• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Should we repeal the 2nd Amendment?

Repeal the 2nd Amendment?

  • Yes

    Votes: 22 31.0%

  • No

    Votes: 20 28.2%

  • No, amend it to make possession of a gun VERY difficult with tons of background checks and psych eva

    Votes: 25 35.2%

  • I can be agent M

    Votes: 4 5.6%
  • Total voters
    71
I repeat: the problem with this debate, at least as far as the internet goes, is the extremists on both sides dominate the discussion.
 
dudalb said:
Once again the issue is what kind of guns are you talking about?
Click to expand...

That’s been my point. Ban assault weapons and related accessories that allow fast, repeated, multiple bullets to be fired.

Someone or a lawmaker with better weaponry knowledge than me could write it more set-in-stone.

I think we’re all agreed on this point.
 
Orphia Nay said:
That’s been my point. Ban assault weapons and related accessories that allow fast, repeated, multiple bullets to be fired.
Click to expand...


Just about every modern gun allows allows fast repeated shots to be fired.
 
Orphia Nay said:
That’s been my point. Ban assault weapons and related accessories that allow fast, repeated, multiple bullets to be fired.

Someone or a lawmaker with better weaponry knowledge than me could write it more set-in-stone.

I think we’re all agreed on this point.
Click to expand...

Ah, but the problem is what does fast, repeated, multiple bullets mean?
Any semi auto rifle? What Magazine size, etc.
 
jt512 said:
Just about every modern gun allows allows fast repeated shots to be fired.
Click to expand...

I would support a limit on magazine size to ten rounds, and no automatic fire
provision, and a licence for semi auto weapons. througly back ground checks and 30 day waiting period.
Less striginent rules for manualy operated weapons like bolt action rifles.
 
Cat Not Included said:
You believe you are special and statistics don't apply to you. In fact, I'm pretty sure pretty much every gun owner would say they are not violent and are strict about the safe handling of firearms, and is sure they would never have an accident with a gun or harm themselves or a family member with a gun. Wonder where all those accidents, suicides and murders actually come from then?
Click to expand...


Those statistics average across the gamut of gun owners from highly trained to utterly incompetent. If you stratify those statistics by level of training and competence, you will almost certainly find that the accident rate is much higher among the untrained/incompetent than the trained/competent.

You're sitting on your couch munching snacks and watching Fox News and suddenly your door smashes open and a guy is pointing a gun at you and screaming at you to get on the floor. Sure, you'll just shoot him. There's no way you'll be panicked.
Click to expand...


Panic? You're projecting.

There's no way he'll shoot your first when he sees you reaching for a gun.
Click to expand...


You think I'd just stand there and reach for a gun with a gun already pointing at me at close range?

There's no way this is actually cops doing a no-knock raid.
Click to expand...


You think I'm not trained to identify the target?
 
Orphia Nay said:
Machine guns, for a start. Help me out here.
Click to expand...

You mean fully automatic weapons...ones that fire repeatedly with a single trigger press. Those are essentially banned for civilian use in the US. Most modern guns that civilians can own are semi-automatic: each trigger press fires a single shot, but you can press the trigger repeatedly without having to cock the gun or chamber a round manually between shots.
 
Last edited:
dudalb said:
Once again the issue is what kind of guns are you talking about?
Click to expand...
Simple.

[originalist SCOTUS]

The 2A applies only to any hand-carried, single-shot, muzzle-loaded, black-powder weapon that was available as military issue in 1776. Everything after that is not covered by the 2A, and so can be controlled as necessary.

[/originalist SCOTUS]
 
dudalb said:
I repeat: the problem with this debate, at least as far as the internet goes, is the extremists on both sides dominate the discussion.
Click to expand...
If the belief that sensible gun control is needed in order to address the massive gun death rate in the US gets me labelled as an "extremist", then so be it.
 
Jack by the hedge said:
No, it referred back to a recent post which claimed a small demographic causes the statistical difference between the US and Australia.
Click to expand...
The study mentioned in that post stated "The majority of violent crimes are perpetrated by a small number of persistent violent offenders, typically males, characterized by early onset of violent criminality, substance abuse, personality disorders, and nonviolent criminality". It never claimed that the offenders were black. It's not even a US study (it was conducted in Sweden).

Of course, research like this should never be allowed in case it leads to a politically incorrect finding (and if it doesn't, say it does). :rolleyes:
 
Random said:
This has always seemed to me to be the main difference between the pro-gun and anti-gun crowds. One group imagines that when trouble strikes, that they will have a gun. The other imagines that when trouble strikes, someone else will have a gun.
Click to expand...

There is no honest response to your comment than "what an utter stinking pile of lying bovine excrement".
 
jt512 said:
Do you ever not opine on subjects that you know nothing about?




If your alternative is getting shot, you better damn well try something. Do yourself a favor and look up "force-on-force training" on youtube. Post again after you've learned something. Suggested wording: "OK, jt512, you have a point."
Click to expand...

You know, showing this kind of careless, irresponsible and frankly stupid attitude is exactly the kind of thing that would rightly have you being refused a gun licence over her.

You are exactly the kind of person that shows why the US's free for all gun culture is so self destructive. Well done.
 
jt512 said:
Oh, really? You can't be competent by just watching a youtube video? You actually have to make a commitment and take lessons and practice? Who knew?
Click to expand...

Proficiency with tactics and shooting is not like riding a bicycle. Professionals who do it for a living screw it up a lot even after years of experience.

Your notion of having been trained leaves a lot to be desired. If you never ended up embarrassed by or at least witnessed mishap in training then your training sucked and your perspective on what you can and cannot do is not realistic.

The end result of my actual, professional tactical training was that humans with guns are massively over confident in their own skills while seriously deficient at recognizing the limitations on their own senses and judgement.

I am getting old. My training is out of date. But even if I was still training, the last thing I would ever want near me is another person who thinks they know what they are doing when I have not trained along side them and seen what they know.
 
tone down the incivility and rulev12 violations, especially. jt512


Replying to this modbox in thread will be off topic  Posted By: jimbob
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom