Thinking about options

[ScorpionHunter]

The reason we don't allow a 3 y.o. to buy an UZI is the same reason he can't sign a mortgage, open up a trading account, or vote is that our culture doesn't allow it after a couple thousand years of trial and error. Some cultures let a 50 y.o. guy marry a 9 y.o. girl. Ours doesn't. So, the fact that the child can't buy a gun isn't really a challenge to the "shall not be infringed" argument. Our culture broadly agrees that the age of majority is about 18. At that point, I believe he should be able to buy as many ARs (select fire) and Magpul D-60s as he can afford. Through Amazon with free next-day delivery. And no, I don't think background checks do any good.

To the point about the 30 round mags, I ask this question with all sincerity and respect for the loss you experienced. Does it matter, or is the feeling of personal loss and grief greater, when the family member or friend is killed alongside other people, or just alone? I have been blessed to have never lost anyone to violence. So, I can only guess about the permanent hole in my life if I lost a child who was murdered. But I don't know if I would feel worse or even differently if she was killed alone by a vengeful boyfriend or in a mass shooting at a movie theater. What, then, is the point of letting people have 10 round magazines, or even single shot guns, if 30 round magazines bother you?

When someone tells me he thinks mag capacity should be restricted to some arbitrary number, I ask that question. I've asked about 10 people, and have only got blank stares in response.

And now, I think I will take advantage of a labor day sale and buy another gun.

 

[Rhino]

So honest I think you don’t have me pegged correctly and misunderstand my intent. That said, I can see that I’ve raised some sore points and I get that. I have one more set of questions. From a PR standpoint, I think the pro-right to be armed side is in serious danger of losing the public opinion battle. Giving me that point for argument’s sake,

1. How do we draw a greater line of distinction between us and those who commit such acts as what happened in Odessa?

2. Assuming we can’t prevent all of them, what can gun owners as groups do to try and at least reduce the frequency? I’m a personal responsibility kind of guy and feel like leaving it to the legislatures and police is not in our favor. Are there pro-2A groups encouraging concerned people like the Allen shooter’s mom to get their angry young man into a peer group that could help prevent some of this stuff?

 

[ZX9RCAM]

I believe the fact that I don't murder people is a good enough line for me.

 

[Mowingmaniac 24/7]

"the current situation is madness" please elaborate.

You have a lot to say, but won't answer a single question or most recently, an invitation....nice, apparently not even politely declining unless you did so on the down low....

Leftist sounding argument: "I think the pro-right to be armed side is in serious danger of losing the public opinion battle. Giving me that point for argument’s sake"

No, I'm not willing to compromise on that as the 'public opinion' argument sounds an awful lot like the left's 'common sense' blather......please agree with me on this itty bitty point and then here's the next one, yes it's a bit more forceful, and now this one: Disarm! NOW!!

Pro-right?

Your terminology is becoming more and more revealing.....

You sound like a gun owner who leans heavily to the left.

Lots of them in the Liberal Gun club.

 

[Sam7sf]

So honest I think you don’t have me pegged correctly and misunderstand my intent. That said, I can see that I’ve raised some sore points and I get that. I have one more set of questions. From a PR standpoint, I think the pro-right to be armed side is in serious danger of losing the public opinion battle. Giving me that point for argument’s sake,

1. How do we draw a greater line of distinction between us and those who commit such acts as what happened in Odessa?

2. Assuming we can’t prevent all of them, what can gun owners as groups do to try and at least reduce the frequency? I’m a personal responsibility kind of guy and feel like leaving it to the legislatures and police is not in our favor. Are there pro-2A groups encouraging concerned people like the Allen shooter’s mom to get their angry young man into a peer group that could help prevent some of this stuff?

Are you here on behalf of some anti gun or liberal gun group?

 

[Rhino]

Are you here on behalf of some anti gun or liberal gun group?

No

 

[Wezel]

2. Assuming we can’t prevent all of them, what can gun owners as groups do to try and at least reduce the frequency? I’m a personal responsibility kind of guy ...

We need to shoot back and stop this stuff as soon as it starts. Don’t just carry for your protection...be ready to go on the offensive. Carry an attack capable piece and engage.

 

[Mowingmaniac 24/7]

You have lots of left leaning questions, but only willing to provide one monosyllabic answer.

And no elaboration regarding your posting of this: "the current situation is madness"

What does that mean?

That the left is on the winning side of their anti-gun hysteria - so throw in the towel you buncha red neck, knuckle dragging, low brows?

You've broadly hinted that...

Gun owners should see it your way and start down the 'we give up - take our guns' argument path because you're persuaded the left can now take away rights, so go all weak in the knees and collapse?

NO!

 

[toddnjoyce]

From a PR standpoint, I think the pro-right to be armed side is in serious danger of losing the public opinion battle. Giving me that point for argument’s sake

How about “I don’t care about public opinion.”

I don’t negotiate with terrorists. It’s like trying to teach a pig to sing; it’s a waste of time and all it does is annoy the pig.

Have fun annoying the pig.

 

[Rhino]

How about “I don’t care about public opinion.”

I don’t negotiate with terrorists. It’s like trying to teach a pig to sing; it’s a waste of time and all it does is annoy the pig.

Have fun annoying the pig.

50% of your fellow citizens may be fools advocating for theft and centralized government but they aren’t terrorists.

 

[easy rider]

50% of your fellow citizens may be fools advocating for theft and centralized government but they aren’t terrorists.

Depends on what you call "terrorists".

But let me ask you something, what would you call "arbitrary use of power or control"?

 

[Rhino]

But let me ask you something, what would you call "arbitrary use of power or control"?

Pretty normal sinful (wrong) human behavior that most of us engage in any time we are angry.

 

[easy rider]

Pretty normal sinful (wrong) human behavior that most of us engage in any time we are angry.

Ever look up the meaning of tyranny? Power and control, they show no evidence of how more control on guns will make a difference, but will use power to enforce it.

 

[DoubleDuty]

My two cents. The 2nd says no infringements. We have already allowed too many. So unequivocally I say no, no, no, no.

 

[Rhino]

Ever look up the meaning of tyranny? Power and control, they show no evidence of how more control on guns will make a difference, but will use power to enforce it.

Sure, but it seems the masses don’t actually fear tyranny as long as it offers them a carrot for their fears. The founders mentioned that, too, in the Declaration of Independence.

all experience hath shewn that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable than to right themselves

.

 

[toddnjoyce]

50% of your fellow citizens may be fools advocating for theft and centralized government but they aren’t terrorists.

Yes, they are. I’ve already explained it: they are enemies of the Constitution.

This is why I don’t argue over gun control.

 

[easy rider]

Sure, but it seems the masses don’t actually fear tyranny as long as it offers them a carrot for their fears.

Certainly, and that's the easiest way to gain control, play on their fears. Do you hear a big push for "gun control" at times when we aren't hearing about another "mass shooting"?

I worked for the government in an instillation that was considered a strategic target during 9/11 in 2001. The fear was nationwide since we at first didn't know who was attacking us. I, myself, at first thought we needed more control, the government needed to do whatever was necessary to make us safe. I then thought of at what cost this sense of safety would be. I soon realized that freedom wasn't worth a cost of a sense of safety. Since then I have witnessed a chipping away of our freedoms in the name of safety, but are we really any safer? I guess we haven't given up enough of our freedom in reaching that safety we desire.

 

[Wildcat Diva]

Y’all are killin me. I’m a real person, not a troll. Wildcat Diva may not have me zeroed in but she knows who I am.

I DO? My situational awareness skills really ARE shoddy. That’s not something that I’m too sure that I’ll be able to sharpen if indeed I do need them. Sad, really.

At any rate, I’ll wave at ya, even if I’m not snapping as to who ya are, exactly.

 

[rmantoo]

1. How do we draw a greater line of distinction between us and those who commit such acts as what happened in Odessa?

There are at least 393 MILLION firearms in civilian hands in the USA. Less than 16,000 of those were used in murders, or 0.004071%. And that number is even lower if we take out multiple uses of the same firearms... But my point is that statistics draw, imho, PLENTY of distinction between the 392,084,000 NON-criminally used firearms and the +-16,000 that were criminally used. If that's not a big enough distinction, I don't know what would be.

Likewise, about 30% of Americans own firearms, or about 98,100,000 people. If you take ALL instances of gun violence, INCLUDING suicides (which I don't think is right, but I will for the sake of trying to make the #s look more 'severe' for arguments sake)but not including verified self defense and LEO use, that's 0.0061036 % of those owners were involved in gun violence.

No matter how you look at it, those numbers point to the fact that guns, and gun owners, are NOT the problem. The problem is that too few people understand statistics and are unwilling to accept reality.

 

[Hoji]

50% of your fellow citizens may be fools advocating for theft and centralized government but they aren’t terrorists.

No. But they would gleefully sit back and cheer when they load the other half into boxcars.