why the left hates guns

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

did it ever dawn on you that your interpretation was wrong and your entire post invalid?

of course, you can't ask for clarification. and i doubt you'd cut anyone else slack should the positions be reversed.

it should have dawned on you on my second post that we were talking about two different things. instead, you chose to continue along the path of "you lie"

Now nowhere did I say "you lie". That IS a lie, so I guess you do although now I've said it, I guess that makes you right after the fact.

Guess you should count yourself lucky that I didn't respond with:

"What makes you think we care"

[slim 1,525]

I can't tell if you are delusional, or you simply have no comprehension of what the 2nd amendment is. You misunderstand the scope and context in which the amendment was written.

You're the one saying it's about duck hunting.

Slave state? In what context would you need hollow point bullets, or assault rifles, or a large arsenal of weapons to protect your family? You live in Vermont, not Compton, what are you worried that a moose might break into your house?

Does the federal law differentiate between what you can own and where?

The SCOTUS and their rulings are based along ideological lines period. It's why we, as in the first world, don't run a country based on their decisions alone.

Are you aware of how this place works?

Thank you captain obvious, however, that specific comment was not relating to the Constitution specifically. The again, the Constitution also once insinuated that women had no right to vote, as did not slaves.. I'll leave it at that.

Yep. We fixed that. Why didn't we "fix" guns while we were at it?

You're located in the Midwest, which to me is similar to being in a 2nd world country. So I get you guys wouldn't have a clue about anything first world oriented - just guns, calibers, fire rates etc. Awesome.

Well, you live in DC which is like Somalia as you'd have us believe. Does that mean your rights change when you leave the beltway?

the Feds increased confusion with their use of the term "assault weapon" which the AR-15 is under their definition.

I bought one of the "compliant" AR-15s during the ban and it is "not" an assault rifle. As such, it is safe for private ownersip. In reality, the only difference between the rifle I have and the "assault weapons" that were banned is I cant affix a bayonet on mine and don't have a flash suppressor on the end.

What that really means is it's exactly the same rifle, it just looks "safer" on paper.

It's the same way with magazines and clips. Seriously, how many movies and people have you seen that call a magazine a clip?

Here in Ohio we recently had a law change. Previously, we'd been prohibited from transporting loaded magazines or any ammo "ready at hand" with firearms in vehicles. That's right, we couldn't have bullets ready to go in our guns. Since so many folks were using loaded clips for M-1 matches at Camp Perry, they've amended the wording to now say we can have loaded clips.

So.... many folks now carry M-1s as their "trunk guns."

[Ban Hammer 13,342]

Now nowhere did I say "you lie". That IS a lie, so I guess you do although now I've said it, I guess that makes you right after the fact.

Guess you should count yourself lucky that I didn't respond with:

"What makes you think we care"

"you lie" is a euphemism. and i know you don't care anyways.

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

How is that a euphemism?

A euphemism would be to say "economical with the truth", not "you lie".

[Captain Oates 911]

I can't see why guns are a political thing here

I got my first firearms licence in the UK in 1964 and became an officer at my first club for 14 years.

The members were a cross section of society with university Professors and engineers and bricklayers and doctors.

I currently own an AR-15 assault rifle and two Lee Enfield 303's and a CZ target rifle and two Ruger pistols and 9mm Glock. I have a concealed licence but only so I don't run foul of any regulations while I am transporting the guns. I don't carry them as I don't want to shoot someone or go to bed quaking with fear with a gun at the side of me.

Most of the gun stuff in the US is just political posturing and guns are used as an excuse. One of the guys who shoots with me is a Democratic Party local politician.

To me they are a hobby just like my boat and computers - I don't intend to overthrow the government under any circumstances but I would like to be a spectator when some of these militias try.

Edited August 4, 2010 by saywhat

[Heracles 417]

Are you aware of how this place works?

I don't believe anyone is arguing the rules alone on here, rather, they're arguing the rationality of having them. Hypothetically, if there was a clause permitting 12 year old foreign prostitutes, clearly you would support it.

Yep. We fixed that. Why didn't we "fix" guns while we were at it?

How long is a piece of string? Similar question. I'm not a mind reader or historian, so I cannot speak bout the past. What can speak about is the present.

Well, you live in DC which is like Somalia as you'd have us believe. Does that mean your rights change when you leave the beltway?

DC cannot do a damn thing about guns, when you can literally drive 10 minutes and purchase them without any license or check of any sort. Once again you dance around the question of if guns make you safer, then why is the United States homicide rate higher than pretty-much every other first world country that has them restricted or flat-out banned? The logical conclusion is that Constitution aside, gun ownership does not make a country safer. In fact, it increases the homicide rate.

Edited August 5, 2010 by Heracles

[slim 1,525]

Most of the gun stuff in the US is just political posturing and guns are used as an excuse.

By George, I think he's got it.

I don't believe anyone is arguing the rules alone on here, rather, they're arguing the rationality of having them. Hypothetically, if there was a clause permitting 12 year old foreign prostitutes, clearly you would support it.

No, we're definitely arguing the rules. I'm saying the 2nd amendment means one thing, others are saying it means another.

Also I wouldn't necessarily support everything that is the law. SCOTUS has sometimes interpreted things in ways I disagree with. However, that doesn't change the law.

How long is a piece of string? Similar question. I'm not a mind reader or historian, so I cannot speak bout the past. What can speak about is the present.

You just tried to use the past to prove your point. When I shot it down, you respond with this?

OK, speak on the present then. Why, if "mistakes" were made (or we've changed our mind since) have we changed certain parts of the constitution yet we haven't changed the part on guns?

DC cannot do a damn thing about guns, when you can literally drive 10 minutes and purchase them without any license or check of any sort.

Are you still insinuating that people who commit crimes with guns purchase and possess them legally? As if a license and/or background check would stop any of them from doing the murders, rapes, robberies or assaults (also illegal) that they're illegally doing anyway?

Once again you dance around the question of if guns make you safer, then why is the United States homicide rate higher than pretty-much every other first world country that has them restricted or flat-out banned?

For those who live a safe lifestyle, a criminal can more easily victimize them if they're unarmed. In that case a gun can make them safer.

As for us having a higher homicide rate, (which is 4-5 times higher, per capita) you can blame a myriad of reasons but there's not a single one to indicate the presence of firearms as the cause. Far from it, actually, since most places with higher homicide rates (urban areas with 20 to 50 times higher, per capita) typically have a ban or registration requirement for firearms - which pretty much proves your point of guns making people safer. Less "legal" guns = more crime. More "legal" guns = less crime. That's been proven time and again, most notably after concealed carry or training initiatives (like in Florida.)

On the contrary, there's plenty of evidence to suggest gun bans don't work at all. Take Australia for instance. The gun ban didn't reduce homicides at all.

The logical conclusion is that Constitution aside, gun ownership does not make a country safer. In fact, it increases the homicide rate.

You're less likely to be victimized in the US than any other first world country which is funny because we have a homicide rate that's almost 5 times higher than other places. How can that be?

How can you be safer in the US yet we have more homicides?

Because you have the right to defend yourself with a gun. There aren't many other first world countries where you can do that.

[I AM NOT THAT GUY 5,715]

Yeah I guess, throw in the term full auto and machine gun and things can really get crazy.

Oh I got a souped up Mini-14 that the State of California calls an assault weapon. Never mind that the accuracy on it is so bad that I would be better off throwing it at the person.

90% of the weapons are more accurate than 90% of the shooters. I thought the same thing about my VP70Z, until my gunsmith buddy showed how to fire a double action pistol, and hit things.

[Heracles 417]

You just tried to use the past to prove your point. When I shot it down, you respond with this?

OK, speak on the present then. Why, if "mistakes" were made (or we've changed our mind since) have we changed certain parts of the constitution yet we haven't changed the part on guns?

You asked a question that was unanswerable. The rules have not changed, because people like yourself want guns, not because it's illogical to ban them. Two of your presidents were killed and granddaddy Slim's still didn't want to ban or restrict them.

Are you still insinuating that people who commit crimes with guns purchase and possess them legally? As if a license and/or background check would stop any of them from doing the murders, rapes, robberies or assaults (also illegal) that they're illegally doing anyway?

No, I am insinuating that even the toughest ban in the world in one state cannot work when people can literally walk across states lines and purchase them legally, let alone illegally. Imaginary guns don't kill people.

For those who live a safe lifestyle, a criminal can more easily victimize them if they're unarmed. In that case a gun can make them safer.

A gun will make you safer if you are ready and waiting for the person - one scenario. Contrary to slim John Wayne fantasies, robberies do not go down like that. By the time a Slim realizes he is being robbed, the gun is already at your head. Spare me with the James Bond / Bourne fantasies that you will take them down.

As for us having a higher homicide rate, (which is 4-5 times higher, per capita) you can blame a myriad of reasons but there's not a single one to indicate the presence of firearms as the cause. Far from it, actually, since most places with higher homicide rates (urban areas with 20 to 50 times higher, per capita) typically have a ban or registration requirement for firearms - which pretty much proves your point of guns making people safer. Less "legal" guns = more crime. More "legal" guns = less crime. That's been proven time and again, most notably after concealed carry or training initiatives (like in Florida.)

Refer back to earlier point of being able to purchase guns in another state with no ban. Proven where? You mention facts and proven but typical fail to show where.

On the contrary, there's plenty of evidence to suggest gun bans don't work at all. Take Australia for instance. The gun ban didn't reduce homicides at all.

Actually as discussed earlier, over 10 years it reduced an already low rate by 24 percent. Once again, they didn't ban guys they restricted them. Had they banned them, the rate would probbaly be close to zero.

You're less likely to be victimized in the US than any other first world country which is funny because we have a homicide rate that's almost 5 times higher than other places. How can that be?

Victimized like pub fight. Yeah, I'd rather be in a pub fight than be shot dead.

How can you be safer in the US yet we have more homicides? Because you have the right to defend yourself with a gun.

Safer because you say. The locals news must be fabricated by the liberal media right.

There aren't many other first world countries where you can do that.

Gezz I wonder why that is. Why would most other first world countries restrict or ban guns. Take away their liberty and freedom right..

Edited August 5, 2010 by Heracles

[spookyturtle 9,465]

Now Australia is taking away toy guns too. Next thing you know knives will be outlawed and you won't be able to eat your steak.

[Heracles 417]

Now Australia is taking away toy guns too. Next thing you know knives will be outlawed and you won't be able to eat your steak.

Since you are good at finding articles, how about finding me a situations where Australians have been gunned down at work in the last 5 years. Which might I add, is extremely common here versus the rest of the first world.

[spookyturtle 9,465]

Since you are good at finding articles, how about finding me a situations where Australians have been gunned down at work in the last 5 years. Which might I add, is extremely common here versus the rest of the first world.

Everything is so common here versus the rest of the first world. For the life of me I can't figure out why everything in the world is compared to the US when it sucks so bad here. Really strange, isn't it?

[Heracles 417]

Everything is so common here versus the rest of the first world. For the life of me I can't figure out why everything in the world is compared to the US when it sucks so bad here. Really strange, isn't it?

Did you answer the question regarding whether those shot dead and their families are happy in the other thread? Keen to hear what you have to say. Money says you will divert attention or turn it on me.

[spookyturtle 9,465]

Did you answer the question regarding whether those shot dead and their families are happy in the other thread? Keen to hear what you have to say. Money says you will divert attention or turn it on me.

People were killed at work, a terrible tragedy. Bad things happen everywhere. If you like, I can give you some incidents from the promised land, but of course they won't count because guns weren't involved. There are unhappy families in Paradise too. Of course everyone I know judges their own happiness, they don't rely on someone else to tell them if they are happy or not.

[Heracles 417]

People were killed at work, a terrible tragedy. Bad things happen everywhere. If you like, I can give you some incidents from the promised land, but of course they won't count because guns weren't involved. There are unhappy families in Paradise too. Of course everyone I know judges their own happiness, they don't rely on someone else to tell them if they are happy or not.

US has 14 times greater population than Australia but 55 times the homicide rate; with 22 times the UK's rate but only 4.98 times their population.

If people like you don't waste so much time trying to attack reality, things might change here. Yet to people like you or Slim, there is no problem. The so-called haters must simply be making it up right?

Edited August 5, 2010 by Heracles