38 replies to this topic

[Killman4]

Back in 1939 (United States v. Miller), the supreme court ruled that citizens of the United States may hold the same weapons used by the military. This may be back in 1939 but it is still a supreme court ruling that still stands today. This is also the court case which outlawed short barrel or sawed-off shotguns. It would make more sense if they restricted handguns because most of the murders or accidents come from handguns, not rifles. Rifles make up 4% of all gun related deaths. I think the government is just trying to get at a small group of gun owners. They know if that they went after handguns they would wake a sleeping giant. 

[ᗅᗺᗷᗅ]

Paintball is a lot of fun.  But then no one dies. 

Google will disagree with the no one dies part.

 

This intrigued me so I looked it up.  And sure enough, there have been deaths associated with paintball.  In fairness, though, they were not caused by being shot with the actual paintballs themselves, but by the CO₂ cannisters.  Still, it's not common.  In fact it looks like there have only been two known cases.  That's a better safety record than some children's toys!

[Haflinger]

Paintball has a better safety record than bowling on a per-player basis.

 

I'm not suggesting banning bowling either. B)

[ᗅᗺᗷᗅ]

Did somebody suggest banning paintball?

[Alyster]

Paintball is okay I guess. MILES system with blanks is awesome dude. You can have so much with that: 7.62mm, 5.56mm, simulate mortar fire and air support. You can set up actual minefields, use AT weapons etc etc. The capabilities of the system is just beyooooooooooond. And it immidiately tells the target if they've been hit or not.

 

We had some excercises with that. Later you can see every single move you made, or the shot. I love that I never want to go back to paintball.

 

Edit: link to MILES http://en.wikipedia....gagement_System

Edited by Алйстьер, 30 January 2013 - 01:26 PM.

[Jon32492]

I like turtles.

 

Must have been a slow news day...

[memoryproblems]

Back in 1939 (United States v. Miller), the supreme court ruled that citizens of the United States may hold the same weapons used by the military. This may be back in 1939 but it is still a supreme court ruling that still stands today. This is also the court case which outlawed short barrel or sawed-off shotguns. It would make more sense if they restricted handguns because most of the murders or accidents come from handguns, not rifles. Rifles make up 4% of all gun related deaths. I think the government is just trying to get at a small group of gun owners. They know if that they went after handguns they would wake a sleeping giant. 

 

I'm a little cloudy on the memory, but I seem to remember a somewhat recent supreme court ruling that upheld some law or another that basically paved the way to limiting the guns that people could hold.

 

One problem I think exists with guns is that entirely too many people treat them like they are fucking toys. Buying guns that have no practical reason for no other reason then to take out to the country and shoot at rocks or fence posts with. It's that kind of activity which has proliferated the market with assault rifles and high-capacity magazines. I could understand target practice with practical weapons (handguns, shotguns, single shot or low-capacity magazine rifles) in an attempt to improve accuracy, but I personally find it beyond stupid for people who shoot just to shoot. Those people might as well just buy a shirt telling everybody how small their penis is.

 

Every gun has the ability to kill somebody. Until people understand that and act appropriately, through training themselves and keeping their guns out of the hands of un-trained individuals, we will continue to see people lose their lives in senseless fashion.

 

Last year 11,000 people died in homicides involving firearms. That comes out to about 30 each and every day. That's more deaths every day then occurred in any of the major shooting sprees you hear about so often.

[ᗅᗺᗷᗅ]

Look, the bottom line is that guns make it easy to kill people.  As long as there are a lot of guns, a lot of people will get killed.  This isn't brain surgery we're doing here. 

 

Now, I would argue that the threat to society engendered by having lots of guns outweighs any perceived need for protection.  The number of times a gun has prevented a crime cannot be known, but experience and common sense tells us that it's not very often.  But therein lies the essential crux of the gun lobby's argument: people need guns for protection.  And it's not really a winnable argument on either side.

[The Dark Empire]

Look, the bottom line is that guns make it easy to kill people.  As long as there are a lot of guns, a lot of people will get killed.  This isn't brain surgery we're doing here. 

 

Now, I would argue that the threat to society engendered by having lots of guns outweighs any perceived need for protection.  The number of times a gun has prevented a crime cannot be known, but experience and common sense tells us that it's not very often.  But therein lies the essential crux of the gun lobby's argument: people need guns for protection.  And it's not really a winnable argument on either side.

But Jahrost, we need guns in case the communists take over Americuh and force communist rule on us farm folk. If I don't keep an M16 under my bed Americuh will be overthrown by communist sissy folks. It is up to the average Americun to shoot these communist invaders and save our land. Bottom line here Jahrost is we here need as many guns as possible to shoot as many as them communists as possible. THIS IS NATIONAL SECURITY

[Manoka]

I own a few guns, but I'd like to own a lot more; particularly a SIG short stroke gas piston AR-10. I have a .40 S&W ruger pistol and like, a .357 magnum lever action, and of course a couple of .22's.

 

I went hunting, once, against birds, and I hated it D:

 

 

I used a BB gun and I was a great shot but I felt sorry for the birds D:

 

Needless to say I don't really like to hunt or do so very often; I would to survive but other than that I don't really like it.

 

 

Target practice is fine for me.

 

Like a usual gun owner, I plan on killing nobody.

 

 

If I can help it, even in self defense. Since some 300,000 criminals, at least are stopped every year, by people with guns, but only like, 800 are killed, you usually don't have to kill in self defense if you have a gun, compared to say, a knife or a bow and arrow, which it would be harder to stand there for 30 mintues with, threatning someone with a fully drawn bow or holding your knife to their neck or something, until the police arrived, or just generally get them to surrendor when they themselves are likely to have a gun.

 

But, unless someone can get me some batarangs and titanium dipped tri-weave hardended kevlar armor, I probs cannot defend myself without it. Sucks but, gunning for forcefields/nanobots.

Edited by Manoka, 30 January 2013 - 08:54 PM.

[DiscJockey]

Wait, what? The premise that outlawing guns will somehow make criminals (people who do NOT obey the law) less likely to get guns is from fantasy land. Look up Chicago's murder with guns stats for 2012. Chicago has some of the harshest, most restrictive gun laws in the nation -- and the HIGHEST murder rate.

 

Where do the notorious mass murders take place typically? IN GUN FREE ZONES -- places where criminals know the people are unarmed.

 

Constitution -- the 2nd amendment is about the citizens having a means of defense against tyranny. It is not about hunting.

[Haflinger]

Actually, the highest murder rate now is in DC. Traditionally the three highest murder rates are in Detroit, Miami and DC.

 

However that aside: The issue isn't the murder rate in the US, which is fairly high. The issue is the number of gun-related deaths which is where the US is constantly among the world's leaders. And it's because your rate of gun ownership is almost three times as much as the #2 nation in the world.

 

You have more guns per capita than the Sudan. It's insane.

[ᗅᗺᗷᗅ]

Constitution -- the 2nd amendment is about the citizens having a means of defense against tyranny. It is not about hunting.

 

If that's the case, you might as well give up the ghost.  Tyranny is already upon us, but a much more subtle tyranny, a tyranny of economics.  We are all beholden to Wall Street.  But if you mean tyranny as in the government imposes martial law, then there's nothing you and your guns could do to stop it.  The United States military is the most effective fighting force the world has ever known, capable of projecting military power to any point on the globe.  They have tanks and jets and aircraft carriers.  A bunch of Turner Diaries wannabes are not going to pose any threat to them, should they want to "take over."  Which they don't, because it makes no fucking sense anyway.

[Ellis]

Constitution -- the 2nd amendment is about the citizens having a means of defense against tyranny. It is not about hunting.

 

If that's the case, you might as well give up the ghost.  Tyranny is already upon us, but a much more subtle tyranny, a tyranny of economics.  We are all beholden to Wall Street.  But if you mean tyranny as in the government imposes martial law, then there's nothing you and your guns could do to stop it.  The United States military is the most effective fighting force the world has ever known, capable of projecting military power to any point on the globe.  They have tanks and jets and aircraft carriers.  A bunch of Turner Diaries wannabes are not going to pose any threat to them, should they want to "take over."  Which they don't, because it makes no fucking sense anyway.

 

The British are coming

[DiscJockey]

Well, we are definitely economically enslaved.

Now for guns making it easier to kill ... people have been murdering one another since the beginning. There will always be a way found to murder.

 

Here is one example, of many, where a gun in the hands of a law-abiding citizen saved lives:

"The armed resource officer who took the gun away was off-duty and at the school..."

http://www.cbsnews.c...ect-says-chief/

[ᗅᗺᗷᗅ]

The easier you make it the more it's going to happen.

[Evil Rudekker]

I don't own a gun, and I don't hate guns.  I don't *like* them, but oh well.  Since I'm married to a Quaker/pacifist, my wife wouldn't let me have one anyways.  Since I work in a financial institution, some of my coworkers have actually have guns pointed at them while at work.  Some have quit because of it.  I don't want any guns pointed at me, and in the case of a robbery, I REALLY FRIGGIN SERIOUSLY don't want a shootout in front of my desk.  For this reason, employees of my credit union are not allowed to carry a gun to work.  I don't honestly see why anyone would want one for any reason but fear.  I'm generally not a fan of any decisions made out of fear.

[Alyster]

I don't own a gun, and I don't hate guns.  I don't *like* them, but oh well.  Since I'm married to a Quaker/pacifist, my wife wouldn't let me have one anyways.  Since I work in a financial institution, some of my coworkers have actually have guns pointed at them while at work.  Some have quit because of it.  I don't want any guns pointed at me, and in the case of a robbery, I REALLY FRIGGIN SERIOUSLY don't want a shootout in front of my desk.  For this reason, employees of my credit union are not allowed to carry a gun to work.  I don't honestly see why anyone would want one for any reason but fear.  I'm generally not a fan of any decisions made out of fear.

 

Guns aren't that effective in close range combat either. I don't know why they make people feel "safe". Maze and telescopic baton or a knife would be my first choice. The gun causes so much problems.

 

• First of all it's uncomfortable for other people.
• It takes more time to take your gun, load, aim and shoot than to just hit someone with a baton, shoot maze or stab someone. 
• You can lose your gun extreamly easily at to the foe at point blank range so you wouldn't even understand what happened.
• It's not effective in long ranges either, with a pistol I wouldn't even try to shoot (to kill) someone over 10m away. Tactical shooting is a lot different than range shooting for 25m for pistols. 
• Guns are more dangerous. You have to be so careful for collateral damage from a missed shot, a ricochet or what ever. Much easier to avoid such things with batons, knives and OC spray.
• Guns are a legal nightmare: for owning AND using. I mean sure for some states with lose gun control no one gives a shit who you shoot, but most of the civilized world actually prefers you not to shoot others.    

So yeah, I promote stabbing people in this post. 

Edited by Алйстьер, 01 February 2013 - 01:47 PM.

[Haflinger]

You should never have a gun pointed at someone who's closer than five feet from you. It is far too easy to be disarmed, and then you are the one being shot.