My parents bought me a set encyclopedias titled How It Works. Even as a juvenile I could have built something with far more potential to harm than one could achieve with a semi-automatic assault rifle
When I was in elementary school....
- Thread starter CAJUNEER_rivals
- Start date
Sooooo homemade bombs > assault weapons? Maybe, maybe not lol. Maybe analogies just aren't your thing.
Is there anything short of world demolishing that will stop all that is bad? Why in the world do conservatives keep harping this bs?
Because banning guns will not stop mass killings; however, an armed citizenry might.
No it won't. It will mean possibly more bullets flying around. But it won't stop bad guys with a suicide wish going out in a public place and start shooting.
A couple of points to be made: I don't think libs (at least not this lib) are calling for a total ban of guns. We are calling for legislation that makes sense, that reduces the number of deaths each year. Not that I'm trying to minimize what the Tsarnaev brothers did, but I think only three deaths resulted. I am also not minimizing the threat of foreign terrorism on US soil, but I am honestly more concerned about an American with mental health issues committing a mass shooting than I am an ISIS inspired shooter. Look at the statistics.
Good post except one aspect. I don't qualify the mental health part. Plenty of bad guys with guns that would never fall into a mental health argument.
I guess for the same reason that liberals keep harping on the same BS. Since I'm not a NRA or a gun person, banning guns is not a big deal with me. This issue is really about politics on both sides.
You could be right about that as it pertains to mass killings. But what about the unintended consequences of more guns being in more places more often?
I'm not anti-gun, but a lot of these arguments just don't make sense. There are 8 children killed every day by guns and another 9 shot and injured but not killed. If you subtract the 18 year olds I think it drops to 5 and 4 or something.
Think of all the heated arguments over nothing and then add guns into the mix. Road rage, fights/arguments at sporting events, etc. Then think about incidents like the woman with CC permit shooting at somebody that stole something from Walmart (or wherever that was) and think of how many more incidents like that there might be.
If there were 5 other people with guns in the theater with John Holmes, what kind of guarantee that they'd only shoot him and not other people?
People are stupid, hot headed and irrational (not to mention drunk or otherwise impaired). Having more running around with guns definitely wouldn't make me feel safer.
Didn't you learn anything from watching all those shootem up westerns we watched years ago? Think of how many of those showed Mr. Badguy stroll in with guns blazing only to have Mr.Goodguy draw and take him out.
George Zimmerman comes to mind. Too many lone ranger wannabe's will completely F this up. Granted, the right people in the right place with a gun can foil bad guys with bad intentions. But I think those will be far outnumbered by George Zimmerman types who have no f-ing clue what they are doing.
Do you think a person is more or less likely to road rage if he thinks the other person may have a pistol in the console?
How about if we all got little Toyota pickups with machine guns mounted in the back. I bet no one would cross us.
The decision to kill someone is the essence of the problem over and above the number of guns the public has access to. Why do people kill others? Banning guns of various types won't change the decision to kill someone only the method changes. History is ripe with how pre-gun societies killed.
Also do those with mental illness lose any of their constitutional rights? Does the public have a right to know the mental health diagnosis of another? Maybe so if the public gets to know who a sex offender is. I'd be interested in the rationale for lost rights based on a diagnosis if this is someone's position.
No idea but twice in the last three years, i have had nuts pull out guns in their road rage against me. Perfect example of a gun nut being too loose with their weapon. What if i had a gun and a violent temperament and decided to start shooting? Is that the society you want? Not me.
And most likely Zimmerman would be dead from having his head smashed in as the evidence showed at the trial. Luckily for him, he had a gun.
If somebody is so unstable as to fall to road rage in the first place, I don't think it would matter.
2 points: 1) Why are you such a bad driver? 2) I assume if you also possessed a gun and pulled it out and started firing over a traffic incident then possibly 1 or maybe 2 idiots could have been killed.
Both cases, jerks violating basic traffic laws seriously putting others in danger. After me and others honking and obviously cursing him out, jerks brandish a gun. Yes, i did honk but i don't find speeding and passing someone in a neighborhood with kids playing or attempting to get around a school bus before they go from yellow to red lights as something i did anything wrong.
I assume you are being funny. My driving was no issue in either case but that isn't the point.
It's a great example. The situation would have been avoided had Zimmerman not been armed and tried to play lone ranger.
He wrongfully confronted an innocent bystander with a firearm. It's the aggressive mindset he had that created the situation.
I have done the same but no guns were pulled on me. There are a lot of nuts on the roads.
Zimmerman did absolutely nothing wrong and the jury saw all the evidence and found him not guilty. Thats a problem with a lot of people who post here. They totally disregard the facts in order to push their agenda.
Last edited:
It was self-defense when the shot was fired ... but if he doesn't have a gun, does it even get to that point? There's really no way to answer that, as nobody knows.
He confronted the kid first. It's the lone ranger mindset. Aggressive behavior + guns = stupidity. Zimmerman created that whole situation and the events that followed.