14 dead at Batman premeire in Colorado

[jerryskids 5,206]

The problem with gun control is that for it to be effective, it has to be 100% efficient. Meaning you have to get rid of ALL of the guns, or else only the bad guys will have the guns. And that will never happen in the US -- it would be a massive effort comparable to the war on drugs, and probably as ineffective. We aren't some small island like the UK, or an island with minimal population centers on the coasts like Australia (which started as a penal colony, so I presume they have weapons control built in from the beginning). This is a big focking country with shiotty border control and an inherent systemic belief in the right to arm yourself which is so strong that it was the second thing our founders added to the constitution.

[BLS 313]

you MUST always put that caveat in there and it is a falsely Utopian view to accept that it will always be done responsibly.

 

 

You can say the same thing with driving a car. Do you want everybody to start walking?

It's part of the risk you assume. You cannot protect everyone from everything. I would certainly NOT want to live in such a world.

[Strike 3,979]

Lets see....if im in a room with 1000 knives...the odds i get cut with a knife are pretty good. If you remove the knives....my odds of getting cut go down significantly.......odd how that works when you dont have them around.

 

I would post a laughing icon at this post but it just doesn't seem appropriate at this time.

[Strike 3,979]

The problem with gun control is that for it to be effective, it has to be 100% efficient. Meaning you have to get rid of ALL of the guns, or else only the bad guys will have the guns. And that will never happen in the US -- it would be a massive effort comparable to the war on drugs, and probably as ineffective. We aren't some small island like the UK, or an island with minimal population centers on the coasts like Australia (which started as a penal colony, so I presume they have weapons control built in from the beginning). This is a big focking country with shiotty border control and an inherent systemic belief in the right to arm yourself which is so strong that it was the second thing our founders added to the constitution.

 

The U.K. enacted a handgun "ban" in 1997. Gun crime is up significantly since that ban was enacted. Gun control simply doesn't work.

[BLS 313]

Lets see....if im in a room with 1000 knives...the odds i get cut with a knife are pretty good. If you remove the knives....my odds of getting cut go down significantly.......odd how that works when you dont have them around.

 

 

If you took all the cars off the road, you'd never have drunk driving incidents either.

[TD Ryan2 314]

I don't think any of us wants every dumbass on the street carrying a gun. I am for fairly stingent requirements, but if those requirements are met, and proper protocol followed, I don't have any problem seeing a few more guns around.

it's taken a while, but I finally found something that we (slightly) disagree on.

 

July 20, 2012 - the day parrot was WRONG!

[GobbleDog 816]

The problem with gun control is that for it to be effective, it has to be 100% efficient. Meaning you have to get rid of ALL of the guns, or else only the bad guys will have the guns. And that will never happen in the US -- it would be a massive effort comparable to the war on drugs, and probably as ineffective. We aren't some small island like the UK, or an island with minimal population centers on the coasts like Australia (which started as a penal colony, so I presume they have weapons control built in from the beginning). This is a big focking country with shiotty border control and an inherent systemic belief in the right to arm yourself which is so strong that it was the second thing our founders added to the constitution.

Valid point.

 

My prediction is instead of trying to round up all the existing guns, the government will simply outlaw the buying and selling of new ammunition and guns. Then over time, those things will become much more expensive and difficult to obtain.

[BLS 313]

The U.K. enacted a handgun "ban" in 1997. Gun crime is up significantly since that ban was enacted. Gun control simply doesn't work.

 

 

http://sob.apotheon.org/?p=1323

 

 

[titans&bucs&bearsohmy! 2,745]

You're conflating a multitude of different issues here to address my question about carrying. The act of simply carrying is not terribly dangerous if done responsibly.

 

Sure. Transporting nuclear waste is relatively safe if done responsibly. So is using dynamite. Doesn't mean I want any random dipsh!t who wants to doing it.

 

 

I'm sorry man, but that's just nonsensical, fear-mongering, rhetoric.

 

No, it really isn't. The percentage of people who could, in the heat of a sudden gunfight, have the presence of mind to draw their weapon, aim it, and fire an accurate shot is pretty small. I'd say well less than 20% of the population. That is why police and military spend so much time traing... so that when it happens, it is instinctual. And even then, some cops and military men, with a great deal of high level training, freeze and/or miss. Ever looked up the accuracy rate of the average police officer? And those are guys who are required to practice so many hours at a range periodically, and EXPECT to find themselves in a bad situation. When the bullets start flying at the local starbucks, most people would fail miserably.

[Recliner Pilot 61]

Lets see....if im in a room with 1000 knives...the odds i get cut with a knife are pretty good. If you remove the knives....my odds of getting cut go down significantly.......odd how that works when you dont have them around.

You sukk at analogies.

[titans&bucs&bearsohmy! 2,745]

If you took all the cars off the road, you'd never have drunk driving incidents either.

 

Cars have a useful function. Traffic fatalities are an acceptable "cost of doing business" in relation to the benefits. Guns do nothing except kill. That is all they do. There is no societal benefit to their existence whatsoever.

[TD Ryan2 314]

Doesn't mean I want any random dipsh!t who wants to doing it.

 

to be fair - neither does parrot.

strict regulations, weed out the bad-eggs, etc and guns are OK.

 

I'm just skeptical of a system that can effectively, efficiently do that... it's the "only the Good Guys get guns" approach.

 

1. You've got to be sure it's only the good guys.

 

2. even the good guys are human and fallable, nobody is "good" or "evil" in absolute terms - even the "good guys" can make mistakes and bad decisions.

[5-Points 2,731]

The guy gassed the theater before opening fire. Police were claiming they couldn't even enter without gas masks.

 

Point being, if 5 people in the crowd had been armed, the only thing that might change is 10 more people would be dead due to the people in the crowd shooting while choking on gas and being unable to see clearly.

 

I don't feel strongly about gun control either way, but the person that knows whats about to go down (usually the bad guy), will always have a giant advantage.

Or maybe the threat/probability of armed resistance would have been enough to deter this coward from his course of action.

[KSB2424 3,083]

I've never understood why regular joes need a handgun anyway. You hunt with a shotgun/rifle. The best home defense is a shotgun as its really hard to miss and the bullets don't go into other rooms as much so the odds of killing your own family by accident goes down.

 

The only people carrying handguns legally should be law enforcement (i.e. trained individuals).

[GobbleDog 816]

Cars have a useful function. Traffic fatalities are an acceptable "cost of doing business" in relation to the benefits. Guns do nothing except kill. That is all they do. There is no societal benefit to their existence whatsoever.

Owning a gun does have some benefits. Piece of mind (real or not). It makes your pr*ck feel bigger. And they're useful for putting holes in paper targets.

 

Are those benefits worth all the deaths and injuries? 60% of Americans seem to think so. But that percentage is falling with each tragedy.

[Strike 3,979]

to be fair - neither does parrot.

strict regulations, weed out the bad-eggs, etc and guns are OK.

 

I'm just skeptical of a system that can effectively, efficiently do that... it's the "only the Good Guys get guns" approach.

 

1. You've got to be sure it's only the good guys.

 

2. even the good guys are human and fallable, nobody is "good" or "evil" in absolute terms - even the "good guys" can make mistakes and bad decisions.

 

It's already legal to carry in most places. That system you say can't effectively work is already in place and seems to........effectively work. Not sure how you can argue otherwise.

[BLS 313]

I've never understood why regular joes need a handgun anyway. You hunt with a shotgun/rifle. The best home defense is a shotgun as its really hard to miss and the bullets don't go into other rooms as much so the odds of killing your own family by accident goes down.

The only people carrying handguns legally should be law enforcement (i.e. trained individuals).

 

 

Wrong.

http://www.theboxotruth.com/docs/bot3.htm

[TD Ryan2 314]

it is a bit puzzling to me that the "Benefits" of owning a gun rarely have anything to do with protecting ourselves from our own government gone awry - I do believe that was the original intent of the Constitution when it armed the citizens - not to protect against eachother but rather protect against a government that did not obey The People.

[parrot 789]

Awesome thread; gun control and death penalty debates going on simultaneously.

 

Abortion anyone?

[BLS 313]

Cars have a useful function. Traffic fatalities are an acceptable "cost of doing business" in relation to the benefits. Guns do nothing except kill. That is all they do. There is no societal benefit to their existence whatsoever.

 

 

Scenario:

 

You're in a movie theater, watching a midnight preview of the new Batman movie. Some crazy focker comes in with a rifle and starts indiscriminantly shooting people.

 

No societal benefit of carrying a gun? Would you rather just be shot? Do you really believe if we outlawed all guns nobody would commit this crime with a gun?

 

I realize I'm not going to convince you of their benefit. My guess is you're scared to death of guns because you've never been around them or don't have much experience with them.

Either way, I disagree with you on the benefit, but respect your opinion.

[GobbleDog 816]

Awesome thread; gun control and death penalty debates going on simultaneously.

 

Abortion anyone?

Pro-choice. Without abortion, the scumbag population would skyrocket.

[Strike 3,979]

it is a bit puzzling to me that the "Benefits" of owning a gun rarely have anything to do with protecting ourselves from our own government gone awry - I do believe that was the original intent of the Constitution when it armed the citizens - not to protect against eachother but rather protect against a government that did not obey The People.

 

That was certainly ONE of the reasons they enacted the 2nd amendment. No one has ever argued it was the only reason.

[TD Ryan2 314]

It's already legal to carry in most places. That system you say can't effectively work is already in place and seems to........effectively work. Not sure how you can argue otherwise.

I respectfully disagree.

The system does not keep guns out of the wrong hands.

[KSB2424 3,083]

Wrong.

http://www.theboxotruth.com/docs/bot3.htm

How many stacks of sheetrock would a bullet from a standard handgun go through?

 

I'd rather a family member take two pellets of spray from a 20 guage in another room than a bullet from a Smith and Wesson.

 

Not to mention the fact that its much harder to miss with a shotgun than a handgun.

[BLS 313]

I respectfully disagree.

The system does not keep guns out of the wrong hands.

 

 

It NEVER will. Hence why we should have the right to defend ourselves from those who don't abide by our laws.

[GobbleDog 816]

Regardless of the gun debate... anyone care to guess the race, religion, and motive of the shooter?

 

 

I think we're all assuming white christian motivated by insanity, right?

[BLS 313]

How many stacks of sheetrock would a bullet from a standard handgun go through?

 

I'd rather a family member take two pellets of spray from a 20 guage in another room than a bullet from a Smith and Wesson.

 

Not to mention the fact that its much harder to miss with a shotgun than a handgun.

 

 

Let’s consider the three main options.

 

 

Pistols

 

Many folks use a pistol for home defense. They can certainly be effective, and are a lot better for home defense than a spoon.

 

They, like other systems, have advantages and disadvantages. Let’s look at both.

 

Advantages:

 

1. Pistols are “convenient”. They are small, and easy to carry on your person. They can be concealed in public, but that isn’t as big of a factor for home defense.

 

2. It may be easier to move or manipulate a child while holding a pistol, as compared to holding a long-gun.

 

 

Disadvantages:

 

1. They are much less effective as Stoppers than a rifle or a shotgun. This is not something to “argue” about. It is simply a FACT.

 

Pistols “can” and often will Stop a bad guy, but they are less effective than a rifle or a shotgun.

 

2. Pistols are harder to aim and hit the target with than other systems. Practice can improve your accuracy, but they cannot be operated as accurately as a shoulder-fired weapon.

 

Novice shooters will have a harder time shooting a pistol accurately than a shoulder-fired weapon

 

3. Pistols are easier to take away from the shooter than a rifle or a shotgun. Many people falsely believe this is not true, but if you ever get some professional training, you will find that this is a simple fact.

 

4. Pistols will penetrate several walls, sometimes even more than a rifle or shotgun. Again, many people falsely believe this is not true, but it is a fact. See Shooting Through Walls

 

Any round that will penetrate enough to effectively Stop a bad guy, will penetrate several walls.

 

 

Shotguns

 

Advantages:

 

1. A shotgun loaded with buckshot, preferably #1 buckshot, or 00 buckshot, is a very effective Stopper. As Clint Smith notes, “A shotgun at close range will remove meat and bone.”

 

2. Shotguns can be bought for less money than many other systems. Many folks cannot afford a $900 carbine, but a perfectly adequate pump shotgun can be found for less than $200. While not the biggest issue, this can be important for many people.

 

3. At inside-the-home-distances, the spread of buckshot from a shotgun is relatively dense, that is, the patterns can be fairly tight, only a few inches wide. See Buckshot Patterns

 

Some folks mistakenly think this is a bad thing, but we do not want wide patterns with a shotgun, as we are responsible for every projectile that does not hit the target. We want tight patterns.

 

Federal Flight Control Buckshot is the “best of the best” for this application, as it will usually shoot the tightest patterns out of any shotgun.

 

4. Intimidation – Let’s be honest, the large bore of a shotgun is intimidating to some bad guys. As an ex-police officer, I can tell you that people that are not afraid of having a pistol pointed at them will often feel much differently about a big bore shotgun.

 

5. The shotgun is a shoulder-fired system and this gives the shooter a great advantage in accuracy.

 

 

Disadvantages:

 

1. With the wrong ammo (birdshot), a shotgun can be a very poor stopper. See Shotgun Ammo FAQs

 

2. Shotguns tend to have heavy recoil. This slows down follow-up shots. Follow-up shots can be very important, especially if there is more than one opponent.

 

3. Shotguns are slow to reload. The more you have to manipulate your system (reloading, etc.), the less ready you are to use it.

 

(Magazine loaded shotguns like the Saiga are faster to reload, but still have the recoil problem.)

 

4. Precision – Some folks mistakenly think that precision is not a “shotgun word”, but that is not always true. Shotguns can be fairly precise, but not as precise as a carbine. See Precision Shooting with Buckshot.

 

5. Pump shotguns (especially) can be easily jammed by a nervous shooter, and a “short stroke jam” is very difficult to fix.

 

 

Carbines/Rifles

 

When speaking of a carbine/rifle, we will primarily be speaking of a system such as an AR-15 carbine in .223. Other rifle/carbine systems will have slightly different advantages and disadvantages.

 

Advantages:

 

1. The carbine is a very powerful weapon system. A carbine loaded with the best .223 ammunition is an excellent fight Stopper. They are much more powerful and effective than any normal handgun. Rifles are rifles and pistols are pistols. Don’t forget that.

 

2. A carbine is a shoulder-fired system, meaning that it is much easier to make accurate hits with than a pistol. It will also usually have much better sights than most shotguns.

 

3. A magazine fed carbine is much easier and faster to reload than a shotgun. And with a 30 round magazine, it will have less manipulation than a handgun or a shotgun, as you will not need to manipulate it as often.

 

 

Disadvantages:

 

1. Cost – A carbine can be expensive, and not all folks can afford to buy one. That is not the “fault” of the system, but it is a consideration.

 

 

Let’s discuss some Myths about home defense.

 

1. Myth - I don’t want to use a long gun, because they can easily be taken away from you by the bad guy.

 

Fact – With proper training, a long gun is actually harder to take away from a shooter than a handgun.

 

“They say you can’t use a rifle or shotgun indoors because a bad guy will grab the barrel. Yeah? Well, he better hang on, ‘cause I’m gonna light him up and it’ll definitely be an "E" ticket ride."- Clint Smith

 

Get some professional training.

 

 

2. Myth - Long guns are too loud and I might hurt my hearing.

 

Fact – Any firearm will be “loud” inside a home. But the actual decibels of noise are very close with all three systems. And if someone is trying to kill you or your family, hearing loss will be way down on the list of important things to worry about.

 

Suppressors are also a realistic possibility to reduce noise.

 

 

3. Myth - All I need is one shot, so reloading is not important.

 

Fact – You do not know how many shots will be needed, so you had better prepare for the worse scenario. Bad guys do not always stand facing you with their arms to their sides and let you shoot them in the 5X zone. They just might be running and hiding behind things, and even shooting back at you. You may need follow-up shots and need them quickly.

 

 

4. Myth - You should use the firearm you are most comfortable with.

 

Fact – This myth is often repeated, but is wrong. If the system you are “most comfortable with” is a .22 Short revolver, then you need to “get comfortable” with a better system.

 

Using a poor system that has a record of being poor at Stopping bad guys is not the best idea. Get something that is effective and practice until you are comfortable.

 

 

5. Myth - I do not need a light.

 

Fact – Half of every 24 hours is dark. Your house lights may be out or even turned out by the bad guy. You must identify your target, so a weapon light is essential. For more, see Low Light Essentials

 

 

6. Myth - I cannot use a carbine, as it will penetrate more walls than a pistol.

 

Fact – Many types of pistol ammo will actually penetrate more walls than a carbine or a shotgun loaded with buckshot.

 

But, most importantly, any round from any system that will Stop a bad guy, will penetrate several walls. See Rifles, Shotguns, and Walls

 

Conclusions:

 

Here’s the bottom line: Rifles > Shotguns > Pistols.

 

Do as you please, but that’s just the facts.

 

 

 

 

WALL PENETRATION TESTS OF DIFFERENT GUNS:

 

http://www.theboxotruth.com/docs/bot12.htm

 

 

 

 

 

[BLS 313]

Regardless of the gun debate... anyone care to guess the race, religion, and motive of the shooter?

 

 

I think we're all assuming white christian motivated by insanity, right?

 

I'm assuming white. No idea on religion, nor should it matter. The motive will be he's fuckin INSANE.

[GobbleDog 816]

I'm assuming white. No idea on religion, nor should it matter. The motive will be he's fuckin INSANE.

If he turns out to be Muslim, it'll matter.

[Strike 3,979]

I'm assuming white. No idea on religion, nor should it matter. The motive will be he's fuckin INSANE.

 

The people identified as his parents in San Diego are white so I think that's a safe assumption.

[KSB2424 3,083]

Here’s the bottom line: Rifles > Shotguns > Pistols

 

Thats what I said. Why are you argueing with me.

[TD Ryan2 314]

don't forget the video games! Guaran-fockin-tee he's plays those evil video games!

[cyclone24 1,814]

Cars have a useful function. Traffic fatalities are an acceptable "cost of doing business" in relation to the benefits. Guns do nothing except kill. That is all they do. There is no societal benefit to their existence whatsoever.

 

 

Exactly....one is for daily function and production....the other is for killing people...errrrr....sport. Right.

[IGotWorms 3,315]

Very sad

 

Read that the dude had an "AK type weapon". First thought was that we really should not have allowed the assault weapons ban to lapse. But I think we should probably save the hand-wringing and the second-guessing for later.

[titans&bucs&bearsohmy! 2,745]

Or maybe the threat/probability of armed resistance would have been enough to deter this coward from his course of action.

 

Right. Most of these clowns save the last bullet for themselves. This clown apparently made no attempt to get away at all.

 

It's already legal to carry in most places. That system you say can't effectively work is already in place and seems to........effectively work. Not sure how you can argue otherwise.

 

The system seems to effectively work? We had 15 innocent people killed an 50 wounded 12ish hours ago, and your going to say our "weeding system" works?

 

 

it is a bit puzzling to me that the "Benefits" of owning a gun rarely have anything to do with protecting ourselves from our own government gone awry - I do believe that was the original intent of the Constitution when it armed the citizens - not to protect against eachother but rather protect against a government that did not obey The People.

 

Anyone who thinks that a random collection of citizens armed with random handguns and hunting rifles would have ANY chance against the government is insane. That crap barely worked 300 years ago when the govenment and the people had pretty much the same weapons. Now, the government has much better toys.

 

Scenario:

 

You're in a movie theater, watching a midnight preview of the new Batman movie. Some crazy focker comes in with a rifle and starts indiscriminantly shooting people.

 

No societal benefit of carrying a gun? Would you rather just be shot? Do you really believe if we outlawed all guns nobody would commit this crime with a gun?

 

I realize I'm not going to convince you of their benefit. My guess is you're scared to death of guns because you've never been around them or don't have much experience with them.

Either way, I disagree with you on the benefit, but respect your opinion.

 

First off, I agree wholeheartedly on your last point. I disagree with you, but respect your opinion.

 

Now... I'm not afraid of guns. Hell, I'm a southern boy. I've shot guns hundreds of times at least, can take them apart, clean them, etc. I used to own one myself. My brother and father carry on a daily basis (they own rental properties in the memphis ghetto.) My mom keeps a pistiol in her glove box (which is, as I'm sure you would agree, completely useless, not even factoring in the fact that my mother is a hysterical type person in even the most minor crisis.)

 

So no, its not a fear of guns, or a lack of experience with them. Hell, if I needed to, I would carry myself, and have once or twice illegally when I had business in the ghetto (I was collecting rent for my dad. I was 18, he gave me a .38 to carry. I didn't have to use it, but I could tell that the guy was sizing me up, so I moved my jacket aside to show it to him. He then decided to just pay me.)

 

I just believe that our society has changed and grown to the point where gun ownership is a suicide pact. These massacres are happening at a more and more rapid clip. That isn't going to stop. And I think that, in the vast majority of cases, "defense" is a myth. Most people who carry a gun for defense would just die with a gun strapped to their hip, or maybe in their hand if they had exceptional reflexes.

 

Now, I'm pragmatic enough to realize that, America's history being what it is, it may well be completely impossible to implement effective gun control here. There are too many guns, you could never get rid of enough of them. That argument probably has some validity. But the following things could, and should, be done.

 

1. Seal the borders and ports off tighter than a gnat's asswhole. (this should be done for a variety of reasons.)

2. Outlaw the import or manufacture of new guns.

3. As the police collect guns, destroy them.

 

Eventually, they would become rare and expensive enough to keep them out of the hands of stupid ghetto crackheads.

 

I would even be ok with a hald measure... you can carry a gun, but it can only hold 3 bullets. That would help prevent the kind of crap we saw last night.

 

In any event, we are still a LONG way away from anything happening. Our politicians are a bunch of spineless panderers, and won't do sh!t until the outrage gets WAY higher.

[IGotWorms 3,315]

i'd love to see someone be against the death penalty in this case.

 

No doubt who did it. No doubt he's guilty. What more do you need?

 

What if it was proven that the guy was severely mentally ill? I'm not saying that would excuse his actions but maybe it would mitigate the use of the death penalty.

[phillybear 364]

If we just ban Ozzy Osbourne music, and throw in Judas Priest and Iron Maiden, none of this will ever happen again.

[parrot 789]

it's taken a while, but I finally found something that we (slightly) disagree on.

 

July 20, 2012 - the day parrot was WRONG!

 

FOCK OFF TD!!!

[Strike 3,979]

 

The system seems to effectively work? We had 15 innocent people killed an 50 wounded 12ish hours ago, and your going to say our "weeding system" works?

 

 

So you have knowledge of how he acquired his guns?

[NewbieJr 540]

What if it was proven that the guy was severely mentally ill? I'm not saying that would excuse his actions but maybe it would mitigate the use of the death penalty.

Nope, if he's THAT violently ill, he has absolutely no purpose on thsi earth. Kill the focker.