Page 1 of 5
#1
A gunman killed 50 people and wounded 53 and the death of "The Voice" singer in Orlando, FL, USA.....tell me again why these weapons should be legal.

I mean, as a American baseball bat hitter myself, I'm really against guns in reality and I believe in 2nd Amendment when it comes to owning basic firearms to protect one's home and family, or even go hunting animals. But someone explain to em why in hell one person should be able to posses the firepower to kill 50 people and wound more than 50 others with a single weapon in the gay club. There was nothing like this in existence when the 2nd Amendment was written long ago.

I feel weird about this.

Let's be real, this isn't some fiction story like the Marvel character named Frank "The Punisher" Castle, who actually assaults bad people in one place and nobody can stop him from killing, so don't be butthurt about the laws, gun controls or anything. This is just crazy. People being crazy, same thing happened in a movie theater (where the Batman was playing during midnight) and other public places. Crazy is gonna be crazy. Seriously, I'm already getting tired of hearing/seeing crazy crime in the last 20 years in the USA in my life. Fuck this country (North America).....
Dean Dave Mustaine VMNTX electric (Black)
Epiphone Les Paul Custom Pro electric (Ebony w/ gold)
Orange Micro Terror 20W Hybrid amp head
Orange Crush Pro 120W amp head
Kustom 4x12 cabinet
Voodoo Lab Pedal Power 2 Plus Power Supply
Korg Pitchblack Chromatic Pedal Tuner
Electro-Harmonix XO Metal Muff
MXR M-103 Blue Box
TC Electronic Dark Matter
TC Electronic Fangs Metal
#2
Which weapons, specifically?

And more to the point, under our system it's not anyone's job to show you why something should be legal, it's your job to show why it shouldn't.

And to that end here's a hint. A miniscule fraction of people misusing (even grossly misusing) something that millions own and do not misuse isn't grounds for a ban on the item in question.
“Ignorance more frequently begets confidence than does knowledge.”
Charles Darwin
#3
all weapons should be illegal

guns are made for 2 things: badassery at the shooting range...

and....

KILLING PEOPLE
Quote by jrcsgtpeppers
There shall be a stop to this madness. The battle is not over. My tasty licks aren't going anywhere.

Quote by The_Blode
^ I've just realised if you say Simple Plan's 2011 effort "Get Your Heart On!" really fast in a Southern American accent, it sounds gross. . .like sexual gross!

Quote by Necroheadbanger
Hello.
I'm looking for professional bongo-ists and triangle-ists to make a Progressive Technical Brutal Death Metal band
(will be called AxOxJxLxAxIxVxXxUxWxZxQxUxRxWxGxJxSxAxLxKxMxNxHxUxGxAxAxWxVxCxBxZxVx)
(Don't even ask what it means)


https://soundcloud.com/95dank



#4
Quote by Hal-Sephira
But someone explain to em why in hell one person should be able to posses the firepower to kill 50 people and wound more than 50 others with a single weapon in the gay club.


"Hello I'd like a gun please"

"Sure, here you are. Sorry, you're only allowed to buy enough bullets to kill 10 people these days though"
#5
Quote by k.lainad
all weapons should be illegal

guns are made for 2 things: badassery at the shooting range...

and....

KILLING PEOPLE

I was made for that same purpose

*queue bad-ass music and explosions in the background*
#6
Quote by ultimate-slash
I was made for that same purpose

*queue bad-ass music and explosions in the background*



"Ultimate-Slash, a BB gun in the armament of life..."
“Ignorance more frequently begets confidence than does knowledge.”
Charles Darwin
#8
Quote by k.lainad
all weapons should be illegal

guns are made for 2 things: badassery at the shooting range...

and....

KILLING PEOPLE



Or sport hunting

or food hunting

or personal defense of the farming community against animals


Knives are weapons and are used daily to make food easier to consume and within given professions.

BB's are ball bearings, explosives are used in construction & demolition, and most household chemicals inclusive of flour are capable of being easily made into combustible materials.


oh shit, the feds will realize I've taken chemistry. I'm going to be on a list. NOooooooooooo!!!!
Real knowledge is to know the extent of one's ignorance - Confucius
#9
but i need muh assault rifles in case the gov'nment tries to take over!

also north america is not a country
Last edited by institutions at Jun 14, 2016,
#10
This country was founded with the Constitution of the United States. I understand some people don't like it, but that's how it is. 99% of the other nations on earth have strict gun-laws, and anyone with those views can apply for citizenship to most of those countries fairly easy.

The 2nd Amendment wasn't meant for hunting. It was for preserving freedom. How are you going to do that unless you have the same weaponry that an opposing force might have?

The wording in it does not mean that "The Army" can have those weapons - that is a given. "Well Regulated" means WELL ARMED. You have to understand the language of the time. With that being said, do you think that they meant you could have single shot weapons, while the British, or another threat, could have gatling guns and cannons? No.

It's real simple, but people keep thinking it's about hunting, which is a joke.
#11
Quote by pressureproject
This country was founded with the Constitution of the United States. I understand some people don't like it, but that's how it is. 99% of the other nations on earth have strict gun-laws, and anyone with those views can apply for citizenship to most of those countries fairly easy.

The 2nd Amendment wasn't meant for hunting. It was for preserving freedom. How are you going to do that unless you have the same weaponry that an opposing force might have?

The wording in it does not mean that "The Army" can have those weapons - that is a given. "Well Regulated" means WELL ARMED. You have to understand the language of the time. With that being said, do you think that they meant you could have single shot weapons, while the British, or another threat, could have gatling guns and cannons? No.

It's real simple, but people keep thinking it's about hunting, which is a joke.


Don't take it too seriously, this is UG, largely an anti-gun leftist liberal haven. Fortunately nobody here matters anyway...

Also, there weren't a lot of Gatling guns used by the British during the Revolutionary war, since they wouldn't be invented for about another 90 years. Cannon were of course legal for individuals who could afford them, and were seen to some degree on ships, but merchants didn't prefer them because they were heavy and took up valuable cargo space/weight.

Interestingly black powder muzzle-loading cannons are still completely legal to own and require no paperwork...
“Ignorance more frequently begets confidence than does knowledge.”
Charles Darwin
Last edited by Arby911 at Jun 14, 2016,
#13
As someone who owns a good quality handgun and has an appreciation for the sport, I believe in our 2nd amendment right to protect myself when the U.S Govt. cannot. However I firmly believe that no one needs an assault rifle to protect themselves. If you need an assault rifle, you got yourself into some shit that you shouldn't have gotten into IMO.
Gear:
1987 Charvel Model II
2010 Carvin ST300C
1990 Charvette 100
1991 Ibanez RG560M
2006 Fender Mexi Strat
Jackson/Charvel Star W/ Custom Graphics.
Ovation CP 247 Acoustic
Line 6 POD HD Pro X
Pro Tools 9

Tutorial: Studio Quality Programmed Drum Sounds
#14
Quote by RBM01991
As someone who owns a good quality handgun and has an appreciation for the sport, I believe in our 2nd amendment right to protect myself when the U.S Govt. cannot. However I firmly believe that no one needs an assault rifle to protect themselves. If you need an assault rifle, you got yourself into some shit that you shouldn't have gotten into IMO.


Well, maybe. Although I question your knowledge of the subject due to your misuse of the contextually false and inflammatory term "Assault Rifle". (And don't you think there are folks out there that would be perfectly happy to replace "assault rifle" in your last sentence with "handgun" and make the same claim?)

I note further that it's been commonly understood for over 2 centuries that the 2nd not only codified our right to defend ourselves when the Gov't could not, but to defend ourselves when the Gov't itself was the aggressor.

In that case having a bit more than a handgun may be appropriate, no?
“Ignorance more frequently begets confidence than does knowledge.”
Charles Darwin
Last edited by Arby911 at Jun 14, 2016,
#15
but - what exactly is an assault rifle?
Real knowledge is to know the extent of one's ignorance - Confucius
#17
Quote by dPrimmy
but - what exactly is an assault rifle?


There are 3 common definitions.


1. Any intermediate caliber rifle capable of fully automatic (selective)fire. (This is the correct one.)

2. Any rifle used to assault. (This is the pedantic one.)

3. Any semi-automatic sporting rifle that "looks" dangerous in the eyes of the uninformed public. (This is the liberal and media definition. )

Hope that helps.
“Ignorance more frequently begets confidence than does knowledge.”
Charles Darwin
Last edited by Arby911 at Jun 14, 2016,
#18
Quote by dPrimmy


2. Any rifle used to assault. (This is the pedantic one.)

My God, it's full of stars!
#19
Quote by Arby911
Well, maybe. Although I question your knowledge of the subject due to your misuse of the contextually false and inflammatory term "Assault Rifle". (And don't you think there are folks out there that would be perfectly happy to replace "assault rifle" in your last sentence with "handgun" and make the same claim?)

I note further that it's been commonly understood for over 2 centuries that the 2nd not only codified our right to defend ourselves when the Gov't could not, but to defend ourselves when the Gov't itself was the aggressor.

In that case having a bit more than a handgun may be appropriate, no?


Well I know what you're getting at so I'll assume you're talking about the whole AR-15 debate. People are getting butthurt because they're calling the AR-15 which is a semi-auto rifle a machine gun/assault rifle. The AR-15 was designed for the U.S Army by ArmaLite in the 50's. The design was sold to Colt in the late 50's which then they took, modified it and made it into the M16 assault rifle which has been in service since then. Now of course people will confuse the AR-15 with an assault rifle because it looks like one. To the common person an AR-15 is an assault rifle, because it looks like one, even though its different than an M4 or M16 rifle.

Also while the second amendment does state that it protects us when the Govt. is the aggressor, the 9th and 10th amendment protect us from the Govt. becoming the aggressor, as it limits the Federal govt's powers and keeps most of it for the individual states.

My whole point of view comes from the fact that I walked into a gun show 2 weeks ago, filled out some paper work, handed them my credit card, waited 3 days and I had a gun in my hands. People can do the same thing with a rifle and that scares the shit out of me.
Gear:
1987 Charvel Model II
2010 Carvin ST300C
1990 Charvette 100
1991 Ibanez RG560M
2006 Fender Mexi Strat
Jackson/Charvel Star W/ Custom Graphics.
Ovation CP 247 Acoustic
Line 6 POD HD Pro X
Pro Tools 9

Tutorial: Studio Quality Programmed Drum Sounds
#20
failed edit: hesitated too much. Arby took over.


Assault rifle is loosely classified by definition and the USG as a compact weapon between submachine gun and a full blown rifle with selective fire modes and a short & compact body style designed for military use.


going to wikipedia:
"In general, assault weapons are semiautomatic firearms with a large magazine of ammunition that were designed and configured for rapid fire and combat use."


From the information available - the assailant used an AR-15 civilian variant of the military M-16 rifle, which only includes a semi-automatic firing mode (no different than most commonly available dual action or semi-automatic pistols). 1 decision, 1 bullet.

So - with this idea, an assailant walking in with several 10-17 round specialty point high(er) caliber handgun magazines could do as much damage as this individual - and in a more concealed form factor, no?

And those high capacity magazine bans that were supposed to limit rounds introduced into a firearm to 10 per magazine - were introduced in 8 states and 11 US cities. Strangely enough, California is in both of those categories and ...wait... didn't their mass shooter use a 30 magazine, illegally?

While we're at it - I'll take this a bit closer to home:

http://chicago.suntimes.com/news/map-chicago-weekend-shooting-tracker-for-june-10-13/

10 round magazine limit and some of the most strict firearm owner laws in the country. But Orlando got the press the same way that the electoral college works. Everyone voting for news stories was in the *******.


It's not an assault weapons problem, it's a firearms acquisition problem. Whether it be legal or illicit means - people are acquiring them and using them. I don't know that there is a 'complete' answer for how to address this either. I don't like the idea of everyone being armed (like Cobb County, GA) and I don't like the idea of abolishing firearms all together - as poop rolls downhill into the lowest common denominator and household chemicals and hardware store components were used in the Boston Marathon bombing.

When we look at the US's biggest mass casualty moments within our lifetimes - they didn't come at the hand of firearms. Oklahoma City & New York City were blown up- either with fertilizer or a bomb on wings(conspiracy theories aside). With a hatred and a desire to harm people - there is always another way.
Real knowledge is to know the extent of one's ignorance - Confucius
Last edited by dPrimmy at Jun 14, 2016,
#21
assault rifles should not be made available to the general public
#22
Quote by RBM01991

My whole point of view comes from the fact that I walked into a gun show 2 weeks ago, filled out some paper work, handed them my credit card, waited 3 days and I had a gun in my hands. People can do the same thing with a rifle and that scares the shit out of me.


And your ability to get that handgun scares the shit out of a lot of other people. About 20 times more people are killed with handguns than rifles in the US every year. (Knives kill about 6 times as many as rifles.)

They are wrong too...are you a danger to your fellow law-abiding citizens because you own a handgun? Then why would you be if you owned a rifle?

Your logic is flawed.
“Ignorance more frequently begets confidence than does knowledge.”
Charles Darwin
#23
Quote by kalypto
assault rifles should not be made available to the general public


And they aren't. Happy now?
“Ignorance more frequently begets confidence than does knowledge.”
Charles Darwin
#24
Quote by Arby911 at #34007597
And they aren't. Happy now?

then how come anyone can get hold of an ar15 or whatever they're called
#26
Quote by kalypto
then how come anyone can get hold of an ar15 or whatever they're called


Because you can bolt on "cool" to most rifles to give them a more tactical appearance. In their function - it's still 1 decision, 1 bullet.
Real knowledge is to know the extent of one's ignorance - Confucius
#27
Quote by kalypto
then how come anyone can get hold of an ar15 or whatever they're called


Because an AR-15 isn't an assault rifle, it's a semi-automatic sporting rifle (the most popular sporting rifle in the US currently).

And as noted above, rifles (including the AR) are used in a very small percentage of murders. Knives are much more common.

But that doesn't get the media exposure, so we get people that think there's an AR-15 epidemic, which is nonsense. National estimates put the number of AR-15's (and variants) in the US at between 5 and 10 million. From what I can find they were the weapon of choice in a murder less than 10 times last year.

Are you sure trying to ban them is the best use of your outrage?
“Ignorance more frequently begets confidence than does knowledge.”
Charles Darwin
Last edited by Arby911 at Jun 14, 2016,
#28
Quote by Arby911
And your ability to get that handgun scares the shit out of a lot of other people. About 20 times more people are killed with handguns than rifles in the US every year. (Knives kill about 6 times as many as rifles.)

They are wrong too...are you a danger to your fellow law-abiding citizens because you own a handgun? Then why would you be if you owned a rifle?

Your logic is flawed.


Ok, I'll play,

While more people are killed with handguns a year, a large number of those are suicides, not murders. However someone with a rifle has the potential to do a lot more damage with it because of how accurate they are and much more easily modified to fully automatic. There's videos on youtube to show you how.

Also, I'm not a danger to my fellow man because I'm not taking it out in public and pointing it at people. I will agree with you however on one thing. It scares the shit out of people how easily I can get a gun in the state of Florida, handgun or not. All I'm saying is, as someone who has gone through the system, that there needs to be a smarter process.
Gear:
1987 Charvel Model II
2010 Carvin ST300C
1990 Charvette 100
1991 Ibanez RG560M
2006 Fender Mexi Strat
Jackson/Charvel Star W/ Custom Graphics.
Ovation CP 247 Acoustic
Line 6 POD HD Pro X
Pro Tools 9

Tutorial: Studio Quality Programmed Drum Sounds
#29
Where were the gun control advocates after the Paris attacks?


"Every day I wonder how many things I am dead wrong about."
#30
Quote by Arby911 at #34007604
Because an AR-15 isn't an assault rifle, it's a semi-automatic sporting rifle (the most popular sporting rifle in the US currently).

And as noted above, rifles (including the AR) are used in a very small percentage of murders. Knives are much more common.

But that doesn't get the media exposure, so we get people that think there's an AR-15 epidemic, which is nonsense.

looks pretty tactical to me


like it was designed to kill humans, you know, in a war situation
#31
It is functionally the same as any wood stock semi-automatic hunting rifle with a detachable magazine. It is actually a more functional version of that, nothing more. People get hung up in the image of a weapon looking "tactical" but the fact remains it is not significantly different from any older style rifle and they are used in an incredibly low number of crimes; and are almost never converted to a fully automatic weapon when used in those crimes. If one is that set on hurting large amounts of people it's just as "simple" to build an explosive device.


"Every day I wonder how many things I am dead wrong about."
#32
they did a topic on this on the radio the other day

all the gun advocates sounds so crazy

their main reason for owning a semi automatic is to kill a large quantity at once. so when the government is out of control they can protect themselves. also when the terrorists shut down the grid and there is no power they can defend themselves when stocking up at the supermarket and such

Quote by Pastafarian96
I an evety characyer in this story
#33
Quote by kalypto
looks pretty tactical to me


like it was designed to kill humans, you know, in a war situation



Bolt on cool.


1 decision. 1 bullet.
Real knowledge is to know the extent of one's ignorance - Confucius
#34
Quote by RBM01991
Ok, I'll play,

While more people are killed with handguns a year, a large number of those are suicides, not murders. However someone with a rifle has the potential to do a lot more damage with it because of how accurate they are and much more easily modified to fully automatic. There's videos on youtube to show you how.

Also, I'm not a danger to my fellow man because I'm not taking it out in public and pointing it at people. I will agree with you however on one thing. It scares the shit out of people how easily I can get a gun in the state of Florida, handgun or not. All I'm saying is, as someone who has gone through the system, that there needs to be a smarter process.



Actually I used the FBI statistics for murders, which do NOT include suicide.

There are videos on youtube that show a lot of things. It's not as simple to modify a semi-automatic to fully automatic as you might think, and it's something that the BATFE takes very seriously in looking at firearms designs. It's also immaterial because in the crime(s) under discussion it didn't happen.

I don't know anyone that takes their rifles out in public and points them at people either. You're drawing a distinction that simply doesn't exist.

Will making it harder to legally acquire a firearm reduce gun crime? Given that most (but of course not all) gun crime is committed with illegally obtained firearms, it's not likely to have much effect.

But it will significantly affect those who wish to acquire a firearm for any legal purpose, the very people that are no threat.

Is that really the group that you want to negatively impact?
“Ignorance more frequently begets confidence than does knowledge.”
Charles Darwin
#35
Quote by kalypto
looks pretty tactical to me

like it was designed to kill humans, you know, in a war situation


Ok, how about this one?



To save the suspense that's also a common hunting rifle. It has no "tactical" look.

It's also far more deadly than the AR that was in your picture, because it's a much larger caliber weapon, with commensurately more capability for damage and distance.

Which is why it's an excellent sporting rifle.

You're making uninformed claims/decisions based on emotion, not generally the best way to move ahead.

Quote by M00NAGEDAYDREAM
they did a topic on this on the radio the other day

all the gun advocates sounds so crazy

their main reason for owning a semi automatic is to kill a large quantity at once. so when the government is out of control they can protect themselves. also when the terrorists shut down the grid and there is no power they can defend themselves when stocking up at the supermarket and such


There were people in New Orleans after Hurricane Katrina that defended themselves and their property with AR's. There were shopkeepers in LA during the 1992 riots that defended themselves and their property with AR's.

Maybe not as crazy as you would like to believe...sometimes bad shit happens, and when it does it's seemingly inevitable that scumbags will try to take advantage of it (looting, rioting etc.). It's a good thing to not have to be a victim.
“Ignorance more frequently begets confidence than does knowledge.”
Charles Darwin
Last edited by Arby911 at Jun 14, 2016,
#36
Quote by Arby911
Actually I used the FBI statistics for murders, which do NOT include suicide.

There are videos on youtube that show a lot of things. It's not as simple to modify a semi-automatic to fully automatic as you might think, and it's something that the BATFE takes very seriously in looking at firearms designs. It's also immaterial because in the crime(s) under discussion it didn't happen.

I don't know anyone that takes their rifles out in public and points them at people either. You're drawing a distinction that simply doesn't exist.

Will making it harder to legally acquire a firearm reduce gun crime? Given that most (but of course not all) gun crime is committed with illegally obtained firearms, it's not likely to have much effect.

But it will significantly affect those who wish to acquire a firearm for any legal purpose, the very people that are no threat.

Is that really the group that you want to negatively impact?


I understand what you're saying, however most mass shootings and major atrocities like what just happened in Orlando, the weapons were purchased legally. Thing is, most people who want to commit mass murders, know they're either going to die, or they have a huge chance of dying, so for them buying guns legally isn't an issue. It would actually be a bigger risk for them to be trying to get a weapon illegally because of how easy it is to be caught.
Gear:
1987 Charvel Model II
2010 Carvin ST300C
1990 Charvette 100
1991 Ibanez RG560M
2006 Fender Mexi Strat
Jackson/Charvel Star W/ Custom Graphics.
Ovation CP 247 Acoustic
Line 6 POD HD Pro X
Pro Tools 9

Tutorial: Studio Quality Programmed Drum Sounds
#37
Quote by RBM01991
I understand what you're saying, however most mass shootings and major atrocities like what just happened in Orlando, the weapons were purchased legally. Thing is, most people who want to commit mass murders, know they're either going to die, or they have a huge chance of dying, so for them buying guns legally isn't an issue. It would actually be a bigger risk for them to be trying to get a weapon illegally because of how easy it is to be caught.


Yes, but although these things are tragic and senseless, they are also statistically minor. Making policy based on perception is the key to making bad policy. What law would you see enacted that would still allow you to legally purchase your handgun but would not have allowed these shooters to acquire their weapons?

And you've still not explained why someone else's legally obtained rifle is more dangerous than your legally obtained handgun, especially in light of the FBI numbers?
“Ignorance more frequently begets confidence than does knowledge.”
Charles Darwin
Last edited by Arby911 at Jun 14, 2016,
#38
Quote by Arby911


There were people in New Orleans after Hurricane Katrina that defended themselves and their property with AR's. There were shopkeepers in LA during the 1992 riots that defended themselves and their property with AR's.

Maybe not as crazy as you would like to believe...sometimes bad shit happens, and when it does it's seemingly inevitable that scumbags will try to take advantage of it (looting, rioting etc.). It's a good thing to not have to be a victim.


you make a better argument than those gun freaks

Quote by Pastafarian96
I an evety characyer in this story
Last edited by M00NAGEDAYDREAM at Jun 14, 2016,
#39
Quote by M00NAGEDAYDREAM
you make a better argument than those gun freaks 2k16


I know there are some folks that are irrational on both sides of the argument, the trick perhaps is not to take any of them seriously!!
“Ignorance more frequently begets confidence than does knowledge.”
Charles Darwin
#40
I don't think guns/gun ownership is the problem. First of all, it has been declining over the past 40 years. The murder rate has also been dramatically declining over the last 40 years, but I don't think the two are necessarily correlated. A fewer amount of people now own more of the guns (i.e., gun ownership has become more concentrated).

So why punish the 99.999% of responsible gun owners? That's about as effective as banning Islam because a handful of Muslim extremists are committing crimes in the name of Allah...

Are there simply more homicidal/mentally deranged people today? What about the types of medications we prescribe people? A large number of antipsychotics and antidepressants have side effects like temporary psychosis, homicidal thoughts, suicidal thoughts, etc. Throw a gun in the mix...
Page 1 of 5