Gun Control?

[MadMan1978]

Can some thing please be explained to me by those who support he need to have AR15s and that Bushwacker weapons...Explain if you can why you need theses weapons in your home.


Please know I have own 3 guns in my life- 2 22 rifles and a shot gun I no longer have any Guns or any sort.

[maccards44]

1st question; It's annoying to have to reload after every shot. I've shot single shot firearms, semi's and automatics. Mostly everyone that I know owns a semi-automatic. My job requires me to carry a semi-auto, it's what I prefer basically.

2nd question; I don't know what you mean by "less". If you mean would I feel like lesser of a shooter, then no. It's all personal preference.

Thanks for responding. It's a lot of questions, and you don't owe anyone an explanation of your opinions so I appreciate it.

When I said "less" I just meant 'less of an experience' which you answered when you talked about reloading.
I can see why having to reload would be an annoyance. But, for me, I think we have reached a point where that annoyance is one we have to live with to keep weapons like this out of the hands of non-police or non-military folks. I respect your differing opinion though.

[maccards44]

A) It appears that he actually left the rifle in the car and just used handguns in the school, so your attack on someone that has done nothing wrong is pointless.
B) Why should he feel guilty? Would you feel guilty if you learned that he drove a car like yours to the school or wore shoes like yours as he walked through the school?

Deep down, you know that I wasn't 'attacking' Zimbow right? We are just talking like adults. Really.
That silliness aside, the ME's office says he used the rifle to kill the kids, not the handguns. So this conversation about semi-automatic rifles is relevent.
I never said Zimbow "should" feel guilty and he doesn't. I never even said "guilty" I said "uncomfortable" and there is a big difference.

Since you asked, yes, I'd feel off or uncomfortable if someone used the same shoes I am wearing right now to stomp 20 kids to death. I'd probably ditch those shoes. I wouldn't feel 'guilty' because that's silly. I would feel 'creepy' and wouldn't want to share any characteristic with such evil- even something as small as shoes.

[Wickabee]

How could gun control laws have stopped this?



You are taking his comment out of context. He is simply saying, if you are sane (and have the legal right to buy a gun) then you should buy a gun and protect yourself rather than assume that law enforcement will be there when you need protecting. He said nothing about not buying a gun means you are insane.



...


The simple answer is to ask what gun control would have done to prevent this? Talking about more gun control when cun control would have had no effect is diverting attention from the primary issue. What is gained or accomplished by talking about more gun control?



I hear this argument a lot. It is entirely incorrect. Had Adam Lanza walked into that school with a pump action 12 gauge shotgun loaded up with buckshot I imagine he would have killed more than 26 people. When you shoot into a crowd with a handgun one bullet hits one person. When you shoot into a crowd with a shotgun you hit numerous people.

You are correct, he was not a criminal. However, he appears to have been diagnosed with autism and anti-social disorder and had significant issues with functioning in school and society.





Both of you are making a fatal flaw of taking issue with what a gun looks like. Perhaps you would be happier if it looked like this? http://cdn2.armslist.com/sites/armsl..._stain_640.jpg

FYI, they are both semi-auto rilfes that shoot .223 ammunition. The only difference is looks.



A) It appears that he actually left the rifle in the car and just used handguns in the school, so your attack on someone that has done nothing wrong is pointless.
B) Why should he feel guilty? Would you feel guilty if you learned that he drove a car like yours to the school or wore shoes like yours as he walked through the school?

1: I would tell you to go read every other time I've been asked this, but I'll humour you and answer this again. Gun control wouldn't have stopped this particular shooting, but there are many that it would. I'm not selling gun control as a cure-all, as you seem to think I am. I have no idea where you would even get that. Kind of like the people who hear "gun control" and translate it as "ban on guns". It makes no sense to me.

2: You believe whatever you want. I can read and will believe that if sane people own guns, then not owning a gun makes you insane. That's just basic logic. Please, however, end this. The point is that the attitude that "sane people own gunsfor protection" is part of the problem.

3: Shutting down any corner of the discussion is unproductive. If we only look at "what could have stopped this EXACT incident with these EXACT people at this EXACT time in this EXACT place" (you get the point) we ignore everything else. To say gun control isn't a potential piece of the solution overall because it probably wouldn't have helped this time is shortsighted. At least be willing to talk about it. You guys are so worried about losing your guns you're willing to lose your fellow countrymen and women. You won't even discuss gun control because it's a "liberal" idea. That's fine, but don't cry when this happens again and again and again. You won't even discuss potential solutions? How is that not part of the problem?

4: Fair argument. At the same time it doesn't look at the real issue. Newtown isn't the issue, gun violence is the issue. Newtown is just the symptom. You're looking at the entire issue in the context of one shooting. That will only solve that one shooting.

Answered in order of responses to me.

[JustAlex]

Yesterday has nothing to do with your criticism of America. You have been spewing anti-America hate every since your first post on this board. If guns and gun violence did not exist it would not change your hate for America.

Yeah, whatever.

The fact that this country does NOTHING after every single massacre when almost any other first-world nation would at least have a DISCUSSION about what should or should not be done is a complete failure of this country.

If being anti-American means that I never want to see this horrific tragedy happen again and I'm willing to give up some of my own rights (Such as the right to buy ASSAULT weapons)......then I'm 100% Anti-American!

BTW.....I am not the type that swallows all the nonsense of "nationalism" just because I happened to be born in said country.

My first priority in my life is myself and my loved ones, my second priority is humanity in general regardless of what imaginary line you live in.

I take zero offense to your labeling of "Anti-American" because there are too many things that I can list about this country that deeply shames me to even call myself "American".

And two days ago, I was DEEPLY ashamed to call myself American.

[Wickabee]

Some people will always equate wanting better for your country with hating it.
Senseless, but they still do it.

[drtom2005]

You don't have mental health checks??? Woah.
Also, does someone taking their meds at the time they buy the gun guarantee they won't stop and (potentially) go nuts (for lack of a better term) and shoot a bunch of people?

Well all of the drugs can be checked with drug levels. Some are expensive. But if you want a gun, people should be required to send in their levels monthly. Not a perfect answer but better.

[Zimbow]

Can some thing please be explained to me by those who support he need to have AR15s and that Bushwacker weapons...Explain if you can why you need theses weapons in your home.


Please know I have own 3 guns in my life- 2 22 rifles and a shot gun I no longer have any Guns or any sort.

Please know for me is that I collect guns more than I collect cards anymore. It's more or less a hobby. A guy I went to high school with joined the military and told me that the AR-15 and M4 type weapons were one that they used while in service. He said a majority of military personnel like to be able to use a weapon that they used while serving. A AR-15 or M4 styled rifle is as close as it gets. Plus, almost all the AR-15s and M4 styled rifles have interchangeable parts. You can have a Bushmaster lower with a Rock River upper receiver. Have a Mossberg 500 grip along with a different barrel. Gun parts now-a-days are like a universal channel changer. Can actually take a Bushmaster Ar15 and turn it into something completely different.

[Zimbow]

Thanks for responding. It's a lot of questions, and you don't owe anyone an explanation of your opinions so I appreciate it.

When I said "less" I just meant 'less of an experience' which you answered when you talked about reloading.
I can see why having to reload would be an annoyance. But, for me, I think we have reached a point where that annoyance is one we have to live with to keep weapons like this out of the hands of non-police or non-military folks. I respect your differing opinion though.

No problem. Glad to oblige. As long as there is a gun maker making civilian style guns that replicate military styled weapons, people will always want them. Especially automatic weapons. Civilians aren't legally allowed to go into a gun shop and buy an M16 rifle. They have to go through a Class III license procedure. They usually have to go through a rigorous ATF (Alcohol Tobacco Firearms) background check. I believe it's a $200 fee initially. Then annual renewals are more like a tax. Don't quote me but I believe it's like $1500 per year to keep it. I'll get some information on it. Plus automatic weapons are a lot of money to buy. I believe most M16's are $15,000 an there is a specific date one can buy after. 1985 I think.

http://www.wikihow.com/Get-a-Class-3-Firearms-License
http://www.atf.gov/firearms/faq/nati...-firearms.html

[Wickabee]

Well all of the drugs can be checked with drug levels. Some are expensive. But if you want a gun, people should be required to send in their levels monthly. Not a perfect answer but better.

I can agree to that.