I just really fucking hate people sometimes. Fuck all. This shit really makes me consider home schooling. I've got a 3 year old and another coming in the next few weeks (if not sooner) and some things in this world really worry me about trying to bring them up in it.
Statistically speaking children are actually safest when at school. It's important to remember that events like this, while certainly tragic, are also extremely rare.
"Regulate Sniper Rifles" is very poor wording. He should've said "Regulate .50 BMG ammunition".Quoting Lazlo (view post)
As the resident gun collector, hunter, and target shooter, I have felt for a very long time that there needs to be more regulation, back ground checks, education, etc.
I own an AR-15 w/ all the trimmings, and have several thirty round clips for it. It is a gun I rarely use, and, honestly, think that being able to own it should require a few requirements. I know in MN you need a special permit to buy a pistol that requires a background check. I believe you need this same permit to purchase an 'assault weapon' firearm. This is a step in the right direction.
My other firearms include a couple pistols, a couple shotguns, and several rifles, most of which are appreciating in value.
Here's a scary thought for you. The following picture is of a PS90, one ugly little vicious firearm. The magazine capacity is 50 rounds of 5.7 x 28mm, a round that is not as high powered as a .223, but is very accurate, and very lethal at 100 yards. The first run of these that were imported to the US had a very interesting feature: You could turn them fully automatic in less then 15 seconds without damaging, adding, or removing any parts, and then back to semi auto in the same amount of time.
Get a short barrel permit for it, which requires quite the back ground check, and it looks like this:
That thing is all of 500mm / 20" in length. Think of how concealable that is. Our favorite ex-special forces, current SWAT cop carries one of these around at all times in a satchel, and nobody has a clue. Its a great weapon for military and the police, but seriously, I should not be able to go out and buy one without quite the background check, if at all.
“What we are dealing with here is a perfect engine, er... an eating machine. It's really a miracle of evolution. All this machine does is swim and eat and make little sharks and that's all.”
Ya know something that pisses me off about the whole thing? That people are sharing his name. Motherfucker did this to etch his name into the annals of infamy. He deserves to be forgotten forever. I don't want to know his name. I wish he were to have never existed. Fuck him and fuck everyone who is granting him his final pathetic wish. :frustrated:
Losing is like fertilizer: it stinks for a while, then you get used to it. (Tony, Hibbing)
Spot-on.
The death toll of the kids up to 20 now. 2 kids that were shot and rescued died at the hospital.
Movie Theater Diary
They also confirmed that the guns were legally purchased and registered to the shooter's mother. Why a kindergarten teacher with a son with mental history problems would keep two handguns and a rifle in the house, I dunno, but whatever.
Movie Theater Diary
Man in China Stabs 22 Children and 1 Adult at a Primary School
Key difference: nobody died.
Coming to America (Landis, 1988) **
The Beach Bum (Korine, 2019) *1/2
Us (Peele, 2019) ***1/2
Fugue (Smoczynska, 2018) ***1/2
Prisoners (Villeneuve, 2013) ***1/2
Shadow (Zhang, 2018) ***
Oslo, August 31st (J. Trier, 2011) ****
Climax (Noé, 2018) **1/2
Fighting With My Family (Merchant, 2019) **
Upstream Color (Carruth, 2013) ***
It is security theater, because it won't actually make you any safer. Thirty round magazines would still exist.
Part of the idea behind the second amendment is to keep dangerous items in the hands of civilians. This is a representation of our freedom, just like the first amendment. It says that our government is open and trusting enough to allow its citizens the weapons and words of their choosing, without interference from the powers that be. That's pretty powerful stuff, and afaik, unique in the world.
I don't want another tragedy to take away more of our rights. We're already living in a society where we're searched almost at-will, where there's "free speech zones" at public events, where government agents confiscate nail clippers and water bottles before we get on airplanes.
In other words, a society where certain rights really only exist in theory, and on a practical level they've been made almost completely irrelevant.
America is so weird.
This time.
From 2010-2011 there were half a dozen rampage killings involving schools in China, and none of them involved guns. 21 dead, 90 injured.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/School_...a_(2010–2011)
In 2006, a man attacked a kindergarten classroom and killed 12 children and injure four more people, using only a pair of knives and a can of gasoline.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shiguan...rgarten_attack
Yeah, I'm sick of giving people the benefit of the doubt. "Freedom" is such an abused term in this country, supported and attacked whenever it's convenient for a political argument. Far as I'm concerned, on a civilian level I'd support a ban anything outside of six round handguns, single load shotguns, and hunting rifles (I'm sure there's a better way to describe this, but I know very little about guns, so I'm basically just describing images I have in my head). People can still hunt and protect themselves. Anything beyond that is unnecessary.
Amen. No reason a civilian needs an assault rifle.
Last 5 Viewed
Riddick (David Twohy | 2013 | USA/UK)
Night Across the Street (Raoul Ruiz | 2012 | Chile/France)*
Pain & Gain (Michael Bay | 2013 | USA)*
You're Next (Adam Wingard | 2011 | USA)
Little Odessa (James Gray | 1994 | USA)*
*recommended *highly recommended
“It isn't easy to accept that suffering can also be beautiful... it's difficult. It's something you can only understand if you dig deeply into yourself.” -- Rainer Werner Fassbinder
twitter | next projection | criticker | frames within frames
And I'm sick of people tossing aside the Constitution in moments of fear. We've got the greatest basis of law the world has ever seen, and yet we're willing to shred it at a moment's notice.
Banning things is easy. How's that War on Drugs working out for ya?
In that case, do you support getting rid of the class 3 weapons designation, which would allow civilians to get their hands on fully automatic weapons, short barreled rifles / shotguns, and other fun military hardware?
EDIT: Don't forget silencers!
“What we are dealing with here is a perfect engine, er... an eating machine. It's really a miracle of evolution. All this machine does is swim and eat and make little sharks and that's all.”
Technically, civies can get their hands on those toys, if they file the appropriate Class III paperwork, and actually find someone who will sign off on it. Plus one hell of a background check.
“What we are dealing with here is a perfect engine, er... an eating machine. It's really a miracle of evolution. All this machine does is swim and eat and make little sharks and that's all.”
You are being completely unreasonable. The Constitution gave everyone a right to bear arms. I'm not taking that away. Your constant use of hyperbole in this thread is becoming insufferable. Tell me in what way I'm "shredding" that document by limiting the scope of what civilians can own. Should it be okay for them to own and carry a rocket launcher? How about if Bill Gates decided to devise a team to build his own nuke? See, I can be ridiculous too. The fact is, the government exists, in part, to place reasonable limitations on its citizenry. We buy into that and give up some of our rights by doing so. I don't think it's unreasonable to restrict gun laws to stop the average citizen from owning assault weapons, just like I don't think it's unreasonable to ask require that they drive 25 mph through neighborhoods. Will it stop events like this? No. Will it help to cut down on the loss of human life when someone snaps? I think it will, and I'd be willing to sacrifice a fraction of my rights to bet on that.
I think the problem is parity. One way to gut the second amendment is by seriously curtailing what citizens may own while allowing the government access to anything and everything.
In KF's world, I could own a six shooter while the cops and military have fully automatic rifles and those nasty 100-round magazines. In that situation, technically you've maintained the 2nd amendment while largely destroying its spirit. This isn't altogether dissimilar, in my mind, to the TSA, "stop and frisk" laws, and the 4th amendment.
So I guess my question back to you is: What's the other guy holding?
Apologies for calling you out as insufferable. That's not fair. I know moments like these are incredibly difficult to deal with and everyone gets edgy.
Even with assault rifles, the government has access to weapons and tech that will never be equaled or allowed on a civillian level. If you're looking for a fair fight with them, you've already lost.
This is where the problem starts -- and yes, this is a slippery slope argument, because we collectively end up neutering our rights by degrees over time.
See, again, the 4th amendment. What started out as a reasonable (?) search at airports has become a literal, virtual strip-search. What began as "reasonable cause" has now become "stop and frisk." The 4th amendment is a joke now.
So you sacrifice today could very easily mean that ten, twenty years from now, the 2nd amendment exists in name only.
You might be fine with that, but I'm not.
Not a problem.
Maybe so, but I think it's odd and disingenuous to have a discussion about "gun control" and not talk about it in terms of government. But nobody ever does that.
Which makes me wonder, when this weaponless utopia comes around, what the lefties will say when a cop or a grunt goes batshit and shoots up a McDonald's with their government issued firearm (which, iirc, has already happened).
KF answered this before I had a chance to. If you're concerned about the government crushing us, then, yes, we are ridiculously outgunned.
“What we are dealing with here is a perfect engine, er... an eating machine. It's really a miracle of evolution. All this machine does is swim and eat and make little sharks and that's all.”
I know. Answered in a previous post, but to add: I'm not really concerned with Ruby Ridge kind of situations, ie being outgunned. I'm more concerned with the gradual erosion of individual rights, no matter what they may be.
I don't own a gun and don't plan to. I've been held up at gunpoint and I've had guns fired at me (well, not at me as much as in my direction; the bullet went over my head).
I'm still wary of restrictive gun control laws.
I'm still of the opinion that the Constitution needs updating. Laws and ideals from the 1700s aren't the same as they are now. I mean, the reason Amendment 2 existed was in fear of being invaded by the British. :lol:
I'm aware that it has been updated upon research. Pretty interesting to read as there have been attempts over time.
Just needs some revising. Policemen aren't exactly walking around with assault rifles unless they are in a situation which is deemed necessary. In Europe, you see them walking around with assault rifles all the time.
To revise it to the point where a certain amount of rounds per minute can be fired seems understandable to me at least. You don't lose the right to bear arms in self-defense, which is what the 2nd Amendment is.
Posting Permissions
forum
Reply With Quote
