Atlanta: Child Shot In Head At School

Post Reply New Topic

I do go to the range (it's an hours drive), but I also live in the middle of nowhere so my backyard is also one (outback Oz); I go to the range to shoot the loud stuff so as not to bother the neighbors (I don't have to, but I do that for them).

One problem with weapons stored in a known location is that it's easy for people to hit; happened here once in the past decade -- a club had all its handguns stolen (hundreds). If they're dispersed, it's then a robbery of opportunity, which is less likely to equate to a stolen firearm (especially as we have to have them in a safe bolted to the frame of the house -- that's as secure as the police stations'). Also, most of the illegal handguns here come from the police themselves (plus illegal imports), as the location of the arms are known (plus the odd corrupt officer); not long ago a small station had its safe stolen (which contained several revolvers and a semi-automatic rifle). Besides, it's my property, and I won't harm anyone with such; the few bad people don't deserve the pleasure of taking away my freedom. If they're stolen, that has nothing to do with me (as I follow the legislation of how they're to be stored).

I like having firearms here, as I can shoot them here, hunt here, I can tinker with them whenever I like (just like tinkering with a car), and the very rare occasion that I might need it for protection -- the police are a good ten minutes away from me (who are rarely there), so a station an hour away would be the one to help -- far too late.

I also have my bows here too. You can make the same argument that they should be kept at the range (they're just as lethal as a firearm).

(I'll have a different perspective than someone in the US. I grew up with rather strong regulations, or what I like to call, enough paperwork to dissuade people to even bother and also a revenue for the government. i.e., tax. I'd probably have a similar view as someone in the UK who is a responsible shooter.)

Well, now that Russia finally woken up and smelled the coffee, they could start helping out politically by pushing Assad out. Israel's involvement however is truly frightening for the area and generally, the world.

Let's not forget as well that there is still unrest in Bahrain either.

When someone repeatedly dotes solely on deaths from gunshot and refuses to accept the realities that we live with that says a lot. And by gun hater I do mean someone opposed to private ownership of firearms.
I do shoot at a firing range. In fact I'm a volunteer range officer there and with that comes the privileged of being able to use those facilities (10 separate ranges of various configurations) whenever I want. I'm not going to store my guns there and no one else wants to, either. Why should we?

I thought he was being sarcastic...

if guns were illegal in america , the kid would be less likely to have been shot in the head.

This really isn't splitting atoms.

And if cars were banned, no one would ever get run over.

Oh sure; if the war on drugs is an example of the effectiveness of making something illegal......

noone would ever get to work on time.

Its an awful analogy, please don't use it anymore. Cars were designed with one specific purpose in mind; getting people from A to B. The entire raison d' etre for guns is to launch chunks of hot lead at living things. They have no non lethal applications.

i dont think drugs should be illegal either, because it serves only to make culprits out of otherwise victimless crimes and to waste police resources.

However guns arent the same thing. For one thing it is A LOT harder to smuggle guns. You cant put a pistol in a condom and swallow it. The reason america has far more gun related violence than any other western country is the prevalence and ease of access of guns.

Substitute drugs with guns in that /\ sentence and it will apply equally well.


And that prevalence and ease of access as you like to call it should tell you that we wouldn't need to smuggle them in.
I would say to try harder but there's nothing you could come up with that would be valid in this discussion.

Living things? So all those target rifles that I own, some of which I designed and built myself, shouldn't exist in your mind because guns "have no non lethal applications"?

As to cars, what does the purpose they were designed to do have to do with the effects they actually have, one of which is numerous traffic deaths? Even if I were to accept the whole "guns are only designed for killing" argument, which I do not (and as the only gun designer in this particular room, I can say that with some authority), sometimes killing is what is called for. A gun in the hand of a armed citizen can save a life as easily as it can take one, as can one in the hand of a policeman or soldier; it's the context that is important, not the particular tool.



Then don't make awful posts. Oh wait, that would eliminate most of them...

Just for fun though, let's make some similar statements to yours and see how they've worked out:

"If drugs were illegal, people would be less likely to get high."

"If alcohol was made illegal, less people would drink."

"If we make gambling illegal, fewer people will do it."

Did ANY of those ideas work as intended?

no, no, and no.

All this 'Guns are only designed for killing" argument, is entirely true.

The direct ancestor of the firearm is the fire lance, a blackpowder-filled tube attached to the end of a spear and used as a flamethrower; shrapnel was sometimes placed in the barrel so that it would fly out together with the flames. The earliest depiction of a gunpowder weapon is the illustration of a fire-lance on a mid-10th century silk banner from Dunhuang.

Since then, many variations have been designed with the intention to kill as many as possible as fast as possible - from the repeater, revolver, self-loading and gatling gun. It was only after conflict that these other uses were discovered. The firearm is a weapon created in war, for war.

/\
You forgot the part where they control people's minds and even act on their own....

Uh huh. Cause if guns were banned in the USA, people in america could still fire bullets from their fingers.

yes you have inanimate targets, but for what purpose? To practice firing on other people and/or animals. In this case its a means to an end not the end itself. Infantry training in the army, who also shoot card targets dont intend to go to war against said targets,

Killing develops a greater level of necessity according to the danger of the weapon involved. When guns are involved, death becomes invariably harder to avoid. Thats why the USA has more criminal fatalities than any other western developed country.



Entirely different. Forms of vice, are motivated and fuelled by social alienation. I guarantee that if America banned guns, the number of gun related fatalities would fall in line with Canada, Oceania and European developed countries.