41 minutes ago, jvs said:

 

Yes i get it,only Yanks have a clue about the world but that is besides the point.

Point is you are saying legal guns/owners are not the problem,maybe not but,

between 200 and 300 thousands of guns are stolen each year in the US,that is a lot of guns.

The moment those guns are stolen they become more dangerous because they are now in irresponsible hands.

My question is ,if you allow your gun to be stolen does that  mean you are an irresponsible owner and therefore you should not have a gun?

If you have a gun for protection and it gets stolen then how much protection is it really?

300 000 guns is a very big number,can not be coincidence right?

If your gun gets stolen and later used for a crime does that maybe make the legal owner somewhat guilty?

When is it legal/illegal to use a gun?

Look at it as a link in a chain that goes missing,the chain is broken and therefore not longer a chain.

 

 

I missed this before. yes, many guns are stolen and used in crimes, so the only thing anyone can do is lock them up in mandatory safes. If you can afford a gun, and especially many, you can afford a decent safe that's hard or impossible to steal. Anyone who leaves their guns out, especially around children, meaning mostly handguns, or the ammo, isn't being safe.

1 minute ago, fredwiggy said:

I didn't mean mass killing with a butter knife of course but was pointing out the mentality of the killer themselves, that they can kill with almost anything, and that guns just kill faster and more. 

Yes and if this killer would not have a gun?

He would be able to kill less people,i would call that good.

You are just one more step away of realizing guns can be/are the problem.

 

2 minutes ago, jvs said:

Would it make a lot of difference which one  would kill you?

I would be about twenty-times more likely to be killed in the US by a handgun, than a long gun.

Just now, Yellowtail said:

I would be about twenty-times more likely to be killed in the US by a handgun, than a long gun.

Thank you now go and reflect on that.

Just now, jvs said:

Yes and if this killer would not have a gun?

He would be able to kill less people,i would call that good.

You are just one more step away of realizing guns can be/are the problem.

 

Why do you assume the killer is a he? Are you a misogynist? What about they-them? 

 

Just now, jvs said:

Yes and if this killer would not have a gun?

He would be able to kill less people,i would call that good.

You are just one more step away of realizing guns can be/are the problem.

 

I'm a gun owner and hunter, and had a FFL license to sell guns for years, and I know some things need to be changed, and immediately, and I listed them before, but the main problem will always be mental illnesses. Most deaths are suicides, which is depression. Many are gang related, using those stolen or legal guns to kill others. The rest are people going off the edge and killing innocents or domestic violence, killing a partner, which is still mental illness. All weapons can kill people. Look at how many are stabbed in the UK and Thailand, besides those shot here. Almost every day it happens, if not every day but you can't ban knives or machetes. 

Per the left, the problem is not that people want to kill each other, the problem is only that they have guns to do it with. 

3 minutes ago, Yellowtail said:

Why do you assume the killer is a he? Are you a misogynist? What about they-them? 

 

You are responding to a post that was a response to someone else's post and that person

referred to a would be killer person as a he/him.

Therefore i responded like i did,are you stupid? 

 

4 hours ago, newbee2022 said:

Both wrong 

 

Not wrong.

Not wrong according to most tobacco-smoking gun lobbyists.

 

6 minutes ago, Yellowtail said:

About 4% of firearm deaths in the US are rifles, and less than half of those are "assault" rifles. 

They are not assault rifles.   An assault rifle must be able to select or made to shoot, on fully automatic.  Meaning pull the trigger once, and it continues shooting till empty or you release the trigger.

 

With few exceptions, none have been used, and the few that have, were issued and available only to military personal.

 

Already mention, 1970 @ Ohio State.   Another involving a military issued rifle, killed 6, at a defence contractor factory, I think.

Just now, jvs said:

You are responding to a post that was a response to someone else's post and that person

referred to a would be killer person as a he/him.

Therefore i responded like i did,are you stupid? 

 

Yes, I am really stupid. I still can't figure out how guns kill people without people that want to kill people. 

 

You're really smart, would you please explain it? 

 

Also, please explain what the difference is between a semi-automatic hunting rifle, and an assault rifle.  

4 minutes ago, fredwiggy said:

I'm a gun owner and hunter, and had a FFL license to sell guns for years, and I know some things need to be changed, and immediately, and I listed them before, but the main problem will always be mental illnesses. Most deaths are suicides, which is depression. Many are gang related, using those stolen or legal guns to kill others. The rest are people going off the edge and killing innocents or domestic violence, killing a partner, which is still mental illness. All weapons can kill people. Look at how many are stabbed in the UK and Thailand, besides those shot here. Almost every day it happens, if not every day but you can't ban knives or machetes. 

No but you can ban guns,the problem is you just don't want to ban guns and everyday more shootings occur and i can guarantee you there will be more shootings followed by more prayers and condolences.

This will be followed by more topics like this and nothing will change.

Unfortunately.

6 minutes ago, Yellowtail said:

Per the left, the problem is not that people want to each other, the problem is only that they have guns to do it with. 

Sorry i don't understand this post.

6 minutes ago, Yellowtail said:

Yes, I am really stupid. I still can't figure out how guns kill people without people that want to kill people. 

 

You're really smart, would you please explain it? 

 

Also, please explain what the difference is between a semi-automatic hunting rifle, and an assault rifle.  

I did that above, but I must be on your ignore list ...

... assault rifle = FULLY automatic, not 'semi' ... class over

 

https://aseannow.com/topic/1375127-deadly-shootout-rocks-downtown-alabama-2-dead-12-wounded/page/5/#findComment-20136352

 

4 hours ago, impulse said:

 

I'd bet dollars to donut holes that every participant on both sides of the gunfight was out on parole or bail or early release.  Released because they had a tough childhood and aren't responsible for their crimes.

 

I'd bet dollars to donuts that's one of the stupidest diversions on AN the last week.

 

 

3 minutes ago, Yellowtail said:

Yes, I am really stupid. I still can't figure out how guns kill people without people that want to kill people. 

 

You're really smart, would you please explain it? 

 

Also, please explain what the difference is between a semi-automatic hunting rifle, and an assault rifle.  

I know you are really stupid,now everyone else knows it too!

Thanks.

 

1 minute ago, jvs said:

No but you can ban guns,the problem is you just don't want to ban guns and everyday more shootings occur and i can guarantee you there will be more shootings followed by more prayers and condolences.

This will be followed by more topics like this and nothing will change.

Unfortunately.

Guns are necessary for hunting and target shooting, and defense in the right hands, so banning them will never happen, as millions of people hunt alone, which is, especially with the deer species, mandatory to keep their populations in the carrying capacity of the land they live on. Besides what I listed as things that will help, no one has any other ideas that will work, as there will always be people out to kill, and that behavior starts at home, and you can't force parents to be good parents and not be absent, because it's a  generational issue. 

1 minute ago, fredwiggy said:

Guns are necessary for hunting and target shooting, and defense in the right hands, so banning them will never happen, as millions of people hunt alone, which is, especially with the deer species, mandatory to keep their populations in the carrying capacity of the land they live on. Besides what I listed as things that will help, no one has any other ideas that will work, as there will always be people out to kill, and that behavior starts at home, and you can't force parents to be good parents and not be absent, because it's a  generational issue. 

 

Not to mention the collecting of these beautiful weapons, rifles and handguns alike.

Just now, Cameroni said:

 

Not to mention the collecting of these beautiful weapons, rifles and handguns alike.

I wish I had the money, as there are quite a few I'd like to own, one being a hunting handgun, Thompson Center.

7 minutes ago, fredwiggy said:

Guns are necessary for hunting and target shooting, and defense in the right hands, so banning them will never happen, as millions of people hunt alone, which is, especially with the deer species, mandatory to keep their populations in the carrying capacity of the land they live on. Besides what I listed as things that will help, no one has any other ideas that will work, as there will always be people out to kill, and that behavior starts at home, and you can't force parents to be good parents and not be absent, because it's a  generational issue. 

Here's a fun fact for y'all ... hunters 'theoretically' same more lives, than people killed in 'mass school shootings'.

 

Rational is, ~200 people die a year in auto accidents caused by deer.   Now if millions, yes millions, of deer weren't killed, that ~200 would be much higher.

 

<200 are killed in 'mass school shootings' every year.   So hunters save more lives, than loss to mass school shootings by nutters.

 

Yes, it sucks that 1 kid is killed in any school by forearms or any means at any time.

Just now, KhunLA said:

Here's a fun fact for ... hunters 'theoretically' same more lives, the people killed in 'mass school shootings'.

 

Rational is, ~200 people die a year in auto accidents caused by deer.   Now if millions, yes millions, of deer weren't killed, that ~200 would be much higher.

 

<200 are killed in 'mass school shootings' every year.   So hunters save more lives, than loss to mass school shootings by nutters.

 

Yes, it sucks that 1 kid is killed in any school by forearms or any means at any time.

They let the deer over populate, it means more vehicle collisions, more attacks on people from deer, more disease spreading of deer, and more starvation and deer eating more of what people grow for themselves. 

Easy to avoid getting killed by firearm in the USA ... don't piss anyone off.

 

Most solved murders are committed by known assailants.  And they would be, spouses, GF/BF, partners.   Not victims during a crime.

 

Already mentioned, most deaths, are suicides.   Although anyone that serious, will find a way, and nice to know, an easy & quick way was available  IMHO

21 minutes ago, BLMFem said:

I'd bet dollars to donuts that's one of the stupidest diversions on AN the last week.

 

Nah.  I don't hold a candle to some of the idiots on AN.

 

Like the ones that think there's no connection between more crime and letting repeat criminals out on bail, parole and early release.  Claiming that's just a diversion.  Like you, for example.

2 minutes ago, impulse said:

 

Nah.  I don't hold a candle to some of the idiots on AN.

 

Like the ones that think there's no connection between more crime and letting repeat criminals out on bail, parole and early release.  Claiming that's just a diversion.  Like you, for example.

The left want to take guns away from law abiding citizens, but wants no-cash bail for criminals violating gun laws. 

 

Why? Because:

-Punishing law-abiding citizens with new laws? Easy. 

-Enforcing existing laws? Hard.

3 hours ago, BLMFem said:

I'd bet dollars to donuts that's one of the stupidest diversions on AN the last week.

 

 

You'd lose that bet. Buddy.

3 hours ago, fredwiggy said:

Guns are necessary for hunting and target shooting, and defense in the right hands, so banning them will never happen, as millions of people hunt alone, which is, especially with the deer species, mandatory to keep their populations in the carrying capacity of the land they live on. Besides what I listed as things that will help, no one has any other ideas that will work, as there will always be people out to kill, and that behavior starts at home, and you can't force parents to be good parents and not be absent, because it's a  generational issue. 

Other countries hunt also,same difference but that is getting away from the topic.

Killing people has nothing to do with hunting .

Would you agree that when your gun gets stolen you lose the right to ever own another one?

If the "good owners" would make sure their gun does not get stolen that would make a very big difference.

If you leave the pool gate open and some one drowns in your pool the pool owner can be convicted of being

neglect .

Do the same rules exist for guns?

Are you allowed to handle a gun while intoxicated?

 

Stupid as f gun laws ...what do you expect . Morons.

3 hours ago, Cameroni said:

 

Not to mention the collecting of these beautiful weapons, rifles and handguns alike.

Collecting guns is fine,can be a great hobby as long as it is done according tot the law.

5 minutes ago, Usnh said:

Stupid as f gun laws ...what do you expect . Morons.

Can you be a little bit more specific?

Who are the "Morons"?