NY Times wilfully ignorant

DogStarIn1066:

Also, I am an authority, as I served in the forces that defended you and our way of life. A "thank you for your service " might be nice.

I thank you for your service.

I'm sorry you didn't/don't fully understand what you fought for. Maybe someday?

originally posted by: DogStarIn1066

originally posted by: Edumakated

originally posted by: DogStarIn1066
a reply to: Edumakated
I was an Army officer. An AR-15 pretty much does the same thing in semi as an M-16. Oh, and we never used a 16 on full auto. So, pretty much the same thing.

Try and keep up.

Appealing to authority does not make a factual argument. Doing practically the same thing IS NOT the same thing.

Just come out and say you guys want to ban all semi-auto firearms which is the implication.

Ok, sure.

Ban them.

No need for them from my point of view.

I shot two deer this fall with a bolt action.

No second shot with either. Why do I need semi? I know how to shoot.

Also, I am an authority, as I served in the forces that defended you and our way of life. A "thank you for your service " might be nice.

Or are you now in favor of disrespecting military officers?

So it is disrespect to point out the flaws in your argument? Your service in the military, while admirable, has zip to do with you making an informed or logical argument.

Appealing to authority is what people do when the facts aren't on their side. A math professor telling me 2+2 = 5 does not make 2+2 = 5.

By the way, thank you for your service.

a reply to: MisterSpock

guess he fought to pass on LESS rights to his children

a reply to: Irishhaf

I'd say its the modability of the gun. The fact that you can add or remove parts like hand grips, pistol grips, tactical sights, tactical flashlights. Now that I've said this, someone is going to point out the M1 and how you can just modify it to be an M16 like I wouldn't know this fact, but I don't see too many people converting their M16's into old fashioned wood stock M1's. Its more the other way around.

Also, you don't really need all those tactical adaptions to go hunting. Sure they can't hurt to have them, but I see it more like taking a bazooka to go deer hunting. It's overkill. If you can't drop your target with a single shot from a bolt action rifle then you need some practice on your aim. Most hunters sit in a tree stand and wait for their prey to pass anyways. But on the other hand, those adaptations sure do make it easier to operate the gun in a chaotic situation such as a firefight.

That's just the way I see things. I really don't even want to totally ban assault rifles anyways. They look cool as # and are fun to shoot for target practice. I just want more comprehensive background checks on purchases, possibly a national database tracking serial numbers, and mandatory certification classes for gun training and storage for all buyers of guns that has to be maintained and updated. Is this going to stop all gun crime? Nope, but at least its a start instead of pretending like all these shootings are just the sacrifice that is necessary to have a gun culture.

The real question will one day come is, 'am I willing to die to keep my gun's?'
My guess is no, most will willingly give them up and history repeats as always.
Never would have imagined here is US though as being a possibility.

originally posted by: Chadwickus
Is there actually any pro second amendment people that aren’t paranoid that they’re gonna take your guns away?

Like, does it come when you get your licence?

“Here’s your gun sir, and your dose of paranoia too”[/quote/]

edit on 27-3-2018 by childoffather because: something is wrong with my coding when posting

Well first there are a handful that say they want all guns.

Second, Muh Russia is a political strategy straight out of the dnc playbook, with complicit media actors. I'm a liberal. But people like you are frankly being useful idiots for the DNC in joining in this hysteria.

Also, it's important to remember that the Russian hysteria is one huge conspiracy theory believed by many liberals right now, i.e. that there is some large scale collusion and traitorous behavior going on in the right. Hence, you believe in conspiracy theories too.

Thirdly, the CIA is a rogue agency with a ton of history to prove that. FBI is questionable too for similar reasons.

You mainstream liberals are making a big mistake in trying to rehabilitate the reputations of George W Bush and the CIA just to support your Trump hysteria.

a reply to: JoshuaCox

originally posted by: DogStarIn1066

originally posted by: Perfectenemy
a reply to: DogStarIn1066

Alright then the kids should start fighting against obesity and deaths caused by don't text and driving as well. That kills way more people in the US daily then any mass shooting event and the numbers are on the rise. Repeal the Second Amendment is trending so i guess they are after all your guns. I'm not an american but i support the right to bear arms. Repealing the Second Amendment creates a precedence and who really believes it just stops there.

Good points.

Kids are doing things about the questions you posed. One thing at a time.

I put a ballistic pad in my 15 year old sons back pack, and told him if the shooting starts to run.

This is horrible. My son goes to shcool with more armor on Then I wore into battle during the first gulf war. Are you not seeing that this is maddness?

Just telling him to run is not wise. Running can you killed, depending on the circumstances. In an active shooter situation, you try to get out if you can. If there's no clear path you shelter in place. Barricade doors and windows if you can, put as many walls and other barriers between you and the shooter as you can and get out of sight. Attack as a last resort.

What's madness is that it's perfectly okay to have strong security measures in a bunch of other places we take our kids like banks, airports etc, but somehow having it in schools is considered madness.

a reply to: Krazysh0t

My Mossberg 500 is modable. I have a bright as # light on it. Ban those too?

a reply to: DogStarIn1066

Well sorry to hear that. There is also a recurring theme why these mass shootings happen. How many times did it turn out that the person responsible was mentally ill or got reported to the police way before and nothing happened? Specifically in the case of Parkland it's blatantly clear that the authorities proved to be highly incompetent and refused to do their job more than once. Cruz wasn't just a red flag no he stood in a sea of red flags and somehow nobody picked up on it. So no i don't blame guns in general. I blame the parents,students,bullies,faculty staff,police and the FBI. They all failed miserably to prevent this tragedy.

originally posted by: face23785
a reply to: Krazysh0t

My Mossberg 500 is modable. I have a bright as # light on it. Ban those too?

Where did I call for banning anything? Please quote my words. I'll wait.

a reply to: face23785

What's madness is that it's perfectly okay to have strong security measures in a bunch of other places we take our kids like banks, airports etc, but somehow having it in schools is considered madness.

why is it still easier to get into a school than it is a courthouse?
ever hear of a mass shooting at a courthouse?
I will concede we don't value the safety of our children as much as we should; because if we did it would be harder to enter a school than an airport or a courthouse.
Taking away rights is not the answer, it is an agenda.

originally posted by: DogStarIn1066

originally posted by: JinMI
a reply to: introvert

Dead childern.

Defend it.

Different thread needed I know, but I could ask you the EXACT SAME thing of you.

Abortion, MILLIONS of dead children, defend it....yeah thought so.

Dorian Soran

originally posted by: TinySickTears
a reply to: DogStarIn1066

I'm with you man.
Pretty funny how people react. Just look a couple posts up.
These kids don't understand rights and blah blah.

They're using their right to speak and assemble and are getting dismissed by all the Charlton Heston types.

I've not heard any of those kids say ban all guns or don't sell anymore guns or take away people's guns.

They're not saying that but that's all these right wing freak shows are hearing.

Jesus Christ man.
Times change and things should change a Long with it.
Good on these kids I hope they keep at it and I hope the changes happen.

About 15 years ago two guys wandered into my property with rifles during deer season. I walked out, unarmed, and escorted them off my land. Imagine if I had gone out with a gun.

Yeah, right, I want to get into a gunfight with my fellow citizens.

I was taught about guns as a kid. Never point them at another person.

As a soldier I did have to point them, and anyone who has done that knows how horrible it is.

So to the wet-dreamer Rambo wanna-bees out there, I can only say that if you want to blow things up and kill people you have an outlet in a military career.

Leave our kids and our schools out of your sick dreams.

And, yes, these kids are going to take your evil guns.

They will leave me with my deer rifle and bird guns.

You folks are ruining gun sports for the rest of us, who are responsible.

a reply to: Krazysh0t


Thanks for the reply, without knowing how each of us identifies an assault its impossible to have a rational discussion about the topic.

I have an AR, I am open to the idea of further restriction on it but the problem I foresee is congress. Odds are high that instead of writing the regulations to specify the AR-15 they will instead write it to target semi-automatic weapons which opens up a huge can of worms for me.


As for my idea of an assault weapon, fire capability and is it used by the military. Yes I realize I am splitting hairs by saying the cousin of an M-4 is not an assault weapon, But its just the way I see it.

originally posted by: Krazysh0t
Good for you. I really don't care, but congrats I guess.

Just making the point that quick, accurate hits are not only the domain of modern sporting rifles. Any shooter with basic training can be effective with a pistol. I'm a slightly above average shooter at best with a pistol.

Um... You can be killed by an errant bullet. Sure, practice makes you more consistently lethal, but any amateur can pick up a gun, point it at a target and as long as they don't flat out drop the gun when they fire there is a chance they'll hit their target. Hell there are cases where people have been killed by someone shooting a gun straight up in to the air. Here's one .

The discussion isn't about errant bullets, it's about intentional shootings. There should actually be less errant hits in a shooting involving any rifle than a shooting involving handguns.

Since rifles in general account for less than 5% of all gun homicides, why not start by restricting handguns? Is it because the general populace is ignorant of facts and more likely to be willing to infringe rights because something is "scary"?

originally posted by: DogStarIn1066

originally posted by: Perfectenemy
a reply to: DogStarIn1066

Alright then the kids should start fighting against obesity and deaths caused by don't text and driving as well. That kills way more people in the US daily then any mass shooting event and the numbers are on the rise. Repeal the Second Amendment is trending so i guess they are after all your guns. I'm not an american but i support the right to bear arms. Repealing the Second Amendment creates a precedence and who really believes it just stops there.

Good points.

Kids are doing things about the questions you posed. One thing at a time.

I put a ballistic pad in my 15 year old sons back pack, and told him if the shooting starts to run.

This is horrible. My son goes to shcool with more armor on Then I wore into battle during the first gulf war. Are you not seeing that this is maddness?

It is madness because the odds of a school shooting happening at your son's school are less than winning the Powerball lotto. I guess you pack a parachute every time you a fly in a plane? Put on a fire suit when you get in your car?

originally posted by: shooterbrody
a reply to: face23785

What's madness is that it's perfectly okay to have strong security measures in a bunch of other places we take our kids like banks, airports etc, but somehow having it in schools is considered madness.

why is it still easier to get into a school than it is a courthouse?
ever hear of a mass shooting at a courthouse?
I will concede we don't value the safety of our children as much as we should; because if we did it would be harder to enter a school than an airport or a courthouse.
Taking away rights is not the answer, it is an agenda.

You should really stop and think how dumb the comparison you just made is. We don't regularly shuffle violent criminals in and out of schools who need to be watched at all times.

Sure guns used to mean cannon I believe? In Britain I think that's still the distinction.

At the same time, that's semantics. In common societal discourse guns means firearms.
a reply to: Gothmog

originally posted by: Krazysh0t

originally posted by: shooterbrody
a reply to: face23785

What's madness is that it's perfectly okay to have strong security measures in a bunch of other places we take our kids like banks, airports etc, but somehow having it in schools is considered madness.

why is it still easier to get into a school than it is a courthouse?
ever hear of a mass shooting at a courthouse?
I will concede we don't value the safety of our children as much as we should; because if we did it would be harder to enter a school than an airport or a courthouse.
Taking away rights is not the answer, it is an agenda.

You should really stop and think how dumb the comparison you just made is. We don't regularly shuffle violent criminals in and out of schools who need to be watched at all times.

who is the dummy?
do they bring the criminals in the front door?
no they do not, they bring them in handcuffed in a even more secure entrance

originally posted by: Irishhaf
a reply to: Krazysh0t


Thanks for the reply, without knowing how each of us identifies an assault its impossible to have a rational discussion about the topic.

I have an AR, I am open to the idea of further restriction on it but the problem I foresee is congress. Odds are high that instead of writing the regulations to specify the AR-15 they will instead write it to target semi-automatic weapons which opens up a huge can of worms for me.


As for my idea of an assault weapon, fire capability and is it used by the military. Yes I realize I am splitting hairs by saying the cousin of an M-4 is not an assault weapon, But its just the way I see it.

Yeah. I don't agree with targeting Semi-Autos. Far too many guns are semi-auto that AREN'T tactical in nature.