- Joined
- Oct 1, 2005
- Messages
- 38,750
- Reaction score
- 13,845
- Gender
- Undisclosed
- Political Leaning
- Libertarian - Right
Guns were designed to kill. Period. Claiming a different purpose reveals guilt in denial.
Not in every case, no. That's a fact.
Guns were designed to kill. Period. Claiming a different purpose reveals guilt in denial.
I think we begin to adopt a far more sensible and mature attitude about firearms. We look at them as tools - nothing more and nothing less. We put them in their proper perspectives and quit elevating them to the level of the Holy and the Perfect.
That would be step one.
Not in every case, no. That's a fact.
You're right. Water guns were made to annoy people.
BBC News - Gun attack at Batman film premiere in Denver
Breaking news as I write this. Reported that 10 dead and 2 gunmen, and 1 arrested.
Speculation is now what the motivation is.
The initial reports make this sound organized and planned, if more than one shooter I personally suspect jihadi or similar anti-western / anti-American motivation. Too many dead and injured, my prayers go out to all the effected people and families.
The initial reports make this sound organized and planned, if more than one shooter I personally suspect jihadi or similar anti-western / anti-American motivation. Too many dead and injured, my prayers go out to all the effected people and families.
I think we begin to adopt a far more sensible and mature attitude about firearms. We look at them as tools - nothing more and nothing less. We put them in their proper perspectives and quit elevating them to the level of the Holy and the Perfect.
That would be step one.
I think we begin to adopt a far more sensible and mature attitude about firearms. We look at them as tools - nothing more and nothing less. We put them in their proper perspectives and quit elevating them to the level of the Holy and the Perfect.
That would be step one.
Holy crap. That sounds like more than just some lone psycho spree killer.
Nope. As I said above, assault rifles -- the M-16 and similar -- were designed specifically to wound.
Not to mention the various types of ammunition designed to do even less damage, such as rubber bullets. They're designed specifically for non-lethal riot suppression.
Look, that you didn't know this doesn't make it any less true.
Now I want to buy an M1A/M21/M25 even more.
One man with a scoped rifle would have stopped most of this tragedy.
OK, but we ALL agree that their is no need for a lawnmower permit, or a circular saw permit. We have plenty of laws to restrict legal sales to criminals, and too many laws to restrict non-criminals from legally carrrying their legally purchased handguns. If I can legally walk down the street with a chainsaw, then I can legally walk down the street with a handgun as long as I obey the laws with either. ;-)
The attacker was an Indian Muslim.
Just ban the Islamic cancer already.
and why does crazy and evil find its way far more often in the USA than in any other single society?
I remember the famous essay written by the superb historian Richard Hofsteder on American Gun Culture written over forty years ago. I doubt today if it would have a chance in hell of getting published as the right has so succeeded in making gun culture as American as apple pie and motherhood.
I do NOT think this should be a debate about only laws. It must be a debate about changing american culture so that firearms are not gloried, worshipped or admired the way they are. They should be looked at as utilitarian tools - no more and no less. We will NOT solve the problem of American violence being three times that of Canada - our closest and most similar neighbor - until we get rid of American gun culture.
I DO NOT want to live in a nation where you or anybody else is openly carrying a gun on the street even if you are obeying the laws. That is simply my preference. You want to get a CCW and have it under your jacket - I can accept that. YOu want a gun in your home for protection - fine and good. You want one in your business for protection against crime - you have my complete support.
The M-16 is a type of gun. I am talking about guns. Guns period. As in.....I don't have the patience for this semantic dance so have fun.
The M-16 is a type of gun. I am talking about guns. Guns period. As in.....I don't have the patience for this semantic dance so have fun.
I think we begin to adopt a far more sensible and mature attitude about firearms. We look at them as tools - nothing more and nothing less. We put them in their proper perspectives and quit elevating them to the level of the Holy and the Perfect.
That would be step one.
More than which societies? Germany? Spain? Cambodia? Vietnam? North Korea? Bosnia? Serbia? Russia? China? Argentina? El Salvador? Venezuala? Nicaragua? Mexico? Finland? Latvia? Plenty of crazy has gone found it's way in those societies. Lot's societies have way more crazy mother****ers than us.
What perspective should we put them in? An outright ban?
Yep, exactly right. Full autos are not worthless, but they will suppress better than kill, rideup makes them laughably inaccurate for a majority of shooters, the reason our military went to burst fire was to save money on wasted rounds. The M-16 is designed to different specs as well, the older models had more stopping power, the A4 is more of a defensive "to wound" on target rifle, little tumble, more velocity than it's counterparts meaning less fatal in most circumstances.And on a slightly different, but related point, assault rifles such as the M-16 were designed specifically to wound, not to kill.
(Different assuming you mean the blank to be "lay down suppression.")
Guns were designed to kill. Period. Claiming a different purpose reveals guilt in denial.
Correct, one of the nastiest things Vietcong snipers did was to wound the point man in a battallion and pick off the rest of the soldiers that tried to get him out of the line of fire.Yep. Killing an enemy soldier removes ONE from the battle, wounding removes at least TWO from the fight and requires expensive treatment to keep morale up. ;-)
Why do you ask dishonest questions that I have already answered before they were ever asked? Your answer was in the portion of my post you reporduced. Like my kids used to say as teenagers...... DUH.