Bump stocks. Who will be

[Gordon Gray]

Hi Brad and Pneumonic,

I think both of you are missing the basic facts about the AR 15 of which I will cite two:

1) They were designed as a "MILITARY" weapon to be used in war because they can kill many people in a very short period of time.

2) They appear to be the "weapon of choice" for the vast majority of mass killings in the USA.

Responsible gun owners need to recognize the above and not go into the typical arguments about someone trying to take their rights away.

To state the obvious, our school children also have a basic right to assume they can go to school without fearing that they will be the next victim of a AR 15 (and its variants) weapon.

Best,

Gordon

 

[Pneumonic]

Hi Brad and Pneumonic,

I think both of you are missing the basic facts about the AR 15 of which I will cite two:

1) They were designed as a "MILITARY" weapon to be used in war because they can kill many people in a very short period of time.

2) They appear to be the "weapon of choice" for the vast majority of mass killings in the USA.

Responsible gun owners need to recognize the above and not go into the typical arguments about someone trying to take their rights away.

To state the obvious, our school children also have a basic right to assume they can go to school without fearing that they will be the next victim of a AR 15 (and its variants) weapon.

Best,

Gordon

It seems to me that our freedom should not be threatening to anyone. If all law-abiding citizens are to be infringed upon in such a manner as to make them less safe, that will not help children.

Criminals are the people who should suffer any group punishment, not the law-abiding.

The sad part is none of this will help kids. They will still die in gun free zones. But confiscation Nationwide, as you wish, would make the entire country a gun free zone, making us all live in a criminal free fire zone.

Let me ask this:

Is having a gun in the school not already illegal?

Is killing another person not already illegal?

If the person committing these crimes is already willing to break those laws why would they obey a law prohibiting an AR-15, or any gun for that matter? As such, how exactly is more laws restricting guns going to stop children from dying .... outside of the unrealistic proposition of removing all guns from the hands of everyone?

What about heinous mass killings done with other weapons … should they all be banned too?

This picture summarizes things for me on the topic of school shooting.

 

[RCHeliGuy]

That's INCREDIBLY shortsighted. The point is not to put a gun in the next school shooters hands.

The key issue is that this is age related and it would only take a decade or two to work its way through.

There are two key issues. Kids buying guns between 18-21, and the parents having guns for kids 13-17. That is the vast majority of school shooters.

Making guns illegal would first impact the 46% of mass murderers who went out to purchase the murder weapon.

It would take another 5 years to start having an impact on the parents and by 20 years the kids wouldn't have guns at home to grab.

That WOULD have an impact and drop the number of school shootings.

Armed Staff has not proven to be effective and has the potential to enable additional killing to happen.

There is no instant fix that will start working tomorrow. These have to be long term objectives.

 

[Pneumonic]

That's INCREDIBLY shortsighted. The point is not to put a gun in the next school shooters hands.

The key issue is that this is age related and it would only take a decade or two to work its way through.

There are two key issues. Kids buying guns between 18-21, and the parents having guns for kids 13-17. That is the vast majority of school shooters.

Making guns illegal would first impact the 46% of mass murderers who went out to purchase the murder weapon.

It would take another 5 years to start having an impact on the parents and by 20 years the kids wouldn't have guns at home to grab.

That WOULD have an impact and drop the number of school shootings.

Armed Staff has not proven to be effective and has the potential to enable additional killing to happen.

There is no instant fix that will start working tomorrow. These have to be long term objectives.

What's your long term solution to mass murders via vehicles and bombs and chemical weapons and the like? Or, are you short sighted to only worry about guns

 

[RUR]

What's your long term solution to mass murders via vehicles and bombs and chemical weapons? Or, are you short sighted to only worry about guns

This is a false choice, implying that gun legislation is moot simply because there are other opportunities for mass killings.

Meanwhile and unlike, say, assault weapons, possessing bomb-making or chemical weapon weapon-making materials are already felonies and plenty of prosecutions have resulted.

But all this is pointless. Gun legislation can only be successful via the ballot box and, even after that, via the judicial system.

 

[Pneumonic]

This is a false choice, implying that gun legislation is moot simply because there are other opportunities for mass killings.

Meanwhile and unlike, say, assault weapons, possessing bomb-making or chemical weapon weapon-making materials are already felonies and plenty of prosecutions have resulted.

Huh, owning an assault rifle is as illegal as making a bomb is.

My pointing out other methods of murdering, and asking about any long term plan for them, is to point out the inconsistency and hypocrisy being employed by many. If one wishes a long term plan to stop mass murders why not include ALL known methods? Why be selective and only ban guns? I mean, ~19x more people are killed every year with knives in America than with guns. Should knives not be on the ban list as well?

 

[RCHeliGuy]

This fallacy is ridiculous trap.

Limiting guns won't keep people from being hit by lightning, make them exercise or stop overeating either. So what?

BTW in the completely off topic area, I'm at least exercising while I'm typing

 

[amey01]

What about heinous mass killings done with other weapons … should they all be banned too?

Generally, yes, they are illegal. Nail bombs, driving trucks down crowded malls, making chemical weapons........while all possible [and indeed do happen] - they are illegal. So you are seeing much less killings with these methods. Thanks for making a great argument to show how foolish your point of view is.

This picture summarizes things for me on the topic of school shooting.

There are plenty of "Armed staff on duty" in Las Vegas. Probably more than anywhere else in your country.

>>>Did those armed staff help deter the mass-killer?

>>>Did any of the armed guards manage to stop the killer?

Give us a break. This is getting pathetic.

 

[Pneumonic]

Generally, yes, they are illegal. Nail bombs, driving trucks down crowded malls, making chemical weapons........while all possible [and indeed do happen] - they are illegal. So you are seeing much less killings with these methods. Thanks for making a great argument to show how foolish your point of view is.

Huh, vehicles that are used to mow down people are illegal? The nails and chemicals that are used to make bombs to blow up people are illegal?

Wow, who knew .....

There are plenty of "Armed staff on duty" in Las Vegas. Probably more than anywhere else in your country.

>>>Did those armed staff help deter the mass-killer?

>>>Did any of the armed guards manage to stop the killer?

Give us a break. This is getting pathetic.

Far too little is known about the Vegas incident to make any valid opinion just yet. So, let's wait to see what happened.

 

[amey01]

Huh, vehicles that are used to mow down people are illegal? The nails and chemicals that are used to make bombs to blow up people are illegal?

Wow, who knew .....

By trying to be patronising and rolling your eyes, you have missed the point completely.

Ironically, the Vegas killer could probably have killed more people by driving a truck through that venue. Or by planting a few nail bombs in around the stage. All easily available items. Or he could have 3D printed them as you said in an earlier post. But that didn't happen.

America has a gun problem. Nothing else. End of story.

Far too little is known about the Vegas incident to make any valid opinion

Copout response.

If you extol the virtues of armed "goodies" as a valid prevention/deterrent method, then tell me why those armed "goodies" didn't stop the Vegas incident? Or any other incident for that matter.

Don't kids have the right to a day's learning without fearing a high-grade shootout between their teachers and an armed killer? Even if they do happen to survive it? What kind of country do you want to live in?

 

[Bernard]

All I'm reading here is one pathetic reason after another to continue the carnage. Get rid of that god-damned 2nd Amendment.

At what point do you say "ENOUGH!"?

 

[amey01]

I mean, ~19x more people are killed every year with knives in America than with guns. Should knives not be on the ban list as well?

Rubbish.

Can you quote a source please? A serious source, not a statistically manipulated source.

If you are going to base your argument on a fairy-tale, the pro-gun argument really has reached its end.

FBI:

https://ucr.fbi.gov/crime-in-the-u....able_8_murder_victims_by_weapon_2009-2013.xls

From this serious source, firearms would appear to be about 8x higher than knives, and higher than knives as well as all other killing methods combined!

Regardless - knives do not have the ability to kill 58 people and injure 515 people in 2 minutes (Vegas). Major difference.

 

[Pneumonic]

By trying to be patronising and rolling your eyes, you have missed the point completely.

Ironically, the Vegas killer could probably have killed more people by driving a truck through that venue. Or by planting a few nail bombs in around the stage. All easily available items. Or he could have 3D printed them as you said in an earlier post. But that didn't happen.

America has a gun problem. Nothing else. End of story.

America has a problem indeed ..... with its murder rate. Attempting to ban AR-15's from law abiding citizen's isn't going to solve that issue. Those with intent to murder will simply find another gun or another method.

Don't kids have the right to a day's learning without fearing a high-grade shootout between their teachers and an armed killer?

I don't wish to see teachers armed in schools so, no. But, if it is enough of a concern, then I would like to see an armed specialist in the schools to prevent it from being a prime soft target zone open for the taking.

 

[Pneumonic]

Rubbish.

Can you quote a source please? A serious source, not a statistically manipulated source.

If you are going to base your argument on a fairy-tale, the pro-gun argument really has reached its end.

FBI:

https://ucr.fbi.gov/crime-in-the-u....able_8_murder_victims_by_weapon_2009-2013.xls

From this serious source, firearms would appear to be about 8x higher than knives, and higher than knives as well as all other killing methods combined!

Regardless - knives do not have the ability to kill 58 people and injure 515 people in 2 minutes (Vegas). Major difference.

Sorry, this x19 # was meant to be attributed to the AR-15's we were talking about that you guys want to see banned. I was careless in my posting.

 

[amey01]

America has a problem indeed ..... with its murder rate.

Because.......one very simple, eminently effective, and highly efficient form of killing apparatus is freely available!

 

[RCHeliGuy]

<sigh> What a waste of time. Everyone feels strongly. No one changes their mind. We may as well be talking about power cables.

 

[Pneumonic]

Because.......one very simple, eminently effective, and highly efficient form of killing apparatus is freely available!

An AR-15? Surely you jest .....

 

[Pneumonic]

<sigh> What a waste of time. Everyone feels strongly. No one changes their mind. We may as well be talking about power cables.

At least with power cables we can take out our scopes and meters and measure away and offer up definitive proof on the matter. The issues with guns, as it is with objective measurements, many of those who are most vocal and critical, don't know anything about guns or objective measurements respectively.

 

[amey01]

At least with power cables we can take out our scopes and meters and measure away and offer up definitive proof on the matter.

Just like homicide stats, right? (ones which aren't manipulated)

An AR-15? Surely you jest .....

This has never been about the AR15. It is about gun laws and controls in general. The AR15 might (rightfully, I believe) be subject to those controls.

 

[RCHeliGuy]

This is very interesting. Particularly around 8:45 which involves politics.

His conclusions are that when you ask someone "why?" be careful because that may actually cause that person to form an a opinion and then justify it.

The surprising part is that when they used magician like tricks to switch a person's answers and then asked them why they choose those answers, many people would defend the opposite view to what they had actually chosen.

I can only assume that these questions are mostly about things that people didn't already have very strong opinions about. But what it says is interesting. Once you believe you have made a decision, you will find a way to defend it.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tuEGoAabL9o