[split] Firearm Education Thread (lots of pics)
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
14-11-2014, 06:37 AM
RE: [split] Firearm Education Thread (lots of pics)
(13-11-2014 12:53 PM)Stevil Wrote:  
(13-11-2014 06:04 AM)Cathym112 Wrote:  How many times do I have to go over this? A criminal will always have access to weapons.
We can restrict their access to guns.

(13-11-2014 06:04 AM)Cathym112 Wrote:  Further, a criminal is not a lawful gun owner.
This is a bizzare thing to say. Anyone can pull a trigger. Anyone can become a criminal. Lawful gun owners can and do become criminals.
Lawful gun owners do get their guns stolen and into the hands of already established criminals.

(13-11-2014 06:04 AM)Cathym112 Wrote:  If you have been convicted of a felony, you cannot legally own or obtain a gun.
There are many gun homocides/massacres committed by people who have obtained some guns via retail avenues



(13-11-2014 06:04 AM)Cathym112 Wrote:  People are dangerous. With or without guns.
People are more dangerous with guns.

You are really frustrating on this topic.

How would you restrict a criminals access to weapons? Nyc doesn't allow guns within the parameters of the city. Criminals stormed the diamond district and stole 2 million worth of stuff and pistol whipped a guard. So what do you suggest? Tougher gun laws? Great idea! Tell me that part again where criminals obey laws?

The second a person not registered to the gun picks it up, they instantly become a criminal in that they do not have lawful possession of the gun.

Therefore, claiming that lawful gun owners become criminals is an illogical impossibility. Since the second they commit a crime, they are no longer a lawful gun owner. If my husband got convicted of assault - then bam - he instantly becomes an unlawful gun owner and would have to relinquish the guns.

Very few crimes are commited with legally obtained guns because the second a lawful owner gives access to their gun to an unregistered person - that is unlawful!

A gun is effective. No one is denying that. Further - a gun facilitates far more "weak" people to protect themselves than it facilitates a "weak" person to commit a crime.

There is no illusion that men have a disparity of force against a woman. Why would you deny a woman access to the most effective means to protect herself?

People are far more dangerous with a drugs and alcohol or religious fanaticism than they are a gun.

A little rudeness and disrespect can elevate a meaningless interaction to a battle of wills and add drama to an otherwise dull day - Bill Watterson
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like Cathym112's post
14-11-2014, 07:14 AM
RE: [split] Firearm Education Thread (lots of pics)
(13-11-2014 07:57 PM)Stevil Wrote:  
(13-11-2014 04:09 PM)Chas Wrote:  You are wrong. Knives are effective weapons and are the second most-used murder weapon and the third most common in armed robbery.
This doesn't address the question of what would happen if guns were removed from society.
Sure some people are killed with knives.
What we don't know is whether all these gun deaths would be directly translated into knive deaths.
From the link you provided it is interesting to see that gun based murders are 5 to 10 times higher than knife based murders.
The question should be:
Why are gun murders much higher than knife murders?
Is it because:
- guns are the preferred murder weapon
- guns are more effective at turning an altercation into a murder. i.e. more effective at killing rather than harming in comparison to knives.

If guns are the preferred murder weapon then the question is
Why the preference to use guns for murder?
is it because:
- guns are more convenient
- guns make the attacker brave and hence more likely to attack
- killers prefer to kill from a distance rather than close up

Of course there are other options too, but just some thoughts here.

Killers prefer to kill from a distance? What is your proof of this?


Guns also give an attacker pause if they believe the target also has a gun. Hence the presence of twarted crimes. The police are known to carry guns. Very few criminals try to fire at the police.

Guns are convenient to obtain? For criminals yes, and they will always be able to obtain them.

Guns for a lawful owner? Background check first, then gotta get my fingerprints, then I have to show proof of safety class, proof of law knowledge class, then I have to wait 12 weeks for the permit. Once I'm granted the permit, I go to a gun store, submit to another background check, purchase a gun, but I can't walk out the door with it until I take the receipt back to the police department, file an application to add that particular gun to my permit, get a new permit card with the serial numbers of that gun on the ID, then return to the gun store, show them proof of the permit, submit to another background check, then I can take the gun home.

Does that sound even remotely convenient to you?

A little rudeness and disrespect can elevate a meaningless interaction to a battle of wills and add drama to an otherwise dull day - Bill Watterson
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
14-11-2014, 07:38 AM
RE: [split] Firearm Education Thread (lots of pics)
(14-11-2014 05:10 AM)Metazoa Zeke Wrote:  
(13-11-2014 05:59 PM)Chas Wrote:  It's a self-defense skill that can be used to disarm regardless of weapon.
It's still not a viable solution for many people

It is still better safe than sorry, and even if somebody will never get in that situation they can teach it to someone else so that they can know what to do if they get into that situation

(13-11-2014 05:59 PM)Chas Wrote:  I can grab a gun and prevent it from firing. Not so much with a knife.

That is because you grab the arm or wrist, keep in mind the gun only needs a trigger pull for its power, a knife needs the person holding it for power.

You apparently didn't watch the video in that post.

Skepticism is not a position; it is an approach to claims.
Science is not a subject, but a method.
[Image: flagstiny%206.gif]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
14-11-2014, 07:47 AM
RE: [split] Firearm Education Thread (lots of pics)
(13-11-2014 07:57 PM)Stevil Wrote:  
(13-11-2014 04:09 PM)Chas Wrote:  You are wrong. Knives are effective weapons and are the second most-used murder weapon and the third most common in armed robbery.
This doesn't address the question of what would happen if guns were removed from society.

Guns won't be removed from society. Even in countries where firearm ownership is severely restricted, there are firearms.

Besides, the question isn't a good question. Look at Switzerland - high rate of gun ownership, low rate of crime.

Quote:Sure some people are killed with knives.
What we don't know is whether all these gun deaths would be directly translated into knive deaths.

Machetes and clubs were used by Hutus to kill nearly one million Tutsis in Rwanda in 100 days.

Quote:From the link you provided it is interesting to see that gun based murders are 5 to 10 times higher than knife based murders.
The question should be:
Why are gun murders much higher than knife murders?
Is it because:
- guns are the preferred murder weapon
- guns are more effective at turning an altercation into a murder. i.e. more effective at killing rather than harming in comparison to knives.

Probably it is the weapon of choice because it is easier to kill with a gun, likely due to its effectiveness at a distance and the psychological distance from the victim it provides.
It also makes it possible for the weak to kill the strong.

Quote:If guns are the preferred murder weapon then the question is
Why the preference to use guns for murder?
is it because:
- guns are more convenient
- guns make the attacker brave and hence more likely to attack
- killers prefer to kill from a distance rather than close up

Of course there are other options too, but just some thoughts here.

See above.

Skepticism is not a position; it is an approach to claims.
Science is not a subject, but a method.
[Image: flagstiny%206.gif]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Chas's post
14-11-2014, 07:52 AM
RE: [split] Firearm Education Thread (lots of pics)
(14-11-2014 07:14 AM)Cathym112 Wrote:  Guns for a lawful owner? Background check first, then gotta get my fingerprints, then I have to show proof of safety class, proof of law knowledge class, then I have to wait 12 weeks for the permit. Once I'm granted the permit, I go to a gun store, submit to another background check, purchase a gun, but I can't walk out the door with it until I take the receipt back to the police department, file an application to add that particular gun to my permit, get a new permit card with the serial numbers of that gun on the ID, then return to the gun store, show them proof of the permit, submit to another background check, then I can take the gun home.

Does that sound even remotely convenient to you?

Yikes - I thought Massachusetts was a pain. Where are you?

Skepticism is not a position; it is an approach to claims.
Science is not a subject, but a method.
[Image: flagstiny%206.gif]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
14-11-2014, 08:15 AM
RE: [split] Firearm Education Thread (lots of pics)
Popping in again: How does everybody here feel about the specifics of gun ownership?

(Obviously anubody can answer anything.)

Zeke:
-Would you feel better if people were restricted to the types of guns they could get? If so what types? Rifles? Pistols? Semi-auto? Full auto? I understand a bazooka, to reach for an extreme example, is a very large rifle/ small cannon; is that OK?

Pro-gun crowd in general:
-Are fully automatic weapons OK? Under what curcumstances would you reverse your answer?
What about the concealed carry laws? What do they do in areas that you're in? What should they do?
-Gun collecting is presumeably a thing you support; do you have a different opinion when the rationale behind owning the weapon is for the sake of owning the weapon as opposed to self defense or hunting or somethong?
-At what point is a, hypothetical, "best gun" (The gun that fires the most rounds, most accurately, with the greatest ability to contain rounds) overkill for the role it was purchased for?

Everybody:
-What would people say if the standard bullet type changed to less lethal amunition? (Rubber bullets or beanbag rounds or something.)
-How do you feel about other variations of bullets? Ones that aren't just slugs; FMJ, hollow points, whatever. They make the gun better at specific tasks: does that change the function or the validity of the task the ammo was purchased for?
- I mean: If you're purchasing a shotgun for home defense is it a better option to pick SABOT or birdshot?
-Would anybody ever need the more specialised ammo types?

Soulless mutants of muscle and intent. There are billions of us; hardy, smart and dangerous. Shaped by millions of years of death. We are the definitive alpha predator. We build monsters of fire and stone. We bottled the sun. We nailed our god to a stick.

In man's struggle against the world, bet on the man.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
14-11-2014, 08:51 AM
RE: [split] Firearm Education Thread (lots of pics)
(14-11-2014 08:15 AM)Stuffed_Assumption_Meringue Wrote:  Popping in again: How does everybody here feel about the specifics of gun ownership?

(Obviously anubody can answer anything.)
-Are fully automatic weapons OK? Under what curcumstances would you reverse your answer?

Automatic weapons require training/practice to use effectively. I don't think they serve any sporting purpose other than 'fun to shoot'.

Quote:What about the concealed carry laws? What do they do in areas that you're in? What should they do?

I don't understand what you're asking.

Quote:-Gun collecting is presumeably a thing you support; do you have a different opinion when the rationale behind owning the weapon is for the sake of owning the weapon as opposed to self defense or hunting or somethong?

'Gun collecting' is generally thought of has owning for the sake of having, not necessarily for use.

Quote:-At what point is a, hypothetical, "best gun" (The gun that fires the most rounds, most accurately, with the greatest ability to contain rounds) overkill for the role it was purchased for?

That's too nebulous. Hunting rifles usually have a magazine capacity of 1 to 10 rounds, but may be capable of having larger magazines. It partly depends on what you're hunting.
For defensive weapons, many consider more magazine capacity as better. That's one reason there are extended magazines. For concealed carry, there is a trade-off between size/weight and concealability.

Quote:Everybody:
-What would people say if the standard bullet type changed to less lethal amunition? (Rubber bullets or beanbag rounds or something.)

There is no 'standard bullet type'. And the criminals aren't going to pay any attention.

Quote:-How do you feel about other variations of bullets? Ones that aren't just slugs; FMJ, hollow points, whatever. They make the gun better at specific tasks: does that change the function or the validity of the task the ammo was purchased for?

I don't understand the question.

Quote:- I mean: If you're purchasing a shotgun for home defense is it a better option to pick SABOT or birdshot?

Neither, although either will be effective at close range.

Quote:-Would anybody ever need the more specialised ammo types?

What are these 'more specialised ammo types'? What's 'standard'?

[Image: sound7.jpg]

And that's just one caliber.

Skepticism is not a position; it is an approach to claims.
Science is not a subject, but a method.
[Image: flagstiny%206.gif]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
14-11-2014, 09:33 AM
RE: [split] Firearm Education Thread (lots of pics)
(13-11-2014 11:35 PM)Stevil Wrote:  
(13-11-2014 10:18 PM)wazzel Wrote:  I do not agree with your most assessment of crimes of passion.
Do you think most incidents of domestic violence end in murder?

Surely most of the time it is a slap, a punch, a choke, a push or something.
Most do not end in murder, even when a gun is in the house. I do not see where outlawing guns would stop most domestic violence occurrences.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
14-11-2014, 09:35 AM
RE: [split] Firearm Education Thread (lots of pics)
(14-11-2014 07:52 AM)Chas Wrote:  
(14-11-2014 07:14 AM)Cathym112 Wrote:  Guns for a lawful owner? Background check first, then gotta get my fingerprints, then I have to show proof of safety class, proof of law knowledge class, then I have to wait 12 weeks for the permit. Once I'm granted the permit, I go to a gun store, submit to another background check, purchase a gun, but I can't walk out the door with it until I take the receipt back to the police department, file an application to add that particular gun to my permit, get a new permit card with the serial numbers of that gun on the ID, then return to the gun store, show them proof of the permit, submit to another background check, then I can take the gun home.

Does that sound even remotely convenient to you?

Yikes - I thought Massachusetts was a pain. Where are you?

New York. In accordance with the Safe Act.

A little rudeness and disrespect can elevate a meaningless interaction to a battle of wills and add drama to an otherwise dull day - Bill Watterson
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
14-11-2014, 09:40 AM
RE: [split] Firearm Education Thread (lots of pics)
(14-11-2014 07:52 AM)Chas Wrote:  
(14-11-2014 07:14 AM)Cathym112 Wrote:  Guns for a lawful owner? Background check first, then gotta get my fingerprints, then I have to show proof of safety class, proof of law knowledge class, then I have to wait 12 weeks for the permit. Once I'm granted the permit, I go to a gun store, submit to another background check, purchase a gun, but I can't walk out the door with it until I take the receipt back to the police department, file an application to add that particular gun to my permit, get a new permit card with the serial numbers of that gun on the ID, then return to the gun store, show them proof of the permit, submit to another background check, then I can take the gun home.

Does that sound even remotely convenient to you?

Yikes - I thought Massachusetts was a pain. Where are you?

That is a pain. I had my background check and all that while I waited in the store. Took about half an hour. Probably helped than I have no criminal activity on my record, not even a parking ticket and this is the first gun I have purchased in 20 years.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: