taped banana clips to "get back at society".
Is that really a difficult concept to understand!?!
03-23-2020, 09:15 AM
#105
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Aug 2018
Position: Line holder
Posts: 513
Originally Posted by Aeirum
Is that really a difficult concept!?!
When I was kid I remember the “dive under the desk” drills that would save us from Soviet nuclear annihilation.
It’s sad that after decades of “progress”, we now teach grade schoolers techniques for armed nut case survival. All this military-grade hardware has not made our children safer.
03-23-2020, 09:23 AM
#106
Banned
Joined APC: Mar 2018
Posts: 1,358
Originally Posted by Aeirum
I do like guns. I don't like that 30+ round semi auto weapons are available to the general public. Nearly any adult even those not old enough to be entrusted with buying a beer can buy a weapon today designed and intended to kill many in a short time. I know, I know, not fully automatic is a start but clearly not enough.
As far as not participating I have made a decision not to own certain types of weapons. I only own those intended for hunting. The problem is that i'd like to participate in general societal activities such as sending my kids to school and going to the movies without fearing that any tom dick and harry can buy a reduced recoil AR with taped banana clips to "get back at society".
Is that really a difficult concept to understand!?!
As far as not participating I have made a decision not to own certain types of weapons. I only own those intended for hunting. The problem is that i'd like to participate in general societal activities such as sending my kids to school and going to the movies without fearing that any tom dick and harry can buy a reduced recoil AR with taped banana clips to "get back at society".
Is that really a difficult concept to understand!?!
03-23-2020, 09:24 AM
#107
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Oct 2010
Posts: 4,603
Originally Posted by rickair7777
I can agree that it should be moved, however...
The problem is PEOPLE, not guns. Everybody brought (hunting) guns to school when I was in HS. Some stayed in the pickup truck, some folks brought them in to their lockers so they would be more secure. There was never any sort of threatening event involving weapons, any fights were with fists out back. Eventually the school did ask us to leave the guns in our trucks (accidental discharge liability).
So any solutions really need to focus on people who are the problem (mostly younger people), NOT infringe on the constitutional rights of the rest of us.
Background checks are appropriate, but it has to be QUICK... if it's just a mechanism for the state to circumvent the constitution by stalling that's not acceptable.
Age limits are appropriate... you can't rent a car under age 25. You can't drink under 21. You can't hold an ATP under 23.
So maybe possession by those under some age (21-25) should require supervision. The supervision does not have to be physically invasive, kind of like a co-signer to a loan, someone who accepts responsibility to vouch for the person's maturity and stability. The supervisor might need to own a gun and have completed a safety course (to prevent irresponsible idiots from signing off anyone and everyone). The supervisor might need to be a family member.
Limitations on weapons are mostly silly. Limit full-automatic weapons to hobbyist/collectors with a permit and more involved background check (yes bump-stocks are full auto mechanisms). But stop wasting time debating what kind of vented carbon handguard somebody wants on their gun. For home defense (or defense against tyranny) tactical modifications are legit. Full auto is almost never a legit tactical choice unless it's a heavy crew-served weapon in a military unit... I think we can get our constitutional bang-for-the-buck without full auto, it has more utility for mass-murder than for tactical ops.
The problem is PEOPLE, not guns. Everybody brought (hunting) guns to school when I was in HS. Some stayed in the pickup truck, some folks brought them in to their lockers so they would be more secure. There was never any sort of threatening event involving weapons, any fights were with fists out back. Eventually the school did ask us to leave the guns in our trucks (accidental discharge liability).
So any solutions really need to focus on people who are the problem (mostly younger people), NOT infringe on the constitutional rights of the rest of us.
Background checks are appropriate, but it has to be QUICK... if it's just a mechanism for the state to circumvent the constitution by stalling that's not acceptable.
Age limits are appropriate... you can't rent a car under age 25. You can't drink under 21. You can't hold an ATP under 23.
So maybe possession by those under some age (21-25) should require supervision. The supervision does not have to be physically invasive, kind of like a co-signer to a loan, someone who accepts responsibility to vouch for the person's maturity and stability. The supervisor might need to own a gun and have completed a safety course (to prevent irresponsible idiots from signing off anyone and everyone). The supervisor might need to be a family member.
Limitations on weapons are mostly silly. Limit full-automatic weapons to hobbyist/collectors with a permit and more involved background check (yes bump-stocks are full auto mechanisms). But stop wasting time debating what kind of vented carbon handguard somebody wants on their gun. For home defense (or defense against tyranny) tactical modifications are legit. Full auto is almost never a legit tactical choice unless it's a heavy crew-served weapon in a military unit... I think we can get our constitutional bang-for-the-buck without full auto, it has more utility for mass-murder than for tactical ops.
03-23-2020, 09:29 AM
#108
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Oct 2010
Posts: 4,603
Originally Posted by Itsajob
It is tragic when harm is done to anyone, but focusing on guns is placing the blame in the wrong place, the focus should be the individual. A gun, car, knife, etc is just a tool. There are far more kids killed or harmed because someone consumed alcohol, or were not closely supervised in the tub or swimming pool. Why is one death a bigger problem than the other? Why do people want to outlaw one and not the other? I’m not against change, but if we are going to give up liberty to save lives let’s make sure that we have statistical data showing that we are getting the biggest return for our sacrifice, not because it feels good, or fits our political narrative.
03-23-2020, 09:30 AM
#109
Banned
Joined APC: Mar 2019
Posts: 229
Originally Posted by Itsajob
There is a statistically greater chance of you or your loved ones being harmed by many things other than guns. Worrying about the lone evil person with an AR and a high capacity magazine is energy wasted. Your kids have a better chance of getting killed driving to school or in an accident while playing, than they do from a crazy guy with a gun. I don’t find it a difficult concept to understand, but I try to use math more than emotions
...Which is why the DOT constantly changes regulations to improve vehicle safety. Car manufacturers are fighting a constant battle to keep up with changing regulation.
Increased focus on improving driving and vehicle safety is a pet topic of mine that I am passionate about but it doesn't absolve the gun issue. Its a different topic for a different discussion. Again its really amazing to me to see these arguments being proposed as logic.
03-23-2020, 09:39 AM
#110
Banned
Joined APC: Mar 2018
Posts: 1,358
Originally Posted by Qotsaautopilot
I don’t leave my kids unsupervised in the bath or pool. I don’t get drunk and beat the shiit out of them. I am fully aware that there is inherent risk in every aspect of life but I fully expect to be able to send my children to elementary school to learn reading writing and arithmetic and play with their friends at recess without being gunned down by some outcast that is looking to die after killing as many innocents as he can.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
