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.
The definition of a what constitutes a high powered weapon is irrelevant.
No, it's not. If you want to ban it you need to define it.
I'm going to assume that an AR15 would be included on your list, even though I'm not convinced you could identify one if I handed it to you.
Regardless, can you explain to me how an AR15 is more powerful than this?
Quote:
The goal is to acknowledge the existence of such weapons and start banning them and surely some guns fit in that category.
As I'm personally aware of no legal firearm I think ought to be banned, I doubt you're going to convince me. Regardless, the answer to the question of why the AR15 is higher powered than the firearm in the picture will determine where this conversation goes.
Quote:
If you do then we agree. If you don't then you might be a gun nut.
I'm probably a gun nut to you. But I'm not paranoid, I'm not racist, I'm not redneck, and I'm not stupid, so maybe not.
No, it's not. If you want to ban it you need to define it.
I'm going to assume that an AR15 would be included on your list, even though I'm not convinced you could identify one if I handed it to you.
Regardless, can you explain to me how an AR15 is more powerful than this?
As I'm personally aware of no legal firearm I think ought to be banned, I doubt you're going to convince me. Regardless, the answer to the question of why the AR15 is higher powered than the firearm in the picture will determine where this conversation goes.
I'm probably a gun nut to you. But I'm not paranoid, I'm not racist, I'm not redneck, and I'm not stupid, so maybe not.
So you are of the opinion that no gun is too powerful for citizens to own?
That is the debate not whether I'd ban this or that gun.
I think once regular citizens are clear where people who favor guns stand then it becomes very clear who has way out there views.
Saying that no guns should be banned is a way out there view and that is the debate I want to expose normal people to.
You want to have the irrelevant debate about how powerful the AR15 is blah, blah, blah and this other gun is blah, blah, blah.
That's irrelevant, but the idea that you may believe that no guns should be banned that is very revealing and extreme.
So you are of the opinion that no gun is too powerful for citizens to own?
That is not what I said. What I said was that I am unaware of any currently legal firearm that I would be in favor of banning. That doesn't mean that I'm in favor of civilian ownership of RPG's.
Quote:
That is the debate not whether I'd ban this or that gun.
That is precisely what it is about. If you are going to ban guns that are "too powerful", you need to delineate and define precisely what is, and what is not, "too powerful".
Quote:
You want to have the irrelevant debate about how powerful the AR15 is blah, blah, blah and this other gun is blah, blah, blah.
Do you even know the specs of an AR15? Understand what ammo it uses? Are you familiar with the ballistic characteristics of the weapon? I would think it would be important to understand that before calling for it to be banned.
That is not what I said. What I said was that I am unaware of any currently legal firearm that I would be in favor of banning. That doesn't mean that I'm in favor of civilian ownership of RPG's.
That is precisely what it is about. If you are going to ban guns that are "too powerful", you need to delineate and define precisely what is, and what is not, "too powerful".
Do you even know the specs of an AR15? Understand what ammo it uses? Are you familiar with the ballistic characteristics of the weapon? I would think it would be important to understand that before calling for it to be banned.
Ok then once you acknowledge reality that certain weapons are too dangerous in your opinion for private citizens to own, then question becomes why can't they own an RPG in your opinion?
Ok then once you acknowledge reality that certain weapons are too dangerous in your opinion for private citizens to own, then question becomes why can't they own an RPG in your opinion?
Stuff like "that" is already Federally regulated. I don't recall ever hearing of a civilian example...not a LIVE one anyways.
Ok then once you acknowledge reality that certain weapons are too dangerous in your opinion for private citizens to own, then question becomes why can't they own an RPG in your opinion?
An RPG is an order of magnitude more powerful than a .223 cartridge. There is no defensive use of an RPG, whereas a .223 is appropriate for sport shooting, hunting, as well as self defense, though some think it's not powerful enough for big game.
So, are you okay with .223 rifles? 7.62mm? .50 caliber?
If not, based upon what criteria?
BTW, since you obviously don't know enough about firearms to tell me why the AR-15 is more dangerous than the rifle in the picture I posted, I'll spill the beans. It's not. It fires the exact same round downrange at the exact same speed, and reloads in a functionally identical manner. It doesn't "look" as "scary", but it is functionally identical.
"Hell no" = compromise. Get serious. For decades the NRA had the votes to create gridlock negating any meaningful reform. Now with this massacre, I have no doubt they don't. So quite frankly, the side w/o the votes should not be answering "Hell NO" to anything.
It will never be 12/13/2012 for the NRA and their mindset again.
They don't have the votes? Democrats don't have enough votes to override a Republican filibuster of the Senate, meaning they can kill a gun bill even if all of the Democrats and Independents support it. In the House, Republicans have a majority, so obviously gun legislation won't pass through there.
Look at it this way, the pro-gun lobby isn't arguing for change, just that we should maintain the status quo. The anti-gun lobby is always going to be fighting an uphill battle, and right now, it doesn't appear they have the votes to pass a sweeping gun control bill.
I would like to add that we do have a problem with violence, but banning firearms isn't the solution, we need to take a good long look at our culture and our values. We need to figure out what is going wrong with these young men, and why they lash out violently against innocent people. I'm not qualified to answer that question, but that's the heart of the problem. I find it strange that both the USA and China, the two largest countries in the World, with vastly differing culture and value systems, are having the same problem at the same point in history. I think that examining our cultural similarities is a good place to start. Actually, I might start a thread with that in mind.
Last edited by Widowmaker2k; 12-17-2012 at 05:01 PM..
The problem is you can't have a serious discussion with the mentally insane. gun nuts are crazy. They have crazy views about the world. They live in a constant state of fear. They have these fantasies that they are going to fight the government, or fight marauding bands of urban criminals who are they are terrified will riot.
Many are conspiracy theorists, and racists who are ruled by fear.
You understand the irony in these statements one assumes...?
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.
