Conservative contortionism blames mass shootings on anything and everything but guns

[dan_c00000]

Ahh... geez... did I offend you? Think about the statement of the meme.

The whole point is to ridicule the alleged masculinity of gun culture. I'm sorry if you got offended by it.

 

[NeverEndingMe]

The whole point is to ridicule the alleged masculinity of gun culture. I'm sorry if you got offended by it.

did you get some new welfare today? its the first and isn't uncle obama giving it away? just have to get in the van with him...

 

[warksman]

I really like The US and the people, been there many times, own a holiday home in Florida too but the one thing us Brits have never understood about the USA is it's obsession with guns. We have very very few guns in the UK and surprise surprise deaths by firearm are very rare. More guns equals more deaths it's that simple. And no, we don't get loads of people killed by knives or hammers or anything else either. There are more American citizens killed by guns in the USA every year than were killed in Iraq and Afghanistan together. How mad is that? The greatest danger to the people of the USA are their neighbours!

 

[LWulf]

Okay, first, I generally agree with the purpose you describe, but a lot of what you said specifically really makes me wonder how well you thought about it.

...
1. Mandatory K-12 firearm education. No opt outs.
2. Registration, just like cars.
3. If your weapon is stolen it must be reported within 30 days. (and that's only because I didn't set a lower standard it should probably be much lower like if you can't prove you were out of town 48 hours) after that a crime with your gun is your fault.)
and I'll add four.
4. Qualify every five years.

...

Terrorists simply don't kill Americans and never have in numbers worth caring about. Everything we've done to prevent terrorism in the last 15 years is roughly akin to making a kid wear water wings in Arizona to prevent drownings. It might make you feel good but mostly it makes you look dumb.

suggestion 1 - sounds nice in theory but lets check how effective enforced athletics has had on public health. More people it seems are dying of heart attacks at age 50 or younger today, and that's because more people are overweight today.
suggestion 2 - Registration sounds like a good idea until you consider suggestion 4 and the logistics of regulating it. more on this later.
suggestion 3 - so someone has a gun "stolen" They go next door, blow off their neighbor's head because that guy reminded me of the annoying guy on Lit that I can't stand (just a pun, not aiming that at anybody) and then report the gun as stolen a couple days later (within the 30 day premise). How is this helping?
Suggestion 4 - okay, so how do you enforce the regulation of it? Someone goes out, get's a registration like you suggestion, pass it and thereby go out and buy a cache of guns. 4 years later (whenever) they renew their registration and fail.
What do they do now? abiding that they are conforming to the law and don't just walk into the nearest burger joint and shoot the masses.
You can't "return" gun merchandise from where it was bought. You don't take guns out on the road, as a matter of course, unlike a car.

it seems like you are just creating more red tape which usually means more chances for errors to happen in the system.

As for "terrorists simply don't kill Americans and never have in numbers worth caring about." I nearly gulped when you said this. Forget 9/11 have you??

While I agree the most we have done in the past 15 years has been to put average Americans through excessive paces, there are also real issues too. The problem I see are regulations on guns stop normal average americans from obtaining guns, where a lunatic or assassin can drive into an illegal gunmart and still buy as many guns as he likes.

However, I don't see here being a reason for anybody to have an automatic machine gun like an ak-47, up to and including the police.

****
I would like to see not so much regulations as much as a proper weapon disposal site or some such.

As an real life example, my stepfather bought a shot gun. He felt he needed one, whatever, not important. He eventually died. No one in the family who can legally own it.

Bring it to the police to properly dispose of it - they refused it.
Bring it to the metal scrap dump, it's illegal to dispose of it this way (they refuse it).

What's a person to do??

The police advise to sell it on e-bay or some such. Seriously??? Now if we sell it to frank the fanatic, we could be implicated as illegal arms traders or be complicit in anything frank the fanatic does with said shotgun.
If we throw it in the ocean, that's either ecologically unconscionable or allows that someone might find it, salvage it and use it for ill purposes, where we could still be held liable.

 

[Sean Renaud]

Let me start by stating you're making the classic mistake of thinking that any idea anybody comes up with has to be perfect right out the box with absolutely no tweaking. If I were that good you'd elect me emperor of the world and call it a day. However lets look at your points.

-snip-​

suggestion 1 - sounds nice in theory but lets check how effective enforced athletics has had on public health. More people it seems are dying of heart attacks at age 50 or younger today, and that's because more people are overweight today.

These are not related issues at all, I don't even know how you could possibly compare enforced athletics on public health and firearm education on firearm safety. That's like saying that teaching kids to swim has no effect on kids drowning. It's pants on head retarded.

Lets compare it to something that's actually similar. Sexual education. It doesn't matter where you go either state by state or country by country sex ed, ideally without letting parents opt out for any reason (including religious) and teaching them everything including proper contraceptive use decreases teen and unwanted pregnancies along with abortions. Since no place on earth has mandatory gun training in its schools there are no examples but I'd bet i works the same way. Kids who learn about sex through a combination of schoolyard talk and Brazzers entertainment make bad choices. Kids who are taught by professionals and ideally by parents who aren't too shy to talk to their kids openly make bad decisions. I see no reason why kids who learn about guns from law enforcement and ideally parents who are neither cowboys nor pacifists would make better decisions over all than those who learned from playing cops and robbers than and watching the Matrix.

suggestion 2 - Registration sounds like a good idea until you consider suggestion 4 and the logistics of regulating it. more on this later.

It shouldn't be any more complicated than car registration to be honest.

suggestion 3 - so someone has a gun "stolen" They go next door, blow off their neighbor's head because that guy reminded me of the annoying guy on Lit that I can't stand (just a pun, not aiming that at anybody) and then report the gun as stolen a couple days later (within the 30 day premise). How is this helping?

Nothing is perfect. The real goal of this is to find out who keeps having guns stolen. Largely same as above. IF the majority of gun crimes are being commited with stolen guns they are coming from somewhere and no matter what people say about them being highly sought after items by theives it seems highly unlikely that they are actually stolen vs a group of people setting up a ring. That's what I would do.

Suggestion 4 - okay, so how do you enforce the regulation of it? Someone goes out, get's a registration like you suggestion, pass it and thereby go out and buy a cache of guns. 4 years later (whenever) they renew their registration and fail.
What do they do now? abiding that they are conforming to the law and don't just walk into the nearest burger joint and shoot the masses.


You can't "return" gun merchandise from where it was bought. You don't take guns out on the road, as a matter of course, unlike a car.

it seems like you are just creating more red tape which usually means more chances for errors to happen in the system.

This one is simple. They are required to turn it in. If they are later found with it in their possession you give them a hefty fine and prevent them from owning a weapon again for X years. Sure you dont' take guns out on the road like cars but lets be fair I don't get pulled over every day. Or every month. Or every year. I can count on my fingers how many times I've been pulled over and half of them had to do with my registration being out of date. I could potentionally drive around for years on an expired license and never once get pulled over. Again nothing is perfect.

You cannot return a car after five years either. You can however sell it or if that's out of the question give away or be forced to forfeit it.

Yes, it is more red tape. Redtape that for he most part wouldn't hurt anything and might help quite a bit. It might cause some hiccups sure but all things do. If your argument is that everything is hunky doory now that's one thing, if not then a few hiccups are fine.

As for "terrorists simply don't kill Americans and never have in numbers worth caring about." I nearly gulped when you said this. Forget 9/11 have you??

9/11 is a massive abberation and really shouldn't be spoken about in the greater scheme of terrorism. The reality is that terrorist do not kill Americans and never have in numbers worth caring about. Even if you count 9/11 it's really a blip in the grand scheme of things.

While I agree the most we have done in the past 15 years has been to put average Americans through excessive paces, there are also real issues too. The problem I see are regulations on guns stop normal average americans from obtaining guns, where a lunatic or assassin can drive into an illegal gunmart and still buy as many guns as he likes.

If the guns were harder for the normal average American to get the illegal gun mart would have a harder time getting them too. And lets not forget that the lunatics almost always use legally obatined firearms because they lack the connections to find said illegal gunmart. As for assassins. . .shit can you actually name an assassinated American after say Reagan?

However, I don't see here being a reason for anybody to have an automatic machine gun like an ak-47, up to and including the police.

I actually have relatively little issue with AKs, the reality is that aside from the occasional psycho in a movie theatre those punks are just gonna run out of ammo, warp the barrel and look dumb. There is little reason for them I agree but if we're restricting weapons we should start with hand guns and then work our way around.

I would like to see not so much regulations as much as a proper weapon disposal site or some such.

As an real life example, my stepfather bought a shot gun. He felt he needed one, whatever, not important. He eventually died. No one in the family who can legally own it.

Bring it to the police to properly dispose of it - they refused it.
Bring it to the metal scrap dump, it's illegal to dispose of it this way (they refuse it).

What's a person to do??

The police advise to sell it on e-bay or some such. Seriously??? Now if we sell it to frank the fanatic, we could be implicated as illegal arms traders or be complicit in anything frank the fanatic does with said shotgun.
If we throw it in the ocean, that's either ecologically unconscionable or allows that someone might find it, salvage it and use it for ill purposes, where we could still be held liable.

You're right it's not important why he wanted it. It's his right, I'm curious what was so crazy about it and/or your family that nobody could legally own it.

In the case of your father's weapon however there are tons of things. First tossing it in the ocean really isn't that ecologically bad. You realize we intentionally sink battle ships to make coral reefs right? IT would just become a rock and would corrode so quickly in most places that anybody who managed to restore it back to working order deserved to kill whoemver they wanted dead. Seriously that is the person who would have rigged C4 to a remote control car and taken you out in the bathroom for fucks sake.

On a serious note dismantle it, fill the barrel with concrete (you can by it at Home Depot) do the same for chamber. Anybody willing to work that hard to make a weapon workable again deserves it. If you know anybody with welding material you can cut all the important parts, hell a good enough metal saw will handle it as well.

I've never personally had to destroy a weapon (that I owned) so I have no idea how difficult it is legally to offhand it. If it's as difficult as you make it sound then yes, it needs to be easier. But that's not to say that you burying it in your backyard and pouring some concrete over it wouldn't solve the problem. Just that obviously that's not ideal.

As for the terrorist issue have you ever actually looked at the numbers of Americans killed by terrorists annually? It comes out to roughly 4 a year on average if you date back to first accepted attack in like the 50's. Lightning kills more Americans than that.

 

[gotsnowgotslush]

Bring it to the iron Smith and squish it.
Bring it to the smelter and melt it.
Re- mold it ! Shovel or plow blade ?
Armor for Ren Fair ? A shield for Ren Fair ?
Parts for a fantasy Iron Man ?

 

[Sean Renaud]

Bring it to the iron Smith and squish it.
Bring it to the smelter and melt it.
Re- mold it ! Shovel or plow blade ?
Armor for Ren Fair ? A shield for Ren Fair ?
Parts for a fantasy Iron Man ?

In fairness I don't know where the nearest Iron Smith or Smelter is and thus couldn't do any of the other things you mention and shit that isn't convienent doesn't get done. Hell I've got a closet that's basically filled with old computers dating as far back as the 90's because you have to dispose of them properly and it's just a pain in the ass so I never do it. And the local school does a drive twice a year I just never hear about it until the day after and don't really care enough to hunt it down. So I know how that is.

 

[LWulf]

Let me start by stating you're making the classic mistake of thinking that any idea anybody comes up with has to be perfect right out the box with absolutely no tweaking.

No I don't, but I expect if you put one card up and stand it on it's edge and say that qualifies as a house of cards, then yes, I will say it's not "perfect."

These are not related issues at all, I don't even know how you could possibly compare enforced athletics on public health and firearm education on firearm safety. That's like saying that teaching kids to swim has no effect on kids drowning.

It's related if you look at it for it's format. You were saying mandatory gun and firearm education and safety would be a good thing to teach kids.
JFK thought the same about phys ed. Mandatory phys ed will help all americans grow up to be healthier longer living adults.

No, I disagree. Telling a kid who lives in the middle of the country, hundreds of miles from any lake, being told they MUST learn how to swim because they MIGHT need it sometime in their life is just wasting tax payer funds.

More importantly, making something mandatory like that means that the child has to show passing knowledge of the subject matter to pass into the next grade or graduate. I can see a discussion like this:
"Did you get into the college/job you wanted?"
"No, I failed mandatory gun safety class"

Seriously??? Kids don't have enough mandatory things to learn in school as it is, some of which they WILL use in life??

Lets compare it to something that's actually similar. Sexual education. It doesn't matter where you go either state by state or country by country sex ed, ideally without letting parents opt out for any reason (including religious) ...

Don't get me started on sex education. I'm an atheist, but even I don't like the idea that you're saying some people's belief systems have to take a back seat so your belief can be taught over theirs. That's just downright arrogance.
That's NOT what this country was started for.

"He that would make his own liberty secure, must guard even his enemy from opposition; for if he violates this duty he establishes a precedent that will reach himself."

Nothing is perfect. The real goal of this is to find out who keeps having guns stolen. Largely same as above. IF the majority of gun crimes are being commited with stolen guns they are coming from somewhere and no matter what people say about them being highly sought after items by theives it seems highly unlikely that they are actually stolen vs a group of people setting up a ring. That's what I would do.

No. nothing is perfect, but your methodology is one of "let's throw enough shit on the wall and eventually something will stick that works." That's not someone that has a plan, that's someone who is backpedaling for a system that doesn't work.

I think you believe with enough red tape, enough problems should be able to be caught... eventually. Bureaucracy works when you have lots of fiscal money and lots of people who like jobs that don't make sense. We don't have a lot of either nowadays.

If the guns were harder for the normal average American to get the illegal gun mart would have a harder time getting them too. And lets not forget that the lunatics almost always use legally obatined firearms because they lack the connections to find said illegal gunmart. As for assassins. . .shit can you actually name an assassinated American after say Reagan?

That's a fallacious statement. Prohibition reduced the average person from obtaining alcohol, but "illegal" people who wanted to get it, got it by the droves.

Taking the statistician point of view doesn't corroborate (nor deny) your statement.

... There is little reason for [ak47's] I agree but if we're restricting weapons we should start with hand guns and then work our way around.

So I take it you are all for oppressive government, or at least building the foundation for such a form to step into the void?

You're right it's not important why he wanted it. It's his right, I'm curious what was so crazy about it and/or your family that nobody could legally own it.

The point is, nobody wanted the permits to legally own it. You can't sell what you don't have a legal right to own.

In the case of your father's weapon however there are tons of things. First tossing it in the ocean really isn't that ecologically bad.

You really have no clue about ecology, do you? As my mom used to say to me, "just because everyone steps up to a bridge and jumps off, doesn't mean it's the right thing to do."

On a serious note dismantle it, fill the barrel with concrete (you can by it at Home Depot) do the same for chamber. Anybody willing to work that hard to make a weapon workable again deserves it. If you know anybody with welding material you can cut all the important parts, hell a good enough metal saw will handle it as well.

So, all this blabber before this is you being comical? Nice to know I was trying to talk seriously to a comedian.
And what if my mom didn't have kids to "saw" or "weld" as needed? Here she is, 60 years old and frail and she won't let it out of her grip for fear it will be used against someone, and the LEGAL trail, believe it or not, would lead back to her and she would be held accountable for any murders made with that gun.

So for the rest of your suggestions that go along the lines of "So what if someone CAN make it workable again...?" is moot, because it shows you have no concept of capital crimes and accountability.

As for the terrorist issue have you ever actually looked at the numbers of Americans killed by terrorists annually? It comes out to roughly 4 a year on average if you date back to first accepted attack in like the 50's. Lightning kills more Americans than that.

All I can say to this form of logic is, I hope you aren't one of them, nor anybody you know, and I mean that. Because I don't see the rationality of accepting any form of crime as being "acceptable losses."
Those are rules of war, not life.

Lightning isn't something you can control. If you can't see the logic of that to refute your statement, then I see no purpose to discussing this any further with you.

 

[dan_c00000]

its

 

[Sean Renaud]

No I don't, but I expect if you put one card up and stand it on it's edge and say that qualifies as a house of cards, then yes, I will say it's not "perfect."

I didn't claim it would solve all the problems but let's carry on.

It's related if you look at it for it's format. You were saying mandatory gun and firearm education and safety would be a good thing to teach kids.

JFK thought the same about phys ed. Mandatory phys ed will help all americans grow up to be healthier longer living adults.

They are still unrelated in any real way. JFK was thinking if you make kids work out they'll be in better shape. And frankly he wasn't wrong the reality is our P.E. system in the States is a goddamn joke. You're not even required in most states to do it all twelve years you remain in government mandated school and much of what you do, isn't held to any standard. Speaking from military experience I can tell you that a moderate work out three times a week can keep damn near anybody from getting overweight. A decent work out five times a week should produce goddamn machines.

No, I disagree. Telling a kid who lives in the middle of the country, hundreds of miles from any lake, being told they MUST learn how to swim because they MIGHT need it sometime in their life is just wasting tax payer funds.

Okay that's an entirely retarded point. First, it's not wasting tax payer funds. You never know when they might move, join the Navy or hell a goddamn pool opens up in their neighborhood. But my actual point was people who know how to swim are less likely to drown. Not immune mind you, people get cramps, drunk, fall in with cloths on, get tangled in ropes and try to save people bigger than them. Unless your point is that knowing how to swim has no effect on drowning we'll just assume you read that wrong.

More importantly, making something mandatory like that means that the child has to show passing knowledge of the subject matter to pass into the next grade or graduate. I can see a discussion like this:
"Did you get into the college/job you wanted?"
"No, I failed mandatory gun safety class"

Seriously??? Kids don't have enough mandatory things to learn in school as it is, some of which they WILL use in life??

Yes seriously. If you can't pass a mandatory gun safety class you really aren't qualified to do anything at all in the universe and wouldn't have made it into college or gotten a job to begin with.

Don't get me started on sex education. I'm an atheist, but even I don't like the idea that you're saying some people's belief systems have to take a back seat so your belief can be taught over theirs. That's just downright arrogance.
That's NOT what this country was started for.

Yeah, and that's why we have so many teen pregnancies and so many abortions. It's not just the religious people, it's the people like you who won't throw them under the bus for the good of the country. Also that has absolutely nothing to do with what this country was started for. Even if it did all the Founders are long since dead and their opinions matter fairly little.

"He that would make his own liberty secure, must guard even his enemy from opposition; for if he violates this duty he establishes a precedent that will reach himself."

Yeah, cute words but historically not really true. Granted most catchy phrases are like that, they sound cool but don't hold up particularly well when reality comes due and really nobody ever intended to do it in the first fucking place.

No. nothing is perfect, but your methodology is one of "let's throw enough shit on the wall and eventually something will stick that works." That's not someone that has a plan, that's someone who is backpedaling for a system that doesn't work.

This isn't really a whole lot of stuff. A four point plan is not throwing everything at the wall. Also trying to change a system is by definition not backpedaling for a system that doesn't work.

I think you believe with enough red tape, enough problems should be able to be caught... eventually. Bureaucracy works when you have lots of fiscal money and lots of people who like jobs that don't make sense. We don't have a lot of either nowadays.

And they will be caught eventually. We actually have infinite money and not enough jobs of any sort but I'm not about to start debating economics with you at the moment. You're confused enough as it is.

That's a fallacious statement. Prohibition reduced the average person from obtaining alcohol, but "illegal" people who wanted to get it, got it by the droves.

Taking the statistician point of view doesn't corroborate (nor deny) your statement.

If it reduced the average person from obtaining alcohol it worked. The fact that the cost was WAY too high is a separate issue. I agree that it ultimately the price was higher than we wanted to pay.

So I take it you are all for oppressive government, or at least building the foundation for such a form to step into the void?

Everybody in every society is. Well there are a few that aren't, they are called anarchists.

The point is, nobody wanted the permits to legally own it. You can't sell what you don't have a legal right to own.

I'm still impressed that he had something so fucking awesome that you needed permits to own it. I mean holy fucking shit.

You really have no clue about ecology, do you? As my mom used to say to me, "just because everyone steps up to a bridge and jumps off, doesn't mean it's the right thing to do."

Quite a bit actually.

So, all this blabber before this is you being comical? Nice to know I was trying to talk seriously to a comedian.
And what if my mom didn't have kids to "saw" or "weld" as needed? Here she is, 60 years old and frail and she won't let it out of her grip for fear it will be used against someone, and the LEGAL trail, believe it or not, would lead back to her and she would be held accountable for any murders made with that gun.

So for the rest of your suggestions that go along the lines of "So what if someone CAN make it workable again...?" is moot, because it shows you have no concept of capital crimes and accountability.

Again, cement.

Show me these capital crimes that would lead back to her, please. She clearly doesn't have it legally because as you stated she can't. But I'll wait on that, this should be educational.

All I can say to this form of logic is, I hope you aren't one of them, nor anybody you know, and I mean that. Because I don't see the rationality of accepting any form of crime as being "acceptable losses."
Those are rules of war, not life.

Lightning isn't something you can control. If you can't see the logic of that to refute your statement, then I see no purpose to discussing this any further with you.

I may one day be one of them, sometimes shit happens and it happens to me. But yes acceptable losses are a rule of life not a rule of war. You're entire argument here is about that.

I can't control lightning? First you've clearly never heard of a lightning rod but ignoring your ignorance I can't control lots of things. Terrorists. Drunk Drivers. Earthquakes. Hurricanes. Mass murderers with handguns. All of these things and more are beyond my control. My direct control anyway.

I can of course build lightning rods to protect against most lightning and stay my happy ass indoors during thunderstoms. I can pass laws against drunk driving, and call 911 if I see a car weaving in traffic. I can build houses that are earthquake resistant and be prepared for the worst same for huricanes. And I can make getting weapons more difficult so fewer people have them.

By your logic I hope that nobody you know is ever gunned down, especially not by a gun they purchased legally.

 

[mark_j]

Dead serious. Just takes enough heat.

Fascinating article.. Did you actually read it?

While it is true that you can create (note the word create) a situation where the round will "cook-off", in the real world it takes a considerable amount of sustained fire to get the barrel hot enough to facilitate that condition. Further, the design of the firearm is also going to dictate the chances of this becoming a problem depending on whether it fires from an open or a closed bolt.

I'll use three examples since these are the ones i have direct experience with:

M60 MG

It is recommended that the barrel be changed under the following conditions.

• Sustained rate of 100 rounds per minute with six to eight rounds per burst, for 10 minutes; then you must change the barrel.
• On rapid fire, it can deliver up to 200 rounds per minute for 2 minutes before the barrel must be changed.
• The cyclic rate of fire is 550 to 600 rounds per minute, with a barrel change required every minute.

M16A2 Rifle

In full automatic mode:

130-200 rnds before you MAY have a chance of cook-off

Berretta 92-S

I have no recommended figure here but I have run 3 mags (14 rnds/mag) rapid fire and the gun performed flawlessly. Yes the barrel was warm but in no way did it feel hot enough to cook-off a round.

I could include a few others in the example but it isn't necessary. In all of the examples it needs to be noted that the gun was in operation. Revolvers generally can't be fired fast enough to create the temps required. The only other way to generate enough heat to cook-off a round is if the gun is in a fire. It's not going to get hot enough sitting in a car or anyplace else unless that place is on fire.

And in the rare case that you have a weapon that is fired electronically a static shock could set it off.

They didn't make enough of those to really be a factor, so it's sort of a non-point.

You're also making the radical assumption that the gun was ever in a safe.

I didn't assume anything. I said that the gun was "safe" which means unloaded, uncocked.

Mine weren't for years. If you're gun is for shits and giggles (as mine are now) you keep them in a safe.

So? I used to keep my rifles in my Granddads old gun rack on the wall for years until I finally got a safe and all they did up there was collect dust.

Point being, in all that time did it ever move by itself from where you had it?
Did it ever load itself?
Did it ever cock itself?
Did it ever do anything that didn't require your hand?

If your gun is for self defense you keep it close at hand at all times.

Under your control is the better term. Not sitting on the night stand, or in the couch cushions, on the coffee table or in a drawer and certainly not cocked and locked unless you are ready to use it.

They can also fall for any number reasons. But like I said, sufficiently rare that they really only need to be brought up in the case of "it can't happen" vs "it doesn't happen."

The point is that all of the situations you mentioned required the intervention of human being.

 

[Sean Renaud]

Fascinating article.. Did you actually read it?

You just asked for could it really happen. And those are just one article. Take it frome someone who's been to Iraq. It's not impossible for a round to fire it's goddamn self under the proper conditions.

They didn't make enough of those to really be a factor, so it's sort of a non-point.

There are quite a few though most of them admittedly aren't "guns" but the 2nd Amendment gives you every bit as much right to own rockets as it does guns.

I didn't assume anything. I said that the gun was "safe" which means unloaded, uncocked.

Radical assumption.

So? I used to keep my rifles in my Granddads old gun rack on the wall for years until I finally got a safe and all they did up there was collect dust.

Well that gun is easily accessed which was my point.

Point being, in all that time did it ever move by itself from where you had it?
Did it ever load itself?
Did it ever cock itself?
Did it ever do anything that didn't require your hand?

Yes, I've lived through several earthquakes.
No, I kept it loaded at the time.
No it never cocked itself
And no mine never did anything that didn't require my hand.

Which as I stated above yes can happen but are sufficiently rare to be a side issue. Funny how you have to focus here because the rest of your ideas are devoid of any value.

Under your control is the better term. Not sitting on the night stand, or in the couch cushions, on the coffee table or in a drawer and certainly not cocked and locked unless you are ready to use it.

Well duh not cocked and locked. Though that's making the assumption you're talking about someone who has had some training. Which is unnecessary in America. But yes I agree.

The point is that all of the situations you mentioned required the intervention of human being.

An earthquake requires the intervention of a human being?! I knew it ! Bush does hate black people and KAtrina wasn't a fluke!

I notice you've completely abandoned your original point that guns are weapons and are designed to kill.

 

[NeverEndingMe]

you are displaying signs of mental illness. please get help



QUOTE=gotsnowgotslush;68753999]Millions of guns and hundreds of dead American children.

Something is very wrong.

Conservative contortionism blames mass shootings on anything and everything but guns


Part of the deal that Republicans made to win elections, is to take money and support from anyone and everyone.

It should come as no surprise that one of the biggest pieces of the Republican propaganda/lobbying/fundraising machine is willfully ignoring the laws that govern its practices.

It abuses its tax-exempt status to funnel millions ($37 million in 2014) to political campaigns supporting Republican Congressmen, who in turn keep any laws from passing that might help alleviate America’s epidemic of gun violence, which kills more than 30 people a day. The NRA’s recent mega-convention in Tennessee (sixteen acres of guns!) featured every single major and minor Republican presidential candidate (except Rand Paul, who they don’t like), giving the same tired prattle of Second Amendment rights and jingoistic paranoia about the threat of “Muslim terrorists”.

http://www.occupydemocrats.com/nra-caught-illegally-funneling-donations-to-republican-candidates/

Yahoo News recently published a report exposing illegal transfers of funds from the NRA’s nonprofit to their lobbying group, the Institute for Legislative Action (ILA), and then to their PAC, the Political Victory Fund. The NRA has been soliciting donations from their members and then funneling the cash into the PAC, using funds which a member may have thought were for funding events but are now being put to use supporting a political candidate with whom he or she may not approve of, which is very illegal.

NRA can’t claim to be raising money for the corporation — to finance such things as its lobbying or research initiatives — and then deposit that money into the account of its PAC.

The NRA also appears to have violated a federal law that bars soliciting for a connected PAC from anyone other than the group’s employees or members — what the law calls its “restricted class.” And the NRA appears to have violated another provision that says Internet solicitations must be at websites that are accessible only to members (the restricted class), not the general public.


https://www.yahoo.com/politics/the-nras-brazen-shell-game-with-donations-a-116744915796.html

The most bizarre list of deflections, from Republicans, were heard after the massacre in South Carolina .

Seven things Republicans have blamed the Charleston massacre on apart from race

http://i100.independent.co.uk/artic...eston-massacre-on-apart-from-race--bk1LiXKibl[/QUOTE]

 

[mark_j]

You just asked for could it really happen. And those are just one article. Take it frome someone who's been to Iraq. It's not impossible for a round to fire it's goddamn self under the proper conditions.

Right. Google is your friend. It's pretty much a given that you can find reams of lab tests, torture tests, failure tests, fire tests, recall lists, product warnings, anecdotal evidence and plain old urban legends that would support the "it could happen" statement. All of those, if you actually read them, will point to some extreme condition, failure or defect. Just about all of those cases occur while the weapon is in operation and are easy to mitigate with proper safety practices.

Further, I wore the uniform as well. So the statement of having been to Iraq doesn't mean shit to me and it sure as hell doesn't make you an expert. You fought your war, I fought mine. In the end it doesn't mean fuck all other than this:

Combat and firefights are NOT normal conditions.

My initial statement still stands.

If that gun is sitting unloaded on a table, in a closet or wherever you can think of, you can stare at it until the Second Coming of Christ and it is never going to "just go off" without you doing something to it either by act, omission or negligence.

Added note:

Before you go off half cocked using your "google foo" to find a "got ya" incident, note the following..

Firearm Defect/Recall List (dated but still valid). I'm sure there are other recall lists but I'm not going to dig them up right now.

Also:

There is an issue with Remington and the alleged defective Common Fire Control (Walker Trigger). This product has been used in Mod. 700 and 710 bolt action rifles, Mod. 742 semi-auto rifle, Mod. 870 pump shot gun and Mod. 1100 semi-auto shot gun.

NBC originally aired this report back in 2010 about the 700 and 710 rifles and has since added other reports alleging that the 742, 870 and 1100 also use this same trigger assembly and would therefore would be subject to the same defect. There has been a lot of controversy about this with lawsuits, complaints, statements by Remington etc.

It should be noted that Remington has decided to settle a 2013 class action and issue a recall on it's 700 series rifles. The information on this settlement is here. As of yet, I haven't heard of anything directly involving the 742, 870 or 1100 other than what NBC has stated.

Not that you will bother to actually read any of that stuff.

There are quite a few though most of them admittedly aren't "guns" but the 2nd Amendment gives you every bit as much right to own rockets as it does guns.

Yeah, but we aren't talking about shit like Metal Storm, electrically fired artillery, rockets or a host of other exotic weapons that the average Joe isn't going to have in his house. You even stated it yourself in post 111 "What the Constitution does or doesn't say doesn't matter.". Kind of funny how you start referencing the 2A when it suits your purpose.

Well that gun is easily accessed which was my point.

With a trigger lock and the bolt removed they weren't much more than wall decorations or clubs. The one pistol I had was kept in one of those home fire safe things where you would store important papers along with my rifle bolts. Home defense wasn't much of a concern to me in those days.

Yes, I've lived through several earthquakes.
No, I kept it loaded at the time.
No it never cocked itself
And no mine never did anything that didn't require my hand.

EVERYTHING moves during an earthquake . So I'll concede that point. But thank you for acknowledging that a gun can't do anything without your hand (or anyone else's for that matter). So all this shit about accidental/negligent/unintentional discharge of a firearm can all be traced back to a really basic concept of firearm safety. You, as a military man, should know that shit.

Which as I stated above yes can happen but are sufficiently rare to be a side issue. Funny how you have to focus here because the rest of your ideas are devoid of any value.

It's not a side issue since it all fits in the "guns are evil" meme constantly bandied about. Like somehow the damn thing is gonna load itself and just jump off the table and shoot somebody bullshit.

Well duh not cocked and locked. Though that's making the assumption you're talking about someone who has had some training. Which is unnecessary in America. But yes I agree.

Please, they print basic safety instructions right on the fucking box and in the instruction manual. Anyone who buys a firearm and doesn't take the time to read the manual or even to find out how the damn thing works is absolutely fucking stupid and would probably be doing the world a favor by removing themselves from the gene pool. It's unfortunate that sometimes there is collateral damage that results from that stupidity, but it's just like operating any other potentially dangerous tool. If you don't know what you're doing you're an accident waiting to happen.

An earthquake requires the intervention of a human being?! I knew it ! Bush does hate black people and KAtrina wasn't a fluke!

Don't be daft..

I notice you've completely abandoned your original point that guns are weapons and are designed to kill.

I didn't forget. It'll get addressed in another post.

 

[mark_j]

****
I would like to see not so much regulations as much as a proper weapon disposal site or some such.

As an real life example, my stepfather bought a shot gun. He felt he needed one, whatever, not important. He eventually died. No one in the family who can legally own it.

Bring it to the police to properly dispose of it - they refused it.
Bring it to the metal scrap dump, it's illegal to dispose of it this way (they refuse it).

What's a person to do??


The police advise to sell it on e-bay or some such. Seriously??? Now if we sell it to frank the fanatic, we could be implicated as illegal arms traders or be complicit in anything frank the fanatic does with said shotgun.
If we throw it in the ocean, that's either ecologically unconscionable or allows that someone might find it, salvage it and use it for ill purposes, where we could still be held liable.

Take it to a reputable FFL licensed dealer or pawn shop who deals in used guns and sell it to them. You probably won't get much for it unless it has some sort of collectors value. At least that way the proper paperwork is done, the gun is checked and it gets re-sold with the proper background checks and procedures.

 

[mark_j]

Do you think private citizens should be allowed to own/operate fully armed nuclear warbirds?

Maybe just an A-10....conventionally armed to the teeth....how about that??

Can't help you with the nuke - not in stock

Talk to Paul Allen at Flying Heritage Collection and ask him how he got hold of the operational Mig 29 he has there. I'm sure he'll be happy to tell you all about how he managed that.

Don't think the A-10 is on the civilian surplus market as yet. I'm pretty sure the ATF would balk a bit (actually they'd probably choke on their lunch) over the idea of a civilian flying around with GAU-8 on board. If you have to take that nasty bastard off the aircraft you'll have to put about 700lbs of ballast in the nose to get it to fly right.

Kinda takes the fun out it I would think..

 

[BotanyBoy]

Can't help you with the nuke - not in stock

Talk to Paul Allen at Flying Heritage Collection and ask him how he got hold of the operational Mig 29 he has there. I'm sure he'll be happy to tell you all about how he managed that.

Don't think the A-10 is on the civilian surplus market as yet. I'm pretty sure the ATF would balk a bit (actually they'd probably choke on their lunch) over the idea of a civilian flying around with GAU-8 on board. If you have to take that nasty bastard off the aircraft you'll have to put about 700lbs of ballast in the nose to get it to fly right.

Kinda takes the fun out it I would think..

We got nukes, why not let people have them?? 2A!!

Mig is disarmed, which is a CLEAR violation of 2A right?

And you didn't answer the question.....do you think citizens should be allowed to run around with full armed warbirds? How about a tank locked cocked ready to rock, surplus M1A's rolling the streets popping off 120's like it ain't no thang!!!

No one flips them the bird on the morning commute eh!

Hey 2A says shall not be infringed right??? RIGHT?

 

[NeverEndingMe]

We got nukes, why not let people have them?? 2A!!

Mig is disarmed, which is a CLEAR violation of 2A right?

And you didn't answer the question.....do you think citizens should be allowed to run around with full armed warbirds? How about a tank locked cocked ready to rock, surplus M1A's rolling the streets popping off 120's like it ain't no thang!!!

No one flips them the bird on the morning commute eh!

Hey 2A says shall not be infringed right??? RIGHT?

go smoke some more pot ... America needs for you to fry whats left of that little brain of yours ... carry on good little slave

 

[BotanyBoy]

go smoke some more pot ... America needs for you to fry whats left of that little brain of yours ... carry on good little slave

Can't answer the question can you?

No one on the right will because they will either back their BS and sound like a total fucking nut or realize that no rights, not even constitutional ones, are absolute.

 

[NeverEndingMe]

Can't answer the question can you?

No one on the right will because they will either back their BS and sound like a total fucking nut or realize that no rights, not even constitutional ones, are absolute.

I'm sorry, but your a fucking retard.

 

[mark_j]

We got nukes, why not let people have them?? 2A!!

Mig is disarmed, which is a CLEAR violation of 2A right?

And you didn't answer the question.....do you think citizens should be allowed to run around with full armed warbirds? How about a tank locked cocked ready to rock, surplus M1A's rolling the streets popping off 120's like it ain't no thang!!!

No one flips them the bird on the morning commute eh!

Hey 2A says shall not be infringed right??? RIGHT?

You were serious about that? I thought you were just being a smart ass troll. But, Ok, let me get out the Book O' Toys and see what I can do for you.

Let's see.....

Still no nukes. You might want to check with a corrupt foreign government or two and see if they want to part with theirs.

Jets are easy.. You would have to contact the seller to see about armament as I have no information on that... Got a couple mil hanging around we might be able to hook you up.

Light & Heavy Tanks... This is just an example, there are pages full of this stuff for sale.

Field artillery.. Again, there are pages of this stuff. Some live and some de-milled.. Depends on your pocketbook.

I don't deal directly with Title II weapons, FAA certifications or BATF transfer forms so the paperwork is on you..

Have fun and don't hurt yourself.

Can't answer the question can you?

No one on the right will because they will either back their BS and sound like a total fucking nut or realize that no rights, not even constitutional ones, are absolute.

I thought this crap was dealt with already with the decision in District of Columbia v. Heller. Scalia stated it himself in the majority decision. "(2) Like most rights, the Second Amendment right is not unlimited. It is not a right to keep and carry any weapon whatsoever in any manner whatsoever and for whatever purpose: Seems pretty definitive to me and to anyone who has actually bothered to read the decision.

You may not like Scalia or agree with the decision but he did make it awfully clear in that little quote I put up.. It is what it is and I don't think anyone is really arguing that.

So other than being a troll and bomb throwing, what's your point?

 

[mark_j]

I'm sorry, but your a fucking retard.

Go suck a shotgun dirtbag, you're polluting the gene pool..

 

[BotanyBoy]

You were serious about that? I thought you were just being a smart ass troll. But, Ok, let me get out the Book O' Toys and see what I can do for you.

Let's see.....

Still no nukes. You might want to check with a corrupt foreign government or two and see if they want to part with theirs.

Jets are easy.. You would have to contact the seller to see about armament as I have no information on that... Got a couple mil hanging around we might be able to hook you up.

Light & Heavy Tanks... This is just an example, there are pages full of this stuff for sale.

Field artillery.. Again, there are pages of this stuff. Some live and some de-milled.. Depends on your pocketbook.

I don't deal directly with Title II weapons, FAA certifications or BATF transfer forms so the paperwork is on you..

Have fun and don't hurt yourself.

I didn't ask you if they were available for purchase or not....do you have a hard time with English or something?

But you helped me prove my point....we don't have problems with those things because the only way to get them is to either disarm them or jump through some SERIOUS hoops.

I thought this crap was dealt with already with the decision in District of Columbia v. Heller. Scalia stated it himself in the majority decision. "(2) Like most rights, the Second Amendment right is not unlimited. It is not a right to keep and carry any weapon whatsoever in any manner whatsoever and for whatever purpose: Seems pretty definitive to me and to anyone who has actually bothered to read the decision.

You may not like Scalia or agree with the decision but he did make it awfully clear in that little quote I put up.. It is what it is and I don't think anyone is really arguing that.

So other than being a troll and bomb throwing, what's your point?

That all these arguments are just circle jerk opinions. The "right" is just a matter of what the people think is the best way to manage it.

 

[mark_j]

I didn't ask you if they were available for purchase or not....do you have a hard time with English or something?

Seriously? Wound a little too tight are we? Go smoke a bowl and relax, I was fucking with you.

But you helped me prove my point....we don't have problems with those things because the only way to get them is to either disarm them or jump through some SERIOUS hoops.

More I think shows that if you got the money you can get just about anything. These aren't exactly the type of things the average Joe is going to bring home and show the wife. Could you imagine how it would go over if Joe pull up to the house towing a twin mount 40mm Bofors?

Her: What the hell is that?

Him: It's my new gun.. Isn't it great? Only cost about 15 grand, I got a deal!

Her: What in the world are you going to do with that thing?

Him: Dunno, thought I'd build a memorial around it in the front yard. Maybe take it out this fall and go duck hunting or shoot a few squirrels. Yeah we can have a lot of fun with this baby.

Her: (as she's looking up the divorce lawyer)

That all these arguments are just circle jerk opinions. The "right" is just a matter of what the people think is the best way to manage it.

So you're the authority on what "IS" is huh?

 

[BotanyBoy]

Seriously? Wound a little too tight are we? Go smoke a bowl and relax, I was fucking with you.

As a heart attack, not even wound at all, I'm a roller not a bowler and good because I'm EXTRA fuckin' serious.

More I think shows that if you got the money you can get just about anything. These aren't exactly the type of things the average Joe is going to bring home and show the wife. Could you imagine how it would go over if Joe pull up to the house towing a twin mount 40mm Bofors?

Don't forget survive the ATF interviews and checks.

There is a reason we had a big problem back in the day with machine guns and today we don't.....they are a huge pain in the fuckin' ass to get a hold of and if you get caught with one without the right paperwork you're in ultra mega deep doodie.


Why does the RW insist this wouldn't work for pistols?

So you're the authority on what "IS" is huh?

No....just being real about it. The US gov can ban guns outright, search and confiscate every fucking firearm in America 100% legal and not at all in violation of 2A. IF the can sell everyone on where they think "is" is.

And the longer the RW/pro gun rights groups keep sticking their head inthe sand about it pretending there is no problem and nothing can be done to stop the non problem because laws just don't matter when it comes to guns!!

The bigger they will lose in the long run because it will get so out of hand a democrat will get up there, say the right things and everything not muzzle loaded will go the way of the tommy gun.