U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Psychology
 [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)
 
 
Old 02-27-2013, 01:00 PM
 
Location: On the "Left Coast", somewhere in "the Land of Fruits & Nuts"
8,367 posts, read 8,206,469 times
Reputation: 5892

Advertisements

Addict: (def) to devote or surrender (oneself) to something habitually or obsessively.

Narcissism, Substance Abuse, and Reckless Behaviors

Devoid of the ability to empathize, permeated by haughty feelings of superiority and uniqueness, the narcissist cannot put himself in someone else's shoes, or even imagine what it means. The very experience of being human is alien to the narcissist whose invented False Self is always to the fore.

Pathological narcissism is an addiction to Narcissistic Supply (aka, constant proof of their omnipotence & grandiosity), the narcissist's drug of choice. It is, therefore, not surprising that other addictive and reckless behaviours – workaholism, alcoholism, drug abuse, pathological gambling, compulsory shopping, or reckless driving, etc. – piggyback on this primary dependence.

The narcissist – like other types of addicts – derives pleasure from these exploits. But they also sustain and enhance his grandiose fantasies as "unique", "superior", "entitled", and "chosen". They place him above the laws and pressures of the mundane and away from the humiliating and sobering demands of reality. They render him the centre of attention – but also place him in "splendid isolation" from the madding and inferior crowd.
Quick reply to this message

 
Old 02-27-2013, 02:00 PM
 
Location: Formerly Pleasanton Ca, now in Marietta Ga
4,027 posts, read 3,318,712 times
Reputation: 5436
Quote:
Originally Posted by diablo234 View Post
I don't think most gun owners themselves are nuts since they might only have a few hunting rifles for example, but the people who buy AK-47's, Uzi's, TEC-9's, and other high powered weapons for some "doomsday" scenario certainly fit that profile.
You just had someone give you a thumbs up for this post showing there are people think the same as you. The problem is you are basing you thoughts on unfounded facts and untruths.

There are plenty of hunting rifles which are much more high powered than an ak 47 that aren't being talked about. The ammo in many hunting rifles is often a 30.06. The ak uses 7.62 x 39, a round that is about a little bit more than half the size of the hunting rifle round.

The Uzi and Tec 9 use 9 mm bullets. There are millions of handguns and rifles that use larger rounds than 9 mm. A lot of handguns use 40 or 45 cal because they are bigger rounds with more stopping power ( or killing power)

So my question is why did you single out just the firearms that have "scary reputations" that are not any more potent than many handguns and rifles now? Is there another point I am missing on why these are more dangerous. If they were painted white instead of evil black would that make them less dangerous?
Before you say that these are machine guns-there are plenty of laws already on the books severley restricting or prohibiting full automatic. I own 2 ak's and they are semi automatic-one trigger pull-one bullet.

This is the problem-people making statements who aren't aware of why or if it is even true. Just repeating a statement that wasn't true that someone else made without researching it for themselves.

Many of the politicians trying to get gun laws passed don't even know the facts themselves. They are just taking bits that sound good to them and parroting them to the public to gain brownie points. I heard one trying to ban 50 cal. She publicaly said no one needs to have a gun that can fire "heat seeking" bullets. The fact is there are no heat seeking bullets, but most of the public is stupid enough to believe anything a politician says - if aligns with their own beliefs -misinformed or not. But I doubt if the same politician said the sky was green that they would take her seriously.
Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-27-2013, 02:03 PM
 
3,300 posts, read 7,177,318 times
Reputation: 4058
Quote:
Originally Posted by Themanwithnoname View Post
Columbine happened with 10 round magazines...

You are willing to give up freedoms for the illusion of safety. And, well, Franklin already addressed that.

If you've been friends for 20 years, and you don't think he is not a nut... Perhaps you should sit down and talk to him with an open mind.

Removing the ability for people to buy guns for cash and no backgound check at a gun show will, indeed, improve gun safety.

So the point you seem to be trying to make is that, because TWO nuts had ten-round mags, THEREFORE there is NO WAY that limiting high capacity mags would help AT ALL.

16 kids might be alive if that were the case.

Here, I will help you: 26 - 10 = 16.
Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-27-2013, 02:42 PM
 
Location: Old Bellevue, WA
18,792 posts, read 13,435,035 times
Reputation: 7911
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pfhtex View Post
Removing the ability for people to buy guns for cash and no backgound check at a gun show will, indeed, improve gun safety.

So the point you seem to be trying to make is that, because TWO nuts had ten-round mags, THEREFORE there is NO WAY that limiting high capacity mags would help AT ALL.

16 kids might be alive if that were the case.

Here, I will help you: 26 - 10 = 16.
wrong and wrong. Criminals and psycho-killers rarely obtain their guns from gun shows. The number is around 2%, according to an NIJ study.
The Facts about Gun Shows | David B. Kopel | Cato Institute

If we move that number from 2% to 0%, how much difference will it really make? Lanza got his guns by killing his mother and taking her guns.

And you're seriously going to argue that Lanza would not have been able to do what he did without 30 round magazines? He wouldn't have needed any magazines at all. As a 20 year old man, he could have gone into the elementary school and killed 26 with a 2 shot shotgun.

All your gun control proposals do is to distract from solutions to the real problem--mental illness and control of people on psyche meds.
Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-27-2013, 02:49 PM
bg7
 
7,698 posts, read 7,524,607 times
Reputation: 14986
Quote:
Originally Posted by Themanwithnoname View Post
No, they are pro freedom (of all types) and your weak disclaimer is belied by the phrases you choose.
Yes, especially freedom from weapons. Wait a mo..



They are, of course, prisoners of their weapons. They are pro self-safety. Societies without guns are clearly freer for people than societies full of weapons.
Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-27-2013, 03:10 PM
 
11,501 posts, read 17,329,593 times
Reputation: 17024
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pfhtex View Post
Removing the ability for people to buy guns for cash and no backgound check at a gun show will, indeed, improve gun safety.

So the point you seem to be trying to make is that, because TWO nuts had ten-round mags, THEREFORE there is NO WAY that limiting high capacity mags would help AT ALL.

16 kids might be alive if that were the case.

Here, I will help you: 26 - 10 = 16.
I am not sure what taking away the ability to buy guns with legal currency will do. But the gist of your argument - that we should not sell guns to criminals or crazies - make sense. Guess what - there are already federal laws on the books that say just that (gun show or not). So basically you are arguing that current laws should be enforced. Glad we are in agreement.
Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-27-2013, 03:11 PM
 
5,410 posts, read 8,081,530 times
Reputation: 7166
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pfhtex View Post
Removing the ability for people to buy guns for cash and no backgound check at a gun show will, indeed, improve gun safety.
Please show me some REAL DATA which supports this other than your baseless, bias statement,

Conversely I CAN show you some real data that genocide has rarely not had restrictions in personal firearms ownership preceding it.

Even in places where there hasn't been genocide... disarmermemnt of free individuals has lead to tyranny (Castor's famous "Armas Perras Que" (Forgive my bad spelling in Spanish) Or, why do you need weapons now that we are in power... which as we all know lead to him becoming a dictator.

As a matter of fact... if you buy a firarms from a dealer at a gunshow YOU HAVE TO DO THE SAME FBI BACKGROUND CHECK.... there IS NO "Gunshow Loophole" Now, in some states you can buy from individuals, just like if you buy (In those states) a .22 from your brother in law. but you CANNOT BUY A GUN FROM A DEALER AT A GUNSHOW WITHOUT THE FBI BACKGROUND CHECK. (I stated it twice because some people can't seem to get it.

Now: As far as criminals with guns... they wouldn't be criminals if they followied the law, and just like so called 'assault weapons' are used to commit LESS than 1% of crimes... they DON'T get their 'supply' from gunshows.


SO PLEASE... show me some REAL FACTUAL DATA to back up this propaganda you are spouting...

Quote:
Originally Posted by Pfhtex View Post
So the point you seem to be trying to make is that, because TWO nuts had ten-round mags, THEREFORE there is NO WAY that limiting high capacity mags would help AT ALL.

16 kids might be alive if that were the case.

Here, I will help you: 26 - 10 = 16.
Please show me where your basic math equation makes ANY DIFFERENCE when you consider that the Columbine shooters CHANGED MAGAZINES.

Here, please see how it takes LESS than a second to change magazines:

Army Pro Shooting Tips : How to Speed Reload a Pistol - YouTube
(And no, it's not hard for anyone to do it...)

So no, it wouldn't make any difference. but I'll tell you where it WILL make a difference... it'll make a difference to the woman attacked by a group of thugs intent on gang rape.

Or someone who suffers a home invasion by mutable assailants.

If you dont thing that a regular citizen needs it, then ask yourself why a cop... with a long arm and backup a radio call away needs it!


I'll tell you what WOULD HELP... if they didn't create these 'victim disarmerment zones'... are you aware that almost every 'mass shooting' in the last 50 years has occurred in a 'gun free zone' (More instances of those criminals not being aware of the law I guess... so how-about we stop prohibiting the teachers from being to defend themselves and others if they want to... and stop creating target rich environments for nutcases...


All this is aside from the fact that the Constitution merely innumerate NATURAL RIGHTS... which are god given, and man CANNOT take away.
And also the fact that the best reason to be armed is to defend against tyranny in government.

And for those of you who say... that's from 200 years ago, how about the Battle of Athens in the US, in 1946: The Battle of Athens
Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-27-2013, 03:20 PM
 
5,410 posts, read 8,081,530 times
Reputation: 7166
Quote:
Originally Posted by bg7 View Post
Yes, especially freedom from weapons. Wait a mo..



They are, of course, prisoners of their weapons. They are pro self-safety. Societies without guns are clearly freer for people than societies full of weapons.
Really?

Like Communist china?

or (Insert any other dictorial country here)


History is rife with examples where disarmerment was followed by a loss of liberty, or (Such as in the case of the Jews, or Stalinisht Russia) a Genocide.

Again: I back up what I say... I challenge you to back up your baseless political diatribe.


Are you aware that violent crime in Great Brittan (And Australia) WENT UP following gun bans:
Joyce Lee Malcolm: Two Cautionary Tales of Gun Control - WSJ.com
(I trust the Wall Street Journal is an acceptable source)


That aside: Technology doesn't stop. There will NEVER be 'no guns' anymore than we could do away with fire... and you should be glad. If it were not for guns... the biggest guy, with the biggest club or sword would get whatever he wanted. Firearms allow the 5 foot 2 inch 98 pound woman to stand up to a football lineman.
Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-27-2013, 03:24 PM
 
11,501 posts, read 17,329,593 times
Reputation: 17024
Quote:
Originally Posted by aslowdodge View Post
So my question is why did you single out just the firearms that have "scary reputations" that are not any more potent than many handguns and rifles now? Is there another point I am missing on why these are more dangerous. If they were painted white instead of evil black would that make them less dangerous?
Before you say that these are machine guns-there are plenty of laws already on the books severley restricting or prohibiting full automatic. I own 2 ak's and they are semi automatic-one trigger pull-one bullet.
It's due to serious misinformation. The black plastic gun looks evil, so it is evil. It takes on it's own persona. The reality - these military based semi-automatic weapons, which basically work in the same manner as semi-automatic handguns and hunting rifles (I hate the term "assualt weapon", such a term is a political creation that has no meaning except by individual interpretation), are very rarely used in murders. Why? Because they are impractical, small caliber, and difficult to control under rapid fire conditions for people that are not trained in it...as for automatic weapons I think there is only one record of a murder by an automatic weapon in the US since the 1930's (by a government employee ironically).
Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-27-2013, 03:33 PM
 
7,497 posts, read 9,178,553 times
Reputation: 7394
Are anti-guns basically just control freaks without guns?
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.


 
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 > Psychology
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

2005-2017, Advameg, Inc.

City-Data.com - 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 - Top