chbare Posted December 21, 2012 Posted December 21, 2012 However, I have neither stated my opinion about gun ownership nor have I stated rather I own a gun in this conversation. My point has been to focus on the subject with a broad lense instead of simply focusing on a single aspect. Should we not appreciate the issue as broadly as possible? For example, why focus only on "assault" weapons when it is known that hand guns are the most commonly used firearm in terms of killing people in the United States. Again, I believe in a broad discussion where hyperbole is minimalised as much as possible. I've put personal bias on the shelf and want to focus on the issue broadly since our country is at a point where dialogue and change is possible.
Guest ~~~ Posted December 21, 2012 Posted December 21, 2012 Dunno, what if he snaps? What if the other guy next to you snaps and is hiding one, or is his in car and brings it in? I will always stand by my rights, every time I see a shooting event like this it just makes be want to go out and buy a gun. It won't be for protection, it will be for as I said to show I stand by the rights and for the people that died in history for them. Stupid is as stupid does. If you are stupid, you'll probably do stupid stuff; like these gunmen.
craig Posted December 21, 2012 Posted December 21, 2012 (edited) However, I have neither stated my opinion about gun ownership nor have I stated rather I own a gun in this conversation. My point has been to focus on the subject with a broad lense instead of simply focusing on a single aspect. Should we not appreciate the issue as broadly as possible? For example, why focus only on "assault" weapons when it is known that hand guns are the most commonly used firearm in terms of killing people in the United States. Again, I believe in a broad discussion where hyperbole is minimalised as much as possible. I've put personal bias on the shelf and want to focus on the issue broadly since our country is at a point where dialogue and change is possible. The reason I assume people (myself included) are focusing on assult weapons, is primarialy it WAS an assult weapon that took the like of 20 kids under 7 at Newtown......most mass murders in situations like this use assult weapons to do their damage (not just the USA either). In Australia in Port Arthur, it was a military assult rifle that was used, I Norway it was a assult weapon that killed the kids at the camp on the island. in Newtown it was an AR15 assult weapon (that the killer took after killing his mother) that committed this heanous crime. if there are as many hand gun killings in the USA, then why do you (not you personally, but the USA in general) not want guns regulated to assist in minimising this number? Surely saving ONE life would have to be a bonus..... Edited December 21, 2012 by craig 1
Curiosity Posted December 21, 2012 Posted December 21, 2012 NRA's solution to the Sandy Hill tragedy...arm everyone in every school in America. I'm beyond sad.
Secouriste Posted December 21, 2012 Posted December 21, 2012 I don't even understand how anyone can pay attention to what the NRA says. I'd rather ask Kim-Jong-Un's advice than NRA's... I'm just bringing a little piece of news: The same day as the shooting in the US, a man attacked a primary school in China... with a knife. He started assaulting the kids in front of the school, then was able to get inside, armed with a butcher knife. In the end: 2 light wounds / 0 death and the criminal was subdued by teachers and people passing by. The children were able to safely escape the place. It's as simple as that: no matter how crazy the person is, the nature of the weapon will play a great role in the actual damages. I'm not putting aside the mental illness issues and all the others problems that can lead to such tragic event. My point focuses on the guns on purpose. 1
DFIB Posted December 21, 2012 Posted December 21, 2012 The designation "assault rifle" has been used many times in this thread. Besides being a rifle used in the commision of an assault, what do you think is meant by this designation?
Secouriste Posted December 21, 2012 Posted December 21, 2012 I'm not a weapon specialist but I' go like that: An automatic rifle loaded with a large amount of heavy caliber ammos. Used only to attack human military (or otherwise armed) targets.
chbare Posted December 21, 2012 Posted December 21, 2012 However, the 5.56mm round used in the AR 15 style rifles is most certainly not a large or heavy caliber round. In fact, it is quite small and virtually all the bullets used to hunt deer, elk and so on are of a larger caliber. In addition, where do we draw the line when it comes to a "large amount." I am not being argumentative or talking semantics, but having a good definition of what we are discussing is probably a good idea. 1
spenac Posted December 21, 2012 Posted December 21, 2012 Good so the semi autos that are used in this case would not be banned by you as they are not automatic. I'm not a weapon specialist but I' go like that: An automatic rifle loaded with a large amount of heavy caliber ammos. Used only to attack human military (or otherwise armed) targets.
DFIB Posted December 22, 2012 Posted December 22, 2012 Good so the semi autos that are used in this case would not be banned by you as they are not automatic. Where did you get your graph? I have seen em on both sides of the argument and really don't know which are true. I saw one that says that baseball bats are the most common weapon. If I can find I again I will post it . I am not saying that it is correct only that there are a lot of graphs floating around.
Recommended Posts