Gun threads

[mark galoob]

i just wanted to make a couple points based on what tsg said...

first of all your statement that you would rather go after a pistol than a carbine in a close in situation tells me you have never really thought that through very well. id much rather go up against a carbine (ar) than a pistol if im close in and my only option is hand to hand. i think anybody that has any tactical training would tell you the same thing. pistols are much quicker at close range than an a carbine.

second you state that the nra has no fix to the problems except to add more guns...this is absurd...and its exactly what the extreme liberal press is feeding everybody right now. i highly suggest you go to the nra website and actually read the speech before you make untrue statements like that.

folks, weather you like it or not, guns with high cap mags are here...right or wrong. the supreme court ruled on it and its a mute point. agree or not.

the nra is suggesting that there are monsterous people walking our streets right now. we have no idea how many but they are out there. and we protect our money from these monsters with peeps with guns. we protect our president from these monsters w/ peeps with guns. we protect our congress, and our govt buildings, and our airports, and our office buildings...all these things we value we protect with peeps with guns. and for our most valuable most beloved assetts, our children, we leave them high and dry, and the monsters know this because we advertise it. why not protect them also with security guards or police officers. that is all they are suggesting and to say otherwise is flat out falsehood.

mark galoob

 

[mark galoob]

your right, he could of changed out clip after clip and unloaded on those kids with a old small caliber hand gun. And in this case it might not of made a bit of difference but in a lot of situations it would make a huge difference.

im just curious, what then is an acceptable body count.

the problem here is there are monsters with no value to human life, that walk among us, and if they are determined enough, they will find a way to mass murder with small guns, large guns, ied's, car bombs, flying an airplane full of fuel into it...

guns are not the problem...

mark galoob

 

[tsgstl]

i just wanted to make a couple points based on what tsg said...

first of all your statement that you would rather go after a pistol than a carbine in a close in situation tells me you have never really thought that through very well. id much rather go up against a carbine (ar) than a pistol if im close in and my only option is hand to hand. i think anybody that has any tactical training would tell you the same thing. pistols are much quicker at close range than an a carbine.

second you state that the nra has no fix to the problems except to add more guns...this is absurd...and its exactly what the extreme liberal press is feeding everybody right now. i highly suggest you go to the nra website and actually read the speech before you make untrue statements like that.

folks, weather you like it or not, guns with high cap mags are here...right or wrong. the supreme court ruled on it and its a mute point. agree or not.

the nra is suggesting that there are monsterous people walking our streets right now. we have no idea how many but they are out there. and we protect our money from these monsters with peeps with guns. we protect our president from these monsters w/ peeps with guns. we protect our congress, and our govt buildings, and our airports, and our office buildings...all these things we value we protect with peeps with guns. and for our most valuable most beloved assetts, our children, we leave them high and dry, and the monsters know this because we advertise it. why not protect them also with security guards or police officers. that is all they are suggesting and to say otherwise is flat out falsehood.

mark galoob

I am the general public and I am not, nor are the average citizen trained "tactically"
I still even with what you say in a situation were these have happened IE a larger room that has many people would react just as I described. Hopefully there would be someone with me and we could overpower him. Right or wrong based on tactical training is irrelevant.

I am affiliated with no party, I follow no news. I don't blog or read blogs I was never even into politics or any matters really. I just see what others here say or what I see in other places and I base my opinion on the facts that I know. The main thing I have seen said by the NRA is how they want more guns in schools. This just seems completely bass ackwards. What about preschools then? You are fixing a problem with a problem, it logically makes no sense.

you said:
"folks, weather you like it or not, guns with high cap mags are here...right or wrong. the supreme court ruled on it and its a mute point. agree or not."

Until the day I die I will never settle for liking something or not. Sorry I never will. I could care less who ruled on what, if I disagree on something I will voice my opinion.

Edit: Furthermore when I play Call of Duty I'm not using my pistol to do the killing, there is obviously a advantage to using these weapons or these guys wouldn't be using them. You can take a shot with a smaller caliber as well and still survive. Besides all that like I said the assault ban is only one of the (lesser important) things that need to be done.

 

[cajun312]

I am the general public and I am not, nor are the average citizen trained "tactically"
I still even with what you say in a situation were these have happened IE a larger room that has many people would react just as I described. Hopefully there would be someone with me and we could overpower him. Right or wrong based on tactical training is irrelevant.

I am affiliated with no party, I follow no news. I don't blog or read blogs I was never even into politics or any matters really. I just see what others here say or what I see in other places and I base my opinion on the facts that I know. The main thing I have seen said by the NRA is how they want more guns in schools. This just seems completely bass ackwards. What about preschools then? You are fixing a problem with a problem, it logically makes no sense.

you said:
"folks, weather you like it or not, guns with high cap mags are here...right or wrong. the supreme court ruled on it and its a mute point. agree or not."

Until the day I die I will never settle for liking something or not. Sorry I never will. I could care less who ruled on what, if I disagree on something I will voice my opinion.

Edit: Furthermore when I play Call of Duty I'm not using my pistol to do the killing, there is obviously a advantage to using these weapons or these guys wouldn't be using them. You can take a shot with a smaller caliber as well and still survive. Besides all that like I said the assault ban is only one of the (lesser important) things that need to be done.

Some people think games like Call of Duty should be banned....because of all the killing.

 

[mark galoob]

:ROFLMAO:

mark galoob

 

[Marlene]

this is absurd...and its exactly what the extreme liberal press is feeding everybody right now. i highly suggest you go to the nra website and actually read the speech before you make untrue statements like that.

NRA Executive Vice President & CEO, Wayne LaPierre is calling for armed police officers in every school following the elementary school shooting in Newtown, Connecticut one week ago today. In remarks Friday to the press in Washington, LaPierre said, “the only way to stop a bad guy with a gun is a good guy with a gun

how is it a "liberal" press feeding everyboday? sounds like he is saying more guns to me. want to counter with why this isn't true? I tried to go the NRA site but it just filled with join up ads and such and I didn't see a non-liberal press reporting that the words we all heard come out of his mouth were not what he said, even if we did hear them. I'm just not getting how you can turn this around and blame the liberal press for showing this guy's speech and letting him say what he said.

 

[CES020]

how is it a "liberal" press feeding everyboday? sounds like he is saying more guns to me. want to counter with why this isn't true? I tried to go the NRA site but it just filled with join up ads and such and I didn't see a non-liberal press reporting that the words we all heard come out of his mouth were not what he said, even if we did hear them. I'm just not getting how you can turn this around and blame the liberal press for showing this guy's speech and letting him say what he said.

Marlene, I can't speak for him, but what I think he was saying is that the press is acting like he said he wants all teachers and staff to carry guns and to have guns in the classrooms as well, when the actual statement you posted said he called for armed officers (law enforcement people) to be present at schools. So it's not giving anyone more guns in schools, it's asking law enforcement officers to be stationed at schools. That's a long way away from saying "more guns in schools".

I don't follow the NRA, so I have no idea what anyone said, I'm just reading the quotes above and that's how I read it.

I could be wrong.

 

[SignManiac]

I'm amazed this thread is still going. Do you all really think you're right in your personel opinions or have a solution??? Get real.

Bad layouts can be fixed, the gun issue, never.

 

[mark galoob]

marlene, i heard and read the speech. their solution is actually more of a multi tiered security approach to schools. similar to how they would approach securing a govt building or a bank, or a corporate office building, and having the full power of the nra helping any schools that want it to activally engage parents, teacheres, staff and the community at large to come up with a plan that individual schools could take and use the parts that would work for them and discard the parts that wont work for them.

as far as more guns in schools, his remarks were very specific. we need well trained armed guards such as police officers in schools now to deal with the threat of these monsters. to keep our schools safe now...today.

to just say "more guns in schools" is completely ignorant of the true intent of the position. it implies that they want young, untrained teachers assistants fresh out of school to arm with machine guns and spray lead everywhere killing massive amounts of other children, to protect their students, and that these horible machine guns are going to be in unsecure places so the kindergardeners can take them outside and mow each other down.

i believe the nra position is that the root of the problem is not guns, but these crazy violent people who do not value human life that are walking among us. ie the "monsters" or "demons" "madman" or what ever you want to call them

how is it so hard for people to understand that the monster who did this is the problem. its not rocket science...a madman determined to mass murder will do that with or without guns.

mark galoob

 

[bob]

...If I face a hand gun I am much more likely to try and over power the shooter. If it is a assault weapon that has large clips I will be looking for the nearest exit....

Spoken like someone who has never been shot at.**

When someone states just what they might do in some acute hypothetical situation it's endlessly amusing. In the real world no one has any idea of what they actually would do in such situations. I should think that they describe what they would like to do or what they see themselves doing but the fact is, until the actual event, you have no idea what you would do.

**Unless you've had actual experience at this sort of thing most likely the first thing you'd do is look for a good place to clean out your pants. There's not a whole hell of a lot of functional difference between facing a semi-automatic hand gun or a semi-automatic long gun, each of comparable caliber. Even a double action wheel gun can get off six shots and reload quicker that you might think. Actually the bore diameter isn't particularly interesting at closer ranges, as in a class room.

This isn't an episode of Call of Duty or a rousing rubber of cowboys and indians. The bad guys will be shooting real bullets.

 

[Techman]

If I face a hand gun I am much more likely to try and over power the shooter. If it is a assault weapon that has large clips I will be looking for the nearest exit....

No you wont.. you will pee your pants, and scream like a girl..
Very likely fill your drawers with a stinky load.. Pun intended..

You will comply with the perps demands and act all hang dog and pray he doesn't shoot you. Then when the threat is gone if you are unharmed you will carry that image for days and weeks and months,, All the same time fully regretting never having a real weapon in your hand. Then like most others you will go to the gun range and get fully trained until you can shoot like an expert. And then never again face a perp.

 

[Bigdawg]

I haven't posted on this because I have very mixed feelings.

I strongly believe in private gun ownership... not much anyone can say that would sway me from that position.

But when it comes to "arms" as bob pointed out... where exactly SHOULD the limit be? There has to be one... I don't think anyone can seriously say there shouldn't be. Arms include all types of weapons besides guns... so going back to Marlene's earlier thoughts... we already have those limits. We can't possess a nuclear weapon... even if we found the parts, bought the plutonium on the black market and built our weapon.. the LAW says it is illegal to own or possess it. That's a limit. We already accept limits to "arms."

So saying there should be no limit is just silliness. The question is WHERE the limit should be drawn. Should the law say you can only own "arms" that are guns and there is no limit to that? Should the law say anything capable of killing 20 people in 2 minutes should be outlawed? Should bombs and grenades be include as acceptable weapons - they are, after all, "arms?"

Then there is the mental health end and the responsibility of gun ownership. The Newtown killer's mom was in NO WAY a responsible gun owner. She had a son with problems - that she knew about - and didn't lock up her guns to prevent him from using that as an outlet for his mental illness. Gun owners HAVE to take responsibility (and the majority do) of making sure their "arms" are secured from those that should not have access to them.

I personally believe there should be limited magazine capacity. For those that argue that it infringes on your rights - your rights are already infringed. You can't own a bomb. You can't own a nuclear weapon. Society has already accepted that some arms are not meant to be used anywhere but war. And if your argument is that it won't make any difference - he can reload quickly - most shooters that were taken down, were taken down as they reloaded.

Arming society to the t's is not the answer. Putting armed guards at school puts us closer to a police state than I personally am very uncomfortable with. Who do we arm next? I shudder to think about where that line of reasoning could go.

So what we need are reasonable discussions - without the emotion attached to gun ownership. Will it happen? Probably not. I heard some talking head say yesterday that gun owners think about their guns and gun rights all the time... and to some extent I believe that to be true. I am always conscious of the fact that a gun is in my home. But owning a gun doesn't rule my life and it is most definitely not the prism I view life through.

 

[fmg]

Please I would like to ask a simple question. What is the fascination between guns and american people?
Thank you.

 

[Techman]

What is the fascination between guns and american people?

It is the rally point around which some are refusing to allow one side dictate a way fo life to the other.

Some of us are sick of being told what to do, how to do it, and when,, by a few others who do exactly what they say not to do.

It is a point around which some are holding the line against the creeping loss of our individual freedoms daily lives caused by others others who are doing it only for power or because they live in fear. We refuse to give up our guns actually means,, we are refusing to allow the basic changes being done to our way of life and the American traditional values.

 

[Bigcat_hunter]

Please I would like to ask a simple question. What is the fascination between guns and american people?
Thank you.

We enjoy our freedom. A disarmed society is not free.

 

[fmg]

We enjoy our freedom. A disarmed society is not free.

I am from England which is a disarmed society and I have always been able to enjoy my freedom.
Thank you for your reply.

 

[WildWestDesigns]

I am from England which is a disarmed society and I have always been able to enjoy my freedom.
Thank you for your reply.

The underlying issue is more of a cultural one. Guns and the related munitions have played an important part in the shaping of this country. It just also happens to be a cultural issue that broke the camel's back when it comes to steadfast refusal for change that Techman is talking about.

 

[Bigcat_hunter]

Your version of "freedom" is probably vastly different from mine.

 

[fmg]

Your version of "freedom" is probably vastly different from mine.

What would that be, just curious.

 

[signage]

It is the rally point around which some are refusing to allow one side dictate a way fo life to the other.

Some of us are sick of being told what to do, how to do it, and when,, by a few others who do exactly what they say not to do.

It is a point around which some are holding the line against the creeping loss of our individual freedoms daily lives caused by others others who are doing it only for power or because they live in fear. We refuse to give up our guns actually means,, we are refusing to allow the basic changes being done to our way of life and the American traditional values.

A majority suffer from the few that do not follow the rules! And if new rules are enacted, these few will not follow them any ways!