Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
 [Register]
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.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
View Poll Results: Which one do you ban?
Gun number A should be banned. 3 50.00%
Gun number B should be banned. 1 16.67%
Gun number C should be banned. 2 33.33%
Gun number D should be banned. 0 0%
Voters: 6. You may not vote on this poll

Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 05-10-2018, 08:14 AM
 
Location: Sinking in the Great Salt Lake
13,138 posts, read 22,821,936 times
Reputation: 14116

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by LarsMac View Post
Gun control isn't (or shouldn't be) about banning guns. It should be about qualification, safety, storage and management.

If you want to own a gun, fine. Go prove that you are a responsible person who knows how to safely manage and handle your weapons. License and insure the things, and store them safely where a 3 year-old can't get his hands on one and shoot baby sister, or Mom.
Except that pesky 2nd amendment is written right into the Constitution amongst all our other inalienable rights. Nobody is suggesting there be a requirement to prove that someone can exercise free speech in a safe and responsible manor or properly store their bibles (there are lots of dangerous ideas in there!)... anyway millions of gun owners safely handle their firearms, successfully manage the risk and store them properly WITHOUT Uncle Sam's supervision.

I miss the days when it was generally assumed an adult was responsible and had him/herself together unless proven otherwise.

Thanks liberals for your efforts to turn us all into defacto children.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 05-10-2018, 08:29 AM
 
Location: Just over the horizon
18,461 posts, read 7,094,796 times
Reputation: 11707
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chango View Post
I would ban that Garand. WTF is up with that ugly-a$$ monte carlo stock?! That's not authentic!
Looks photo shopped to me
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-10-2018, 08:32 AM
 
Location: Chicago Area
12,687 posts, read 6,738,099 times
Reputation: 6594
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chango View Post
Ahhh... that's better.

Honestly though, there's no point trying to be sneaky with anti-gunners as it seems the only "education" they willingly absorb on the subject comes from Hollywood Movies and they tend to think that makes them experts.

Anti-gun people don't approach the problem with facts, experience and a realistic understanding of what firearms can/can't do... they start at the baseline of: "EWWW! Guns are icky! I'm SCARED!". They then try to use the general public's ignorance to whittle away at everyone's right to own one so they can try to accomplish their actual goal of removing scary things from their existence to alleviate their irrational fear.

Obviously this is a stupid way to deal with fear. If somebody wanted to cure their arachnophobia, what would work better?

1. Try to eliminate spiders from the country altogether (maybe starting with the scariest spiders first?)

2. Crack open some books and study spiders, observe them in the wild and then graduate by holding an 'effing tarantula yourself?

The cure to fear is knowledge and experience.
LOL true. Still, you can have a lot of fun with people who know absolutely nothing about guns. For example:


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SqJ_4YhYMhE

I just wish Crowder had thrown a M-16 style BB gun on the table. I'm betting that a lot of people would have pointed at it and said, "Ban that one!"
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-10-2018, 08:33 AM
 
Location: Just over the horizon
18,461 posts, read 7,094,796 times
Reputation: 11707
Quote:
Originally Posted by RedZin View Post
If a gun is statistically more likely to be used to kill people, based on the data, then make it harder to purchase.

Not commonly used. Commonly used to kill humans.

And, I'm not for banning. Just having more hoops to jump through.


If you ban the one that is “commonly used” then another one will take it’s place as being the most commonly used.

Then you’ll want to ban (or make it harder to get) that one.

Ad Nauseam
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-10-2018, 08:44 AM
 
Location: NJ
23,564 posts, read 17,237,701 times
Reputation: 17603
Quote:
Originally Posted by HansProof View Post
Probably AK. The woodwork alone is an embarrassment to anything a patriot would carry.
designed with loose tolerances so it works flawlessly under battle conditions, mud, dirt etc.


AR had problems with jamming early on and it is no coincidence that several of the shootings mentioned guns jamming. Ammo plays a part in jams as well.


Ban NONE of those guns.


It is the democrats proverbial slippery slope that ends with the banning of all firearms.


Ban auto shotguns and you ban a two shot automatic designed by Browning in the late 50s, whose justification for a two shot auto shotgun was a concern that in the future semiauto guns would be restricted. Known as the Browning 12weight or 20weight. One in the magazine and one in the chamber, no different than a double barrel shotgun, yet classified as a semi auto gun subject to banning.
High level classification used by states to ban some weapons, erroneously bans others that operate differently....and more nefariously, puts a target on the guns that are not banned.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-10-2018, 08:50 AM
 
Location: PSL
8,224 posts, read 3,500,240 times
Reputation: 2963
Quote:
Originally Posted by MLSFan View Post
instead of outright banning guns, i favor the german system of permits for guns, different permit for different type/number of guns

at least then people need to be trained for each kind of gun they own, assuming classes are required for the permit, if not, its a money making scheme for the state

yes, i know a safety class wont stop someone from murdering, but it stops the idiots shooting themselves in the foot or parents leaving it out for the kids
Not really...

Exhibit A
https://youtu.be/vfONckOPyaI

Then there's many videos of those "trained" that shoot themselves...
I recall a few threads where those who were trained had been shot by their offspring, their offspring shot themselves by finding a weapon.

Over confidence and a "it'll never happen to me" attitude combined with the forbidden fruit approach to firearms = Darwin Parenting award.

Far as parents go...
It's simple really.

Ladies, don't leave pistols in purses. You have far better options to carry concealed than a purse. Kids are attracted to purses like moths to a flame. Besides that's the first thing a burglar goes for. Alot of good that purse, clutch, bag is when some rapscallion takes off running with it...

(Had to shoot my own sister with her pistol in a simunition class to show her how foolish leaving a pistol in a purse is, now she has a garter holster for dresses/skirts, Sticky holster for pants/shorts for waistband, corset holster, and a bra holster that puts the weapon in her weak arms armpit, and spare mags in her strong arms armpit. Women have more, and better options than their hand bags for concealed carry)
She was of the same attitude, oh that would never happen. Nobody grabs a purse runs, and shifts through it while running. I keep it close and tight to me under my arm.
broke the straps and made 10 paces before I had the weapon and spun around putting all 8 shots in her chest. Blink of an eye I had that purse. 5 seconds she was dead on the ground if that were live ammo.

Fellas, don't leave your weapon on the night stand while junior roams about.
There's plenty of hide away options within an arms reach of where you rest your head at night, that junior can't access.

Like the head board to my bed.
Is it really a head board or do you need an RFID card near the bottom right corner to have a foam cut out tray drop down with an AR Shotgun 2 pistols and spare mags?
Did it cost money? Sure it did. Some day down the road I'd like to have kids. A bedside lock box is useless to me. Running down the hall to the spare bedroom full of safes exposes me should an armed intruder be inside at 2 am. There's also the risk of the girlfriend being nerve wracked and mistaking me for the bad guy. Hence-shouting a password to come back down the hallway so she doesn't plug me.
There's only so much one can train for. And that money for training can be saved with common sense.

Again... common sense isn't a common commodity. There are 2 things you cant teach.
Common sense and ambition.

If you're going to have kids and guns... at the very least, do not create an allure with the "forbidden fruit" approach. You'll win a Darwin parenting award as quick with the forbidden fruit approach as one would carelessly leaving a weapon laying around...

But honestly, how many folks reproduce that you wouldn't trust raising a puppy, let alone a child these days? Whether they have firearms in the house or not...

Will training reduce the occurrences? Probably. Only so much.


All it takes is one moment of forgetfulness like the Air Marshall that left their sidearm in the bathroom and some folks coming to justify it as, oh they're over worked, under paid, tired, accidents happen, you'd do the same...

No. My holsters are in waistband. If I have to drop my drawers to squat, the holsters stay right in the pants at my ankles. There's no forgetting. 1911s aren't particularly light. Neither are Glock 19s. Lift pants you're getting smacked in the ankle with the mag well.
The toilet tank is not a good place, the chit ticket dispenser is not a good place, neither is the sink.
You're already in a compromising situation/position. Why leave it out of your immediate reach to potentially be forgotten?

With regards to training, it's more of developing good habits than it is the 4 simple rules and keeping your booger hooks off the bangswitch at all times.
What works for some won't work for others.

Some folks are portly and can't carry in waist band, their done flop will push it out or surely print.
Some folks love their bulky 6 shooters and need dirty Harry's suspenders holster. Some folks like useless belly blasters that fit in the palm of their hand and keep them in their pockets.
Some folks like Austrian plastic fantastics with bulky slides.
Some folks have limited range of motion and can't have a holster in a cross draw position.
What habits work for you might not work for me. What habits work for me doesn't work for most.

Now if you'll excuse me, I have 3420 rounds to put away. 3,000 to go on stripper clips for this weekends tournament.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-10-2018, 08:53 AM
 
Location: My House
34,938 posts, read 36,270,562 times
Reputation: 26552
Quote:
Originally Posted by 1AngryTaxPayer View Post
So p***ssing off legal gun owners is your solution?
Why would they be pissed off if they're still able to get a gun, but just need to complete extra steps to ensure that mass murderers and unstable people cannot get them so easily?

If that pisses them off, I'll suggest that they aren't exactly stable individuals themselves.
__________________
When in doubt, check it out: FAQ
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-10-2018, 08:54 AM
 
Location: My House
34,938 posts, read 36,270,562 times
Reputation: 26552
Quote:
Originally Posted by FatBob96 View Post
If you ban the one that is “commonly used” then another one will take it’s place as being the most commonly used.

Then you’ll want to ban (or make it harder to get) that one.

Ad Nauseam
First, I never said I wanted to ban any of them.

Second, I'm fine with gun purchases taking extra steps to accomplish, longer waiting periods, etc.
__________________
When in doubt, check it out: FAQ
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-10-2018, 08:54 AM
 
Location: PSL
8,224 posts, read 3,500,240 times
Reputation: 2963
Quote:
Originally Posted by RedZin View Post
If a gun is statistically more likely to be used to kill people, based on the data, then make it harder to purchase.

Not commonly used. Commonly used to kill humans.

And, I'm not for banning. Just having more hoops to jump through.
Cars statistically kill more people than firearms.
Going to implement more hoops to jump through for them?

I'm with ya. Nobody needs a high capacity fuel tank, fully automatic transmissions, more specifically F series ford pickups with their military grade aluminum bodies. They're vehicles of war for God sakes. Who needs one of those!
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-10-2018, 08:55 AM
 
Location: My House
34,938 posts, read 36,270,562 times
Reputation: 26552
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chango View Post
Except that pesky 2nd amendment is written right into the Constitution amongst all our other inalienable rights. Nobody is suggesting there be a requirement to prove that someone can exercise free speech in a safe and responsible manor or properly store their bibles (there are lots of dangerous ideas in there!)... anyway millions of gun owners safely handle their firearms, successfully manage the risk and store them properly WITHOUT Uncle Sam's supervision.

I miss the days when it was generally assumed an adult was responsible and had him/herself together unless proven otherwise.

Thanks liberals for your efforts to turn us all into defacto children.
Well, people aren't doing a lot of killing with mouths or bibles. Not directly, anyway.
__________________
When in doubt, check it out: FAQ
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
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.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 10:45 AM.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top