PDA

View Full Version : In the three years since Sandy Hook...



Pages : [1] 2

Norman Bernstein
12-14-2015, 07:37 PM
Three years ago on Monday, a heavily armed gunman walked into Sandy Hook Elementary School in Newtown, Connecticut, and started shooting. When he was done, he had killed 26 people, including 20 children, most of them with an assault-style rifle equipped with high-capacity magazines. He saved his final shot, reportedly fired from a handgun, for himself.

The massacre shocked the nation's collective conscience and spurred calls for congressional lawmakers to do more than offer the "thoughts and prayers" (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/shootings-thoughts-prayers_565f57d5e4b08e945fedd2ad) that have become commonplace in the aftermath of mass shootings in the U.S. Many argued that this tragedy, like many before and after it, demanded meaningful action.

And three years later:

555 more kids dead by gun.

I'm not writing this OP to argue for more gun legislation... I've given up on that tactic, since it doesn't work.... it can't work... and it will never work.

I'm writing the OP as a warning to the parents and grandparents of young children. There is no other reason.

ccmanuals
12-14-2015, 07:40 PM
Not looking forward to Jan 1st in Texas when the open carry law takes effect.

Scary times.

Phillip Allen
12-14-2015, 07:41 PM
how many killed by cars? bucket drownings?

lets keep this in perspective

Paul Pless
12-14-2015, 07:45 PM
how many killed by cars? bucket drownings?

lets keep this in perspective

Perspective? How bout this, despite there being millions more vehicles and drivers on the road, driving millions upon millions additional miles.per year, vehicle related fatalaties continue to go down and have been each year for decades. Gun fatalaties surpassed vehicle related fatalities this year for the first time. There's some perspective for you. . .

Norman Bernstein
12-14-2015, 07:50 PM
how many killed by cars? bucket drownings?

lets keep this in perspective

Which of the 555 children voluntarily undertook the risk of the gun that killed them, in full knowledge of the dangers and consequences?

When we drive a car, we're aware of the potential danger, and accept the risk. I don't think any of those children were even aware of the risk, when they were shot and killed.

Phillip, sometimes you are just..... well, I can't really say it. Perhaps 'inhumanly devoid of social conscience' is a way I can say it, without getting banned.

Jim Bow
12-14-2015, 08:07 PM
Emmit Till's mother insisted that her son's casket be open so that all could witness what lynching looks like.
Maybe folks need to see a 2 year old with half her head missing to get the point.

The Bigfella
12-14-2015, 08:25 PM
Emmit Till's mother insisted that her son's casket be open so that all could witness what lynching looks like.
Maybe folks need to see a 2 year old with half her head missing to get the point.

I think the issue is that some here only have half a brain. Their posts sure don't provide evidence of a fully functioning human brain.

Joe (SoCal)
12-14-2015, 08:33 PM
https://scontent-ord1-1.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-xfa1/v/t1.0-9/12342735_1023087344450986_5971754348763666205_n.pn g?oh=8aee4722ad190a60e1e9f0db506a6ab6&oe=571FE554

http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-QnLEZ8uWI0g/UqsrD4ATdhI/AAAAAAAALeg/7KUfXwY0sgc/s1600/Sandy+Hook+Elementary+School+shooting+12.jpg

C. Ross
12-14-2015, 08:33 PM
Before Sandy Hook, I thought unlimited ownership of unlimited weapons was a really bad idea, but it wasn't an issue I focused on.

After Sandy Hook, I said "enough". It's my fight now.

The pro-gun folks need to accept that they have created the supply chain through which these weapons and ammunition are legally purchased. I'd not want that blood on my hands. I can only speculate that the reason for such tortured and foolish arguments, like the insufferably idiotic "you need a good man with a gun to stop a bad man with a gun" are invented in order to somehow avoid the blood debt the gun folks know they bear.

Jim Bow
12-14-2015, 08:51 PM
And then there's the elected sheriff of Douglas County Oregon who suggested to his followers.that Sandy Hook may have been a government conspiracy to take away our guns. No comment since he responded.to a mass.shooting at Umqua Community College.

CWSmith
12-14-2015, 09:13 PM
Now is the time for the gun lobby to enter into reasonable dialog (mandatory safes, mandatory education, etc.). With every senseless death the vote turn toward legislation just a little bit more. When compromise is no longer needed, it will no longer be sought.

Joe (SoCal)
12-14-2015, 09:28 PM
Before Sandy Hook, I thought unlimited ownership of unlimited weapons was a really bad idea, but it wasn't an issue I focused on.

After Sandy Hook, I said "enough". It's my fight now.

The pro-gun folks need to accept that they have created the supply chain through which these weapons and ammunition are legally purchased. I'd not want that blood on my hands. I can only speculate that the reason for such tortured and foolish arguments, like the insufferably idiotic "you need a good man with a gun to stop a bad man with a gun" are invented in order to somehow avoid the blood debt the gun folks know they bear.


Sandy Hook did it for me too. Now it's personal.

To see Awwww Shucks® QUOTED weasely, foolishly an absofookingly stupid rebuttal makes me vomit a lot in my mouth. How disgusting and reminds me of the only time I got him to admit his sole purpose for posting on gun threads is to block and obstruct any and all forms of any gun control for as long as he can. What a sickening useless pathetic human endeavor, makes me sick :mad::mad::mad:

Joe (SoCal)
12-14-2015, 09:58 PM
Joe , tell us what you REALLY think !!!.
Regards Rob J.

I ALWAYS do !
You must be new ;)

C. Ross
12-14-2015, 10:04 PM
Sandy Hook did it for me too. Now it's personal.

I thought about my daughters. I grew up around guns and I understand them. I don't understand the insanity of where we are now. Enough. Enough.

S.V. Airlie
12-14-2015, 10:16 PM
how many killed by cars? bucket drownings?

lets keep this in perspectiveA car is a necessary evil that has uses; work is the big one, cars are not designed to kill. Guns have no other function but to kill something or practice for shooting something. So, take your gun analogy, wrap it up and save it for those who don't know the functional difference between a gun and a car. This is a pet excuse you dump on people, apparently republican rabid gun owners lap it up. Reasonable, intelligent people don't.

Joe (SoCal)
12-14-2015, 10:19 PM
How much is Gun Insurance these days ?
Cause Car Insurance in NJ is a bitch.

S.V. Airlie
12-14-2015, 10:22 PM
I drive tops, 6k a year. My car insurance is way down. It helps that my last ticket was in 1993 too.

Steve McMahon
12-14-2015, 11:05 PM
3 years, and 1000 more "mass" shootings....
http://www.ctvnews.ca/world/3-years-and-1-000-mass-shootings-after-sandy-hook-a-call-for-action-1.2699412

Are you stunned or just stupid?

Kevin T
12-14-2015, 11:42 PM
Bucket drownings? WTF? How soon till we get treated to the moronic blather regarding helmets as mandatory in cars, as always nothing of substance, just lockstep mindless distraction and deflection. Maybe we'll find out once again about the great and vast amount of rights surrendered by gun "enthusiasts" in 1968 or whenever the "H E double hockey sticks" this grievous gun legislation took place? But 20 dead 5 and 6 year old children, and it's time to bring on the swimming pool death nonsense. Contemptuous, utterly contemptuous! It's hopeless, the country is awash in an ocean of blood, in fact you could say that blood, moribund obesity and just plain old fashioned ignorance and the celebration thereof are our top three industries. Your call on the top spot

bobbys
12-15-2015, 02:14 AM
To a liberal morality is put into a inanimate, object, Remove the object or denie it's access and one can claim a higher moral authority without addressing anything else and overlooking any pesky other issues..

Any sort of sexual sin, multiple by the hundreds, People playing violent video games .,liberals making hollywood movies with liberal actors killing dozens of people at a time yet being anti gun but taking a nice fat paycheck and running up to the Oscar podium for a reward..

Shaming kids that might have a honest sport of hunting and instead teach them perversion is the norm.

Never fighting against drug abuse but winking at it and encouraging it.

Yeah going against guns relieves a lot of guilt from libs and removes these other issues from the forefront.

The Bigfella
12-15-2015, 03:43 AM
Bobbys , a lot of the people railing against the American gunculture are not lefties.
They are middle of the road , or conservative people , who care , and are prepared to take their share of the responsibily of reducing gun deaths and trauma.
I was happy to accept gun control in Australia bought in after the Port Arthur massacre.
In reality , it meant no difference to me , except my rifles are registered and locked away , and I have a licence to own them.
Some of the Conservative Politicians gave their total support , knowing it would probably mean they would lose their job.
And for some , it did.
But they still have no regrets , they know they did the right thing.
Rob J.

Bingo.

I sit somewhere to the right of Genghis Khan... and I support gun law reform. My rifles are registered, I'm licenced.. which means trained, etc... and my rifles are stored in a locked gun safe, with ammo locked up separately.

One of these days, the collective US IQ will get above 60. There's a few dinosaurs that need to be left behind along the way. Some of them on this forum.

Phillip Allen
12-15-2015, 03:48 AM
To a liberal morality is put into a inanimate, object, Remove the object or denie it's access and one can claim a higher moral authority without addressing anything else and overlooking any pesky other issues..

Any sort of sexual sin, multiple by the hundreds, People playing violent video games .,liberals making hollywood movies with liberal actors killing dozens of people at a time yet being anti gun but taking a nice fat paycheck and running up to the Oscar podium for a reward..

Shaming kids that might have a honest sport of hunting and instead teach them perversion is the norm.

Never fighting against drug abuse but winking at it and encouraging it.

Yeah going against guns relieves a lot of guilt from libs and removes these other issues from the forefront.

it's good and thoughtful post, bobbys but the aggressive 'liberal' mindset cannot let it go unchallenged. it is very threatening

PeterSibley
12-15-2015, 03:56 AM
It's twaddle.

Phillip Allen
12-15-2015, 04:02 AM
BARK, BARK, BARK... ( nice responses)

PeterSibley
12-15-2015, 04:10 AM
Come on Phillip, it is twaddle and you know it. The War on Drugs was about as successful as the war on booze, it's just played into criminal profits .
and it's damn hard to get shot without a gun in the picture.

Twaddle.

Peerie Maa
12-15-2015, 05:12 AM
Come on Phillip, it is twaddle and you know it. The War on Drugs was about as successful as the war on booze, it's just played into criminal profits .
and it's damn hard to get shot without a gun in the picture.

Twaddle.
From another thread



http://forum.woodenboat.com/images/icons/icon1.png Re: More guns less .....



http://forum.woodenboat.com/images/misc/quote_icon.png Originally Posted by Peerie Maa

That very nearly make sense. :confused:



Phillip is less concerned about making sense than in dumping on any discussion about restricting access to firearms. Nonsense derails a thread just as quickly as sensible argument. Often it derails a thread more quickly. That is his goal.



So either Phillips brain is addled by breathing in lead fumes when casting bullets, or he is cynically dishonest when posting his idiocy on gun threads.

skuthorp
12-15-2015, 06:41 AM
From another thread



So either Phillips brain is addled by breathing in lead fumes when casting bullets, or he is cynically dishonest when posting his idiocy on gun threads.
Phillip is not stupid, which leaves the other explanation.

TomF
12-15-2015, 07:41 AM
Cripes. So fookin predictable, the way these threads go.

Someone talks about kids shot dead, and Phillip responds with buckets, or swimming pools, or tangled bedsheets. Then we spend time whacking him for talking like an @ss, and he spends time defiantly proclaiming his right to be one. Ron periodically might drop in to use the buzzwords "Freedom" or "Liberty."

Tomorrow there'll be another mass shooting, and we'll get to do it all over again.

TomZ
12-15-2015, 07:42 AM
And three years later:

555 more kids dead by gun.

I'm not writing this OP to argue for more gun legislation... I've given up on that tactic, since it doesn't work.... it can't work... and it will never work.

I'm writing the OP as a warning to the parents and grandparents of young children. There is no other reason.

Very true Norman, we all need to heed the warning.

Some schools have taken steps to harden their facilities to varying degrees. They hold cargo more precious than gold. Parents trust them to keep their children safe. Much more could be done. Teachers should be given tools to protect, it doesn't have to be guns, - safe rooms, hardened doors, security detail, security accessments and plans, but all this costs money. Perhaps the licensing fees could be put towards these improvements, much the way hunting fees are put into resource management.

Keith Wilson
12-15-2015, 07:52 AM
Before Sandy Hook, I thought unlimited ownership of unlimited weapons was a really bad idea, but it wasn't an issue I focused on. After Sandy Hook, I said "enough". It's my fight now. Likewise. I did not grow up around guns. I don't own one, have never fired a gun in my life, and probably never will. But for most of my life, it hasn't been a big deal; I figured if people really wanted to have guns, OK, fine; there are better things to argue about. No longer.

The development that I've found really disturbing is that the argument on the right has shifted from preserving the freedom to have guns if one wants, to 'more guns is a positive good', that the cure for murderous nuts having guns is for everybody to have guns. We have actual celebrations of the fact that a relatively small number of paranoid fools have been buying guns in gigantic quantities since Obama was elected. Add to this a veiled (sometimes not so veiled) threat of armed insurrection if the rest of us try to change the laws in way they don't like. I suppose it's just another aspect of the American right wing's decent into madness, but I've f***ing had enough.

Peerie Maa
12-15-2015, 08:29 AM
The thing that really saddens me about the US is the lack of outrage.

Why is it that hardly anyone seems to care?

Keith Wilson
12-15-2015, 08:35 AM
God save us from what we can get used to.

TomF
12-15-2015, 08:37 AM
The thing that really saddens me about the US is the lack of outrage.

Why is it that hardly anyone seems to care?Facebook likes and outrage are apparently enough.

KMacDonald
12-15-2015, 08:45 AM
https://scontent-ord1-1.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-xfa1/v/t1.0-9/12342735_1023087344450986_5971754348763666205_n.pn g?oh=8aee4722ad190a60e1e9f0db506a6ab6&oe=571FE554

http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-QnLEZ8uWI0g/UqsrD4ATdhI/AAAAAAAALeg/7KUfXwY0sgc/s1600/Sandy+Hook+Elementary+School+shooting+12.jpg

Irrational sensationalism at it's worst.

Peerie Maa
12-15-2015, 08:47 AM
Facebook likes and outrage are apparently enough.

Well here is an idea. Facebook every Representative and every Senator to express outrage and demand action.

TomZ
12-15-2015, 08:49 AM
I think that Norms response is admirable. Sure some gun regulations make sense, but in the larger picture, there are other things we should focus on immediately. Both sides have developed 'gun tunnel vision' when these kinds of things happen. It then becomes just another political football, while the problem remains unchanged.

S.V. Airlie
12-15-2015, 08:49 AM
Irrational sensationalism at it's worst.And why is it irrational?

TomF
12-15-2015, 08:52 AM
Irrational sensationalism at it's worst.Au contraire, it's very rational sensationalism.

Dead, formerly adorable 5-6 year olds are the perfect poster children for gun control.

KMacDonald
12-15-2015, 08:54 AM
And why is it irrational?

As they say around here "never let a good tragedy go to waste".

Phillip Allen
12-15-2015, 08:58 AM
https://scontent-ord1-1.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-xfa1/v/t1.0-9/12342735_1023087344450986_5971754348763666205_n.pn g?oh=8aee4722ad190a60e1e9f0db506a6ab6&oe=571FE554

http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-QnLEZ8uWI0g/UqsrD4ATdhI/AAAAAAAALeg/7KUfXwY0sgc/s1600/Sandy+Hook+Elementary+School+shooting+12.jpg

hanging their little bodies at the city gate... got to drive his point home even if it smells bad

poor taste at its most garish

S.V. Airlie
12-15-2015, 09:03 AM
It is meant to be mind boggling that something like this can happen in a "civilized" society. You don't like it because the images are the result of you gun nuts and therefore, have nothing to say to justify it..To you, it's in poor taste! Welcome to reality PA.

Peerie Maa
12-15-2015, 09:03 AM
hanging their little bodies at the city gate... got to drive his point home even if it smells bad

poor taste at its most garish


I find that - once again - it's probably time to remind folks of a few of the most common logical fails.

https://scontent-sea1-1.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-xal1/v/t1.0-0/p480x480/12031999_1204840916195920_7848135570270266028_n.jp g?oh=6433346489c159c7f9cd9f1ad2a1fb17&oe=57138FDB
That would be the first commandment.

Joe (SoCal)
12-15-2015, 09:07 AM
Awwwww Shucks ®

Peerie Maa
12-15-2015, 09:09 AM
Au contraire, it's very rational sensationalism.

Dead, formerly adorable 5-6 year olds are the perfect poster children for gun control.


As they say around here "never let a good tragedy go to waste".

And it takes a pretty sick puppy to not recognise that it is a very rational sensationalism.

When considering defending the indefensible, it is better to STFU.

KMacDonald
12-15-2015, 09:22 AM
Awwwww Shucks ®

Troublemaker!!!!!!!!!!!!!

TomZ
12-15-2015, 09:23 AM
I think they should actually be poster children for 'FIXING THE PROBLEM'.

Just last week, a school near me recently had a 'drill'. It was a suprise drill, not even the teachers knew. I spoke with several of the students afterwards. Panic ensued, teachers yelling 'RUN! Get the h* outta here!. screaming and confusion as kids of all ages ran into the woods. Some of the kids weren't 'found' again until late in the afternoon. Several had run to the next town. They were terrorized, plain and simple. An older student found a bunch of younger ones hiding in a pile of leaves out in the woods, afraid to move. He saw one kid in a tree and told him to get down, as he was presenting a good target. I've looked for this on the news, but it looks like it just was a 'successfull drill'.

This is NOT AMUSING!

WHY DON'T THE TEACHERS HAVE THE FACILITIES AND PLAN TO SAFEGUARD THEIR KIDS!

protect them
security accessments
hardened facilities
Teacher training, including weapons training.
a standardized ranking system for school security.
a security certification program.

Have any of these been done for starters?
How about trying to figure out what has changed in our society where these kinds of things happen? We may not want to go back to the 50's, but something has clearly changed, not for the better, and I don't think it has anything to do with larger capacity.
Wasting time deflecting the blame to law abiding citizens is just despicable.

Phillip Allen
12-15-2015, 09:23 AM
Troublemaker!!!!!!!!!!!!!

don't worry about it... he's just another wannabe street tough

KMacDonald
12-15-2015, 09:29 AM
I think they should actually be poster children for 'FIXING THE PROBLEM'.

Just last week, a school near me recently had a 'drill'. It was a suprise drill, not even the teachers knew. I spoke with several of the students afterwards. Panic ensued, teachers yelling 'RUN! Get the h* outta here!. screaming and confusion as kids of all ages ran into the woods. Some of the kids weren't 'found' again until late in the afternoon. Several had run to the next town. They were terrorized, plain and simple. An older student found a bunch of younger ones hiding in a pile of leaves out in the woods, afraid to move. He saw one kid in a tree and told him to get down, as he was presenting a good target. I've looked for this on the news, but it looks like it just was a 'successfull drill'.

This is NOT AMUSING!

WHY DON'T THE TEACHERS HAVE THE FACILITIES AND PLAN TO SAFEGUARD THEIR KIDS!

protect them
security accessments
hardened facilities
Teacher training, including weapons training.
a standardized ranking system for school security.
a security certification program.

Have any of these been done for starters?
How about trying to figure out what has changed in our society where these kinds of things happen? We may not want to go back to the 50's, but something has clearly changed, not for the better, and I don't think it has anything to do with larger capacity.
Wasting time deflecting the blame to law abiding citizens is just despicable.

Good example of another knee jerk reaction. We don't expect much out of our public schools but we get a whole lot less.

S.V. Airlie
12-15-2015, 09:32 AM
Knee jerk, that's funny! About the same knee jerk shown by those who oppose Planed Parenthood by showing pics, doctored, of abortions. At least, the Sandy Hook pics of children weren't doctored. You want KNEE JERK, there's real knee jerking at it's best.

TomF
12-15-2015, 09:56 AM
WTF.

In what universe is it more logical to turn elementary schools into hardened targets, than to take some proven, empirically sound steps to reduce the likelihood of serious threats in the first place?

Hardening the target is a terrifically expensive admission of failure. A public health staffer who went last year to Sierra Leone to fight Ebola made a presentation when she came back. A whole lot of money was spent on protective suits, on zero-pressure enclosed stretchers to transport ill people ... while a far more effective way to fight ebola was handwashing with a mild bleach solution. She showed pictures of plastic jugs slung on a horizontal stick, rigged so that stepping on a makeshift treadle lever made from another stick would gently spill the water over one's hands. Total cost, maybe 25 cents.

Hardening the target is a 1st world solution, throwing simply spectacular amounts of money into an arms race instead of taking effective and proven steps to reduce the problem's incidence. Apologies for the rant TomZ, but hardening the targets should be a much later element of reducing the risks. Working at the wrong end of the Pareto chart here.

John Smith
12-15-2015, 09:57 AM
how many killed by cars? bucket drownings?

lets keep this in perspective

These are false arguments. Yes, cars do kill people, but that is not their purpose. The purpose of guns is to kill people.

varadero
12-15-2015, 09:58 AM
How to sneak chocolate into an American cinema....

http://www.thepoke.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2015/01/LUzLs8q.jpg

John Smith
12-15-2015, 09:59 AM
And then there's the elected sheriff of Douglas County Oregon who suggested to his followers.that Sandy Hook may have been a government conspiracy to take away our guns. No comment since he responded.to a mass.shooting at Umqua Community College.

I've received a couple of communications telling me this incident did not happen.

John Smith
12-15-2015, 10:02 AM
I thought about my daughters. I grew up around guns and I understand them. I don't understand the insanity of where we are now. Enough. Enough.

Good luck! Any hint of new legislation drives gun sales UP. The guns used in all the shootings that we are now responding to have already been sold. By the time any new law actually becomes law, there is going to be 500 million guns already sold.

Unless you address those guns, nothing will change.

TomZ
12-15-2015, 10:05 AM
WTF.

In what universe is it more logical to turn elementary schools into hardened targets, than to take some proven, empirically sound steps to reduce the likelihood of serious threats in the first place?

Hardening the target is a terrifically expensive admission of failure. A public health staffer who went last year to Sierra Leone to fight Ebola made a presentation when she came back. A whole lot of money was spent on protective suits, on zero-pressure enclosed stretchers to transport ill people ... while a far more effective way to fight ebola was handwashing with a mild bleach solution. She showed pictures of plastic jugs slung on a horizontal stick, rigged so that stepping on a makeshift treadle lever made from another stick would gently spill the water over one's hands. Total cost, maybe 25 cents.

Hardening the target is a 1st world solution, throwing simply spectacular amounts of money into an arms race instead of taking effective and proven steps to reduce the problem's incidence. Apologies for the rant TomZ, but hardening the targets should be a much later element of reducing the risks. Working at the wrong end of the Pareto chart here.

In this universe we have right here! Sorry, I thought we were looking for solutions - this is our Children we are talking about.
In this line of thinking - "while a far more effective way to fight ebola was handwashing with a mild bleach solution."
we could at least provide them some form of cover, better than leaving them exposed. We provide security for our banks, I would think these would be more valuable.
Sounds so simple, yet so consistently rejected. I guess it doesn't fit in the agenda.

"Hardening the target is a terrifically expensive admission of failure." or too expensive
"than to take some proven, empirically sound steps to reduce the likelihood of serious threats in the first place?" doesn't look like those steps are happening too soon, whats being done in the meantime?

and WTF just isn't a valid argument for something you just don't want to do.

TomF
12-15-2015, 10:14 AM
In this universe we have right here! Sorry, I thought we were looking for solutions - this is our Children we are talking about.
In this line of thinking - "while a far more effective way to fight ebola was handwashing with a mild bleach solution."
we could at least provide them some form of cover, better than leaving them exposed. We provide security for our banks, I would think these would be more valuable.
Sounds so simple, yet so consistently rejected. I guess it doesn't fit in the agenda.Tom, if an elementary school is turned into a mini fortress, the mass shooters will target daycare centres. If the daycare centres become mini fortresses, they'll target Toys "R" Us stores. Or shopping malls. Or wading pools. Or soccer fields. Or summer camps. Or etc. It is simply not possible to put cinder block walls and secure locked entry-ways with security-guard confirmed access everywhere that kids congregate. And even if it were possible, doing so would so dramatically transform America to make it unrecognizeable. I cannot see how anyone's "freedom" is enhanced by that much security-monitored control of one's movements.

It's another instance of "the terrorists winning." Domestic terrorists, this time.

Phillip Allen
12-15-2015, 10:15 AM
These are false arguments. Yes, cars do kill people, but that is not their purpose. The purpose of guns is to kill people.

I have a number of guns, not one of which is purposed to kill people... where is your thank you for my taking those guns out of the mix?

TomF
12-15-2015, 10:17 AM
I have a number of guns, not one of which is purposed to kill people... where is your thank you for my taking those guns out of the mix?Do you own any firearms which owe design features to military R&D?

S.V. Airlie
12-15-2015, 10:17 AM
PA wants a bone, he done good.

TomZ
12-15-2015, 10:31 AM
Tom, if an elementary school is turned into a mini fortress, the mass shooters will target daycare centres. If the daycare centres become mini fortresses, they'll target Toys "R" Us stores. Or shopping malls. Or wading pools. Or soccer fields. Or summer camps. Or etc. It is simply not possible to put cinder block walls and secure locked entry-ways with security-guard confirmed access everywhere that kids congregate. And even if it were possible, doing so would so dramatically transform America to make it unrecognizeable. I cannot see how anyone's "freedom" is enhanced by that much security-monitored control of one's movements.

It's another instance of "the terrorists winning." Domestic terrorists, this time.

We should NOT be leaving our kids defenseless while politics play out. THAT is wrong. You may not have noticed, but America has already been transformed. "Terrorists Winning" doesn't involve placing our kids on the front line in my universe.

If burglars break down your door, don't you replace it with a stronger door? or would that be letting the burglar win?

Old Dryfoot
12-15-2015, 10:38 AM
Threads like this really make me want to meet a few people, so I can shake their hand, and then kick them square in the n*ts.

For those people, it just won't sink in until it's their family laying there in a pool of blood.

Steve McMahon
12-15-2015, 10:47 AM
I am so thankful for the country I live in and that my need to travel south of the border has diminished to very seldom in the last decade.

TomF
12-15-2015, 10:48 AM
We should NOT be leaving our kids defenseless while politics play out. THAT is wrong. You may not have noticed, but America has already been transformed. "Terrorists Winning" doesn't involve placing our kids on the front line in my universe.

If burglars break down your door, don't you replace it with a stronger door? or would that be letting the burglar win?The objective is to have fewer kids experience harm, Tom. That's an objective we share.

We differ on the most effective measures to take to reduce the risks. You want to be sure the kids aren't left defenceless; I want to reduce their need to be defended in the first place.

CWSmith
12-15-2015, 10:52 AM
...if an elementary school is turned into a mini fortress, the mass shooters will target daycare centres. If the daycare centres become mini fortresses, they'll target Toys "R" Us stores. Or shopping malls. Or wading pools. Or soccer fields. Or summer camps. Or etc. It is simply not possible to put cinder block walls and secure locked entry-ways with security-guard confirmed access everywhere that kids congregate.

The murderers in Paris did not go after schools or children at all. They attacked coffee shops and concert halls. It is not possible to protect all of society from the threat of guns, regardless of who plans to use the guns and what motivation they have.

Too Little Time
12-15-2015, 10:53 AM
In what universe is it more logical to turn elementary schools into hardened targets, than to take some proven, empirically sound steps to reduce the likelihood of serious threats in the first place?

Hardening the target is a terrifically expensive admission of failure.

Hardening the target is certainly expensive. But the real reason to not harden the target is that incidents are rare. And the consequences are minor.

I have said before that I go out in public and do not fear for my life. I let my kids and grand kids go out alone and neither I nor they do not fear for their lives.

TomZ
12-15-2015, 10:53 AM
The objective is to have fewer kids experience harm, Tom. That's an objective we share.

We differ on the most effective measures to take to reduce the risks. You want to be sure the kids aren't left defenceless; I want to reduce their need to be defended in the first place.

My way is quicker, with immediate results. This will buy you time to figure out your way.

KMacDonald
12-15-2015, 10:54 AM
These are false arguments. Yes, cars do kill people, but that is not their purpose. The purpose of guns is to kill people.

That's ridiculous. No wonder responsible dialog doesn't take place.

S.V. Airlie
12-15-2015, 10:56 AM
Of course it's ridiculous to you and your ilk.

TomF
12-15-2015, 10:58 AM
My way is quicker, with immediate results. This will buy you time to figure out your way.
Your way posits a multi year, multi-trillion-dollar building program, with multi-billion-dollar ongoing costs to pay the security staff and ensure that the electronics etc. are kept up to date. And even at that, it would only protect the school buildings themselves, rather than the school playgrounds or athletics fields, or anywhere else kids happen to group.

And for that reason, I figure it would spend what little political capital exists on the illusion of security and the increase of fear, which might actually prompt an increase in firearms sales and contribute to an even easier pool of weapons for crazies to use to attack un-hardened targets.

Peerie Maa
12-15-2015, 11:00 AM
I have a number of guns, not one of which is purposed to kill people... where is your thank you for my taking those guns out of the mix?

Your guns, your hobby is not the problem.

Your defence of a system that facilitates US citizens killing US citizens of all ages by the thousand every year is the problem.

TomZ
12-15-2015, 11:02 AM
Your way posits a multi year, multi-trillion-dollar building program, with multi-billion-dollar ongoing costs to pay the security staff and ensure that the electronics etc. are kept up to date. And even at that, it would only protect the school buildings themselves, rather than the school playgrounds or athletics fields, or anywhere else kids happen to group.

And for that reason, I figure it would spend what little political capital exists on the illusion of security and the increase of fear, which might actually prompt an increase in firearms sales and contribute to an even easier pool of weapons for crazies to use to attack un-hardened targets.

Perhaps we could start by providing a single classroom with a fully locking solid door - so the students inside the classroom might not die - it's not big bucks Tom, but no one even wants to put any thought into it. The 'multi-trillioin-dollar building' phrase sure is a way to stop thinking on the subject. Common sense is outright rejected and replaced by slogans.

Steve McMahon
12-15-2015, 11:04 AM
That's ridiculous. No wonder responsible dialog doesn't take place.

Perhaps you could enlighten us as to what the real purpose of guns are smartypants. ;)

TomF
12-15-2015, 11:35 AM
Perhaps we could start by providing a single classroom with a fully locking solid door - so the students inside the classroom might not die - it's not big bucks Tom, but no one even wants to put any thought into it. The 'multi-trillioin-dollar building' phrase sure is a way to stop thinking on the subject. Common sense is outright rejected and replaced by slogans.That's quite different from what I thought you were describing ... certainly that some have described. It hasn't happened yet? That part, at least, has been pretty standard in a lot of places for a long time.

KMacDonald
12-15-2015, 11:37 AM
If children that age can circumnavigate they should be able to pack heat to protect themselves.

Phillip Allen
12-15-2015, 11:42 AM
Your guns, your hobby is not the problem.

Your defence of a system that facilitates US citizens killing US citizens of all ages by the thousand every year is the problem.

cars... killing citizens by the thousands...

TomF
12-15-2015, 11:43 AM
If children that age can circumnavigate they should be able to pack heat to protect themselves.Brilliant troll comment, standing ovation.

Should kids the same age be able to pack heat to hold up corner stores, carjack, or take out the guy their girlfriend's cheating with too? Or would you restrict concealed carry to the circumnavigators? How might you do the background check for that?

Joris
12-15-2015, 11:43 AM
Perhaps we could start by providing a single classroom with a fully locking solid door - so the students inside the classroom might not die - it's not big bucks Tom, but no one even wants to put any thought into it. The 'multi-trillioin-dollar building' phrase sure is a way to stop thinking on the subject. Common sense is outright rejected and replaced by slogans.

I wonder what the effect on our children will be if they grow up locked in a "safe zone" because it is a freedom to own a gun...
It would be like the cold war all over again but 100 times worse.
Joris

S.V. Airlie
12-15-2015, 11:43 AM
What were cars made for Phillip?

cars... killing citizens by the thousands...

Phillip Allen
12-15-2015, 11:46 AM
What were cars made for Phillip?

to kill... just look at the myriad of military vehicles, trucks, jeeps, transport planes ... all designed to make killing more efficient, like bringing bullets to the killers... landing craft (think boats) and much much more...

Phillip Allen
12-15-2015, 11:50 AM
don't forget cop cars bringing cops to places where unarmed black kids might be found

TomF
12-15-2015, 11:50 AM
What was water made for, Phillip?

S.V. Airlie
12-15-2015, 11:50 AM
As usual, PA is spinning like a top. Cars were designed for transportation pure and sample, guns are designed primarily, to kill. If you can't see the difference, you are hopeless.

Peerie Maa
12-15-2015, 11:51 AM
cars... killing citizens by the thousands...

Phillip . . . . still pretending to be a moron....

P.S. Phillip, I drive a car. My car was designed to get me from a to b in safety, and managed that twice today.
Too many guns were designed and optimised to kill US citizens. Why are you soooo happy to see US citizens killed by US citizens with guns Phillip, why would that be Phillip?

TomZ
12-15-2015, 11:51 AM
That's quite different from what I thought you were describing ... certainly that some have described. It hasn't happened yet? That part, at least, has been pretty standard in a lot of places for a long time.

Thats what I'm talking about, not a prison, just tools for the teachers to protect their students. And a standardized minimum steps for public schools for starters.
I don't see much evidence of that kind of thinking, mostly they just install a metal detector and a note to the parents (time permitting). Perhaps newer schools consider this - I've seen some funky looking towers on some that look like a prison.

Prayer shouldn't be the teachers only option. And we should not look on in disgust if a school decides to arm a few of the more prepared administrators, that should be totally up to the attending parents and administrators.

Perhaps instead of large regional schools, we could experiment with smaller, dispersed classrooms... whatever, that kind of discussion just doesn't take place as far as I can tell. I'm just sick of the policital footbal.

Phillip Allen
12-15-2015, 11:52 AM
As usual, PA is spinning like a top. Cars were designed for transportation pure and sample, guns are designed primarily, to kill. If you can't see the difference, you are hopeless.

could you expand on that word... 'primarily'

S.V. Airlie
12-15-2015, 11:54 AM
Look it up. You can do that at least can't you even though you are hopeless regarding gun issues.?

Phillip Allen
12-15-2015, 11:54 AM
Thats what I'm talking about, not a prison, just tools for the teachers to protect their students. And a standardized minimum steps for public schools for starters.
I don't see much evidence of that kind of thinking, mostly they just install a metal detector and a note to the parents (time permitting). Perhaps newer schools consider this - I've seen some funky looking towers on some that look like a prison.

Prayer shouldn't be the teachers only option. And we should not look on in disgust if a school decides to arm a few of the more prepared administrators, that should be totally up to the attending parents and administrators.

Perhaps instead of large regional schools, we could experiment with smaller, dispersed classrooms... whatever, that kind of discussion just doesn't take place as far as I can tell. I'm just sick of the policital footbal.

me too

S.V. Airlie
12-15-2015, 11:55 AM
What made it political?

isla
12-15-2015, 11:58 AM
cars... killing citizens by the thousands...
Intentionally?

Phillip Allen
12-15-2015, 11:58 AM
Phillip . . . . still pretending to be a moron....

P.S. Phillip, I drive a car. My car was designed to get me from a to b in safety, and managed that twice today.
Too many guns were designed and optimised to kill US citizens. Why are you soooo happy to see US citizens killed by US citizens with guns Phillip, why would that be Phillip?

my guns are intended to facilitate my hobby...

as to the soooo happy part... what evidence have you got for such a mean spirited comment?

Peerie Maa
12-15-2015, 12:00 PM
What made it political?

Of course it is political. The small arm industry has purchased their part of the US political system, just as another thread discusses how communications companies have purchased their part of the US political system.

Peerie Maa
12-15-2015, 12:02 PM
my guns are intended to facilitate my hobby...

as to the soooo happy part... what evidence have you got for such a mean spirited comment?

It follows naturally from all of your comments, obfuscation, moronic posts and other attempts to derail threads like this.

Phillip Allen
12-15-2015, 12:03 PM
It follows naturally from all of your comments, obfuscation, moronic posts and other attempts to derail threads like this.

seems pretty subjective to me

S.V. Airlie
12-15-2015, 12:03 PM
Only in your hands maybe, the guy next door maybe not. I suppose you expect brownie points or a doggie bone for your having guns for "hobby use" only. As Nick stated, it's not the hobby you've got but, your attempt and support in the reasoning that everyone should have a gun. It's the second Amendment as interpreted by you and your ilk afterall

Phillip Allen
12-15-2015, 12:06 PM
Only in your hands maybe, the guy next door maybe not. I suppose you expect brownie points or a doggie bone for your having guns for "hobby use" only. As Nick stated, it's not the hobby you've got but, your attempt and support in the reasoning that everyone should have a gun. It's the second Amendment as interpreted by you and your ilk afterall

find where I said everyone should have a gun or be known as a liar

S.V. Airlie
12-15-2015, 12:08 PM
You may as well have even if you didn't say it. Good bye, I've enjoyed beating me head against a brick wall. No sense in that.

Phillip Allen
12-15-2015, 12:11 PM
You may as well have even if you didn't say it. Good bye, I've enjoyed beating me head against a brick wall. No sense in that.

I MAY have??? that's some interpretation, Jamie

Peerie Maa
12-15-2015, 12:11 PM
find where I said everyone should have a gun or be known as a liar

OK,
Now is your opportunity to redeem your self.
All you have to do is state that guns should be securely locked in gun safes unless at the target range or on the hunting field. Furthermore agree that guns optimised for killing people should be limited to use by the military alone.

Phillip Allen
12-15-2015, 12:13 PM
OK,
Now is your opportunity to redeem your self.
All you have to do is state that guns should be securely locked in gun safes unless at the target range or on the hunting field. Furthermore agree that guns optimised for killing people should be limited to use by the military alone.

closet... police

BTW, what do you mean by 'optimized'?

TomF
12-15-2015, 12:15 PM
closet... policeTake a look at that "sensational" poster again.

Phillip Allen
12-15-2015, 12:19 PM
Take a look at that "sensational" poster again.

... and?

S.V. Airlie
12-15-2015, 12:28 PM
You certainly asking for a lot of definitions, ever heard of Webster? No, didn't think so!

Peerie Maa
12-15-2015, 12:37 PM
OK,
Now is your opportunity to redeem your self.
All you have to do is state that guns should be securely locked in gun safes unless at the target range or on the hunting field. Furthermore agree that guns optimised for killing people should be limited to use by the military alone.


closet... police

BTW, what do you mean by 'optimized'?

I think that you know what it means, but I'll play along so that you cannot refuse to answer.

optimize
[op-tuh-mahyz]



Word Origin (http://forum.woodenboat.com/source-word-origin)


verb (used with object), optimized, optimizing. 1. to make as effective, perfect, or useful as possible.


So , ready to put the record straight?

S.V. Airlie
12-15-2015, 12:43 PM
I think that you know what it means,

You expect way too much Nick!

PA, from another thread, you appear to be unable to take care of yourself, what would make me believe you can take gun ownership responsibly. If you can't do one, how can you say you do the other? One involves your health at that.

Peerie Maa
12-15-2015, 12:46 PM
I think that you know what it means,

You expect way too much Nick!

Give him some room please, let us stay focussed.;)

KMacDonald
12-15-2015, 12:49 PM
OK,
Now is your opportunity to redeem your self.
All you have to do is state that guns should be securely locked in gun safes unless at the target range or on the hunting field. Furthermore agree that guns optimised for killing people should be limited to use by the military alone.

No they should not be locked away. They should be readily accessible in case they are needed. And yes, with the safety off.

S.V. Airlie
12-15-2015, 12:50 PM
Under a pillow is a perfect spot I guess.

Peerie Maa
12-15-2015, 12:59 PM
No they should not be locked away. They should be readily accessible in case they are needed. And yes, with the safety off.

Well, the Grinch is notorious for hating children.

Over the past year, new studies (https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__everytown.org_documents_2014_10_innocents-2Dlost.pdf&d=BQMFaQ&c=RAhzPLrCAq19eJdrcQiUVEwFYoMRqGDAXQ_puw5tYjg&r=zZ-ULk44Cmdk_g8Nibpw-jVetFWF8cmowsSgSjx8dqw&m=ziR17rw7z5pcW1Zid2a4GMuuHlTr5YSG6e1uyeMXbYs&s=Ct1CaVpJRYmgqMX0QSiFY_cMyG5Qg5sJJ96-MkyMYrQ&e=) and media (https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__www.theguardian.com_world_2014_jun_25_us-2Daccidental-2Dgun-2Ddeaths-2D100-2Dchildren-2Dyearly&d=BQMFaQ&c=RAhzPLrCAq19eJdrcQiUVEwFYoMRqGDAXQ_puw5tYjg&r=zZ-ULk44Cmdk_g8Nibpw-jVetFWF8cmowsSgSjx8dqw&m=ziR17rw7z5pcW1Zid2a4GMuuHlTr5YSG6e1uyeMXbYs&s=mwD_DBnjp1q9srW4QYXa_tD8Ed_mzFuiGVSyfMWemR0&e=) reports have documented America’s extraordinary number of child-involved shootings. These occur when a child happens upon a gun, or is left alone with one, and ends up shooting themselves or another person. Such disasters result in hundreds (https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__www.huffingtonpost.com_2014_06_25_child-2Dshooting-2Ddeaths-2Deverytown-5Fn-5F5527932.html&d=BQMFaQ&c=RAhzPLrCAq19eJdrcQiUVEwFYoMRqGDAXQ_puw5tYjg&r=zZ-ULk44Cmdk_g8Nibpw-jVetFWF8cmowsSgSjx8dqw&m=ziR17rw7z5pcW1Zid2a4GMuuHlTr5YSG6e1uyeMXbYs&s=81D84BEmD7qJ14elDovd1Frh-HfRqOg49_VXhnq_FaY&e=) of child fatalities and have made (https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__www.slate.com_articles_health-5Fand-5Fscience_medical-5Fexaminer_2014_06_gun-5Fdeaths-5Fin-5Fchildren-5Fstatistics-5Fshow-5Ffirearms-5Fendanger-5Fkids-5Fdespite-5Fnra.html&d=BQMFaQ&c=RAhzPLrCAq19eJdrcQiUVEwFYoMRqGDAXQ_puw5tYjg&r=zZ-ULk44Cmdk_g8Nibpw-jVetFWF8cmowsSgSjx8dqw&m=ziR17rw7z5pcW1Zid2a4GMuuHlTr5YSG6e1uyeMXbYs&s=1fLG2Qt_JaXvzAo6R349-taw51AgApp8i4R6fl6jYK4&e=) American children nine times more likely to die in gun accidents than children anywhere else in the developed world. These deaths pose a massive challenge for the NRA. They demonstrate fairly conclusively that guns cannot be both safe and ubiquitous; the inevitable consequence of widespread gun ownership is a never-ending series of tragedies involving children. But, desperate to insist there’s nothing wrong, the NRA has proved itself totally incapable of responding to the problem.
The stories are endless and gruesome. A toddler shoots an infant (https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__www.kboi2.com_news_local_Toddler-2DShoots-2Dinfant-2DNews-2DIdaho-2DCaldwell-2D-2D204354381.html&d=BQMFaQ&c=RAhzPLrCAq19eJdrcQiUVEwFYoMRqGDAXQ_puw5tYjg&r=zZ-ULk44Cmdk_g8Nibpw-jVetFWF8cmowsSgSjx8dqw&m=ziR17rw7z5pcW1Zid2a4GMuuHlTr5YSG6e1uyeMXbYs&s=gx60big75U7IyMZZzB75VAIGHywwki5d9XYqqQQh55w&e=) while they are left alone in a car. A five-year-old boy shoots (https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__www.9news.com_story_news_crime_2014_08_04_pueb lo-2Dchild-2Dshot_13579155_&d=BQMFaQ&c=RAhzPLrCAq19eJdrcQiUVEwFYoMRqGDAXQ_puw5tYjg&r=zZ-ULk44Cmdk_g8Nibpw-jVetFWF8cmowsSgSjx8dqw&m=ziR17rw7z5pcW1Zid2a4GMuuHlTr5YSG6e1uyeMXbYs&s=Qh0_Ben9nlE80q1zkSmmENWGWFQmJ5Iw5Ye2RNT1aX0&e=) a three-year-old girl. And so on, ad infinitum (http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/post-nation/wp/2014/09/04/how-often-do-children-in-the-u-s-unintentionally-shoot-and-kill-people-we-dont-know/). In Texas last month (https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__www.huffingtonpost.com_2015_03_03_texas-2Dchild-2Dshootings-5Fn-5F6792170.html&d=BQMFaQ&c=RAhzPLrCAq19eJdrcQiUVEwFYoMRqGDAXQ_puw5tYjg&r=zZ-ULk44Cmdk_g8Nibpw-jVetFWF8cmowsSgSjx8dqw&m=ziR17rw7z5pcW1Zid2a4GMuuHlTr5YSG6e1uyeMXbYs&s=7xDs2eYP5o0hoKi16B9lNHA90TOL1uyxWfFS5oBiDJM&e=), the sheriff of Houston pleaded despairingly with the public after three children were shot dead in four days. And in widely reported Idaho incident, a two-year-old shot his mother (https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__www.cnn.com_2014_12_30_us_idaho-2Dwalmart-2Dshooting-2Daccident-2Dmother-2Dtoddler_&d=BQMFaQ&c=RAhzPLrCAq19eJdrcQiUVEwFYoMRqGDAXQ_puw5tYjg&r=zZ-ULk44Cmdk_g8Nibpw-jVetFWF8cmowsSgSjx8dqw&m=ziR17rw7z5pcW1Zid2a4GMuuHlTr5YSG6e1uyeMXbYs&s=BrD2zFvBDozOBMx0NTSCT6jun6iW3a08_G2pz6VZO7I&e=) to death in a Walmart after finding a gun in her handbag.

from https://www.washingtonpost.com/posteverything/wp/2015/04/09/deaths-of-children-are-the-most-devastating-effect-of-our-gun-culture-the-nra-has-no-idea-what-to-say-about-them/

and

Injuries and deaths due to firearms in the home.

Kellermann AL (http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/?term=Kellermann%20AL%5BAuthor%5D&cauthor=true&cauthor_uid=9715182)1, Somes G (http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/?term=Somes%20G%5BAuthor%5D&cauthor=true&cauthor_uid=9715182), Rivara FP (http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/?term=Rivara%20FP%5BAuthor%5D&cauthor=true&cauthor_uid=9715182), Lee RK (http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/?term=Lee%20RK%5BAuthor%5D&cauthor=true&cauthor_uid=9715182), Banton JG (http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/?term=Banton%20JG%5BAuthor%5D&cauthor=true&cauthor_uid=9715182).
Author information (http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/9715182#)


Abstract

OBJECTIVE:

Determine the relative frequency with which guns in the home are used to injure or kill in self-defense, compared with the number of times these weapons are involved in an unintentional injury, suicide attempt, or criminal assault or homicide.
METHODS:

We reviewed the police, medical examiner, emergency medical service, emergency department, and hospital records of all fatal and nonfatal shootings in three U.S. cities: Memphis, Tennessee; Seattle, Washington; and Galveston, Texas.
RESULTS:

During the study interval (12 months in Memphis, 18 months in Seattle, and Galveston) 626 shootings occurred in or around a residence. This total included 54 unintentional shootings, 118 attempted or completed suicides, and 438 assaults/homicides. Thirteen shootings were legally justifiable or an act of self-defense, including three that involved law enforcement officers acting in the line of duty. For every time a gun in the home was used in a self-defense or legally justifiable shooting, there were four unintentional shootings, seven criminal assaults or homicides, and 11 attempted or completed suicides.
CONCLUSIONS:

Guns kept in homes are more likely to be involved in a fatal or nonfatal accidental shooting, criminal assault, or suicide attempt than to be used to injure or kill in self-defense.



from http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/9715182

There will be more of the same.

S.V. Airlie
12-15-2015, 01:03 PM
*Immaterial!

CWSmith
12-15-2015, 02:03 PM
Under a pillow is a perfect spot I guess.

Or in his pants.

TomF
12-15-2015, 02:14 PM
Or in his pants.Happiness is a warm gun.

S.V. Airlie
12-15-2015, 02:32 PM
Or in his pants. His pants are probably way too tight.

KMacDonald
12-15-2015, 03:23 PM
Perhaps you could enlighten us as to what the real purpose of guns are smartypants. ;)

I'm not going to attempt to teach calculus to kindergartners.

TomF
12-15-2015, 03:38 PM
I'm not going to attempt to teach calculus to kindergartners.
If children that age can circumnavigate they should be able to pack heat to protect themselves.
A foolish consistency is the hobgoblin of little minds ...:D :D

Joe (SoCal)
12-15-2015, 04:13 PM
I saw enough AWWW SHUCKS ® quoted in this thread to get nauseous I'm out of it. Its gonna go round and round with no resolution or admission from the gun nut's

I don't need a Gun and I don't need this thread

Foster out

skuthorp
12-15-2015, 05:02 PM
Frustrating aint it Joe?

S.V. Airlie
12-15-2015, 05:04 PM
Frustrating aint it Joe?Depressing really, people who put guns before everything else.

Peerie Maa
12-15-2015, 05:14 PM
Phillip has gone a bit quiet.

S.V. Airlie
12-15-2015, 05:17 PM
Low sugar! Gone to the local eatery for some carb riddled food.

KMacDonald
12-15-2015, 07:24 PM
When Tom resorts to personal attacks you know his opponent has already won the war. It is in their play book so we can't say we didn't see it coming------again.

KMacDonald
12-15-2015, 07:26 PM
After watching the news, it looks like fear has taken over the libs in California again. They closed an entire school system. Doesn't look like they have much faith in the police.

CWSmith
12-15-2015, 07:27 PM
When Tom resorts to personal attacks you know his opponent has already won the war. It is in their play book so we can't say we didn't see it coming------again.

What personal attack? Did I miss it? What posting? All I saw is that Tom enjoyed watching someone make a fool of himself. We all do that.

KMacDonald
12-15-2015, 07:31 PM
What personal attack? Did I miss it? What posting? All I saw is that Tom enjoyed watching someone make a fool of himself. We all do that.

Yes, you missed the boat. Thanks for proving my point.

CWSmith
12-15-2015, 07:33 PM
Yes, you missed the boat. Thanks for proving my point.

Delightful and snarky at the same time! :)

Now, could you please answer my question. In what posting did Tom resort to a personal attack?

Ian McColgin
12-15-2015, 07:39 PM
Augustus Busch? I know Bud Lite is bad but had no idea it was so deadly.

S.V. Airlie
12-15-2015, 07:44 PM
After watching the news, it looks like fear has taken over the libs in California again. They closed an entire school system. Doesn't look like they have much faith in the police.And of course you know it's the libs. Glad you have a crystal ball.

S.V. Airlie
12-15-2015, 07:45 PM
Delightful and snarky at the same time! :)

Now, could you please answer my question. In what posting did Tom resort to a personal attack?It's far from "snarkey".

CWSmith
12-15-2015, 07:53 PM
It's far from "snarkey".

You weren't on the receiving end.

TomF
12-15-2015, 08:05 PM
What personal attack? Did I miss it? What posting? All I saw is that Tom enjoyed watching someone make a fool of himself. We all do that.

I had the poor taste to reference the Grinch's own contradictory posts. Poor form to recognize the irony. ;)

bobbys
12-15-2015, 08:12 PM
I saw enough AWWW SHUCKS ® quoted in this thread to get nauseous I'm out of it. Its gonna go round and round with no resolution or admission from the gun nut's

I don't need a Gun and I don't need this thread

Foster out.
intresting, a guy that hates inanimate objects also feels qualified to give psychiatric exams helter skelter.

Bob Adams
12-15-2015, 08:15 PM
No they should not be locked away. They should be readily accessible in case they are needed. And yes, with the safety off.

I keep my home defense weapon in one of these. The two times I have needed it, it was instantly accessible to me, but no one else.

http://ll-us-i5.wal.co/dfw/dce07b8c-599a/k2-_1960f502-33b1-47ee-be52-7a80bb69721f.v1.jpg-f2c795a04b36fbfa959655ec55e4fba74a0bb81b-optim-450x450.jpg

bobbys
12-15-2015, 08:23 PM
Obama is protected by a fortress of firearms.

Obama and Busch have killed thousands of innocent people, and they have 24 hour protection from men with firearms.

The average Joe expects the same right to safety as anyone else..

Obama could lead by example., Remove the White House fence, I think he should be protected by a gun but it should be a musket, he should have Obamacare, a minimum wage, Should eat the same food as the troops, vacation in America, send his kids to public school, set the White House thermosat to what he told us to, stop driving around in a gas guzzler .

PeterSibley
12-15-2015, 08:25 PM
.
intresting, a guy that hates inanimate objects also feels qualified to give psychiatric exams helter skelter.

Strange can't tell which inanimate objects are dangerous and which ones aren't.

Spoons are pretty harmless, guns aren't.

bobbys
12-15-2015, 08:40 PM
Strange can't tell which inanimate objects are dangerous and which ones aren't.

Spoons are pretty harmless, guns aren't.
.

So fat people are fat because of spoons?

PeterSibley
12-15-2015, 08:42 PM
Sometimes.

bobbys
12-15-2015, 08:52 PM
I sat a gun and spoon on the table and do far they have not moved.

Course when I was gone I set a trail camera..

Still nothing.

Course I have not checked all the missing person accounts nor any fatter fat people ..

I gave the gun a very stern lecture that Joe would have liked but passed on the spoon because I have some ben and Jerries ( commies) Cherry Garcia ice cream in the freezer..

No sense alienating the spoon at a time like this.

PeterSibley
12-15-2015, 08:56 PM
Keep watching, in fact don't leave that table.

Phillip Allen
12-15-2015, 09:01 PM
Phillip has gone a bit quiet.

doing other things

The Bigfella
12-15-2015, 09:06 PM
Baking?
http://ichef.bbci.co.uk/food/ic/food_16x9_608/foods/f/fruit_cake_16x9.jpg

CWSmith
12-15-2015, 09:58 PM
I had the poor taste to reference the Grinch's own contradictory posts. Poor form to recognize the irony. ;)

That's what I thought. I guess to some, holding up a mirror is a personal attack. :)

KMacDonald
12-15-2015, 10:13 PM
And of course you know it's the libs. Glad you have a crystal ball.

Last time I checked California was liberal. Did it change for the better recently?

Glen Longino
12-15-2015, 10:44 PM
After watching the news, it looks like fear has taken over the libs in California again. They closed an entire school system. Doesn't look like they have much faith in the police.

If they had Not closed the schools and one of them had blown up killing hundreds of kids, you would be the first here howling bloody murder.
Your hypocrisy is much more transparent than you seem to imagine.

KMacDonald
12-15-2015, 10:54 PM
Don't be ridiculous Glen!!!!!!!!! There is not a hypocritical bone in my body.

Osborne Russell
12-15-2015, 10:59 PM
After watching the news, it looks like fear has taken over the libs in California again. They closed an entire school system. Doesn't look like they have much faith in the police.

No, it was the Reds who closed down the entire school system. They're taken over by fear again.

Phillip Allen
12-15-2015, 11:20 PM
No, it was the Reds who closed down the entire school system. They're taken over by fear again.

the REDS again??? good god, you're eat up with paranoia

Phillip Allen
12-15-2015, 11:21 PM
If they had Not closed the schools and one of them had blown up killing hundreds of kids, you would be the first here howling bloody murder.
Your hypocrisy is much more transparent than you seem to imagine.

if? IF?

CWSmith
12-15-2015, 11:43 PM
353 mass shootings in the USA this year as of the San Bernardino shootings of 12/2/2015.

And so it goes.

Peerie Maa
12-15-2015, 11:48 PM
doing other things

OK, got an answer to my question now?

Glen Longino
12-15-2015, 11:51 PM
if? IF?

Yep, IF!
It's a real word with real meaning!
Look it up!

goodbasil
12-16-2015, 02:05 AM
Gotta agree with NB's #5 post.

Phillip Allen
12-16-2015, 05:57 AM
Which of the 555 children voluntarily undertook the risk of the gun that killed them, in full knowledge of the dangers and consequences?

When we drive a car, we're aware of the potential danger, and accept the risk. I don't think any of those children were even aware of the risk, when they were shot and killed.

Phillip, sometimes you are just..... well, I can't really say it. Perhaps 'inhumanly devoid of social conscience' is a way I can say it, without getting banned.

what child voluntarily rides in cars... bear in mind that children are not qualified (by our standards) to make such decisions

there, I answered a stupid question

The Bigfella
12-16-2015, 06:07 AM
what child voluntarily rides in cars... bear in mind that children are not qualified (by our standards) to make such decisions

there, I answered a stupid question

Yep... you got a couple of words right.

Peerie Maa
12-16-2015, 06:16 AM
Well, you have slept on this?
OK,
Now is your opportunity to redeem your self.
All you have to do is state that guns should be securely locked in gun safes unless at the target range or on the hunting field. Furthermore agree that guns optimised for killing people should be limited to use by the military alone.
Ready to share your views?

Phillip Allen
12-16-2015, 06:41 AM
Well, you have slept on this?
Ready to share your views?

voluntarily lock them in a closet... no home inspections

what do you mean by optimized... ?

is THIS optimized for killing people? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2mm_Kolibri

it was advertised as a self-defense weapon

Peerie Maa
12-16-2015, 06:51 AM
voluntarily lock them in a closet... no home inspections

what do you mean by optimized... ?

is THIS optimized for killing people? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2mm_Kolibri
I think that you know what it means, but I'll play along so that you cannot refuse to answer.

optimize
[op-tuh-mahyz]



Word Origin (http://forum.woodenboat.com/source-word-origin)


verb (used with object), optimized, optimizing. 1. to make as effective, perfect, or useful as possible.
So , ready to put the record straight?
But I'm sure that you knew that. As to that .22 round no it is not optimised as it is a failure according to your link.
So what about guns made and marketed for killing people, guns that are inefficient or useless for hunting?
Care to answer that half of the question?

Phillip Allen
12-16-2015, 07:06 AM
But I'm sure that you knew that. As to that .22 round no it is not optimised as it is a failure according to your link.
So what about guns made and marketed for killing people, guns that are inefficient or useless for hunting?
Care to answer that half of the question?

optimized would include 100% of firearms, so long as they are capable of doing so... includes pellet guns... you are operating in the realm of semantics

BTW, the Kolibri is 2mm... a .22 is 5.56mm

it can easily be argued the Kolibri is optimized for killing since that was it's intended purpose..."oh what a tangled web we weave..."

Peerie Maa
12-16-2015, 09:08 AM
optimized would include 100% of firearms, so long as they are capable of doing so... includes pellet guns... you are operating in the realm of semantics

BTW, the Kolibri is 2mm... a .22 is 5.56mm

it can easily be argued the Kolibri is optimized for killing since that was it's intended purpose..."oh what a tangled web we weave..."

No Phillip, stop promulgating terminological inexactitudes.
Bu your argument this is an optimised wall because its intended purpose was to be a wall.
http://www.greatyarmouthmercury.co.uk/polopoly_fs/1.1867294.1360177832!/image/370022650.jpg_gen/derivatives/landscape_630/370022650.jpg

can you see why it was not optimised?

Now show some self respect and stop p!$$!ng about.

S.V. Airlie
12-16-2015, 09:12 AM
Someone thinks it's possible to stand in quicksand and not sink. Go PA, go, twist something out of anyone's else's post. Signs of desperation for sure.

P.I. Stazzer-Newt
12-16-2015, 09:27 AM
Encore un fois


Why. Oh why, does anyone ever respond to a Fullup Alien post on a gun thread.

It's not here to participate in a discussion but to destroy it.

Honour is absent, and always has been.

Phillip Allen
12-16-2015, 10:25 AM
No Phillip, stop promulgating terminological inexactitudes.
Bu your argument this is an optimised wall because its intended purpose was to be a wall.
http://www.greatyarmouthmercury.co.uk/polopoly_fs/1.1867294.1360177832!/image/370022650.jpg_gen/derivatives/landscape_630/370022650.jpg

can you see why it was not optimised?

Now show some self respect and stop p!$$!ng about.

I'm being straight forward... what do YOU mean by optimized?

S.V. Airlie
12-16-2015, 11:06 AM
I'm being straight forward... what do YOU mean by optimized?Right, this is your being straight forward PA

http://s3.amazonaws.com/thumbnails.illustrationsource.com/huge.0.1185.JPG

Osborne Russell
12-16-2015, 11:07 AM
After watching the news, it looks like fear has taken over the libs in California again. They closed an entire school system. Doesn't look like they have much faith in the police.


No, it was the Reds who closed down the entire school system. They're taken over by fear again.


the REDS again??? good god, you're eat up with paranoia

uh . . .

S.V. Airlie
12-16-2015, 11:19 AM
Yup, as a good little "red", you certainly do lap up the paranoia Phillip.

Peerie Maa
12-16-2015, 01:02 PM
I'm being straight forward... what do YOU mean by optimized?

Feercrissakes Phillip, I have told you TWICE.

1. to make as effective, perfect, or useful as possible.

As you seem to have difficulty reading or understanding that definition, I'll point out that I am discussing guns that are NOT made and sold for hunting, or target practice. I am talking about guns made and sold to people who do not hunt, do not engage in competitive target practice, but are buying guns intended for and intending to be able to use them to kill US citizens.

Phillip Allen
12-16-2015, 04:15 PM
Feercrissakes Phillip, I have told you TWICE.


As you seem to have difficulty reading or understanding that definition, I'll point out that I am discussing guns that are NOT made and sold for hunting, or target practice. I am talking about guns made and sold to people who do not hunt, do not engage in competitive target practice, but are buying guns intended for and intending to be able to use them to kill US citizens.

that would be any shotgun loaded with heavy shot

Phillip Allen
12-16-2015, 04:21 PM
come on people... this can't be that hard for you. attacking me, automatically (Jamie-like) doesn't get the job done.

you want a law against certain guns... you write the law and use only the language used here in this thread? somewhere along the way, someone's gonna have to define what those guns are. something so unbelievably vague as what's been used here won't pass muster anywhere. try reversing this thing and tell us what guns you WILL allow in your proposed law... maybe that'll get somewhere

Tom Montgomery
12-16-2015, 04:22 PM
I am quite sure Nick means firearms that are designed for PRINCIPALLY killing human beings.

Reasonable people can certainly agree on which weapons fall under that definition.

Unreasonable people will obstinately refuse to agree on anything, of course.

Peerie Maa
12-16-2015, 04:23 PM
that would be any shotgun loaded with heavy shot

What part of
guns that are NOT made and sold for huntingdo you not understand?

Just for once please post something with a bit of self respect, rather than pretending to be an idiot.
Now let us have an honest answer to the question put.

Phillip Allen
12-16-2015, 04:23 PM
I am quite sure Nick means firearms that are designed for PRINCIPALLY killing human beings.

Reasonable people can certainly agree on which weapons fall under that definition.

Unreasonable people will obstinately refuse to agree on anything, of course.

as a 'reasonable' person... what guns fall in your gun ban? don't forget to describe the guns

Tom Montgomery
12-16-2015, 04:25 PM
All handguns would fall under that description. So let's start there.

PeterSibley
12-16-2015, 04:27 PM
Why don't you put up a list Phillip ?...as a reasonable person. We'd like to see which weapons you think are specifically designed to kill humans and you are something of a firearms authority .

Peerie Maa
12-16-2015, 04:30 PM
I am quite sure Nick means firearms that are designed for PRINCIPALLY killing human beings.

Reasonable people can certainly agree on which weapons fall under that definition.

Unreasonable people will obstinately refuse to agree on anything, of course.

Yep it is easier in law to define what you do allow, rather than trying to list those that you do not, that way loopholes. So no Phillip, we will stick with allowing your target shooting guns, and long guns for hunting, and remove all of those that are not fit for those purposes. So can you define the guns that you consider good for competitive target shooting?
If you can do the same for hunting game and wildfowl all the better, or maybe someone else will do so.

Phillip Allen
12-16-2015, 04:31 PM
Why don't you put up a list Phillip ?...as a reasonable person. We'd like to see which weapons you think are specifically designed to kill humans and you are something of a firearms authority .

the brown bess?

in any event, I'm not the one wanting the law whose responsibility it is to come up with the discription

George Jung
12-16-2015, 04:37 PM
Mean kids. Quit picking on the 'challenged' amongst ya!

Phillip Allen
12-16-2015, 04:38 PM
What part of do you not understand?

Just for once please post something with a bit of self respect, rather than pretending to be an idiot.
Now let us have an honest answer to the question put.

hunting bullets are soft point... they are fired in AR 15's... therefore, AR 15's are designed for hunting

I see problems with your vague description

Peerie Maa
12-16-2015, 04:40 PM
the brown bess?

in any event, I'm not the one wanting the law whose responsibility it is to come up with the discription

Bit of a cop out. Too frightened to provide an honest answer?

Come on, I am sure that you can, give it a go do.

Tom Montgomery
12-16-2015, 04:41 PM
"The Brown Bess"

Good Lord.... :rolleyes:

Phillip Allen
12-16-2015, 04:42 PM
Bit of a cop out. Too frightened to provide an honest answer?

Come on, I am sure that you can, give it a go do.

it's your proposal, let us see YOUR honest answer

Tom Montgomery
12-16-2015, 04:42 PM
hunting bullets are soft point... they are fired in AR 15's... therefore, AR 15's are designed for hunting

I see problems with your vague description
The BULLETS are designed for hunting. Not the firearm.

Hunting bullets are soft point. AR15's can fire soft point bullets. Therefore AR15's are designed for hunting?

I see problems with your logic.

PeterSibley
12-16-2015, 04:43 PM
the brown bess?

in any event, I'm not the one wanting the law whose responsibility it is to come up with the discription

So you don't want any modifications to weapons available ? Would you be happy with full auto AR15s in everyone's hands? Can you think of anyone you'd prefer not to see so armed ?

Phillip Allen
12-16-2015, 04:43 PM
"The Brown Bess"

Good Lord.... :rolleyes:

optimized for killing people...

Peerie Maa
12-16-2015, 04:43 PM
hunting bullets are soft point... they are fired in AR 15's... therefore, AR 15's are designed for hunting

I see problems with your vague description

Liar Liar pants on fire.
The AR-15 was first built in 1959 by ArmaLite (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ArmaLite) as a small arms rifle for the United States armed forces (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_armed_forces).and you damned well know it.

Phillip Allen
12-16-2015, 04:45 PM
So you don't want any modifications to weapons available ? Would you be happy with full auto AR15s in everyone's hands? Can you think of anyone you'd prefer not to see so armed ?

I didn't say that... YOU said that

let the guy who wants the law describe what HE wants

Paul Pless
12-16-2015, 04:47 PM
So you don't want any modifications to weapons available ? Would you be happy with full auto AR15s in everyone's hands? Can you think of anyone you'd prefer not to see so armed ?Phillip did mention that he places the logical limit of the second amendment being struck at 'crew served weapons'. . .

Phillip Allen
12-16-2015, 04:47 PM
Liar Liar pants on fire. and you damned well know it.

muzzle loading firearms were designed for killing people and later modified for hunting...

Tom Montgomery
12-16-2015, 04:48 PM
optimized for killing people...
It was optimized at the time... 1722. And it was certainly intended as a military weapon.

Hey, if it floats your boat we can legislate that all antique military firearms be disabled to prevent discharge of a round.

Tom Montgomery
12-16-2015, 04:50 PM
I didn't say that... YOU said that

let the guy who wants the law describe what HE wants
Hey! I said all handguns fall under the description. You chose to ignore that and posted some nonsense about an antique firearm in yet a continuing attempt to derail the conversation.

Peerie Maa
12-16-2015, 04:53 PM
it's your proposal, let us see YOUR honest answer

Ah, I have never claimed to be an expert on guns. So you are better qualified than I.

However, this is an example of a game shooting rifle
http://keyassets.timeincuk.net/inspirewp/live/wp-content/uploads/sites/6/2010/12/deer_stalking_rifle_sticks.jpg
This is advertised for target shooting
http://www.targetshooting.co.nz/ubbthreads.php/ubb/download/Number/1933/filename/G/E.jpg
Target pistol
http://media.gizmodo.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2012/07/target-model.jpg
And we all know what shot guns look like.

Your turn, what you got.

PeterSibley
12-16-2015, 04:53 PM
I didn't say that... YOU said that

let the guy who wants the law describe what HE wants

My question mark means it's a question Phillip, not a statement of what you want. But logically if you won't respond that puts you in the full auto camp.

Phillip Allen
12-16-2015, 04:53 PM
Hey! I said all handguns fall under the description. You chose to ignore that and posted some nonsense about an antique firearm in yet a continuing attempt to derail the conversation.

there is a "piling-on" happening... I ;ignored nothing. I just can'[t answer all at the same time... but you must have known that

handguns can be used for target shooting and hunting and self defense... all of which fall in the category of legitimate use

PeterSibley
12-16-2015, 04:55 PM
No hunter would use a full auto rifle.... they're military weapons. Hunting is about accuracy and skill and deer don't shoot back.

Phillip Allen
12-16-2015, 04:55 PM
Ah, I have never claimed to be an expert on guns. So you are better qualified than I.

However, this is an example of a game shooting rifle
http://keyassets.timeincuk.net/inspirewp/live/wp-content/uploads/sites/6/2010/12/deer_stalking_rifle_sticks.jpg
This is advertised for target shooting
http://www.targetshooting.co.nz/ubbthreads.php/ubb/download/Number/1933/filename/G/E.jpg
Target pistol
http://media.gizmodo.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2012/07/target-model.jpg
And we all know what shot guns look like.

Your turn, what you got.

your notion of optimized is very vague... come up with a description and I'll either agree or tell you why it won't work

Phillip Allen
12-16-2015, 04:56 PM
No hunter would use a full auto rifle.... they're military weapons.

then start there with your description

Peerie Maa
12-16-2015, 04:56 PM
there is a "piling-on" happening... I ;ignored nothing. I just can'[t answer all at the same time... but you must have known that

handguns can be used for target shooting and hunting and self defense... all of which fall in the category of legitimate use

Show us a picture of a hand gun that is an effective and accurate hunting gun. Would you use a target pistol for self defence? What model would be good enough to do both effectively? Honest answers please.

PeterSibley
12-16-2015, 04:57 PM
then start there with your description

I did.

TomF
12-16-2015, 04:59 PM
it's your proposal, let us see YOUR honest answerPhillip, this really isn't rocket science. You just object to the very notion, and will resist restricting anything under (as you'd put it in another thread) crew-served weapons. Let's just put that out there - you're free to tell us if you've changed your mind.

Pretty much every one of America's "allies" in the developed world in one way or another restricts the ownership, storage, carry and use of firearms which in America are marketed principally for "self protection." That would be handguns, for instance. No other OECD country has any "open carry" that I'm aware of, and most heavily restrict "concealed carry" to on-duty LEOs or military.

Most countries have some kinds of restriction on semi-auto and automatic weapons too - especially those which were designed primarily for military or self-protection-against-humans use. Full-auto is usually ruled right out, apart from highly specialized military collector licenses. Semi-auto is usually permitted like any other long gun, but with restrictions in the number of rounds to be chambered or in a clip. Because in our countries, long guns are for target shooting or hunting, and a hunter who requires a 30 round clip to get a deer shouldn't be hunting at all. There's rather a recognition that high capacity ammunition storage was mostly designed to be useful in military or human-on-human situations - and we really don't much want a lot of that.

But you know this. You just hate it, and would prefer to talk about kids who die accidentally falling into buckets of water than kids who die because someone with an AR intended to kill them.

Peerie Maa
12-16-2015, 04:59 PM
your notion of optimized is very vague... come up with a description and I'll either agree or tell you why it won't work

A picture tells a thousand words Phillip. Those are all optimised for their intended use, can you add examples to the list of guns that you would consider good enough to take to the field with out being thought of as a prat by your shooting peers?

Peerie Maa
12-16-2015, 05:01 PM
Are you STILL going !!!!.
Jeez , if discussing firearms was banned from this forum , what would you do ??.
Go out to the range again , and shoot more pop up figure targets or something ?.
Sniff some more lead fumes ?.
Rob J.

Rob, this is not about guns so much, as it is about trying to get Phillip to commit to an honest answer.

Phillip Allen
12-16-2015, 05:01 PM
A picture tells a thousand words Phillip. Those are all optimised for their intended use, can you add examples to the list of guns that you would consider good enough to take to the field with out being thought of as a prat by your shooting peers?

being thought of as a prat or anything else is not part of the description of hunting

Tom Montgomery
12-16-2015, 05:02 PM
He ducks! He weaves! He rope-a-dopes!

Phillip Allen
12-16-2015, 05:03 PM
Rob, this is not about guns so much, as it is about trying to get Phillip to commit to an honest answer.

I HAVE committed to an honest answer... remember this is YOUR law... so the disallowed guns require description

PeterSibley
12-16-2015, 05:04 PM
Pest eradication from helicopters? It's got a lot more in common with military applications than hunting in my book Rob.

Paul Pless
12-16-2015, 05:04 PM
Show us a picture of a hand gun that is an effective and accurate hunting gun. Would you use a target pistol for self defence? What model would be good enough to do both effectively? Honest answers please.

its a stupid argument, there's too much overlap
let's just effectively license and regulate all firearms
if you can pass a strong legal and mental health background check
and follow that up with appropriate traing and testing for safety and competency then you should be allowed to own most any gun type that's currently on the market.

FWIW, here's the classic answer to your question, the S&W model 14 military and police target in .38 or .357. been around since the thirties. . .
good target pistol, good on duty police revolver, good self defense handgun (if a little large to carry) good hunting pistol up to deer sized game

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/8/8e/Smith_%26_Wesson_Models_10_and_14.jpg

Tom Montgomery
12-16-2015, 05:04 PM
Handguns designed and intended for personal protection. How's that description?

And that is just a start.

By the way Paul, how many people have been shot and killed by those two models of S&W handguns since the thirties?

PeterSibley
12-16-2015, 05:08 PM
Phillip, this really isn't rocket science. You just object to the very notion, and will resist restricting anything under (as you'd put it in another thread) crew-served weapons. Let's just put that out there - you're free to tell us if you've changed your mind.

Pretty much every one of America's "allies" in the developed world in one way or another restricts the ownership, storage, carry and use of firearms which in America are marketed principally for "self protection." That would be handguns, for instance. No other OECD country has any "open carry" that I'm aware of, and most heavily restrict "concealed carry" to on-duty LEOs or military.

Most countries have some kinds of restriction on semi-auto and automatic weapons too - especially those which were designed primarily for military or self-protection-against-humans use. Full-auto is usually ruled right out, apart from highly specialized military collector licenses. Semi-auto is usually permitted like any other long gun, but with restrictions in the number of rounds to be chambered or in a clip. Because in our countries, long guns are for target shooting or hunting, and a hunter who requires a 30 round clip to get a deer shouldn't be hunting at all. There's rather a recognition that high capacity ammunition storage was mostly designed to be useful in military or human-on-human situations - and we really don't much want a lot of that.

But you know this. You just hate it, and would prefer to talk about kids who die accidentally falling into buckets of water than kids who die because someone with an AR intended to kill them.

OK ! I didn't know Phillip had actually let the cat out of the bag.

So here it is ....Phillip approves of anything and anything that isn't "crew served". That basically any killing machine that one man can drag around by himself.

Phillip Allen
12-16-2015, 05:09 PM
No hunter would use a full auto rifle.... they're military weapons. Hunting is about accuracy and skill and deer don't shoot back.

define or describe what you mean by 'full auto'

try googling

Tom Montgomery
12-16-2015, 05:11 PM
OK ! I didn't know Phillip had actually let the cat out of the bag.

So here it is ....Phillip approves of anything and anything that isn't "crew served". That basically any killing machine that one man can drag around by himself.

Like these:

http://breakingdefense.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/3/2011/10/127912465.jpg

PeterSibley
12-16-2015, 05:12 PM
Why? I now no what you approve of.... anything!

PeterSibley
12-16-2015, 05:13 PM
Jeez , what a tugger !.
I'm out of this "discussion" , he is a complete idiot.
Rob J.

+1

He loves guns more than people.

Peerie Maa
12-16-2015, 05:14 PM
its a stupid argument, there's too much overlap
let's just effectively license and regulate all firearms
if you can pass a strong legal and mental health background check
and follow that up with appropriate traing and testing for safety and competency then you should be allowed to own most any gun type that's currently on the market.

Pretty well what we have here. If you can show good cause for owning the weapon, and have adequate secure storage, then you are licensed. You don't even need to prove that you are trained.

However, there is judgement and limits on what sort of guns you can show good cause to keep.

Phillip Allen
12-16-2015, 05:15 PM
Nick , its not possible.
He has had years of evading giving honest answers .
He gets off on screwing everybody around.
Why else would he do it ?.
Rob J.

here you guys have the golden opportunity to come up with a description and you're throwing it away by attacking me or my character... then complaining that I won't give an honest answer even though I have...

skuthorp
12-16-2015, 05:16 PM
Semantics Phillip, Semantics.

I am disappointed in you.

Phillip Allen
12-16-2015, 05:16 PM
Pretty well what we have here. If you can show good cause for owning the weapon, and have adequate secure storage, then you are licensed. You don't even need to prove that you are trained.

However, there is judgement and limits on what sort of guns you can show good cause to keep.

define 'good cause'

Phillip Allen
12-16-2015, 05:17 PM
Semantics Phillip, Semantics.

I am disappointed in you.

if you're gonna write a law, you better know the language

Phillip Allen
12-16-2015, 05:19 PM
Like these:

http://breakingdefense.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/3/2011/10/127912465.jpg

Tom, you're changing the discussion. it's about guns which may be sold in the US... NOT honest

Peerie Maa
12-16-2015, 05:20 PM
define 'good cause'

Did you not take a course on Journalism or sumtin? How did you manage with this level of illiteracy?
Have you no pride, no self esteem?

Paul Pless
12-16-2015, 05:22 PM
Did you not take a course on Journalism or sumtin? How did you manage with this level of illiteracy?
Have you no pride, no self esteem?its just a way for him to slow down and ultimately discourage the conversation

Phillip Allen
12-16-2015, 05:25 PM
Show us a picture of a hand gun that is an effective and accurate hunting gun. Would you use a target pistol for self defence? What model would be good enough to do both effectively? Honest answers please.

Nick... I would use whatever came to hand for self-defense... even tennis rackets and brooms

kitchen knives
guns
fireplace pokers
baseball bats
cavalry sabers and anything else

Phillip Allen
12-16-2015, 05:28 PM
Did you not take a course on Journalism or sumtin? How did you manage with this level of illiteracy?
Have you no pride, no self esteem?

show me your literacy and define 'good cause' as it applies to your law

you must have SOME idea?

Paul Pless
12-16-2015, 05:29 PM
Nick... I would use whatever came to hand for self-defense... even tennis rackets and brooms
didn't you just buy a hide out revolver though?

Tom Montgomery
12-16-2015, 05:29 PM
Isn't this discussion about firearms?

What does it have to do with baseball bats, fireplace pokers and kitchen knives? Or, for that matter, swimming pools, automobiles, etc.?

Speaking of changing the discussion....

Peerie Maa
12-16-2015, 05:29 PM
Nick... I would use whatever came to hand for self-defense... even tennis rackets and brooms

kitchen knives
guns
fireplace pokers
baseball bats
cavalry sabers and anything else

So, you admit that you don't need guns. Good, progress at last.

Peerie Maa
12-16-2015, 05:32 PM
show me your literacy and define 'good cause' as it applies to your law

you must have SOME idea?

Nope I'll not sink to your levels of idiocy. I'll let you monopolise that until you realise the futility of your act.

Phillip Allen
12-16-2015, 05:32 PM
Pest eradication from helicopters? It's got a lot more in common with military applications than hunting in my book Rob.

are you now gonna include helicopters?

TomF
12-16-2015, 05:34 PM
Iirc, you've observed with some scorn how Bill Clinton took pains to define "sexual relations" so narrowly that it meant nothing. Same principle's at work, but you're the guy demanding a definition of the word "is". :D

Give it up. Is your notional limit still "crew served weapons" Phillip? Using whatever definition you'd intended at the time? Does your house still constitute an adequate "locked storage" venue?

TomF
12-16-2015, 06:04 PM
In 53 years, I've never had to run to a gun safe when seconds count. I have had to run to take something out of the hands of a toddler who was gonna get hurt. Had I kept a loaded firearm where I'd kept, say, a glass vase of flowers where pulling on a tablecloth could tip stuff onto the floor...

Paul Pless
12-16-2015, 06:22 PM
Running to a gun safe when seconds count?Guns since their inception have undergone continuous development to make them more accurate, have more firepower, be more lethal, be more reliable, be more concealable, be lighter in weight, etc. . .* The gun rights lobby embraces each of those things enthusiastically and almost without limit. Yet when it comes to accepting well proven technology such as electronic smart guns, electronic safes or even quick opening analog safes they are unabashedly against all these things. Such positions are ludicrous.


*indeed the development of the gun as a marvel of engineering, industrial revolution, history, and industrial design is one of the areas that draws me in as a firearms enthusiast and collector.

Phillip Allen
12-16-2015, 06:23 PM
In 53 years, I've never had to run to a gun safe when seconds count. I have had to run to take something out of the hands of a toddler who was gonna get hurt. Had I kept a loaded firearm where I'd kept, say, a glass vase of flowers where pulling on a tablecloth could tip stuff onto the floor...

if time without mishap counts then consider John L's time without mishap... post above

Peerie Maa
12-16-2015, 06:27 PM
First, I will say that my house contains my wife, myself, and three goofy spoiled dogs.

You have presented a different, but common scenario with children being present. Toddlers and guns do not mix. I would not have a gun exposed to general view or reach. But, you can safely keep a gun handy without it being in reach or general view. I have done it for 40 years. My father and his father have done the same thing for the past 80 years with zero mishaps. My kids knew about the weapons as they got older and have been to the range with me many many times. They grew up respecting gun responsibility, and a caring for others. It all goes with being responsible and respectful. Life is precious!

I think that you are one of the lucky ones.

Summing matters up, Hemenway notes that a number of surveys have found that a gun kept at home is far more likely to be used in violence, an accident, or a suicide attempt than self defense. (He also goes off on a long diversion about how a poorly trained gun owner is unlikely to use one well even when self defense is involved.) As a result, from a public health perspective, there's little doubt that a gun at home is generally a negative risk factor. from http://arstechnica.com/science/2011/04/guns-in-the-home-lots-of-risk-ambiguity/

S.V. Airlie
12-16-2015, 07:14 PM
Oh my god, Phillip's replicating himself.

shaloli
12-16-2015, 07:45 PM
This thread proves my theory that liberals are compassionate and think with their heart
and
conservatives are compassionate and think with their brains!

S.V. Airlie
12-16-2015, 08:57 PM
This thread proves my theory that liberals are compassionate and think with their heart
and
conservatives are compassionate and think with their brains!Forty posts to his name and HE figured it out!:)

Steve McMahon
12-16-2015, 09:26 PM
Running to a gun safe when seconds count?

Cops will be there in 4-5 minutes.........right?
Sucks to have that many enemies.

KMacDonald
12-16-2015, 11:39 PM
This thread proves my theory that liberals are compassionate and think with their heart
and
conservatives are compassionate and think with their brains!
Yep. Libs don't have brains.

S.V. Airlie
12-17-2015, 12:02 AM
Yep. Libs don't have brains. So, you're a lib now, good to know!

Ralphie Boy
12-17-2015, 12:15 AM
Again, I'm stunned that there are some on this forum who are not disgusted by the killing of the children, but are only disgusted that people would want to remind us of this tragedy to try and prevent a re-occurance.

Massacres of children - hey, no problem! Proposing new gun laws, now that's disgusting, right mssrs Allen, Macdonald, et al?

Phillip Allen
12-17-2015, 12:17 AM
Again, I'm stunned that there are some on this forum who are not disgusted by the killing of the children, but are only disgusted that people would want to remind us of this tragedy to try and prevent a re-occurance.

Massacres of children - hey, no problem! Proposing new gun laws, now that's disgusting, right mssrs Allen, Macdonald, et al?

the deaths of the children are a tragedy without doubt... displaying their bodies to elicit an emotional over reaction is also a kind of tragedy

S.V. Airlie
12-17-2015, 12:23 AM
the deaths of the children are a tragedy without doubt... displaying their bodies to elicit an emotional over reaction is also a kind of tragedyThe pics I've seen have NOT been bodies. Most appear to be class pictures. And their deaths are tragedies, how ya gonna help stop the killing PA?

Glen Longino
12-17-2015, 12:29 AM
Yep. Libs don't have brains.

Look folks, an example of the production of a Rep brain, juvenile, meaningless, silly, baseless Gobbledygook!
If Old MacDonald could distill and bottle his Gobbledygook, he could be a billionaire and run for POTUS like his idol Delirium Tremens !

S.V. Airlie
12-17-2015, 12:36 AM
Look folks, an example of the production of a Rep brain, juvenile, meaningless, silly, baseless Gobbledygook!
If Old MacDonald could distill and bottle his Gobbledygook, he could be a billionaire and run for POTUS like his idol Delirium Tremens ! So true!

Joris
12-17-2015, 01:58 AM
the deaths of the children are a tragedy without doubt... displaying their bodies to elicit an emotional over reaction is also a kind of tragedy

Here in Belgium we had a campaign that showed very explicit pictures of traffic accidents, the idea was that most people were used to the idea that something needed to be done and didn't even think about anymore, and therefore didn't change their behaviour. You can't get much changed if people don't want to work along...
By shocking the public they would "wake up". Some said this would only feed peoples' hunger for sensation by after a few years it proved to be a huge success. They did something similar about drunk drivers and this also was a huge success.
So when you say it's a tragedy to "displaying their bodies" and all, maybe it's a tragedy that it has come so far that some feel this is needed? Or that it doesn't have any real effect anymore...In the end it doesn't really matter. If you look at the amount of shootings in the US today, one has to wonder where can this go? People outside the US haven't wondered how this can be solved for a long time, they just wonder how bad it will be when it goes wrong. Some of you have this gun-disease so bad that you are prepared to die for it and pushed a lot of people in a situation where they will need to die for it also...

Peerie Maa
12-17-2015, 05:51 AM
Sir.....if you decide to follow the logic of some person who has a certain agenda, then fine. But, the root of the problem is not the gun. Almost 95%% of gun crimes are committed by people who already have had track records of being mentally ill, or have already been convicted of other crimes. We as a society, coddle the criminals, and the kids. We are afraid of being too stern, for fear of the backlash. The criminals and the kids are in your face because they know that nobody can touch them.

Lanza's own father avoided him because he was crazy. He didn't feel safe around the kid. He knew the kid was was dangerous in some fashion. Lanza's school teachers knew he was nuts.

We probably have the same percentage of mentally ill people living in the community as does the US, after all we are of the same species subject to the same illnesses.

However we do not kill as many of our citizens as does the US. What is the difference between our two societies that makes that so? You make it easy for anyone, mentally ill, pissed off, irresponsible, complacent or whatever to obtain a gun, we don't.

The Pareto principle suggests that if you are trying to fix a problem you do the easy fix that solves 90% of the causes first, then move onto the next largest remaining problem. For you guys that means remove the unnecessary guns from your society first. Then move onto the next problem which will probably be guns in the hands of criminals.

skuthorp
12-17-2015, 07:04 AM
I see the NRA supporters are rallying, to paraphrase a Tom Lehrer song title "Whose Next?" in the gun lottery. Coming to a town/street/ house near you.

But then the price of such freedoms is obviously acceptable to some in the USA and in that case it's a question of "where's next?".

KMacDonald
12-17-2015, 08:11 AM
I see the NRA supporters are rallying, to paraphrase a Tom Lehrer song title "Whose Next?" in the gun lottery. Coming to a town/street/ house near you.

But then the price of such freedoms is obviously acceptable to some in the USA and in that case it's a question of "where's next?".

This country has a long history of fighting for freedom, both our own and others. Millions have sacrificed their lives for it. The occasional random act of gun violence is not a reason to abandon their efforts. Freedom trumps all. Sure, there are those that cower in the corner every time the press sensationalizes a shooting. Fortunately they are in the minority and the EXCEPTIONAL majority are able to view these incidences in the proper light.

KMacDonald
12-17-2015, 08:21 AM
Look folks, an example of the production of a Rep brain, juvenile, meaningless, silly, baseless Gobbledygook!
If Old MacDonald could distill and bottle his Gobbledygook, he could be a billionaire and run for POTUS like his idol Delirium Tremens !

WOW, every time I think you have reached the low point you are able to dig down deep and stoop even lower. You should be proud. By the way, I don't use alcohol.

Peerie Maa
12-17-2015, 08:28 AM
This country has a long history of fighting for freedom, both our own and others. Millions have sacrificed their lives for it. The occasional random act of gun violence is not a reason to abandon their efforts. Freedom trumps all. Sure, there are those that cower in the corner every time the press sensationalizes a shooting. Fortunately they are in the minority and the EXCEPTIONAL majority are able to view these incidences in the proper light.

There is that FREEDOM argument again. A thread on here showed that I as a Brit have more freedom in my daily life than the Grinch enjoys.

So Mr K MacDonald, how does FREEDOM affect your day to day life? Let us see if you are really more free.

CWSmith
12-17-2015, 08:30 AM
This country has a long history of fighting for freedom, both our own and others. Millions have sacrificed their lives for it. The occasional random act of gun violence is not a reason to abandon their efforts. Freedom trumps all.

More to the point: Random acts of gun violence have nothing to do with fighting for freedom. Your logic is backwards.

KMacDonald
12-17-2015, 08:32 AM
More to the point: Random acts of gun violence have nothing to do with fighting for freedom. Your logic is backwards.

Sorry you missed the point.

CWSmith
12-17-2015, 08:44 AM
Sorry you missed the point.

No, I got it. There was nothing deep or complicated. You equate gun rights with freedom and you think that soldiers who put their lives on the line for freedom do so for your gun rights. I got it. I just don't agree with it.

KMacDonald
12-17-2015, 09:41 AM
No, I got it. There was nothing deep or complicated. You equate gun rights with freedom and you think that soldiers who put their lives on the line for freedom do so for your gun rights. I got it. I just don't agree with it.

Yep, you missed the point. Gun rights are one of our constitutional freedoms but gun rights don't equal freedom and I never said it does.