What The Hell Does A Normal American Need An Army Assault Weapon For.....Target Practice?

[JTalbain]

Debating with right wingers on this issue is like debating tolerance and human rights with ISIS......

We are talking about (as the title clearly states) military assault weapons' bans......and the dimwitted right wingers revert to the moronic "....they're trying to yake our guns away and I know my 2nd amendment rights...."

Too simplistic a view of right wingers.....so. let them play with all the guns they want to either ease their inordinate FEARS, or embellish their weak egos..

You want to talk about "simplistic"? That's liberalism. Posing this question is every bit as stupid and outrageous as someone posing the question "What the hell does a normal American need a computer and internet access for....spreading propaganda?"

The technology you use to piss and moan like a child about the 2nd Amendment is far more advanced and far more dangerous than any fully automatic weapon, junior. The fact that this simple reality never even crossed your very small mind is why you are completely unqualified to be having a discussion about the 2nd Amednement.

I could get into the fact that our life literally could not exist in the same form without computers and internet access. Or that, aside from a few sport hunters and hobbyists, the vast majority of people could go right on their merry way if guns didn't exist. But those facts are neither here nor there.

Here's the reason why these discussions are so difficult: Gun control advocates are trying to address an issue and Pro-gun advocates are trying to ignore it. We keep on hearing that "the only thing that will stop a bad guy with a gun is a good guy with a gun". It's then completely ignored that bad guys with guns are the problem, and some measure needs to be taken to address that. You can't police thought or violent tendencies, but you can police possessions. If the equation for a shooting is bad guy + gun = violence, you want to prevent the violence, and you can't regulate away a person's ability to be a violent sociopath, what does that leave?

I'll go ahead and say that I am not in favor of mass gun confiscations or other more hardcore gun control methods. But a warning to those who want to actually keep their guns: The Second Amendment is not an impenetrable defense. There needs to be a serious effort made to address violence within our country. As well, the rights granted by the Second Amendment need to be defended in ways that are actually logical, rather than treating them as if the are self-evident. What I'm tired of seeing is people who resist gun control by hiding behind the Second Amendment and who refuse to acknowledge the real issues or offer alternatives. If all you've got is "We're exercising our Second Amendment rights!", then, well... eventually people will start looking at exercising their 21st Amendment rights. I don't think I really need to say this but...
Majority of Americans Want Stricter Gun Control For First Time In Years
Poll: Gun control support spikes after shooting - CNNPolitics.com

None of these numbers are going to get much more favorable for Pro-gun advocates without significant change in our country.

 

[2aguy]

Debating with right wingers on this issue is like debating tolerance and human rights with ISIS......

We are talking about (as the title clearly states) military assault weapons' bans......and the dimwitted right wingers revert to the moronic "....they're trying to yake our guns away and I know my 2nd amendment rights...."

Too simplistic a view of right wingers.....so. let them play with all the guns they want to either ease their inordinate FEARS, or embellish their weak egos..

You want to talk about "simplistic"? That's liberalism. Posing this question is every bit as stupid and outrageous as someone posing the question "What the hell does a normal American need a computer and internet access for....spreading propaganda?"

The technology you use to piss and moan like a child about the 2nd Amendment is far more advanced and far more dangerous than any fully automatic weapon, junior. The fact that this simple reality never even crossed your very small mind is why you are completely unqualified to be having a discussion about the 2nd Amednement.

I could get into the fact that our life literally could not exist in the same form without computers and internet access. Or that, aside from a few sport hunters and hobbyists, the vast majority of people could go right on their merry way if guns didn't exist. But those facts are neither here nor there.

Here's the reason why these discussions are so difficult: Gun control advocates are trying to address an issue and Pro-gun advocates are trying to ignore it. We keep on hearing that "the only thing that will stop a bad guy with a gun is a good guy with a gun". It's then completely ignored that bad guys with guns are the problem, and some measure needs to be taken to address that. You can't police thought or violent tendencies, but you can police possessions. If the equation for a shooting is bad guy + gun = violence, you want to prevent the violence, and you can't regulate away a person's ability to be a violent sociopath, what does that leave?

I'll go ahead and say that I am not in favor of mass gun confiscations or other more hardcore gun control methods. But a warning to those who want to actually keep their guns: The Second Amendment is not an impenetrable defense. There needs to be a serious effort made to address violence within our country. As well, the rights granted by the Second Amendment need to be defended in ways that are actually logical, rather than treating them as if the are self-evident. What I'm tired of seeing is people who resist gun control by hiding behind the Second Amendment and who refuse to acknowledge the real issues or offer alternatives. If all you've got is "We're exercising our Second Amendment rights!", then, well... eventually people will start looking at exercising their 21st Amendment rights. I don't think I really need to say this but...
Majority of Americans Want Stricter Gun Control For First Time In Years
Poll: Gun control support spikes after shooting - CNNPolitics.com

None of these numbers are going to get much more favorable for Pro-gun advocates without significant change in our country.

that is why I post.......anti-gunners are not addressing criminals...they are focusing all of their efforts on laws that will not stop actual gun crime, or mass shootings, but will make it harder for law abiding people to access guns.

We have issued alternatives.....the anti-gunners keep proposing laws that do nothing to address gun crime, they have been actually shown how those laws fail to stop criminals and mass shooters but they do not care.

The simple fact is, when you catch a criminal with a gun, you need to lock them up for a long time...that is how they do it in Japan..if you are felon caught with a gun in Japan....you go to jail for 30 years....it has stopped hardened Yakuza from using and carrying guns....it has stopped the next gang war that was brewing in Japan....

You need to aim gun control at the criminals who use guns....not law abiding people...in Chicago...a felon caught with a gun can be back on the street with a court date in less than a week....and often they go out and murder people......and if they are actually sentenced...they serve less than 2 years...and get out and then shoot people.......

You are wrong...you can't stop possession of guns by criminals...they can't do it in France, Britain, Australia....they have done it in Japan with 30 year prison sentences...they also fine the Yakuza bosses millions of dollars when one of their minions shoot people........

Britain did what you said, they confiscated guns....and their gun crime rate stayed the same....after spiking.......and now it is up 4%.....

That link you gave....is based on liars polling the uninformed........the liars doing the polls don't tell he uninformed poll takers what they mean by background checks, or that background checks will not stop criminals and mass shooters from getting guns.......

So those links are pretty silly if you want real action on gun crime.

 

[Mikeoxenormous]

"What The Hell Does A Normal American Need An Army Assault Weapon For.....Target Practice?"

What makes you think you have a right to demand an answer? Would a simple "yes" make you happy?

Actually the BEST answer to the O/P is that NORMAL Americans don't need an army assault weapon to hunt Bambis and shoot at targets......However, ABNORMAL Americans need to show how macho they are.....and succumb to the NRA propaganda.

Abnormal Americans are the men who look at another mans hairy pimply ass and say "Hmm, Hmm, Hmm, now that looks good, or a woman looks at another womans muff and wants to take the dive into it, but cant get satisfied because the penetration is only artificial". Yep Abnormal people are those that sit in their parents basement until they are 26, using their parents healthcare policy, eating government cheese, free cellphone, free money, using their parents Netflix account, while screwing their floozy trailer park girlfriend, while smoking Dope. Abnormal Americans, want the government to take care of them, instead of going out on their own, and taking personal responsibility for their actions and make something of themselves.
Moonbattery: Psychiatrist Confirms: Liberalism Is a Mental Disorder

Based on strikingly irrational beliefs and emotions, modern liberals relentlessly undermine the most important principles on which our freedoms were founded. Like spoiled, angry children, they rebel against the normal responsibilities of adulthood and demand that a parental government meet their needs from cradle to grave.

Nitwit4900 is the perfect example of a typical liberal. Dumber than a box of rocks.

 

[M14 Shooter]

There needs to be a serious effort made to address violence within our country.

Agreed.
And, after those efforts are made, and should they fail, you can talk about guns.
Violence is a symptom. Treat the disease. Leave the law abiding alone.

 

[Mikeoxenormous]

There needs to be a serious effort made to address violence within our country.

Agreed.
And, after those efforts are made, and should they fail, you can talk about guns.
Violence is a symptom. Treat the disease. Leave the law abiding alone.

In Saudi Arabia, crime happens but no where near the scale it does in America.
If you are caught stealing, you get a notch in your ear showing that you committed a crime.
If you are caught stealing a second time, they check your ear and if notched, you right hand is removed from your wrist and you get no welfare. Better learn how work left handed, and if not the family better take care of you.
If you are caught a third time, if you lost one hand then you lose the other hand, no welfare and you better learn to eat with your feet. It is very hard to steal with stubs but if you do again, then pretty much you go to jail, for a long time. No food from the government(family or friends) water comes in from 1 side of the floor out the other side and you don't piss where it comes in.
Now if you commit murder, then you get 1 appeal, then have your head removed from your shoulders, end of game, no more repeat offenders. No family member gets reimbursed.

We coddle our criminals, and treat our victims like shit. When living in Saudi Arabia, I could leave my car and house unlocked. Can you do that in America today?

 

[Little-Acorn]

What The Hell Does A Normal American Need An Army Assault Weapon For.....Target Practice?


Normal Americans need a gun such as an AR-15, to protect their rights from hysterical leftists who screech, "What The Hell Does A Normal American Need An Army Assault Weapon For.....Target Practice?" in the leftists' ongoing efforts to illegally take their guns away.

 

[Campbell]

Debating with right wingers on this issue is like debating tolerance and human rights with ISIS......

We are talking about (as the title clearly states) military assault weapons' bans......and the dimwitted right wingers revert to the moronic "....they're trying to yake our guns away and I know my 2nd amendment rights...."

Too simplistic a view of right wingers.....so. let them play with all the guns they want to either ease their inordinate FEARS, or embellish their weak egos..

Their guns represent their limp, tiny dicks..........makes them feel good to go armed.

 

[Chuz Life]

Debating with right wingers on this issue is like debating tolerance and human rights with ISIS......

We are talking about (as the title clearly states) military assault weapons' bans......and the dimwitted right wingers revert to the moronic "....they're trying to yake our guns away and I know my 2nd amendment rights...."

Too simplistic a view of right wingers.....so. let them play with all the guns they want to either ease their inordinate FEARS, or embellish their weak egos..

Their guns represent their limp, tiny dicks..........makes them feel good to go armed.

Wow, look! A talking vag.

 

[M14 Shooter]

Their guns represent their limp, tiny dicks..........makes them feel good to go armed.

Spoken like a 7yr old. Well done.

 

[JTalbain]

that is why I post.......anti-gunners are not addressing criminals...they are focusing all of their efforts on laws that will not stop actual gun crime, or mass shootings, but will make it harder for law abiding people to access guns.

We have issued alternatives.....the anti-gunners keep proposing laws that do nothing to address gun crime, they have been actually shown how those laws fail to stop criminals and mass shooters but they do not care.

The simple fact is, when you catch a criminal with a gun, you need to lock them up for a long time...that is how they do it in Japan..if you are felon caught with a gun in Japan....you go to jail for 30 years....it has stopped hardened Yakuza from using and carrying guns....it has stopped the next gang war that was brewing in Japan....

You need to aim gun control at the criminals who use guns....not law abiding people...in Chicago...a felon caught with a gun can be back on the street with a court date in less than a week....and often they go out and murder people......and if they are actually sentenced...they serve less than 2 years...and get out and then shoot people.......

You are wrong...you can't stop possession of guns by criminals...they can't do it in France, Britain, Australia....they have done it in Japan with 30 year prison sentences...they also fine the Yakuza bosses millions of dollars when one of their minions shoot people........

Britain did what you said, they confiscated guns....and their gun crime rate stayed the same....after spiking.......and now it is up 4%.....

That link you gave....is based on liars polling the uninformed........the liars doing the polls don't tell he uninformed poll takers what they mean by background checks, or that background checks will not stop criminals and mass shooters from getting guns.......

So those links are pretty silly if you want real action on gun crime.

This is the kind of BS that shuts down intelligent debate.

1) How exactly are you defining "gun control"? Long jail sentences for criminals who use guns are a measure of gun control, and you praise Japan for doing such. It might be a measure of gun control that you agree with, but it is a measure of gun control. Virtually no one of note is actually saying they want the government to go door to door and take all the guns away from law abiding citizens. Trying to equate all gun control with confiscation is intellectually dishonest, and I'm pretty sure you know that. It's also worth noting that Japan, in addition to the legal penalties has EXTREMELY STRICT gun control laws. Moreso than any other country you mentioned.

2) Your opinion of the polls is COMPLETELY IRRELEVANT. They are merely a measurement of what people think and what their opinions are. If 90% of people wanted to abolish the Second Amendment, it wouldn't matter how flawed the methodology of the study is. An ignorant, biased, or overzealous person's vote counts for the exact same amount as yours. As such, choosing to ignore numbers like that is putting your head in the sand. If people aren't willing to make genuine arguments in defense of the right to bear arms, and they can't give legitimate proven reasons as to why the right is important, the country will move on without them, and they'll lose those rights forever.

3) You are flatly wrong about gun control having no effect in other countries. Go ahead and call the numbers liars, but they are what they are. All numbers are latest figures available.

Firearm Homicides per 100K Population: USA- 3.43, United Kingdom- 0.23, France- 0.21, Australia- 0.16, List of countries by firearm-related death rate - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Murder rate per 100K Population: USA- 3.9, France-1.2, UK-1.0, Australia-1.0, List of countries by intentional homicide rate - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Correlation does not equal causation, but if you're trying to defend gun rights, you are fighting a seriously uphill battle trying to claim that the correlation doesn't even exist. And I'll go ahead and predict the next argument. "Oh my God, a wiki article? Anyone can change that! We shouldn't take that seriously at all." But the wiki is FULLY ANNOTATED by actual scholarly sources. So please, if you're going to waste everyone's time by deflecting and trying to attack the veracity of the source. At least have the decency to post what you think the REAL numbers are. If you can't, know that the average person is going to rely on those numbers because they are readily available, backed up by scholarly sources, and more authoritative than what some guy on a message board is saying. Try to overcome your confirmation bias.

 

[nat4900]

This is the kind of BS that shuts down intelligent debate.

.....and let me add something that drives me a bit crazy when "debating"this issue with R-Wers........We are talking about banning military-style assault weapons......and they quickly respond with, "...are you trying to take my guns from me.....over my dead body.."

I well know that we have among many right wingers the mentality of the "old west" where everyone carried a gun as the instrument that made even the weakest among them "equal" .....so taking ALL guns away is absurd (albeit a great crutch for right wingers).......:

 

[M14 Shooter]

Correlation does not equal causation, but if you're trying to defend gun rights, you are fighting a seriously uphill battle trying to claim that the correlation doesn't even exist.

And yet, 1993-2014, violent crime as well as gun-related violent crime in the US fell ~55%, even though scores of millions of new guns ere sold.
If more guns = more violence/crime/murder.... how'd that happen?

 

[Little-Acorn]

What The Hell Does A Normal American Need An Army Assault Weapon For.....Target Practice?


Normal Americans need a gun such as an AR-15, to protect their rights from hysterical leftists who screech, "What The Hell Does A Normal American Need An Army Assault Weapon For.....Target Practice?" in the leftists' ongoing efforts to force law-abiding people give up their guns.

 

[nat4900]

In case anyone was wondering who the right wing IDIOTS are who claim, "...oh my god those liberals want to take ALL guns away from us fearful conservatives...."......Here chimes in Little [brain] Acorn to dispel any doubts.

 

[JTalbain]

Correlation does not equal causation, but if you're trying to defend gun rights, you are fighting a seriously uphill battle trying to claim that the correlation doesn't even exist.

And yet, 1993-2014, violent crime as well as gun-related violent crime in the US fell ~55%, even though scores of millions of new guns ere sold.
If more guns = more violence/crime/murder.... how'd that happen?

Because gun sales are not the only factor in determining gun crime. If you had ever worked seriously with statistics, you would know how ridiculous it is to claim that any relation between two factors over such a long period in such a huge system as the crime rate in society. It's such a nebulous topic at that scale that it's almost not even worth mentioning. There's no control and too many diluting factors at that level to determine any effects.

Looking for a straight up consistent correlation? Compare GDP per capita and people living in poverty by country to murder rate. It's pretty clear that richer countries with fewer destitute and desperate people are less likely to murder, which explains why third world countries can be such hellholes.

We should hop on board that train instead! Silly liberals! Rather than addressing gun control, we should address poverty and economic prosperity in order to address the root causes of crime! If we were legislating that, we would need to make sure people were able to get enough money to live. Also, address the surprise things that can happen in life to create a safety net, preventing people from becoming too destitute and desperate. So we're looking at a better minimum wage, welfare programs, universal healthca... wait a tick...

What was that I said earlier, about people in debate deflecting and shutting down arguments rather than offering alternatives? I'm noticing a trend...

 

[Papageorgio]

This is the kind of BS that shuts down intelligent debate.

.....and let me add something that drives me a bit crazy when "debating"this issue with R-Wers........We are talking about banning military-style assault weapons......and they quickly respond with, "...are you trying to take my guns from me.....over my dead body.."

I well know that we have among many right wingers the mentality of the "old west" where everyone carried a gun as the instrument that made even the weakest among them "equal" .....so taking ALL guns away is absurd (albeit a great crutch for right wingers).......:

Already disproven, try again.

 

[Cecilie1200]

Debating with right wingers on this issue is like debating tolerance and human rights with ISIS......

We are talking about (as the title clearly states) military assault weapons' bans......and the dimwitted right wingers revert to the moronic "....they're trying to yake our guns away and I know my 2nd amendment rights...."

Too simplistic a view of right wingers.....so. let them play with all the guns they want to either ease their inordinate FEARS, or embellish their weak egos..

Yes, you are talking about "military assault weapons' bans" . . . for weapons that are NOT "military assault weapons". So how concerned am I about being called "simplistic and dimwitted" by someone who can't make their point without lying like a frigging rug?

PLEASE don't like me or agree with me. As long as the toxic-waste likes of you disapproves of me, I know I'm right.

 

[Cecilie1200]

Debating with right wingers on this issue is like debating tolerance and human rights with ISIS......

We are talking about (as the title clearly states) military assault weapons' bans......and the dimwitted right wingers revert to the moronic "....they're trying to yake our guns away and I know my 2nd amendment rights...."

Too simplistic a view of right wingers.....so. let them play with all the guns they want to either ease their inordinate FEARS, or embellish their weak egos..

Their guns represent their limp, tiny dicks..........makes them feel good to go armed.

No, what makes ME feel good is knowing YOU DON'T go armed . . . and the criminal-coddling culture you leftists have created is bound to catch up with your delusional, helpless ass eventually.

You know who mindlessly parrots "You only want guns to compensate for a small dick" as an argument? Someone who spends a lot of time compensating for a small dick. It's obviously made you obsessed with the concept.

 

[Cecilie1200]

This is the kind of BS that shuts down intelligent debate.

.....and let me add something that drives me a bit crazy when "debating"this issue with R-Wers........We are talking about banning military-style assault weapons......and they quickly respond with, "...are you trying to take my guns from me.....over my dead body.."

I well know that we have among many right wingers the mentality of the "old west" where everyone carried a gun as the instrument that made even the weakest among them "equal" .....so taking ALL guns away is absurd (albeit a great crutch for right wingers).......:

Let me add something that drives me a bit crazy when "debating" ANY issue with left-wingers . . . The fact that they think "debate" means "spin out a lot of lies and see what sticks".

I well know that we have among many left-wingers the mentality of the kindergarten where everyone holds hands and sits on the rug for story time and got applauded for the "achievement" of simply breathing in and out regularly . . . so saying that ANYTHING would actually make these genetic deficients "equal" to real people is absurd, (but a great crutch for left wingers).

By the way, learn to punctuate in a coherent fashion. Quantity does not equal quality when it comes to periods (any woman can tell you that), and this IS, at least nominally, your mother tongue. It's bad enough how difficult your fundamental ignorance and dishonesty makes your posts to read, without ALSO making them visually incomprehensible.

 

[M14 Shooter]

Correlation does not equal causation, but if you're trying to defend gun rights, you are fighting a seriously uphill battle trying to claim that the correlation doesn't even exist.

And yet, 1993-2014, violent crime as well as gun-related violent crime in the US fell ~55%, even though scores of millions of new guns ere sold.
If more guns = more violence/crime/murder.... how'd that happen?

Because gun sales are not the only factor in determining gun crime.

Oh... so having millions and millions more guns does not necessarily result in more crime, or less crime - there are "other factors".
Well said.