Both sides of the gun conversation are RIDICULOUS

This is getting infuriating.

On the one hand, you've got the very vocal pro-gun advocates, who equate ANY laws about guns as an attack on the second amendment. Who take any attempt at a conversation about gun laws and turn it into "They're gonna take er guns!". Who think that they should have a right to own any gun they want, yet cannot provide a single logical reason why they need an m4 or ar-15 with high capacity mags.

Then you have the anti-gun advocates, who think ANY gun is a bad one. Who think that if you ban guns all together, no one will ever have them. Who ignore the fact that a person who is looking to commit murder already has no regard for the law, or other people, and therefore will not give one single crap about whether or not the gun they own is legal.

What about the middle ground, people? What about having a SIMPLE CONVERSATION on the matter without jumping to extremes on both sides? What about taking a look at WHAT KIND OF GUNS are out there for public consumption? What about looking at SIMPLE STEPS in the purchase process that could keep SOME guns out of hands of those that shouldnt have them? What about a look at WHAT THE USES OF CERTAIN GUNS ARE?

When we we stop being lead around by vocal fanatics on both sides? When will we see that there IS a happy medium? When will we DEMAND MORE FROM OURSELVES? Forget our politicians. WHEN WILL WE DEMAND MORE FROM OURSELVES?

reply to post by captaintyinknots


This is not specifically addressed to you OP but no middle ground needs to exist, PERIOD.

No this is America, we have our God given right to defend ourselves with whatever necessary. The Bill of Rights and our founding fathers wanted us to have Guns to protect this nation and OURSELVES.

I have a great Idea, anyone who does not like it can move. Many countries do not have a population with Guns. If you think your gonna be safe there then GO!!

If you have a problem living in a nation with the Bill of Rights then get out!!! If you cant afford to leave then please stop trying to take my God giving rights from me because WE will never ever let that happen.

Originally posted by Patriotsrevenge
reply to post by captaintyinknots

 

This is not specifically addressed to you OP but no middle ground needs to exist, PERIOD.

No this is America, we have our God given right to defend ourselves with whatever necessary. The Bill of Rights and our founding fathers wanted us to have Guns to protect this nation and OURSELVES.

I have a great Idea, anyone who does not like it can move. Many countries do not have a population with Guns. If you think your gonna be safe there then GO!!

If you have a problem living in a nation with the Bill of Rights then get out!!! If you cant afford to leave then please stop trying to take my God giving rights from me because WE will never ever let that happen.

Do we? Do we have a god given right to have assault weapons? I can imagine no god that would ever want that.

But your statement is a prime example of why things will not change. Because "it is our right", therefore we do not need to demand better from ourselves. Because I bring up gun conversations, and you automatically take it to that extreme place of "theyre gonna ban guns". Even though that is the EXACT OPPOSITE of the statement that I made.

reply to post by captaintyinknots

As a gun rights advocate, most of the hysteria from my peers is agitation over stated goals from TPTB to strip the citizenry of guns.

And regardless of which of our rights they are destroying, its always done through incremental-ism. Especially in the case of tragedies.


It provides them with an excuse to execute a plan that had been formulated prior to the actual event.

Patriot Act being a good example.

Originally posted by gladtobehere
reply to post by captaintyinknots

 

As a gun rights advocate, most of the hysteria from my peers is agitation over stated goals from TPTB to strip the citizenry of guns.

And regardless of which of our rights they are destroying, its always done things through incremental-ism. Especially in the case of tragedies.

It provides them with an excuse to execute a plan that had been formulated prior to the actual event.

Patriot Act being a good example.

edit on 16-12-2012 by gladtobehere because: (no reason given)

You speak a lot of truth. But it is also natural to HAVE THE CONVERSATION when events such as these take place. Yet we cannot, because both extremes stick their fingers in their ears.

The fact is, though, that you will NEVER disarm the american people. It is not realistic to think it could happen. That ship has sailed.

Awe, another poster who fails to realize that this country called the U.S. was not founded on google searches associated with being an arm-chair warrior, rather by blood and guts and the ability to keep and bear weapons by Constitutional rights. Simply amazing how short minded individuals can be, with regards to observing the history of nation-states whom lost their right to bear arms, and what insinuated soon there after. 2) And, the observation that a government thinks twice about its masses opinions when one they bear arms, and two they have a Constitution.

Thus, this paradigmn that you speak of is not just a joke, in which actors on one side or the other are playing a Hasboro game, but rather a top priority whom's founding father argued for it.

There are two things to remember that are more important than you or I, and that is the citizens of the U.S. have rights under God, and not the Government. 2) These same citizens have the right to bear arms. without these two rights, humanity would be sitting in a whole different outcome right now.

Both sides of the gun conversation are RIDICULOUS

Even though I have no immediate/fore-seeable use for a gun (protect my property)?

Guns are as necessary as money is. Money is so people will work together. Guns concept is to stop the criminal threat/assault.

Somebody wants something I have "worked" for?

Let's ridicule people unwilling to work together for the greater good of us all, huh?

reply to post by captaintyinknots


I recently had a lengthy youtube debate about gun control that started off rough but turned into a very healthy agreement. No, not everyone will agree with what was said by me, but for those wishing to read a normal debate about guns then you can check out the comments here, it would be way too much work to copy and paste all those different comments. Scroll down to the post by tehdouglas1 that starts off "A real gun owner is someone" which was posted about a hour ago, the conversation is between myself and "Veryserioususer" and spans over 33 comments.

www.youtube.com...

edit- ugh, I wish youtube could display conversations right, its so out of order

Originally posted by loveguy

Both sides of the gun conversation are RIDICULOUS

Even though I have no immediate/fore-seeable use for a gun (protect my property)?

Guns are as necessary as money is. Money is so people will work together. Guns concept is to stop the criminal threat/assault.

Somebody wants something I have "worked" for?

Let's ridicule people unwilling to work together for the greater good of us all, huh?

What does this have to do with what I said, other than serving as another example of the fact that people cant even talk about gun restrictions without immediately jumping to "banning guns"?

There is a place, a very important place, for guns in our society.

Originally posted by kingsquirel
Awe, another poster who fails to realize that this country called the U.S. was not founded on google searches associated with being an arm-chair warrior, rather by blood and guts and the ability to keep and bear weapons by Constitutional rights. Simply amazing how short minded individuals can be, with regards to observing the history of nation-states whom lost their right to bear arms, and what insinuated soon there after. 2) And, the observation that a government thinks twice about its masses opinions when one they bear arms, and two they have a Constitution.

You were shown up in your own thread because you know nothing about American or European history.

I can show you up again if you like. You don't know anything about what you are discussing.

reply to post by captaintyinknots
You're welcome to re-read it and comprehend it the way I intended it to be.



PEACE

Originally posted by kingsquirel
Awe, another poster who fails to realize that this country called the U.S. was not founded on google searches associated with being an arm-chair warrior, rather by blood and guts and the ability to keep and bear weapons by Constitutional rights. Simply amazing how short minded individuals can be, with regards to observing the history of nation-states whom lost their right to bear arms, and what insinuated soon there after. 2) And, the observation that a government thinks twice about its masses opinions when one they bear arms, and two they have a Constitution.

Thus, this paradigmn that you speak of is not just a joke, in which actors on one side or the other are playing a Hasboro game, but rather a top priority whom's founding father argued for it.

There are two things to remember that are more important than you or I, and that is the citizens of the U.S. have rights under God, and not the Government. 2) These same citizens have the right to bear arms. without these two rights, humanity would be sitting in a whole different outcome right now.

And yet one more person who prove that the ability to have the conversation is above their head. Like I said in my title-ridiculous.

Originally posted by loveguy
reply to post by captaintyinknots

 

You're welcome to re-read it and comprehend it the way I intended it to be.

PEACE

I get what you are saying, however, you are not getting what the topic of this thread is. I welcome YOU to re-read IT, and try to keep up.

Originally posted by captaintyinknots
This is getting infuriating.
...
Then you have the anti-gun advocates, who think ANY gun is a bad one. Who think that if you ban guns all together, no one will ever have them. Who ignore the fact that a person who is looking to commit murder already has no regard for the law, or other people, and therefore will not give one single crap about whether or not the gun they own is legal.

With respect, this is not my position. I live in a country that has passed extremely strict gun legislation. As a result the number of total firearm murders per year is under 50. That's in a nation of 60 million. By contrast the US has 5x more population than us and many thousands of gun homicides and suicides per year.

Even knife crime wise you seem to be 8x more likely to be stabbed than us and around 500x more likely to be shot.

This is why I am a gun control advocate, because I live in a peaceful modern country where even our police would quit the force rather than be armed with firearms. If that doesn't tell you we're on the right track, nothing will.

reply to post by captaintyinknots

How to do this nicely?

I was ridiculing you for ridiculing the ridiculousness of ridicule.

Sorry.

You actually answered your own question very quickly and effectively.

You say that gun owners see the laws as an attack on their rights and in the same digital breath, state that you see no good reason for someone to own an AR15.

The AR15 style rifle is the number one selling rifle in the US. There are MILLIONS privately owned at present yet, somehow, they account for less than 1% of firearm-related crime in the U.S.

In fact, around 2% of criminals are caught with anything that could be classified as an "Assault Weapon." That classification includes AK47's and their variants as well.

So, simple logic dictates that the AR15's primary use is anything but violent crime and death.

By going after the firearms that are least likely to be used in the course of a crime, tell me again how that doesn't look like a direct attack on the rights of law-abiding gun owners?

I've intentionally left out the sources of my fact because I want you to do some digging and see the numbers for yourself. Stop believing the media and look at the statistics presented by the DOJ and FBI.

Even more to your point, I'm tired of the "give me one logical reason why you want to own (fill in the blank)."

Let's make a short list of items that could be thrown in the blank:

-a pit bull
-a fast car
-nice jewelry
-sex toys
-a big screen TV
-a motorcycle
-a boat

Just because someone disagrees with me, doesn't mean I shouldn't be able to own something. I enjoy shooting an AR15 for reasons that anyone who hasn't shot one will never understand. It's fun to me and I have no thoughts of doing harm to anyone when I punch tiny holes in paper targets. My justification for owning one is: I want one, I'm responsible, and I passed a background check.

reply to post by captaintyinknots


I do not own any guns, but even I can see that guns are not the issue. You want us to talk about gun control when it is the human mind that needs more controls put into place. Just look at the Middle East. If they don't have a gun to kill kids with, they throw acid in their faces, stone them, rape them, sell them into the sex trade, behead them....

Taking guns away isn't the answer because it isn't even the question. So, this lunatic that killed twenty school kids, if he didn't have guns are we to assume that he wouldn't have taken his car and run them over while they waited to board a school bus? Are we to assume that he wouldn't have learned how to make home-made bombs and throw them into each classroom?

People like this aren't interested in guns - they are interested in killing, and they would simply find another way to do it without guns.

Originally posted by Answer
You actually answered your own question very quickly and effectively.

You say that gun owners see the laws as an attack on their rights and in the same digital breath, state that you see no good reason for someone to own an AR15.

The AR15 style rifle is the number one selling rifle in the US. There are MILLIONS privately owned at present yet, somehow, they account for less than 1% of firearm-related crime in the U.S.

In fact, around 2% of criminals are caught with anything that could be classified as an "Assault Weapon." That classification includes AK47's and their variants as well.

So, simple logic dictates that the AR15's primary use is anything but violent crime and death.

By going after the firearms that are least likely to be used in the course of a crime, tell me again how that doesn't look like a direct attack on the rights of law-abiding gun owners?

I've intentionally left out the sources of my fact because I want you to do some digging and see the numbers for yourself. Stop believing the media and look at the statistics presented by the DOJ and FBI.

Ahh yes, the old "you must be an msm sheep" crowd. The arrogance of your statements is downright stupid. Your statistics are also misleading. I'm well aware of the numbers. Perhaps you should do some research on how many of these weapons are used in mass casualty crimes, if you want to have an honest debate.

Also, you, like many others, are proving my point. I mentioned ar-15's. You immediately take that as I support a ban on them. The conversation cant even be had with someone like you.

Perhaps you should also do a bit of research as to why AR's are the most popular rifle to buy these days. A little hint-it has to do with the fact that up until 10 or so years ago, you couldnt buy them.

Originally posted by Answer
Even more to your point, I'm tired of the "give me one logical reason why you want to own (fill in the blank)."

Let's make a short list of items that could be thrown in the blank:

-a pit bull
-a fast car
-nice jewelry
-sex toys
-a big screen TV
-a motorcycle
-a boat

Just because someone disagrees with me, doesn't mean I shouldn't be able to own something. I enjoy shooting an AR15 for reasons that anyone who hasn't shot one will never understand. It's fun to me and I have no thoughts of doing harm to anyone when I punch tiny holes in paper targets. My justification for owning one is: I want one, I'm responsible, and I passed a background check.

You are still missing the point. You are still jumping to "they wanna take ma guns!" You are proving yourself to be part of one of the two categories that I illustrated in my op.

I want a bazooka. i have no criminal record. I have no intentions of using it against people. Why shouldnt I be able to have one?

Again, it comes down to demanding better from OURSELVES, first and foremost.