View Poll Results: Is this a "strong argument" for banning 'assault weapons'?

Voters
54. You may not vote on this poll
  • Yes, because...

    6 11.11%
  • No, because...

    46 85.19%
  • Other

    2 3.70%
Page 22 of 32 FirstFirst ... 122021222324 ... LastLast
Results 211 to 220 of 313

Thread: Is this a "strong argument" for banning 'assault weapons'?

  1. #211
    Global Moderator
    The Hammer of Chaos
    Goshin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Dixie
    Last Seen
    Today @ 03:29 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    40,525

    Re: Is this a "strong argument" for banning 'assault weapons'?

    [quote=nerv14;1058010856]
    Quote Originally Posted by Goshin View Post

    Its fine, but you should look at my last post. I said I need to look at how dangerous certain firearms are.
    I do understand that people would want a handgun to protect themselves. This is why I am fine with people owning handguns.
    Okay, we really really need to start at square one.

    People are dangerous. Everything else is an accessory.

    A very determined man with some common household chemicals and a little knowlege can kill far more people than any one man with an automatic firearm. Case in point: Timothy McVeigh.

    In the Phillipines, there was (maybe still is) a practice called amok. This is when someone, typically but not always a Philipino Muslim, often but not always a skilled exponent of the island's blade-arts of escrima/kali/arnis, runs into a crowd of people with a machete, chopping off body parts. They are said to be in a state of killing frenzy such that they have to be shot repeatedly to stop them. Some have racked up body counts the Columbine killers would envy before being gunned down.... with just a machete, which for them is a tool for cutting cane.

    Aum Shin Ryo (a Japanese extremist cult) unleashed homebrew sarin nerve gas in a subway, attempting to kill hundreds of people. They killed a few and sickened many, as they didn't quite have all their ducks in a row.

    People are dangerous. Everything else is an accessory.

    In the hands of a person determined to kill, a brick is a very lethal weapon.
    In the hands of someone unwilling to kill, a .50 machine gun is a steel paperweight.

    G.
    Last edited by Goshin; 05-04-09 at 05:09 PM.

    Fiddling While Rome Burns
    Carthago Delenda Est
    "I used to roll the dice; see the fear in my enemies' eyes... listen as the crowd would sing, 'now the old king is dead, Long Live the King.'.."

  2. #212
    Professor
    Shewter's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    Puget Sound
    Last Seen
    02-21-13 @ 08:14 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    1,995

    Re: Is this a "strong argument" for banning 'assault weapons'?

    [quote=Goshin;1058010887]
    Quote Originally Posted by nerv14 View Post
    In the hands of someone unwilling to kill, a .50 machine gun is a steel paperweight.

    G.
    OR a very fun toy/tool. Much like a Dirt-bike, or a fast car, or a video game console, or a computer or aXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
    Quote Originally Posted by Tucker Case View Post
    Don't apologize to me over that silly ****. I could care less if I can see the dust or not.
    Now apologize for apologizing!

  3. #213
    Educator nerv14's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Last Seen
    02-07-11 @ 06:24 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    601

    Re: Is this a "strong argument" for banning 'assault weapons'?

    [quote=Goshin;1058010887]
    Quote Originally Posted by nerv14 View Post

    Okay, we really really need to start at square one.

    People are dangerous. Everything else is an accessory.

    A very determined man with some common household chemicals and a little knowlege can kill far more people than any one man with an automatic firearm. Case in point: Timothy McVeigh.

    In the Phillipines, there was (maybe still is) a practice called amok. This is when someone, typically but not always a Philipino Muslim, often but not always a skilled exponent of the island's blade-arts of escrima/kali/arnis, runs into a crowd of people with a machete, chopping off body parts. They are said to be in a state of killing frenzy such that they have to be shot repeatedly to stop them. Some have racked up body counts the Columbine killers would envy before being gunned down.... with just a machete, which for them is a tool for cutting cane.

    Aum Shin Ryo (a Japanese extremist cult) unleashed homebrew sarin nerve gas in a subway, attempting to kill hundreds of people. They killed a few and sickened many, as they didn't quite have all their ducks in a row.

    People are dangerous. Everything else is an accessory.

    In the hands of a person determined to kill, a brick is a very lethal weapon.
    In the hands of someone unwilling to kill, a .50 machine gun is a steel paperweight.

    G.
    Your example with the machete attack isn't something that any normal crazy person can do to murder. Most people would collapse after a few shots when they start swinging with the sword. Also, many people who would possibly kill with an automatic weapon may not be able to actually use some sword for the same mass murder.

    I really hate to repeat myself, but I have said countless times that I don't want to ban all guns (and possibly I won't want to ban any if I get more info on the subject). If someone wants to kill someone else, then they will find a way to do that.

    However, my main view is that specifically, weapons that allow someone who is deranged to kill many people at once should possibly be outlawed.
    Sure, if someone is insane they can use a car to kill many people. However, that doesn't allow them to kill any large group of people that they want, and cars also have a huge benefit to society.

    Some automatic guns though, allow people to kill many individuals anywhere that they want. Those guns also don't seem to have any other benefits to society that other guns may be able to provide.

    Please just respond to that so we can not repeat discussions...


    I do need to get more information about how dangerous certain weapons are and the effects of gun control though.

  4. #214
    Banned
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    Los Angeles
    Last Seen
    09-22-10 @ 02:36 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    11,430

    Re: Is this a "strong argument" for banning 'assault weapons'?

    Quote Originally Posted by nerv14 View Post
    Some automatic guns though, allow people to kill many individuals anywhere that they want. Those guns also don't seem to have any other benefits to society that other guns may be able to provide.
    The benefit a rapid-fire weapon provides is the ability to deter tyrannical politicians.

    What greater benefit is there?

    Considering that the original arguments against these weapons was based on convenience store robberies, and almost all such hold-ups are done with cheap pistols, and you can see that the desire to ban the guns comes before any semi-rational excuse is thought up.

    So you should ask yourself, since the guns targeted for control by the politicians aren't relevant to the kinds of crime they're pretending to want to eliminate, why are the politicians really doing this.

    Really, you should study that and come up with a real reason, instead of being yet another mouthpeice for the enemies of the republic.

    Needless to say, this weekend LAPD arrested a guy wanted for more than thirty murders in the 1970's. Naturally, that guy did not use guns.

    There are plenty of serial killers with much higher body counts than these little boys with their guns, so it's not like the guns are being used to do anything exceptional.
    Last edited by Scarecrow Akhbar; 05-05-09 at 05:26 PM.

  5. #215
    Global Moderator
    The Hammer of Chaos
    Goshin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Dixie
    Last Seen
    Today @ 03:29 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    40,525

    Re: Is this a "strong argument" for banning 'assault weapons'?

    Quote Originally Posted by nerv14 View Post

    Your example with the machete attack isn't something that any normal crazy person can do to murder. Most people would collapse after a few shots when they start swinging with the sword. Also, many people who would possibly kill with an automatic weapon may not be able to actually use some sword for the same mass murder.
    How about the Tim McVeigh example? Shall we ban fertilizer and diesel fuel? Those were the primary components of his bomb that took out the building in OKC and killed 168 people...more than any ten shooters put together. My point is you can't stop mass-murder by banning weapons, and most mass-murderers don't simply "snap", snatch up a handy gun and start killing...they PLAN ahead.


    However, my main view is that specifically, weapons that allow someone who is deranged to kill many people at once should possibly be outlawed.
    Sure, if someone is insane they can use a car to kill many people. However, that doesn't allow them to kill any large group of people that they want, and cars also have a huge benefit to society.
    Guns are a huge benefit to society. Every year, around 30,000 die from gunshot wounds, including all cases: accident, self-defense, suicide, law-enforcement action, and violent crime. Depending on what study you believe, however, guns are used to PREVENT violent crime anywhere from 90,000 times per year to over 2 million times per year, usually with no shots fired at all.

    Some automatic guns though, allow people to kill many individuals anywhere that they want. Those guns also don't seem to have any other benefits to society that other guns may be able to provide.
    Okay. FULL-auto guns are already heavily restricted, and legally-owned Full-autos are virtually never a factor in mass murders. There is no reason to ban them entirely to fulfill your premise as they are not a factor. Almost all full-autos used to commit violent crime were illegally obtained...and laws don't stop criminals (hint: they don't obey them.)

    You know what would be effective against a mass-murderer armed with a full-auto weapon? One or two armed citizens in the area responding to his actions by shooting him dead. It happens on occasion, too.



    I do need to get more information about how dangerous certain weapons are and the effects of gun control though.
    My friend, that is exactly what I was trying to do. The first thing you have to recognize is that it ain't the arrow that's dangerous, it's the Indian. I can say that since I'm half-Cherokee

    People are dangerous. The only effective way to prevent dangerous people from harming the innocent, is for other dangerous people to stop them before they rack up much of a body count. This is why I have a concealed-carry permit and pack a gun.

    The effects of gun control are easily seen in Washington DC, Chicago, NYC and other major cities: honest citizens are disarmed and helpless in the face of armed thugs, who get whatever guns they want despite what the law says.
    In a previous gun-control thread I put up links and quotes about how crime is lower in states with Shall-issue concealed carry permits, and higher in cities with draconian gun-control. Search it up and have a look.



    G.

    Fiddling While Rome Burns
    Carthago Delenda Est
    "I used to roll the dice; see the fear in my enemies' eyes... listen as the crowd would sing, 'now the old king is dead, Long Live the King.'.."

  6. #216
    Sage

    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Last Seen
    09-29-16 @ 11:04 PM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    29,230

    Re: Is this a "strong argument" for banning 'assault weapons'?

    Quote Originally Posted by Goshin View Post
    How about the Tim McVeigh example? Shall we ban fertilizer and diesel fuel?
    When I buy certain photo chemicals I have to register with the FBI and DHS. I really have no problem with this.

  7. #217
    Banned
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    Chicago
    Last Seen
    04-02-15 @ 04:08 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    8,211

    Re: Is this a "strong argument" for banning 'assault weapons'?

    Some automatic guns though, allow people to kill many individuals anywhere that they want.
    A semi-automatic rifle could be used to same effect, as could a shotgun.

  8. #218
    Banned
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    Chicago
    Last Seen
    04-02-15 @ 04:08 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    8,211

    Re: Is this a "strong argument" for banning 'assault weapons'?

    Quote Originally Posted by winston53660 View Post
    When I buy certain photo chemicals I have to register with the FBI and DHS. I really have no problem with this.
    Good for you. How is this relevant?

  9. #219
    Global Moderator
    The Hammer of Chaos
    Goshin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Dixie
    Last Seen
    Today @ 03:29 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    40,525

    Re: Is this a "strong argument" for banning 'assault weapons'?

    Quote Originally Posted by winston53660 View Post
    When I buy certain photo chemicals I have to register with the FBI and DHS. I really have no problem with this.
    Yup. I have a farmer friend who buys fertilizer by the ton, and diesel fuel by the 500-gallon tank. Lots of farmers do, and those are the primary components for an OKC bomb. The information about how to build such bombs is widely known and easily available....illustrating the point that banning substances or items won't stop mass murder. (If you ban fertilizer or diesel, the price of a head of lettuce is going to be $200. )

    Personally, I get PO'd when I have to show ID for buying cold medicine.
    Last edited by Goshin; 05-05-09 at 05:57 PM.

    Fiddling While Rome Burns
    Carthago Delenda Est
    "I used to roll the dice; see the fear in my enemies' eyes... listen as the crowd would sing, 'now the old king is dead, Long Live the King.'.."

  10. #220
    User ThomasPaine's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    Suburban Chicago
    Last Seen
    06-12-09 @ 07:33 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Very Conservative
    Posts
    47

    Re: Is this a "strong argument" for banning 'assault weapons'?

    I guess I'd have to say no to the poll.

    I just bought an AK-47. It's a semi-automatic and thus legal. Do I need it? No. So why did I buy it? One, because I feared that unless I got it now, I might never be able to get one. Two, my gut tells me something is brewing out there that may overflow.

    If we have another terrorist attack (which I think is very likely) I don't know how the country will react. What if it's bigger then 9/11? What if it's nuclear? What if it's cyber and shuts down power or communications?

    One can play out many situations. They say there is only 3 days worth of food in the stores. If power or communications goes, can the stores be resupplied? If not, what does the puboic do with a shortage of food.

    If there's an attack, do middle eastern looking people get our sympathy or do we start to look at them as targets? If it's targets, things could get messy.

    What if the tea party movement grows and keeps getting ignored? What if our elected officials continue their arrogance and ignore what the people are saying? What happens when China quits buying our paper (like now) and we have to print money to monetize the deb? Will we get back to 15-20% inflation plus double-digit unemployment?

    Lot's of scary unknowns. I can defend my home from a burglar with my 9mm. But if I have to defned my home from a mob, I want more firepower.

    I'm probably paranoid, but my Boy Scout training taught me to be prepared. And my third reason for getting the rifle is that it look like a good investment. AK-47s are getting harder to find and the prices keep going up. The guy at the gun store thanks Obama every day because business is booming.

    My only dilemma now is how much ammo I need to have.

Page 22 of 32 FirstFirst ... 122021222324 ... 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
  •