If more weapons were the answer, we’d be the safest country on earth. We are not even close so that logic is easily disproven.
If firearms were not a deterrent then gun stores would have ms shootings like thewaters.
So your solution is, Bob? Confiscate all citizens’ guns?
No.
Not much of an answer, there, Bob.
End the gun show loophole, enhance background checks, limit magazine size among other things. I own several weapons and I use them for hunting or target shooting. I don’t need an AR with a 30 rd magazine to do what I do. We can enact common sense reforms and not affect sportsmen. The fact of the matter is some guns are designed for one thing and one thing only, killing as many humans as possible and as quickly as possible. Sadly, thanks to morons like you, these are available to ANYONE including the mentally ill.
Well, if you’re not a dirtbag, we statistically ARE one of the safest countries on earth. Lots of drug dealers shoot each other, lots of rival gang members shoot each other, lots of people get shot after getting in fights at bars, and lots of bad guys get shot by good guys while they are committing a crime, etc. Truly RANDOM intentional shootings? Like, a dude just randomly breaks into a house and shoots some innocent person? Not even a rounding error as far as death statistics.
How many people went to the movies last year in the U.S. versus how many were shot or killed by a crazy dude while sitting in a theater? I looked up domestic ticket sales for 2014, and unless I’m reading them wrong, over a billion tickets were sold that year. How many people were killed while attending? Do the math. Pretty darn safe to go to a movie if you ask me. Well, if you survive the drive there, of course. The most dangerous thing any of us do on a daily basis is get in your car and hit the road…
+1. Especially if you drive the Lloyd “Expressway” or the University “Parkway”.
Bob,
If gun control and banning of weapons were the answer, then Chicago would be one of the safest cities in the country instead of at the bottom of that list. They have a gun ban, remember.
Apples and oranges. It’s within a stone’s throw of Wisconsin and Indiana.
Not much of an answer there, Bob.
And New York City and Washington, D.C. and L.A. and San Francisco – all wonderfully safe cities to live in (pardon me while I gag).
Lots of Wolves out there, and Lots of Lambs,
If your not ready,–your what’s for Dinner in the world we live in today.
“you’re” as in “you are”; not “your”.
When a leopard chases down a gazelle, no one would deny that the gazelle has every right to fight off the attacking predator with hooves and horns. Yet many who want to completely control weaponry would be denying the same right to human beings. I’ll be damned if you will take my right to protect myself and others away.
Mass shootings are not caused by weapons. They are caused by the traits that are found in the human condition: Murder, violence and insanity.
It is murder, violence and insanity which need to be controlled – not weapons.
All weapons should be legal and available to all who wish to acquire them with very few exceptions.
Gun control. Dis-allowing good citizens the right to bear arms. It is a dream of the liberal left to disarm all who would carry.
Let them enact all the laws they want. What a colossal waste of time and effort.
It is estimated there are some 300 million non military weapons already in the hands of private American citizens. Good people.
I fear a government that would confiscate my weapons and you should too.
An armed society is a polite society.
Balloonpilot you are right . I could not agree with you more .
@English Bob:
“I own several weapons and I use them for hunting or target shooting. I don’t need an AR with a 30 rd magazine to do what I do… The fact of the matter is some guns are designed for one thing and one thing only, killing as many humans as possible and as quickly as possible.”
Of interest, perhaps, I also own several weapons. I don’t hunt, ergo I am not a sportsman. I do shoot regularly at targets, but that is almost strictly to practice and get good at the one thing my guns were purchased for – – self-defense. Since I purchased my guns exclusively for self-defense, I absolutely want one designed for one thing and one thing only… stopping as many threats as possible as quickly as possible. For me, an AR style rifle in an intermediate caliber is ideal for home/self-defense. Lightweight, compact, accurate, easy to operate, less prone to overpenetration than many other weapons, low recoil, easily accessorized, etc.
Put another way, you say you don’t need or want an AR to do what you want to do with a firearm. Cool. If you like to hunt and target shoot and don’t feel the need for an AR, it’s silly for you to spend the money on one. I’m a law-abiding citizen and I feel that an AR fits the bill nicely for what I want/need a firearm to do (self/home defense). Tell me again why I shouldn’t be allowed to own one?
He doesn’t want you to have one because he’s a liberal. That’s just the way they think. If you can call what they do ‘thinking.’
Can’t wait for Dick Engbers and Steve Small to jump in on this issue.
Gun free zones = killing zones. All should carry.
no surrender
If more weapons were the answer, we’d be the safest country on earth. We are not even close so that logic is easily disproven.
If firearms were not a deterrent then gun stores would have ms shootings like thewaters.
So your solution is, Bob? Confiscate all citizens’ guns?
No.
Not much of an answer, there, Bob.
End the gun show loophole, enhance background checks, limit magazine size among other things. I own several weapons and I use them for hunting or target shooting. I don’t need an AR with a 30 rd magazine to do what I do. We can enact common sense reforms and not affect sportsmen. The fact of the matter is some guns are designed for one thing and one thing only, killing as many humans as possible and as quickly as possible. Sadly, thanks to morons like you, these are available to ANYONE including the mentally ill.
Well, if you’re not a dirtbag, we statistically ARE one of the safest countries on earth. Lots of drug dealers shoot each other, lots of rival gang members shoot each other, lots of people get shot after getting in fights at bars, and lots of bad guys get shot by good guys while they are committing a crime, etc. Truly RANDOM intentional shootings? Like, a dude just randomly breaks into a house and shoots some innocent person? Not even a rounding error as far as death statistics.
How many people went to the movies last year in the U.S. versus how many were shot or killed by a crazy dude while sitting in a theater? I looked up domestic ticket sales for 2014, and unless I’m reading them wrong, over a billion tickets were sold that year. How many people were killed while attending? Do the math. Pretty darn safe to go to a movie if you ask me. Well, if you survive the drive there, of course. The most dangerous thing any of us do on a daily basis is get in your car and hit the road…
+1. Especially if you drive the Lloyd “Expressway” or the University “Parkway”.
Bob,
If gun control and banning of weapons were the answer, then Chicago would be one of the safest cities in the country instead of at the bottom of that list. They have a gun ban, remember.
Apples and oranges. It’s within a stone’s throw of Wisconsin and Indiana.
Not much of an answer there, Bob.
And New York City and Washington, D.C. and L.A. and San Francisco – all wonderfully safe cities to live in (pardon me while I gag).
Lots of Wolves out there, and Lots of Lambs,
If your not ready,–your what’s for Dinner in the world we live in today.
“you’re” as in “you are”; not “your”.
When a leopard chases down a gazelle, no one would deny that the gazelle has every right to fight off the attacking predator with hooves and horns. Yet many who want to completely control weaponry would be denying the same right to human beings. I’ll be damned if you will take my right to protect myself and others away.
Mass shootings are not caused by weapons. They are caused by the traits that are found in the human condition: Murder, violence and insanity.
It is murder, violence and insanity which need to be controlled – not weapons.
All weapons should be legal and available to all who wish to acquire them with very few exceptions.
Gun control. Dis-allowing good citizens the right to bear arms. It is a dream of the liberal left to disarm all who would carry.
Let them enact all the laws they want. What a colossal waste of time and effort.
It is estimated there are some 300 million non military weapons already in the hands of private American citizens. Good people.
I fear a government that would confiscate my weapons and you should too.
An armed society is a polite society.
Balloonpilot you are right . I could not agree with you more .
@English Bob:
“I own several weapons and I use them for hunting or target shooting. I don’t need an AR with a 30 rd magazine to do what I do… The fact of the matter is some guns are designed for one thing and one thing only, killing as many humans as possible and as quickly as possible.”
Of interest, perhaps, I also own several weapons. I don’t hunt, ergo I am not a sportsman. I do shoot regularly at targets, but that is almost strictly to practice and get good at the one thing my guns were purchased for – – self-defense. Since I purchased my guns exclusively for self-defense, I absolutely want one designed for one thing and one thing only… stopping as many threats as possible as quickly as possible. For me, an AR style rifle in an intermediate caliber is ideal for home/self-defense. Lightweight, compact, accurate, easy to operate, less prone to overpenetration than many other weapons, low recoil, easily accessorized, etc.
Put another way, you say you don’t need or want an AR to do what you want to do with a firearm. Cool. If you like to hunt and target shoot and don’t feel the need for an AR, it’s silly for you to spend the money on one. I’m a law-abiding citizen and I feel that an AR fits the bill nicely for what I want/need a firearm to do (self/home defense). Tell me again why I shouldn’t be allowed to own one?
He doesn’t want you to have one because he’s a liberal. That’s just the way they think. If you can call what they do ‘thinking.’
Can’t wait for Dick Engbers and Steve Small to jump in on this issue.
Comments are closed.