School shooting in CT

Post Reply New Topic

Whatever happened to the police instead of vigilantism? Isn't that what they're for? Trained and paid by the public to protect the public?

i guess you guys were right and i was wrong.CNN headline news and new england local news all say the shooter likely had autism although aspergers specificly was never mentioned

You can stop right there. I'm a GUNSMITH by training, I DESIGN guns, and you (and a lot of other people) seem to be both mistaken, and really hung up, on this whole "designed to kill" thing.

I'll take the handgun thing first 'cause it's simpler and more wrong. There are many handguns out there where the explicit designed purpose is hunting or target shooting, the Thompson Contender series, the Ruger Mks 1-3, any of the Desert Eagles, all modern single action revolvers, the list goes on. So you're demonstrably wrong on that one, no arguments.

Now you do know that the term "assault weapon" is not an actual technical term, but instead a political one designed in the 1980s by gun control proponents to demonize a particular type of firearm, right? "Assault Rifle" does refer to a specific type of fully automatic firearm chambering an intermediate (read: low powered) round and possessing a detachable magazine, but those are practically non-existent in civilian hands due to the tight regulations on fully automatic weapons, and one was not used in this crime.

An AR-15 is just a semi-automatic rifle chambered in a round so weak that it's illegal to hunt deer with in most states, the popularity of which is mainly driven by it's modularity, i.e. the ability to customize it heavily without someone like myself doing all the work, rather than any extra "deadliness".

Even the military's M4s and M16s are not "designed to kill", they use the same relatively weak round as the civilian firearms, as the military is not interested in killing people but in controlling territory, with violence being one of the tools they use. To them, wounding is better than killing because it takes more of the enemy out of commission than a kill would, the wounded man plus the men required to carry him off the field and care for his injuries. The M16 was designed to be lighter for the soldier to carry, to recoil less than higher powered weapons to allow for greater accuracy in automatic fire, and to chamber a lighter round that the soldier in the field could carry more of, not to be "better for killing", as the M14 it replaced is certainly perfectly adequate in that regard.

Don't get me wrong, guns are weapons, and can certainly and relatively easily be used to kill, but that's not "what they're designed for". So knock it off.



Your view of "normal" is warped, and you should stop regarding your opinions as facts. If you live in the real world, you tend to notice that it isn't completely safe, and perhaps desire the ability to keep you and your loved ones a bit more safe from some of the bad things that are out there, and there's nothing odd or wrong with that.




Yep, I do. What of it?

Defending yourself is not vigilantism, vigilantism is going out and looking for criminals to attack or lynching someone you thought wrongly got off in court. Words mean things you know.

Also, do you carry a policeman in your pocket? The police are OK at solving crimes after the fact, but not so good at protecting victims from harm in the moment, and legal precedent declares that they have no duty to protect you even if they happen to be there. So I'll keep my guns, thank you very much.

And you're giving them the benefit of assuming perfect compliance with said bans. I can build a gun from a block of metal, and I'm hardly the only person who can do so. Someone with access to CnC tools could just plug in the proper CADCAM files and churn out weaponry as fast as they could feed the billets into the machine.

<Very interesting!>



<brilliant!
Guns are tools.
IMO the Issue is isolation.

Spocks Daughter
Intermountian North West

It seems that the gun grabbers (who rarely had any trigger time) have thought out more thoroughly how potentially deadly my guns are than I have.

1. Budget cuts.
2. Fewer prosecutions, prisoners being let out early to save money/space.
3. The cops are not legally required to protect you. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Warren_v._District_of_Columbia

From Wiki: An arsenal is a place where arms and ammunition are made, maintained and repaired, stored, issued to authorized users, or any combination of those. Over the centuries, this has included every variant of such a place, whether privately or publicly owned (with the latter in older royal and modern state-owned versions).

Even in casual modern usage, 3 guns is a pretty paltry number to designate an "arsenal".



Why would knowledge worry you? Do you think information should be suppressed if certain people think it's "dangerous" or "subversive"?

For you information, I'm a gunsmith, which means I know a lot more about guns than someone in the military or police would, as even there armorers only deal with a narrow range of firearms, while I'm trained on the entire breadth. Note: this also means I know a lot more about them than you, keep that in mind.



Congratulation, you can use a search engine on the internet...



You almost get it here, and then relapse... *sigh*

The problem is that "attacking" and "killing" are not synonyms, and you're treating them as if they are. Moreover, you're treating killing as something that's objectively bad, when there are circumstances when someone being killed is the "good" course of action, e.g. a guy on his way to kill a bunch of kindergarteners.



The purpose of guns is to launch lumps of lead in predictable paths, it's the choices that the user of the gun makes that determine the purpose that lead is put to, good or evil.

yes your right.

Knowledge doesn't worry me. I'm constantly seeking knowledge in how to better protect and saved lives. It's my main interest in life, both voluntary and employment are heavily involved in saving and prolonging life. I cannot see any other view towards life than to save it.

Well if you're not a policeman or in the military, I'd be highly suspicious to those that take an interest in objects and methods to kill people. That screams danger to me. I'd be calling the police if you lived in my county, let alone anywhere else. What next, bomb creation 101 for casual interest? C'mon.



Well that explains everything, you obviously want to protect your livelihood producing killing machines. Why did I know this earlier? Any further debate with you is pointless.

Anyone else want to debate this issue?

Last edited by J-Greens on 15 Dec 2012, 6:13 pm, edited 1 time in total.

The fact is that someone will try to kill a large number of people.
Recently, explosives have accomplished that aim.
The IRA in the 1970's, the Gunpowder Plot of 1605, the Oklahoma Alfred P. Murrah Building, HiroshimaNagasaki, the Twin Towers, somebody's going to do 'The Unthinkable'.
There have been numerous plots discovered in America alone involving poisoning of water supply.
Anyone remember the deliberately tainted Tylenol?
Remember the 'Rajneesh' cult in Oregon that sent out members to contaminate salad bars at local restaurants?
The Triad company of Wisconsin distributed contaminated alcohol prep pads to hospitals across the country...any employee COULD have contaminated-poisoned any product deliberately.
Guns are being used for crimes, such as our topic, but someone who wants to kill a lot of people WILL find a way.
Gun control will not stop them.

Sylkat

So in the last year how many people were killed in the USA in the last year by maniacs with bombs, contaminated tylenol, salads, etc etc?
Because we know the number killed by guns is well over 10,000.
I think guns are winning in the "Best tool for murdering" stakes by quite a stretch.

people are wrong in thinking that people dont hunt with AR15'S they do and many AR's are now available in common deer calibers usualy .308's.

here is the problem though:
because of the rise in the AR's popularity for hunting more guns stores are carying more of them,which then gives criminals the chance to break into these gun stores and steal them.now a .308 is a 51mm shell casing,now a AK47 fires a 39mm shell casing both 30 caliber.so this gives criminals the chance to flood the black market with semi auto rifles more powerfull then a AK47.
traditional deer rifles were never popular with criminals because they were slow moving hard to load bolt action rifles designed for a well placed shot at an animal that cant see you.these guns are slow working and if someone say robbed a store, the store owner could put 4 bullets from his 9mm automatic before the robber could even think.criminals would have same problem in a shoot out with police.

because gun stores carry so many of these hunting AR .308'S now criminals have easier access to steal these very powerfull semi auto's.
yes almost all crime is commited with illegal guns,the illegal guns must come from somewhere.usualy gun store roberies or puppet buyers.this is going to be a possible problem,but yes most AR buyers are legitamate hunters or match competition shooters

So, yes, you do favor suppressing information that you consider dangerous. What offense would you report me to the police for? Knowing too much?



Sadly, gunsmithing hasn't been my livelihood in some time, but even if it were, it wouldn't diminish the fact that I'm far better informed on this issue that you are, and wouldn't change any of the involved facts. You could try and argue that my profession was biasing my opinions and try and argue the facts, but I see you'd rather just take the cop-out and ignore a strong challenge to your views. Oh well, have fun at that book burning, or whatever it is you people do for fun.

Last edited by Dox47 on 15 Dec 2012, 7:49 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Here's the big problem with this argument: most gun crime is not committed with rifles, and of the small fraction that is, an even smaller portion of that number is committed with anything resembling an AR. The most popular rifle in crime, IIRC, is the old Soviet SKS, which usually is fitted with an internal magazine and reloads via 10 round stripper clips. It would seem that cheapness and availability trumps outright power when criminals are concerned.

Here's the big problem with this argument: most gun crime is not committed with rifles, and of the small fraction that is, an even smaller portion of that number is committed with anything resembling an AR. The most popular rifle in crime, IIRC, is the old Soviet SKS, which usually is fitted with an internal magazine and reloads via 10 round stripper clips. It would seem that cheapness and availability trumps outright power when criminals are concerned.[/quote]yes, well said but the increasing popularity of the AR will make it more convienient and availible which like you said criminals like.

another thing to is that your from the west coast where so many russian guns come from mexico,but in the northeastern cities most guns come from gun store burgluries in like say maybe tennesee where there are more automatic guns in stores because of more relaxed gun laws.then these guns get sold on the black market in new york or something