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)
 
Old 01-27-2018, 10:25 PM
 
Location: Richmond
1,645 posts, read 1,215,334 times
Reputation: 1777

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by Boris347 View Post
And even more gun owners have decided to ignore any gun laws now, or in the future, because there are so many, it takes a lawyer to figure out which one applies to you, and some of them are so stupid that they are based on what the gun looks like, and if its a "scary" looking gun. Most of these laws are introduced by morons who have never fired a gun and don't know the difference between a Muzzle brake and a the emergency brake on their cars. So the best solution is to ignore them all and get what you want. Lets face it, if you NEED to get out your AR15s or any Weapon to defend your Country or your family from any hostile person or persons, a gun Law is the last thing that's going to matter.


FACT not Fiction...

Quite true


And that is even more evident in the states that don't allow another states Carry Conceal permits and where states like New York don't honor say Virginia's carry conceal permit. Why is New York's state government so much smatter than Virginia's state government; if Virginia having performed a background check on me is OK with me carrying a concealed hand gun, but New York is not.


Suddenly having a weapon that you bought legally, with a valid carry conceal permit from one state, and now once you cross a states border, now you are a felon.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 01-27-2018, 11:28 PM
 
Location: San Diego
18,741 posts, read 7,620,616 times
Reputation: 15011
One of the most important effects to letting everybody carry a gun if they want to, is deterrence. If all so-called "gun control" laws were eliminated (i.e. if the 2nd amendment were actually obeyed), making it legal for any adult to carry, most of them still wouldn't bother. But a few would. And a criminal who's thinking about robbing someone, or raping or even murdering, he'd have to think twice knowing that there are probably a few people in the crowd who have a gun and know how to use it. He'd never know which one(s) they are, and so couldn't know who to defend against until too late.

And so he may well decide not to commit his robbery or murder at all. A few truly insane criminals would still go ahead. But a large number of crimes would now never happen in the first place. All without a shot being fired.

But how would we know, exactly, how many crimes got prevented this way? The effect is, simply nothing happened. How to you quantify that, effective and beneficial though it is?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-28-2018, 05:35 AM
 
59,111 posts, read 27,349,464 times
Reputation: 14290
Quote:
Originally Posted by LearnMe View Post
If making simple-minded comments to nowhere without substance is to "hit a nerve," you're hitting them out of the park!
OK, I have lost count the number of time in EVERY gun thread YOU have been TOLD the Ar-15 is NOT an "assault rifle" yet you keep saying it is.

I have lost count the number of times in EVERY gun thread YOU have been TOLD that restricting the size of magazines is NOT a good idea with SOLID EXPLANATIONS AS TO WHY, yet you keep repeating the same old lame argument.

Your name is "learn me" but it is clear some things you refuse to learn about.

"You can lead a horse to water but you CAN'T make him drink"

We can repeat over and over and over the FACTS for, but we CANNOT make you "learn"!
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-28-2018, 05:43 AM
 
59,111 posts, read 27,349,464 times
Reputation: 14290
Quote:
Originally Posted by NY_refugee87 View Post
Remove the emotion from it and see it logically You will have a satisfying way to reduce "gun violence"
I addressed one way in doing just that. Odd you nor others have seriously challenged what I had proposed. Especially when I lay the plan on the table with mentioning I wont address hyperbole.
What do I get?
*crickets*



And what plan specifically curtails their activities?
That is the problem with "gun control" What applies to the bad seed must apply to all in the name and sake of being fair? No. Chicago Oakland NOLA Detroit, Those are their problems to address. And it goes on neglected just like the school shootings.
I propose a fix I catch hell.
Others have proposed a fix. They catch hell.
It tells me every time I engage in these debates, there is no genuine concern by the side that wants to ban. They just want to ban, curtail, and subjectively interpret and dictate to others on the basis of what goes on in the cities and suburbs, and what goes on in isolated incidents.
School shootings-No deterrence present.
Cities-No deterrence present. You could put a cop on every street corner in those cities. They would become targets. That wouldn't solve anything.
Shot Spotter. Again. Its a monitoring device, and an expensive one to use. Again. NO deterrent present. Wait until folks figure out how to trigger it by slapping 2 bricks together in an alley way...
The approach I find from the left and the anti gun crowd is much the same in everything else.

Monitor it. Thats all they want to do is Monitor.
Do not give others the right to defend themselves.
Make them dependent upon the police to ensure their safety. Seconds matter. Help is only minutes away.
Demonize the implement to create an allure. Also to create more tensions between left and right or pro vs anti.
Skip over the incentive, the motive, and the individuals reasons for doing such heinous activities. Its the guns fault...




Intelligent mature conversation. Pfft. Not with the likes that have commented continuously in these threads with knee jerk responses. There is no communicating with them. Fact be damned. Look at the arguing had between myself and lvmensch.
Wants to ban the AR15 in one breath for having no legitimate purpose other than to kill as many people as possible...
Ignores the statistics doesnt even know what the definition of statistics Is to begin with, makes the outlandish claim that there has to be some sort of benefit with the deaths that occur to justify the rifles existence?
Again skip over the fact a human element existed to control and manipulate the weapon... Its the weapon. The inanimate object solely or majorly responsible.




Well, we have tried it in the anti gunners way for years. Multiple times.
Clintons AWB did not reduce or curtail or stop anything. Columbine still happened. 2 sawed off shotguns and an intratec9 pistol.

The ban. The limit. The regulation. The curtailing of rights. Does not work. Does not reduce. Does not Stop.

Having a deterrence does.
We once had a common agreement on responsible gun owners.
When liberals took the approach of being proactive in the school about safe sex, there was a decline in teen pregnancy from 1990-2014. Decline in teenage pregnancy, decline in teenage abortion, decline in STD rates among teens too.
Now the numbers of kids finding weapons and injuring or offing themselves and others, is a tiny fraction of those who have fallen.
If the goal is to have responsible gun owners. Reduce the occurrences of these events and tragedies from happening... Why not teach responsible manners in school like with safe sex?

Its a legitimate question. Why are firearms demonized and the mere suggestion of introducing a program or class to address the elephant in the room met with such vehement opposition?
Could it be a political agenda would lose relevancy as it loses victims bodies to stand on top of to grandstand on behalf of?

I believe so. As insulting as that is and tacky and brutal that is, can't fault me for being honest with my opinion generated from an observation...

I honestly believe if there were guns everywhere and drastically reduced crimes/accidents/negligent occurrences, democrats would not have something to present to their voting base.
The would lose relevancy.
I'm convinced of it.

Prove me wrong.
Firearms go back in the classroom.
Children are taught safe practices and methods along with laws. Let them know how much they risk and stand to lose for being an Ahole and stupid with a firearm.

Allow Teachers and school faculty to exercise their 2nd amendment rights to keep and bear arms to have the means of defense to protect the students and themselves.
Want specifics on how I would address it? Fine I would list and address every concern conceivable. But I will not engage in hyperbolic rhetoric, doomsday prophecies, and ridiculous what Ifs.

Basics of the above.
1. Expedite their concealed carry permit. Teachers can not hold a license to teach while holding a felony charge. Just do the finger printing the passport ID and turn around in a quicker fashion to get them their permit/license following their state guidelines. If their state even requires a CCW.
2. Train during summer break. Train right there in the class room with simunition rounds with sheriffs dept/swat/law enforcement and private and volunteer trainers. I would volunteer to take part in training the faculty. Starting with the basic principles and go right on up to force on force with simulating an active shooter. You get the bang, the concussion as close as the real thing as possible.
3. Help to hone through what worked, what didn't work and how to do improve.
4. Want smart gun tech so a teachers weapon can not be lifted by a crazed student? Fine we can do that.
5. Want a safe or lockable and readily accessible container for the weapon? Fine we can do that too.
6. Want a budget for what it would cost? I can come up with it. For the simunition rounds, the weapons, the cost of a container/smart gun tech.

Do not counter with the kids will die in droves. A teacher will snap and kill all the kids. I won't engage in hyperbole.

Inner cities and such...

That's a separate problem and the outline to address that is listed in that article. Yet... Mayors are not coordinating efforts to address it. So I will.

Want the shootings to stop in your big cities and urban areas?
Perhaps maybe lower taxes to attract businesses to hire the locals. That way they are not turning to criminal enterprise to float themselves and their families. Provide an opportunity for gods sake!
If its true that this isnt "gang" warfare but just some confused young men with a grudge... Speak to them. Show them the error in their ways. Provide them with a positive figure to look up to. Provide them with an alternative than You scuffed my shoe? I shoot you fool! Or you stole my girl, I steal your life! If true that young men are killing each other due to rivalry and petty instances leading to a big violent grudge... Then perhaps address the incentives there that exist that promote this crap.

The way the article cites it, it seems more a cultural thing than a legitimate crime thing... Insinuating live by the sword, die by it...
Yet...
You look at the age group. Say 17-24 urban environment and 17-24 rural environment.

How is it the rural kids aren't offing themselves in record numbers?
Is it
1. Lack of single parent house holds?
2. Growing up with responsible parents?
3. Educated in proper and responsible practices with a firearm?
4. Know the act of threatening to do harm with, or actually doing harm with, is a crime with a hefty punishment and is not worth it?

What separates the urban kids from the rural kids?
For the concept of guns=death... How is it Billy Bob in rural areas doesn't grab his gun when disrespected? Yet... Hard Street Harold can put a hole in your face for "dissing" him in some fashion?
If that is the angle the report wants to run with... Its just misguided youth who turn to violence in inner cities and rack up the body count over grudges and such...

At least there was an acknowledgement of Yeah, you know what... There is something more to it than guns... And that, I can respect...
Solely the gun? Now you're being silly...
"6. Want a budget for what it would cost? I can come up with it. For the simunition rounds, the weapons, the cost of a container/smart gun tech. "

The NRA has the Eagle Eddy firearm training program designed for schools and will DO IT FOR FREE but the liberal anti-gun loonies will have NONE OF IT.

I agree with your "sex training and NOT gun training.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-28-2018, 05:52 AM
 
Location: PSL
8,224 posts, read 3,501,337 times
Reputation: 2963
Quote:
Originally Posted by Quick Enough View Post
"6. Want a budget for what it would cost? I can come up with it. For the simunition rounds, the weapons, the cost of a container/smart gun tech. "

The NRA has the Eagle Eddy firearm training program designed for schools and will DO IT FOR FREE but the liberal anti-gun loonies will have NONE OF IT.

I agree with your "sex training and NOT gun training.
6 refers to the lawful training and arming of teachers/school faculty.
Also, what it would cost to place a lockable impervious storage device in the room so a child can not lift the weapon from a teacher or easily access the weapon. Or have the weapon on the teacher, but the weapon have "smart gun" technology in it to prevent the weapon from being fired by anyone but the recognized finger print or RFID...
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-28-2018, 05:57 AM
 
59,111 posts, read 27,349,464 times
Reputation: 14290
Quote:
Originally Posted by NY_refugee87 View Post
Then we can't have a discussion then.

Plain and simple.

Not willing to read? Not willing to debate or honestly discuss it.
Go back to ALL of his/her post on other gun thread and he says the same things over an over.

He NEVER "learns".
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-28-2018, 06:06 AM
 
59,111 posts, read 27,349,464 times
Reputation: 14290
Quote:
Originally Posted by Floorist View Post
The only difference is the number of magazines required. Changing magazines is so fast it would have no affect. The shooters are the problem, not the guns.
I have posted this over and over and NONE of the anti gunners ever respond.

You are laying in your bed and 1, 2 or 3 ARMED robbers break into your house.

(I have posted REAL articles where this happened and it is NOT rare)

Being they are criminals in the 1st place means they do NOT follow the laws.

EACH has STOLEN 9mm with ILLEGAL 10 round mags.

Your 9 can only have 5 rounds.

Even if it is only 1 bad guy.

Why should you be under "gunned"?

He as 10 rounds and you only have 5.

limiting mag sizes COULD cause innocent people to be killed.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-28-2018, 06:07 AM
 
59,111 posts, read 27,349,464 times
Reputation: 14290
Quote:
Originally Posted by Floorist View Post
One reason I have not bought an AR15 is because the M16 was a piece of junk. I used one in combat and they were totally unreliable. Are the ARs a better rifle?
"the M16 was a piece of junk"

It was improved and came to be a very reliable weapon.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-28-2018, 06:16 AM
 
Location: PSL
8,224 posts, read 3,501,337 times
Reputation: 2963
Quote:
Originally Posted by Roboteer View Post
One of the most important effects to letting everybody carry a gun if they want to, is deterrence. If all so-called "gun control" laws were eliminated (i.e. if the 2nd amendment were actually obeyed), making it legal for any adult to carry, most of them still wouldn't bother. But a few would. And a criminal who's thinking about robbing someone, or raping or even murdering, he'd have to think twice knowing that there are probably a few people in the crowd who have a gun and know how to use it. He'd never know which one(s) they are, and so couldn't know who to defend against until too late.

And so he may well decide not to commit his robbery or murder at all. A few truly insane criminals would still go ahead. But a large number of crimes would now never happen in the first place. All without a shot being fired.

But how would we know, exactly, how many crimes got prevented this way? The effect is, simply nothing happened. How to you quantify that, effective and beneficial though it is?
Well, when the numbers of new, not renewed, but new, first time issued concealed carry permits are rising, it wouldn't be a minority of the population who is carrying...

Your last statement. That's where politics and science clash like religion and science.

There are no 2 cities, no 2 states, no 2 America's to study and put laws into place to see which method would work. However, I am willing to place a bet, you have allowed everyone in America to have unabridged 2nd Amendment rights, with a stand your ground no duty to retreat. Impunity to defend yourself your loved ones, your community, your property, our school kids, I am willing to bet, these heinous activities would stop.

Naysayers would like to be hyperbolic in nature and claim the incidents will rise, accidents galore would take place, cite anti gun "stats" that conflict with CDC reports that differ immensely from the narrative of "accidents", negligence, etc...
These same anti gunners, only trust and put blind faith in government agencies for having the authority to use violence upon others.

That attitude has to change. In the case of school shootings, it's proven, when seconds matter help is minutes away. The typical mass shooting lasts 10-15 minutes with often times the offender taking their own life to avoid prison.

This needs to change.

People need to stop being dependent upon a government agent/police officer to defend them and their children. People need to put a little faith in their fellow citizens and stray from the narrative that it will be the wild west.

Along with reducing/plea bargaining charges for crimes with a firearm.
Give strict harsh punishments for using a firearm in crime.
Let the right of the people to keep and bear arms for lawful purposes and defense.
Let the people be in charge of their safety and the safety of their community.

It's dangerous thought to the anti gun crowd. It's something that has been brainwashed into them that firearms are inherently dangerous and that only criminals and homicidal nuts own them. That simply is not true.
Most gun owners, it's a hobby, and means of lawful defense.

It's the anti gun crowd who's paranoia drives them to believe otherwise, coupled with Hollywood action movies for knowledge...
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-28-2018, 06:27 AM
 
59,111 posts, read 27,349,464 times
Reputation: 14290
Quote:
Originally Posted by lvmensch View Post
Actually in any realistic outcome they will be grandfathered. Maybe a ban on sales with some sort of by back procedure. But no I do not expect that anyone will come to take the ARs.

As I have said a number of times as long as we have the existing interpretation of the 2nd I will support permissive concealed carry and may chose to do so myself. But let us not misunderstand. There is every indication that people armed with handguns will not do well against anyone with an AR. See Johnson in Dallas and Mateen in Orlando.
"
Sen. Dianne Feinstein reintroduces assault weapons ban legislation

Every ONE who supports the 2nd Amendmnet SHOULD read this

She also WANTS to confiscate GUNS.



https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WCRKv-szJlo


So does Hillary which is WHY we CANNOT allow the dems to re-takes control of Congress and the WH

I sincerely HOPE that if we get a more conservative Supreme Court many of these state laws which are in direct confliction, "'shall NOT be in fringed'" to the 2nd Amendment will be challenged and overturned.
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
Similar Threads

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 04:26 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