some facts about Guns and ideas about guns in america

[Aizen]

so people hunted for thousands of years with rocks, spears, and how and arrows. But you want to tell me a modern gun isn't good enough.

Yes. Some guns have startling recoil, poor accuracy, bad stocks, terrible triggers, no sights or crappy factory issued sights, and prone to ammo jams. The need for modifications on certain guns are obvious. Some people start off with good guns in which modifications are not needed but rather just to make a good thing better. Other people start off with bad guns that either need to be sold/destroyed or seriously modded just to get into shape.

What are the real world uses and purposes?

Some gun owners who regularly shoot are not hunters at all but are just shooters. Thus all their modifications are to help for their hobby of shooting at the range or at targets they practice with. For hunters, gun modifications help the hunter be more successful and in regards to hunters who hunt in areas with dangerous animals, mods can help improve the odds on their personal safety.

This leads me back to the question of why do you need more that 10 rounds per clip?

Which leads me back to my question, why can I not hold any more bullets than what a small pistol can hold? Not a huge rifle with a large clip, but why can I not have more than what a small pistol can hold?

 

[MeachTheMonster]

they are easier... They come already made. You just have to aim and pull the trigger.

so why again shouldn't we restrict these ready made killing machines?

 

[Blackking]

so why again shouldn't we restrict these ready made killing machines?

We do... have you every tried to purchase one??

I mean legally.. . if we bring up illegal weapons.. then this convo, these bills, this issue is irrelevant.

 

[MeachTheMonster]

We do... have you every tried to purchase one??

I mean legally.. . if we bring up illegal weapons.. then this convo, these bills, this issue is irrelevant.

Some states have good laws/restrictions others don't. Which undermines the effectiveness of the laws because people just drive to the next state over and buy the guns without restrictions. Which brings me to your second statement. This conversation especially the backround check issue is directly related to "illegal guns"

Illegal guns get on the street by people using legal loopholes to purchase the weapons legally then selling them on the street. We should be trying to close those loopholes.

 

[Sensitive Blake Griffin]

Gun control doesn't mean banning guns outright which gun rights advocates cannot separate the two at all

an 18 year old can go out and legally buy a shotgun.. that shyt is absurd!

 

[MeachTheMonster]

Yes. Some guns have startling recoil, poor accuracy, bad stocks, terrible triggers, no sights or crappy factory issued sights, and prone to ammo jams. The need for modifications on certain guns are obvious. Some people start off with good guns in which modifications are not needed but rather just to make a good thing better. Other people start off with bad guns that either need to be sold/destroyed or seriously modded just to get into shape.

Most modifications/accessories are not even addressed. Just those that are used for military/people killing purposes. There are plenty of scopes, sights, triggers, ect that people could use to improve their weapons.

Some gun owners who regularly shoot are not hunters at all but are just shooters. Thus all their modifications are to help for their hobby of shooting at the range or at targets they practice with. For hunters, gun modifications help the hunter be more successful and in regards to hunters who hunt in areas with dangerous animals, mods can help improve the odds on their personal safety.

"Sport" modifications were not being banned. And again the idea that these things are needed for hunting is pure nonsense. People have and do hunt very successfully with much less.

Which leads me back to my question, why can I not hold any more bullets than what a small pistol can hold? Not a huge rifle with a large clip, but why can I not have more than what a small pistol can hold?

Because some people use the extra ammo capacity to kill extra people. You have no real justifiable reason to need a lot of bullets in each clip. Therefore it isn't worth it to grant a right, just for the sake of granting it, when the only people who actualy need that capability are using it to kill people.

 

[daze23]

remember when we finally freed ourselves from tyranny in 2004?

me neither...

 

[Aizen]

Most modifications/accessories are not even addressed. Just those that are used for military/people killing purposes. There are plenty of scopes, sights, triggers, ect that people could use to improve their weapons.

These other modifications have more purposes beyond just the military or killing. Trying to label it as such is intellectually dishonest.

"Sport" modifications were not being banned. And again the idea that these things are needed for hunting is pure nonsense. People have and do hunt very successfully with much less.

As a hunter, tell me what your set-up is. You say it is not needed. So what do you roll with, why do you roll with it and why do you look down or disapprove of people who want more? Hunting with less often means that - less success and greater risk for personal injury/death if hunting dangerous game.

Because some people use the extra ammo capacity to kill extra people. You have no real justifiable reason to need a lot of bullets in each clip. Therefore it isn't worth it to grant a right, just for the sake of granting it, when the only people who actualy need that capability are using it to kill people.

Again, the extra ammo is not exclusively for criminal use. This black-or-white characterization is an all-or-nothing approach in terms of argumentation. The number 10, for what is an acceptable number of rounds was probably arbitrarily established because that goes far behind rifles and goes well into hand-guns. Even if you agree with limited rounds, you should realize Dianne Feinsein's idea is far-reaching to pretty much ban many rifles and ban a decent amount of pistols too.

 

[MeachTheMonster]

First off.. No it is not gun enthusiast that are going around murking people. smh, we examine the root causes of everything except this issue. We examine the profiles of pedophile rapist, and terrorist.. but we want to pretend that gun enthusiast are the one that are responsible for these shootings. And gun bans, limitations, or anything related do not make society safer at all. Review my links on first page.

2. People who support guns usually aren't brain washed the way we are on most issues.. I've been in these debates on both sides. I used to be simple minded and thought that we needed to fight the guns instead of the real issues. Most supporters and advocates are very informed, it's not like the patriot Act or other issues.

3. Our nation is owned by lobbyist.. that's just the way it is. I'm not gonna smack up a random Jewish person simply because Apac supports fck sh1t in the middle East.. And I'm not going to place provisions on random US citizens because NRA controls harry reid and they all are making a killing (lol) off selling accessories. I don't f with the NRA because many of it's members are racist (I could b wrong tho). But they aren't incorrect on many of it's stances.

However, I don't agree that armed citizens can prevent most killings.

4. " continue to make millions of dollars off the lives of American citezens." first I would like to say .... do u need a tissue? Second I would like that say, that you have a limited understanding of the issue. I live in Detroit. I'm not going to blame the violence in my city on Guns. last summer it seems like every other day a b1tches body was ending up in a trunk... I would be foolish to blame that on anything other than limited resources, negative culture, and social-economic situations. Most mass killings are health related or political and not related to the manufacturing or distribution industry.

5. I'm not against the bill, I'm against the pork. lil bits of swine go into every bill and most of it isn't a huge deal... but for some bills it's a huge fcking deal. So just like with bills dealing with Privacy rights- most of it may seem reasonable, but then someone will slide in a pork about internet privacy that I do not agree with. Just like this bill. Watch when the next one comes out how many proposals are in it as well. That makes it so the mental health screen can never get passed... because people like you are crying about Deadly horrible man killing machines and limited clips.

1. Gun restrictions don't make people less violent, but in knowing people are violent why do we pass out guns so freely? Why is it that American states with stricter gun laws also have less gun violence? Why is it that America has the most lax gun laws and the most gun violence? Is it just a coincidence?

2. you can't be serious

Gun advocates who are informed also support this bill. It's the people like dude in the picture, and confused militant nikkas that oppose gun control

3. Well you should stop making their arguments for them. They throw all of the sensational rhetoric in the conversation in order to divert attention from the fact that they are making a killing off illegal gun activity. The people with the most to loose by these restrictions are the gun manufacturers and criminals. Most gun owners won't be effected at all.

4. Those social/economic issues are the cause of violence and should be addressed. But that still doesn't change the fact that guns are too easy to get. With background checks and provisions to hold people accountable for where their guns end up. "Illegal" guns in Detroit would be more expensive and it wouldn't make economic sense to spend hundreds of dollars on a gun just to rob the corner store for $85

5. The "pork" doesn't matter. That's all political fluff. Stuff for politicians to argue over. We the people, black people especially, should ignore these fights because they are never about us either way. We need to start using these politicians to get what we need out of them instead of harping on philosophical differences. Backround checks would be good for our community. Everything else wouldn't effect us at all. Why fight over those things?

 

[MeachTheMonster]

Some of the other modifications people like Dianne Feinstein have an issue with are not modifications with only military or mass murder purposes. Trying to label it as such is intellectually dishonest.

I'm talking about this bill, not Dianne Feinstein's opinion.

As a hunter, tell me what your set-up is. You say it is not needed. So what do you roll with, why do you roll with it and why do you look down or disapprove of people who want more? Hunting with less often means that - less success and greater risk for personal injury/death if hunting dangerous game.

I don't need to be a hunter to know that people have hunted successfully for thousands of years without pistol grip shotguns.

And I also know that plenty of restrictions have been placed on hunting and hunting weapons to make sure they are not too efficient. I'm not sure what the overlap is, but most of the items on the "assault weapons ban" list are illegal for hunting purposes anyway. And the assault weapons ban specifically protects guns used for hunting purposes.

Again, the extra ammo is not exclusively for criminal use. This black-or-white characterization is an all-or-nothing approach in terms of argumentation. The number 10, for what is an acceptable number of rounds was probably arbitrarily established because that goes far behind rifles and goes well into hand-guns. Even if you agree with limited rounds, you should realize Dianne Feinsein's idea is far-reaching to pretty much ban many rifles and ban a decent amount of pistols too.

Again the clip size ban wouldn't ban any weapon only the size of the clips in said weapon. And extra amo is used exclusively for extra efficient killing. There is nothing an American citizen NEEDS extra efficient killing power for other than killing a bunch of people.

 

[Blackking]

1. Gun restrictions don't make people less violent, but in knowing people are violent why do we pass out guns so freely? Why is it that American states with stricter gun laws also have less gun violence? Why is it that America has the most lax gun laws and the most gun violence? Is it just a coincidence?

2. you can't be serious

Gun advocates who are informed also support this bill. It's the people like dude in the picture, and confused militant nikkas that oppose gun control

3. Well you should stop making their arguments for them. They throw all of the sensational rhetoric in the conversation in order to divert attention from the fact that they are making a killing off illegal gun activity. The people with the most to loose by these restrictions are the gun manufacturers and criminals. Most gun owners won't be effected at all.

4. Those social/economic issues are the cause of violence and should be addressed. But that still doesn't change the fact that guns are too easy to get. With background checks and provisions to hold people accountable for where their guns end up. "Illegal" guns in Detroit would be more expensive and it wouldn't make economic sense to spend hundreds of dollars on a gun just to rob the corner store for $85

5. The "pork" doesn't matter. That's all political fluff. Stuff for politicians to argue over. We the people, black people especially, should ignore these fights because they are never about us either way. We need to start using these politicians to get what we need out of them instead of harping on philosophical differences. Backround checks would be good for our community. Everything else wouldn't effect us at all. Why fight over those things?

I don't know anyone who has acquired an AK legally.

And black people shouldn't ignore these fights because they are important. Most importantly, the guns aren't the root cause of the violence. If someone ends up shot, people are going to say... it was probably drug related, or domestic related. No one who understands y it happened, would ever say, damn... we need to get rid of those guns. Because if I wanted to kill my GF and I didn't have a gun, it would be easy to just stab her.
-point is that background check legislation is more difficult to pass if people feel like gun rights are being threatened. That's the truth, so regardless of what the main components are to any bill.... if it touches on clips, assault, etc.. the sh1t will fail. That would be asking democratic politician to forfeit their seat in order to pass a bill - they don't care about safety or the American public that much.

 

[Blackking]

remember when we finally freed ourselves from tyranny in 2004?

me neither...

what r u saying?

 

[MeachTheMonster]

I don't know anyone who has acquired an AK legally.
And black people shouldn't ignore these fights because they are important. Most importantly, the guns aren't the root cause of the violence. If someone ends up shot, people are going to say... it was probably drug related, or domestic related. No one who understands y it happened, would ever say, damn... we need to get rid of those guns. Because if I wanted to kill my GF and I didn't have a gun, it would be easy to just stab her.

Again economic issues should be addressed, but that doesn't mean gun access issues shouldn't be addressed.

-point is that background check legislation is more difficult to pass if people feel like gun rights are being threatened. That's the truth, so regardless of what the main components are to any bill.... if it touches on clips, assault, etc.. the sh1t will fail. That would be asking democratic politician to forfeit their seat in order to pass a bill - they don't care about safety or the American public that much.

This I agree with. And that goes for both sides. The only reason people feel guns are threatened is because the NRA and their lobbyists and politicians say they are. When in reality most American citizens including most gun owners agree that some more strict restrictions need to be put in place.

 

[Aizen]

If I were not a hunter but had problems with how people hunted, I would be much different about it. Rather than just promote some bill, I'd ask questions like "How many rounds do you use?" How many rounds do you need to feel safe? How many rounds has it taken to kill an animal in your worst case scenario?" And from there, you could get some sort of scientific, field-tested, experience-proven, authentic round ceiling. Where I live, you can hunt with any gun, any caliber. You can have big magazines, no problem. Some people here take full use of it. Trying to restrict it would get some funny stares.

This is my final post in this thread. Get your feet wet in the game and see how you feel. If you feel the same, then awesome. But if you like going a little harder in the lane, there's nothing wrong with that either and you'll be happy that as of now, you can still do so.

Adios.

 

[Blackking]

Some states have good laws/restrictions others don't. Which undermines the effectiveness of the laws because people just drive to the next state over and buy the guns without restrictions. Which brings me to your second statement. This conversation especially the backround check issue is directly related to "illegal guns"

Illegal guns get on the street by people using legal loopholes to purchase the weapons legally then selling them on the street. We should be trying to close those loopholes.

That's not the only way they get there. People bring them in from Canada and Mexica.. cars are rarely checked.

But you can't purchase a Gloc in MI then travel to NY with it.. that's illegal. First off, NY laws are wayyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyy overboard, plus those laws don't help w violence - other policies are what helped that state. 2nd. We have enuf guns on the streets. some people have arsenals. so unless we plan on going door to door and doing searches, there's no hope in cleaning up the streets completely of weapons.

If laws are passed, are people supposed to just turn weapons in? or what? how does that work?