Thoughts and Prayers

[One Brow]

I don't believe it would accomplish very much at all as far as criminal gun acts are concerned. By far most gun murders are committed with handguns and only a few shots are fired. That's the biggest gun issue there is and almost none of the "sensible regulations" address it at all.

Is it addressable, in your opinion?

I believe that individuals have a right to defend themselves. There are situations where magazine capacity could be advantageous. If you look at the riots in LA after the Rodney King verdict, I believe it would be advantageous in holding off a mob.

You want to hold off a mob by spaying with 30ish bullets as opposed to 10ish? The mob is still charging you after you discharge 7 bullets, but stops after 27?

The 2nd amendment is fundamentally about the people's right to resist the government. As laughable as many find that idea, I believe an armed populace is a deterrent to an abusive government. Limiting magazine size limits that deterrent.

IF we do have a military coup, I don't think it will be citizens with rifles defending us. If anything, more of them would join the coup than fight it.

At any rate, the government we currently have is already highly abusive. They just don't use martial law to accomplish it.

 

[Gameface]

Is it addressable, in your opinion?



You want to hold off a mob by spaying with 30ish bullets as opposed to 10ish? The mob is still charging you after you discharge 7 bullets, but stops after 27?



IF we do have a military coup, I don't think it will be citizens with rifles defending us. If anything, more of them would join the coup than fight it.

At any rate, the government we currently have is already highly abusive. They just don't use martial law to accomplish it.

Welcome back!

 

[One Brow]

Welcome back!

Thank you. I've missed it here.

 

[Gameface]

To answer some of your questions...

I find the gun situation depressing. I'm not as much a gun rights advocate as I was, and that is largely because I don't like the character of current gun rights advocacy. The NRA wants the wild-wild west where everyone gets a gun and we shoot first, shoot second and we don't ever get around to asking any questions or wondering why were shooting in the first place.

Is the handgun crime and murder problem addressable? I don't really know. But if we're gonna talk about gun control shouldn't we attempt to address the far and away biggest gun problem instead of the smallest?

Large magazines provide a tactical advantage. Tactical advantages are tactically advantageous. You want to argue otherwise? And if you don't acknowledge the tactical advantage then what's the argument for regulating something that doesn't matter, has no advantage?

There will never be a military coup in the U.S.. As a former service member I will say there is nothing in the culture of the U.S. military that could ever bring our military members to act against the people in a unified way. Now we can discuss the several hundred different possible scenarios and which ones an armed populace would play a factor in (greater than zero) but that would get pretty time consuming.

 

[Gameface]

Thank you. I've missed it here.

I am the poster formerly known as Gameface, btw...

 

[Joe Bagadonuts]

To answer some of your questions...

I find the gun situation depressing. I'm not as much a gun rights advocate as I was, and that is largely because I don't like the character of current gun rights advocacy. The NRA wants the wild-wild west where everyone gets a gun and we shoot first, shoot second and we don't ever get around to asking any questions or wondering why were shooting in the first place.

Is the handgun crime and murder problem addressable? I don't really know. But if we're gonna talk about gun control shouldn't we attempt to address the far and away biggest gun problem instead of the smallest?

Large magazines provide a tactical advantage. Tactical advantages are tactically advantageous. You want to argue otherwise? And if you don't acknowledge the tactical advantage then what's the argument for regulating something that doesn't matter, has no advantage?

There will never be a military coup in the U.S.. As a former service member I will say there is nothing in the culture of the U.S. military that could ever bring our military members to act against the people in a unified way. Now we can discuss the several hundred different possible scenarios and which ones an armed populace would play a factor in (greater than zero) but that would get pretty time consuming.

I find the situation depressing as well. I think most people do. I don't understand where you're coming from when you say that the NRA wants people to shoot and not ask questions. That seems like the opposite of what they say to me. Everything I have seen from them is about education, restraint, and guns as a deterrent. And, of course, they make a huge deal of the right to bear arms. I have never seen any information from them that suggests people ought to go out and shoot at other people and I am very interested in seeing the info that backs up your claim.

 

[Keefe]

I’m confused.

GF, you have a child?

 

[Rubashov]

As a foreigner, American gun crime is a factor when considering coming to your country on holiday. No other first world country requires such consideration.

 

[Getting Traded]

thoughts and prayers. It had been a day or two since the last school was shot up. So we were due for another mass shooting. Brings the total to 18 now for this year.

Thoughts and Prayers, and congress will do nothing. Think we can get a good 3 days maybe before the next school or theater is shot up?

The sad thing is most Americans support sensible gun reforms. Sad that we are letting the NRA buy off the gop and bully the majority of us.

About that stat of 18 -- is that just for 2018? Yeah, it's not only sad, it's outrageous. We need to start a movement to get gun control. It's a lot more important than the MeToo thing. People are dying, not getting exposed to someone's stupid dick.

 

[Getting Traded]

Excellent article about the "assault weapon myth"

https://www.nytimes.com/2014/09/14/sunday-review/the-assault-weapon-myth.html

Yeah, but in these mass shootings, how many times was an assault or automatic weapon used? There's no reason for a non-military person to own such a weapon. In any case, the issue is control and getting the guns out of the hands of irresponsible, criminal, or mentally-ill people. And don't give me the guff that it won't stop it from happening. We have all kinds of laws against things are not good for society and there's no guarantee it won't happen. But we still have laws in place. We need bleeping gun control!

 

[Gameface]

I’m confused.

GF, you have a child?

Yeah. That's news to you? 16yo.

 

[Keefe]

Yeah. That's news to you? 16yo.

100%. I can’t remember you ever mentioning that here or when I visited, I feel like I asked, and you said no.

But my memory is really bad so who knows.

 

[Scat]

Yeah, but in these mass shootings, how many times was an assault or automatic weapon used?

Never. I don't recall an automatic ever being used and define "assault" weapon. Couldn't that vague description be used for any weapon?

 

[One Brow]

To answer some of your questions...

I find the gun situation depressing. I'm not as much a gun rights advocate as I was, and that is largely because I don't like the character of current gun rights advocacy. The NRA wants the wild-wild west where everyone gets a gun and we shoot first, shoot second and we don't ever get around to asking any questions or wondering why were shooting in the first place.

Is the handgun crime and murder problem addressable? I don't really know. But if we're gonna talk about gun control shouldn't we attempt to address the far and away biggest gun problem instead of the smallest?

Large magazines provide a tactical advantage. Tactical advantages are tactically advantageous. You want to argue otherwise? And if you don't acknowledge the tactical advantage then what's the argument for regulating something that doesn't matter, has no advantage?

There will never be a military coup in the U.S.. As a former service member I will say there is nothing in the culture of the U.S. military that could ever bring our military members to act against the people in a unified way. Now we can discuss the several hundred different possible scenarios and which ones an armed populace would play a factor in (greater than zero) but that would get pretty time consuming.

I lurked for a little while, I knew when you mentioned poker.

I agree that not addressing handguns means not addressing the biggest part of the problem. I wish I was smart enough to know how.

I fully acknowledge the tactical advantage of the larger magazine compared to the smaller magazine. However, I question the degree that holds up compared to people not carrying guns at all. A > B, but B >>>>> C, so does A >>>>>> C really mean we need keep A on the table, when removing A can save many more lives than keeping it?

Yes, coup was a poor choice of words on my part. However, I still think that, should any President attempt to impose some sort fo martial law, the people owning the guns are more likely to support that effort than oppose it, so their guns wouldn't be needed anyhow.

 

[One Brow]

About that stat of 18 -- is that just for 2018? Yeah, it's not only sad, it's outrageous. We need to start a movement to get gun control. It's a lot more important than the MeToo thing. People are dying, not getting exposed to someone's stupid dick.

Is there some reason we can't do both, outside of your unwillingness?

 

[Deleted member 5000]

Maybe we should not be forcing kids such as him to attend school. Some responses will be we can't have uneducated kids, but that opens up a whole another can of worms. If one is motivated to learn they will especially in the internet age, to many formal school is a hindrance. Some schools are experimenting with the model of not forcing subjects on the pupils but let them gravitate to the subject that interests them.

 

[One Brow]

Maybe we should not be forcing kids such as him to attend school. Some responses will be we can't have uneducated kids, but that opens up a whole another can of worms. If one is motivated to learn they will especially in the internet age, to many formal school is a hindrance. Some schools are experimenting with the model of not forcing subjects on the pupils but let them gravitate to the subject that interests them.

Why do you think he didn't want to attend school?

 

[franklin]

Yeah. That's news to you? 16yo.

I just realized I've been posting here way too long. The first time I saw you mentioning him he was 10.

 

[Stoked]

I lurked for a little while, I knew when you mentioned poker.

I agree that not addressing handguns means not addressing the biggest part of the problem. I wish I was smart enough to know how.

I fully acknowledge the tactical advantage of the larger magazine compared to the smaller magazine. However, I question the degree that holds up compared to people not carrying guns at all. A > B, but B >>>>> C, so does A >>>>>> C really mean we need keep A on the table, when removing A can save many more lives than keeping it?

Yes, coup was a poor choice of words on my part. However, I still think that, should any President attempt to impose some sort fo martial law, the people owning the guns are more likely to support that effort than oppose it, so their guns wouldn't be needed anyhow.

I find this to a curious assumption. I think it would depend on the president, the current social climate and the reason. And even then I would expect some gun owners to resist. A healthy percentage, if not a majority, in fact.

 

[MVP]