Firearms. Who or what is dangerous?


log in

Advanced search

Message boards : Politics : Firearms. Who or what is dangerous?

Previous · 1 · 2 · 3 · 4 · 5 · 6 · 7 . . . 25 · Next
Author Message
Message 1319755 - Posted: 25 Dec 2012, 0:31:25 UTC

Saw a pic of the Webster Whack Job.

Man 'O Live. Like looking In The Mirror at meself.

Age is A MO FO. FO SHO.

Can't remember if his hair is parted. Well, guess it depends how he let the Final Round Fly. he a he a he.

Lady said 80 Million Moms are not going to let 5 Mil NRA members push them around. Flex it Momma.

Tiny Bubbles Broheim. Tiny Bubbles. When I was stationed at Pearl, I watched a guy in a bar play his uke and sing Tiny Bubbles.

Memories. Like when I parted my hair in The 60s.

DEMON...I Remember HOT
____________


Profile zaezl
Send message
Joined: 10 Sep 00
Posts: 2
Credit: 220,532
RAC: 398
United States
Message 1319759 - Posted: 25 Dec 2012, 0:57:41 UTC

What happened at Sandy Hook Elementary is unthinkable. I expect people to have an emotive, visceral response to such a tragedy. I am a father. Upon hearing the news I rushed home and held my daughter tight and I wept. I am sure a lot of Americans did. But I also rushed home to hold my daughter when I saw the leaked gunship footage from the Bradley Manning bundle, which depicts a US military helicopter blowing civilian vehicles to bits, vehicles with Iraqi children in them. My fear is that that is the difference between me and most Americans. Their response to tragedy is not evenly apportioned. It is often myopic and divorced from broader acts of savagery undertaken by their own government. Their response is often simplistic, easily goaded by political leaders and the media with ad metum and ad bellum appeals. I believe that most Americans live in an infantilized, Disney-fied version of the world, where it's somehow alright to decry gun violence when a domestic shooting occurs in an American mall or school, but fail to possess the same indignation and outrage when a US military drone kills a dozen children in Pakistan. Human savagery behaves like a liquid; you cannot agitate it without causing ripples. It spills over and leaks. It gathers and concentrates in the lowest possible points, and it doesn't magically stop at fences and concertina wire. Every facet of the US economy and indeed every mainstream political agenda, liberal and conservative, is intrinsically tied to and dependent upon the culture of militarism and conquest that the United States has imbibed in since at least the Spanish American war. America spends more on its military than any other nation on earth by far. Her social policies and welfare state depend utterly on a GDP that is super charged by global economic marginalization and an unfair advantage in world markets and natural resource extraction, and this is accomplished through militarism, clandestine warfare and bloody regime pacification, which the US engages in regularly under the auspices of its rapacious foreign policy and its endless actual and notional wars, such as the war of terror and the war on drugs. A huge byproduct of this paradigm are the countless military grade weapons waiting to leak through US borders in the event of the supply vacuum caused by a new prohibition on gun ownership. Many of these weapons would be American made and our savagery on the world stage would come home to roost in an even more violent and sadly ironic way than it has with our plethora of deranged gunman. That is not a pro-gun statement. It is a pro-reality assertion. It is cheaper to jump through legal hoops and acquire a gun than it is to deal with the black market, but a gun prohibition would eradicate this cost prohibition, and just like heroin and cocaine before them, M4 rifles would make their way onto American streets. The same weapons that have killed and maimed in the hands of despots would now simply trickle into the US and continue to kill and maim in the hands of gangs or lunatics. Instead of guns flowing out and drugs flowing in, guns and drugs would flow in, because prohibition does not work. You cannot bridle supply by ignoring or legislating against demand. Guns are a symptom, not a cause, and this nation has some deep soul searching to do, about what kind of nation it wants to be and how it wants to project itself at home and abroad, and our militaristic teleology needs to be parsed before any other cultural, clinical or other contributors to these shootings can be addressed. Might I also remind this particularly tech savvy audience that 3D printers are only getting smaller and more powerful. Guns can already be "printed." The implications for this are that the 2nd Amendment is effectively redundant, and with it, law enforcement and the desire to put the genie back in the bottle.

Profile Es99
Volunteer moderator
Volunteer tester
Avatar
Send message
Joined: 23 Aug 05
Posts: 8644
Credit: 244,327
RAC: 138
Canada
Message 1319760 - Posted: 25 Dec 2012, 1:02:36 UTC - in response to Message 1319759.

What happened at Sandy Hook Elementary is unthinkable. I expect people to have an emotive, visceral response to such a tragedy. I am a father. Upon hearing the news I rushed home and held my daughter tight and I wept. I am sure a lot of Americans did. But I also rushed home to hold my daughter when I saw the leaked gunship footage from the Bradley Manning bundle, which depicts a US military helicopter blowing civilian vehicles to bits, vehicles with Iraqi children in them. My fear is that that is the difference between me and most Americans. Their response to tragedy is not evenly apportioned. It is often myopic and divorced from broader acts of savagery undertaken by their own government. Their response is often simplistic, easily goaded by political leaders and the media with ad metum and ad bellum appeals. I believe that most Americans live in an infantilized, Disney-fied version of the world, where it's somehow alright to decry gun violence when a domestic shooting occurs in an American mall or school, but fail to possess the same indignation and outrage when a US military drone kills a dozen children in Pakistan. Human savagery behaves like a liquid; you cannot agitate it without causing ripples. It spills over and leaks. It gathers and concentrates in the lowest possible points, and it doesn't magically stop at fences and concertina wire. Every facet of the US economy and indeed every mainstream political agenda, liberal and conservative, is intrinsically tied to and dependent upon the culture of militarism and conquest that the United States has imbibed in since at least the Spanish American war. America spends more on its military than any other nation on earth by far. Her social policies and welfare state depend utterly on a GDP that is super charged by global economic marginalization and an unfair advantage in world markets and natural resource extraction, and this is accomplished through militarism, clandestine warfare and bloody regime pacification, which the US engages in regularly under the auspices of its rapacious foreign policy and its endless actual and notional wars, such as the war of terror and the war on drugs. A huge byproduct of this paradigm are the countless military grade weapons waiting to leak through US borders in the event of the supply vacuum caused by a new prohibition on gun ownership. Many of these weapons would be American made and our savagery on the world stage would come home to roost in an even more violent and sadly ironic way than it has with our plethora of deranged gunman. That is not a pro-gun statement. It is a pro-reality assertion. It is cheaper to jump through legal hoops and acquire a gun than it is to deal with the black market, but a gun prohibition would eradicate this cost prohibition, and just like heroin and cocaine before them, M4 rifles would make their way onto American streets. The same weapons that have killed and maimed in the hands of despots would now simply trickle into the US and continue to kill and maim in the hands of gangs or lunatics. Instead of guns flowing out and drugs flowing in, guns and drugs would flow in, because prohibition does not work. You cannot bridle supply by ignoring or legislating against demand. Guns are a symptom, not a cause, and this nation has some deep soul searching to do, about what kind of nation it wants to be and how it wants to project itself at home and abroad, and our militaristic teleology needs to be parsed before any other cultural, clinical or other contributors to these shootings can be addressed. Might I also remind this particularly tech savvy audience that 3D printers are only getting smaller and more powerful. Guns can already be "printed." The implications for this are that the 2nd Amendment is effectively redundant, and with it, law enforcement and the desire to put the genie back in the bottle.

Wow,

Excellent first post. Welcome to the forums.
____________
Are you a feminist? Take the test

Profile Sarge
Volunteer tester
Avatar
Send message
Joined: 25 Aug 99
Posts: 9201
Credit: 1,349,207
RAC: 1,729
United States
Message 1319769 - Posted: 25 Dec 2012, 1:29:53 UTC - in response to Message 1319755.

Saw a pic of the Webster Whack Job.

Man 'O Live. Like looking In The Mirror at meself.

Age is A MO FO. FO SHO.

Can't remember if his hair is parted. Well, guess it depends how he let the Final Round Fly. he a he a he.

Lady said 80 Million Moms are not going to let 5 Mil NRA members push them around. Flex it Momma.

Tiny Bubbles Broheim. Tiny Bubbles. When I was stationed at Pearl, I watched a guy in a bar play his uke and sing Tiny Bubbles.

Memories. Like when I parted my hair in The 60s.

DEMON...I Remember HOT



You're right, people don't part their hair anymore.
Can we keep him distracted?
May the odds
be ever in your favor
in 2013.

Profile Gary Charpentier
Volunteer tester
Avatar
Send message
Joined: 25 Dec 00
Posts: 12089
Credit: 6,384,804
RAC: 8,040
United States
Message 1319797 - Posted: 25 Dec 2012, 4:06:45 UTC - in response to Message 1319760.

What happened at Sandy Hook Elementary is unthinkable. I expect people to have an emotive, visceral response to such a tragedy. I am a father. Upon hearing the news I rushed home and held my daughter tight and I wept. I am sure a lot of Americans did. But I also rushed home to hold my daughter when I saw the leaked gunship footage from the Bradley Manning bundle, which depicts a US military helicopter blowing civilian vehicles to bits, vehicles with Iraqi children in them. My fear is that that is the difference between me and most Americans. Their response to tragedy is not evenly apportioned. It is often myopic and divorced from broader acts of savagery undertaken by their own government. Their response is often simplistic, easily goaded by political leaders and the media with ad metum and ad bellum appeals. I believe that most Americans live in an infantilized, Disney-fied version of the world, where it's somehow alright to decry gun violence when a domestic shooting occurs in an American mall or school, but fail to possess the same indignation and outrage when a US military drone kills a dozen children in Pakistan. Human savagery behaves like a liquid; you cannot agitate it without causing ripples. It spills over and leaks. It gathers and concentrates in the lowest possible points, and it doesn't magically stop at fences and concertina wire. Every facet of the US economy and indeed every mainstream political agenda, liberal and conservative, is intrinsically tied to and dependent upon the culture of militarism and conquest that the United States has imbibed in since at least the Spanish American war. America spends more on its military than any other nation on earth by far. Her social policies and welfare state depend utterly on a GDP that is super charged by global economic marginalization and an unfair advantage in world markets and natural resource extraction, and this is accomplished through militarism, clandestine warfare and bloody regime pacification, which the US engages in regularly under the auspices of its rapacious foreign policy and its endless actual and notional wars, such as the war of terror and the war on drugs. A huge byproduct of this paradigm are the countless military grade weapons waiting to leak through US borders in the event of the supply vacuum caused by a new prohibition on gun ownership. Many of these weapons would be American made and our savagery on the world stage would come home to roost in an even more violent and sadly ironic way than it has with our plethora of deranged gunman. That is not a pro-gun statement. It is a pro-reality assertion. It is cheaper to jump through legal hoops and acquire a gun than it is to deal with the black market, but a gun prohibition would eradicate this cost prohibition, and just like heroin and cocaine before them, M4 rifles would make their way onto American streets. The same weapons that have killed and maimed in the hands of despots would now simply trickle into the US and continue to kill and maim in the hands of gangs or lunatics. Instead of guns flowing out and drugs flowing in, guns and drugs would flow in, because prohibition does not work. You cannot bridle supply by ignoring or legislating against demand. Guns are a symptom, not a cause, and this nation has some deep soul searching to do, about what kind of nation it wants to be and how it wants to project itself at home and abroad, and our militaristic teleology needs to be parsed before any other cultural, clinical or other contributors to these shootings can be addressed. Might I also remind this particularly tech savvy audience that 3D printers are only getting smaller and more powerful. Guns can already be "printed." The implications for this are that the 2nd Amendment is effectively redundant, and with it, law enforcement and the desire to put the genie back in the bottle.

Wow,

Excellent first post. Welcome to the forums.

+1

____________

Profile Gary Charpentier
Volunteer tester
Avatar
Send message
Joined: 25 Dec 00
Posts: 12089
Credit: 6,384,804
RAC: 8,040
United States
Message 1319803 - Posted: 25 Dec 2012, 4:50:07 UTC - in response to Message 1319759.

Might I also remind this particularly tech savvy audience that 3D printers are only getting smaller and more powerful. Guns can already be "printed." The implications for this are that the 2nd Amendment is effectively redundant, and with it, law enforcement and the desire to put the genie back in the bottle.

Actually you can rather easily make many assault rifles in a garage workshop today. See http://www.cncguns.com/ for example. Obviously drug cartels have more than enough cash to purchase equipment capable of turning out dozens of such weapons per day. They also wouldn't be bound to make them semi-auto either, or have size requirements on magazines or put serial numbers on them. No, the genie is out of the bottle forever, just like stills were out of the bottle for prohibition.

____________

Profile Es99
Volunteer moderator
Volunteer tester
Avatar
Send message
Joined: 23 Aug 05
Posts: 8644
Credit: 244,327
RAC: 138
Canada
Message 1319805 - Posted: 25 Dec 2012, 5:00:59 UTC - in response to Message 1319803.

Might I also remind this particularly tech savvy audience that 3D printers are only getting smaller and more powerful. Guns can already be "printed." The implications for this are that the 2nd Amendment is effectively redundant, and with it, law enforcement and the desire to put the genie back in the bottle.

Actually you can rather easily make many assault rifles in a garage workshop today. See http://www.cncguns.com/ for example. Obviously drug cartels have more than enough cash to purchase equipment capable of turning out dozens of such weapons per day. They also wouldn't be bound to make them semi-auto either, or have size requirements on magazines or put serial numbers on them. No, the genie is out of the bottle forever, just like stills were out of the bottle for prohibition.

I do find it strange here that the pro-gun lobby here seem to getting confused with the difference between gun regulation and prohibition. Then throwing up arguments against gun regulation based on this.

Even the UK doesn't have gun prohibition. They just have very strict regulation on who can have guns, what sort of guns and how they are stored.
____________
Are you a feminist? Take the test

WinterKnight
Volunteer tester
Send message
Joined: 18 May 99
Posts: 8497
Credit: 23,039,515
RAC: 14,830
United Kingdom
Message 1319810 - Posted: 25 Dec 2012, 6:14:00 UTC - in response to Message 1319805.
Last modified: 25 Dec 2012, 6:27:31 UTC

It also surprises me that for all the guns in the US they don't seem to appear anywhere near the top in sports that use guns.

In my distant past before my knees gave out I used to do Biathlon, so follow it quite a bit. The USA team only just manages to get better results than the UK. Even though they have much better conditions, a larger population and definitely have a lot better access to guns.

Quick explaination of Biathlon, race around cross country circuit,
stop and fire weapon at five targets* (.22, 50yds),
repeat 2 or 4 times,
race one circuit to finish.
* firing from prone or standing position as directed, depending on type of race. There are sprints, mass starts, persuits and relays.

WinterKnight
Volunteer tester
Send message
Joined: 18 May 99
Posts: 8497
Credit: 23,039,515
RAC: 14,830
United Kingdom
Message 1319816 - Posted: 25 Dec 2012, 6:42:50 UTC - in response to Message 1319809.
Last modified: 25 Dec 2012, 6:44:12 UTC

Are you sure your understanding of ethics and morals are correct?

I thought ethics was about using reasoning to find the solution, whilst morals was about making the correct choice.

Therefore if I am correct your whole line of reasoning is suspect and probably false.

Profile Es99
Volunteer moderator
Volunteer tester
Avatar
Send message
Joined: 23 Aug 05
Posts: 8644
Credit: 244,327
RAC: 138
Canada
Message 1319820 - Posted: 25 Dec 2012, 7:00:03 UTC - in response to Message 1319816.

Are you sure your understanding of ethics and morals are correct?

I thought ethics was about using reasoning to find the solution, whilst morals was about making the correct choice.

Therefore if I am correct your whole line of reasoning is suspect and probably false.

I think that pretty much covers it.
____________
Are you a feminist? Take the test

Profile Es99
Volunteer moderator
Volunteer tester
Avatar
Send message
Joined: 23 Aug 05
Posts: 8644
Credit: 244,327
RAC: 138
Canada
Message 1319821 - Posted: 25 Dec 2012, 7:04:38 UTC - in response to Message 1319809.

I cannot deny that what happened is tragic. I will not deny that I too was saddened to my core and cried.

...

Sad? You should be angry. Very, very angry.
____________
Are you a feminist? Take the test

Profile Gary Charpentier
Volunteer tester
Avatar
Send message
Joined: 25 Dec 00
Posts: 12089
Credit: 6,384,804
RAC: 8,040
United States
Message 1319918 - Posted: 25 Dec 2012, 17:34:13 UTC - in response to Message 1319809.

The moment ethics and morality are separated you have none of either. Fatwa is one result. The inquisition is another. The suspension of one because of the other. There is no suspension ever. They are identical.


____________

Profile Gary Charpentier
Volunteer tester
Avatar
Send message
Joined: 25 Dec 00
Posts: 12089
Credit: 6,384,804
RAC: 8,040
United States
Message 1319919 - Posted: 25 Dec 2012, 17:40:57 UTC - in response to Message 1319805.

I do find it strange here that the pro-gun lobby here seem to getting confused with the difference between gun regulation and prohibition. Then throwing up arguments against gun regulation based on this.

The proposals are prohibitions, not regulation.

Regulation, you must sell a trigger lock with every gun.
Regulation, you must have a gun safe.

Prohibition, it is illegal to sell a 30 round magazine.
Prohibition, it is illegal to own a semi-automatic weapon.



____________

WinterKnight
Volunteer tester
Send message
Joined: 18 May 99
Posts: 8497
Credit: 23,039,515
RAC: 14,830
United Kingdom
Message 1319926 - Posted: 25 Dec 2012, 18:22:18 UTC - in response to Message 1319919.

I do find it strange here that the pro-gun lobby here seem to getting confused with the difference between gun regulation and prohibition. Then throwing up arguments against gun regulation based on this.

The proposals are prohibitions, not regulation.

Regulation, you must sell a trigger lock with every gun.
Regulation, you must have a gun safe.

Prohibition, it is illegal to sell a 30 round magazine.
Prohibition, it is illegal to own a semi-automatic weapon.



But there does have to be a limit on what weapons a private citizen can own. Under your definition all weapons above that limit are prohibited, or should people be able to own grenade launchers, tanks, artillery guns etc.

There is no circumstances that I can think of where 30 round magazines or assault rifles are needed.

bobby
Avatar
Send message
Joined: 22 Mar 02
Posts: 1962
Credit: 14,637,343
RAC: 3,127
United States
Message 1319935 - Posted: 25 Dec 2012, 18:54:36 UTC

Results show that regardless of storage practice, type of gun, or number of firearms in the home, having a gun in the home was associated with an increased risk of firearm homicide and firearm suicide in the home.

source

For every time a gun in the home was used in a self-defense or legally justifiable shooting, there were four unintentional shootings, seven criminal assaults or homicides, and 11 attempted or completed suicides.

source

The Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development has 31 nations it terms "High Income", they are Australia, Austria, Belgium, Canada, Czech Republic, Denmark, Estonia, Finland, France, Germany, Greece, Hungary, Iceland, Ireland, Israel, Italy, Japan, Luxembourg, Netherlands, New Zealand, Norway, Poland, Portugal, Slovakia, Slovenia, South Korea, Spain, Sweden, Switzerland, United Kingdom, United States. The United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime provides details of firearm homicides per 100,000 of the population here. Of the OECD High Income nations, the US has the highest firearm homicide rate at 3.2, in second place is Switzerland, with a rate of 0.8. USA #1 by a factor of 4, yay us.

How the NRA operates.
____________
I think you'll find it's a bit more complicated than that ...

Profile Gary Charpentier
Volunteer tester
Avatar
Send message
Joined: 25 Dec 00
Posts: 12089
Credit: 6,384,804
RAC: 8,040
United States
Message 1319936 - Posted: 25 Dec 2012, 18:54:59 UTC - in response to Message 1319926.

Under your definition all weapons above that limit are prohibited, or should people be able to own grenade launchers, tanks, artillery guns etc.

This may come as a surprise to you but I know someone who does own them.

____________

WinterKnight
Volunteer tester
Send message
Joined: 18 May 99
Posts: 8497
Credit: 23,039,515
RAC: 14,830
United Kingdom
Message 1319940 - Posted: 25 Dec 2012, 19:08:14 UTC - in response to Message 1319936.

Under your definition all weapons above that limit are prohibited, or should people be able to own grenade launchers, tanks, artillery guns etc.

This may come as a surprise to you but I know someone who does own them.

Are they modern and are they in working order.

Profile Gary Charpentier
Volunteer tester
Avatar
Send message
Joined: 25 Dec 00
Posts: 12089
Credit: 6,384,804
RAC: 8,040
United States
Message 1319956 - Posted: 25 Dec 2012, 20:17:42 UTC - in response to Message 1319940.

Under your definition all weapons above that limit are prohibited, or should people be able to own grenade launchers, tanks, artillery guns etc.

This may come as a surprise to you but I know someone who does own them.

Are they modern and are they in working order.

For security reasons I shouldn't answer that. Take that non-answer as your answer.

____________

Previous · 1 · 2 · 3 · 4 · 5 · 6 · 7 . . . 25 · Next

Message boards : Politics : Firearms. Who or what is dangerous?

Copyright © 2014 University of California