Author Topic: U.S. Politics 2017 (split fm US Election: 2016)  (Read 101911 times)

0 Members and 3 Guests are viewing this topic.

Offline Bird_Gunner45

  • Sr. Member
  • *****
  • 38,926
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 933
Re: U.S. Politics 2017 (split fm US Election: 2016)
« Reply #1325 on: October 06, 2017, 17:45:22 »
YouTube, liveleak and other video streaming sites are full of videos of armed average joe's holding their own against armed attackers. Sometimes even out numbered 3:1 like the woman in this video.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z4wjq6cn0To

I wont post the link but if you YouTube search Woman beaten by robber you'll immediately see a video from NJ of a woman getting beaten senseless in front of her 3 year old daughter during a robbery in the middle of the day.

It's clear the woman in the first video didn't have much training but she fared a lot better than the woman in the other video I'm talking about.

The problem is when the average joe, who is weak in the use of weapons, starts firing without proper training they put anyone else around them at danger too from stray bullets. Moreover, this puts law enforcement at a disadvantage since its harder to tell who is who or to control a situation when everyone is firing.

Offline Kat Stevens

    beth am dyrnu braf yn y gwddf?

  • Army.ca Subscriber
  • Army.ca Fixture
  • *
  • 194,550
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 5,371
  • that's how we roll in redneck land
Re: U.S. Politics 2017 (split fm US Election: 2016)
« Reply #1326 on: October 08, 2017, 15:10:19 »
Gun control should only be seen as part of a solution to the overwhelming gun violence in the US. There are certainly socio-economic factors at play that guns exacerbate. Small, white, rural counties in Alabama and Mississippi have the highest per capita gun violence rates in the US. Small, largely white, states such as Oklahoma and Nebraska have higher gun violence rates than California and LA county. The murder rate in the US is significantly higher than in most western nations including all causes, so there is an undeniable social element.

As opposed to a "gun control" boogeyman which some seem to fear, I think that there need to be controls short of full out gun control. Do people need to own semi-automatic rifles? Do they need to own multiple? Does there need to be a restriction so that law enforcement dont need to drive around in armoured patrol vehicles? All questions that need to be part of an overall strategy. When a 60-odd year old can kill 58 people and wound 500 with a knife than I will state that knife-control needs to be discussed.

I own two SKS, one is bone stock and the other all Bubba’d up, a semi auto 12 ga, a mini 14, and a semi auto .22 for plinking. I have never pointed any semi auto at a human being, including myself, except in the service of my country. Do I need them? Nope. Do I enjoy using them? Silly question. Why do you feel that I shouldn’t be able to employ my rifles in a sane responsible manner?  Motorcycles today can reach or exceed 250 kmh, all vehicles can exceed the speed limit.  Why do we need them to have that capability? Speed kills, but manufacturers continue to provide the means to do so.
« Last Edit: October 08, 2017, 16:40:00 by Kat Stevens »
Apparently, a "USUAL SUSPECT"

“In peace there's nothing so becomes a man as modest stillness and humility; but when the blast of war blows in our ears, then imitate the action of the tiger; stiffen the sinews, summon up the blood, disguise fair nature with hard-favor'd rage.”

 Every normal man must be tempted at times to spit on his hands, hoist the black flag, and start slitting throats

Offline Jarnhamar

  • Army.ca Subscriber
  • Army.ca Fixture
  • *
  • 222,406
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 8,988
Re: U.S. Politics 2017 (split fm US Election: 2016)
« Reply #1327 on: October 08, 2017, 16:13:23 »
The problem is when the average joe, who is weak in the use of weapons, starts firing without proper training they put anyone else around them at danger too from stray bullets.
While I've been on enough ranges to say the military aren't exactly paragons of weapons use WITH proper training I agree with you. Shooting puts everyone around you at some level of risk. Whether it's target shooters, hunters, soldiers firing warning shots or people using firearms for self-defense, there are risks.  The various degrees of hitting bystanders while using a firearm to save your life (prevent rape etc..) is a balance people have to find for themselves.

Quote
Moreover, this puts law enforcement at a disadvantage since its harder to tell who is who or to control a situation when everyone is firing.
While again I think you're right that in a wild west type scenario where the cops show up and everyone is in a boondock saints firefight it causes confusion I think those firefights are few and far between. Check this example.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rqyDHwZcL1Y
Someone is pinning the cop to the ground. A CCW permit holder approaches and intervenes.  If I recall he ends up shooting the man attacking the police officer then places his pistol on the ground and waits for more police to show up.  Compare that to what happened in Ottawa recently.

http://ottawacitizen.com/news/local-news/ottawa-officer-allegedly-assaulted-while-firefighters-stand-by-wife
Ottawa police officer had his arm almost broken by a trained MMA fighter who bested him and wrestled him to the ground.  Four firefighters were watching, the downed officer called out for help but they just stood there and watched. The officer was lucky he wasn't severely hurt.


There are no wolves on Fenris

Offline mariomike

  • Directing Staff
  • Army.ca Fixture
  • *
  • 428,710
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 7,372
    • The job.
Re: U.S. Politics 2017 (split fm US Election: 2016)
« Reply #1328 on: October 08, 2017, 16:37:21 »
http://ottawacitizen.com/news/local-news/ottawa-officer-allegedly-assaulted-while-firefighters-stand-by-wife
Ottawa police officer had his arm almost broken by a trained MMA fighter who bested him and wrestled him to the ground.  Four firefighters were watching, the downed officer called out for help but they just stood there and watched. The officer was lucky he wasn't severely hurt.

That is disappointing.

This also involved Ottawa Police and Emergency Services,
The paramedics managed to restrain Gregson with Czapnik’s handcuffs and stuff him into the back seat of a cruiser.

"Dying officer thanked paramedic rescuers":
OTTAWA — As Ottawa police officer Eric Czapnik lay dying from a mortal knife wound to the throat, he spoke two final and poignant words to his paramedic rescuers, thanking them.

The patrolman had moments earlier been sitting alone early Dec. 29, writing case notes inside his cruiser parked outside the emergency department of the Ottawa Hospital’s civic campus when a man approached and attacked with a knife.

Four paramedics, none yet publicly identified, ran from the emergency room to help. It wasn’t until a male paramedic grabbed the man in headlock from behind, they realized the assailant had a knife.

As the attacker tried to reach around and stab the male paramedic, a female paramedic wrestled the weapon from his hand. A second female paramedic kicked him in the groin, and all three wrestled him to the ground. Another female paramedic attended to Czapnik.

As he lay dying from the random attack, Czapnik, 51, uttered his last words to the paramedics, according to police sources.

“Thank you,” he said.

That his very final act was an expression of gratitude to others is a powerful testament of a man who, as his mourners heard last week, cared deeply about others and about his community, police said.

The first police officers to arrive on the scene found the suspect restrained with Czapnik’s handcuffs, sitting in the back seat of his cruiser.

None of the paramedics were physically injured. But the incident is reviving debate whether paramedics should wear special protection.":
http://www.ottawacitizen.com/news/heroic+paramedics+describe+toll+const+eric+czapnik+murder+took+them/6308651/story.html
« Last Edit: October 08, 2017, 16:42:52 by mariomike »
Get on the bus. Take a ride with us.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X2lSGnPl-ww

Offline FJAG

  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *****
  • 96,135
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 1,010
  • Ex Gladio Justicia
    • WordPress Page
Re: U.S. Politics 2017 (split fm US Election: 2016)
« Reply #1329 on: October 08, 2017, 16:44:35 »
I see the administrations campaign against sports teams taking a knee is getting even more serious.

http://www.foxnews.com/us/2017/10/08/vice-president-mike-pence-leaves-colts-49ers-game-after-players-reportedly-kneel.html

Makes you wonder : If all it takes to get rid of Trump or Pence is taking a knee . . . ?  >:D

 :cheers:
Illegitimi non carborundum
Semper debeatis percutis ictu primo
Access my "Allies" book series at:
https://wolfriedel.wordpress.com

Offline mariomike

  • Directing Staff
  • Army.ca Fixture
  • *
  • 428,710
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 7,372
    • The job.
Re: U.S. Politics 2017 (split fm US Election: 2016)
« Reply #1330 on: October 08, 2017, 16:59:52 »
« Last Edit: October 08, 2017, 19:44:38 by mariomike »
Get on the bus. Take a ride with us.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X2lSGnPl-ww

Offline Bird_Gunner45

  • Sr. Member
  • *****
  • 38,926
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 933
Re: U.S. Politics 2017 (split fm US Election: 2016)
« Reply #1331 on: October 08, 2017, 17:53:33 »
I own two SKS, one is bone stock and the other all Bubba’d up, a semi auto 12 ga, a mini 14, and a semi auto .22 for plinking. I have never pointed any semi auto at a human being, including myself, except in the service of my country. Do I need them? Nope. Do I enjoy using them? Silly question. Why do you feel that I shouldn’t be able to employ my rifles in a sane responsible manner?  Motorcycles today can reach or exceed 250 kmh, all vehicles can exceed the speed limit.  Why do we need them to have that capability? Speed kills, but manufacturers continue to provide the means to do so.

In your own example you define the problem- cars are made that can do 250km/h but that is speed is governed by speed limits since we as a society accept that there are some restrictions on our freedoms (in this case driving as fast as I want down hwy 1). Guns are no different and there's a difference between some sort of restriction and all out banning. For those who are pro-gun any compromise or limits are seen as complete bans. This is not the case. I grew up with guns on a farm and used them my whole life. However, I also see that there's a public safety issue in the US right now with mass shootings and can accept that no one needs to own an AR-15 for self defence or hunting. It's sport only (lets be honest). Therein, I can accept limitations on the number that can be owned, how they are transported, and how they are reported to authorities. We place limitations on almost everything. Heck, I can't go and take $10,000 out of the bank without needing a background check and providing a reason why I want my money.

Offline PuckChaser

  • Directing Staff
  • Army.ca Fixture
  • *
  • 879,315
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 7,232
    • Peacekeeper's Homepage
Re: U.S. Politics 2017 (split fm US Election: 2016)
« Reply #1332 on: October 08, 2017, 18:37:45 »
There were just as many firearm-related deaths (10.5 per 100k) in the United States in 2014, as motor vehicle deaths (10.6 per 100k). Drug poisoning (by just opioid and heroin) beats them both at 14.6 per 100k. Heroin is completely illegal but somehow is killing more people than guns. If banning firearms worked like banning heroin did, we'd see the firearm-related death rate RISE by almost 50%. There's also not a massive cry to make motor vehicles harder to obtain and place restrictions on their use, but they seem to kill more people every year than firearms do.

https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/fastats/injury.htm

Offline MCG

  • Army.ca Legend
  • *****
  • 189,700
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 11,462
Re: U.S. Politics 2017 (split fm US Election: 2016)
« Reply #1333 on: October 08, 2017, 18:48:25 »
I own two SKS, one is bone stock and the other all Bubba’d up, a semi auto 12 ga, a mini 14, and a semi auto .22 for plinking. I have never pointed any semi auto at a human being, including myself, except in the service of my country. Do I need them? Nope. Do I enjoy using them? Silly question. Why do you feel that I shouldn’t be able to employ my rifles in a sane responsible manner?  Motorcycles today can reach or exceed 250 kmh, all vehicles can exceed the speed limit.  Why do we need them to have that capability? Speed kills, but manufacturers continue to provide the means to do so.
You have those weapons legally under Canadian law.  This thread is about the US.  Nobody is talking about doing anything to your guns.  But, your post does seem to suggest it is still possible for a law abiding citizen to own the firearms that they want to own even with greater control/regulation than exists in the US.

Offline mariomike

  • Directing Staff
  • Army.ca Fixture
  • *
  • 428,710
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 7,372
    • The job.
Re: U.S. Politics 2017 (split fm US Election: 2016)
« Reply #1334 on: October 08, 2017, 19:00:26 »
There were just as many firearm-related deaths (10.5 per 100k) in the United States in 2014, as motor vehicle deaths (10.6 per 100k).

Motor vehicle fatalities have been dropping rapidly across North America in recent decades.
Unlike the old death traps back in the 1970's - before MADD and mandatory seat belt laws - the cars of today are equipped with air bags, laminated and tempered glass, crumple zones, side impact protection beams, collapsible steering columns and padded dashboards.  Convertibles lacked roll-over bars. Car fires are also much less common now, thanks to improved fuel system integrity and fire retardant materials.

In the city I live, most traffic fatalities are pedestrians.

Cars do indeed kill. But, they beat riding on the backs of animals.  :)

As far as shootings are concerned, by far, most of the shootings I was sent to were self-inflicted. Not always fatal.
That's anecdotal. The official statistics may vary.

That was here in Canada, but perhaps there is some similarity in the US?



« Last Edit: October 08, 2017, 19:57:14 by mariomike »
Get on the bus. Take a ride with us.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X2lSGnPl-ww

Offline PuckChaser

  • Directing Staff
  • Army.ca Fixture
  • *
  • 879,315
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 7,232
    • Peacekeeper's Homepage
Re: U.S. Politics 2017 (split fm US Election: 2016)
« Reply #1335 on: October 08, 2017, 19:07:09 »
You have those weapons legally under Canadian law.  This thread is about the US.  Nobody is talking about doing anything to your guns.  But, your post does seem to suggest it is still possible for a law abiding citizen to own the firearms that they want to own even with greater control/regulation than exists in the US.

I wouldn't be so quick to superimpose the Canadian moral and ethical acceptance of some firearm regulations, or to even assume our system is perfect. A Canadian may tolerate our draconian firearm regulations, where an American may look at us as a communist state.

Offline mariomike

  • Directing Staff
  • Army.ca Fixture
  • *
  • 428,710
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 7,372
    • The job.
Re: U.S. Politics 2017 (split fm US Election: 2016)
« Reply #1336 on: October 08, 2017, 19:10:40 »
Canada is not perfect. Never was. Never will be. But, I'm happy to live on this side of the border.  :)
Get on the bus. Take a ride with us.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X2lSGnPl-ww

Offline FJAG

  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *****
  • 96,135
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 1,010
  • Ex Gladio Justicia
    • WordPress Page
« Last Edit: October 08, 2017, 20:06:32 by FJAG »
Illegitimi non carborundum
Semper debeatis percutis ictu primo
Access my "Allies" book series at:
https://wolfriedel.wordpress.com

Offline Bird_Gunner45

  • Sr. Member
  • *****
  • 38,926
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 933
Re: U.S. Politics 2017 (split fm US Election: 2016)
« Reply #1338 on: October 08, 2017, 20:17:09 »
There were just as many firearm-related deaths (10.5 per 100k) in the United States in 2014, as motor vehicle deaths (10.6 per 100k). Drug poisoning (by just opioid and heroin) beats them both at 14.6 per 100k. Heroin is completely illegal but somehow is killing more people than guns. If banning firearms worked like banning heroin did, we'd see the firearm-related death rate RISE by almost 50%. There's also not a massive cry to make motor vehicles harder to obtain and place restrictions on their use, but they seem to kill more people every year than firearms do.

https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/fastats/injury.htm
+

There are a lot of red herring arguments here.

First, you should probably check that site again for the rates of drug deaths vs guns. From what I saw, "drug poisoning opioid analgesic deaths per 100,000 population" was 7.0 and heroin was 4.0. That's 11, not 14.6 (all overdoses is about 15). That is definitely too high and certainly indicates a problem. So, do you advocate the legalization of heroin under the assumption that legalization would lower this rate? If I take the argument the way its proposed, than I would have to assume that you agree legalization would lower deaths? What is the opportunity cost for society of de-criminalization of hard drugs? (ie- how many people would die if the drugs were legal vs illegal). Do you agree with drop in clinics for addicts, since really, in the same logic as gun lovers, they're just doing a hobby that they love? Discuss.

As for motor vehicles, there are a huge number of restrictions in place. There are speed limits, safety belts, driver's licence age requirements, yearly inspections in most US states, restrictions on distracted driving (cell phones in particular), regulations about wearing helmets (motorcycles) in the majority of states, restrictions on the use of alcohol and drugs, and a number of laws on the particular operations of the motor vehicle. Since the next argument back will be "but people still die in car accidents" I'll just jump to the logic trap- this is true. People still drink and drive, use cell phones, and cause other people to die. However, how do we rationalize the opportunity cost of removing all of the controls (see what I did there  :D)? How can we accurately predict how many people would die if all regulation was removed? Do you then also agree with removing regulations/controls on vehicles in the way you seemingly agree in guns since regulating vehicle operations doesn't seem to help (though it does... a lot).

If we use the same logic than one would have to question why there is still heavy security in airports and why is the US still in Afghanistan/the Middle East? Terrorist attacks of all varieties only killed 3503 Americans from 2001-2014 (compared to 440,095 gun deaths in the same period). Why is the US so willing to spend money and lives fighting against the 3503 and largely unwilling to do anything to curb gun violence? What would the money spent to combat the agents of the 3503 deaths don't if invested in the US for mental health initiatives? Why are Americans willing to have their civil liberties infringed upon (PATRIOT act, NSA, etc) to fight terrorism and why doesn't this desire translate to the far higher number of deaths due to guns (or opiods/heroin in your earlier example)? the average American has a 1:45,808 chance of dying by a terrorist attack but a 1:7945 chance of dying by an accidental gunshot. To add the the craziness, the average American has a 1:138,324,873 chance of being killed by an illegal immigrant terrorist. So, based on the odds, I assume that you dont support the Trump travel bans or screening refugees since you have far less chance of being killed by one?
+300 « Last Edit: October 08, 2017, 20:21:31 by Bird_Gunner45 »

Offline mariomike

  • Directing Staff
  • Army.ca Fixture
  • *
  • 428,710
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 7,372
    • The job.
Re: U.S. Politics 2017 (split fm US Election: 2016)
« Reply #1339 on: October 08, 2017, 20:22:36 »
As for motor vehicles, there are a huge number of restrictions in place. There are speed limits, safety belts, driver's licence age requirements, yearly inspections in most US states, restrictions on distracted driving (cell phones in particular), regulations about wearing helmets (motorcycles) in the majority of states, restrictions on the use of alcohol and drugs, and a number of laws on the particular operations of the motor vehicle. Since the next argument back will be "but people still die in car accidents" I'll just jump to the logic trap- this is true. People still drink and drive, use cell phones, and cause other people to die. However, how do we rationalize the opportunity cost of removing all of the controls (see what I did there  :D)? How can we accurately predict how many people would die if all regulation was removed?

For those who study US highway fatality statistics,

List of motor vehicle deaths in U.S. by year
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_motor_vehicle_deaths_in_U.S._by_year#Motor_vehicle_deaths_in_U.S._by_year
« Last Edit: October 08, 2017, 20:25:53 by mariomike »
Get on the bus. Take a ride with us.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X2lSGnPl-ww

Offline Bird_Gunner45

  • Sr. Member
  • *****
  • 38,926
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 933
Re: U.S. Politics 2017 (split fm US Election: 2016)
« Reply #1340 on: October 08, 2017, 20:32:10 »
Nice picture - Al Jolson - a white guy in black face taking a knee and singing "Swanee". Hmmm.  >:D

 :cheers:

While I generally agree with the protest, by definition the players are in the wrong according to the Flag code.

According to the Flag code of 1923, section 8 "No disrespect should be shown to the flag of the United States of America; the flag should not be dipped to any person or thing. Regimental colors, state flags, and organization or institutional flags are to be dipped as a mark of honor". IAW section 301:

Conduct During Playing. — During a rendition of the national anthem —

(1) when the flag is displayed —
(A) all present except those in uniform should stand at attention facing the flag with the right hand over the heart;
(B) men not in uniform should remove their headdress with their right hand and hold the headdress at the left shoulder, the hand being over the heart; and
(C) individuals in uniform should give the military salute at the first note of the anthem and maintain that position until the last note.

(2) When the flag is not displayed, all present should face toward the music and act in the same manner they would if the flag were displayed.

However, then people should note that section 8 (d) states, " The flag should never be used as wearing apparel, bedding, or drapery. It should never be festooned, drawn back, nor up, in folds, but always allowed to fall free. Bunting of blue, white, and red, always arranged with the blue above, the white in the middle, and the red below, should be used for covering a speaker’s desk, draping in front of the platform, and for a decoration in general."

https://www.senate.gov/reference/resources/pdf/RL30243.pdf

Offline MCG

  • Army.ca Legend
  • *****
  • 189,700
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 11,462
Re: U.S. Politics 2017 (split fm US Election: 2016)
« Reply #1341 on: October 08, 2017, 21:21:45 »
I wouldn't be so quick to superimpose the Canadian ...
Nobody did any such thing.  Rather, someone associated a change with the American condition as being the same as stripping of weapons from Canadians.  The reality is that the US system could become uniformly much more restrictive and US citizens could still have quicker and easier access to firearms than exists in Canada.

Offline Kat Stevens

    beth am dyrnu braf yn y gwddf?

  • Army.ca Subscriber
  • Army.ca Fixture
  • *
  • 194,550
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 5,371
  • that's how we roll in redneck land
Re: U.S. Politics 2017 (split fm US Election: 2016)
« Reply #1342 on: October 08, 2017, 22:47:08 »
You have those weapons legally under Canadian law.  This thread is about the US.  Nobody is talking about doing anything to your guns.  But, your post does seem to suggest it is still possible for a law abiding citizen to own the firearms that they want to own even with greater control/regulation than exists in the US.

Nice one, but swing and a miss. My post was in reply to Bird Gunners statement that semi autos are unnecessary, and by extension, could/should not be allowed because they are an immediate threat somehow. My point was that I’ve owned semis for quite some time and am yet to kill anyone with one. Canada or US is irrelevant to my reply.
Apparently, a "USUAL SUSPECT"

“In peace there's nothing so becomes a man as modest stillness and humility; but when the blast of war blows in our ears, then imitate the action of the tiger; stiffen the sinews, summon up the blood, disguise fair nature with hard-favor'd rage.”

 Every normal man must be tempted at times to spit on his hands, hoist the black flag, and start slitting throats

Offline kkwd

  • Full Member
  • *****
  • 56,652
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 351
Re: U.S. Politics 2017 (split fm US Election: 2016)
« Reply #1343 on: October 08, 2017, 23:20:28 »
Should I be afraid when I see someone on the street with a gun on their hip? Should I be scared when I know that many more people concealed carry? There are 14 and half million permits in the United States with many more carrying in states with no permit required. Can someone point me to news stories with examples of law abiding gun carriers committing crimes in masses? I have heard many times "If having guns tightly controlled saves just one life them I am all for it". I have a different take, "If having guns readily saves just one life then I am all for it".

http://www.gunfacts.info/gun-control-myths/concealed-carry/
https://crimeresearch.org/2016/07/new-study-14-5-million-concealed-handgun-permits-last-year-saw-largest-increase-ever-number-permits/

You got to be careful if you don't know where you're going, because you might not get there.
                                                                                                                   Yogi Berra

Offline MCG

  • Army.ca Legend
  • *****
  • 189,700
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 11,462
Re: U.S. Politics 2017 (split fm US Election: 2016)
« Reply #1344 on: October 09, 2017, 00:00:05 »
Nice one, but swing and a miss. My post was in reply to Bird Gunners statement that semi autos are unnecessary, and by extension, could/should not be allowed because they are an immediate threat somehow. My point was that I’ve owned semis for quite some time and am yet to kill anyone with one. Canada or US is irrelevant to my reply.
Okay.  You quoted the whole post which made many comments about US statistics and philosophies on gun culture.  Your intent to focus on only one sentence was ambiguous to me. 

Regardless, you own those firearms you want in this more regulated country.  That would seem to suggest there is room for the US (which this thread is about) to sustain availability even with increased regulation.

Offline Bird_Gunner45

  • Sr. Member
  • *****
  • 38,926
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 933
Re: U.S. Politics 2017 (split fm US Election: 2016)
« Reply #1345 on: October 09, 2017, 00:40:01 »
Nice one, but swing and a miss. My post was in reply to Bird Gunners statement that semi autos are unnecessary, and by extension, could/should not be allowed because they are an immediate threat somehow. My point was that I’ve owned semis for quite some time and am yet to kill anyone with one. Canada or US is irrelevant to my reply.

Clearly people can own semi-automatic rifles without going on a killing spree, so "swing and a miss" back at ya. They are unnecessary for self defence or hunting, so I don't know what your point proved. I have shown statistically that guns and access to them increase suicide. Shown that gun deaths and murder in the US are exceedingly higher than anywhere else in the world due to its lax gun laws. Shown that contrary to Fox news reports, 70-80% of gun murders aren't gang related. Even shown that more people were killed in gun related deaths due to "Love triangles" than were killed in France, South Korea, and Japan combined.

You have no reason to own a semi-automatic rifle outside of sport shooting. Asking for some level of control over these weapons, in the face of constant mass shootings and gun violence shouldn't be a radical departure. The POS who committed the Las Vegas shooting had 23 semi-automatic rifles in the hotel room and another 19 in his house. Do you think that this is something that should be considered normal?

Further, as MCG noted, you have those weapons in Canada where there is gun control and only 173 gun related deaths. You basically proved the point that you can have gun control and still have guns.

Offline Bird_Gunner45

  • Sr. Member
  • *****
  • 38,926
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 933
Re: U.S. Politics 2017 (split fm US Election: 2016)
« Reply #1346 on: October 09, 2017, 00:56:17 »
Should I be afraid when I see someone on the street with a gun on their hip? Should I be scared when I know that many more people concealed carry? There are 14 and half million permits in the United States with many more carrying in states with no permit required. Can someone point me to news stories with examples of law abiding gun carriers committing crimes in masses? I have heard many times "If having guns tightly controlled saves just one life them I am all for it". I have a different take, "If having guns readily saves just one life then I am all for it".

http://www.gunfacts.info/gun-control-myths/concealed-carry/
https://crimeresearch.org/2016/07/new-study-14-5-million-concealed-handgun-permits-last-year-saw-largest-increase-ever-number-permits/

Depends if you agree with the statistical analysis of people firing weapons, which is the weakness of this whole argument. If you read "On Killing" and "On Combat" than you will see that historically the vast majority of soldiers (90% in some studies) never fired their weapons or fired them ineffectively due to the psychological instinct to not kill other people. the 10% that would fire fell neatly into the rate of sociopaths or fired due to being in a team (MGs) or being in machines that took away the human face of killing (airplanes). By adapting training regimens the US army was able to raise this to 90% in Vietnam and modern conflict.

Why is this valid to the argument that if everyone has guns than we're safer? Well, if the average US citizen is untrained than they would still fall into the 90% of people who wouldn't kill. The people who commit mass murders, such as the LV shooter, clearly fall into the 10% of sociopaths. How many of these mass shootings have there been in states with lax gun regulations (Nevada for example) and how many times have we seen anyone actually fire back (which is the whole thesis of the argument)? The average US citizen will not statistically fire a weapon in anger unless they are trained to do so over the course of years, so them having a weapon only serves to create more tension, escalate situations, and increase chaos for no actual benefit. Moreover, research has shown that right-to-carry laws don't make anyone safer. In fact, statistically the opposite is true. Yes, the Atlantic is a left-ist publication, but the studies are echoed in other places and the research is academic based.

https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2017/06/right-to-carry-gun-violence/531297/

As for the "Can someone point me to news stories with examples of law abiding gun carriers committing crimes in masses" this is a misnomer. No one is a criminal until they commit a crime (it's in the name) same as no one is a mass shooter until they commit a mass shooting so the statement is meaningless. Up until the LV shooter started spraying bullets he wasn't a criminal and hadn't been convicted of a crime. So, by your parameters, then he was actually an example of a non-criminal law abiding gun carrier committing a crime in masses.

Offline Jarnhamar

  • Army.ca Subscriber
  • Army.ca Fixture
  • *
  • 222,406
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 8,988
Re: U.S. Politics 2017 (split fm US Election: 2016)
« Reply #1347 on: October 09, 2017, 12:52:10 »
Nice one, but swing and a miss. My post was in reply to Bird Gunners statement that semi autos are unnecessary, and by extension, could/should not be allowed because they are an immediate threat somehow. My point was that I’ve owned semis for quite some time and am yet to kill anyone with one. Canada or US is irrelevant to my reply.

While I don't think anyone in the Liberal government is happy this happened I can imagine for some  it's the same sort of relief that came from Trump getting elected and their using it as an excuse not to make good on the peacekeepers to Africa promise. Only in this case it gives them momentum to push their gun control ideas.

I think the speed they're capitalizing on it in terms of pushing their gun control promises (before everyone was even out of the ICU) speaks volumes.   What happened in the US will definitely affect Canadian gun owners.
+100
There are no wolves on Fenris

Offline Bird_Gunner45

  • Sr. Member
  • *****
  • 38,926
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 933
Re: U.S. Politics 2017 (split fm US Election: 2016)
« Reply #1348 on: October 09, 2017, 13:29:58 »

I think the speed they're capitalizing on it in terms of pushing their gun control promises (before everyone was even out of the ICU) speaks volumes.   What happened in the US will definitely affect Canadian gun owners.

But you can say the same thing for the NRA and gun supporters who came out with the "its not guns fault" almost immediately after the shooting. Neither side has a monopoly on using tragedy to push a narrative.

Offline PuckChaser

  • Directing Staff
  • Army.ca Fixture
  • *
  • 879,315
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 7,232
    • Peacekeeper's Homepage
Re: U.S. Politics 2017 (split fm US Election: 2016)
« Reply #1349 on: October 09, 2017, 13:43:48 »
But you can say the same thing for the NRA and gun supporters who came out with the "its not guns fault" almost immediately after the shooting. Neither side has a monopoly on using tragedy to push a narrative.

One side blames an inanimate object for a murder, the other blames the individual. Which one is out of touch?