Gun control discussion

[Edwina's Secretary]

One does not NEED a gun to kill a coyote, any more than one NEEDS a fork to eat his or her food. They are both just tools that let the person accomplish the task more efficiently, with less mess.

You are kidding right? That an assault rifle kills a coyote with "less mess"??? An animal killed with multiple bullets is "less mess" than an animal killed with one or even two clean shots. It seems to me if someone is not good enough shooter to kill the animal without "mess", they should find some other form of recreation - or occupation.

Even I, not closely tied to anyone who shots animals...can't buy that one!

Anymore than I can buy that jeeps and HMMWV were designed (although adapted would be the better word) to kill. These are vehicles designed to move people or goods from place to place - albeit those people may be involved in killing other people. Tanks are vehicles designed to kill people. (I know this because, during WWII, my dad was involved in designing and testing tanks.) Perhaps your brother has confused them.

Although I have had a bit of fun with the visual of a jeep being used to kill the enemy. I imagine folks at Camp Pendleton practicing killing people with jeeps. Very fun. Silly, but fun!

[DriftyAlison0]

My opinion on guns-its not the guns that kill people, its the people behind the gun that kills people. Sure ban the automatics and AK 47's and the other military weapons and keep normal pistols (shotguns for hunters) alone. One why punish the ones who uses the guns right for the idiots who don't and the bad guys will go to the black market and still have guns.

[Karen]

You are kidding right? That an assault rifle kills a coyote with "less mess"??? An animal killed with multiple bullets is "less mess" than an animal killed with one or even two clean shots. It seems to me if someone is not good enough shooter to kill the animal without "mess", they should find some other form of recreation - or occupation.

You don't seem to realize that these weapons being talked about in the press can (and often are) be used to fire a single shot at a time. Not everyone who uses them just holds down the trigger until a clip runs out. And being able to kill a predatory animal accurately, with one clean shot, is way less messy. So you think farmers, ranchers, or other defending their animals should come up with another "occupation" if they cannot kill the predator neatly, but don't think they should be allowed to use an accurate weapon? You are contradicting yourself.

Just saying ...

[blue]

Does wood furniture on an AR make it less scary?



Maybe girly it up a little.





Should bolt action ARs be regulated?

[Lady's Human]

You are kidding right? That an assault rifle kills a coyote with "less mess"??? An animal killed with multiple bullets is "less mess" than an animal killed with one or even two clean shots. It seems to me if someone is not good enough shooter to kill the animal without "mess", they should find some other form of recreation - or occupation.

Even I, not closely tied to anyone who shots animals...can't buy that one!

That is because your logic, as usual, is nonexistent. An AR is a highly accurate platform. As such, you don't need more than one or two shots to put down a coyote. However, like most predatory canines, they move in packs. You may need to shoot more than one. My neighbor raises horses. He uses a semi automatic rifle to eliminate problem animals as he isn't a professional sniper. Sometimes it takes more than one shot to eliminate the animal. Should he give up farming because he doesn't meet your bar as a marksman?

Anymore than I can buy that jeeps and HMMWV were designed (although adapted would be the better word) to kill. These are vehicles designed to move people or goods from place to place - albeit those people may be involved in killing other people. Tanks are vehicles designed to kill people. (I know this because, during WWII, my dad was involved in designing and testing tanks.) Perhaps your brother has confused them.

No, I haven't confused anything. One of the requirements for WW2 jeeps was that they would be able to use various and sundry weapons in several different types of mounts. Hence, they were designed to kill. HMMWVs mount several different types of weapons from different weapons stations as well. They were, in fact, designed as killing machines. I know a little bit about both weapons systems, I've used both. First hand, not what my father told me at the kitchen table. Gunnery table 8 exists for a reason.

Although I have had a bit of fun with the visual of a jeep being used to kill the enemy. I imagine folks at Camp Pendleton practicing killing people with jeeps. Very fun. Silly, but fun!

Again, various gunnery tables involve the use of jeeps with ring mounted weapons (when they were still in the system) and HMMWVs. Not silly at all, except in your mind.

[Lady's Human]

Blue, if you add wooden furniture and take away that evil, evil bayonet lug, they are definitely less scary. Just ask Sen. Feinstein!

[Lady's Human]

Thank you for making my point about concealed carry. I do not know how many firearms are within my range on any given day. And I think that is a terrible shame. And morally wrong..

You being harmed by a person with a concealed carry permit is almost a zero probability event.

You being harmed by someone with a vehicle is almost a statistical certainty.

However, you rail and gnash your teeth about the near-zero probability event, and blithely ignore the statistically certain event?

Then you have the gall to accuse another person of using no logic?

[blue]

You being harmed by a person with a concealed carry permit is almost a zero probability event.

You being harmed by someone with a vehicle is almost a statistical certainty.

However, you rail and gnash your teeth about the near-zero probability event, and blithely ignore the statistically certain event?

Then you have the gall to accuse another person of using no logic?

Logically, you are more likely to encounter a mass murder in a gun free zone.

Logically, gun crimes occur more in areas with high gun restrictions.

Logically, more gun crimes occur in high population areas.

Logically you are safer in sparse population areas with few firearm restrictions.

Common link with mass shootings, what drugs where they taking?

http://www.wnd.com/2013/01/the-giant...ook-reporting/

ETA: Logic matters very little if at all to those who live in fear. I know people who refuse to ride a bus without a helmet.

[cassiesmom]

We are only nine days into 2013 and there have already been 13 murders in Chicago. Mostly on the South Side and mostly gang-on-gang shootings. I hope the task force headed by VP Biden looks at the reasons why young people join gangs and obtain guns. I don't think they can address gun violence without also looking at other issues like poverty, education, stability of the family, and just creating a better future for young people than gang membership, prison, or early death. Mayor Emanuel announced that he wants the community policing program in the city administered on a local level instead of by the department central administration, so they can try to do more in their immediate communities where the police are working. VP Biden, I'm sure Chicago is not the only big city dealing with gangs, drugs and gun violence. HELP!

[mon]

C'mon folfs, you can but an illegal firearm in Canada B.C. whenever u please. All ya need is the balls to go downtown and buy 1 off a freaky criminal. You can also legally get 1 easily. Just sayin'.

[mon]

All I am saying is that people break laws. No matter what they are, if they feel like it. Make all the gun control laws you please. Dude wants a gun, Oh I'm pretty sure he or she will finf one.

[pomtzu]

Philadelphia stats:

On New Year's Day 2013, 3 people were shot and killed in the City of Brotherly Love! Yes - Happy New Year, Philadelphia!

Total not available for January yet, but December was pretty brutal........
105 gun related injuries
23 of those died the day of the shooting

I don't see an end to all of this madness - unfortunately.

[Edwina's Secretary]

All I am saying is that people break laws. No matter what they are, if they feel like it. Make all the gun control laws you please. Dude wants a gun, Oh I'm pretty sure he or she will finf one.

Teenagers will get and drink alcohol regardless of laws...so why bother having any laws? People will drive drunk - no matter what if they feel like it so...why have controls on it? People will drive any speed they want - no matter if there are speed limits. Make all the speed limits you want...guy wants to speed...he or she will.

The hallmark of a civilization is the willingness and will to establish rules and standards of behavior - even if some people will break the laws nonetheless.

Just saying.....

[Edwina's Secretary]

That is because your logic, as usual, is nonexistent. An AR is a highly accurate platform. As such, you don't need more than one or two shots to put down a coyote. However, like most predatory canines, they move in packs. You may need to shoot more than one. My neighbor raises horses. He uses a semi automatic rifle to eliminate problem animals as he isn't a professional sniper. Sometimes it takes more than one shot to eliminate the animal. Should he give up farming because he doesn't meet your bar as a marksman?



No, I haven't confused anything. One of the requirements for WW2 jeeps was that they would be able to use various and sundry weapons in several different types of mounts. Hence, they were designed to kill. HMMWVs mount several different types of weapons from different weapons stations as well. They were, in fact, designed as killing machines. I know a little bit about both weapons systems, I've used both. First hand, not what my father told me at the kitchen table. Gunnery table 8 exists for a reason.



Again, various gunnery tables involve the use of jeeps with ring mounted weapons (when they were still in the system) and HMMWVs. Not silly at all, except in your mind.

Keep on paddling. At least you may convince yourself! Guns are good. Guns are good. Guns are good. Close your eyes and repeat...guns are good...

But insulting my father? Really, really low. He knew more about machines than you could ever, ever know. I guess his 32 patents don't compare to your exalted knowledge. Really, really low. A pity your father didn't tell you about decency at the kitchen table. Mine did.

[mon]

I'm not quite sure that we need to get nasty with one another or feel the least bit wierd if we all have a difference of opinion on a subject. It's not like one persons opinion is going to change anything one way or another. I get that if I break the law I should be punished to the full extent of the law. Bring it on. I try not to do it personally and I don't wanna pack heat. Call me stupid, a pacifist or nieve. It is MY choice.