U.S. Gun Violence

Post Reply New Topic

And that determination just happened to coincide with what I said above.


It seems to me that he's the one trying to cram things down our throats. After all, we're not telling Australians what they need to do to be in step with the rest of the civilized world.

Yes, I concur that a seemingly endless supply of ammo in a magazine causes the lesser experienced shooter to "spray and pray" thus putting false confidence quantity alone and ignoring the fundamentals of marksmanship. You fist have to know HOW to shoot accurately before worrying about how many rounds you have on tap. It seems that antis believe that shooting any firearm effectively is as easy as falling off a log. A 15 shot magazine is 15 opportunities to miss just as well as 15 opportunities to hit. With an 8 shot mag even the less experience shooter will feel forced to at least slow it down and take more effort in aiming.
This "spray and pray" technique is basically what happened back when cops went from 6 shot revolvers to 15 +/- shot semiautos. The less gun savvy cops ditched what little proficiency they had and relied on volume of fire.

Maybe I should have used sarcasm tags.

The politicos think they are above everyone else. We can't have "assault weapons" but they either have them or can have hired goon squads armed to the teeth with them. Such utter hypocrisy.

If they want to disarm us, they should be equally disarmed.

I like your image there:



With the number of people here who are completely obsessed with guns, there is hardly any point for anyone with a mild contrary view to enter the discussion. He'll be piled on for 20 pages, and then you guys will go on talking about the kinds of guns that you would like to have.

Yes.

I have no idea why people are for taking from or limiting weapons for people, but are fine with people in the government having them.

They're the same people.

Of course the earth is flat! If it weren't we’d all slide off.


It would support my case quite well to anyone with a grip on reality.


I’m not a Mad Max fan.


Does the saying “it’s the Indian, not the arrow” mean anything to you? If a person cannot shoot well than they cannot shoot well. A decent marksman armed with an SMLE is more of a threat than someone inept armed with an AR-15. Do I really have to explain?
And yes, having a weapon does make me more capable of defending myself and I’m not going to forfeit that right out of fear that someone else can be equally armed with malevolent intentions. The difference lies in the reason and purpose of my weapon as opposed to that of the bad guy.


Sigh….You and your social contracts.
Apparenty you are not familiar with US gun laws or you wouldn’t have tossed in the word “unrestricted” up there. Every gunz-r-bad discussion since I’ve been on WP we’ve had to educate and re-educate the antis on gun laws in the US since you all seem to labor under the illusion that just anyone can run into Wal-Mart and buy a machinegun or run around town with a dangerous assault rifle. And we do not arm ourselves against our fellow citizens. That’s just delusional.


Our government is run by crooked politicians and the blindly obedient bureaucrats that work under them. We can never have an efficient government because of our political polarity (i.e. neither side can agree on what the role of government should be and what is right and wrong).
Call me a rebel but I’m hesitant, as are many others, to allow myself to be the subject knee-jerk legislation, whatever the rationale may be, pecking away at my rights. And there is still no compromise from me. We have a history of gun rights compromises that have been to no avail other than to create a new class of criminal to clutter up the judicial system.

Probably because people with ASDs are more independent from the group, in addition to suffering more abuse [from the group] than the average person.

When you have those things, you realize you're the only person who can protect yourself.

You’re the one that wants to pass feel-good laws based on unfounded rationale, not me. You want to fix what’s not broken and I’ve only challenged it. If that’s insulting or demeaning then so be it.


Allow me to illustrate: Our shooting range is the only outdoor range in this county which offers at least limited access to the public. Meaning we open two of the 15 separate firing ranges on our complex to outsiders. This is mostly a suburban county with literally no place off the beaten path to go shooting like in more rural areas. The effect: Most of the shooters from this county and the neighboring parts of three other counties funnel in to us on weekends and we (including me) are exposed to a very wide array of shooters/gun owners. As an RSO, I’m not just seeing the shooters on one side or the other of one firing lane, but I interface with and oversee shooters on 25 firing lanes on that one rifle range alone. About half as many shooters if I’m on the handgun range. A few times I’ve had to oversee both ranges if the other RO didn’t show up. True, I usually only have RO duty once a month but with that volume of shooters the experience from that alone stacks up quickly and deeply in only a few years. If you rarely ever go to a shooting range and have never been in the role of an RO then your experience is simply pale by comparison.


Of course there are people ranting about black helicopters and all that shi+ but they are a small minority and I don’t hear all that much from at the shooting range. It’s more of a stereotype that the antis blow out of proportion. Myself, I do not live in fear of nationwide door to door confiscation as many of them obviously do because I know that it is logistically impossible. On the other hand, I can assure you that I am of that “go down fighting” mindset they carry on about.


Although I am an NRA member I don’t even know or care what their stance on anything is today. I don’t even know or care to know who the president of the NRA is at the moment or the one before that. At best, I breeze through the monthly American Rifleman to see if there are any good articles on guns but there usually are not. I belong to the NRA because it is the largest pro-gun legislative action entity out there and it is required for membership at our shooting range. I’m flatly and unflinchingly of the no compromise school since compromise on this matter has never added value and only leads to more compromise. With as many new gun owners that have been created in the past 5 years and growing mistrust of government, I can’t see much in the way of legislation actually being passed except in the most liberal states. Disagree all you want, but I don’t think your wish will come true in the foreseeable future.


I think it should be an equal measure of education on both safety and the reason for owning guns. One compliments the other.

In closing, I think it’s abundantly obvious by now that you and I will never come together on our differences.
Yours truly,
The Xtremist

As I have said before, your range experience means that you have much experience with the types of gun owners that would go to a range. As I have said before, my experiences at ranges are my personal experience. As I have said before, I have plenty of experience with the type of gun owner who never has been and never will be at a range; the type who are much less likely to be safe or educated on the matter. That being the biggest reason that I think safety regulations are important.



I did not say they were the majority. I did say they were the loudest, the most annoying, and the primary reason that I stopped going to the range.



I think safety should be the first and foremost focus of any firearm training. Educating someone on why to own a gun is purely marketing.



It is a shame, because I am not really too far from your position on anything other than the whole "any laws pertaining to firearms are evil" stance.

And as I clearly said if you’d read it, they don’t have much of a choice but to come to our range if they want to shoot. That also means hunters to sight in and practice before hunting season. These are the ones we have the most issues with since, while generally safe enough for hunting, they are not accustomed to the more detailed and stricter rules of a shooting range. Except for the older ones, they all have had hunter safety education as a prerequisite to licensing. Really, I think your argument is past being played out.


It’s either you are oversensitive or just using that as an excuse to evade the stricter regimen of range safety imposed on you by RO’s who’s authority you resent. I see both often enough.


Marketing? No, I’ talking about informing the general public about why it needs to have the right and that their personal protection rest on their hands, not the cops or government. Nothing about marketing unless you see that as marketing fear.


No, I think we’re miles apart based on the content of our discussions.

True.
The comparison of weapons is amusing though.
Someone said they didn't get why guns are sometimes seen as phallic analogies. But it does kinda seem that way sometimes.

Well....

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eUqvZqaCrzo[/youtube]

You are the one who loves to throw around your range experience as making you the ultimate authority on gun ownership and all things firearm related. And there are plenty of options for people who don't want to go to the range, legal and otherwise. You can try to convince me that no one living near you shoots anywhere but the range, but you will never convince me, so I will maintain that the type of gun owner that you have experience with is still not representative of the whole any more than my experience is.



I have no problem whatsoever with someone enforcing safety rules, guidelines, or regulations. I love safety of all types. I also love clear and definitive rules, regulations, and procedures. I am also usually a big fan of those who oversee safety programs. In case you haven't noticed, I have repeatedly called for gun safety education and would fully support a requirement for gun safety training prior to getting a concealed carry, so assuming I would avoid a range because someone might try to make me be safe seems a little odd.

I am overly sensitive to overly paranoid, loud, and obnoxious people. I won't deny that.

Don't need a gun to blow your mind

It's ironic considering how he died.

http://www.salon.com/1999/05/12/penises/



An ex-marine told me that, during basic training, if a marine referred to his rifle as a "gun", then he had to go around to various people on the base, drop his pants, and shout the "This is my rifle!" poem, as punishment. That was back in the 1980s. Since women have entered the marines in large numbers since then, I suspect that the practice has been abandoned.

Compared to you I have do have a wealth of experience, knowledge, and a rational understanding of all things firearm related.


Of course there are people who shoot on their own property here but, being predominantly suburban county, very few have that option. I wish more of them did have enough property in non-residential areas so we wouldn't be flooded with shooters on the weekends. My point was that with our situation here, I do get exposure to the entire spectrum of everyone around here that shoots at all. Furthermore, that gives me a much deeper well of knowledge to draw on than you do. How much more explanation does it require?


Let’s say I find it odd that someone with such an obsession for gun safety disdains shooting at facilities that are under the control of safety enforcement personnel merely because of a small minority of wacko’s sounding off about black helicopters or whatever bothers them.


Grow a harder shell, maybe…