Welcome to Laser Pointer Forums - discuss green laser pointers, blue laser pointers, and all types of lasers



Gun Discussion

spyrorocks

New member
Joined
Oct 23, 2007
Messages
1,911
Points
0
I think you mean natural selection?


Kids also eat the stuff under the sink.

I'm all for responsible storage of guns. I don't think anyone would argue against that.
 



Cyparagon

Well-known member
Joined
Sep 12, 2007
Messages
9,877
Points
113
There are quite a few members getting defensive about the wrong subjects. I don't think many people think all guns should be banned - that's not really the debate here.
Or if it is, it's a one-sided waste of time.

The reason they put in the 2nd amendment was so citizens could protect against tyrannical governments... who protects us from the police or the government? That would be for "militias"

I hear that a lot, but how often has this idea actually been put to use? And how many people have pointed a gun at a policeman and everything goes smoothly from there?

I doubt I'll ever have my house set on fire, but I still have smoke detectors. I doubt I'll ever get into a serious car crash but I use seat belts. I doubt that I'll ever get attacked by an armed man

Some safety devices are inherently safer than others. For example, children don't kill themselves with seatbelts or smoke detectors when you're out of the house.

they'll make thermite... All options are cheap, easy and just as effective as guns.

GWeXQ.gif


While death by thermite would be pretty horrendous, I don't think you can get away with classifying it as "just as effective" as a handgun.
 
Last edited:

ARG

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 27, 2011
Messages
6,851
Points
113
I think you mean natural selection?


Kids also eat the stuff under the sink.

I'm all for responsible storage of guns. I don't think anyone would argue against that.

Yup, that's what I meant :p I always forget what it's called. It's part of darwins theory's though.

It's not just kids.
1319481995_top_gear__james_may_vs_gun.gif
 
Last edited:

Things

New member
Joined
May 1, 2007
Messages
7,535
Points
0
Damn it Cyparagon, stop with all the epic posts, I can't give anymore rep! :D
 

TacoHerder

New member
Joined
Feb 14, 2012
Messages
488
Points
0
When I was 8 years old I was jumped by a 7th grade kid. That same day he came back to my house and tried hitting on my sister. I told him to get lost or I would shoot him. He LOL'd and told me too. So I went and got my dads 16g. He help up his hand and dared me too. I blew a hole right threw his hand(HAHA). Spent a week in juvy until my parents got me out. In Texas at the time they couldnt arrest a 8 yr old for that crime, a year later they changed that law....

Not sure what this has to do with gun laws, but dang did it feel awesome to see that loser cry in pain. He is now serving a life sentence for dealing crack and killing a hooker. So it seems I might have done everyone a favor by just killing the loser.
 

jander6442

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 8, 2009
Messages
3,219
Points
83
I'll make this real simple.... bann them all OR don't bann any of them.


Oh, and next time you go to the range look around, there are a lot of scared law abiding citizens out there spending their hard earned money learning how to properly shoot and maintain there firearms:gun:. I wonder why? could it be that at the end of the day when someone or something wants to take whats yours you'll always have that choice to exercise your right to defend yourself how best you can. This means that for some folks who cannot use karate, the force, or like cyp, a keyboard.... meaning a gun might be their only option and if thats the case then it is good they are practicing safety and etiquette.

3 people in the world a sheep, a wolf, and a sheepdog.... pick one.
 

InfinitusEquitas

Well-known member
Joined
Mar 27, 2011
Messages
15,445
Points
113
Thought of another one, accidents can happen if a gun is not stored under lock & key properly. I'm all for natural selection though.

Some people don't deserve to live...

VBnY0.jpg


Or procreate. Especially procreate.
 
Last edited:

brad5452

New member
Joined
Dec 15, 2012
Messages
16
Points
0
I hear that a lot, but how often has this idea actually been put to use? And how many people have pointed a gun at a policeman and everything goes smoothly from there?

It hasn't happened in the United States, except for the revolutionary war but that's what lead to the 2nd amendment so I guess that doesn't count. While it hasn't happened in the US, I think Syria is having something similar happen right now, and Egypt is either to the point or getting there I think. I think Israel has something going on too, I don't know, I don't pay much attention to global news. It's not likely to happen here, but I don't think it's worth the risk to not have the option to if we need to.

Some safety devices are inherently safer than others. For example, children don't kill themselves with seatbelts or smoke detectors when you're out of the house.

That's why you don't leave a loaded gun lying around if there are children or idiots in the house. Guns are extremely safe when handled correctly. I wouldn't blame a kid killing himself with a parent's gun on the gun itself, I'd blame it on the negligence of the parents. If you carry near idiots or kids, use a good retention holster and maybe conceal it.

While death by thermite would be pretty horrendous, I don't think you can get away with classifying it as "just as effective" as a handgun.

You're right. As I said in the beginning of my post, I didn't really do any major editing and didn't know what I was going to type until I typed it. I really should have thought that through more, I feel like an idiot now. Even though thermite isn't very effective for mass murder scenarios, the bombs still are. Home made guns aren't that hard to make with basic tools either. I forgot about gun kits. You can buy the tools and parts necessary to make things, such as an AK receiver, from a flat piece of metal with holes cut in it, or a block that you mill out. It's hard to regulate pieces of metal and bolts and such. The parts that can be regulated would be made at home. This supports the point that I was getting at, that banning guns or certain kinds of guns will do nothing to stop psychos from killing.
 

BShanahan14rulz

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 29, 2009
Messages
3,151
Points
63
A lot of these big shootings seem to be taking place in gun-free zones.

Discuss.
 

spyrorocks

New member
Joined
Oct 23, 2007
Messages
1,911
Points
0
Modern guns are quite safe. I don't think i've read of one discharging on its own.
 

NyteHisagi

New member
Joined
Dec 26, 2012
Messages
1
Points
0
I'm just going to throw my 10 cents worth in.
I live in the south where every other person owns a gun. We have them for multiple reasons primarily to hunt but we keep them handy Incase there is a need to use them defensively. I'm not sure if it has already been mentioned on this thread, but the gun has been given the nickname "the Great Equalizer" because whoever is behind the trigger is instantly more powerful than an assailant for e.g. An 80 year old wheelchair bound woman can stop an assailant cold if she has a firearm. Further more, if the government makes having guns illegal, that will not stop the "bad guys" from getting them, it will just stop the "legitimate" gun owners from being able to protect themselves and their families. While I am completely agains using a gun for uneccessary violence, I am all for using it for protection, and passification alone.
 

InfinitusEquitas

Well-known member
Joined
Mar 27, 2011
Messages
15,445
Points
113
Full Story: Guns pour in at L.A. buyback events - latimes.com

Excerpt:
Cars queued up for blocks at the drive-through events, with the city giving cards
worth up to $100 for handguns, shotguns and rifles, and up to $200 for assault weapons. There was a bit of haggling involved, but the guns were all taken.

Full Story: President Obama reveals how he 'keeps the fire going' with the First Lady... even after 20 years of marriage | Mail Online

Excerpt:
President Barack Obama revealed the 'real reason' he wanted a second term as president is because his daughter Malia, age 14, is about to start dating boys.
'One of the main incentives of running was continued Secret Service protection so we can have men with guns around at all times,' the father of two joked.

Full Story:Michael Moore: ?Calm Down, White People, and Put Away Your Guns? | CNS News

Excerpt:
In his blog, Moore said that Connecticut’s tough gun laws “did nothing to prevent” Adam Lanza from killing 20 children and 6 others at the Sandy Hook Elementary School.

Tough gun laws “won't really bring about an end to these mass slayings and it will not address the core problem we have,” Moore said. “Connecticut had one of the strongest gun laws in the country. That did nothing to prevent the murders of 20 small children on December 14th.”

He said a “dirty little fact” liberals do not want to discuss is that the “killer only ceased his slaughter when he saw that cops were swarming onto the school grounds – i.e, the men with the guns.”
 

Cyparagon

Well-known member
Joined
Sep 12, 2007
Messages
9,877
Points
113
Let's not kid ourselves. Even if Obama "wanted your guns," there's no way he would get them.

It's not likely to happen here, but I don't think it's worth the risk to not have the option to if we need to.

Another thought I had: disorganized pistol-wielding public vs. US military.
Maybe we're fooling ourselves a little bit with this one?

Guns are extremely safe when handled correctly.

As are nuclear warheads and nitroglycerine. Still not items I'd recommend be unregulated or sold to just anyone. ;)

Smoke detectors and seatbelts on the other hand are extremely safe even when handled incorrectly.


I'll make this real simple.... bann them all OR don't bann any of them.

3 people in the world a sheep, a wolf, and a sheepdog.... pick one.

It's not healthy to think in absolutes like this.
 

Woodofcville

New member
Joined
Oct 24, 2009
Messages
1,184
Points
0
Nobody actually believes we're really gonna have to fight our own US military's full strength at any point in time. Do you have any idea how split the actual military ranks would be if another civil war broke out, you forget that those soldiers were US citizens first huhhh? Ignorant comment deluxe.

The guns are for us to act as a militia supplement to our own military, it's part of the reason we will NEVER be successfully invaded by hostiles. They couldn't fight house to house, AND take on the far-extremely-superior-than-any-other-force-on-the-planet United States military at the same time. It would take the Chinese AND the Russians together, both magically getting here undetected all at once by our massive naval, air, and now even space-born surveillance and weapons platforms. This isn't Call of Duty. We have smaller, faster missiles and lasers that shoot down ICBMs, no problem.
 
Last edited:

brad5452

New member
Joined
Dec 15, 2012
Messages
16
Points
0
Let's not kid ourselves. Even if Obama "wanted your guns," there's no way he would get them.

Exactly! ;)

Seriously though, while he wouldn't be able to take all of our guns, he certainly has the power to limit what we can get by a lot. He wants an assault weapons ban, and from there could try banning semi-auto weapons. Or worse, he could turn California's gun laws into federal law. In CA, you need to use a tool to switch magazines, but that's not the worst of it. There is no legal requirement to give citizens a carry license, even if the police have no reason not to. That effectively allows the state to indirectly ban guns from being carried. I think CA also has an assault weapons ban of it's own, though I could be mistaken. When open carry was legal there, the gun had to be unloaded. Silly laws like that can essentially ban guns.

Another thought I had: disorganized pistol-wielding public vs. US military.
Maybe we're fooling ourselves a little bit with this one?

It seems to be working for other countries, though they are less developed. Maybe I underestimate the military because of how poorly trained the police are? The police tried taking out a guy in New York near the empire state building because he killed an innocent coworker. If I remember correctly, there were two cops that were about 10 feet away from the guy, and they ended up shooting 3 civilians directly and about another six from ricochets. Cops only shoot for qualifications, but I assume the military does much more. That's why I don't trust cops to protect me, once or twice a year for qualifications is certainly not enough practice. That's irrelevant to the discussion, but I suppose it could be used to argue some other points.

Anyway, back to your point. It's a good point, but I think fighting is still worth a shot, should it be necessary. While the military is better organized, guerrilla warfare is very unpredictable. If the military is present, you're going to know it, so that could give an advantage. The Taliban held up much longer than I thought it would. They're basically a militia with contacts and large numbers. Also, some people in the military may find their orders to be immoral and refuse to carry them out. It happened before after Katrina when they had orders to take peoples' guns. Some soldiers refused because they're unlawful orders.


As are nuclear warheads and nitroglycerine. Still not items I'd recommend be unregulated or sold to just anyone. ;)


Smoke detectors and seatbelts on the other hand are extremely safe even when handled incorrectly.

Very good points. I'd counter it by saying regulating guns are more futile than regulating nukes and explosives though. Also, taking nitroglycerin from an ordinary civilian isn't going to prevent them from defending themselves against those who will make it illegally. Taking guns away from civilians on the other hand would.

An interesting but sad story, though not really a valid argument, there's a woman who was on Penn & Teller's Bullshit episode on gun control. She went to a restaurant with her parents and left her gun in the car because of (at the time) recent gun legislature in her state saying that you can't carry in restaurants. An armed psycho unsurprisingly ignored the law and killed several people, including both of her parents. She was understandably mad at legislators because she could have taken out the bad guy before many people were hurt if she had her gun with her.
 

Woodofcville

New member
Joined
Oct 24, 2009
Messages
1,184
Points
0
A semi-auto ban is INSANITY. Listen to yourselves. I assume when I hear people utter the words "semi-auto ban" and fail to include "crazy f*****g" in the same breath they mustn't know the difference between semi-automatic and fully-automatic weapons, which is sadly true for the majority of the armchair activists squawking about the "poor little children", littering my Facebook with tributes to people they never knew, and weren't emotionally attached to, and using this accident as political ammo for their whiney argument. It's wrong.
 




Top