Go Back   MacRumors Forums > Mac Community > Community Discussion > Politics, Religion, Social Issues

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
Old Dec 17, 2012, 11:08 AM   #851
quagmire
macrumors 603
 
quagmire's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Now that the thread has been reopened, I will post what I discussed with CalWizard via PM.

I have egg on my face. I keep on equating semi-auto weapons with burst capable weapons. As long as only one bullet is fired per trigger pull, then I have nothing against that type of weapon. Assault rifles do have burst capability, but if they are made to only fire one bullet per trigger pull, then I'm fine with those weapons as well. I am against weapons that can fire more than one bullet in one trigger pull. Cal also mentioned that the process of getting a burst capable gun is extremely well regulated. While I am against it, I am happy with the regulations in place of a person obtaining a burst capable weapon is enough if properly enforced in preventing nuts in these shootings of obtaining a burst weapon to use in their shootings.

So I will withdraw my ban these guns argument leaving fully embarrassed that I was ignorant on the issue.

Still maintain that we need to change our culture and get rid of the fear component in our gun culture as discussed with my first post in this thread. That matter is more important than banning a certain type of gun, etc.
__________________
Crimes against US History:
CV-6 USS Enterprise
Yankee Stadium
Penn Station-New York
quagmire is offline   4 Reply With Quote
Old Dec 17, 2012, 11:13 AM   #852
Moyank24
macrumors 68040
 
Moyank24's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: in a New York State of mind
Quote:
Originally Posted by ucfgrad93 View Post
We would go back to swords, knives, bows and arrows to kill each other. Thinking that this kind of events would stop just because there are no guns, is naive at best.
Do you honestly believe that if Lanza was armed with a bow & arrow he could have killed 26 people in the span of time that he did? Would they stop? No, because we need to put more emphasis on the diagnosis and treatment of the mentally ill. However, the damage may have been limited.

What's wrong with limiting the number of bullets a clip can hold? Or not allowing the sale of those "speedloaders"? I admit I don't know much about guns, but I'm willing to learn.

Quote:
You think a single shot gun is sufficient for self defense?

A revolver isn't considered a semi-automatic. However, there are people who can shoot them pretty fast as well. Unless of course, these are going to be outlawed as well.
Apparently none of the guns that the shooter's mother owned were sufficient for self defense.
Moyank24 is offline   3 Reply With Quote
Old Dec 17, 2012, 11:17 AM   #853
quagmire
macrumors 603
 
quagmire's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Quote:
Originally Posted by anonymouslurker View Post
He pointed out no such thing.

Terminology and misunderstanding again.

He pointed out that a revolver can still be fired quickly, and while not classified as "semiautomatic", a revolver is indeed still another "fire as fast as you can pull the trigger" gun.

I guess the only difference between a revolver and an evil semiautomatic pistol is that it "only" fires six shots before needing to be reloaded. (And with speedloaders, is near as fast as changing out a magazine.)
He didn't mention it specifically, but he brought up the fact a person can fire a gun( or revolver as he mentioned) that can only fire one bullet per trigger pull at a fast rate. That is what I meant when I said he pointed that out.

As mentioned in my above post, I mixed up semi-auto with burst weapons.
__________________
Crimes against US History:
CV-6 USS Enterprise
Yankee Stadium
Penn Station-New York
quagmire is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Dec 17, 2012, 11:18 AM   #854
ericrwalker
Banned
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Albany, NY
Quote:
Originally Posted by Moyank24 View Post
Do you honestly believe that if Lanza was armed with a bow & arrow he could have killed 26 people in the span of time that he did? Would they stop? No, because we need to put more emphasis on the diagnosis and treatment of the mentally ill. However, the damage may have been limiited.



Apparently none of the guns that the shooter's mother owned were sufficient for self defense.
Anybody can make a bomb these days. Timothy McVeigh killed about 170 people without a single bullet.

I believe he could have take out 26 people with a knife in that amount of time. His target was mostly defenseless little kids.
ericrwalker is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Dec 17, 2012, 11:22 AM   #855
Happybunny
macrumors 68000
 
Happybunny's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: 's-Hertogenbosch Netherlands
What speaks volumes in this shooting incident is the silence of the NRA.
http://www.slate.com/blogs/the_slate...n_twitter.html
__________________
'You cannot undo history, but you can learn from it'
Happybunny is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Dec 17, 2012, 11:22 AM   #856
Moyank24
macrumors 68040
 
Moyank24's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: in a New York State of mind
Quote:
Originally Posted by ericrwalker View Post
Anybody can make a bomb these days. Timothy McVeigh killed about 170 people without a single bullet.
Of course they can - however, there is a reason purchasing a bomb is illegal.

Quote:
I believe he could have take out 26 people with a knife in that amount of time. His target was mostly defenseless little kids.
In that amount of time? Without opposition? With no survivors?

How many children died in the knife attack in China on the same day?
Moyank24 is offline   2 Reply With Quote
Old Dec 17, 2012, 11:23 AM   #857
copykris
macrumors 6502a
 
copykris's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: home
Quote:
Originally Posted by r.j.s View Post
Since you're claiming a fact. Prove it. Source? Are there charges?
listen, i know you're a little scared, but you can't possibly need a source for that, can you? you facilitate a crime, you're an accomplice, that easy. lenient gun laws went a long way to facilitate this particular tragedy. and the ones before it. i know you refuse to see this for whatever reason, but that's how it is. now i find this as unfortunate as the next guy, but stricter gun laws are the way forward for the us. even the president alluded to that earlier. you're fighting a losing battle. welcome to civilization.
copykris is offline   2 Reply With Quote
Old Dec 17, 2012, 11:23 AM   #858
citizenzen
macrumors 65816
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Quote:
Originally Posted by CalWizrd View Post
"Need" has nothing to do with the equation.

Why does someone "need" a Maserati which is capable of driving at speeds in excess of 180 miles per hour?

Why does someone "need" a 15 carat diamond ring?

Why does someone "need" a 32,000 square foot home?

Why does someone "need" a 72 inch LED high definition television?
I sometimes think gun advocates think we're singling out guns out of spite.

Please rest assured that if diamond rings, mansions and large screen TVs resulted in thousands and thousand of deaths and murders every year, we'd be looking at their value to society and seeking to regulate their use as well.

The key to this is that having guns present in the United States results in ~31,000 dead Americans and ~10,000 murders every year.

That alone demands attention.
citizenzen is online now   4 Reply With Quote
Old Dec 17, 2012, 11:23 AM   #859
Moyank24
macrumors 68040
 
Moyank24's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: in a New York State of mind
Quote:
Originally Posted by Happybunny View Post
What speaks volumes in this shooting incident is the silence of the NRA.
http://www.slate.com/blogs/the_slate...n_twitter.html
Not surprising. They've always been gutless.
Moyank24 is offline   3 Reply With Quote
Old Dec 17, 2012, 11:24 AM   #860
lannister80
macrumors 6502
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Chicagoland
Quote:
Originally Posted by ericrwalker View Post
I believe he could have take out 26 people with a knife in that amount of time. His target was mostly defenseless little kids.
Doubtful. Very doubtful. See Friday's knife attack in China where 22 children were INJURED, but not killed.
__________________
Early 2008 Mac Pro, 8x2.8GHz, 3.25TB, 18GB RAM
UnRAID NAS, 9TB storage, 3TB parity, 400GB cache
lannister80 is offline   2 Reply With Quote
Old Dec 17, 2012, 11:25 AM   #861
copykris
macrumors 6502a
 
copykris's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: home
Quote:
Originally Posted by Happybunny View Post
What speaks volumes in this shooting incident is the silence of the NRA.
http://www.slate.com/blogs/the_slate...n_twitter.html
once again, they're hiding their heads in the sand until this blows over

very scared people
copykris is offline   2 Reply With Quote
Old Dec 17, 2012, 11:27 AM   #862
anonymouslurker
macrumors regular
 
Join Date: May 2012
Quote:
Originally Posted by citizenzen View Post
...
Please rest assured that if diamond rings, mansions and large screen TVs resulted in thousands and thousand of deaths and murders every year, we'd be looking at their value to society and seeking to regulate their use as well.
Like blood diamonds?
anonymouslurker is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Dec 17, 2012, 11:27 AM   #863
ericrwalker
Banned
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Albany, NY
Quote:
Originally Posted by Moyank24 View Post
Of course they can - however, there is a reason purchasing a bomb is illegal.
Yes we know, making something illegal stop access to it. Lets go view the "I want try LSD Thread" and see how many liberals here obey laws against illegal things.




Quote:
Originally Posted by Moyank24 View Post
In that amount of time? Without opposition? With no survivors?

How many children died in the knife attack in China on the same day?
Lucky for those children the Chinese man wasn't very good with a knife. Know thy vital organs and their locations.
ericrwalker is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Dec 17, 2012, 11:28 AM   #864
ucfgrad93
macrumors G5
 
ucfgrad93's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Colorado
Quote:
Originally Posted by copykris View Post
listen, i know you're a little scared, but you can't possibly need a source for that, can you? you facilitate a crime, you're an accomplice, that easy. lenient gun laws went a long way to facilitate this particular tragedy. and the ones before it. i know you refuse to see this for whatever reason, but that's how it is. now i find this as unfortunate as the next guy, but stricter gun laws are the way forward for the us. even the president alluded to that earlier. you're fighting a losing battle. welcome to civilization.
What a load of crap. Could you possibly be any more condescending?

Did the NRA provide guns to Lanza? No. Did they tell Lanza to go shoot up that school? No. Did they provide him transportation to the school? No.

If there is anyone to be blamed other than Lanza, it is his mother. She kept weapons around a person who was unstable.

And I find it unlikely that you see stricter gun laws as unfortunate.
ucfgrad93 is online now   0 Reply With Quote
Old Dec 17, 2012, 11:29 AM   #865
copykris
macrumors 6502a
 
copykris's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: home
Quote:
Originally Posted by anonymouslurker View Post
exactly
copykris is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Dec 17, 2012, 11:30 AM   #866
Moyank24
macrumors 68040
 
Moyank24's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: in a New York State of mind
Quote:
Originally Posted by ericrwalker View Post
Yes we know, making something illegal stop access to it. Lets go view the "I want try LSD Thread" and see how many liberals here obey laws against illegal things..
What is your deal with liberals? And what does that have to do with this dicussion??

My original point still stands.


Quote:
Lucky for those children the Chinese man wasn't very good with a knife. Know thy vital organs and their locations.
Oh, so now we're qualifying our previous statements? I wonder how well the 20 year old shooter in CT knew "thy vital organs and their locations".

My original point still stands.
Moyank24 is offline   5 Reply With Quote
Old Dec 17, 2012, 11:34 AM   #867
rdowns
macrumors Penryn
 
rdowns's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Quote:
Originally Posted by Moyank24 View Post
Not surprising. They've always been gutless.
And maybe a paper tiger too.

A very liberal slant but interesting none the less.

Quote:
1) The NRA’s Candidates Got Their Clocks Cleaned Last Month: The NRA Political Victory Fund spent a massive $16,554,803.07 seeking to elect its preferred candidates last November. They might have accomplished more by burning the money. Just 0.81 percent of these expenditures benefited a winning candidate.

2) An NRA Endorsement Is Virtually Useless: According to an analysis of all 1038 NRA endorsements in the 2004-2010 election cycles, the NRA’s endorsement swung the result in just four races — meaning that the chance that an NRA endorsement will be the factor that places a pro-gun candidate in the House is less than 0.4 percent. The analysis also determined that most candidates garner no boost whatsoever for an NRA endorsement, although “Republican challengers who get endorsed when they run against Democratic incumbents do about 2 percentage points better than similar candidates who don’t get the endorsement.”

3) Democrats Gain Nothing From Pandering To The NRA: One group that has nothing to gain from appeasing the NRA is Democrats. The 2004-2010 analysis mentioned above found that “Democratic incumbents who are endorsed by the NRA get no statistically significant advantage from being endorsed,” and a similar study of the 1994 and 1996 election cycles determined that an NRA endorsement “had almost no impact for Democrats who were endorsed, Republican incumbents who were endorsed, or any kind of candidate in 1996.”

4) Gun Ownership Is Steadily Declining: Lawmakers hoping to appeal to gun owners are reaching out to a steadily dwindling base. In 1977, 54 percent of American adults lived in a gun-owning household. By 2010, that figure declined to 32 percent:

5) Not Even NRA Members Believe All Gun Regulations Are Wrong: NRA members overwhelmingly support a wide range of reforms, including requiring criminal background checks on gun owners and gun shop employees, and mandating that gun-owners tell the police when their gun is stolen.


----------

Quote:
Originally Posted by ericrwalker View Post
Yes we know, making something illegal stop access to it. Lets go view the "I want try LSD Thread" and see how many liberals here obey laws against illegal things.






Lucky for those children the Chinese man wasn't very good with a knife. Know thy vital organs and their locations.

In your world, only liberals do drugs?
__________________
If you say you're leaving Apple because Tim Cook announced he's gay, don't let the door hit you in the ass.
rdowns is offline   3 Reply With Quote
Old Dec 17, 2012, 11:42 AM   #868
citizenzen
macrumors 65816
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Quote:
Originally Posted by ericrwalker View Post
Yes we know, making something illegal stop access to it. Lets go view the "I want try LSD Thread" and see how many liberals here obey laws against illegal things.
Check back when someone kills 20 children by spraying the room with LSD.
citizenzen is online now   1 Reply With Quote
Old Dec 17, 2012, 11:47 AM   #869
Huntn
macrumors 604
 
Huntn's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: The Misty Mountains
I own several guns, none are registered because they were not required to be registered when I purchased them or where I now reside (Texas). I own 3 handguns, because I used to enjoy target practice, but now they are primarily owned the purpose of home defense. When we had kids living in the house, mostly they stayed in a safe. That no longer applies.

The gun control issue has no easy answers. We in the U.S. have dug a very deep hole when it comes to guns. The evidence appears to be that we are a unique country with a unique gun problem. I know of no other developed, western country with the number of gun deaths we have. I am for gun control. I agree with President Obama that we can't treat this as routine or say "oh well" because this is part of our liberties to own guns.

But what to do? That is the issue as we all know. I said this before, but the slogan "guns don't kill people, people kill people" while true, is an attempt to legitimize the imagined necessity the horrendous side effects of reckless gun ownership.

There is nothing we can do to completely eliminate the problem, but we can do some thing to possibly lessen it. I like the idea of treating gun ownership at least as strenuously as car owner and operation. I see no reason to allow assault style, made-to-kill-human guns with large magazines. I am against unofficial populace militias, but not against gun clubs. I see some issues with that distinction. I support gun registration and back ground checks for all sales of guns. My understanding is that gun shows are exempt from this requirement and I can all ready hear the cries of unfairness for instituting this kind of a rule. "Tough" is my reply. I heard that 75% of NRA gun owners support the concept of background checks before purchase. We just have to get NRA leadership on the same page.

Thumb resize.
__________________
The modern business ethos: "I'm worth it, you're not, and I'm a glutton!"
MBP, 2.2 GHz intel i7, Radeon HD 6750M, Bootcamp: W7.
PC: i5 4670k, 8GB RAM, Asus GTX670 (2GB VRAM), W7.
Huntn is offline   4 Reply With Quote
Old Dec 17, 2012, 11:54 AM   #870
quagmire
macrumors 603
 
quagmire's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Quote:
Originally Posted by Huntn View Post
I own several guns, none are registered because they were not required to be registered when I purchased them or where I now reside (Texas). I own 3 handguns, because I used to enjoy target practice, but now they are primarily owned the purpose of home defense. When we had kids living in the house, mostly they stayed in a safe. That no longer applies.

The gun control issue has no easy answers. We in the U.S. have dug a very deep hole when it comes to guns. The evidence appears to be that we are a unique country with a unique gun problem. I know of no other developed, western country with the number of gun deaths we have. I am for gun control. I agree with President Obama that we can't treat this as routine or say "oh well" because this is part of our liberties to own guns.

But what to do? That is the issue as we all know. I said this before, but the slogan "guns don't kill people, people kill people" while true, is an attempt to legitimize the imagined necessity the horrendous side effects of reckless gun ownership.

There is nothing we can do to completely eliminate the problem, but we can do some thing to possibly lessen it. I like the idea of treating gun ownership at least as strenuously as car owner and operation. I see no reason to allow assault style, made-to-kill-human guns with large magazines. I am against unofficial populace militias, but not against gun clubs. I see some issues with that distinction. I support gun registration and back ground checks for all sales of guns. My understanding is that gun shows are exempt from this requirement and I can all ready hear the cries of unfairness for instituting this kind of a rule. "Tough" is my reply. I heard that 75% of NRA gun owners support the concept of background checks before purchase. We just have to get NRA leadership on the same page.

Thumb resize.



I would change equating getting a driving license to getting a pilot license. Getting a drivers license is a joke. No one knows how to drive, the tests are not practical to the real world besides knowing what a stop sign looks like, etc.

Getting a pilots license is much more through. You need to have a medical certificate, you need to have in depth knowledge of how a plane flies and works, and the oral and flight test actually makes sure you know what you're doing. You have to go get your medical renewed either every 12 calendar months( for a 1st class medical or 2nd class medical if you're under 40) or 60 calendar months for a third class medical( under 40). And if you're over 40, the valid times get shorter.
__________________
Crimes against US History:
CV-6 USS Enterprise
Yankee Stadium
Penn Station-New York
quagmire is offline   4 Reply With Quote
Old Dec 17, 2012, 11:57 AM   #871
ericrwalker
Banned
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Albany, NY
Quote:
Originally Posted by Moyank24 View Post
What is your deal with liberals? And what does that have to do with this dicussion??
It has a lot to do with this discussion. Generally liberals want to ban guns, making them illegal in their world will stop access to them. These same liberals have proven that making something illegal doesn't stop access to something. It's a bump in the road.



Quote:
Originally Posted by rdowns View Post

In your world, only liberals do drugs?
Did I ever say so? See my reply quote to Moyank.

Quote:
Originally Posted by citizenzen View Post
Check back when someone kills 20 children by spraying the room with LSD.
I'll wait for bath salts to become illegal first.

----------

Quote:
Originally Posted by lannister80 View Post
Doubtful. Very doubtful. See Friday's knife attack in China where 22 children were INJURED, but not killed.

Yes, it would appear that Chinese man didn't know the locations of the heart, liver and lungs.
ericrwalker is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Dec 17, 2012, 12:04 PM   #872
CalWizrd
macrumors 6502
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: NYC/Raleigh, NC
Quote:
Originally Posted by citizenzen View Post
I sometimes think gun advocates think we're singling out guns out of spite.

Please rest assured that if diamond rings, mansions and large screen TVs resulted in thousands and thousand of deaths and murders every year, we'd be looking at their value to society and seeking to regulate their use as well.

The key to this is that having guns present in the United States results in ~31,000 dead Americans and ~10,000 murders every year.

That alone demands attention.
What I wanted to demonstrate was when someone asks me why I need such a weapon, I reply that need has nothing to do with it.

40+ years of responsible, lawful gun ownership has more than earned me the right to purchase any lawful product that I desire and can afford. It is none of anyone else's business whether they think I have a need for such item or not, especially when they have no idea what it is they are objecting to.

If ultimately the "mythical" assault weapon is once again banned for sale, as it was in the 90's, I will most certainly abide by the law and refrain from trying to acquire one. Sadly, there will be no logical reason for such a ban, but I respect the law.
__________________
"Democracy is a pathetic belief in the collective wisdom of individual ignorance." -- H.L.Mencken
CalWizrd is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Dec 17, 2012, 12:06 PM   #873
citizenzen
macrumors 65816
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Quote:
Originally Posted by Huntn View Post
Thumb resize.
Include age restrictions, the potential to lose one's license for misuse.

Another thing that I'd like to see is a concerted effort on the part of gun manufacturers to enhance the safety of guns, just as automobile manufacturers are constantly making strides to make cars safer.

For instance, make guns "smart". Include biometrics that would only allow the owner to shoot it. Put coded locks on them. Put devices that would allow lost or stolen guns to be located.
citizenzen is online now   0 Reply With Quote
Old Dec 17, 2012, 12:08 PM   #874
Huntn
macrumors 604
 
Huntn's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: The Misty Mountains
Quote:
Originally Posted by CalWizrd View Post
Total, total agreement.
However, I admit, that gun regulations may not have made any difference in this case which was a sick mind gets his hands on a gun with the intent to cause great harm. The guns were registered, but they were not controlled.

If broken down, the two components of this case are 1)sick mind, 2)access to a gun. How can that be minimized? The sick mind needs treatment, the gun needs to be controlled either through a hi-tech fingerprint technology or simply low tech trigger lock and possibly through personal responsibility laws. If your gun gets away from you due to your carelessness, you should be held responsible.
__________________
The modern business ethos: "I'm worth it, you're not, and I'm a glutton!"
MBP, 2.2 GHz intel i7, Radeon HD 6750M, Bootcamp: W7.
PC: i5 4670k, 8GB RAM, Asus GTX670 (2GB VRAM), W7.
Huntn is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Dec 17, 2012, 12:09 PM   #875
citizenzen
macrumors 65816
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Quote:
Originally Posted by CalWizrd View Post
40+ years of responsible, lawful gun ownership has more than earned me the right to purchase any lawful product that I desire and can afford. It is none of anyone else's business whether they think I have a need for such item or not, especially when they have no idea what it is they are objecting to.
What do you mean "when they have no idea what it is they are objecting to"?

I'm objecting to 31,000 dead American every year.

I think I have some idea about what I'm objecting to.
citizenzen is online now   1 Reply With Quote


Reply
MacRumors Forums > Mac Community > Community Discussion > Politics, Religion, Social Issues

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Similar Threads
thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
At Least 194 Children Have Been Shot to Death Since Newtown lannister80 Politics, Religion, Social Issues 196 Dec 18, 2013 01:48 PM
No Homicide Charges For Teen Who Shot And Killed A Man With An Illegal Gun, SYG rdowns Politics, Religion, Social Issues 99 Aug 15, 2013 11:14 AM
Navy SEAL Chris Kyle "American Sniper." Shot and killed. Happybunny Politics, Religion, Social Issues 347 Feb 8, 2013 04:22 PM
Shooting at Atlanta Middle School Leaves 8th Grader Shot in the Head bradl Politics, Religion, Social Issues 169 Feb 3, 2013 09:03 AM

Forum Jump

All times are GMT -5. The time now is 06:10 PM.

Mac Rumors | Mac | iPhone | iPhone Game Reviews | iPhone Apps

Mobile Version | Fixed | Fluid | Fluid HD
Copyright 2002-2013, MacRumors.com, LLC