What's new

Gun Control

Do you have to reload a speed loader? I genuinely have no idea how they work.

For example, let's say there was a ban on civilian purchase of weapons with magazines (so no current guns get taken away). Instead, civilians would have to buy revolvers, rifles that get loaded one bullet at time, etc.

1) Do you think that would significantly impact the ability of a householder to defend themselves against an intruder?
2) Do you think that would significantly impact the ability of a mass shooter to kill a large number of people?

Here's a speed loader
Speedloader.jpg


You push this into the cylinder of a revolver and twist the knob on the back to release the bullets. You can get a holster that can hold several of these. The police often use them.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BOgu4yJAWoI

1) No, I think few situations require several rounds be fired. I'd say it's much more of a "It's better to have it and not need it than to need it and not have it" type situation.

2) No detachable magazines at all? Yeah, it might limit the fewer than 100 people a year who are killed in mass shooting to fewer than 99 per year. So would a universal 25mph speed limit with vehicles equipped with devices that limit their speed. But we're not seriously concerned about life if it means our commute would be longer.
 
1. That's still half the bullets of five magazines with 30 guns each. However, I agree that the quicker a magazine can be changed, the less effective this will be.

2. Agreed.

You're right it is. But take the shooting that just happened. 26 people died. You have five 15 round clips? Well that is 75 bullets. Still more than enough and he could still put more than 1 bullet in a victim.

My point being is that I do not think it will be effective. Keep in mind all the large ammo clips already out there. Hell I just saw a russian shotgun for sell with a 30 round drum. The thousands and thousands of high ammo clips already out there will still be out there. If they pass a law outlawing those will everyone turn them in? No.

Also keep in mind that shooters have already clearly shown that they have no regard for the law and what is or is not legal.

Connecting mental health records to background checks and making firearms training available are much better ways to combat gun violence in my opinion.
 
I think that is an inescapable aspect of life, universal in biology.

I think this view is the delusion. The reality is the innate human imperative to act in one's own interest. Not to submit to power, but to resist power when it comes to destroy your own life and well-being.

Patrick Henry once had an audience for this concept, when he said "Give me liberty, or give me death".
 
Last edited:
I find it interesting that some people say that limiting magazine capacity wouldn't make the mass murderers any less effective because it is so easy to just bring more clips and change them quickly.

But then those same people will say that limiting the magazine capacity would make it more difficult for a "good guy" to defend himself.

To me, if limiting magazine capacity doesn't have any effect on anything then why should anyone care if a law like that ends up happening?
 
I find it interesting that some people say that limiting magazine capacity wouldn't make the mass murderers any less effective because it is so easy to just bring more clips and change them quickly.

But then those same people will say that limiting the magazine capacity would make it more difficult for a "good guy" to defend himself.

To me, if limiting magazine capacity doesn't have any effect on anything then why should anyone care if a law like that ends up happening?

Depends how far the limit it. If it is to a 1 round clip like the state senator crom CT wants then yeah that affects things.
 
Depends how far the limit it. If it is to a 1 round clip like the state senator crom CT wants then yeah that affects things.

Have you ever listened to Janalee Tobias? Sometimes she's on KTKK.

She's got a page from a gun control advocacy site that says. . . . incredibly. . . . "A rape only lasts thirty seconds. . . . but a murder lasts forever". She called them on it, and they hastily retracted the ad/page. Yah we have some people in this thread who seem to think another regulation, somehow, will prevent a determined killer willing to end his own life along with some huge number of others. . . .the sort of perp who obsesses about his ignominity and will do anything for a few minutes of power, even spend a year preparing for his attack.

Janalee says the Second Amendment is the equal rights amendment. She says it's nobody's business what kind of equipment you use to keep your "equal rights". Some ladies like little pink revolvers the size of a perfume bottle, others have differing tastes. She says if she wants a big ugly gun with a huge ammo clip strapped on her shoulder any time she anticipates some trouble, which I presume includes say a stroll down some ghetto street in the sunset. . . .

There's plenty of laws against shooting people, enough to keep anyone who does in jail for the rest of their lives. Obviously, some shooters know this, and that is why when they start shooting, they simply intend to shoot themselves before anyone can take them down and put them through the criminal courts and jails. . . .

Anyone who carries a gun also knows this, and they know the only use of their weapon is self-defense after someone initiates an attack on them.


you've brought the stats which show that where it's legal to carry guns, violent crime of all kinds markedly declines. England and Australia are examples of where such crimes, including home invasion robberies and associated atrocities, have skyrocketed since the law-abiding populace was disarmed.
 
Have you ever listened to Janalee Tobias? Sometimes she's on KTKK.

She's got a page from a gun control advocacy site that says. . . . incredibly. . . . "A rape only lasts thirty seconds. . . . but a murder lasts forever". She called them on it, and they hastily retracted the ad/page. Yah we have some people in this thread who seem to think another regulation, somehow, will prevent a determined killer willing to end his own life along with some huge number of others. . . .the sort of perp who obsesses about his ignominity and will do anything for a few minutes of power, even spend a year preparing for his attack.

Janalee says the Second Amendment is the equal rights amendment. She says it's nobody's business what kind of equipment you use to keep your "equal rights". Some ladies like little pink revolvers the size of a perfume bottle, others have differing tastes. She says if she wants a big ugly gun with a huge ammo clip strapped on her shoulder any time she anticipates some trouble, which I presume includes say a stroll down some ghetto street in the sunset. . . .

There's plenty of laws against shooting people, enough to keep anyone who does in jail for the rest of their lives. Obviously, some shooters know this, and that is why when they start shooting, they simply intend to shoot themselves before anyone can take them down and put them through the criminal courts and jails. . . .

Anyone who carries a gun also knows this, and they know the only use of their weapon is self-defense after someone initiates an attack on them.


you've brought the stats which show that where it's legal to carry guns, violent crime of all kinds markedly declines. England and Australia are examples of where such crimes, including home invasion robberies and associated atrocities, have skyrocketed since the law-abiding populace was disarmed.

Some people just want to ignore those inconvenient truths though.
 
Ugh, no one wants to "disarm the law-abiding public" FFS. Just make it so "the law-abiding public" can't buy the more intense and capable of guns. I don't give a **** if you have a pistol in your shoebox, but I do care when a guy can buy endless rounds of ammo online for his high capacity killing machine. So don't get it twisted.
 
Beantown said:
If anyone breaks into my home I am assuming they have a gun.

Just like that man in NE who shot his own son whom he thought was an intruder. Be careful man, life's not a video game
 
Ugh, no one wants to "disarm the law-abiding public" FFS. Just make it so "the law-abiding public" can't buy the more intense and capable of guns. I don't give a **** if you have a pistol in your shoebox, but I do care when a guy can buy endless rounds of ammo online for his high capacity killing machine. So don't get it twisted.

Define high capacity killing machine. Do you mean a rifle that fires as fast as a pistol?
 
Ugh, no one wants to "disarm the law-abiding public" FFS. Just make it so "the law-abiding public" can't buy the more intense and capable of guns. I don't give a **** if you have a pistol in your shoebox, but I do care when a guy can buy endless rounds of ammo online for his high capacity killing machine. So don't get it twisted.

Why is it any of your business what I buy?

Sure, you probably have a vested interest in how I use my guns, but what guns I actually own is none of your business. Why I decide to buy guns is none of your business. What someone says my gun was designed to do is none of your business.

It's already against the law to kill innocent people. No need for laws that target legal, responsible, tax paying citizens.

Can someone please define "police state" for me please? I keep hearing how we might someday be on the road to becoming a police state, but we might actually already be one.

And isn't it weird how as we strip our citizens of their guns, we're arming citizens in Syria/Libya/Egypt/etc with much more powerful weaponry? Wake up people.

I remember watching a show about the civil war on the history channel a year or 2 ago. As the northern troops were matching through the southern states freeing slaves, one was asked if they would join the war if they were all given guns. His response was that if they all had guns, there never would have been a war.
 
My point being is that I do not think it will be effective. Keep in mind all the large ammo clips already out there. Hell I just saw a russian shotgun for sell with a 30 round drum. The thousands and thousands of high ammo clips already out there will still be out there. If they pass a law outlawing those will everyone turn them in? No.
Connecting mental health records to background checks and making firearms training available are much better ways to combat gun violence in my opinion.

I'm OK with passing laws that have a long-term effect, if there is no viable way to accomplish a goal in the short term.
Which of the recent shootings (say in the past two years) do you see having been prevented by this mental health database?
 
Ugh, no one wants to "disarm the law-abiding public" FFS. Just make it so "the law-abiding public" can't buy the more intense and capable of guns. I don't give a **** if you have a pistol in your shoebox, but I do care when a guy can buy endless rounds of ammo online for his high capacity killing machine. So don't get it twisted.

Until in 10 years that pistol is a 'baby-killing machine' inspired by the devil.
 
Just like that man in NE who shot his own son whom he thought was an intruder. Be careful man, life's not a video game

I see this as a question of training. Proper use of a tactical light would make this very unlikely. Note that tactical style 'assault' rifles with a rail that can mount light are much safer in dark situations. A rifle is easier to aim than a pistol and with a light you can see exactly what you are shooting at.
 
Criminals don't care about the gun laws, which is why they are criminals. If law abiding Americans can't own guns, the only people who did have them would be the bad guys. They outlawed homicide, assault, burglary etc. long ago and guess what? If people want to kill somebody, they'll do it however they can: gun, knife, poison, beating, whatever. If somebody with bad intentions wants to score a gun, there are 10 more people willing to sell it to them. I'm a strong supporter of 2nd amendment rights. An un-armed people invites tyranny because the government no longer fears the public.

Government officials don't worry about it because they have armed guards to protect them. They will always have access to that. Nobody else is assigned to protect my kids, so the responsibility is mine & I'll take it. People worry about criminals with guns going after them or their kids, so they scream for more gun control. But what about when those same kind of people come into your house (having scored weapons illegally) or go into public places and start shooting? I don't know about you guys, but I'd rather have the ability to defend the innocent with the same means the criminals will always get access to, like it or not.

People wonder how others can store guns in a house where they are raising kids. With secure locks for one thing, and also with education. I would rather have them than not have them. That's my opinion and everyone is entitled to theirs. That's what makes America great.
 
Ugh, no one wants to "disarm the law-abiding public" FFS. Just make it so "the law-abiding public" can't buy the more intense and capable of guns. I don't give a **** if you have a pistol in your shoebox, but I do care when a guy can buy endless rounds of ammo online for his high capacity killing machine. So don't get it twisted.

https://www.foxnews.com/politics/20...l-package-in-nation-passed-by-new-york-state/

Read the 5th paragraph. IT is very much talked about and desired by some people.
 
Back
Top