Stop using guns to kill things!

Post Reply New Topic

This is interesting. The shooter used an extended magazine on his glock as well.

On a hunch I looked here: http://www.imfdb.org/wiki/Dark_Knight,_The

The Joker uses a G17 with extended magazine. Though his is modified for full auto.

If guns were banned innocent people wouldn't be able to defend themselves properly and the criminals will still be able to illegally have access to guns.The only weilders would be police and criminals more innocent people would be raped robbed or killed by the time police arrived than with guns legal

This thread is only 6 pages so far. We've had them go 25+ pages on this same topic.

It would create a new class of criminal in the form of otherwise innocent gun owners.
In addition to that it would automatically expand the hell out of the existing gun black market and all the crime involved in that alone.

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-ExC7fE1LaY&feature=related[/youtube] If this lady didnt have a gun she would have been raped and killed as well.

Last edited by AspieOtaku on 22 Jul 2012, 9:26 pm, edited 1 time in total.

I would like to expand on this with what happened in the UK riots.
Rioters felt it good sport to invade apartments in groups and there was nothing the residents could do because they had no weapons. They had to leave or allow people to rob them, while others that refused got their places burnt.

Also, what happens when everyone is unarmed, and authority goes unchecked? This happened after the recent "Batman shooting" and seems to have gone largely unnoticed. Now while I was only sent this video link and whoever sent it is probably dubious the footage can't be denied.

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dpeyv6-FlzU[/youtube]

Do you really think it's a good idea to disarm US citizens given this sort of common abuse of authority?

Yeah, they've definitely got some issues to sort out in Anaheim.
I also saw something about the protesters throwing rocks and bottles at the cops before the cops started in with the rubber bullets and dogs.

So sometimes it works to be packing a gun, and sometimes it doesn't; statitstically, more often it doesn't (more innocent people are killed by guns than are saved by them, and the ones who are saved, are not saved by AR17s).

I liked your point of view AussieMatty & wish more people were like you. But there are no easy answers for the USA. In America guns have been a part of the culture since the beginning and there are over 300 Million guns in private possession.

http://www.davekopel.com/2dAmendment.htm

Dave Kopel is pretty good, though he's not completely politics free.

There's a lot of basic stuff that the media misreports and then people mindlessly parrot that would be cured by a couple of trips to a range, I'm not sure that a lot of that can simply be absorbed through research.

Mostly though, I wish people would apply just a hint of scrutiny to the stuff they quote from the anti-gun groups, the way they distort both their numbers and their language ought to give pause to anyone assessing their credibility. It's not even complicated either, they lump suicides and police shootings in with actual murders to pump up their numbers, and make up scary terms to try and demonize certain types of firearms. Not many people are afraid of a deer rifle, but call it an "intermediate caliber sniper rifle" like the Violence Policy Center does, and it sounds a bit more alarming. These are not the actions of honest people.

Depends on who's stats you want to go by, defensive gun use is infamously hard to track as it most often never goes beyond presentation and isn't reported; I've seen estimates in the US ranging from 100,000 to 2,000,000 successful incidents of gun related self defense annually. Also, it's AR-15, and they aren't often used in crime either, current high profile attack notwithstanding. Its not exactly practical either to carry around with you for protection or to carry around with you to attack people with, it's just too damn bulky, like most long arms. Look it up, rifles are used in an infinitesimal number of crimes, and so called "assault weapons" are used in only a small percentage of that number.

AussieMatty,

I'll abide by your request and stop using guns when I kill things. Instead, I'll lasers.

AR15. I stand corrected.

I actually read this, let me point just a few things out:



Right off the bat, he's either a liar or grossly misinformed, the number is closer to 30,000 IF you lump in suicides (the majority of US gun deaths are suicides BTW), police shootings, and justified self defense. If you want to talk about gun MURDERS, the number is more like 10,000, which sounds like a lot, but is still lower than Jason's number by a factor of 10, hardly a small mistake.



Next he trots out a thoroughly debunked piece of legal theory, the "militia interpretation" of the 2nd amendment, an argument rejected by SCOTUS along with the majority of the constitutional law community; guess Georg-, I mean Jason, wasn't paying attention.



This, LKL, is why I call anti gun people ignorant. What cartridge does an AR-15 fire? The .223 Remington, though you can also call it the 5.56mm NATO if you're of a military or European bent. Outside the military, do you know what this cartridge is used for hunting? Varmints. Woodchucks, prairie dogs, coyotes, maybe really small deer, in fact it's so small and low powered that it's illegal to hunt deer with in several states as inhumane. Why does the military use it then? Because it's light to carry so the soldiers can haul more rounds with them, it doesn't recoil much so it's easy to train people to shoot it accurately, and because the military isn't all that interested in killing the other guys. A wounded enemy combatant is better to the military than a dead one, because now his buddies have to carry him off the battlefield and devote resources to tending to him, taking more net troops from the enemy than an outright kill would. So in that way, a lightweight, easy shooting round that isn't the most lethal makes perfect sense for a military cartridge, but is hardly the farther firing, more accurate and lethal payload that Mr. Costanz-, I mean Alexander (that never gets old) seems to think. More accurate? That would be a bolt gun. More powerful or lethal? Try anything over .30 caliber, not a fast .22. Long range? Try something with a barrel of more than 16 inches, the shortest legal length. It doesn't shoot any faster or hold any more ammo than any other semi auto rifle either for that matter, but those are the only things remotely true in that statement. Basically, Jason knows exactly dick about the AR-15, or guns in general I would imagine.

As to the rest, f*ck Jason Alexander in his ignorant neck, that's my new universal response to these people. Ebert, Bloomberg, (especially Bloomberg), the Brady Bunch, all right in the neck.

I find it a little sickening how quick gun advocates are to defend their position after such a tragedy.

Anyway, it's really not guns that are at the root of the problem. The problem is the breakdown of community spirit.

In any case the rest of the world is laughing at us for holding on so righteously to the second amendment.

One of these days we will collectively smarten up.

And no I don't have to explain myself.

Excuse me? If the anti-gun people weren't trying to exploit the tragedy because otherwise no one would ever listen to them (it takes a certain emotional state to fall prey to gun control "logic"), then none of us gun people would be saying boo.



Only if you want to be taken seriously. It's totally up to you though.