Shooting in Connecticut

[OpenGambit]

Forum Sponsor

I for one is not defending loose gun laws. There are certain laws in Ontario i do agree on, while others i disagree. Its certain things like a total ban that gets me fired up. Sometimes u have to put your foot on the ground & say enough is enough & just push back.

Sometimes people give a band aid soln. to a bigger problem

Sent from my Phone, dont judge the grammar

Bans are dumb, defining an assault rifle is like defining a pit bull. A worthless exercise.

What I am talknig about is giving the ATF teeth to enforce rules that let them crack down on gun dealers that sell illegally (estimated 1 % back when the ATF did have this power). Closing background check loopholes, and controling secondary market sales.

none of these things would affect me at all. I walk into a gun store, show my pal. order something, they do what they do. I come pick it up later. I can't sell it to some guy on the street. WHATS THE PROBLEM WITH THAT?

Its a gun, the purpose of its existence is to kill whatever you point it at, that is its true nature. And in the US everyone freaks out the moment you want to treat it as something more than a box of candy. Simply put, because its a society where people are afraid, a paranoid, irrational fear that other people and the government are out to get them, that leads to people living in gated communities and building bunkers and buying billions of dollars of guns. And for what? crime that consistently goes down? The far far greater likelihood that a gun in the house is going to kill someone living there than someone breaking in?

the US has a problem, and guns are but a symptom of a disease of the mind that affects the nation.

 

[BuckWild]

Bans are dumb, defining an assault rifle is like defining a pit bull. A worthless exercise.

What I am talknig about is giving the ATF teeth to enforce rules that let them crack down on gun dealers that sell illegally (estimated 1 % back when the ATF did have this power). Closing background check loopholes, and controling secondary market sales.

none of these things would affect me at all. I walk into a gun store, show my pal. order something, they do what they do. I come pick it up later. I can't sell it to some guy on the street. WHATS THE PROBLEM WITH THAT?

The ATF have no teeth as decreed by law.
There were a few Republicans funded by the NRA that slipped language into some bills limiting the ATF from doing anything.
They can't even tell you to not sell a gun to an impaired person (even a drunk person). They can only suggest.
There was a good piece on the Daily Show last week that would make your draw drop when you see the pieces of laws stuck onto other Bills.
One US Senator or House Rep. said let the ATF do their jobs yet he is the same guy that had the NRA approve the law he attached into an unrelated Bill removing and limiting the ATF's power to regulate.

Why do you think for 6+ years the ATF have no Director?
Why do you think since the 70's the ATF still have about the same 2,500 Agents?

You got 20+ dead little children and yet they want to put more guns in the schools.
They would like to arm Teachers.
Let's arm the Principal with an AR15 was another suggestion.
Stubborn persistence at it's finest.
The ME ME ME culture. It ain't my kid in the ground so not my problem.

This will happen again. The sad part is the next shooter will probably try to kill more people.

 

[OpenGambit]

I don't even know why you are replying to me. it should have been clear from my post that I am aware of the issues with the ATF, which for the record, I was aware of before the daily show.

I like Jon Stewart, but I don't select satire as my source of reliable information. Thanks.

 

[Macs]

I bet more people die per year in drunk driving than firearm related crimes.
If we ban alcohol do u know how much lives we can save?


Sent from my Phone, dont judge the grammar

Remember how well Prohibition did?

 

[BuckWild]

Remember how well Prohibition did?

Slavery also made lots of people wealthy as well.

 

[BNKN]

Now I don't feel so bad for being such a jerk.

 

[BuckWild]

I don't even know why you are replying to me. it should have been clear from my post that I am aware of the issues with the ATF, which for the record, I was aware of before the daily show.

I like Jon Stewart, but I don't select satire as my source of reliable information. Thanks.

I was adding to your points.
The Daily Show did a decent job gathering the info that 95% of the people would not sift through or be aware of.
* There was a poll done last year and Jon Stewart was the most trusted source for news over the other official news shows.
I thought that was funny.

There was also a big debate when the cool off period was implemented. If the NRA had it's way you could just walk into any store and buy a gun like you do a soda and be on your way.

It's interesting that you have to be 21 in the US to buy alcohol yet you can buy a gun at 18 if not younger.
Why is that?

 

[BuckWild]

Now I don't feel so bad for being such a jerk.

But Obama won again.
If only Mitt had won, we would all be so much freer.

 

[D23]

We should get rid of speed limits because it's an inconvenience and slows you down.
We should get rid of stop signs because they once again slow you down.
We should get rid of traffic lights or allow people to run the red if they think no cars are coming.

You sound like a lunatic.

There is ZERO need for a civilian to have these assault type weapons.
And IF there is such a need then you go through a rigorous system of approvals much like the other person mentioning about the chemical agent used for their research. You are just being ruled by fear.

The first part: Whats an assault type weapon exactly? The second part: Sounds like Canada.

You could be one of those teachers or if you were in a movie theater and some deranged or not deranged person opened fire.
If they have to reload every 5 or 10 shots then you have a better chance of survival to flea or to attack the shooter vs. the shooter just almost endlessly and rather quickly spraying bullets towards you.

And here is how ignorance makes fools of the uninformed.

Scenario: You are in a mall and I start shooting my "assault rifle" with ten round magazines. You were calm enough to count my rounds even though you were face down in your own piss and decide I need to change magazines. You stand up and two seconds later eat the first round of my new magazine. Or you try to rush me, and I draw my loaded Glock 17 and smash your face with 9mm?

Whats the difference? I'm not loading a musket.

Can someone please answer the following:
1. Why do civilians need hollow point bullets/armour piercing bullets?
2. Why does a civilian need a Tech9 or similar guns considering hunters do no use these?

If you want to join the gun fun in the USA then perhaps this is not the country for you.

And if you want to ask questions of Americans, ask them on an American forum. Flip flopping between Canada and America makes your questions hard to follow.

Canadian answer.

1. For hunting / what armour piercing bullets are you talking about? .50 BMG?

5.56 doesn't pierce armour.

2. WTF does sport shooting have to do with hunting?

Make sense or go post about "what's a good cheap helmet" in general.

 

[OpenGambit]

D23: I think the 2 second argument is for extra running time, not for retaliation.

lets just go with your 2 seconds, so its an extra 4 seconds to shoot off 30 rounds. I think it adds up to be something significant.

 

[BuckWild]

You sound like a lunatic.



The first part: Whats an assault type weapon exactly? The second part: Sounds like Canada.



And here is how ignorance makes fools of the uninformed.

Scenario: You are in a mall and I start shooting my "assault rifle" with ten round magazines. You were calm enough to count my rounds even though you were face down in your own piss and decide I need to change magazines. You stand up and two seconds later eat the first round of my new magazine. Or you try to rush me, and I draw my loaded Glock 17 and smash your face with 9mm?

Whats the difference? I'm not loading a musket.



And if you want to ask questions of Americans, ask them on an American forum. Flip flopping between Canada and America makes your questions hard to follow.

Canadian answer.

1. For hunting / what armour piercing bullets are you talking about? .50 BMG?

5.56 doesn't pierce armour.

2. WTF does sport shooting have to do with hunting?

Make sense or go post about "what's a good cheap helmet" in general.

You sound like an angry person.
Try to have a nice day.

 

[Motorcycle Mike]

The thing about trying to ban everything that can cause harm, is where do you stop? At what point do you accept that sometimes **** happens and bad people do bad things and no matter what bans you initiate **** still happens.

Sometimes large dogs kill people. People don't need large dogs so maybe they should be banned. Think of the children.

Motorcycles cause a lot of death and greatly impacts the surviving families. People don't need motorcycles and they should be banned, think of the children.

Alcohol causes a lot of death and greatly impacts the surviving families. People don't need alcohol and it should be banned, think of the children.

X cause a lot of death and greatly impacts the surviving families. People don't need x and they should be banned, think of the children.

Eventually we might as well all be locked away in a padded room to protect ourselves from ourselves.

Banning high capacity magazines, as I pointed out with the above statistics, will do little or nothing to reduce the total firearm homicide rate -- so why ban them?
Who is to say that this shooter couldn't have done as much or more damage with a pump action shotgun, for example? After all it takes very little time to shove a shell into the tube magazine.

We have had too many years of the ban hammer solving nothing but reducing our freedom to pursue our hobbies of choice. Stop with your liberal band-aid solutions and get to the heart of the problem -- what is making people do these mass shootings or murders at all?

I don't know the answer to this riddle. I do not think magazine bans will do a single damn thing.

I can't help but wonder though... what is with North America's infatuation with violence? Turn on any TV channel and you are bombarded with people getting shot, things getting blown up, etc. They even show the clip of Kennedy getting his head shot off. Now if any of these channels show a tit, the crap hits the fan. Some stations even sensor swearing, but has no problem showing people getting shot. I am not saying that boobs, swearing, or shooting should be banned on TV, but I am saying that North America's infatuation with violence is part of this problem -- not the tools with which they commit this violence.

 

[D23]

D23: I think the 2 second argument is for extra running time, not for retaliation.

lets just go with your 2 seconds, so its an extra 4 seconds to shoot off 30 rounds. I think it adds up to be something significant.

OK, lets go with my (slow) estimate on reload. You are prone on the floor and have 2 seconds to get up and get away from me provided I don't draw my secondary weapon. Athletic build might get to it's feet in two seconds. fat *** (so typical slob at a mall) wouldn't be fully vertical before I'm done.

1. Did I have 11 rounds or 10? Could have chambered a round then topped the mag before putting it in.

2. Were you really able to count my rounds in a fetal position thinking you were going to die? even so...

3. Who's to say I didn't leave one round in the chamber before my mag chage? It's what I teach so it's not uncommon. In that scenario you have 0 seconds. I just have to point and shoot.

We have already concluded any idiot can fire a gun regardless of ability. I'm just better.

Not trying to be a psychopath here. I'm just giving a professional answer.

 

[OpenGambit]

The thing about trying to ban everything that can cause harm, is where do you stop? At what point do you accept that sometimes **** happens and bad people do bad things and no matter what bans you initiate **** still happens.

Sometimes large dogs kill people. People don't need large dogs so maybe they should be banned. Think of the children.

Motorcycles cause a lot of death and greatly impacts the surviving families. People don't need motorcycles and they should be banned, think of the children.

Alcohol causes a lot of death and greatly impacts the surviving families. People don't need alcohol and it should be banned, think of the children.

X cause a lot of death and greatly impacts the surviving families. People don't need x and they should be banned, think of the children.

Eventually we might as well all be locked away in a padded room to protect ourselves from ourselves.

Banning high capacity magazines, as I pointed out with the above statistics, will do little or nothing to reduce the total firearm homicide rate -- so why ban them?
Who is to say that this shooter couldn't have done as much or more damage with a pump action shotgun, for example? After all it takes very little time to shove a shell into the tube magazine.

We have had too many years of the ban hammer solving nothing but reducing our freedom to pursue our hobbies of choice. Stop with your liberal band-aid solutions and get to the heart of the problem -- what is making people do these mass shootings or murders at all?

I don't know the answer to this riddle. I do not think magazine bans will do a single damn thing.

I can't help but wonder though... what is with North America's infatuation with violence? Turn on any TV channel and you are bombarded with people getting shot, things getting blown up, etc. They even show the clip of Kennedy getting his head shot off. Now if any of these channels show a tit, the crap hits the fan. Some stations even sensor swearing, but has no problem showing people getting shot. I am not saying that boobs, swearing, or shooting should be banned on TV, but I am saying that North America's infatuation with violence is part of this problem -- not the tools with which they commit this violence.

we don't ban those things, we have mitigating factors, such as seat belts, crumple zones, bumpers; leash laws, muzzles; helmets, lights; AA, support programs, serving it right. etc.

 

[OpenGambit]

OK, lets go with my (slow) estimate on reload. You are prone on the floor and have 2 seconds to get up and get away from me provided I don't draw my secondary weapon. Athletic build might get to it's feet in two seconds. fat *** (so typical slob at a mall) wouldn't be fully vertical before I done.

1. Did I have 11 rounds or 10? Could have chambered a round then topped the mag before putting it in.

2. Were you really able to count my rounds in a fetal position thinking you wqere going to die? even so...

3. Who's to say I didn't leave one round in the chamber before my mag chage? It's what I teach so it's not uncommon. In that scenario you have 0 seconds. I just have to point and shoot.

We have already concluded any idiot can fire a gun regardless of ability. I'm just better.

Not trying to be a psychopath here. I'm just giving a professional answer.

I am suggesting that if you have a crowd of people that are running away (we are talking about mass murder right?). It would take an extra 18 seconds (i don't care if your estimate is slow you were the one that gave it) to fire 100 rounds. I think that would logically result in less casualties when we are talking about mass violence.

You appear to be talking about 1 person, but I am talking about a crowd.

 

[Motorcycle Mike]

we don't ban those things, we have mitigating factors, such as seat belts, crumple zones, bumpers; leash laws, muzzles; helmets, lights; AA, support programs, serving it right. etc.

And that is why I agree with firearm licensing measures, but I don't agree with specific bans like magazine capacities or even bans based solely on looks (like the AK-47 lookalikes).

 

[OpenGambit]

And that is why I agree with firearm licensing measures, but I don't agree with specific bans like magazine capacities or even bans based solely on looks (like the AK-47 lookalikes).

Canada has a magazine ban and a ban on FA weapons. I think that is acceptable. The US has neither of these things

 

[FiReSTaRT]

Yes...we live in a democracy.

So you are saying that because the majority disagrees with reason, facts and common sense, they should impose their will on the minority population in a tyrannical fashion? Guess what, that's precisely the reason why we also have constitutions. Thank God that the Americans have a specific provision in their constitution and that in Canada the minority is big enough to make the political parties think twice. They were able to push us up to a certain point, but now we're pushing back. Thank you for C-19

we don't ban those things, we have mitigating factors, such as seat belts, crumple zones, bumpers; leash laws, muzzles; helmets, lights; AA, support programs, serving it right. etc.

Yes and that is why we have mitigating factors like safety training, storage and transport regs (those go a bit overboard in severity, tbh) and background checks. We aren't banning Mustangs, aftermarket seats and Momo steering wheels before too many knuckleheads crash them.

 

[BuckWild]

People should be able to install a flame thrower on their car as a theft or robbery deterrent.
People should be able to buy a tank and license it because it should be everyone's right to drive what they want.
People should be able to conduct biological and chemical experiments in their homes.

Why are all these rules preventing people from doing so?

 

[OpenGambit]

Yes and that is why we have mitigating factors like safety training, storage and transport regs (those go a bit overboard in severity, tbh) and background checks. We aren't banning Mustangs, aftermarket seats and Momo steering wheels before too many knuckleheads crash them.

as stated before I don't really have a problem with the regs in Canada, but there are huge loopholes in the states that have to be dealt with, which I summarized above, and none of which are worth defending.

I do agree that the restricted weapon transport regs are silly in Canada.

Forum Sponsor