Jump to content

Washington set to become 10th state to ban assault weapons sales


Recommended Posts

Posted
27 minutes ago, pomchop said:

AR 15 round is the LAST thing you would use for hunting

That’s nonsense. It’s the primary rifle for pig and coyote eradication. It’s fine for deer under 100 yds. Right around 1000 ft-lbs. Where I live in west Tennessee many deer are taken with an AR-15. It’s far easier to shoot and far easier to become proficient without a scope. In the woods it’s almost impossible to have a clear shot at an identifiable animal at more than 50 yards. 

  • Like 1
Posted
21 minutes ago, billd766 said:

https://www.senate.gov/about/origins-foundations/senate-and-constitution/senate-passes-the-thirteenth-amendment.htm#:~:text=The 2012 film Lincoln told,Representatives on January 31%2C 1865.

 

The 2012 film Lincoln told the story of President Abraham Lincoln and the final month of debate over the Thirteenth Amendment, leading to its passage by the House of Representatives on January 31, 1865.

It seems that mikebike didn't take into account when the 13 amendment was ratified.

Posted
20 minutes ago, tuktuktuk said:

That’s nonsense. It’s the primary rifle for pig and coyote eradication. It’s fine for deer under 100 yds. Right around 1000 ft-lbs. Where I live in west Tennessee many deer are taken with an AR-15. It’s far easier to shoot and far easier to become proficient without a scope. In the woods it’s almost impossible to have a clear shot at an identifiable animal at more than 50 yards. 

Not to mention easier to carry than a bolt action rifle. And the ammo is both lighter and cheaper.   

  • Confused 1
Posted
24 minutes ago, billd766 said:

That was aimed more at KhunLA than generally.

 

There is no real need to hunt and kill for food anymore, as there was when the 2nd amendment was written.That was back in the days of muzzle loading, black power rifles, where if you were very good and well trained, you might get 2 shots off in a minute.

 

Nowadays you can buy most sorts of meat in the supermarket and the only reasons to kill wild animals is to cull them. An AR15 is not that much good for culling. A bolt action rifle of a reasonable calibre will do the job better, provided that the person pulling the trigger knows what they are doing.

 

 

 

Hunting is eco friendly, far more so than relying on over processed and packaged food from a supermarket.  "Farm to Table" is a common mantra for eco warriors. How about "Forest to table"?  Hunters are stewards of the environment.

  • Confused 1
Posted
36 minutes ago, Chomper Higgot said:

But not the weapon of choice for non crime related mass killers at schools, colleges, places of worship, shopping malls and public spaces.

 

Also a great deal easier for law enforcement officers to face up to and deal with.

According to Statista, handguns are the weapon of choice for mass shootings, by 2 to 1 over ALL long guns (not just AR15 types).

 

https://www.statista.com/statistics/476409/mass-shootings-in-the-us-by-weapon-types-used/

 

My challenge still stands. Would you, as a person in favor of gun control, put a sign outside your house saying "This Is A Gun Free Zone"?  And if not, why not? 

  • Sad 1
Posted
4 minutes ago, Hanaguma said:

According to Statista, handguns are the weapon of choice for mass shootings, by 2 to 1 over ALL long guns (not just AR15 types).

 

https://www.statista.com/statistics/476409/mass-shootings-in-the-us-by-weapon-types-used/

 

My challenge still stands. Would you, as a person in favor of gun control, put a sign outside your house saying "This Is A Gun Free Zone"?  And if not, why not? 

I have to admit, I saw that very sign in front of the gate to a huge mansion just outside Princeton, New Jersey. On the other side of the gate was a BLM flag. No doubt their security was fully armed. 

Posted

Post removed:

 

28. You will not make changes to messages quoted from other members posts, except for purposes of shortening the quoted post. Do not shorten any post in a way that alters the context of the original post. Do not change the formatting of the post you are quoting.

 

Please stay on topic and keep it civil:

"Washington set to become 10th state to ban assault weapons sales"

  • Thumbs Up 1
Posted (edited)
58 minutes ago, Hanaguma said:

According to Statista, handguns are the weapon of choice for mass shootings, by 2 to 1 over ALL long guns (not just AR15 types).

 

https://www.statista.com/statistics/476409/mass-shootings-in-the-us-by-weapon-types-used/

 

My challenge still stands. Would you, as a person in favor of gun control, put a sign outside your house saying "This Is A Gun Free Zone"?  And if not, why not? 

Yes, conflating all ‘Mass shootings’ with the ‘Mass shootings’ that is driving calls for gun controls.

 

Few people care if a drug gang kill each other in a crack house, the concern is non crime related mass shootings in. schools, colleges, places of worship, shopping malls, and public spaces.

 

 

 

 

Edited by Chomper Higgot
Posted
25 minutes ago, Bkk Brian said:

Nowhere to hunt in Washington. The majority of AR-15 owners don't have them for hunting anyway.

My first response was deleted for not quoting your entire comment. I don’t really understand why that’s okay sometimes and not okay other times. 
 

There are huge wilderness areas in Washington State where you can hunt big game with a license. 

Posted
4 minutes ago, Chomper Higgot said:

Yes, conflating all ‘Mass shootings’ with the ‘Mass shootings’ that is driving calls for gun controls.

 

Few people care if a drug gang kill each other in a crack house, the concern is non crime related mass shootings in. schools, colleges, places of worship, shopping malls, and public spaces.

 

 

 

 

So, you mean a subset of mass shootings, which are a subset of shootings then....   Interesting that shootings which involve, how can I say, non caucasian people, do not elicit a response.

 

Is it really a good use of time to so micromanage people?  

  • Confused 1
Posted
4 minutes ago, tuktuktuk said:

My first response was deleted for not quoting your entire comment. I don’t really understand why that’s okay sometimes and not okay other times. 
 

There are huge wilderness areas in Washington State where you can hunt big game with a license. 

Yet you missed that majority don't own them for hunting, links already supplied in this topic. 

  • Thumbs Up 1
Posted (edited)
4 minutes ago, Hanaguma said:

So, you mean a subset of mass shootings, which are a subset of shootings then....   Interesting that shootings which involve, how can I say, non caucasian people, do not elicit a response.

 

Is it really a good use of time to so micromanage people?  

Oh do you haven’t noticed the calls for gun controls in the aftermath of non crime related mass shootings st schools, colleges, places of worship, shopping malls, public spaces.

 

I wonder how that managed to evade you?

 

This seems to have evaded you too:

 

https://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/texas-man-pleads-guilty-90-federal-hate-crimes-and-firearms-violations-august-2019-mass

 

 

Edited by Chomper Higgot
  • Thumbs Up 1
Posted
2 minutes ago, Bkk Brian said:

Yet you missed that majority don't own them for hunting, links already supplied in this topic. 

I didn’t miss it, I just didn’t choose to address it. Truth be told I have no idea what intentions people have for the weapons they own. 

  • Confused 1
Posted
20 hours ago, KhunLA said:

Please stop calling them automatic weapons ... it sound silly and implies much ignorance.

 

Different states have different hunting rules & seasons, and what can or can not be used.  Not much difference if you shoot 1 round at a time, and reload, or have a mag of 5.

 

Though if hunting, you'll only need or get off 1 round.  One could guess, it's so idiots don't try to keep shooting at a moving target.   Maybe a hunter can chime in to clarify, as I am not.

They are not all AR-15s either, but we all know the gun types we are discussing.

 

Hiding by pedantic semantics is not going to get away from that fact.

  • Like 1
Posted
Just now, tuktuktuk said:

I didn’t miss it, I just didn’t choose to address it. Truth be told I have no idea what intentions people have for the weapons they own. 

Well it formed part of my post context, that using the reason for AR-15's for hunting is a deflection from what the majority of people actually buy them for and why they are being banned in Washington. But if you do want to know the link is on the first page.

  • Like 1
Posted
12 minutes ago, Chomper Higgot said:

Oh do you haven’t noticed the calls for gun controls in the aftermath of non crime related mass shootings st schools, colleges, places of worship, shopping malls, public spaces.

 

I wonder how that managed to evade you?

 

This seems to have evaded you too:

 

https://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/texas-man-pleads-guilty-90-federal-hate-crimes-and-firearms-violations-august-2019-mass

 

 

It didnt evade me, I simply don't think it is very important. Creating legislation based on random events and sentiment is not a recipe for good governing. 

  • Confused 1
Posted
2 minutes ago, Hanaguma said:

It didnt evade me, I simply don't think it is very important. Creating legislation based on random events and sentiment is not a recipe for good governing. 

Right so the tragic litany of non crime related mass killings in schools, colleges, places of worship, shopping malls and public spaces is something that you don’t feel is important.


These events are far from random, they share a number of characteristics, amongst which is weapon of choice.

 

 

  • Like 2
Posted
3 minutes ago, Chomper Higgot said:

Right so the tragic litany of non crime related mass killings in schools, colleges, places of worship, shopping malls and public spaces is something that you don’t feel is important.


These events are far from random, they share a number of characteristics, amongst which is weapon of choice.

 

 

In term of creating public policy no, it isn't important.   It makes up less than 2% of overall homicides, but eats up a huge slice of attention.  Chicago alone has the equivalent EVERY WEEKEND.  But somehow that evades the public eye.  And yours too.

Posted
3 minutes ago, Hanaguma said:

In term of creating public policy no, it isn't important.   It makes up less than 2% of overall homicides, but eats up a huge slice of attention.  Chicago alone has the equivalent EVERY WEEKEND.  But somehow that evades the public eye.  And yours too.

You don’t seem to grasp how the impact of public opinion on political decision making works.

 

The events driving public opinion are non crime related mass shootings in schools, colleges, places of worship, shopping malls and public spaces.

 

People want to know their kids are safe at school or college, families want to feel safe in places of worship, while out shopping or in public spaces.

 

Your repeated attempts to conflate this with what goes on in the criminal world, where the vast majority of Americans never enter, is noted.

 

Posted
On 4/20/2023 at 10:11 AM, Chomper Higgot said:

I personally would like to see businesses doing more, banning guns on their premises.

Would this prevent criminals from bringing guns onto these premises, or just the non criminals?

Posted
5 minutes ago, Chomper Higgot said:

People want to know their kids are safe at school or college, families want to feel safe in places of worship, while out shopping or in public spaces.

It's more about feelings than actual facts.  Banning sales of guns that look scary will not stop mass shootings, neither will banning guns from anywhere (unless those places have armed security manning scanners at all access points).

 

It's all politics.  Ban nearly all guns or don't bother.

Posted
1 minute ago, Chomper Higgot said:

What do you mean like the airlines do?

You think security like an airport could become common in most public places? 

 

I guess it would work in terms of keeping the guns out of those areas, but how would it work cost and time wise in somewhere like a mall or a cinema?

Posted
On 4/20/2023 at 7:32 AM, onthedarkside said:

Washington is set to become the 10th state to ban the sale of AR-15s and other guns it classifies as assault weapons.

Very unlikely that it will do anything in terms of school/mass shootings.  A political move.

Posted
5 minutes ago, BangkokReady said:

It's more about feelings than actual facts.  Banning sales of guns that look scary will not stop mass shootings, neither will banning guns from anywhere (unless those places have armed security manning scanners at all access points).

 

It's all politics.  Ban nearly all guns or don't bother.

I’ve got some shocking news for you.

 

People have very strong feelings about the safety of the children.

 

There are many alternatives to gun control beyond banning all guns.

Posted
6 minutes ago, BangkokReady said:

You think security like an airport could become common in most public places? 

 

I guess it would work in terms of keeping the guns out of those areas, but how would it work cost and time wise in somewhere like a mall or a cinema?

It’s you that asked the question trying to conflate criminals with guns and gun controls.

 

Sorry you didn’t like my answer.

Posted
1 minute ago, Chomper Higgot said:

It’s you that asked the question trying to conflate criminals with guns and gun controls.

No.  I simply pointed out that you are wrong.

 

1 minute ago, Chomper Higgot said:

 

Sorry you didn’t like my answer.

I didn't dislike your answer.  It just doesn't make any sense.  The fact that airlines are able to keep guns off of their airplanes, means nothing for keeping guns out other businesses.

 

I notice that you have not been able to explain or justify your answer further.

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.




×
×
  • Create New...