Call of Duty: Black Ops II
Would you buy BLOPS if there was a special tax on it??
Back To: Board List | Topic List | Topic Archived
Drumguy posted... What does it take to get idiots in Washington to understand? Guns don't kill people. Video games don't kill people. PEOPLE kill people. Anything can be a weapon, so let's just ban everything. Just ban murder, duh. --- Monster Hunter Tri is one of the best Capcom games of this generation. Of course, that's not saying much. | |
tizzywilkillyou posted...coreyerb posted... I'm interested in rationally considering the reasons for gun violence. Do you have a different perspective or explanation? tizzywilkillyou posted... Zimbabwe Bob covered this for the most part. The "assault weapon" designation is often very arbitrary. And often comes down to "looks scary/military". Then let's define it. Laws usually are explicit. Where do you want to draw the line? Cub threw out magazine-fed as the ban point. That's very limiting, as has been pointed out, since pistols are magazine-fed. The simple fact that I can't own a fully automatic gun, or a Predator drone for that matter, means we've been lenient with the Second Amendment if it truly was intended to allow citizens to defend themselves from potential government abuse. We have allowed elected officials to enact weapon-restricting policies, so we have options: elect an entirely new party to do away with all restrictions (GOP has OK'd gun-control measures), or maybe talk about which restrictions are worth pursuing. In this case, where does a gun which is this easy to modify to shoot at 900 RPM ( http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SD5-BBTXPhY ) fit into our current society? Would it be a stretch to ask manufacturers not to make such equipment available on a large scale? --- NNID: LoeliaPonsonby / [56] iS*LoPo - http://ironsightge.webs.com | |
Cubfan082 posted... coreyerb posted...This is a tangent, and sorry for picking this out. But how many of your neighbors have been burglarized? What are the burglary rates for your area? Is the ADT sign the only deterrent, or is it maybe more likely that it's random chance? You might be surprised how rare home invasions are. I meant I wasn't trying to pick on just that aspect of what you posted, but I thought it was worth addressing separately. Ever seen "This house is protected by Smith & Wesson" signs? Your ADT sign says the same thing - protected by a service which will quickly summon the police... with their guns. You might as well just put a sign up "I am willing to call the police if you break in." For many people, that's not enough. They feel the need to defend themselves with similar firepower to the mythical intruders, and in many places, they have that right. But aside from every gun-owning house having such a sign, I don't know how you'd argue criminals just know which areas have a high percentage of guns. Burglaries are more about opportunity, not weighing whether the person behind the door (who more often isn't even home during the break-in) might be packing. --- NNID: LoeliaPonsonby / [56] iS*LoPo - http://ironsightge.webs.com | |
ZimbabweBob posted... If the lawmakers on both sides could actually listen to what the other side has to say, evaluate each idea for its merits , not its political value, then we could make some real changes that make a difference. I really want this to happen. But is that possible when businesses which financially benefit from either more gun control or less are allowed to, uncapped, fund these lawmakers' campaigns? Political value is all they care about. Appease your financial backers or they'll purchase another candidate. Until we remove competing financial incentives from policymaking, we're not going to get intelligent discourse, only arguing about which third party gets to make the money. --- NNID: LoeliaPonsonby / [56] iS*LoPo - http://ironsightge.webs.com | |
Hawke0 posted... Drumguy posted...What does it take to get idiots in Washington to understand? Guns don't kill people. Video games don't kill people. PEOPLE kill people. Anything can be a weapon, so let's just ban everything. Haha, that's a good idea. Why didn't they think of that before? Oh wait.... XD | |
Drumguy posted... Hawke0 posted...Drumguy posted...What does it take to get idiots in Washington to understand? Guns don't kill people. Video games don't kill people. PEOPLE kill people. Anything can be a weapon, so let's just ban everything. Tounge-in-cheek but faulty logic. The point isn't that banning certain guns will eradicate murder, it's that banning the most effective killing machines will lessen the death toll of inevitable shooting events. Yeah a guy will still be able to stab his girlfriend, but it's a lot harder to mow down 20 civilians in rapid succession with a handgun. --- NNID: LoeliaPonsonby / [56] iS*LoPo - http://ironsightge.webs.com | |
Please be clear, I threw out high capacity magazines as the starting point, not magazines period. I also threw out internal magazines and fire caps for high damage dealing weapons. --- Did you really just instruct someone to search the Internet for the truth? I never thought I would die like this, but I always hoped... | |
coreyerb posted...
So 10 civilian deaths is okay? That's easily attainable with a handgun/shotgun/what-have-you if you're the only person that brought a gun or two to a fist fight. This is the "slippery slope" that we're talking about. Ban one thing because it "kills too efficiently", and you just move the bar for what is "too efficient" to the point where you feel justified in banning everything. The important thing here is firearm education (and background checking, of course) as part of the licensing/procurement process. For obtaining a concealed-carry permit in Michigan, you have to attend an 8-10 hour training session (typically about 5 applicants per instructor) that has hands-on sessions at the firing range to ensure the applicant wields the weapon safely and responsibly; sessions covering safe storage of the weapon and ammo; sessions describing the decision process for ever unholstering your weapon; etc. etc. etc. If you don't conduct yourself properly around these weapons and lessons, you don't get a license. These are the IMPORTANT lessons that need to be taught when possessing a gun. If you just start banning guns, the black market - in which these lessons will never be taught - will become the go-to source for someone that wants a gun. --- &.Machine NNID, PSN: Machine1136 | |
DoomsSD posted... Cubfan082 posted...I live in Joliet dude, instead of trying to be all cool kid and use homophobic slurs why don't you just ask me that question... point 1 is not an insult, but the truth of the matter. Point 2 is obvious tongue in cheek humor, thus #lightenup --- The one and only Reaper | |
Machine1136 posted... coreyerb posted... It is only a slippery slope to people who have irrational fears... ...this "black market" that you speak of, do you have it on pintrest? Can I find it on google? Who even has a guy who knows a guy that is a guy who deals M60s? Chances are to be that close to something like that you already are a criminal, furthering the beleif that private law abiding citizens have no need for such weapons. ...and if we focus on controling the "black market" with severe punishments for illegally dealing weapons, such as 20 to life terms you make the risk far greater than the reward. The same should be said for those who knowingly posses illegal fire arms. Attending conceal and carry traing would not have prevented Adam Lanza from stealing his mothers weapons, which she did not secure in her house with a child she knew was anti social and being treated with anti depressants. Some of the children who died at Sandy Hook had upwards of 12 bullets in them. They were not shot 12 times directly mind you, but had twelve bullets in them because as he shot the first row of children huddled against the walls, the bullets were passing through them and into the children behind them, who then were directly shot after the children in front dropped dead to the floor leaving him a clean target to re engage after reload. This is what was done with this type of weapon with that type of magazine capacity. And he brought more to the school, but left it in the car, likley because it was too damn heavy to carry it all. Guns don't kill people, people kill people. But that gun and the magazines legally purchased for it with the amount of ammo legally purchased for it turned a meek indivudual into a killing machine. I don't have all answers, but status quo is obviously no longer an option. It seems like more than a reasonable compromise to restrict magazine capacity, and I would honeslty like to hear from someone who can say rationally why a private citizen needs to have 7-30 round mags in their house full metal jacket on an assualt style weapon... ,,,that is not personal defense, that is not put food on the table....so tell me why? --- Did you really just instruct someone to search the Internet for the truth? I never thought I would die like this, but I always hoped... |
Facebook
Twitter
