Incoming Recession 2022/2023

[jaygreenb]

Assuredly you wouldn't because after one or two people you'd be tackled to the ground by other people who witnessed what you did.

These fantasy land situations people come up with to convince themselves in their own mind that guns aren't the problem don't ever play out, but the ones where people take weapons designed to kill other people(per a retired army general who says ian AR 15 is a military weapon and anyone claiming otherwise is full of crap or just using semantics) play out ad nauseum over and over again and people are seemingly cool with kids being killed.

I am starting to think it's a mental illness in this country with gun cult or gun obsession. Or an addiction like an addiction to meth or heroin or crack. Gun junkies that will do anything to get their fix...even sacrifice kids.

While I have no objections with stricter controls or whatever on assaults' rifles. Simply banning them would not save all kids. It is not zero sum. You can also buy after market illegal parts to make even a handgun spray bullets. Its called a switch. Point is, these mentally ill people would still do this crap. You can make a lot of stuff with 3D printers now too

 

[BackInTheGame78]

There is some merit to that, but this would be borne out by disarmed publics worldwide in countries where there was prohibition being ruled by tyrannical dictators. This clearly isn’t the case. It might be the case in some future scenario.

As I’ve said, the US has its own unique position and is in a position where it isn’t able to turn back.

it’s fine if Americans believe gun ownership is a part of their unique culture and feel safer owning a weapon.

it’s purely notions that gun ownership makes a society safer, more polite or whatever, it doesn’t make sense and isn’t backed by stats.

this is why you tend to get quite angry responses, people tend to defend irrational beliefs strongly, especially when there’s national pride at stake, and Americans generally have excessive national pride

The problem is people look at the 2nd amendment and think it gives them the right to bear ANY arms. It doesn't. Firstly, it gives them the right as a well organized militia. Which means they should be forced to participate in regular militia like activities like training, combat, etc like militia used to do.

It's hilarious how they seemingly choose to ignore the parts they don't like or want to do but focus solely on the part they want...the right to bear arms.

Well, that doesn't give you free reign to bear ANY arms. They can and should ban any military style weapon like the AR-15 rifles that have no purpose other than killing large numbers of people. I have yet to see a proponent for these guns give a single valid use case other than what I just stated.

A retired army general said anyone claiming these aren't military weapons is full of crap or using semantics because they are used in identical fashion to how they use their M4s or M16s. The fact they don't have certain settings on them doesn't matter because they don't use them in that way in the military 95% of the time and use them the same way the civilian versions are setup.

People literally are obsessed with this notion that someone is going to take over the country if they don't have AR 15s or similar weapons but simply looking at other countries that have banned them shows this hasn't played out at all. What has played out is they don't have mass shootings anymore.

 

[Pierce Manhammer]

AK47s are tools are designed to kill or injure people.

A tape measure is a tool for measuring distances.

thanks

The logic of your statement doesn’t hold. I can kill you with a tape measure trust me. Again a tool if you were overfor a meal and I put my kimber cdp II pro, unloaded, slider back on the table would you urinate on yourself? I’d say yea. How about a ballpeen hammer? Do you own or have ever shot a firearm? I guess not. Have you ever been a victim of gun violence?

 

[Pierce Manhammer]

Disagree wholeheartedly, a piece of machined steel is not inherently evil. My 9” zwilling Henkels kitchen knife is more deadly then the bayonet I was issued in the army. I have not fired a firearm in years - it’s simply to expensive to do nowadays - my weapons are secured, but available should I ever need to resort to violence to defend myself or loved ones.

Should we outlaw kitchen knives? Machetes? I mean wow you can kill with them, right? Suffer the little children.

The first thing the Nazis did in Europe was confiscate weapons from civilians-it’s what tyrannical governments do.

Assuredly you wouldn't because after one or two people you'd be tackled to the ground by other people who witnessed what you did.

These fantasy land situations people come up with to convince themselves in their own mind that guns aren't the problem don't ever play out, but the ones where people take weapons designed to kill other people(per a retired army general who says ian AR 15 is a military weapon and anyone claiming otherwise is full of crap or just using semantics) play out ad nauseum over and over again and people are seemingly cool with kids being killed.

I am starting to think it's a mental illness in this country with gun cult or gun obsession. Or an addiction like an addiction to meth or heroin or crack. Gun junkies that will do anything to get their fix...even sacrifice kids.

 

[jaygreenb]

The problem is people look at the 2nd amendment and think it gives them the right to bear ANY arms. It doesn't. Firstly, it gives them the right as a well organized militia. Which means they should be forced to participate in regular militia like activities like training, combat, etc like militia used to do.

It's hilarious how they seemingly choose to ignore the parts they don't like or want to do but focus solely on the part they want...the right to bear arms.

Well, that doesn't give you free reign to bear ANY arms. They can and should ban any military style weapon like the AR-15 rifles that have no purpose other than killing large numbers of people. I have yet to see a proponent for these guns give a single valid use case other than what I just stated.

A retired army general said anyone claiming these aren't military weapons is full of crap or using semantics because they are used in identical fashion to how they use their M4s or M16s. The fact they don't have certain settings on them doesn't matter because they don't use them in that way in the military 95% of the time and use them the same way the civilian versions are setup.

People literally are obsessed with this notion that someone is going to take over the country if they don't have AR 15s or similar weapons but simply looking at other countries that have banned them shows this hasn't played out at all. What has played out is they don't have mass shootings anymore.

To stop mass shootings you would have to ban ALL guns. Even then, not sure it would end it either. There are too many guns in this country already and if illegal they would still get in here. While I have I don't have issues with banning all out assault rifles, its disingenuous to act like it solves the issue. With out addressing the mental health and societal aspect, that doesn't solve the problem

 

[BackInTheGame78]

The logic of your statement doesn’t hold. I can kill you with a tape measure trust me. Again a tool if you were overfor a meal and I put my kimber cdp II pro, unloaded, slider back on the table would you urinate on yourself? I’d say yea. How about a ballpeen hammer? Do you own or have ever shot a firearm? I guess not. Have you ever been a victim of gun violence?

You can kill someone with virtually anything but how confident are you going to feel walking into a school with a hammer versus a gun? Let's be real. No 18 year old scrawny incel is walking into a school with a hammer trying to kill people...

He goes there with a military style weapon and body armor because it makes him feel God-like and makes other people fear him.

Nobody is running away from that dude with a hammer...they are running towards him to take it out of his hands and use it on him.

 

[Pierce Manhammer]

I don’t need a pistol grip or flash suppressor to kill you with a long arm I can kill you just as easily with a mossberg 500 bird gun or a m1a, neither would be banned or is. Again platitudes.

The problem is people look at the 2nd amendment and think it gives them the right to bear ANY arms. It doesn't. Firstly, it gives them the right as a well organized militia. Which means they should be forced to participate in regular militia like activities like training, combat, etc like militia used to do.

It's hilarious how they seemingly choose to ignore the parts they don't like or want to do but focus solely on the part they want...the right to bear arms.

Well, that doesn't give you free reign to bear ANY arms. They can and should ban any military style weapon like the AR-15 rifles that have no purpose other than killing large numbers of people. I have yet to see a proponent for these guns give a single valid use case other than what I just stated.

A retired army general said anyone claiming these aren't military weapons is full of crap or using semantics because they are used in identical fashion to how they use their M4s or M16s. The fact they don't have certain settings on them doesn't matter because they don't use them in that way in the military 95% of the time and use them the same way the civilian versions are setup.

People literally are obsessed with this notion that someone is going to take over the country if they don't have AR 15s or similar weapons but simply looking at other countries that have banned them shows this hasn't played out at all. What has played out is they don't have mass shootings anymore.

 

[jaygreenb]

You can kill someone with virtually anything but how confident are you going to feel walking into a school with a hammer versus a gun? Let's be real. No 18 year old scrawny incel is walking into a school with a hammer trying to kill people...

He goes there with a military style weapon and body armor because it makes him feel God-like and makes other people fear him.

Nobody is running away from that dude with a hammer...they are running towards him to take it out of his hands and use it on him.

Are they running away from someone with a rifle, shotgun or handgun?

 

[Pierce Manhammer]

Thank you you just validated that it is a mental health issue.

You can kill someone with virtually anything but how confident are you going to feel walking into a school with a hammer versus a gun? Let's be real. No 18 year old scrawny incel is walking into a school with a hammer trying to kill people...

He goes there with a military style weapon and body armor because it makes him feel God-like and makes other people fear him.

Nobody is running away from that dude with a hammer...they are running towards him to take it out of his hands and use it on him.

 

[BackInTheGame78]

Disagree wholeheartedly, a piece of machined steel is not inherently evil. My 9” zwilling Henkels kitchen knife is more deadly then the bayonet I was issued in the army. I have not fired a firearm in years - it’s simply to expensive to do nowadays - my weapons are secured, but available should I ever need to resort to violence to defend myself or loved ones.

Should we outlaw kitchen knives? Machetes? I mean wow you can kill with them, right? Suffer the little children.

The first thing the Nazis did in Europe was confiscate weapons from civilians-it’s what tyrannical governments do.

You could use the same argument with that...so a few governments that did that are tyrannical but yet you seemingly ignore all the ones who did that are nothing close to tyrannical, of which there are far far more of?

You hone in and focus on the few cases it's happened and ignore the many that it didn't. And trust me, the US military has enough firepower that if they wanted to take over the country and install a tyrannical government they would and would do so quickly and far more easily than most people think...those AR15s don't do sh!t against long range weapons or dropping bombs from the skies.

All of the people who think their guns would prevent it would be cannon fodder.

 

[DonJuanjr]

The problem is people look at the 2nd amendment and think it gives them the right to bear ANY arms. It doesn't. Firstly, it gives them the right as a well organized militia.

It states "A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the PEOPLE... " It doesn't mean one has to be in a militia to secure these rights. These rights are secured so a militia can be formed when needed. What good does it do to form a militia without weapons to fight said tyranny?


"Okay everybody.... We are going to fight tyranny.... We are now organized.... Where do we get weapons to fight?" Doesn't make much sense does it..


Yes it does mean ANY ARMS.. A civilian could buy a warship in colonial days if they could afford it. That's the most advanced arms during that time...

 

[BackInTheGame78]

Are they running away from someone with a rifle, shotgun or handgun?

Pretty sure they would run away from anyone with a gun, unless you are behind them

 

[Pierce Manhammer]

See Afghanistan, it’s been attempted by the Russians, by US, by Hannibal, Xerxes, and countless others. A determined populace will not be subdued. You’re clearly not in tune with military vets or their value systems - the US military cannot be used to police the populace it’s codified in law - and service members would not repeat would not take the unlawful order to do so.

Molón Labe

You could use the same argument with that...so a few governments that did that are tyrannical but yet you seemingly ignore all the ones who did that are nothing close to tyrannical, of which there are far far more of?

You hone in and focus on the few cases it's happened and ignore the many that it didn't. And trust me, the US military has enough firepower that if they wanted to take over the country and install a tyrannical government they would and would do so quickly and far more easily than most people think...those AR15s don't do sh!t against long range weapons or dropping bombs from the skies.

All of the people who think their guns would prevent it would be cannon fodder.

 

[BackInTheGame78]

Thank you you just validated that it is a mental health issue.

Of course it is, but since there is no hope in fixing that on a wide scale, you have to prevent their ability to carry out their wishes. And having more guns doesn't seem to be doing it...because unless you are willing to die just like that kid who thinks he has nothing to live for, you aren't likely putting yourself in harms way...just like the Uvalde police that sat around doing nothing for an hour. They had plenty of guns. Didn't have the IDGAF if I live or die attitude tho to go take the dude on.

This is an argument similar to saying you shouldn't take matches away from kids because it's simply an education issue not an issue with matches. Are you leaving matches out in the open with 3 and 4 year old kids? Have a feeling your education would be wasted as you stand outside watching your house burn down.

 

[BackInTheGame78]

See Afghanistan, it’s been attempted by the Russians, by US, by Hannibal, Xerxes, and countless others. A determined populace will not be subdued. You’re clearly not in tune with military vets or their value systems - the US military cannot be used to police the populace it’s codified in law - and service members would not repeat would not take the unlawful order to do so.

Molón Labe

Seems like it works fine in the UK, in Canada, in New Zealand, in pretty much every other democratic country that's done it.

 

[jaygreenb]

Pretty sure they would run away from anyone with a gun, unless you are behind them

So are you talking about banning ALL guns or assault rifles? Which countries that allowed handguns, shotguns and rifles but only banned assault rifles did shootings stop?

 

[DonJuanjr]

Suppose somehow 300 million firearms disappeared.... It seems like if someone wanted to kill a lot of children, all they'd have to do is run them down in a parade... What then, ban automobiles? Sue Ford, Chevy, etc...

 

[jaygreenb]

I think part of the reason there is so much pushback is because they see it as not effective and a slow infringement on 2nd amendment rights. Say assault rifles get banned, then there is a mass shooting with a handgun. They would be then pushing to ban those. It's slow incremental steps to get rid of guns all together.

 

[jaygreenb]

You can literally turn a handgun into a machine gun with a $20 part. They are everywhere now and can be made pretty easily

 

[BackInTheGame78]

So are you talking about banning ALL guns or assault rifles? Which countries that allowed handguns, shotguns and rifles but only banned assault rifles did shootings stop?

England for one. No not all guns. Only the ones that are military style weapons designed for the sole purpose of killing other people, and which they are pretty much solely used for very effectively during these mass shooter events.