Ten Gun Myths and Memes-- Shot Down

[Pogo]

You asked how the map was bogus, I told you, now you are, quite obviously, desperate.

How typical.

I guess the boldface went right over your head. Oh well the stark irony amused me, that will suffice.

The map is bogus, you posted it, just like you posted the bogus OP.

You have an agenda.

And once again... this from the poster who started this thread.

Dig it.

 

[ABikerSailor]

Easier than flying a plane into a building?

Easier than driving a truck through a crowd?

The map is bogus.

Easier than flying a plane? Definitely. I used to be allowed to play in the FA-18 simulators over in Cecil Field when I was stationed there.

Easier than driving a truck through a crowd? Also yes as well. You have to think about the gas, the brake (clutch if you're in a standard transmission vehicle), as well as the steering and making sure you point in the right direction and are fast enough to run them down.

All you have to do with a gun is point and squeeze the trigger.

You want me to believe you flew a real simulator and think flying a plane into a building is hard? Next thing you will be telling me is that the only purpose of a fully automatic weapon is to kill people.

Wait, you already said that, didn't you?

Taking off isn't much of a problem...............all you have to do is remember what speed is going to get you airborne, and when you reach it, pull up on the stick.

Flying it is a bit different, because when you're in the air, not only do you have to see where you are, but you also have to pay attention to where you're gonna be in 30 seconds. Wanna know what pilot sensory overload is known as? Having your hair on fire.

And yeah................the only purpose of a fully automatic weapon is to kill as many people as possible. Ever heard of any hunter going after a deer with a machine gun? If you have more than 3 bullets in the deer, you've probably ruined the meat. How much worse would it be if it had 30-500 extra bullets in it?

 

[Quantum Windbag]

Easier than flying a plane? Definitely. I used to be allowed to play in the FA-18 simulators over in Cecil Field when I was stationed there.

Easier than driving a truck through a crowd? Also yes as well. You have to think about the gas, the brake (clutch if you're in a standard transmission vehicle), as well as the steering and making sure you point in the right direction and are fast enough to run them down.

All you have to do with a gun is point and squeeze the trigger.

You want me to believe you flew a real simulator and think flying a plane into a building is hard? Next thing you will be telling me is that the only purpose of a fully automatic weapon is to kill people.

Wait, you already said that, didn't you?

Taking off isn't much of a problem...............all you have to do is remember what speed is going to get you airborne, and when you reach it, pull up on the stick.

Flying it is a bit different, because when you're in the air, not only do you have to see where you are, but you also have to pay attention to where you're gonna be in 30 seconds. Wanna know what pilot sensory overload is known as? Having your hair on fire.

And yeah................the only purpose of a fully automatic weapon is to kill as many people as possible. Ever heard of any hunter going after a deer with a machine gun? If you have more than 3 bullets in the deer, you've probably ruined the meat. How much worse would it be if it had 30-500 extra bullets in it?

In other words, flying is no harder than driving. Especially when you factor in the fact that you can't get hurt in a simulator, and the F-18's fly by wire systems are designed to keep the plane in the air unless the pilot really works at crashing it.

I have the same two words for you that I did the last time you posted that balderdash, Vulcan Phalanx.

 

[Uncensored2008]

Taking off isn't much of a problem...............all you have to do is remember what speed is going to get you airborne, and when you reach it, pull up on the stick.

Flying it is a bit different, because when you're in the air, not only do you have to see where you are, but you also have to pay attention to where you're gonna be in 30 seconds. Wanna know what pilot sensory overload is known as? Having your hair on fire.

And yeah................the only purpose of a fully automatic weapon is to kill as many people as possible. Ever heard of any hunter going after a deer with a machine gun? If you have more than 3 bullets in the deer, you've probably ruined the meat. How much worse would it be if it had 30-500 extra bullets in it?

You've never held, much less fired a firearm in your life, have you?

 

[Pogo]

These are both red herrings; what method is "easier" isn't the point. Poisoning a city's water supply might be easier in terms of bang for the buck, but it's still not the point.

The point is that we do not have a flying-airplanes-into-buildings culture and we do not have a drive-a-truck-into-a-crowd culture. If we did, we'd have that problem (and a nice big map for Windbag to post in the name of truck control). But we don't.

Fairly simple: you deal with problems you actually have, not ones you don't.

 

[legaleagle_45]

These are both red herrings; what method is "easier" isn't the point. Poisoning a city's water supply might be easier in terms of bang for the buck, but it's still not the point.

The point is that we do not have a flying-airplanes-into-buildings culture and we do not have a drive-a-truck-into-a-crowd culture. If we did, we'd have that problem (and a nice big map for Windbag to post in the name of truck control). But we don't.

Fairly simple: you deal with problems you actually have, not ones you don't.

So we deal with the favored tool employed by violent people instead of finding solutions to violent people. Then when violent people no longer employ that favored tool because we have removed it from society and they start employing other tools that is when we start thinking of banning other things as well.. At what point do we begin addressing the actual causes instead of the symptoms?

Pogo, have you ever considered that gun control would not work in the USA because we already have over 300 million firearms in private hands, most of them unregistered?

 

[Uncensored2008]

These are both red herrings; what method is "easier" isn't the point. Poisoning a city's water supply might be easier in terms of bang for the buck, but it's still not the point.

The point is that we do not have a flying-airplanes-into-buildings culture and we do not have a drive-a-truck-into-a-crowd culture. If we did, we'd have that problem (and a nice big map for Windbag to post in the name of truck control). But we don't.

Nope, we have liberty embracing culture, and you democrats are dedicated to ending it.

Fairly simple: you deal with problems you actually have, not ones you don't.

The biggest problem we have is a left that is dedicated to ending civil liberty.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

These are both red herrings; what method is "easier" isn't the point. Poisoning a city's water supply might be easier in terms of bang for the buck, but it's still not the point.

The point is that we do not have a flying-airplanes-into-buildings culture and we do not have a drive-a-truck-into-a-crowd culture. If we did, we'd have that problem (and a nice big map for Windbag to post in the name of truck control). But we don't.

Fairly simple: you deal with problems you actually have, not ones you don't.

The government cannot dictate culture unless you institute a theocracy.

 

[Uncensored2008]

The government cannot dictate culture unless you institute a theocracy.

?

That begs the question of Mao's "Cultural Revolution..."

 

[Quantum Windbag]

The government cannot dictate culture unless you institute a theocracy.

?

That begs the question of Mao's "Cultural Revolution..."

How?

The Cultural Revolution not only failed, it was, essentially, an attempt to deify Mao.

 

[Pogo]

These are both red herrings; what method is "easier" isn't the point. Poisoning a city's water supply might be easier in terms of bang for the buck, but it's still not the point.

The point is that we do not have a flying-airplanes-into-buildings culture and we do not have a drive-a-truck-into-a-crowd culture. If we did, we'd have that problem (and a nice big map for Windbag to post in the name of truck control). But we don't.

Fairly simple: you deal with problems you actually have, not ones you don't.

So we deal with the favored tool employed by violent people instead of finding solutions to violent people. Then when violent people no longer employ that favored tool because we have removed it from society and they start employing other tools that is when we start thinking of banning other things as well.. At what point do we begin addressing the actual causes instead of the symptoms?

Pogo, have you ever considered that gun control would not work in the USA because we already have over 300 million firearms in private hands, most of them unregistered?

I don't agree with your premise in the first place. I can't answer that because you're putting words in my mouth.

 

[Pogo]

These are both red herrings; what method is "easier" isn't the point. Poisoning a city's water supply might be easier in terms of bang for the buck, but it's still not the point.

The point is that we do not have a flying-airplanes-into-buildings culture and we do not have a drive-a-truck-into-a-crowd culture. If we did, we'd have that problem (and a nice big map for Windbag to post in the name of truck control). But we don't.

Fairly simple: you deal with problems you actually have, not ones you don't.

The government cannot dictate culture unless you institute a theocracy.

Of course it can't. Who suggested it can? That's absurd.
Government didn't create gun culture either.

 

[Uncensored2008]

How?

The Cultural Revolution not only failed, it was, essentially, an attempt to deify Mao.

All leftists and communists attempt to control the culture. Lenin did, Stalin did, Mao did, Pol Pot did, Obama does. Their success is debatable, but the attempt is a constant.

 

[jon_berzerk]

pogo still thinks guns pull their own triggers.

i hate to point this out, since i actually kinda like you, but that statement is completely wrong.

You have absolutely no evidence that pogo thinks.

--lol

 

[ABikerSailor]

Taking off isn't much of a problem...............all you have to do is remember what speed is going to get you airborne, and when you reach it, pull up on the stick.

Flying it is a bit different, because when you're in the air, not only do you have to see where you are, but you also have to pay attention to where you're gonna be in 30 seconds. Wanna know what pilot sensory overload is known as? Having your hair on fire.

And yeah................the only purpose of a fully automatic weapon is to kill as many people as possible. Ever heard of any hunter going after a deer with a machine gun? If you have more than 3 bullets in the deer, you've probably ruined the meat. How much worse would it be if it had 30-500 extra bullets in it?

You've never held, much less fired a firearm in your life, have you?

Actually, started off when I was around 10 with a 22, and later when I got older, I graduated to a British 3.08.

Then? Later on in the Navy (which I joined when I was 18), not only did I get to fire a 50 cal. machine gun, but later on, I volunteered for the Security Force and ended up qualifying for a Sharpshooter ribbon.

I'm guessing you've never served in the military, have you? (You started the bullshit questions ya ******* asshat.)

 

[bigrebnc1775]

Taking off isn't much of a problem...............all you have to do is remember what speed is going to get you airborne, and when you reach it, pull up on the stick.

Flying it is a bit different, because when you're in the air, not only do you have to see where you are, but you also have to pay attention to where you're gonna be in 30 seconds. Wanna know what pilot sensory overload is known as? Having your hair on fire.

And yeah................the only purpose of a fully automatic weapon is to kill as many people as possible. Ever heard of any hunter going after a deer with a machine gun? If you have more than 3 bullets in the deer, you've probably ruined the meat. How much worse would it be if it had 30-500 extra bullets in it?

You've never held, much less fired a firearm in your life, have you?

Actually, started off when I was around 10 with a 22, and later when I got older, I graduated to a British 3.08.

Then? Later on in the Navy (which I joined when I was 18), not only did I get to fire a 50 cal. machine gun, but later on, I volunteered for the Security Force and ended up qualifying for a Sharpshooter ribbon.

I'm guessing you've never served in the military, have you? (You started the bullshit questions ya ******* asshat.)

Some reason I find some of your claims unbelievable.
You think the feeding device of a firearm is a clip for starters
It's not British 3.08 it called a British 308

 

[jon_berzerk]

You've never held, much less fired a firearm in your life, have you?

Actually, started off when I was around 10 with a 22, and later when I got older, I graduated to a British 3.08.

Then? Later on in the Navy (which I joined when I was 18), not only did I get to fire a 50 cal. machine gun, but later on, I volunteered for the Security Force and ended up qualifying for a Sharpshooter ribbon.

I'm guessing you've never served in the military, have you? (You started the bullshit questions ya ******* asshat.)

Some reason I find some of your claims unbelievable.
You think the feeding device of a firearm is a clip for starters
It's not British 3.08 it called a British 308

the "clip" thing

is always a give away

--LOL

the media and leftist politicians has picked up on that

now they have a new term "magazine clips"

check it out sometime

--LOL

 

[bendog]

Do it Ayn. It'll play well in affluent suburbs. Do it. 2016 draws nigh

Rand Paul and Ted Cruz threaten filibuster on guns - Jonathan Allen - POLITICO.com

 

[Uncensored2008]

Actually, started off when I was around 10 with a 22, and later when I got older, I graduated to a British 3.08.

Then? Later on in the Navy (which I joined when I was 18), not only did I get to fire a 50 cal. machine gun, but later on, I volunteered for the Security Force and ended up qualifying for a Sharpshooter ribbon.

I'm guessing you've never served in the military, have you? (You started the bullshit questions ya ******* asshat.)

So when you post idiocy, you're just blatantly lying, then?

 

[Quantum Windbag]

Taking off isn't much of a problem...............all you have to do is remember what speed is going to get you airborne, and when you reach it, pull up on the stick.

Flying it is a bit different, because when you're in the air, not only do you have to see where you are, but you also have to pay attention to where you're gonna be in 30 seconds. Wanna know what pilot sensory overload is known as? Having your hair on fire.

And yeah................the only purpose of a fully automatic weapon is to kill as many people as possible. Ever heard of any hunter going after a deer with a machine gun? If you have more than 3 bullets in the deer, you've probably ruined the meat. How much worse would it be if it had 30-500 extra bullets in it?

You've never held, much less fired a firearm in your life, have you?

Actually, started off when I was around 10 with a 22, and later when I got older, I graduated to a British 3.08.

Then? Later on in the Navy (which I joined when I was 18), not only did I get to fire a 50 cal. machine gun, but later on, I volunteered for the Security Force and ended up qualifying for a Sharpshooter ribbon.

I'm guessing you've never served in the military, have you? (You started the bullshit questions ya ******* asshat.)

You keep saying you were in the Navy, and you keep ignoring the fact that every Navy ship mounts a weapon that is both fully automatic and purely defensive. No wonder people think you are lying.