Guns: how much longer will it take ....

@Blickers,

Blickers wrote:

Allowing military assault style rifles to be sold in semiauto mode from the factory does contribute to mass killings.

That is incorrect. Having a pistol grip on a gun does not contribute to mass shootings in any way.

Blickers wrote:

These things clearly are not designed to shoot deer.

That is incorrect. A deer rifle with a pistol grip is very much designed to shoot deer.

Blickers wrote:

They are designed for military use.

That is incorrect. Having a pistol grip on a gun does not mean that it was designed for military use.

Blickers wrote:

Allowing rifles to be marketed with a feature which is ONLY useful when fired in automatic mode is an inducement to convert the semiauto assault rifle to automatic mode. And automatic mode is not used in hunting.

Pistol grips are just as useful in semi-auto as they are in full auto.

Blickers wrote:

The only purpose of pistol grips to better control the weapon when it is in automatic mode. They have no other purpose.

That is incorrect. The sole purpose of a pistol grip is to provide a place to hold on to a gun that has retractable/detachable stocks.

Blickers wrote:

Automatic mode is a military mode, not a hunting mode at all. Although I'm sure you will find some YouTube video where a guy uses a fully automatic rifle to kill game and then swear on camera that automatic mode is the best mode for hunting there is.

Full auto weapons are already heavily restricted.

0 Replies

@Blickers,

Blickers wrote:

You read it here first, folks. Baldimo thinks the problem with America is that fully automatic machine guns are too tightly restricted. Baldimo feels availability needs to be increased.

He is right to oppose unreasonable gun laws.

0 Replies

@vikorr,

vikorr wrote:

We get media coverage of a lot of your massacres. They aren't inspiring masacres here.

Your culture isn't saturated with a critical mass of shootings and media coverage.

vikorr wrote:

Set in stone is not really the correct term, because they've ammended it.... How many times?

Not very many times.

No part of the Bill of Rights has ever been removed.

There has only been one amendment that restricted a freedom. It was also the only amendment to be subsequently repealed.

No amendment can be passed if it has serious opposition. The NRA has enough muscle to prevent even a basic statute from being passed. Obama learned that the hard way in 2013 when he wrecked his second term fighting with the NRA. The NRA will have no trouble blocking a constitutional amendment.

1 Reply

@Blickers,

Quote:

Florida had more kids killed and happened months earlier. That's why it received more coverage.

I'm going to continue to call bullshit on this and your stance. It only received more coverage because of the gun used and the blatant anti-gun stance of the media. Your propaganda alone is enough to prove this, the only cases of gun deaths you show any interest in are the ones committed by semi-auto rifles.

1 Reply

@Blickers,

Quote:

You read it here first, folks. Baldimo thinks the problem with America is that fully automatic machine guns are too tightly restricted. Baldimo feels availability needs to be increased.

Typical leftist reaction. You can't even come to terms with being corrected for your misuse of the term ban vs regulated. Instead you try to twist what I said. When you are losing the debate, your desperation become clear.

The moral of the story is, "machine guns" are not banned.

1 Reply

@Baldimo,

Baldimo wrote:

The moral of the story is, "machine guns" are not banned.

I've always wondered about this. (I've been the "second maschin gunner" in our group during the basic [naval] training, mainly just carrying the the tripod and the reserve quick-change barrel. And I had to shoot with it over a period to get and maintain my badge for weapons proficiency.)

(I've shot with it, too, because as the commanding officer I wanted to know the use of it.)

1 Reply

@Walter Hinteler,

Walter Hinteler wrote:

I've always wondered about this.

Federal law does not prevent civilians from owning machine guns, but it imposes difficult and expensive regulations on such ownership.

There are serious Tenth Amendment problems with these federal regulations. They will be struck down if the courts ever decide to fully enforce the Constitution.

Some states ban all civilian-owned machine guns within their state. It is probable that these state-level restrictions are constitutionally legitimate.

0 Replies

@Baldimo,

Baldimo wrote:

neptuneblue wrote:
COLUMBUS, Gov. John Kasich signed an executive order late Monday afternoon requiring Ohio law enforcement to upload certain protection orders and warrants into a database that could prevent people from illegally buying firearms.
This is actual reasonable change to curb gun crimes. If a major part of the problem is crimes being committed by people who are not allowed to have guns legally, then this will indeed help. What type of abuse can resort from this sort of change?

It depends on whether these protection orders involve sufficient due process. Protection orders where there is evidence of actual abuse are one thing. Protection orders because of unsubstantiated accusations from a crazy ex-girlfriend are another.

0 Replies

@Baldimo,

Quote Baldimo:

Quote:

I'm going to continue to call bullshit on this and your stance. It only received more coverage because of the gun used and the blatant anti-gun stance of the media.

Yeah, it's a real shock that a school shooting incident that happened months before where 17 people were killed gets more publicity than a shooting incident that occurred later and 10 people get killed. And you are announcing you are calling bs on people? Rolling Eyes

Only a true gun nut would try to pretend that the number of people killed in a mass shooting is irrelevant to how much coverage it gets or how much the public pays attention. And when it gets to the point that you are acting like a PR firm for a mass shooting that did not involve an assault style weapon to support your agenda of pushing assault-style weapon legalization, your head has gotten completely turned around.

Baldimo: Great news Boss. 10 kids just got shot and killed in school.

Boss: Why is that great news?

Baldimo: Because the gun he used to kill them with wasn't an AR-15. Isn't that wonderful?

0 Replies

@oralloy,

vikorr wrote:

We get media coverage of a lot of your massacres. They aren't inspiring masacres here.

oralloy wrote:

Your culture isn't saturated with a critical mass of shootings and media coverage.

So media coverage isn't an issue when there isn't a critical mass of shooting, only when there is a critical mass of shootings.

Doesn't that suggest that one must look at the contributing factors to the U.S. reaching a state where there is 'a critical mass of shootings'?

1 Reply

@vikorr,

The media coverage is part of the critical mass. The more coverage a massacre gets, the more likely that it will inspire subsequent massacres.

Here is an article about the phenomenon that I am referring to:
http://thewellesleynews.com/2017/10/19/media-contagion-inspires-mass-shootings-in-the-united-states/

1 Reply

@oralloy,

Media coverage can certainly contribute to copycat killings. That's well known. And the article made some very sensible suggestions for helping prevent media coverage from contributing to copycat killings. The same effect is known when celebrities kill themselves, and is one of the reasons news stopped reporting the exact nature of suicides by celebrities.

Media coverage though, cannot be a critical mass of shootings. That is absolutely necessary before there can be both a critical mass of shootings and media coverage.

Nor does media coverage, by itself = another mass shootings. You need:
- nutter
- who radicalises or flips out
- access to guns
- guns
- inspirations (of which media may be just one aspect)

I'm all for media reporting shootings in a harm minimisation way - even while you can't blame the media for the U.S. reaching a critical mass of mass shootings. It may play a contributing role, but that's it.

1 Reply

@vikorr,

vikorr wrote:

Media coverage can certainly contribute to copycat killings. That's well known. And the article made some very sensible suggestions for helping prevent media coverage from contributing to copycat killings. The same effect is known when celebrities kill themselves, and is one of the reasons news stopped reporting the exact nature of suicides by celebrities.

Media coverage though, cannot be a critical mass of shootings. That is absolutely necessary before there can be both a critical mass of shootings and media coverage.

Our problem with school massacres began with a single massacre (Columbine) and the widespread media coverage of that massacre.

vikorr wrote:

Nor does media coverage, by itself = another mass shootings. You need:
- nutter
- who radicalises or flips out
- access to guns
- guns
- inspirations (of which media may be just one aspect)

Guns aren't a factor. Mass killers would just use bombs if they didn't have guns.

vikorr wrote:

I'm all for media reporting shootings in a harm minimisation way - even while you can't blame the media for the U.S. reaching a critical mass of mass shootings. It may play a contributing role, but that's it.

Since we can't wave a magic wand and make all the future mass killers disappear, the only thing we can do is deny them the inspiration that they get from media coverage of past massacres.

The only alternative is doing nothing at all.

2 Replies

@oralloy,

This article gives a very good accounting of what it taking place, it fits what we have seen over the last 20 years since Columbine. Mass shootings are a slow motion riot.
https://www.nationalreview.com/corner/why-do-mass-shootings-happen-best-explanation/

0 Replies

Nothing frightens the rogue governments of Western Europe anywhere near as badly as the idea that the sheeple which live in those countries may eventually wake up to the reality that they need to arm themselves. In fact, a Dutch friend recently told me about a situation in which some government weenie who was in his house for some kind of an inspection, saw two ancient cavalry sabers on a plaque on the wall above the fireplace mantle, some kind of a family heirloom, and freaked; my friend easily could've gone to prison over that.

When Europeans finally do start looking around for places to buy modern weaponry, I would suggest they turn their eyes towards Russia. You can get an idea of what you would expect to pay for a basic modern Russian military rifle by pasting the following into a Google search:

"Сколько стоит АК74 в России?"

As of today you'd be looking at $220 - $450, depending on how fancy a rifle you were looking for. Typical:

https://tiu.ru/Avtomat-kalashnikova.html

1 Reply

Note that the AK74 in that mean a 1974 model rifle and is not a mis-type.

0 Replies

@gungasnake,

gungasnake wrote:

When Europeans finally do start looking around for places to buy modern weaponry, I would suggest they turn their eyes towards Russia.

Совет Европы

1 Reply

@oralloy,

Quote:

Our problem with school massacres began with a single massacre (Columbine) and the widespread media coverage of that massacre

Yep. As I said, it can play a part. For school based mass shootings, I'd say just about all of them are a form of copycat killing.

Quote:

Guns aren't a factor. Mass killers would just use bombs if they didn't have guns.

There are so many things wrong with this, that I wonder how you can possibly say this with a straight face.

2 Replies

@vikorr,

Plenty of school shootings prior to Columbine. Gun nuts like shooting up schools, it's got nothing to do with publicity and everything to do with guns. That's why they keep lying over and over again.

Quote:

On January 17, 1989, a drifter named Patrick Edward Purdy fired an AK-47 into a playground during recess at the Cleveland School in Stockton, California, shooting off nearly 106 rounds in four minutes. He murdered five children and injured 29 others and a teacher before turning the gun on himself. The murder victims and most of the wounded were all children of Southeast Asian war refugees.

On July 12, 1976, 37-year-old Edward Charles Allaway, a custodian at California State University, Fullerton, stormed into the school's library and gunned down seven people and injured two others during a five-minute shooting rampage. When he ran out of bullets, he drove to his wife's work, where he called police and turned himself in.

Lots more at link.

https://www.ranker.com/list/scary-school-shootings/natalie-hazen

2 Replies

@izzythepush,

That's a rather informative article. The way columbine was portrayed, it was like the first mass shooting at a school...but perhaps it was portrayed that way because of the number of victims, and type of guns used.

2 Replies

Guns: how much longer will it take ....

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know