Gun registration in California? They just signed a law giving gun owner information to outside parties..

[Donald H]

Wow. The 'its because I'm black' meme you see on the internet is just that, a meme. You are not actually supposed to take it seriously. I have never actually heard anyone try and justify banning a weapon because it is black....

I'm trying to move the debate forward with new ideas. The point I'm making is that the 'black' weapons appeal the worst of the pro-gun group. These are the same culprits who will use them to shoot at human silouette targets.

Their mindset causes them to fantasize about war and killing people in foreign lands and that has sometimes translated into killing at home in America.

There are far, far too many mass shootings in America and so maybe it's time to stop sending thoughts and prayers and instead look at the possible reasons.

A closer look at a few of the extreme gun personalities posting on this board might provide some clues as to what drives their attitudes.

 

[M14 Shooter]

The point I'm making is that the 'black' weapons appeal the worst of the pro-gun group

^^^
This is a lie.

 

[Polishprince]

I'm trying to move the debate forward with new ideas. The point I'm making is that the 'black' weapons appeal the worst of the pro-gun group. These are the same culprits who will use them to shoot at human silouette targets.

Their mindset causes them to fantasize about war and killing people in foreign lands and that has sometimes translated into killing at home in America.

There are far, far too many mass shootings in America and so maybe it's time to stop sending thoughts and prayers and instead look at the possible reasons.

A closer look at a few of the extreme gun personalities posting on this board might provide some clues as to what drives their attitudes.

That's a load of shit, you know.

There is virtually no one who fantasizes about such things, and the few that there are there is no way to identify or stop them anyhow.

Do you really think that murder victims would be a lot happier if they had to worry about getting garroted, stabbed or crucified, instead of being shot?

I don't see it, really

 

[Donald H]

That's a load of shit, you know.

There is virtually no one who fantasizes about such things, and the few that there are there is no way to identify or stop them anyhow.

I suspect some betray their propensity for violence by their avatars alone, and some have openly expressed their fantasies of an attempte burglary on their own home.

Do you really think that murder victims would be a lot happier if they had to worry about getting garroted, stabbed or crucified, instead of being shot?

No, and that has nothing to do with the discussion.
The guns are more efficient for killing people and the gunners gone bad don't have to get their hands bloody.

Something to consider: Cowards are more attracted to guns because guns build immediate confidence and gratification for the more cowardly.

 

[M14 Shooter]

I suspect some betray their propensity for violence by their avatars alone, and some have openly expressed their fantasies of an attempte burglary on their own home.
No, and that has nothing to do with the discussion.
The guns are more efficient for killing people and the gunners gone bad don't have to get their hands bloody.
Something to consider: Cowards are more attracted to guns because guns build immediate confidence and gratification for the more cowardly.

^^^
This is a lie.

 

[AZrailwhale]

Slavery was the policy of the US government, and the ONLY reason why it ended was because the South had a bowl of dumbass and tried to secede. Left to his own devices, Lincoln never would have ended slavery, merely limited it's expansion.

It was a genocidal policy carried out for centuries... from1619 onwards.



Our genocidal policies sere a lot more thorough than that. We sent in the Army to slaughter the Buffalo to deprive them of their main food source.

We forced them on to Reservations, which were so efficient that they were the model for Hitler's concentration camps.

Guns do not keep government from acting shitty.

Okay, so you skipped over the Philippine War, you know, that genocidal war we fought against probably the nicest people in Asia because they merely wanted their own country. Probably a good call on your part. Fortunately for you, most Americans don't even know we ever fought a war in the Philippines, much less how bad it was.



Uh, no, guy, what brought us the Vietnam War was our attempt to impose a form of government on them THEY DIDN'T WANT.

Our own government admitted if Ho Chi Mihn was on the ballot, he'd have won an election in South Vietnam.

The point that goes over your head is...

Guns do not make governments act better. Ever. That we should tolerate 43,000 deaths every year because hey, it make government scared, that's just a stupid reason.

Lincoln was killing slavery, by limiting it to the southern slave states. The south had largely depleted it's soil by over farming trying to get a return on it's expensive slaves. Slavery would have died out within a couple of decades just like it did in the rest of the western hemisphere. A slave economy is inefficient by nature and can't compete with free labor; people work much harder when it's to their benefit than they do to avoid the lash.

 

[AZrailwhale]

That sentence isn't a slogan, it is a quote from the Supreme Court.

I repeated it twice because you twice made the same dumb point that the right comes from the Constitution, that the right to arms exists "because the constitution said so" and because the framers "couldn't define a militia clearly".

In truth, the Court has been boringly consistent reaffirming the "not granted [thus] not in any manner dependent" principle for going on 145 years.

Supreme Court, 1876: "The right . . . of "bearing arms for a lawful purpose" [that of self-defense in public from the KKK by former slaves in Louisiana] . . . is not a right granted by the Constitution. Neither is it in any manner dependent upon that instrument for its existence. . . ."​

​

Supreme Court, 1886: "the right of the people to keep and bear arms is not a right granted by the Constitution. Neither is it in any manner dependent upon that instrument for its existence. . . . "​

​

Supreme Court, 2008: "it has always been widely understood that the Second Amendment, like the First and Fourth Amendments, codified a pre-existing right. The very text of the Second Amendment implicitly recognizes the pre-existence of the right and declares only that it “shall not be infringed.” As we said in . . . 1876 , “[t]his is not a right granted by the Constitution. Neither is it in any manner dependent upon that instrument for its existence. . . .”​

I can always tell I've won when imbecilic anti-gunners don't recognize the quote and can't comprehend what the quote means and are completely ignorant how that quote destroys their ridiculous arguments.

What drives me nuts is that liberals either refuse, or are unable to comprehend that the Bill of Rights is about things the government is BANNED from doing. None of the ten say that people have the right to do anything, they all say the government is banned from restricting the people from doing things.

 

[AZrailwhale]

Wha

A simple acceptance of the fact that AR type weapons shouldn't be permitted on account of the attraction to mentally deficient characters who dress up in pseudo military costumes, would go a long way on settling the gun debate.

Rational people could easily accept hunters and gun enthusiastics being permitted to have semi-auto weapons such as the M1 Garand, Wild Bill's Garland rifle, or even semi-auto shotguns.

What do you think the difference between a M-1 Garand and a AR-15 is?

 

[Abatis]

I'm trying to move the debate forward with new ideas.

No, you are tying to find some validation for your insecurities and hostilities.

The point I'm making is that the 'black' weapons appeal the worst of the pro-gun group. These are the same culprits who will use them to shoot at human silouette targets.

Their mindset causes them to fantasize about war and killing people in foreign lands and that has sometimes translated into killing at home in America.

Projection, projection, projection . . .

There are far, far too many mass shootings in America and so maybe it's time to stop sending thoughts and prayers and instead look at the possible reasons.

The vast majority of mass shootings (using the Gun Violence Archive criteria, "4+ shot in one incident, excluding the perpetrator(s), at one location, at roughly the same time") are just the everyday violence that happens a few times a week where most shootings happen and are the kind of shootings one doesn't really pay much attention to, except that they lead the local news in just about any large city.

They are the drug corner drive-by's, the drug house rip squads, retaliation shootings at candlelight vigils for other shooting victims and just general mayhem of thug life.

In other words, the "4+ shot in one incident" is great for the DEMedia to throw out histrionic numbers (557 as of Oct 10, 2021) that you glom on to and love to throw out but a close examination destroys the "Whitey Gun Nut on a rampage" narrative.

The nation's "mass shootings" are what most 'regular' shootings are, inner-city young guys shooting inner-city young guys over stupid crap that nobody but inner-city young guys care about.

A closer look at a few of the extreme gun personalities posting on this board might provide some clues as to what drives their attitudes.

Holy shit, I understand why we make you so horny, but you don't need to come on so strong.

.

 

[AZrailwhale]

It also mentions well-regulated militias...



Mexico copied our Second Amendment verbatim... they just don't have the bizarre interpretations of it we do.



Fetuses aren't people. Women have been getting abortions since Jesus time.

When you guys advocate imprisoning women for murder for having abortions, then you can get back to me about how serious you are.

While they copied the Second Amendment, they then turned around and banned civilians from carrying guns in public, restricting them to inside the home only. Civilians are restricted from owning anything larger than a .22 rifle, a .380 (9mm Kurz) pistol or a shotgun 12 gauge or smaller. All legal firearms must be purchased from The Directorate of Commercialization of Arms and Munitions which has exactly ONE store that is located in Mexico City.

 

[Donald H]

......... are just the everyday violence that happens a few times a week where most shootings happen and are the kind of shootings one doesn't really pay much attention to,

America needs to start paying attention! Regardless of who is doing the shooting, there's no doubt there's far too much shooting in which innocent people are the victims too.

At least you acknowledge the slaughter of Americans by gun, even though you attach your political spin to it.

America has squandered freedom away for the sake of ginned up notions of guns bringing freedom back.

Mapped: The world's most and least free countries

India was the center of last year's democratic decline.

www.axios.com

• The U.S. (86) ranks 52nd, between Slovakia and Belize.

More handguns and AR-15's can't buy 'safety' that has compromised your freedom.

.

 

[M14 Shooter]

At least you acknowledge the slaughter of Americans by gun, even though you attach your political spin to it.

The fact you have no rational basis for your statement aside...
A firearm is -far- more likely to be used in self-defense than to commit murder.

America has squandered freedom away for the sake of ginned up notions of guns bringing freedom back.

^^^
This is a lie.

 

[Man of Ethics]

So?


The idea of owning and carrying a firearm isn't to shoot anyone.

In fact, ideally, you hope never to have to.

Is America's nuclear arsenal a waste, even though its been unused since 1945? Of course not- the threat of a thermonuclear attack helps to keep the miscreant nations at bay.

Similar to carrying a gun. If a criminal is looking for someone to rob, rape or murder, he's going to avoid those he thinks are armed. He's looking for easy pickings, not a gun fight.

Hopefully, governments which have nuclear weapons are 100% responsible.

 

[Man of Ethics]

I have enjoyed the gun debate for nearly 30 years; started on USENET in 1992 in talk.politics.guns.

In all that time I don't think I have ever seen such a perfect, succinct example of a poster's words so magnificently manifesting / embodying their username.

Congratulations!

WOW!

Ethics is a relative concept. What is Ethical in one culture/subculture may be unethical in another.

But enabling murder and suicide would seem unethical to me.

 

[M14 Shooter]

But enabling murder and suicide would seem unethical to me.

You;'e right.
We need to tear down those bridges and tall buildings - right now.

 

[Donald H]

A firearm is -far- more likely to be used in self-defense than to commit murder.

The deaths by gun is the same result.
And in instances of a person not defending him/herself with a gun, there are fewer deaths as a result.

Gun Threats and Self-Defense Gun Use

1-3. Guns are not used millions of times each year in self-defense We use epidemiological theory to explain why the “false positive” problem for rare events can lead to large overestimates of the i…

www.hsph.harvard.edu

The evidence is overwhelmingly against the use of guns and that's not just in home burglaries.
Just one example:

6. Guns in the home are used more often to intimidate intimates than to thwart crime

Using data from a national random-digit-dial telephone survey conducted under the direction of the Harvard Injury Control Research Center, we investigated how and when guns are used in the home. We found that guns in the home are used more often to frighten intimates than to thwart crime; other weapons are far more commonly used against intruders than are guns.

Azrael, Deborah R; Hemenway, David. In the safety of your own home: Results from a national survey of gun use at home. Social Science and Medicine. 2000; 50:285-91.

 

[Man of Ethics]

The deaths by gun is the same result.
And in instances of a person not defending him/herself with a gun, there are fewer deaths as a result.

Gun Threats and Self-Defense Gun Use

1-3. Guns are not used millions of times each year in self-defense We use epidemiological theory to explain why the “false positive” problem for rare events can lead to large overestimates of the i…

www.hsph.harvard.edu

The evidence is overwhelmingly against the use of guns and that's not just in home burglaries.

Definitely. Guns take lives much more then they save lives.

 

[hadit]

Uh, yeah, women shooting their husbands more often wouldn't be a good thing. It's that time of the month, bang, bang.



Blah, blah, most gun murders are domestic violence, and all gun suicides are.

So we ban guns, then we only have to concertrate on the criminal gun use, that's a manageable number

We know from prior experience with you that you don't like women all that much, but did you have to make it abundantly clear?

 

[M14 Shooter]

The deaths by gun is the same result.

For each firearm used to commit murder, >10 are used in self-defense.
For each firearm used to commit suicide > 5 are used in self-defense.
Whatever your point, it is negated by the above.

The evidence is overwhelmingly against the use of guns and that's not just in home burglaries.

"The evidence"?
423,000,000 guns in the US; 10,500 gun-related murders
For every gun used to commit murder, > 40,000 are not; 99.99752% of guns are not used to commit murder.
Whatever your point, it is negated by the above.

 

[M14 Shooter]

Definitely. Guns take lives much more then they save lives.

^^^
This is a lie.