Another major school shooting today ... Newtown, Conn

Said another way
"You **** with my rights and Ill really **** with yours"

Not a very adult thesis there O.

Lets just agree to disagree.
You call gun control advocates "Haters of the constitution"
I call you rabis second amendment tyoes
"KID HATERS"

We are at page 305...and I nominate that comment as the funniest line so far in this thread.

You're alright in my book, Oralloy...no matter what these others think of you.

Buy a shotgun... buy a shotgun ~ Joe Biden

If you want to argue that second hand smoke "causes" SIDS then we should be able to show that gun ownership causes homicide.

Majority of homicides are with a gun.
You claim majority of SIDS cases are because of second hand smoke

Millions of parents smoke and their children don't die from SIDS but some do.
Millions of gun owners don't commit murders but some do.

If SIDS is caused by second hand smoke then gun ownership causes homcides. You can't argue one without the other also being true.

I am all for restricting smoking so I don't see any hypocrisy on my part.
The CDC is against smoking and gun ownership so I don't see any hypocrisy there either.

The problem here, Waterdude, is that Biden is right--the best weapon for home defense is a shotgun--bar none. A shotgun loaded with birdshot is devestating across the room, but is largely harmless on the other side of a wall. Whereas a 223 from an AR-15 will penetrate a wall and eject spall that can be deadly.

Firing a rifle, or a handgun inside a room creates hazards to those outside of that room, particularly when the user isn't well practiced with the weapon.

Rap

You either or logic is pitiful as my point had been that there is one hell of a lot of things that cause deaths in or out of the home and there is every reason to think for example that second hand smoking cause many many many more deaths then guns in the home.

Yet we have people going after an object that is way down in the list of cause of deaths and not worrying a bit about others reasons for deaths including deaths of infants.

That raised the great likelihood that the drive to disarmed the american people had other reasons then safety or the death rate in the US.

Such as taking away one of the safe guards to the american people freedoms from the government.

You might have every reason to argue that but there is no factual basis to argue that second hand smoke kills more children than guns.

Firing any weapon inside a room creates all sorts of hazards,;deafening sound, blinding flash, ricochet, over-penetration etc... none of that will change.

Sure, a pump action or semi auto shotgun in the hands of an experienced user and loaded with HD ammunition is a good choice for HD, but the same can be said for an AR that is loaded with ammunition designed for HD and the AR has far less recoil than the shotgun.

The problem here, rap, is that firing warning shots as the VP has suggested is illegal and firing two shots from a double barreled shotgun leaves you with zero rounds. The double barreled shotgun is a piss poor choice for HD, but it's better than no gun at all.

Loading your HD shotgun with bird shot or rock salt is just stupid, it's irresponsible.

I have my HD shotgun shells loaded with crappie hooks.

Rap

Try some of these





I prefer 00, 000 and slugs

My 12 guage double barrel shotgun I would think would likely cause anyone on the wrong end to rethink his desire to harm me.

An if there is anything let after two rounds are fired it make a great big heavy club.

PS I did not purchase this shotgun but inherent it from my great uncle.

I disagree with Biden on many things, and that includes his first choice of weapons. Secondary yes, but not first. Someone knocks on your door late at night, maybe the door to your hotel room. Do you great them with an aimed shotgun? How about one held at your side? If you need it, it's probably too late to get it into action. Large bore handgun starts looking pretty good.

Okay, you can make up your own situation. Isolated house in the country, biker gang invading and clearly intending bodily harm? Shotgun becomes first choice, especially with enough magazine capacity. Which is more likely?

It always for the benefits of the kids be it internet or other censorship or anti gun laws however strangely kids safety/welfare that does not involved taking away freedoms is never a large concern of such people as Farmerman.

After you used the excused of the children to take away the first and second amendments rights what freedoms will be next?

I have been following this debate, and its real difficult to take it serious.
On one side, we have people saying that EVERY gun owner is responsible for the actions of the criminal element (which is pure BS), or that a private citizen doesnt need to own a gun because thats what the police are for, to the claim that reducing gun ownerhip will seriously reduce mass murder.

Lets examine some of these claims...
John Wayne Gacy...33 victims
Richard Ramirez...14 known victims
Gary Ridgeway...48 known victims
Ted Bundy...30 known victims

So we have 4 killers and 125 known victims, and not a single one of them used a gun committing their murders
The argument that reducing gun ownership will prevent mass murders id a silly one.
People will find other ways to kill if they want to,

The claim that private citizens dont need to own a gun for self defense because we have the police is ridiculous on its face.
Thats like saying you dont need a fire extinguisher in your home because thats what the fire department is for, and thats a silly argument also.
There have been several court cases where the courts have ruled that the police do NOT have a duty to protect you, their job is to protect society as a whole, not the individual citizen.

Then we have the other side, the ones saying that Obama wants to take all our guns, that we dont need some reform of current gun laws, that its going to cause a civil war, etc.

All I can say to those people is "get a grip on reality"!!
Congress nor the president can seize every gun without changing the constitution or repealing the second mendment, and that would take a new amendment that would have to be ratified by the states.
Thats not gonna happen.

Also, as a gun owner, I have no problem with reforming gun laws, requiring every gun purchaser to pass a background check, limiting a magazine to 5 rounds, and other simple reforms.

I guess what I am saying is that its impossible to have a serious conversation about this subject as long as the extremists on both sides are dominating the discussion.

That is not the position of the NRA though, they don't want any changes at all. It sounds like you support the relatively modest measure being proposed, which will probably result in you being labelled a freedom hater by the likes of Oralboy.

Or Billy

I would agree with this statement if extremist on one side didn't include the president, his entire administration plus most of the entertainment and news industry.

That is a good call in my opinion Izzy. Do you think we should consider bill to be an utopian progressive being he is stating things that go against the NRA?

I think that Bill has either gone limp or has joined the other empathics among his community.

Simply ridiculous!

Why not simple reforms like enforcing the many laws that are currently on the books?

Do you mean like laws that state that I can not have my own personal nuclear arsenal or what?