SURVEY: Gun Control -- Is it time to curtail gun ownership in the US?

[boomerangutang]

1 hour ago, pizzachang said:

If there was a shred of logic in this statement, the abortion would be illegal and long before gun deaths statistics, people killed other people and took away their "most basic" right.  Actually, mass shootings is a rare event. And, the automobile is much more dangerous (statistically) than a gun.

defined as 4 or more people shot at the same time/place .....there are an average of one mass shooting per day for the past 2 years in the US.  To me that's not 'a rare event.'   I'd like to see none.  Perhaps gun lovers could tolerate 2 or 3 or 4 mass shootings per day.

 

As for individual (and up to 3 shootings per incident), ....the US is slightly ahead of Thailand's average of 35 road deaths per day.  I have opinions about drunk and stupid drivers, but that's another topic.

[boomerangutang]

ok, let's  use the gun-lover's analogy:  comparing guns and vehicles.

 

It's illegal to operate a vehicle while drinking alcohol.  Shouldn't it also be illegal to operate guns with alcohol in the blood?

 

When citizens drink and drive, they get their license suspended.  Sometimes they get their car impounded.  As mentioned before, cars are designed to transport people.  Guns are designed to kill people.   Why do gun users get so much latitude, when car drivers are kept to strict guidelines?  I know the answer, and it ain't pretty. 

 

That's why I seriously advocate the victims and survivors of victims of the Vegas massacre sue the ATF and NRA as co-conspirators in the deaths and injuries.  Without the ATF and NRA, the killer could not have amassed military-grade weapons and so easily used them.

 

If I sell C-4 explosives to a nutcase, and he blows up a school with it, am I not at least partially guilty of the crime?  Similarly, if I'm a politician, and I make it easy for anyone to own as many military-grade weapons as they want, I should be nearly as guilty of the person using those weapons to wreak havoc.

 

 

[notmyself]

7 minutes ago, boomerangutang said:

ok, let's  use the gun-lover's analogy:  comparing guns and vehicles.

 

 

As previously mentioned, the entire vehicle, hammer, knife, (enter object of choice) argument has been totally ripped to shreds but has been promulgated for so long that people on the street still try to use it. To be fair... some time ago there was an excuse which boils down to lack of knowledge be that due of lack of education or lack of availability to research the veracity of a claim (no public library nearby) or even simply for economic reasons. But these days when most everyone has a smartphone and therefore access to most the entire collective knowledge of mankind going back thousands of years, such an excuse is without merit. So what could have been put down to ignorance in a non pejorative sense can now only be put down to wilful ignorance. 

[bazza73]

3 hours ago, smotherb said:

Of course not, that is why it is called hunting and not warfare.

With that level of ordnance, Australian hunters would be more inclined to call it butchery. Doesn't seem to be much skill involved. Just wondering what you would use for hunting elephants - a M60, perhaps?

[boomerangutang]

16 minutes ago, bazza73 said:

With that level of ordnance, Australian hunters would be more inclined to call it butchery. Doesn't seem to be much skill involved. Just wondering what you would use for hunting elephants - a M60, perhaps?

Gun lovers would probably use grenades to hunt elephants, and then take whatever pieces of the blown-apart elephant they could carry, to nail to the walls of their rec rooms.  The father of a friend of mine, had cig ashtrays made out of elephant feet.  I jest not.  They sat on the floor, were about a foot high, and were filled with sand.  Later, when the father was an old man (after he'd been to Africa numerous times, and killed dozens of beasts), he decided that it was cruel to go out with high powered guns with scopes, and kill innocent vegetarian animals (and carnivores, some of which were endangered).   My question is:  why did it take him so many years to get reasonable?  I figured it out when I was a little boy:  that shooting animals was bad.   

 

        It's like Trump voters who decide, after months of witnessing what a dildo Trump is, that maybe they made the wrong decision.   Again, I feel like saying to them, "Hey, why were you earlier so stupid for so long?   Is your brain still growing?   Did you change your meds? "

[notmyself]

4 minutes ago, boomerangutang said:

Gun lovers would probably use grenades to hunt elephants, and then take whatever pieces of the blown-apart elephant they could carry, to nail to the walls of their rec rooms

 

I presume the member is talking about hunting for the purpose of eating/ pest control etc. than for pure sport so the idea of using heavy duty ordinance actually makes sense economically because why pay money for electricity to run a meat grinder when it can be done at the same time at no extra cost.

[amvet]

1 hour ago, boomerangutang said:

ok, let's  use the gun-lover's analogy:  comparing guns and vehicles.

 

It's illegal to operate a vehicle while drinking alcohol.  Shouldn't it also be illegal to operate guns with alcohol in the blood?

 

When citizens drink and drive, they get their license suspended.  Sometimes they get their car impounded.  As mentioned before, cars are designed to transport people.  Guns are designed to kill people.   Why do gun users get so much latitude, when car drivers are kept to strict guidelines?  I know the answer, and it ain't pretty. 

 

That's why I seriously advocate the victims and survivors of victims of the Vegas massacre sue the ATF and NRA as co-conspirators in the deaths and injuries.  Without the ATF and NRA, the killer could not have amassed military-grade weapons and so easily used them.

 

If I sell C-4 explosives to a nutcase, and he blows up a school with it, am I not at least partially guilty of the crime?  Similarly, if I'm a politician, and I make it easy for anyone to own as many military-grade weapons as they want, I should be nearly as guilty of the person using those weapons to wreak havoc.

Cows are also innocent vegetarian animals killed with hammers and hung up while still alive so the heart will pump the blood out.  Calves in mommy when the cows are killed are also drained of blood used in medical research.  Big game in the USA is raised much like cows for hunting.  I believe there are many more deer today in the USA then when the Pilgrims got there.  They call it animal conservation I think. 

[Becker]

39 minutes ago, amvet said:

Cows are also innocent vegetarian animals killed with hammers and hung up while still alive so the heart will pump the blood out.  Calves in mommy when the cows are killed are also drained of blood used in medical research.  Big game in the USA is raised much like cows for hunting.  I believe there are many more deer today in the USA then when the Pilgrims got there.  They call it animal conservation I think. 

And I think it' called wildlife. There are also a lot more people in the US today than when the pilgrims arrived. What's your point?

[Grouse]

To repeat the refrain, once American women understand that real men don't need guns and all these gun slingers are actually big softies, the game will be up ?

[boomerangutang]

2 hours ago, amvet said:

Cows are also innocent vegetarian animals killed with hammers and hung up while still alive so the heart will pump the blood out.  Calves in mommy when the cows are killed are also drained of blood used in medical research.  Big game in the USA is raised much like cows for hunting.  I believe there are many more deer today in the USA then when the Pilgrims got there.  They call it animal conservation I think. 

two wrongs don't make a right.  I learned that in grammar school. P.S. I don't eat red meat.  Several reasons why:

 

>>>  I don't like the way steer are raised. They're miserable.

>>>  Several additives, incl. hormones and anti-biotics,  r pumped into the beast.  Do consumers eat that also?  You tell me.

>>>  It's anti-environmental.  Depletes, hogs and pollutes resources.  

>>>  it's unhealthy.  Beef takes 2 to 4 weeks to go thru the tubes. During that time, it putrefies.

>>>  I've had bulls as friends.  A v. large one, recently, is so calm he lets me walk up to him and play with his horns and ears, which are near 2 ft long.

 

p.s there's a pig farm in my area, in n. Thailand. The sows are in cages that don't allow them to stand or roll over.  Disgusting.

 

 

Edited October 24, 2017 by boomerangutang

[stevenl]

20 hours ago, smotherb said:

No, it was our well-armed boys who received a little training, but most already knew how to use guns. However, we not only saved you from speaking German, we also got you out of those little cages the Japs put you in, and we helped you rebuild your old nanny states--but whose counting, you certainly aren't.

Sarcasm is a not known concept to you.

[boomerangutang]

32 minutes ago, Grouse said:

To repeat the refrain, once American women understand that real men don't need guns and all these gun slingers are actually big softies, the game will be up ?

Rifles are what male gun owners want to be: long and hard.

Plus, they watched so many John Wayne movies, they think guns are magic wands.  In those flics, the good guys always win, and they never miss, ....and the bad guys always miss, when shooting.   It wouldn't surprise me if a lot of those shoot-em-up movies were partly financed by the NRA.  It's great advertising.   

[amvet]

3 hours ago, Becker said:

And I think it' called wildlife. There are also a lot more people in the US today than when the pilgrims arrived. What's your point?

Wild game feeds 100 times the number of people than it did when the pilgrims arrived because the game is hunted managed and utilized instead of starving in the winter like the deer did when the first white men came to North America. 

[Basil B]

Quote

No guns except small arms for personal protection, and hunting-style rifles.

In the UK hand guns are illegal Except for military and police official use.

 

I was sceptical about this law when introduced after Dunblane and Hungerford massacres, my thoughts are for those who participate in sports using hand guns, but there again if it reduces crime so be it.

 

[smotherb]

6 hours ago, bazza73 said:

With that level of ordnance, Australian hunters would be more inclined to call it butchery. Doesn't seem to be much skill involved. Just wondering what you would use for hunting elephants - a M60, perhaps?

That level of ordnance and skill, you say? You Ozzies use 7.62x51mm on pigs. And, the game in West Virginia are not kept in a pen waiting for the hunters to arrive to shoot them, like Ozzies do with pigs in Nannup, WA. Furthermore, shooting from a vehicle or spotlighting game are not as popular as they are with your great Ozzie sportsmen.  

Edited October 24, 2017 by smotherb

[boomerangutang]

1 hour ago, amvet said:

I guess you are saying Americans are murderers with guns because they eat beef and that one way to ban guns is to ban beef.  Good idea.  That along with the small penis thrust in this thread will really convince a lot of cowboys to give up their guns.

I didn't mention the word Americans or US in my prior missive that you're replying to. Neither I nor any sensible group of people will compel cowboys to give up guns.  It's known that cowboys would go ape-shit if that idea were floated.  I don't want to be shot at.  It would be like trying to take an addictive substance away from an addict.  Lots of anger, vindictiveness, screaming would ensue.

 

 

[Scott]

Some off-topic, troll posts and replies removed.   I suggest you stay on topic and keep it civil.  

[bazza73]

12 hours ago, smotherb said:

That level of ordnance and skill, you say? You Ozzies use 7.62x51mm on pigs. And, the game in West Virginia are not kept in a pen waiting for the hunters to arrive to shoot them, like Ozzies do with pigs in Nannup, WA. Furthermore, shooting from a vehicle or spotlighting game are not as popular as they are with your great Ozzie sportsmen.  

I don't know what kind of hunters you met in Nannup, WA. I have been on night patrols with professional hunters in New South Wales. They only have two bolt action calibres - the 0.22 for rabbits, roos, foxes and cats, and the old SMLE 0.303 for pigs, because their skins are thicker. Those choices are based on the cost of ammunition, important to a pro.

I can't claim to be a professional; however, it was an education to watch them. Each would score 200 rabbits in a night ( this was before the calcivirus release ), all head shot.  They didn't bother with a telescopic sight on the .303. All the pigs they shot were moving - fast.

I suspect your array of ordnance would have them rolling around on the ground laughing. I'm having a bit of a chuckle myself.

Edited October 25, 2017 by bazza73
Calcivirus

[bazza73]

12 hours ago, smotherb said:

That level of ordnance and skill, you say? You Ozzies use 7.62x51mm on pigs. And, the game in West Virginia are not kept in a pen waiting for the hunters to arrive to shoot them, like Ozzies do with pigs in Nannup, WA. Furthermore, shooting from a vehicle or spotlighting game are not as popular as they are with your great Ozzie sportsmen.  

Furthermore, we are not hunting on the 107 acres you have. The average property in outback NSW is 40,000 - 50,000 acres. If you want to hunt that area on foot, be my guest.

[pizzachang]

On 10/24/2017 at 10:24 AM, Becker said:

The car is vital to society and is heavily regulated and controlled. Guns are neither.

Please try to upgrade the level of your arguments to at least above 3rd grade.....

That is funny because the 2nd doesn't protect horses.  "vital to society' is of course a subjective view (yours) and the Constitution's importance is an objective one.  

[pizzachang]

22 hours ago, boomerangutang said:

defined as 4 or more people shot at the same time/place .....there are an average of one mass shooting per day for the past 2 years in the US.  To me that's not 'a rare event.'   I'd like to see none.  Perhaps gun lovers could tolerate 2 or 3 or 4 mass shootings per day.

 

As for individual (and up to 3 shootings per incident), ....the US is slightly ahead of Thailand's average of 35 road deaths per day.  I have opinions about drunk and stupid drivers, but that's another topic.

Don't know where you get your information but I suspect it's one the well-known sites that do not favor privately-owned guns. https://www.vox.com/cards/gun-violence-facts/mass-shootings-rare-united-states   Just one of many corroborations. Also FBI statistics support these statements.  Now, since you decided to substitute insults for intelligent debate....you can advance to 2nd grade debating skill level and get your Gold Star

[Becker]

33 minutes ago, pizzachang said:

That is funny because the 2nd doesn't protect horses.  "vital to society' is of course a subjective view (yours) and the Constitution's importance is an objective one.  

Actually, you got it completely and spectacularly wrong. The car's importance to modern society is not a subjective view - it's objective. That's so obvious even the dimmest of people realize this.

The second amendment however we can do just fine without. If the amendment was deleted tomorrow lift would go on much like before. It should in fact have been removed decades ago.

[smotherb]

1 hour ago, bazza73 said:

I don't know what kind of hunters you met in Nannup, WA. I have been on night patrols with professional hunters in New South Wales. They only have two bolt action calibres - the 0.22 for rabbits, roos, foxes and cats, and the old SMLE 0.303 for pigs, because their skins are thicker. Those choices are based on the cost of ammunition, important to a pro.

I can't claim to be a professional; however, it was an education to watch them. Each would score 200 rabbits in a night ( this was before the calcivirus release ), all head shot.  They didn't bother with a telescopic sight on the .303. All the pigs they shot were moving - fast.

I suspect your array of ordnance would have them rolling around on the ground laughing. I'm having a bit of a chuckle myself.

Opportunistic hunters I reckon, but they were Ozzies. For you to think a .303 on a pig vs. a 30-06 on a bear is butchery for the bear; you have a lot to learn. Yeah, wild game does tend to run, happy to hear you know that. I use the different weapons because I like to and none of them are overkill on the game I hunt. Maybe if you Ozzies had a greater choice of weapons; .22 and .303 wouldn't be your primary rifles. 

[bazza73]

15 minutes ago, smotherb said:

Opportunistic hunters I reckon, but they were Ozzies. For you to think a .303 on a pig vs. a 30-06 on a bear is butchery for the bear; you have a lot to learn. Yeah, wild game does tend to run, happy to hear you know that. I use the different weapons because I like to and none of them are overkill on the game I hunt. Maybe if you Ozzies had a greater choice of weapons; .22 and .303 wouldn't be your primary rifles. 

Perhaps you were in too much of a hurry to read my posts properly. I said the choice of 0.22 and 0.303 was governed by the cost of ammunition - maybe not important to you, but for a professional making a living off hunting, very significant. I've also said in a previous post my preferred options are a 0.22 magnum and a 0.222. That's all I need for that hunting area; if I was hunting buffalo or crocodiles ( now protected, they like to eat American tourists ) in the Northern Territory I'd be opting for a 0.243 magnum.

The butchery comment lies in the range of ordnance you use when hunting, and also some of it is semi-automatic. If I can use a fishing analogy, you are like a fisherman who is proud of landing a 20 pound barramundi with a 100 pound breaking strain line.

[smotherb]

2 hours ago, bazza73 said:

Furthermore, we are not hunting on the 107 acres you have. The average property in outback NSW is 40,000 - 50,000 acres. If you want to hunt that area on foot, be my guest.

Gee really, and just how many acres does one hunter cover?

 

I have five public hunting areas within 15 miles of my place, but all the animals I mentioned are on MY land, and I hunt alone without a bunch of yayhoos tromping around.

[smotherb]

42 minutes ago, bazza73 said:

Perhaps you were in too much of a hurry to read my posts properly. I said the choice of 0.22 and 0.303 was governed by the cost of ammunition - maybe not important to you, but for a professional making a living off hunting, very significant. I've also said in a previous post my preferred options are a 0.22 magnum and a 0.222. That's all I need for that hunting area; if I was hunting buffalo or crocodiles ( now protected, they like to eat American tourists ) in the Northern Territory I'd be opting for a 0.243 magnum.

The butchery comment lies in the range of ordnance you use when hunting, and also some of it is semi-automatic. If I can use a fishing analogy, you are like a fisherman who is proud of landing a 20 pound barramundi with a 100 pound breaking strain line.

You think the heavier the caliber the more readily the game will come to you? Overkill ruins the meat and the pelt. You really are in the dark, aren't you? And, you are the one to bring-up professional hunters; although, I believe those yayhoos in WA made their living herding pigs.

[bazza73]

1 hour ago, smotherb said:

You think the heavier the caliber the more readily the game will come to you? Overkill ruins the meat and the pelt. You really are in the dark, aren't you? And, you are the one to bring-up professional hunters; although, I believe those yayhoos in WA made their living herding pigs.

What on earth are you talking about? Ten weapons on a pickup isn't overkill? A 0.22 Magnum and a 0.222 are heavy calibre? What are you smoking today? The .243 magnum is for heavy game - hit a croc with a 0.22 magnum or a 0.222, and it will think it's being tickled.

The meat and the pelt is not ruined with a head shot, unless you are one of those narcissists that likes to festoon the walls with trophies. I'm talking about professional hunters who make a living off pelts and game meat. They don't want or need all your shiny toys.

If you want to talk about being in the dark, you herd feral goats. Herding pigs would be like herding cats. One does it with pig traps baited with carrion, if you want to do it that way.

[Craig krup]

One of the great myths is the cowboy, guns and the wild west. An analysis of wills showed that very few guns were left before the civil war. These were high-value items, cost six months wages, and if people had them they would have appeared in the wills. Guns weren't common until after the Civil War, when the country was awash with them, they were much cheaper and mass production got underway: the Springfield Armory had shown the way. 

 

As to militias fighting invading armies, if the Iraqis - with their history of violence, extended families, phenomenal tribal and religious blood ties and all the rest can't oppose the US army do you honestly think lard + AR15 = victory? Most gun owners would jack if cable went down for a couple of hours. People watch too many movies. They see themselves fighting and opposing, but the reality is they'd break in seconds. There won't be anyone filming you on the day, and the bad guys generally don't miss. 

 

The whole "militia" thing is horse jobbies. If they took it seriously they'd join a Guard unit. 

[smotherb]

26 minutes ago, bazza73 said:

What on earth are you talking about? Ten weapons on a pickup isn't overkill? A 0.22 Magnum and a 0.222 are heavy calibre? What are you smoking today? The .243 magnum is for heavy game - hit a croc with a 0.22 magnum or a 0.222, and it will think it's being tickled.

The meat and the pelt is not ruined with a head shot, unless you are one of those narcissists that likes to festoon the walls with trophies. I'm talking about professional hunters who make a living off pelts and game meat. They don't want or need all your shiny toys.

If you want to talk about being in the dark, you herd feral goats. Herding pigs would be like herding cats. One does it with pig traps baited with carrion, if you want to do it that way.

Me, it appears you need to layoff some of whatever you're taking. The heavy caliber and overkill comments were in response to your statement of me butchering game because of the ordnance I use and your suggestion I may want an M60--or do you not remember what you said?  Herding pigs for others to shoot, no matter how difficult it may be, is not hunting; it's criminal.  I have had enough of your banter. Please continue this by yourself.

[selftaopath]

On 10/22/2017 at 4:39 PM, sirineou said:

"Take a look around what happens when the governments disarm the people, mass slaughter.  "

Ever since the disarming of the Australian people the slaughter in the streets   is appalling !!!!

" If everyone carried a gun, there would be no crime. "

Trump said something similar, and I agree!

Being concerned about his safety , I suggest that they allow everyone in his rallies or where he visits, to be armed, that way if someone tried to kill him, all of his supporters would quickly neutralize him. In fact to give even those far away  the opportunity to neutralise such criminal,  they should all be armed with sniper rifles, and to reduce the noise so we can all hear gems such as the above, all such rifles should be equipped with silencers.  

At the Republican National Convention they did NOT allow any weapons. lol  Why not?