Gun Debate Illustrates Two Different Americas

[protectionist]

Legal definition or popular definition ?

Whichever you choose, or think is proper/correct. Maybe you can post both. Shouldn't be too hard.

 

[protectionist]

Still living in the 1950's isn't healthy, things aren't black and white

leftists??

In many ways the 1950s were superior to the current day.

 

[protectionist]

Ok fine . The AR 15 Cruz used . That’s designed as a military weapon , right ? It’s designed to kill lots of people in a short amount of time .

FALSE! You just displayed your ignorance about guns, and blew away your previous post challenging my OP.

And no need to answer my question of post # 77, now. You already showed you don't know what an assault weapon or assault rifle is.

 

[mikegriffith1]

I think that part of the problem is that the gun lobby is refusing to support even modest, reasonable restrictions on guns, i.e., universal background checks and raising the age for rifles to 21.

 

[protectionist]

I think that part of the problem is that the gun lobby is refusing to support even modest, reasonable restrictions on guns, i.e., universal background checks and raising the age for rifles to 21.

Do you know know why they refuse to support that ?

 

[Winston]

The NRA does not represent gun owners. The NRA represents the gun industry. Those millions of dues paying members are fools. And I would be willing to bet that NRA loses more members per year than it gains new ones as more and more of those fools open their eyes.

Like raising the age to purchase any firearm to 21. The majority of the American public supports that position. Many NRA members also support raising the age to 21. But not the NRA because gun manufacturers and gun dealers don't want to lose the few under 21 year old customers that they have.

What about closing the gun show loophole? Again, I believe the majority of the American public supports closing that loophole and mandating permits for all gun purchases, both public and private. I don't doubt countless NRA members support it as well. But not the NRA. And the reason why is absolutely sinister.

Look. I have known some gun runners. Hell, North Carolina is a big supplier of guns on the Iron Pipeline. It ain't that damn hard. You go to a gun show. You purchase a half dozen guns or so, sometimes in the parking lot. Then you take a drive up I-95, or better, head to Chicago.

Now, all the NRA talk defending that loophole; about making gun transactions bothersome, or restricting personal freedoms, or even passing down guns to heirs becoming problematic, is nothing but a big smoke screen. What they are really defending, what they are really worried about, is the continued ability to circumvent gun laws and, just like the age requirement, reach those customers that are members of MS-13, or convicted felons, are just some person convicted of domestic violence that is prevented from legally owning a gun. They don't represent their members, they don't represent the people, they don't even give a fat rat's ass about the second amendment except to the extent that it enables the GUN INDUSTRY to peddle their wares to, not just "law-abiding citizens", but anyone and everyone else that can push a few dollars across the counter. Their immigration, legal, or mental status be damned.

What you call a smokescreen is in your post, but not in the NRA's website. Is this strawman talk ? Yes, the NRA does oppose background checks at gun shows. Do you know why ?

Why yes, I believe I already mentioned why they oppose background checks at gun shows. Because the gun manufacturers would lose a major conduit to some of their most important customers. The gang bangers, the convicted felons, and all the others that are not legally entitled to a firearm.

 

[protectionist]

Why yes, I believe I already mentioned why they oppose background checks at gun shows. Because the gun manufacturers would lose a major conduit to some of their most important customers. The gang bangers, the convicted felons, and all the others that are not legally entitled to a firearm.

And I just refuted that by telling you none of that hearsay, CNN fake news is being spoken by the NRA, and not in their website. What is spoken by them is that

1) criminals can easily obtain guns even with universal background checks,

2)few guns used by criminals have come from gun shows, and

3)universal background checks is equivalent to a gun registry - what Adolf Hitler used to confiscate all guns in Germany, and turn the country into a fascist dictatorship, ruled by him.

 

[Lysistrata]

The supposed "anti-gun culture" has arisen from the downturn in overall American cultural values and civility. I was raised with guns, which my father kept locked up, and shot them (at targets). BUT, this was at a time when no one threatened each other, one didn't see pictures of so-called Americans loitering around on American street corners dressed in camouflage costumes brandishing military weaponry, no one was pushing the absurd idea that the point of having guns was to "protect" oneself from our own government rather than foreign invasion, as was the case when the 2nd Amendment was written, before the invention of automatic weaponry and before the creation of the National Guard, no one sent threatening messages to their fellow Americans with whom they disagree, such as:

"I am buying up my ammo right now you filthy, ugly, disgusting, fat, stupid, cruel, anti-Christian piece of liberal scum," she read aloud. "I am getting ready for the war so I hope you have a good hiding place, you sick, disgusting, miserable, piece of degenerate lesbian scum."
​

we weren't continually experiencing mass shootings, and race gangs weren't running around in the woods playing soldier. The only problem that might implicate guns in some sections of the country during this time was racial hostility.

My father was a gentleman with a quiet demeanor, a strong sense of ethics, a respect for humanity, and impeccable manners. He would never, ever have indulged in the sort of behavior I've described.

The population of untrustworthy and unethical low-lifes in this country has seemed to increase exponentially in the last few decades, while the weaponry they have access to has increased exponentially in power. This uncivilized and sometimes mentally-ill behavior is the source of "anti-gun culture."

Even if all this were true it doesn't explain why the anti-gun culture opposes guns in schools in the hands of well vetted, well trained, GOOD guys.

Guns should not be in schools. That is no place for them. Absolutely not. We don't turn our nation into an armed camp. We take away the military-style rapid-fire weapons. There is no need for any regular citizen to have them. Enough is enough. Macho bullshit should not outweigh our safety, and the gun control pretty much is based on macho bullshit.

 

[protectionist]

Guns should not be in schools. That is no place for them. Absolutely not. We don't turn our nation into an armed camp. We take away the military-style rapid-fire weapons. There is no need for any regular citizen to have them. Enough is enough. Macho bullshit should not outweigh our safety, and the gun control pretty much is based on macho bullshit.

I will address your comments one at a time >>

1. RE: >> "We take away the military-style rapid-fire weapons. There is no need for any regular citizen to have them."
And how about if this shows up on your front lawn (not in a friendly mood) >>

OR >>>

2. RE: >> "Guns should not be in schools. That is no place for them."

And when another mass shooter (or 2 or 3 ) shows up at the next school, how do you propose to stop them ? Offer them a lollipop ? An ice cream cone ? Sing them a song ?

To supply each school (and many have multiple buildings) with the 10 or 12 SRO's they would need, is way beyond the $400 Million that Gov. Scott proposed in Florida. This would put just ONE SRO in each school, while still leaving 80 schools in the state completely unarmed and defenseless.

Truth is, there is no way to protect/secure the schools, without school employee arming, which is almost virtually free of cost, with the employees (teachers, maintenance crew, janitors, administrtors, etc) acting as security, in volunteer status, and fully vetted & trained.

 

[Rustic]

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.

“Gun nuts” are unwavering extremists . They assume every gun owner thinks like them . They don’t .

They assume any gun control = banning all guns . Which is rediculous .

The gun nut is a misonfirmist when it comes to gun debates . And spare me with the “you are ignorant of guns “ gun nerd move . You try to bully people with gun minutia to avoid the facts about assault weapons .

Progressive ideas and thoughts on the subject or not acceptable

What’s not acceptable? Keeping guns from violent people wh mental issues?

Progressives ideas, They don’t understand firearms and the reality of firearm ownership and they don’t compromise.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

The supposed "anti-gun culture" has arisen from the downturn in overall American cultural values and civility. I was raised with guns, which my father kept locked up, and shot them (at targets). BUT, this was at a time when no one threatened each other, one didn't see pictures of so-called Americans loitering around on American street corners dressed in camouflage costumes brandishing military weaponry, no one was pushing the absurd idea that the point of having guns was to "protect" oneself from our own government rather than foreign invasion, as was the case when the 2nd Amendment was written, before the invention of automatic weaponry and before the creation of the National Guard, no one sent threatening messages to their fellow Americans with whom they disagree, such as:

"I am buying up my ammo right now you filthy, ugly, disgusting, fat, stupid, cruel, anti-Christian piece of liberal scum," she read aloud. "I am getting ready for the war so I hope you have a good hiding place, you sick, disgusting, miserable, piece of degenerate lesbian scum."
​

we weren't continually experiencing mass shootings, and race gangs weren't running around in the woods playing soldier. The only problem that might implicate guns in some sections of the country during this time was racial hostility.

My father was a gentleman with a quiet demeanor, a strong sense of ethics, a respect for humanity, and impeccable manners. He would never, ever have indulged in the sort of behavior I've described.

The population of untrustworthy and unethical low-lifes in this country has seemed to increase exponentially in the last few decades, while the weaponry they have access to has increased exponentially in power. This uncivilized and sometimes mentally-ill behavior is the source of "anti-gun culture."

Even if all this were true it doesn't explain why the anti-gun culture opposes guns in schools in the hands of well vetted, well trained, GOOD guys.

Guns should not be in schools. That is no place for them. Absolutely not. We don't turn our nation into an armed camp. We take away the military-style rapid-fire weapons. There is no need for any regular citizen to have them. Enough is enough. Macho bullshit should not outweigh our safety, and the gun control pretty much is based on macho bullshit.

Guns should not be in schools, but WTF do you do when the bad guys bring those guns to schools trying to kill as many people as they can?

The problem with you people is you know nothing about guns. So you make "military style" weapons illegal and the next shooter brings a handgun that does the exact same thing. Then what do you do? Because after all, the only difference between those military style weapons and a semi-automatic handgun is the handgun looks less scarier. They both do the same thing: fire a round every time you squeeze the trigger.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

I think that part of the problem is that the gun lobby is refusing to support even modest, reasonable restrictions on guns, i.e., universal background checks and raising the age for rifles to 21.

Can you blame them?

If the object is trying to stop school (mass) shootings, does anybody really believe that a background check or age restriction will actually do that?

 

[protectionist]

Can you blame them?

If the object is trying to stop school (mass) shootings, does anybody really believe that a background check or age restriction will actually do that?

The NRA is worried about universal background checks morphing into gun registry - what Hitler used to confiscate guns. I'm a bit worried about it too.

 

[protectionist]

Guns should not be in schools, but WTF do you do when the bad guys bring those guns to schools trying to kill as many people as they can?

The problem with you people is you know nothing about guns. So you make "military style" weapons illegal and the next shooter brings a handgun that does the exact same thing. Then what do you do? Because after all, the only difference between those military style weapons and a semi-automatic handgun is the handgun looks less scarier. They both do the same thing: fire a round every time you squeeze the trigger.

I'm still waiting to hear her answer about the ice cream cones and lollipops.

 

[francoHFW]

The NRA does not represent gun owners. The NRA represents the gun industry. Those millions of dues paying members are fools. And I would be willing to bet that NRA loses more members per year than it gains new ones as more and more of those fools open their eyes.

Like raising the age to purchase any firearm to 21. The majority of the American public supports that position. Many NRA members also support raising the age to 21. But not the NRA because gun manufacturers and gun dealers don't want to lose the few under 21 year old customers that they have.

What about closing the gun show loophole? Again, I believe the majority of the American public supports closing that loophole and mandating permits for all gun purchases, both public and private. I don't doubt countless NRA members support it as well. But not the NRA. And the reason why is absolutely sinister.

Look. I have known some gun runners. Hell, North Carolina is a big supplier of guns on the Iron Pipeline. It ain't that damn hard. You go to a gun show. You purchase a half dozen guns or so, sometimes in the parking lot. Then you take a drive up I-95, or better, head to Chicago.

Now, all the NRA talk defending that loophole; about making gun transactions bothersome, or restricting personal freedoms, or even passing down guns to heirs becoming problematic, is nothing but a big smoke screen. What they are really defending, what they are really worried about, is the continued ability to circumvent gun laws and, just like the age requirement, reach those customers that are members of MS-13, or convicted felons, are just some person convicted of domestic violence that is prevented from legally owning a gun. They don't represent their members, they don't represent the people, they don't even give a fat rat's ass about the second amendment except to the extent that it enables the GUN INDUSTRY to peddle their wares to, not just "law-abiding citizens", but anyone and everyone else that can push a few dollars across the counter. Their immigration, legal, or mental status be damned.

What you call a smokescreen is in your post, but not in the NRA's website. Is this strawman talk ? Yes, the NRA does oppose background checks at gun shows. Do you know why ?

Because they will do anything to sell more guns for their corporate gun maker Masters duh...

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

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.

“Gun nuts” are unwavering extremists . They assume every gun owner thinks like them . They don’t .

They assume any gun control = banning all guns . Which is rediculous .

The gun nut is a misonfirmist when it comes to gun debates . And spare me with the “you are ignorant of guns “ gun nerd move . You try to bully people with gun minutia to avoid the facts about assault weapons .

You want to discuss facts about assault weapons? Go ahead, you first. I'll be glad to talk about assault weapons with you any time.

Ok fine . The AR 15 Cruz used . That’s designed as a military weapon , right ? It’s designed to kill lots of people in a short amount of time .

All guns are designed to kill if need be. Nukes are designed to kill too. But if nukes are in the wrong hands, they can be used for evil purposes.

The fact of the matter is we had an "assault weapons" ban in this country for ten years. After those ten years, it was found that it didn't do any good, so they didn't renew it. More people are killed by hands and feet than assault rifles every year.

Instead of boring you with my personal favorite sites, I thought I would post from one of your own about assault rifles; the New York Times.

The Assault Weapon Myth

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

Guns should not be in schools, but WTF do you do when the bad guys bring those guns to schools trying to kill as many people as they can?

The problem with you people is you know nothing about guns. So you make "military style" weapons illegal and the next shooter brings a handgun that does the exact same thing. Then what do you do? Because after all, the only difference between those military style weapons and a semi-automatic handgun is the handgun looks less scarier. They both do the same thing: fire a round every time you squeeze the trigger.

I'm still waiting to hear her answer about the ice cream cones and lollipops.

The liberal mentality is incredible. Instead of trying to use more guns to protect children in school, try to disarm over 100 million Americans instead to solve the problem.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

Can you blame them?

If the object is trying to stop school (mass) shootings, does anybody really believe that a background check or age restriction will actually do that?

The NRA is worried about universal background checks morphing into gun registry - what Hitler used to confiscate guns. I'm a bit worried about it too.

That's not my worry. My worry is giving them the first step. Because there never is only one step with a liberal.

So we make it illegal for anybody under 21 to purchase an AR. The next school or mass shooting takes place, do you think they will still be happy with their AR age requirement? Of course not. Then it's off to step 2, then step 3, then step 4...........

Liberals are like terrorists in that they are very patient people. They use incrementalism to achieve their ultimate goal.

I remember when the environmentalists only wanted to eliminate lead in gasoline. That's all they wanted to be happy. Look at us today!

I remember when the left insisted we just get rid of smoking in movie theaters. That's all they wanted......movie theaters. Today, you can't even smoke outdoors in some places, and in many places, inside.

I remember when the left only wanted gays out of the closet. That's all they wanted, just to be left alone. Today, states are forced to accept their marriages. They are adopting children that normal couples could otherwise have.

So it never stops at one point with liberals. Their first step is just a stepping stone to many more steps in the future; guns no different.

 

[protectionist]

Because they will do anything to sell more guns for their corporate gun maker Masters duh...

Already answered in Posts # 75 and 93.

 

[protectionist]

The liberal mentality is incredible. Instead of trying to use more guns to protect children in school, try to disarm over 100 million Americans instead to solve the problem.

Incredible indeed. After Parkland, one would think a CHANGE would be hastily brought about, so what how liberals respond ? With more of the same > gun-free zone schools. Yikes! is there a doctor in the house ? I mean really.