penfold1992 wrote:TheDrop wrote:If those 5 year old kids had guns and were trained, they would have been able to stop the shooting
merica.
or facts ?
penfold1992 wrote:TheDrop wrote:If those 5 year old kids had guns and were trained, they would have been able to stop the shooting
merica.


penfold1992 wrote:finally someone with sense! I thought i was the only one.

First off if you are not a gun owner, have not been through the buying process or been to a gun show in the last decade you are most likely totally wrong when it comes to modifying our laws in an attempt to keep firearms out of non-rational actors and criminals. This is not a mark against you, I applaud your choice to go about your life unarmed, but it took me years of being associated with firearm culture, and the laws associated, with it to get a grip on understanding exactly how they work. Reading a NYT editorial or two is not an education on this matter and often times these writers are simply wrong or are actively supporting their views with false claims and facts. In my opinion the mainline media is almost 100% wrong on any gun related reporting and this sickens me. You would think that a talking head of Fox or CNN who knows they will be talking about guns for months after any of these terrible events would sit down one evening and actually learn a bit about what they are talking about? No, this obviously has not happened. Catch terms chronically used inappropriately like “high-powered” and “fully automatic weapon” have only distorted the public’s ability to actually make changes that will save lives pertaining to these very serious issues. Men like Piers Morgan, who I enjoy watching from time to time for their interviewing talents, fall apart journalistically when discussing firearm related issues because they simply will not educate themselves on the realities of the technology and the industry. Instead they are blinded by pure hatred for inanimate objects and are thus totally bias in their reporting so that they can push their agenda. This hurts discourse in this country and it’s a shame. Both gun advocates and the opposition to their very existence should be upset by this polarizing and inaccurate reporting.
Some things I would like to clear up:
People think commercially available assault rifles and battle rifles (AR-15, AK-47, M-14 etc) are fully automatic “machine guns” like you see in the movies. They are not, you pull the trigger once one round comes out, the same as a handgun. To own a fully automatic weapon, where it shoots a string of bullets as long as you hold down the trigger until the magazine is empty, you need to have a Class III permit issued very strictly (including physical inventory checks) by the ATF or if your state allows it, pay a $200 fee for a NFA stamp, receive a thorough background check and wait up to 6 months for approval. Keep in mind that these weapons cost thousands of dollars and have to be manufactured before 1986. The Class III permits, where you can buy and sell “new” fully automatic weapons as well as pre-ban guns are for big money collectors, firearms manufacturers, and often places where you can shoot something “cool” like a “Tommy Gun” at a controlled range. NONE of the high-profile school shootings that have broken our collective heart over the last decade have been prosecuted by a criminal using a fully automatic weapon that I know of. What makes AR-15s and AK-47s different from a repeating hunting rifle is the available magazine capacity choices, some ergonomic features, and usually a menacing black color and shape, that is all. They all go bang ONCE when you pull the trigger just like a handgun.

_Dutchy_ wrote:a piece of a article i found intrestingFirst off if you are not a gun owner, have not been through the buying process or been to a gun show in the last decade you are most likely totally wrong when it comes to modifying our laws in an attempt to keep firearms out of non-rational actors and criminals. This is not a mark against you, I applaud your choice to go about your life unarmed, but it took me years of being associated with firearm culture, and the laws associated, with it to get a grip on understanding exactly how they work. Reading a NYT editorial or two is not an education on this matter and often times these writers are simply wrong or are actively supporting their views with false claims and facts. In my opinion the mainline media is almost 100% wrong on any gun related reporting and this sickens me. You would think that a talking head of Fox or CNN who knows they will be talking about guns for months after any of these terrible events would sit down one evening and actually learn a bit about what they are talking about? No, this obviously has not happened. Catch terms chronically used inappropriately like “high-powered” and “fully automatic weapon” have only distorted the public’s ability to actually make changes that will save lives pertaining to these very serious issues. Men like Piers Morgan, who I enjoy watching from time to time for their interviewing talents, fall apart journalistically when discussing firearm related issues because they simply will not educate themselves on the realities of the technology and the industry. Instead they are blinded by pure hatred for inanimate objects and are thus totally bias in their reporting so that they can push their agenda. This hurts discourse in this country and it’s a shame. Both gun advocates and the opposition to their very existence should be upset by this polarizing and inaccurate reporting.
Some things I would like to clear up:
People think commercially available assault rifles and battle rifles (AR-15, AK-47, M-14 etc) are fully automatic “machine guns” like you see in the movies. They are not, you pull the trigger once one round comes out, the same as a handgun. To own a fully automatic weapon, where it shoots a string of bullets as long as you hold down the trigger until the magazine is empty, you need to have a Class III permit issued very strictly (including physical inventory checks) by the ATF or if your state allows it, pay a $200 fee for a NFA stamp, receive a thorough background check and wait up to 6 months for approval. Keep in mind that these weapons cost thousands of dollars and have to be manufactured before 1986. The Class III permits, where you can buy and sell “new” fully automatic weapons as well as pre-ban guns are for big money collectors, firearms manufacturers, and often places where you can shoot something “cool” like a “Tommy Gun” at a controlled range. NONE of the high-profile school shootings that have broken our collective heart over the last decade have been prosecuted by a criminal using a fully automatic weapon that I know of. What makes AR-15s and AK-47s different from a repeating hunting rifle is the available magazine capacity choices, some ergonomic features, and usually a menacing black color and shape, that is all. They all go bang ONCE when you pull the trigger just like a handgun.

BuDo wrote:_Dutchy_ wrote:a piece of a article i found intrestingFirst off if you are not a gun owner, have not been through the buying process or been to a gun show in the last decade you are most likely totally wrong when it comes to modifying our laws in an attempt to keep firearms out of non-rational actors and criminals. This is not a mark against you, I applaud your choice to go about your life unarmed, but it took me years of being associated with firearm culture, and the laws associated, with it to get a grip on understanding exactly how they work. Reading a NYT editorial or two is not an education on this matter and often times these writers are simply wrong or are actively supporting their views with false claims and facts. In my opinion the mainline media is almost 100% wrong on any gun related reporting and this sickens me. You would think that a talking head of Fox or CNN who knows they will be talking about guns for months after any of these terrible events would sit down one evening and actually learn a bit about what they are talking about? No, this obviously has not happened. Catch terms chronically used inappropriately like “high-powered” and “fully automatic weapon” have only distorted the public’s ability to actually make changes that will save lives pertaining to these very serious issues. Men like Piers Morgan, who I enjoy watching from time to time for their interviewing talents, fall apart journalistically when discussing firearm related issues because they simply will not educate themselves on the realities of the technology and the industry. Instead they are blinded by pure hatred for inanimate objects and are thus totally bias in their reporting so that they can push their agenda. This hurts discourse in this country and it’s a shame. Both gun advocates and the opposition to their very existence should be upset by this polarizing and inaccurate reporting.
Some things I would like to clear up:
People think commercially available assault rifles and battle rifles (AR-15, AK-47, M-14 etc) are fully automatic “machine guns” like you see in the movies. They are not, you pull the trigger once one round comes out, the same as a handgun. To own a fully automatic weapon, where it shoots a string of bullets as long as you hold down the trigger until the magazine is empty, you need to have a Class III permit issued very strictly (including physical inventory checks) by the ATF or if your state allows it, pay a $200 fee for a NFA stamp, receive a thorough background check and wait up to 6 months for approval. Keep in mind that these weapons cost thousands of dollars and have to be manufactured before 1986. The Class III permits, where you can buy and sell “new” fully automatic weapons as well as pre-ban guns are for big money collectors, firearms manufacturers, and often places where you can shoot something “cool” like a “Tommy Gun” at a controlled range. NONE of the high-profile school shootings that have broken our collective heart over the last decade have been prosecuted by a criminal using a fully automatic weapon that I know of. What makes AR-15s and AK-47s different from a repeating hunting rifle is the available magazine capacity choices, some ergonomic features, and usually a menacing black color and shape, that is all. They all go bang ONCE when you pull the trigger just like a handgun.
This biased article makes no sense in light of what happened to the little kids.... A grown man with two pistols (or even one) vs a bunch of 6-7 year old kids would be no different than a grown man with a fully automatic assault rifle vs a room full of capable men... Actually in most cases a man with just a pistol is enough take the lives of 5-6 people who are capable of stopping him with their raw hands and that alone is tragic.... You don't need to know the details behind gun laws/permits/auto vs semi vs full to know that..

penfold1992 wrote:which is why i said if you allow guns only allow long action weapons because if you can pull the trigger time and time again its just as bad as burst firing. automatic guns may kill more people but no gun should be fired in the first place!
if guns were banned now altogether (apart from the police and military) yes the guns that exist now would still be there but after 20 years it will be less of a threat.
I think metal detectors should be in every school payed by the american people by upping there tax but that wont happen either.
also if you think the gun control and hunting control is really strict... its not.
how about the gun control law is:
no matter what, dont give anyone a gun.
thats a stricter law that is still too lenient.


penfold1992 wrote:america is number 1 at everything, including mass murders from gun crime and ignorance.
kill your own people all you want. certainly dont see 3 mass murders in europe from guns.

penfold1992 wrote:america is number 1 at everything, including mass murders gun crime and ignorance.
kill your own people all you want. certainly dont see 3 mass murders in europe from guns.



NuclearSilo wrote:whore will put addict drug on her pussy to attract men
Hapjap wrote:imo there are more much important things to focus on right now than gun regulation. remember that events like this are extremely rare although they seem frequent due to the sensationalized media coverage.
even if a sandy hook event like this happened every month more kids would have died from unintentional drowning. hell even all the number of gun related deaths in the u.s. is less than 20 times less the number of people who die each year from heart disease. contrary to what the media portrays, gun violence is down in the majority of states (look at the third link).
tl;dr gun violence is way over sensationalized in the media and it isn't actually a problem right now.
sources:
http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/fastats/homicide.htm http://www.cdc.gov/homeandrecreationalsafety/water-safety/waterinjuries-factsheet.html https://spreadsheets.google.com/spreadsheet/lv?key=0AonYZs4MzlZbdGhycDRPQlN1dTBoMzJWOTk0Uk9DRVE&hl=en
Hapjap wrote:imo there are more much important things to focus on right now than gun regulation. remember that events like this are extremely rare although they seem frequent due to the sensationalized media coverage.
even if a sandy hook event like this happened every month more kids would have died from unintentional drowning. hell even all the number of gun related deaths in the u.s. is less than 20 times less the number of people who die each year from heart disease. contrary to what the media portrays, gun violence is down in the majority of states (look at the third link).
tl;dr gun violence is way over sensationalized in the media and it isn't actually a problem right now.
sources:
http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/fastats/homicide.htm http://www.cdc.gov/homeandrecreationalsafety/water-safety/waterinjuries-factsheet.html https://spreadsheets.google.com/spreadsheet/lv?key=0AonYZs4MzlZbdGhycDRPQlN1dTBoMzJWOTk0Uk9DRVE&hl=en



Rawr wrote:Fiction, you should just give up, you aren't going to get through to them.
Most of the guys here have probably never even touched a gun in their lives, so naturally they're going to be sheep who follow sensationalist media.
I do give you props for trying, though.


Azilius wrote:Your posts reek of misinformation and fallacious arguments that serve no purpose other than to show how emotionally involved you are into something insignificant and irrelevant to gun laws themselves..

penfold1992 wrote:Azilius wrote:Your posts reek of misinformation and fallacious arguments that serve no purpose other than to show how emotionally involved you are into something insignificant and irrelevant to gun laws themselves..
the death of 20 kids is insignificant and irrelevant. even though they were killed by some sort of device known as "a gun". if one of your children or parents or brother/sister had died then you would probably have exactly the same opinion right?
penfold1992 wrote:making a napalm is easy i think we should give all 5 year olds the necessary tools to launch a napalm strike because that would prevent mass killings in school.
penfold1992 wrote:adam lanza wouldnt have had a gun if his parents wernt allowed a gun either which is a check that should have been made since his brother was in police trouble as well.
penfold1992 wrote:more people are dieing from drowning then gun violence. I should poison 20 people with polonium and state "why are you sending me to prison? more people die of drowning then my polonium killings!" i think that will hold up in court.
penfold1992 wrote:Azilius wrote:Your posts reek of misinformation and fallacious arguments that serve no purpose other than to show how emotionally involved you are into something insignificant and irrelevant to gun laws themselves..
the death of 20 kids is insignificant and irrelevant. even though they were killed by some sort of device known as "a gun". if one of your children or parents or brother/sister had died then you would probably have exactly the same opinion right?
making a napalm is easy i think we should give all 5 year olds the necessary tools to launch a napalm strike because that would prevent mass killings in school.
adam lanza wouldnt have had a gun if his parents wernt allowed a gun either which is a check that should have been made since his brother was in police trouble as well.
more people are dieing from drowning then gun violence. I should poison 20 people with polonium and state "why are you sending me to prison? more people die of drowning then my polonium killings!" i think that will hold up in court.
