Today's Mass Shooting

Status
Not open for further replies.
A shooter with a pump shotgun firing at a bunch of people should be relatively* easy to overrun and take down before too many of the crowd get shot.

* compared to semi-auto high capacity handguns and rifles.
 
According to Reuters this is all Trump's fault... Oh wait nevermind it was retracted an apology was given
 
LTC8K6 said:
A shooter with a pump shotgun firing at a bunch of people should be relatively* easy to overrun and take down before too many of the crowd get shot.

* compared to semi-auto high capacity handguns and rifles.
Click to expand...

OK, you first.
 
sadhatter said:
Or look up the trench broom and how they were so effective nazis wanted them banned.

This is why people who don't know **** about firearms shouldn't be making decisions about them.
Click to expand...

Any people whose families and loved ones are being killed shouldn't be making decisions about what is killing them. Got it!
 
Last edited:
DreamingNaiad said:
I can't find a quote anywhere of her calling for violence against anyone. Do you have a link?
Click to expand...

I made no such claim about Waters.

My statement was about people denying what they said on camera, and suffering few, if any consequences, in general. I believe it is an ongoing general trend.

Say something silly/stupid/wrong/bad, have it pointed out by the public, deny that you said it, and just move on like nothing happened.

No one seems to care any more.
 
And if I see a man with a gun on a plane, I'll kill him.
 
sadhatter said:
Or look up the trench broom and how they were so effective nazis wanted them banned.

This is why people who don't know **** about firearms shouldn't be making decisions about them.
Click to expand...

You have the wrong war. Germany wanted the Model 1897 banned during WW1, when Hitler was just a corporal and there was no Nazi party. It was of course, rather absurd to request shotguns be banned when poison gas was in use.
 
Last edited:
lobosrul5 said:
You have the wrong war. Germany wanted the Model 1897 banned during WW1, when Hitler was just a corporal and there was no Nazi party. It was of course, rather absurd to request shotguns be banned when poison gas was in use.
Click to expand...

True, but the point still stands, that a pump-action shotgun is a pretty effective close-quarters weapon.

Again, it raises the question as to what the valid civilian uses are for such a weapon.
 
LTC8K6 said:
I made no such claim about Waters.

My statement was about people denying what they said on camera, and suffering few, if any consequences, in general. I believe it is an ongoing general trend.

Say something silly/stupid/wrong/bad, have it pointed out by the public, deny that you said it, and just move on like nothing happened.

No one seems to care any more.
Click to expand...
What did she deny that she said on camera?

You are saying she denied how you and others interpreted what she said as if your interpretation were her exact words and they weren't.

She did not deny saying what she said on camera.
 
smartcooky said:
Any people whose families and loved ones are being killed shouldn't be making decisions about what is killing them. Got it!
Click to expand...

Not if they know **** all about it.

Do you not feel knowledge of a subject is required if one wants to regulate it? What other subjects do you feel this applies to? The same logic is use d by anti vaxers, they don't need to know science they have "mommy sense" just as you have "victim sense" which absolves you from having to know about things.
 
jimbob said:
True, but the point still stands, that a pump-action shotgun is a pretty effective close-quarters weapon.

Again, it raises the question as to what the valid civilian uses are for such a weapon.
Click to expand...

The invention of the sub machine gun towards the end of the war rendered them more or less obsolete as trench clearing weapons.
 
sadhatter said:
Not if they know **** all about it.

Do you not feel knowledge of a subject is required if one wants to regulate it? What other subjects do you feel this applies to? The same logic is use d by anti vaxers, they don't need to know science they have "mommy sense" just as you have "victim sense" which absolves you from having to know about things.
Click to expand...
Guns are designed to kill and are being used to murder human beings on a regular basis. Just how much more *********** information do you think we need?

Are there legitimate uses for firearms? Absolutely. Maybe that would justify the highly regulated, strictly controlled private ownership of a very small number of specific guns, with permission able to be revoked easily when those owners show the slightest irresponsibility.
 
LTC8K6 said:
I made no such claim about Waters.

My statement was about people denying what they said on camera, and suffering few, if any consequences, in general. I believe it is an ongoing general trend.

Say something silly/stupid/wrong/bad, have it pointed out by the public, deny that you said it, and just move on like nothing happened.

No one seems to care any more.
Click to expand...

You said she denied what she said. She was accused of calling for violence. She then denied she had called for violence.

So do you have anything where she denies what she said?
 
sadhatter said:
Not if they know **** all about it.
Click to expand...

Why? Give me reasons why knowing how a machine works or knowing how it operates is always a necessary qualification to make rules and regulations about how it works.

sadhatter said:
Do you not feel knowledge of a subject is required if one wants to regulate it? What other subjects do you feel this applies to?
Click to expand...

Do I have to be a motor mechanic or have a driver's licence in order to be allowed to have an opinion on road safety?

Do I have to be an aircraft engineer or an airline pilot to have an opinion on flight safety?

Do I have to be a teacher or an instructor to have an opinion on learning and school curricula?

Should I continue providing more examples?

sadhatter said:
The same logic is use d by anti vaxers, they don't need to know science they have "mommy sense" just as you have "victim sense" which absolves you from having to know about things.
Click to expand...

This is a totally false analogy, but I'll run with it just to humour you, and for my own amusement.

There are quite a number of DOCTORS who are anti-vaxxers...

https://www.marieclaire.com.au/leaked-video-footage-shows-anti-vaxxer-gps-meeting-in-melbourne

...should we be taking notice of them because they have "special knowledge"?

There are also the vast majority of parents who are PRO vaccination; are they not allowed opinions on vaccinations? Should we ignore their opinions because they are not doctors?

It seems that what you really want is for those people who disagree with you not to be allowed an opinion.

* * * *

In any case, I know about firearms. I own and shoot three different types/models of firearm (a Remington 700 .270, a Savage M12 .243Win and a Beretta 686 over-under shotgun), so even under your spurious (and bogus) standards, I am allowed to have an opinion on gun control.

That OK with you?
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom