Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Life is Precious no matter. But I think I do believe in the death penalty.
Ready to give up gun free zones and have an armed deterrence present to handle the situation exactly when it happens?
Or
Continue with a sign that says no guns allowed and hope the police arrive before things escalate even worse?
Maybe you mentioned where you are from before, but where is "down here" exactly? Curious what other forms of entertainment women can choose down there where the shooting range seems to be getting some interest among the ladies, and how many are there with men like you taking your sister a few times.
Florida.
Quote:
Originally Posted by LearnMe
I know you can't tell, but you are waffling from suggesting crime is a function of where Democrats hold office and/or because of Democrats to something else entirely now, and this is why it seems that "intelligent discussion" with you is so difficult, all over the place...
It is a function of where democrats hold office. 28 out of 30 years in NY supports that theory as well as every inner city with a democrat in charge with killings on the rise.
Except in NY it's a matter of how much money can be extorted and passed around to the good ol boy network.
Quote:
Originally Posted by LearnMe
It is NOT intelligent to draw these cause/effect conclusions like you do or to think it is the fault of Democrats that there is no real legitimate or productive way to address the gun violence issue. All sides are frustrated with the problem and lack of solutions, or should be. Seems some are just more resigned to accept things as they are than others, and yes that difference can very often lead to ideas and notions that are not too intelligent at all.
On the contrary. I don't get to stand on a soap box and declare something works or doesn't work unless I've done it. I would hold politicians as accountable for their ineptitude and failure no different than I hold myself and others accountable for theirs.
Conclusion. Chicago, St. Louis Baltimore etc are held by democrats, democrats that preach gun control, and these newer stricter laws come to be with 0 reduction in their cities, 0 positive effects for all. I stand firm in my belief until proven otherwise, democrats won't let a tragedy go to waste to push an agenda as they stand on the backs of the fallen to push for their way further eroding the rights of all.
Show me a democrat mayor that believes in the 2nd amendment and addresses homicides proactively and I'll give them praise. Until then. No they are not concerned with preserving rights thwarting crime or making a positive impact. They bought gun control. They own it. They either admit it isn't working and hasn't been working, or they start changing their tune and becoming proactive.
Quote:
Originally Posted by LearnMe
Some for example think it is intelligent to ban certain types of weapons. Others think more people carrying guns will help. One man's "intelligence" is another man's crazy, but that's not the fault of either side any more than the drug problem can be blamed on Democrats or Republicans, liberals or conservatives, not if an "intelligent discussion" is to be had anway.
It isn't intelligent to ban certain weapons. Nothing intelligent about it. I say again. If you wished upon a shooting star to rid the world of guns and ammo and the knowledge to make both the implement will change and you will have solved nothing as the wish was wasted on the implement not the morive, not the incentive...
For owning these types of weapons that are at fault somehow... not one of mine have extinguished life nor maimed another...
Quote:
Originally Posted by LearnMe
It is also not intelligent to pretend I take whatever position you choose to assume regardless of what my position actually is! If I want to address you directly, I consider your words, not those of others. If you want to address Jerry Brown, then address Jerry Brown, not me as if I am Jerry Brown. If I want to address you, I will address you, and NOT make up whatever arguments or positions I decide for you.
That is at least some of the basic protocol that allows for intelligent discussion anyway...
Quote:
Originally Posted by LearnMe
Exactly. I didn't say the M1 Garand was high capacity. Did I?
I prefer weapons that can accurately shoot targets at longer range at greater volume when it comes to defending against an advance of 1,000 carrying .357s from a distance. I'll leave all the gun detail to you as to which guns that includes, and no doubt the M1 Garand is a contender to consider, but is it the best choice in this regard?
My "theory" is not necessarily, again with all due respect to the various caveats and considerations introduced by NVplummer. I think there is more than one answer to this hypothetical question in any case...
And in that hypothetical you were looking for someone to say the varmint cartridge AR.
Quote:
Originally Posted by LearnMe
Who cares really?
I pay more attention to the information considered more reliable in any case. Number of gun licenses, number of guns sold, crime statistics, etc.
Who doesn't know there are order of magnitude more guns in America one way or another either way? I need no further proof there are more than plenty number of gun owners in America, law abiding or not. I know more men own guns than women, more older white men in particular. I also know the regional differences, etc.
No point in wasting time arguing what one poll or another says or doesn't far as I'm concerned. Then again, what point there is in arguing about any of this is plenty hard to figure as well...
The point is, you won't get to regulate and legislate rights. I won't and millions of others won't allow it.
Ban this gun.
Blame this condition.
Claim it's society, culture, economic, mental health...
Yet the one thing consistently glossed over...
The bulk concern of firearm related homicides, are not widespread, they are isolated to a few cities.
Blame guns? Blame lack of jobs? Blame gang/drug element. Blame race. Blame whatever. Okay. What did that solve? Nothing. It continues to happen in those areas.
Said areas being home to some of the strictest gun laws.
Mass shootings school shootings church shootings = gun free zones. No armed deterrence present to thwart a threat should it arise. Seconds matter help is but minutes away...
A sign and a law will protect...
"It's a travesty of a mockery of a sham of a mockery of a travesty of two mockeries of a sham."
Hey I'm just conveying information. If you don't like it, tough. The link to the joint study is already within this thread.
I mean, suppose you have an X-ray showing a fracture, swelling, difficulty in moving the joint, but no pain. Are you really going to choose it doesn't hurt so I'm fine, or every other indicator that says you have a broken ankle?
Where's your vaunted logic there Mr. Mellish? Or do you demand a mistrial?
Except Gallup and Pew are working on a joint study as to why their figures do not correspond within error, AND, why all other indicators of gun ownership appears to be increasing (sales, concealed carry applications, training enrollments, etc.), but their polls appear to result in decreasing gun ownership.
When the pollsters are jointly studying their poll results, you gotta have significant doubt in their results accuracy.
Source? Actually the Pew and Gallup polls are not far apart at the moment - well inside the error bands.
They are a little different but not in the percentage without guns.
Exactly. I didn't say the M1 Garand was high capacity. Did I?
I prefer weapons that can accurately shoot targets at longer range at greater volume when it comes to defending against an advance of 1,000 carrying .357s from a distance. I'll leave all the gun detail to you as to which guns that includes, and no doubt the M1 Garand is a contender to consider, but is it the best choice in this regard?
My "theory" is not necessarily, again with all due respect to the various caveats and considerations introduced by NVplummer. I think there is more than one answer to this hypothetical question in any case...
Since the "high capacity" standard seems to be anything over ten rounds the M1A does qualify. A 20 round magazine is standard with it which puts it on a roughly equal footing with the old Browning BAR. However the M1A/M14 was designed as a general issue infantry weapon whereas the BAR was issued in a squad support role.
The M1A and M1 Garand share the same action type with the M14 being redesigned to take a detachable box magazine. Both rifles are quite capable of effectively engaging at 1000 yards. In its time and within its niche the Garand was considered to be a "high(er) capacity rifle and was the first semi auto fielded by any country as a general issue infantry rifle. Patton labeled it "the greatest battle implement ever devised."
To my knowledge neither has ever been used in any sort of criminal "mass shooting." Again, to my knowledge the only service type semi autos that have been used for such a purpose are the AK and AR, excluding the gang related shootings that happen everyday but aren't reported on with any fervor. Most of those involve handguns and handgun caliber weapons like the MAC, UZI, TEC 9 (haven't heard much about that one for a while) and other more readily concealed and easier to use within the confines of a spinner rimmed Escalade firearms.
It seems to me that the only time there is a national media frackas over a "mass shooting" is when it is perpetrated by someone who is seen as "mainstream" i.e White, non gang affiliated, and for non drug related motives in an area outside of an inner city setting.
Whenever such a shooting happens there is always, without fail and before the facts are in an assumption that the weapon used is probably an AR or variant too. The AK was the bogeyman for quite a while following the Stockton schoolyard shooting in the 80s but now focus is on the AR. It was the latter incident that triggered the AWB and the import ban. The latter banned rifles like the HK G series, AUG Steyr, FN FAL (also called the SLR) the myriad AK clones from China and former East Bloc countries and a slew of other rifles, shotguns and handguns that met the "list of features" defining an "assault weapon."
Interestingly shotguns that had qualifying features such as the Streetsweeper and a couple others were classified as "destructive devices" and not firearms. The ARs manufactured in the US were never banned but had to have certain features removed such as muzzle brakes, bayonet lugs (as if THAT really mattered) extended pistol grips (leading to those ridiculous thumbhole stocks) and were only sold with magazines 10 rounds and under. Most coming with a 5.
All of this didn't matter a fart in a high wind as far as preventing firearms involved violent crime but was wildly cheered by anti firearms groups nonetheless. The only imported gun that was on the ban list that was ever used in any sort of mass shooting was the AK but hey, while the door was open the horses left the barn.
I do believe that racism has been the problem going back well before the Democrats in the 1960s, well long before that, and I also believe there were many Democrats in the South back in the day and later even in Washington DC who were racist, along with all the other racists all over the country who were not Democrats. Too many racists in America still today! Hell, our founding fathers owned slaves! From there the problem was carried on by many for a very long time now, so that wasting much time on placing blame other than on whites in general is hardly time well spent. Right?
I don't think the blame game is altogether productive or intelligent period. What is productive is to accurately perform cause/effect analysis about what is cause of our problems and what might best alleviate them. Might as well assume there are deekheads on both sides of that effort as well as people with good honest intentions and ideas. In part the "vast world of difference" in these regards is what makes for this "Great American Divide" that I started another thread about...
Do you know what I believe would truly make racism decline? My honest opinion? It's very simple. Every time that any politician from the left or the right engages in identity politics, tries to treat a person differently simply due to their ethnicity, or claims that a law which should apply to all Americans is unfair because "xxxxx" race would have a hard time with it, kick their happy butts out of Washington and tell them to go home. Literally, fire them and ban them from ever working in the public sector again. Modern racism is not promulgated by the common, everyday American. It is fomented by politicians whose main goal is to ensure that Americans are divided enough so that we can never come together and make them actually do their job.
While it is true that both sides of the aisle play the identity politics game, at this point in the current political cycle - and going back for the last 50 years or so - the Democrats are the absolute masters of it. So yes, I do blame the Democrats for a large part of the racism that is existent today. When you spend a decade or more blaming white people for every single social injustice without rhyme or reason, when you have a POTUS who responds to the shooting of a 300 lb. thug that got shot while attacking a police officer by saying "young men of color feel targeted by law enforcement -- guilty of walking while black or driving while black" as if this fine upstanding young man was simply minding his own business when the police decided to pick on him, when you have an entire political party that defends a movement like BLM or Antifa when the members of that movement are consistently breaking the law, you're going to end up angering a large segment of the population. Why? Because people are people. When the supposed leaders of the country are taking sides, what do you think their followers are going to do? They're going to take sides. And when those leaders are making the sides all about skin color or ethnicity, rather than about the individual's ability to follow the law like a normal human being, those sides will appear to be about skin color and ethnicity - even when those things have nothing to do with the real issue.
Will the above completely stop racism? No, because racism is begotten by ignorance and some people will never stop being ignorant. But it would definitely cause a drastic downturn if for just a little while the left would stop accusing anyone who wants to see laws applied fairly and equitably to everyone, regardless of skin color or ethnicity, a racist. The constant cries of "Trump supporters are racist" are nothing but meat tossed in the middle of the dogfighting ring - and they have the same purpose, which is to start the fight. The vast majority of conservatives are not racist. They simply want to see everyone treated equally, regardless of the color of their skin. That isn't racism, it's freaking justice. But if you constantly tell people who aren't racist that they are racist, eventually you'll get a racist reaction out of them. Not because they're racist, but because they're tired of listening to your idiocy.
This goes for whites, blacks, browns, yellows, reds, or purples. I could literally not give a rodent's rectum what color your skin is. If you are a decent human being who obeys the law and treats not only other people but also yourself with respect, you have met your obligation to humanity. You are a good person. Period. Conversely, if you can't pull your pants up and wear a belt to keep them there (complete lack of respect for yourself and others), can't be bothered to care about the way you treat other people, and think that the law doesn't apply to you because you're a more special snowflake than the next guy in line, I have zero use for you and don't honestly care if that offends you. In fact, if you fall into one of those categories I'm perfectly okay if you die a violent death at the hands of one of your victims.
And it makes the same assertion but posts no link.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
