Page 83 of 121 FirstFirst ... 3373818283848593 ... LastLast
Results 821 to 830 of 1205

Thread: School shooting this morning . . .

  1. #821
    Sage
    Boo Radley's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Last Seen
    11-22-17 @ 04:22 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    36,858

    Re: School shooting this morning . . .

    Quote Originally Posted by Henrin View Post
    Muscle building is a good enough reason to say there is situations where it is needed to take in more calories than what is needed to be healthy. As for what qualifies as excessive amounts of ammo, that is simply a matter of opinion.
    I suggest that it is as measurable as muscle building.

    AUSTAN GOOLSBEE: I think the world vests too much power, certainly in the president, probably in Washington in general for its influence on the economy, because most all of the economy has nothing to do with the government.

  2. #822
    Sage
    Boo Radley's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Last Seen
    11-22-17 @ 04:22 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    36,858

    Re: School shooting this morning . . .

    Quote Originally Posted by The Mark View Post
    So you're saying you do not think a situation calling for the use of more than 7 rounds of ammunition will ever arise, or at least will arise so rarely that it is not necessary to carry a clip containing more ammunition?
    Yes, for the average citizen, it is unlikely to ever arise.

    AUSTAN GOOLSBEE: I think the world vests too much power, certainly in the president, probably in Washington in general for its influence on the economy, because most all of the economy has nothing to do with the government.

  3. #823
    Banned
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Last Seen
    07-19-17 @ 03:51 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    60,458

    Re: School shooting this morning . . .

    Quote Originally Posted by Boo Radley View Post
    I suggest that it is as measurable as muscle building.
    What? There is formulas to figuring out how many calories one must take in when muscle building. You can say no such thing about what is excessive amounts of ammo. Do not compare things that are scientific to things that are subjective.

  4. #824
    Sage
    Boo Radley's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Last Seen
    11-22-17 @ 04:22 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    36,858

    Re: School shooting this morning . . .

    Quote Originally Posted by TurtleDude View Post
    It didn't prove any of the stuff you claimed it did. If there is a chance ONE citizen might need more than seven rounds your argument falls apart. And most cops never get involved in a shooting.
    No, 1 is not enough. You have to show it happens. That there is a statistical possibility, even probability.

    AUSTAN GOOLSBEE: I think the world vests too much power, certainly in the president, probably in Washington in general for its influence on the economy, because most all of the economy has nothing to do with the government.

  5. #825
    Sage
    Boo Radley's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Last Seen
    11-22-17 @ 04:22 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    36,858

    Re: School shooting this morning . . .

    Quote Originally Posted by Henrin View Post
    What? There is formulas to figuring out how many calories one must take in when muscle building. You can say no such thing about what is excessive amounts of ammo. Do not compare things that are scientific to things that are subjective.
    We can measure what will do the job, yes. We can Go over the known measurable events requiring a gun, and measure how many need multiple rounds, and assess how many were actually needed. There us a certain amount of subjectivity in muscle building as well. The difference between the is not that great, and both can be approached scientifically.

    AUSTAN GOOLSBEE: I think the world vests too much power, certainly in the president, probably in Washington in general for its influence on the economy, because most all of the economy has nothing to do with the government.

  6. #826
    Banned
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Last Seen
    07-19-17 @ 03:51 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    60,458

    Re: School shooting this morning . . .

    Quote Originally Posted by Boo Radley View Post
    We can measure what will do the job, yes. We can Go over the known measurable events requiring a gun, and measure how many need multiple rounds, and assess how many were actually needed. There us a certain amount of subjectivity in muscle building as well. The difference between the is not that great, and both can be approached scientifically.
    You must know the skill of the user and how they react under pressure, the second of which can not be established beforehand. They might react well and shoot them all in the head or torso in one shot or they might miss like a noob and barely get out alive.

    You are trying to pin it down to seven shots and frankly there is no reason to think you can.

  7. #827
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Last Seen
    07-16-14 @ 01:18 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Moderate
    Posts
    47,571

    Re: School shooting this morning . . .

    Quote Originally Posted by VanceMack View Post
    Just out of curiosity...how exactly is mag capacity relevant in this story?
    I don't know. I didn't bring it up. I just participated in a conversation already going on.

  8. #828
    Pragmatic Idealist
    upsideguy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    Rocky Mtn. High
    Last Seen
    Today @ 11:59 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Progressive
    Posts
    10,085

    Re: School shooting this morning . . .

    Quote Originally Posted by TurtleDude View Post
    what a silly dichotomy

    why don't you tell us what sort of laws would guarantee no more school shootings
    Yes, its a complete hypothetical. Forget the law, I just want you to tell us that if you believed that a particular regulation or restriction would, in all reasonable probability, significantly reduce public shootings (schools, shopping malls, movie theatres, etc), you would be in favor of such. Call it Panacea Gun Control Act.

    I simply am putting you to the test: Would you sacrifice unfettered gun rights to save 25-50 kids per year; or, is it, as I believe it is to you, an acceptable level of collateral casualty in maintaining absolute gun rights?


    I believe my charge is absolutely correct....many to most gun rights advocates find losing 25-50 kids per year to be an acceptable level of collateral casualties... we are sorry for their loss, but its the "price we pay"..... its ugly, but I believe it true.... because some of those people will accept ZERO compromise in how we handle guns in our society.

    Now, I respect the notion that people are not in favor of gun control because they believe it would not solve the problem. I want to strip away that facade of shelter from those that simply would not tolerate any restrictions on guns in any circumstances, even if it would solve the problem. So, the Panacea Gun Control Act of 2016 will not take away individual ownership of guns, but will include some restrictions or regulations we do not have today, but, it is guaranteed to significantly reduce public shootings.....

    Are you in favor of the Panacea Gun Control Act 0f 2106?
    Last edited by upsideguy; 10-27-13 at 12:47 PM.

  9. #829
    Sage
    VanceMack's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Last Seen
    Today @ 11:02 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    54,663

    Re: School shooting this morning . . .

    Quote Originally Posted by upsideguy View Post
    Yes, its a complete hypothetical. Forget the law, I just want you to tell us that if you believed that a particular regulation or restriction would, in all reasonable probability, significantly reduce public shootings (schools, shopping malls, movie theatres, etc), you would be in favor of such. Call it Panacea Gun Control Act.

    I simply am putting you to the test: Would you sacrifice unfettered gun rights to save 25-50 kids per year; or, is it, as I believe it is to you, an acceptable level of collateral casualty in maintaining absolute gun rights? Now, I respect the notion that people are not in favor of gun control because they believe it would not solve the problem. I want to strip away that facade of shelter from those that simply would not tolerate any restrictions on guns in any circumstances, even if it would solve the problem. So, the Panacea Gun Control Act is guaranteed to significantly reduce public shootings.....

    Are you in favor of the Panacea Gun Control Act?
    No...because as your example and words point out...fairy tales dont keep people safe.

  10. #830
    Banned
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Last Seen
    11-03-13 @ 04:10 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    376

    Re: School shooting this morning . . .

    Quote Originally Posted by Henrin View Post
    Yes, and yet those countries allow their military to have such weaponry. I find it very strange to trust the government with weapons you do not trust the people with.
    I have plenty of Class III stuff, so not sure what you are talking about. My 1919A4 belt fed crew served machine gun is the largest of my present weapons, but I had owned an AN-M2 until recently as well. And there are people out there that own GE Miniguns. There are definitely things the US Military owns that civilians should not own. Why do people need LAWS rockets? Why do people need M16 launched grenades? Flame throwers? Mid size mortars? Heck, nuclear weapons? And yet, Americans can legally own all of those except for the nuclear weapons. You might want to youtube Knob Creek.


Page 83 of 121 FirstFirst ... 3373818283848593 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •