What's new
By:

Australia offers to help USA with gun law reform.

Advice is usually nice. But I can tell you right now that full gun control like Australia has is dead on arrival. Just wont happen in the US anytime soon. Maybe ever.
 
There was a huge upswing in the U.S. favoring a wide-open interpretation of the 2nd Amendment just after both Australia and the UK enacted much stricter gun controls than they had before. The NRA was all over the TV with fear-mongering info-mercials and they pointed directly at the AU and UK and basically said "Don't let what happened there happen here!" and it worked.

The pro-gun side is not persuaded by what happened in the AU, they are afraid of it. It is exactly an example of what they hope to prevent.
 
Bulletproof said:
The pro-gun side is not persuaded by what happened in the AU, they are afraid of it. It is exactly an example of what they hope to prevent.
Click to expand...

So they are afraid and want to prevent lowering gun related deaths, accidents and mass shootings? Who are these sick people???
 
[video]https://www.facebook.com/AustralianDemocraticSocialists/videos/1416864731762991/
 
I'd love to think it could work but we've never had a gun culture like you guys do. I remember my first family holiday to the US when I was a kid and walking into K Mart and seeing racks of guns in the sporting goods section, it came as a bit of a culture shock.
 
MVP said:
So they are afraid and want to prevent lowering gun related deaths, accidents and mass shootings? Who are these sick people???
Click to expand...

Me. I appreciate the ability to defend and protect my family. I realize there are consequences that come at a cost and I'm comfortable with that cost. Monster franklin reporting for duty.
 
franklin said:
Me. I appreciate the ability to defend and protect my family.
Click to expand...

Do you need AK-47 to do that or single handgun is not enough? And even so how having AK-47 would have saved your family if they had gone to Vegas concert?
 
franklin said:
Me. I appreciate the ability to defend and protect my family. I realize there are consequences that come at a cost and I'm comfortable with that cost. Monster franklin reporting for duty.
Click to expand...

If you have guns in your home aren't your family members at significantly higher risk of dying from firearm related causes? So you know wouldn't you be doing a better job of protecting your family by not have a gun in your house?
 
This argument about needing a gun to protect family is such a ********. 99.9% of these people who say that and have guns at home will never use it for that purpose.
 
MVP said:
This argument about needing a gun to protect family is such a ********. 99.9% of these people who say that and have guns at home will never use it for that purpose.
Click to expand...
Agreed. The same people who say they have guns for that reason should make their kids wear helmets at all times to prevent the chance of a head injury falling down the stairs. Hell, chances are probably greater of the helmet actually protecting your family than the gun.
 
Rubashov said:
If you have guns in your home aren't your family members at significantly higher risk of dying from firearm related causes? So you know wouldn't you be doing a better job of protecting your family by not have a gun in your house?
Click to expand...

Yes. I already said I am comfortable with the risk to reward trade off. The chances of an incident are so small that I don't bother myself with this politically charged busy body worrisome attitude. In fact, I think people who get worked up over infinitesimal chance events have a psychological problem. It's no different than the sheltering helicopter parents who are creating harmful growth environments for their children and society by being overly worried about kids doing what the sole purpose of life is - to grow up and get to a point where you can fend for yourself.
 
MVP said:
Do you need AK-47 to do that or single handgun is not enough? And even so how having AK-47 would have saved your family if they had gone to Vegas concert?
Click to expand...

I'm convinced these military style weapons will be banned within my lifetime, should I live long enough. I've been waiting for years for the right time to invest $10,000 into AR-15's and ammo for this reason.

I should have purchased those $99 bump fire stocks that are now selling for $299 (not really, I couldn't sell one of those without it bearing on the conscience I don't have).
 
MVP said:
This argument about needing a gun to protect family is such a ********. 99.9% of these people who say that and have guns at home will never use it for that purpose.
Click to expand...

99.99% of people who have a gun will never use it to attempt to kill somebody.
 
MVP said:
Do you need AK-47 to do that or single handgun is not enough? And even so how having AK-47 would have saved your family if they had gone to Vegas concert?
Click to expand...

Why are we jumping straight to an AK here?

Can we at least try to be educated on guns here?
 
At least one American became smarter.

"I've been a proponent of the 2nd Amendment my entire life. Until the events of last night. I cannot express how wrong I was," he tweeted on Monday. "We actually have members of our crew with CHL licenses," or concealed handgun licenses, "and legal firearms on the bus. They were useless."

Keeter said his fellow band members didn't dare take out their weapons in self-defense as bullets rained down on the crowd from the 32nd floor of a hotel across the street "for fear police might think we were part of the massacre and shoot us."


http://www.businessinsider.com/las-vegas-shooting-caleb-keeter-gun-control-2017-10
 
MVP said:
So why even have a gun? Or by defending your family you will be shooting in the air to scare the attacker?
Click to expand...

I think you missed the point. I'll help you.

You said it's silly for people to have a gun bc 99.9% of them will never have to use it for self defense.

I responded with the point that 99.9% of people will never kill somebody with a gun.

So your logic is that if the vast majority won't use it, why have it. You could also take that logic to say, if the vast majority won't use it to kill, then why get rid of it.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page
Back
Top