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.
I'm not talking about "all firearms" and neither is Feinstein. Her bill she is offering up is proposing a ban on rifles. Why isn't she going after handguns? They are used the most? Tell me why she hasn't made a squeak about handguns nor has anyone else all we hear about are these evil assault rifles. I posted the data.
So in your mind it would be better if it took him 10 minutes to kill them instead of 2? Unarmed teachers aren't going to be able to stop a crazy with a large knife any better than a crazy with a gun.
In your mind, it would be the same?
What's with this "the solution must be perfect otherwise it's useless" mentality? These are lives we are talking about. Anything that is even minimally better is better.
Arming teachers is stupid. Who is going to want to be a teacher when the job requires you to be armed? Certainly not people actually interested in teaching...Why not just drop the kids at the local police station, then? Get rid of schools all together? If that's the environment you want your kids growing up in, I want nothing to do with it.
Whatever. I'm done talking about something that should be obvious.
Last edited by dub dub II; 12-17-2012 at 03:32 AM..
I'm not talking about "all firearms" and neither is Feinstein. Her bill she is offering up is proposing a ban on rifles. Why isn't she going after handguns? They are used the most? Tell me why she hasn't made a squeak about handguns nor has anyone else all we hear about are these evil assault rifles. I posted the data.
This is not meant as an attack against gun ownership in it's entirety. This argument is against the counter argument against the argument that the world would be better off if we banned guns (or certain types of guns).
Let's face it guns and ammunition are are one of the most lethal weapons per dollar spent on the weapon. They are also very effective weapons: no other weapon provides such range, lethality, and rate of fire compared to other weapons. It's alot harder to dodge a bullet than to dodge a throwing knife. Not to mention that you can run away from a person that is using say a blunt weapon than a man armed with a gun.
If you look back, the way weapon technology has improved... A single man can do the damage of what an arrow volley executed by many men can do with a gun.
...But access to weapons is but a small part of the equation. Some cultures have less violent crime than others, it may be easier to change our culture than to confiscate the weapons that are already there.
There is something to your argument, no doubt. But note that the essence of the technology that is firearms lies in the cartridge, not the gun. The gun is just a dispenser. There really is little difference in what can be done with a 6 shot revolver and an 18 shot Glock 17.
A few years ago when many police depts were switching from revolver to auto, I read about a study done by the Arkansas state troopers. They went back and looked at every shooting on record for their agency. They found that never once, not even once had a trooper reloaded their 6-shot revolver. Every gunfight was ended in 6 shots or less.
The power lies in the cartridge, not the gun. This is why the 'assault weapon' ban approach will prove spectacularly ineffective, if that's the route we decide to go. If we're going to solve the problem with a gun ban, it's going to have to be a total, Japan-style ban. I think that could work to some degree, but I don't think the US is going to to that.
That's why I think we must look elsewhere for solutions.
It is very easy to use the "mentally unsound" argument for any person that murders someone else. You sort of have to be in an unsound state of mind to take lives. However, that doesn't excuse the method used to kill the victims.
Let's pretend I planned to kill some people for whatever reason. I need a means to do so. Let me look at my options:
1) any hand-to-hand range type weapon
2) bomb
3) gun
Well, a knife, bat, etc - that requires me to get up-close and see the whites of their eyes. I don't think I have the stomatch for that. I could also be easily overwhelmed by people. I'd also imagine that I'd have to be pretty skillful with such weapons to actually kill and not just injure. However, they are easy to acquire. Doesn't take much to get a blunt weapon or a knife.
How about the bomb then? You can't quite just go to the store and get ACME Bomb. Sure, I guess I could buy all the ingredients... find a way to detonate it. I might want to test it out first. I'd also need a place to construct said bomb without people knowing about it. The means/opportunity to do so may not be available to me. Maybe I'd have to find a secluded place to build it. Maybe plan ahead. Oh... well, maybe that's too much work. And maybe I want to kill in cold blood. Yeah... bomb isn't going to work .
How about the gun? No need to get up-close and personal. I'd imagine that without minimal skill I could manage to land some shots that would kill. Semi-automatic is even better. Just spray my victims. I could probably kill faster than I could count the deaths. Doesn't take too much to get a weapon either. They are available legally and illegally. I could murder someone with a gun and then get access to all their guns before I go on my rampage.
I wouldn't quite be killing a family member/neighbor to get access to their knives, bats or pre-made home-built bomb, would I?
So, would people use something else? If they were THAT determined, yes. Would it stop Columbine? Maybe. Those kids built bombs (that all failed). They planned for months. Their killings were all with guns. Would it stop Newtown? Yes. Reports thus far are painting the picture that this was started over an argument a day or two prior to the actual shooting. This guy wouldn't have built a bomb to blow up the school. He wouldn't have taken so many lives with a bat. He did with a gun since it is the easiest to access and most lethal/effective killing machine available to the general public.
This is not meant as an attack against gun ownership in it's entirety. This argument is against the counter argument against the argument that the world would be better off if we banned guns (or certain types of guns).
Let's face it guns and ammunition are are one of the most lethal weapons per dollar spent on the weapon. They are also very effective weapons: no other weapon provides such range, lethality, and rate of fire compared to other weapons. It's alot harder to dodge a bullet than to dodge a throwing knife. Not to mention that you can run away from a person that is using say a blunt weapon than a man armed with a gun.
If you look back, the way weapon technology has improved... A single man can do the damage of what an arrow volley executed by many men can do with a gun.
...But access to weapons is but a small part of the equation. Some cultures have less violent crime than others, it may be easier to change our culture than to confiscate the weapons that are already there.
Box cutters killed 3000 people on 9/11. When you have freedom nut jobs will find a way to kill. Only way to stop is is to reduce freedom which is exactly what the progressives want .
Legislating morality Does not mean a nut job will be more moral
Actually, the anti-gun crowd is saying "If we take guns away, violent crime will stop." I'm merely trying to point out that violence doesn't need a specific tool.
You can never stop violence. What u can do is take away a tool that inflicts mass casualities the day one of these loonies want to go on another killing spree.
Now I'm all for our 2nd ammendment but I will say that some of its provisions need to be tweeked. No ordinary Joe needs an assault rifle. They belong on the battlefield. Not on our residential streets.
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.
