Jump to content

Welcome to mygnrforum.com Guns N' Roses Forum
Register now to gain access to all of our features. Once registered and logged in, you will be able to create topics, post replies to existing threads, give reputation to your fellow members, get your own private messenger, post status updates, manage your profile and so much more. This message will be removed once you have signed in.
Login to Account Create an Account
Photo

Gun Law Debate

Your thoughts?

  • Please log in to reply
349 replies to this topic

#31
ADPT

ADPT

    OH MY GOD

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,540 posts
  • 05-May 07
Has there ever been a case of a spree-bomber? Bombs seem to be the favoured weapons of people with a cause, who don't want to be caught. These spree shootings seem to be a case of someone's sanity failing and they need to go take something out on somebody.

A gun is an immediate gratification of that desire, as is picking up a samurai sword. A bomb isn't, indeed the time it takes to sit down and build one might (assuming they have the knowledge in the first place) be time enough for someone to calm down to change their minds if they'd temporarily lost it. I think the reason a lot of these shooters do kill themselves after they've finished or are forced to stop is because it suddenly dawns on them what they've done.

So I'm not really sure it makes sense to compare guns with building a bomb, they are, ultimately, just tools. It's the person who wields it that's the problem.

Trouble is we don't have the ability to read people's minds, so the practical solution would seem to be some sort of regulation.

Edited by ADPT, 14 December 2012 - 06:59 PM.


#32
sugaraylen

sugaraylen

    I am a Gunner!

  • Supporters
  • 25,407 posts
  • 14-February 10

Has there ever been a case of a spree-bomber?


David Copeland?

ARSENAL TIL I DIE

 

Fearless N***** get slapped in Manhattan

For rappin'

Big Ghost steps off laughin'


#33
Kasanova King

Kasanova King

    FRONTMAN

  • Supporters
  • 11,397 posts
  • 02-December 04



KK - you seem to be conflating two pieces of information here:

Semi-Auto = what you said
Auto (and a lot of other things) = what I said

The problem being, that in your opening post you said "show them your ID, fill out a few forms and walk out with a heavy duty automatic gun of your choice" which is both erroneous and egregious. Any of the guns that you can walk out with are not "heavy duty automatic/s" and there is a MASSIVE difference.


No, not at all. Considering gun manufacturers themselves call their own guns "automatic" even if they are "semi" automatic, as you say, shows my statement to be accurate. On another note, there are several "semi" automatic guns that can be fired just as fast and with more accuracy than some "fully" automatic guns.


Just because somebody calls something by a name which is incorrect doesn't mean that we should all do so, or do you just like to fall in line with current trends? We should be especially accurate in our naming and phraseology when we are attempting to create a discussion on various merits, pros and cons. Unless, of course, we deliberately use the most emotive phrasing that we can muster in an underhanded attempt to rabble rouse.; however, I do think that that ploy would be beneath a man of your moral character.


hahaha....you actually got me to smile...but in realistically, with the advances in technology, there really is little difference between fully and semi. There's plenty of guns that are legally sold as "semi" and can easily be converted to "fully". And like I said, technically speaking, a semi autimatic gun is an automatic gun.

Kasanova King


#34
ADPT

ADPT

    OH MY GOD

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,540 posts
  • 05-May 07

Has there ever been a case of a spree-bomber?


David Copeland?


That's why I asked. Still, I'd classify him as a terrorist.

Edited by ADPT, 14 December 2012 - 07:09 PM.


#35
Rustycage

Rustycage

    FRONTMAN

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 7,666 posts
  • 23-March 04




Too many people think their John Wayne when they hold a gun. There's no chance of changing their minds with legislation. You can't fix stupid.


If they thought they were John Wayne there wouldn't be a problem, he never shot no one that weren't threatening him and he never shot no one in the back or women and children, if people with guns thought they were John Wayne the only thing remotely of note about it would be watching them walk around like they've had their underpants kicked up their arse :lol:

Also, his name was Marion and as we all know, no one named Marion can ever truly be dangerous. Except Suge Knight and Mrs Cunningham out of Happy Days.


My point is about a bigger problem. There are people who feel like they are (insert action star's name here) when they have a gun. John Wayne, Billy the Kid, John McClain, Rambo or whoever. It's not only a gun control issue or a mental health issue, it's a culture issue. What happened today is truly sad and impossible to understand and for a lot of people, in some sick but unintentional way, it's entertainment. This country is one of the main countries that jerk off to violence(so to speak).

Now the issue will shift to the typical left vs right talking points and slippery slope bullshit arguments that's leaves more innocent victims' deaths resulting in nothing.


It's all tragic and awful and everything, don't get me wrong but like...we have a tendency to just like...debating everytime something mental happens, not that we shouldn't, debate is healthy but does anything really need to be changed? Are we really ever gonna change the fact that there are nutters on this earth? Or the fact that human greed causes a great deal of the problems, whether thats governments keeping guns legal for greedy motives? Or, y'know, whatever, it's a tragedy, it's a sick and crazy thing but at the same time, welcome to the real world y'know? Kids die all over the fuckin' place, it's an awful thing but the shit ain't about to stop anytime soon, no matter what we ban.


That's just complacency, IMO. I wouldn't be enough of a prick to stand in the face of a parent of these children and tell them, "welcome to the real world" or "toughen up." Every problem has a solution. It's a long term effort that would probably take generations to overcome but we have to start somewhere. The start is probably going to need to be something that a lot of gun owners don't like.

People always try to put themselves in the mind of a homeowner being robbed when discussing gun control for some reason. When it comes time to put yourself in the mind of the parents of these kids and kids all over the world, apathy and complacency take over. That's not a solution. I guess tragedy is just a source for small talk until it hits home. We teach our kids that violence isn't the answer but when they see violence in their face or deaths on television, everyone sticks their thumb in their ass. It's amazing at how hypocritical people can be when talking about tragedy not directly affecting them.

*Locked*

3325a15.gif


#36
sugaraylen

sugaraylen

    I am a Gunner!

  • Supporters
  • 25,407 posts
  • 14-February 10


Has there ever been a case of a spree-bomber?


David Copeland?


That's why I asked. Still, as I'd classify him as a terrorist.


I suppose your right but he was also loonier than a shithouse rat and there was a hint of like, a spree to what he did and the way he did it. And as far as the political thing, the bastard was a paranoid schitzophrenic with like, a tendency towards hallucinations so although there was a sort of politics there it was hardly cogent. I suppose you're kinda right but i always took him as more of a just a fuckin' mentalist than anybody seriously aligned too or representative of any kind of politics or even capable of holding an even vaguely discernible political perspective other then "i reckon i'm gonna kill a load of blacks and benders cuz the voice in my head say so!".

ARSENAL TIL I DIE

 

Fearless N***** get slapped in Manhattan

For rappin'

Big Ghost steps off laughin'


#37
Kasanova King

Kasanova King

    FRONTMAN

  • Supporters
  • 11,397 posts
  • 02-December 04

Has there ever been a case of a spree-bomber? Bombs seem to be the favoured weapons of people with a cause, who don't want to be caught. These spree shootings seem to be a case of someone's sanity failing and they need to go take something out on somebody.

A gun is an immediate gratification of that desire, as is picking up a samurai sword. A bomb isn't, indeed the time it takes to sit down and build one might (assuming they have the knowledge in the first place) be time enough for someone to calm down to change their minds if they'd temporarily lost it. I think the reason a lot of these shooters do kill themselves after they've finished or are forced to stop is because it suddenly dawns on them what they've done.

So I'm not really sure it makes sense to compare guns with building a bomb, they are, ultimately, just tools. It's the person who wields it that's the problem.

Trouble is we don't have the ability to read people's minds, so the practical solution would seem to be some sort of regulation.


Exactly. Spot on. Very well said.

Kasanova King


#38
Rustycage

Rustycage

    FRONTMAN

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 7,666 posts
  • 23-March 04

Fuck gun control, what we need is idiot control! Once a government unarms it's citizens , it's not a good thing. How do you think it was so easy for the Nazis??


And this is a funny response. This country has all the weapons you can think up. They can kill you from a control room. Who is dumb enough to think that they would stop the government and military with their pea shooters if things really went down? Another John Wayne.

*Locked*

3325a15.gif


#39
sugaraylen

sugaraylen

    I am a Gunner!

  • Supporters
  • 25,407 posts
  • 14-February 10





Too many people think their John Wayne when they hold a gun. There's no chance of changing their minds with legislation. You can't fix stupid.


If they thought they were John Wayne there wouldn't be a problem, he never shot no one that weren't threatening him and he never shot no one in the back or women and children, if people with guns thought they were John Wayne the only thing remotely of note about it would be watching them walk around like they've had their underpants kicked up their arse :lol:

Also, his name was Marion and as we all know, no one named Marion can ever truly be dangerous. Except Suge Knight and Mrs Cunningham out of Happy Days.


My point is about a bigger problem. There are people who feel like they are (insert action star's name here) when they have a gun. John Wayne, Billy the Kid, John McClain, Rambo or whoever. It's not only a gun control issue or a mental health issue, it's a culture issue. What happened today is truly sad and impossible to understand and for a lot of people, in some sick but unintentional way, it's entertainment. This country is one of the main countries that jerk off to violence(so to speak).

Now the issue will shift to the typical left vs right talking points and slippery slope bullshit arguments that's leaves more innocent victims' deaths resulting in nothing.


It's all tragic and awful and everything, don't get me wrong but like...we have a tendency to just like...debating everytime something mental happens, not that we shouldn't, debate is healthy but does anything really need to be changed? Are we really ever gonna change the fact that there are nutters on this earth? Or the fact that human greed causes a great deal of the problems, whether thats governments keeping guns legal for greedy motives? Or, y'know, whatever, it's a tragedy, it's a sick and crazy thing but at the same time, welcome to the real world y'know? Kids die all over the fuckin' place, it's an awful thing but the shit ain't about to stop anytime soon, no matter what we ban.


That's just complacency, IMO. I wouldn't be enough of a prick to stand in the face of a parent of these children and tell them, "welcome to the real world" or "toughen up." Every problem has a solution. It's a long term effort that would probably take generations to overcome but we have to start somewhere. The start is probably going to need to be something that a lot of gun owners don't like.

People always try to put themselves in the mind of a homeowner being robbed when discussing gun control for some reason. When it comes time to put yourself in the mind of the parents of these kids and kids all over the world, apathy and complacency take over. That's not a solution. I guess tragedy is just a source for small talk until it hits home. We teach our kids that violence isn't the answer but when they see violence in their face or deaths on television, everyone sticks their thumb in their ass. It's amazing at how hypocritical people can be when talking about tragedy not directly affecting them.


Unfortunately apathy is the way of the world, for me and you and everybody else. The difference is some people accept it, go about their day and go to sleep. Then others get outraged, then go about their day and go to sleep. Both parties end up doing the same, it's just one wastes energy.

But no, actually, you're right (and i mean this totally straight and unsarcastically here, in case i get misunderstood) if everybody thought like me the world'd be a shitter place than it is, someone has to get up out of their chair and rattle some cages, definitely.


Fuck gun control, what we need is idiot control! Once a government unarms it's citizens , it's not a good thing. How do you think it was so easy for the Nazis??


And this is a funny response. This country has all the weapons you can think up. They can kill you from a control room. Who is dumb enough to think that they would stop the government and military with their pea shooters if things really went down? Another John Wayne.


Stop slaggin' off John Wayne! :lol:

ARSENAL TIL I DIE

 

Fearless N***** get slapped in Manhattan

For rappin'

Big Ghost steps off laughin'


#40
PappyTron

PappyTron

    FRONTMAN

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 8,932 posts
  • 16-May 07




KK - you seem to be conflating two pieces of information here:

Semi-Auto = what you said
Auto (and a lot of other things) = what I said

The problem being, that in your opening post you said "show them your ID, fill out a few forms and walk out with a heavy duty automatic gun of your choice" which is both erroneous and egregious. Any of the guns that you can walk out with are not "heavy duty automatic/s" and there is a MASSIVE difference.


No, not at all. Considering gun manufacturers themselves call their own guns "automatic" even if they are "semi" automatic, as you say, shows my statement to be accurate. On another note, there are several "semi" automatic guns that can be fired just as fast and with more accuracy than some "fully" automatic guns.


Just because somebody calls something by a name which is incorrect doesn't mean that we should all do so, or do you just like to fall in line with current trends? We should be especially accurate in our naming and phraseology when we are attempting to create a discussion on various merits, pros and cons. Unless, of course, we deliberately use the most emotive phrasing that we can muster in an underhanded attempt to rabble rouse.; however, I do think that that ploy would be beneath a man of your moral character.


hahaha....you actually got me to smile...but in realistically, with the advances in technology, there really is little difference between fully and semi. There's plenty of guns that are legally sold as "semi" and can easily be converted to "fully". And like I said, technically speaking, a semi autimatic gun is an automatic gun.


No, a semi-automatic gun is not an automatic gun, at least in the points that are relevant (ie, not splitting hairs). The fact that people bump fire their guns or fit devices which facilitate the same has more relevance. Sure, I can squeeze the trigger of a rifle very quickly, but certainly not at 600-800rpm, and legal Class II guns have been used in virtually no crimes since the laws were passed separating them in the first place; and when I say virtually none I mean about half a dozen times in half a century.

"I actually had one cute hat, and it blew off at the CVS parking lot. And this whole car full of black kids ran over it, for no reason. AND THEY SAW IT! THEY SAW IT!"


#41
tat2d1

tat2d1

    OH MY GOD

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,330 posts
  • 16-October 02


Fuck gun control, what we need is idiot control! Once a government unarms it's citizens , it's not a good thing. How do you think it was so easy for the Nazis??


How what was so easy for the Nazi's, taking over Germany? Are you suggesting that someone put a gun to Hindenburgs head and made him appoint Hitler Chancellor? :lol:


Hitler made it illegal for Jews to own guns. Not saying the holocaust still wouldn't have happened, but atleast they would have had a fighting chance.



Fuck gun control, what we need is idiot control! Once a government unarms it's citizens , it's not a good thing. How do you think it was so easy for the Nazis??


And this is a funny response. This country has all the weapons you can think up. They can kill you from a control room. Who is dumb enough to think that they would stop the government and military with their pea shooters if things really went down? Another John Wayne.


Again, not saying that we would be able to stop the government, but I'd like to have a fighting chance. You can go cower somewhere, I won't go down without a fight ;)
Check out Pythons By Design on Facebook

#42
Rustycage

Rustycage

    FRONTMAN

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 7,666 posts
  • 23-March 04






Too many people think their John Wayne when they hold a gun. There's no chance of changing their minds with legislation. You can't fix stupid.


If they thought they were John Wayne there wouldn't be a problem, he never shot no one that weren't threatening him and he never shot no one in the back or women and children, if people with guns thought they were John Wayne the only thing remotely of note about it would be watching them walk around like they've had their underpants kicked up their arse :lol:

Also, his name was Marion and as we all know, no one named Marion can ever truly be dangerous. Except Suge Knight and Mrs Cunningham out of Happy Days.


My point is about a bigger problem. There are people who feel like they are (insert action star's name here) when they have a gun. John Wayne, Billy the Kid, John McClain, Rambo or whoever. It's not only a gun control issue or a mental health issue, it's a culture issue. What happened today is truly sad and impossible to understand and for a lot of people, in some sick but unintentional way, it's entertainment. This country is one of the main countries that jerk off to violence(so to speak).

Now the issue will shift to the typical left vs right talking points and slippery slope bullshit arguments that's leaves more innocent victims' deaths resulting in nothing.


It's all tragic and awful and everything, don't get me wrong but like...we have a tendency to just like...debating everytime something mental happens, not that we shouldn't, debate is healthy but does anything really need to be changed? Are we really ever gonna change the fact that there are nutters on this earth? Or the fact that human greed causes a great deal of the problems, whether thats governments keeping guns legal for greedy motives? Or, y'know, whatever, it's a tragedy, it's a sick and crazy thing but at the same time, welcome to the real world y'know? Kids die all over the fuckin' place, it's an awful thing but the shit ain't about to stop anytime soon, no matter what we ban.


That's just complacency, IMO. I wouldn't be enough of a prick to stand in the face of a parent of these children and tell them, "welcome to the real world" or "toughen up." Every problem has a solution. It's a long term effort that would probably take generations to overcome but we have to start somewhere. The start is probably going to need to be something that a lot of gun owners don't like.

People always try to put themselves in the mind of a homeowner being robbed when discussing gun control for some reason. When it comes time to put yourself in the mind of the parents of these kids and kids all over the world, apathy and complacency take over. That's not a solution. I guess tragedy is just a source for small talk until it hits home. We teach our kids that violence isn't the answer but when they see violence in their face or deaths on television, everyone sticks their thumb in their ass. It's amazing at how hypocritical people can be when talking about tragedy not directly affecting them.


Unfortunately apathy is the way of the world, for me and you and everybody else. The difference is some people accept it, go about their day and go to sleep. Then others get outraged, then go about their day and go to sleep. Both parties end up doing the same, it's just one wastes energy.

But no, actually, you're right (and i mean this totally straight and unsarcastically here, in case i get misunderstood) if everybody thought like me the world'd be a shitter place than it is, someone has to get up out of their chair and rattle some cages, definitely.


Fuck gun control, what we need is idiot control! Once a government unarms it's citizens , it's not a good thing. How do you think it was so easy for the Nazis??


And this is a funny response. This country has all the weapons you can think up. They can kill you from a control room. Who is dumb enough to think that they would stop the government and military with their pea shooters if things really went down? Another John Wayne.


Stop slaggin' off John Wayne! :lol:


John Wayne is my example because he was an actor glorifying genocide in movies. People blindly following an image of being a hero when the actual result is just more blood to clean up. It's now ingrained into our culture and people say, "it's just the way the world is." The world around you is what you make it and there is NEVER an end to evolution. Refusing to evolve is complacency towards an end. Shooting sprees are not inevitable. Even if it was a dumb idea like putting cops at the doors of every public building, it doesn't address the problem of gun violence in other cases but with this last case, they wouldn't have let a dumb shit with a mask in to go kill kids.

The death of innocent people is never acceptable. A solution may be hard and require big sacrifices. No attempt to address the problem puts the future blood on the hands of all of us.

*Locked*

3325a15.gif


#43
downzy

downzy

    SUPER GOD

  • Supporters
  • 3,063 posts
  • 18-February 06

and legal Class II guns have been used in virtually no crimes since the laws were passed separating them in the first place; and when I say virtually none I mean about half a dozen times in half a century.


So the ban on Class II guns have been effective in their use during crimes but you're opposed to banning slightly less dangerous guns on the grounds that they're classified differently? Why is the threshold for restriction of certain guns kept at the automatic level, yet semi-automatic or high magazine capacity is fine? If restrictions are permissible on a qualitative basis vis-a-vis automatic weaponry is bad and should not be allowed, why can't such distinctions include slightly less dangerous weaponry?

Once you accept a threshold for restriction, it stops becoming whether guns are a constitutional right and where the distinction lies for where to restrict.

#44
Kasanova King

Kasanova King

    FRONTMAN

  • Supporters
  • 11,397 posts
  • 02-December 04





KK - you seem to be conflating two pieces of information here:

Semi-Auto = what you said
Auto (and a lot of other things) = what I said

The problem being, that in your opening post you said "show them your ID, fill out a few forms and walk out with a heavy duty automatic gun of your choice" which is both erroneous and egregious. Any of the guns that you can walk out with are not "heavy duty automatic/s" and there is a MASSIVE difference.


No, not at all. Considering gun manufacturers themselves call their own guns "automatic" even if they are "semi" automatic, as you say, shows my statement to be accurate. On another note, there are several "semi" automatic guns that can be fired just as fast and with more accuracy than some "fully" automatic guns.


Just because somebody calls something by a name which is incorrect doesn't mean that we should all do so, or do you just like to fall in line with current trends? We should be especially accurate in our naming and phraseology when we are attempting to create a discussion on various merits, pros and cons. Unless, of course, we deliberately use the most emotive phrasing that we can muster in an underhanded attempt to rabble rouse.; however, I do think that that ploy would be beneath a man of your moral character.


hahaha....you actually got me to smile...but in realistically, with the advances in technology, there really is little difference between fully and semi. There's plenty of guns that are legally sold as "semi" and can easily be converted to "fully". And like I said, technically speaking, a semi autimatic gun is an automatic gun.


No, a semi-automatic gun is not an automatic gun, at least in the points that are relevant (ie, not splitting hairs). The fact that people bump fire their guns or fit devices which facilitate the same has more relevance. Sure, I can squeeze the trigger of a rifle very quickly, but certainly not at 600-800rpm, and legal Class II guns have been used in virtually no crimes since the laws were passed separating them in the first place; and when I say virtually none I mean about half a dozen times in half a century.


So basically you are agreeing with me. That a semi auto can be just as deadly as a fully auto? Take a look at this video for example:

https://www.youtube....h?v=w2PFY8MNVuY


or this video easily available on youtube:


Edited by Kasanova King, 14 December 2012 - 07:20 PM.

Kasanova King


#45
Kasanova King

Kasanova King

    FRONTMAN

  • Supporters
  • 11,397 posts
  • 02-December 04


and legal Class II guns have been used in virtually no crimes since the laws were passed separating them in the first place; and when I say virtually none I mean about half a dozen times in half a century.


So the ban on Class II guns have been effective in their use during crimes but you're opposed to banning slightly less dangerous guns on the grounds that they're classified differently? Why is the threshold for restriction of certain guns kept at the automatic level, yet semi-automatic or high magazine capacity is fine? If restrictions are permissible on a qualitative basis vis-a-vis automatic weaponry is bad and should not be allowed, why can't such distinctions include slightly less dangerous weaponry?

Once you accept a threshold for restriction, it stops becoming whether guns are a constitutional right and where the distinction lies for where to restrict.


Statistically, according to Papytron himself, they're actually MORE dangerous. :)

Edited by Kasanova King, 14 December 2012 - 07:25 PM.

Kasanova King





0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users