Gun Debate Illustrates Two Different Americas

[Ray From Cleveland]

Democrats are born liars, so they tell us their are avid shooters and also have multiple guns in their home. I file those claims along with the libs that tell me they have their own business, work from home, or are independently wealthy, yet want government to take more money from them.

You’ve noticed that too.

“I’m a white guy BUT...”
“I am married 67 years BUT support gay marriage and divorce...”
“I’m really rich BUT wish the government would tax rich people more”

It is part of the mental illness known as liberalism. Not that they say it but that they think it convincing...because it would convince them.

Remember Al Gores imaginary rich friend who called him up and begged for higher taxes according to him? These people fall for it! So they think it will convince you.

We do get a lot of that here, don't we?

When I ask liberals what they are doing here all day and night, they usually tell me they are independently wealthy, have their own business, or comfortably retired from a well paying profession. Me? I'm the only truck driver here.

Don't get me wrong, we have "some" conservatives that say the same thing, but they are more believable because they are not promoting government to regulate businesses more, tax businesses more, or tax their personal income more.

Democrat politicians have some strange friends. I wonder if the guy that told Gore he needs more taxes taken away from him is the same friend Harry Weed had that said Romney didn't pay any income taxes?

 

[DOTR]

Back when I was a first year college student, I was taught the definition of a nation. Among other things, that definition showed a nation as being a single culture. But in America today, with respect to the subject of guns, we have 2 separate cultures. Those who like (and appreciate) them, and those who despise and fear them.

On USMB, I've heard gun owners referred to as "gun nuts", "gun freaks", etc. They're sometimes referred to as "the gun culture". Well, just as easily, those who dislike/fear guns, could be called the Anti-gun culture.

Perhaps this dichotomy has a relation to how Americans begin adulthood. Millions of high school kids go straight to college, never spending a minute in the military, or anywhere getting introduced to firearms. Most have never even touched a real gun, much less receive training on it. Making things worse, is that college teachers, who also never touched a gun, and whose left-wing political bearings, make them automatic gun opponents.

Millions of other kids bypass college entirely, and go straight into the military, after high school. Unlike the college kids, these young soldiers, sailors, marines, etc. aren't exposed to the leftist propaganda so prolific on college campuses, but they do have lots of introductions to firearms, thereby becoming familiar with and knowledgable of them. So, for the major pars of their adult lives (after college or the military), America is divided generally, into these 2 very differing groups.

Having spent 6 years in the US Army and Army National Guard, and then attending college for 4 years, I noticed a huge gap in gun perception in this 2 groups. I was often taken aback, sometimes humored, by the stiff and robotic way that my college cohorts perceived just the thought of guns. The college kids, with no direct exposure to guns, and lots of indoctrination against them, actually though that the only people to ordinarily possess a gun were police and criminals.

They really thought that if you weren't a cop or military person, you shouldn't have a gun, and had no idea why anyone else would. In contrast, my former Army National Guard buddies had whole collections guns, of various types, each suited for various purposes. They could take apart their M4A1s, M-14s, AR-15s, clean them, and put them back together blindfolded, in accordance with their military training.

How disconcerting it is to hear education system people worrying about things happening with guns in schools, when these fears emanate mostly from ignorance of guns, and how to handle and secure them. Equally perplexing and disturbing is their amazing lack of worry about the danger of guns not being there (in the schools), for the very necessary PROTECTION they provide.

Those who speak about the "gun culture" should do some self-examination, with regard to the anti-gun culture, and the hows and whys of its existence.

That definition of nation is very important. We fight globalists who conflate statehood with nationhood publicly but have very different plans for them both privately. Their hatred for the American nation is visceral while they work for a stronger more powerful government of the country. To them a country’s government is worth seizing to control and repress the nation it represents while convincing citizens loyalty to them is loyalty to the nation.
It shows in Hillary’s, and all Marxist democrat’s, revulsion for Anericans while claiming to love America. Hillary is right this moment overseas bashing American women for voting for their families rather than for her.

 

[P F Tinmore]

Back when I was a first year college student, I was taught the definition of a nation. Among other things, that definition showed a nation as being a single culture. But in America today, with respect to the subject of guns, we have 2 separate cultures. Those who like (and appreciate) them, and those who despise and fear them.

On USMB, I've heard gun owners referred to as "gun nuts", "gun freaks", etc. They're sometimes referred to as "the gun culture". Well, just as easily, those who dislike/fear guns, could be called the Anti-gun culture.

Perhaps this dichotomy has a relation to how Americans begin adulthood. Millions of high school kids go straight to college, never spending a minute in the military, or anywhere getting introduced to firearms. Most have never even touched a real gun, much less receive training on it. Making things worse, is that college teachers, who also never touched a gun, and whose left-wing political bearings, make them automatic gun opponents.

Millions of other kids bypass college entirely, and go straight into the military, after high school. Unlike the college kids, these young soldiers, sailors, marines, etc. aren't exposed to the leftist propaganda so prolific on college campuses, but they do have lots of introductions to firearms, thereby becoming familiar with and knowledgable of them. So, for the major pars of their adult lives (after college or the military), America is divided generally, into these 2 very differing groups.

Having spent 6 years in the US Army and Army National Guard, and then attending college for 4 years, I noticed a huge gap in gun perception in this 2 groups. I was often taken aback, sometimes humored, by the stiff and robotic way that my college cohorts perceived just the thought of guns. The college kids, with no direct exposure to guns, and lots of indoctrination against them, actually though that the only people to ordinarily possess a gun were police and criminals.

They really thought that if you weren't a cop or military person, you shouldn't have a gun, and had no idea why anyone else would. In contrast, my former Army National Guard buddies had whole collections guns, of various types, each suited for various purposes. They could take apart their M4A1s, M-14s, AR-15s, clean them, and put them back together blindfolded, in accordance with their military training.

How disconcerting it is to hear education system people worrying about things happening with guns in schools, when these fears emanate mostly from ignorance of guns, and how to handle and secure them. Equally perplexing and disturbing is their amazing lack of worry about the danger of guns not being there (in the schools), for the very necessary PROTECTION they provide.

Those who speak about the "gun culture" should do some self-examination, with regard to the anti-gun culture, and the hows and whys of its existence.

Once again you are talking out of your ass.

There are many gun owners, and people who appreciate guns- who also believe that there can and should be reasonable restrictions on guns or gun ownership

Should we allow machine guns? Bump stocks? .50 sniper rifles? Armor piercing ammo?

But no one wants to talk about anything in the middle- one is always claiming that the other sides once to take all of their guns, and the other side is always claiming that the first side doesn't care about gun violence.

The majority of Americans want both the right to own guns and also want reasonable restrictions on the purchase and ownership of firearms and their accessories.

That is what neither side wants to talk about.

You said, "shall we allow machine guns? Bump-stocks? .50cal. sniper rifles? Armor piercing ammo? Please point out those individuals who actually own "machine-guns."
While bump-stocks have been in the news because of the action of the Las Vegas shooter and they are being banned, it was only that one violent act in which a bump-stock was used, thus one crime with a bump-stock versus the vast majority of murders are committed by criminals using cheap "pistols" purchased on the black-market. To date, NO .50cal. sniper rifle has been used in a single crime. They're large and cumbersome and very impractical for mass carnage. If you want to cause numerous deaths, it's cheaper and more practical to steal a car or truck and just run down pedestrians. One terrorist managed to kill 85 people in Nice, France, simply by running down pedestrians. Why he went to the trouble of renting the truck instead of stealing one, is what I don't get. A lot of people are under the mistaken belief that the green-tipped NATO 5.56 ammunition is "armor-piercing," it's not classified by the military as "armor-piercing." The military considers that ammunition to have better penetrating power than the standard 5.56 ammunition, but not armor-piercing.
Remember this, there are between 85 and 100 million private citizens "legally" owning over 300 million firearms. Millions of those lawful gun-owning citizens own semi-automatic rifles with detachable magazines which hold a varied number of cartridges. They, like myself, are sportsmen at the ranges, aren't out committing crimes, have no intention of committing crimes and are no threat to you or those you love. The dangerous ones are the mentally unstable individuals who have managed to get their hands on a gun and the Islamists who believe every word in the Koran is the true word of some deity.
The 2nd Amendment wasn't designed for we sportsmen, nor was it designed for hunters. It was solely designed to provide a citizen defense for each state, should a tyrannical government become a threat and they meant not only a foreign tyrannical government, but also should our own government become tyrannical. The first thing the potentially tyrannical government institutes, as seen throughout history, is to disarm its populace so that they cannot fight back against oppressive/persecutory legislation.
The armament they envisioned for the citizens was for them to be similarly armed in small arms, as tyrannical government troops would be armed. Our populace complacently agreed to limiting access to fully automatic weapons, but not to strip us of arms that would be effective in a combat situation, should a foreign nation invade, or our nation attempt to disarm us and impose a tyrannical government such as communism or a theocracy.

Remember this, there are between 85 and 100 million private citizens "legally" owning over 300 million firearms. Millions of those lawful gun-owning citizens own semi-automatic rifles with detachable magazines which hold a varied number of cartridges.

So why should the government bounce all of those innocent people because of a few wackos?

 

[Brain357]

With the most guns in the world and the highest incarceration rate we still have much higher crime rates than other civilized countries with gun control. We also have many unique problems to our country like mass shootings, school shootings, over 50 police shot and killed each year, our police shoot many, many people, toddlers shoot people, road rage shootings, women shot by significant others.... Too many guns.
Why the US has the most mass shootings - CNN
US cops killed 100 times more than German police in 2015
Analysis | American toddlers are still shooting people on a weekly basis this year
Study: Road rage incidents involving guns are increasing

The “boyfriend loophole” in U.S. gun laws is costing women’s lives

More police officers die on the job in states with more guns

Fallen officers: 64 shot dead in the line of duty in 2016 - CNN

FBI: Violent crime increases for second straight year

Guns kill nearly 1,300 US children each year - CNN

Violent crime increases in right-to-carry states | Stanford News

There Have Been Over 200 School Shooting Incidents Since The Sandy Hook Massacre | HuffPost

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

But I thought you said it was laws that were working. NYC doesn't have walls either.

And federal laws work even better. When was the last school shooting in the UK?

Powerful remarks, and no doubt heartfelt. But a study of global mass-shooting incidents from 2009 to 2015 by the Crime Prevention Research Center, headed by economist John Lott, shows the U.S. doesn't lead the world in mass shootings. In fact, it doesn't even make the top 10, when measured by death rate per million population from mass public shootings.

So who's tops? Surprisingly, Norway is, with an outlier mass shooting death rate of 1.888 per million (high no doubt because of the rifle assault by political extremist Anders Brevik that claimed 77 lives in 2011). No. 2 is Serbia, at just 0.381, followed by France at 0.347, Macedonia at 0.337, and Albania at 0.206. Slovakia, Finland, Belgium, and Czech Republic all follow. Then comes the U.S., at No. 11, with a death rate of 0.089.

Sorry, Despite Gun-Control Advocates' Claims, U.S. Isn't The Worst Country For Mass Shootings | Stock News & Stock Market Analysis - IBD

Lott? That is too funny.

Who Is Behind the Lie That More Guns Makes Us Safe?
Furthermore, a panel of 16 researchers assembled by the National Academy of Science’s National Research Council studied Lott’s theory. Fifteen found there was “no credible evidence” for his theory.

This is a story about permits. What does that have to do with what I posted?

It proves your source is a complete joke. He claims more guns equals less crime. Yet with the most concealed carry ever what is happening?
FBI: Violent crime increases for second straight year

Lott’s data and honesty have been repeatedly called into question by other academics. In one case, he claimed to have done a survey that found in 98 percent of cases when a weapon is used in self-defense, it was only brandished and not fired. When other academics asked for his data, Lott claimed he lost it as the result of a catastrophic hard drive crash.

What you ignore is that since CCW programs started being adopted by more and more states, violent crime and gun crimes have been on a near steady decrease. That started in the early 90's and continues today.

There is an old saying: If it's not broke, don't fix it. As long as we have something that's working, why change anything?

However my pervious post was not about more guns. My post was to point out that even in countries that have stricter gun laws, we still only rank 11 in the world as far as mass shootings go.

Violent crime and murder relates more to race population than guns or no guns.

 

[MaryL]

Catholic church used to (perhaps still does) issue "Indulgences". Special favors. Buy your way into heaven. Liberals think along those same lines, you can buy yourself into redemption by just bashing guns. Now, I despise religion and loathe guns, having been actually abused by a asshole that had guns that was a stark raving drunken catholic Irish sot, he was wounded and psychological damaged in WW2. I voted for Trump, loser I am, thinking that might send a message to fellow Americans...

 

[Bootney Lee Farnsworth]

I had to keep my guns locked up so they would not sneak out at night and murder children. I suppose it's a good thing they all drowned in the Sabine River in a tragic boating accident.

 

[Brain357]

And federal laws work even better. When was the last school shooting in the UK?

Powerful remarks, and no doubt heartfelt. But a study of global mass-shooting incidents from 2009 to 2015 by the Crime Prevention Research Center, headed by economist John Lott, shows the U.S. doesn't lead the world in mass shootings. In fact, it doesn't even make the top 10, when measured by death rate per million population from mass public shootings.

So who's tops? Surprisingly, Norway is, with an outlier mass shooting death rate of 1.888 per million (high no doubt because of the rifle assault by political extremist Anders Brevik that claimed 77 lives in 2011). No. 2 is Serbia, at just 0.381, followed by France at 0.347, Macedonia at 0.337, and Albania at 0.206. Slovakia, Finland, Belgium, and Czech Republic all follow. Then comes the U.S., at No. 11, with a death rate of 0.089.

Sorry, Despite Gun-Control Advocates' Claims, U.S. Isn't The Worst Country For Mass Shootings | Stock News & Stock Market Analysis - IBD

Lott? That is too funny.

Who Is Behind the Lie That More Guns Makes Us Safe?
Furthermore, a panel of 16 researchers assembled by the National Academy of Science’s National Research Council studied Lott’s theory. Fifteen found there was “no credible evidence” for his theory.

This is a story about permits. What does that have to do with what I posted?

It proves your source is a complete joke. He claims more guns equals less crime. Yet with the most concealed carry ever what is happening?
FBI: Violent crime increases for second straight year

Lott’s data and honesty have been repeatedly called into question by other academics. In one case, he claimed to have done a survey that found in 98 percent of cases when a weapon is used in self-defense, it was only brandished and not fired. When other academics asked for his data, Lott claimed he lost it as the result of a catastrophic hard drive crash.

What you ignore is that since CCW programs started being adopted by more and more states, violent crime and gun crimes have been on a near steady decrease. That started in the early 90's and continues today.

There is an old saying: If it's not broke, don't fix it. As long as we have something that's working, why change anything?

However my pervious post was not about more guns. My post was to point out that even in countries that have stricter gun laws, we still only rank 11 in the world as far as mass shootings go.

Violent crime and murder relates more to race population than guns or no guns.

You just saw that violent crime has increased with CCW at it's height right? And you realize since the 90's we had the Clinton crime bill which lowered crime and we did get some gun control. But now that CCW is high violent crime is increasing....

 

[DOTR]

Catholic church used to (perhaps still does) issue "Indulgences". Special favors. Buy your way into heaven. Liberals think along those same lines, you can buy yourself into redemption by just bashing guns. Now, I Hate religion and despise guns, having actually abused by assholes that had guns period. I voted for Trump, loser I am, thinking that might send a message to fellow Americans...

If you voted for trump you were a winner for that moment Gibson girl.

 

[Bootney Lee Farnsworth]

The 1994 Gun Ban cause Columbine.

What a stupid mistake that bill was. Glad that piece of fuck died.

 

[Brain357]

Catholic church used to (perhaps still does) issue "Indulgences". Special favors. Buy your way into heaven. Liberals think along those same lines, you can buy yourself into redemption by just bashing guns. Now, I Hate religion and despise guns, having actually abused by assholes that had guns period. I voted for Trump, loser I am, thinking that might send a message to fellow Americans...

Trump? Ouch. I guess the other option wasn't that good...

 

[Brain357]

The 1994 Gun Ban cause Columbine.

What a stupid mistake that bill was. Glad that piece of fuck died.

The guns used in the worst mass shootings in recent years would have been banned. Could have saved lives, shame it is gone.

 

[Daryl Hunt]

Has anyone who keeps crowing about magazine capacity ever refuted this video?



Either provide evidence to the contrary or SHUT THE FUCK UP about magazine capacity.

Simple response. Bringing a lot of 30 round mags will bring a lot of ready to shoot ammo to the shoot. Making you haul around 5 30 round mags versus 5 10 round mags means you will bring 150 rounds versus 50 rounds for almost the same bulk and weight. It just might keep the body count down.

 

[Bootney Lee Farnsworth]

In 1996, I bought one of these for under $200.00:

It was just as deadly as one of these:

It just couldn't have a pistol grip.

What a stupid law made by ignorant communist morons.

 

[Bootney Lee Farnsworth]

Simple response. Bringing a lot of 30 round mags will bring a lot of ready to shoot ammo to the shoot. Making you haul around 5 30 round mags versus 5 10 round mags means you will bring 150 rounds versus 50 rounds for almost the same bulk and weight. It just might keep the body count down.

THat's bullshit.

Magazines weigh practically nothing. The cartridges make up all the weight. Many magazines are polymer now, so the weight is really low.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

Powerful remarks, and no doubt heartfelt. But a study of global mass-shooting incidents from 2009 to 2015 by the Crime Prevention Research Center, headed by economist John Lott, shows the U.S. doesn't lead the world in mass shootings. In fact, it doesn't even make the top 10, when measured by death rate per million population from mass public shootings.

So who's tops? Surprisingly, Norway is, with an outlier mass shooting death rate of 1.888 per million (high no doubt because of the rifle assault by political extremist Anders Brevik that claimed 77 lives in 2011). No. 2 is Serbia, at just 0.381, followed by France at 0.347, Macedonia at 0.337, and Albania at 0.206. Slovakia, Finland, Belgium, and Czech Republic all follow. Then comes the U.S., at No. 11, with a death rate of 0.089.

Sorry, Despite Gun-Control Advocates' Claims, U.S. Isn't The Worst Country For Mass Shootings | Stock News & Stock Market Analysis - IBD

Lott? That is too funny.

Who Is Behind the Lie That More Guns Makes Us Safe?
Furthermore, a panel of 16 researchers assembled by the National Academy of Science’s National Research Council studied Lott’s theory. Fifteen found there was “no credible evidence” for his theory.

This is a story about permits. What does that have to do with what I posted?

It proves your source is a complete joke. He claims more guns equals less crime. Yet with the most concealed carry ever what is happening?
FBI: Violent crime increases for second straight year

Lott’s data and honesty have been repeatedly called into question by other academics. In one case, he claimed to have done a survey that found in 98 percent of cases when a weapon is used in self-defense, it was only brandished and not fired. When other academics asked for his data, Lott claimed he lost it as the result of a catastrophic hard drive crash.

What you ignore is that since CCW programs started being adopted by more and more states, violent crime and gun crimes have been on a near steady decrease. That started in the early 90's and continues today.

There is an old saying: If it's not broke, don't fix it. As long as we have something that's working, why change anything?

However my pervious post was not about more guns. My post was to point out that even in countries that have stricter gun laws, we still only rank 11 in the world as far as mass shootings go.

Violent crime and murder relates more to race population than guns or no guns.

You just saw that violent crime has increased with CCW at it's height right? And you realize since the 90's we had the Clinton crime bill which lowered crime and we did get some gun control. But now that CCW is high violent crime is increasing....

No, it is not. Violent and gun crime did increase after Ferguson, but it leveled off and started to decline after that.

 

[Brain357]

Lott? That is too funny.

Who Is Behind the Lie That More Guns Makes Us Safe?
Furthermore, a panel of 16 researchers assembled by the National Academy of Science’s National Research Council studied Lott’s theory. Fifteen found there was “no credible evidence” for his theory.

This is a story about permits. What does that have to do with what I posted?

It proves your source is a complete joke. He claims more guns equals less crime. Yet with the most concealed carry ever what is happening?
FBI: Violent crime increases for second straight year

Lott’s data and honesty have been repeatedly called into question by other academics. In one case, he claimed to have done a survey that found in 98 percent of cases when a weapon is used in self-defense, it was only brandished and not fired. When other academics asked for his data, Lott claimed he lost it as the result of a catastrophic hard drive crash.

What you ignore is that since CCW programs started being adopted by more and more states, violent crime and gun crimes have been on a near steady decrease. That started in the early 90's and continues today.

There is an old saying: If it's not broke, don't fix it. As long as we have something that's working, why change anything?

However my pervious post was not about more guns. My post was to point out that even in countries that have stricter gun laws, we still only rank 11 in the world as far as mass shootings go.

Violent crime and murder relates more to race population than guns or no guns.

You just saw that violent crime has increased with CCW at it's height right? And you realize since the 90's we had the Clinton crime bill which lowered crime and we did get some gun control. But now that CCW is high violent crime is increasing....

No, it is not. Violent and gun crime did increase after Ferguson, but it leveled off and started to decline after that.

FBI: Violent crime increases for second straight year

 

[Daryl Hunt]

The Tommy Gun 100-Round Drum:

Available in the 1920s if I recall correctly.

Those were heavily regulated even 40 years ago moron. Since being heavily regulated they are very rare in crime. Gun control works.

They were regulated in 1934. I guess they got tired of getting all the civilians shot to ribbons in the cross fires by the gangsters killing off each other in the streets. Bullets have no friends.

 

[Brain357]

In 1996, I bought one of these for under $200.00:

It was just as deadly as one of these:

It just couldn't have a pistol grip.

What a stupid law made by ignorant communist morons.

Looks like that would have been an illegal magazine in 1996. Nice try though.

 

[Daryl Hunt]

Simple response. Bringing a lot of 30 round mags will bring a lot of ready to shoot ammo to the shoot. Making you haul around 5 30 round mags versus 5 10 round mags means you will bring 150 rounds versus 50 rounds for almost the same bulk and weight. It just might keep the body count down.

THat's bullshit.

Magazines weigh practically nothing. The cartridges make up all the weight. Many magazines are polymer now, so the weight is really low.

You completely missed the point. You only have X number of places to carry the mags where you can easily get at them when you are firing. I would think that 5 mags would be just about be the limit unless you have a nice room like the one in Nevada to fire from with a nice big table. If you are mobile, you will only be able to have easy access to about 5 mags. Now, those 30 capacity mags are big. They will be heavy with 30 rounds and take up a lot of space. But those 10 round mags will also take up a lot of space as well but not be as heavy. Still, you will probably be limited to only about 5 and still remain mobile with fast access.

Well, unless you are friggin super man like y ou are about to claim to be.