Official Off Topic Discussion Thread #1
- Thread starter Chrisplosion
- Start date
also seems he had thought this out well in advance, looks like he wanted to do a lords concert the week before but could not book the room he wanted. So if thats true he was not really targeting any select group of folks, if I can not get the hip hops. no matter I will get the country folks. no deference to him.
Hello; Please do not fall prey to the after incident hysteria that uses such incidents to push an agenda. If a person favors the second amendment then stay for the second amendment.
Let me put it another way. Say the guy had used some other tool to cause the mayhem. Say it was another large white truck. Would the call for restricting the rights of folks who drive white trucks be shouted? No I do not think so. At least this has not been the case so far after such mass murder incidents where white trucks were used.
My point being that restricting my rights to bear arms and thus be able to protect myself will not necessarily stop such mayhem. It may force the use of some other "tool" in some cases but likely not many cases. This guy had money to spend and it is my contention he could have gotten his tools of choice, in this case guns, regardless of the laws that might be in place.
In the cities and other places where there are very strict gun laws, shootings still happen.
Im all for the second ammendment but 47 fire arms were found. Even if you were using them to protect yourself how many firearms can you shoot at 1 time ? He had a elevated vantage point if you were in the crowd and armed i doubt you would have been able to do much. Im not saying take away our firearms BUT how is it that its harder to own a drivers licsense than a firearms licsense ?
Sure a knife will kill people but not 57 or what ever the number was. A person properly trained with a hand gun can protect themselves just as well as of they were armed with a high powered semi auto rifle. Infact a hand gun would be more effective on say a home invasion which would be in close courters.
I know cops that also have issues with the ease ot takes to buy a semi auto rifle.
What would you rather go up against ? A modified ar15 or glock ?
Sure u cam do nothing about someone driver a car but we can do sometjing about this witj out taking away our second amendment rights
I was unable to carry unless i re qualified and was competent in the safe handling of a fire arm yearly. But joe shmoe can purchase without amy training
Hello; I think some of that number were found at a separate location and not at the crime scene. How does the number of weapons a person owns matter. I know folks who have many guns. This does not seem to be a valid point.
Hello; This is why it is a "right" to bear arms. We do not have to be trained to use any of the rights named in our constitution.
Hello; To me these statements do aid those whose agenda is to eventually take away our "right" to bear arms. They have already been successful in turning this most current tragedy into a discussion about restricting our right.
Hello; One more point. Why not have an outcry for restricting the right to have a "large white truck" after such a tool has been used in a mass killing? The tool has been used in a manner outside or different from the normal way most people use such a "large white truck". Already after this recent incident the call is out to ban a particular "type" of weapon and a particular type of accessory. Folks do not wish to ban "large white trucks" because when used properly they are useful for so many. The same can be said for the vast majority of guns that I and other folks own. The debate should not be about the tool.
Skj:
"Hello; This is why it is a "right" to bear arms. We do not have to be trained to use any of the rights named in our constitution"
Do you believe our fore fathers would have drafted this with the knowledge of mental disease, gangs, and terrorism? I doubt it.
Its my understanding that the initial intent of the amendment was to give citizens the right to protect themselves against a tyrannical govmt...remember what we were fighting against at the time.
Its your right to fly a plane, drive a car, and even scuba dive all require some level of training. Yet in my state anyone can purchase and open carry firearm. This is truly idiotic.
Skj:
"How does the number of weapons a person owns matter. I know folks who have many guns. This does"
Can you tell me why he or you would need 47 firearms most of which were high powered semi auto weapons ? Its a very valid point. How many firearms can you shoot at one time ? If the goal is to defend your property ?
Skj:
"To me these statements do aid those whose agenda is to eventually take away our "right" to bear arms"
How so ? I never stated take away all of your firearms. BUT our current system is clearly not working. Do you think ts working?
Skj:
"They have already been successful in turning this most current tragedy into a discussion about restricting our right"
I absolutely hate the liberal agenda BUT even tho i have an ongoing boycott on watching the news the wife was watching it last night and imo bith sides were immediately politicizing this event.
Also to be honest my 1st reaction to this was the same as these tree huggers as much as i hate to admit it... "omg how does this keep happening" im pretty sure most people felt rhis but will not admit it.
Skj:
"One more point. Why not have an outcry for restricting the right to have a "large white truck" after such a tool has been used in a mass killing?
Imo this is pointless.
Nothing can be done under this scenerio. Making it harder to own a car isnt possible. This point comes up every time we have a shooting and to me this is a total cop out. One myself i may have used in the past. Shouldnt we evolve to a degree ?
Skj:
"The tool has been used in a manner outside or different from the normal way most people use sucha "large white truck".
Can you tell me whay manner would be the norm in using 47 weapons ? Please answer this particular question as maybe im not seeing a broader picture.
I'll go back to the debate we had about the hunters....you stated it was their right to hunt in such a manner.
While these hunters stated that they "knee what they were doing" the clearly didnt carrying long arms over there shoulders like hill billy elmer fuds. Had they been properly trained they would know this is an incorrect way to carry a firearm.
They also stated they were with in their rights to hunt. Upon further wuestion no they were not....100yards from any living quarters is whats in there right Not on a farm just outside my neighbors property line on.
Again TRAINING would have avoided this confrontation. A child could bave been kiled or injured in this circumstance.
So your answer is we do nothing ? At what point would you consider doing somehing ? If one of these shooting involved you personally? Or 200 are killed in the next shooting ? Maybe its a class room of 1st graders ?
"Hello; This is why it is a "right" to bear arms. We do not have to be trained to use any of the rights named in our constitution"
Do you believe our fore fathers would have drafted this with the knowledge of mental disease, gangs, and terrorism? I doubt it.
Its my understanding that the initial intent of the amendment was to give citizens the right to protect themselves against a tyrannical govmt...remember what we were fighting against at the time.
Its your right to fly a plane, drive a car, and even scuba dive all require some level of training. Yet in my state anyone can purchase and open carry firearm. This is truly idiotic.
Skj:
"How does the number of weapons a person owns matter. I know folks who have many guns. This does"
Can you tell me why he or you would need 47 firearms most of which were high powered semi auto weapons ? Its a very valid point. How many firearms can you shoot at one time ? If the goal is to defend your property ?
Skj:
"To me these statements do aid those whose agenda is to eventually take away our "right" to bear arms"
How so ? I never stated take away all of your firearms. BUT our current system is clearly not working. Do you think ts working?
Skj:
"They have already been successful in turning this most current tragedy into a discussion about restricting our right"
I absolutely hate the liberal agenda BUT even tho i have an ongoing boycott on watching the news the wife was watching it last night and imo bith sides were immediately politicizing this event.
Also to be honest my 1st reaction to this was the same as these tree huggers as much as i hate to admit it... "omg how does this keep happening" im pretty sure most people felt rhis but will not admit it.
Skj:
"One more point. Why not have an outcry for restricting the right to have a "large white truck" after such a tool has been used in a mass killing?
Imo this is pointless.
Nothing can be done under this scenerio. Making it harder to own a car isnt possible. This point comes up every time we have a shooting and to me this is a total cop out. One myself i may have used in the past. Shouldnt we evolve to a degree ?
Skj:
"The tool has been used in a manner outside or different from the normal way most people use sucha "large white truck".
Can you tell me whay manner would be the norm in using 47 weapons ? Please answer this particular question as maybe im not seeing a broader picture.
I'll go back to the debate we had about the hunters....you stated it was their right to hunt in such a manner.
While these hunters stated that they "knee what they were doing" the clearly didnt carrying long arms over there shoulders like hill billy elmer fuds. Had they been properly trained they would know this is an incorrect way to carry a firearm.
They also stated they were with in their rights to hunt. Upon further wuestion no they were not....100yards from any living quarters is whats in there right Not on a farm just outside my neighbors property line on.
Again TRAINING would have avoided this confrontation. A child could bave been kiled or injured in this circumstance.
So your answer is we do nothing ? At what point would you consider doing somehing ? If one of these shooting involved you personally? Or 200 are killed in the next shooting ? Maybe its a class room of 1st graders ?
At one point in our countries history certain group were not alowed ro own property such as homes or horses. Overtime rhis changes...eceryone os allowed to own a horse...cars come along and at some point even this changes. Now you cannot own a car without insurance or proper training (obtaining license) yet none of this is needed to own and operate a firearm. So yes it is harder to kill with a big white truck vs a firearm.
Hello; my guess is that mental disease, gangs and actions that could have been labeled as terrorism were present back in the past and that the framers of the constitution knew of these things. However I do not have the ability to know how the framers might look at things today. My guess is they would stick to what they put on paper. I can be wrong just as you can be. My guess being no more valid than yours. The constitution is a legal document and what we base our laws upon.
Hello; yes this is my understanding as well. It is pretty clear that tyrannical governments are still around on the earth. This is still a valid thing in my mind.
Hello; Driving, flying a plane and scuba are not among the enumerated "rights". In fact may states call the license to do such things "a privilege license." These things are not "rights."
hello; I guess the term "needs" is the sticking point. While no single type of gun is suitable for all circumstances and so the "need" to have several can be valid. Even if the only goal is to defend property there can be a need for several guns. For example several of the same type might "need" to be positioned in various places around a property in order to be handy. You don't get to pause a home invasion so you can go retrieve a defensive weapon in another part of the property.
There are a number of things I have multiples of. Tools come to mind. I one time tried to inventory my hand wrenches. I have many 1/2 inch wrenches. Do I need them? I have them.
Again the "right" to bear arms is not defined by some limit on the number. Many people have numerous guns. No they do not shoot them all at the same time. I have over 800 music CD's. I do not listen to them all at the same time. I do like to have them around so I can pick which I wish to hear at any one time.
Same when folks go to a range. Might have 50 guns but only take a couple out to enjoy shooting.
Hello; See the above comment.
Hello; While I contend that having a "right" should not require training, I do like the idea of adequate training and do practice the notion. Driving, flying, shooting are all enhanced with proper training.
