Batman Shooting

Off Topic Politics & World Issues
81

[quote]theBird wrote:
In Australia we changed the laws and made it almost impossible for people to own a gun. Even proffesional sport shooters need to jump through alot of hoops before they get to have their own gun.

IMO, it has made the country a safer place. We havent had a mass shooting since the laws have changed. The last mass shooting we had was in Tasmania, atleast 10 years ago now, before the laws changed.

Yes, by making guns illegal wont stop people killing people. But it does make it alot harder.

Let go off your guns America!

tweet[/quote].

The rifle and especially the handgun are the most liberating technologies ever invented. The king’s men don’t come crashing through the door a lot if they think there is someone in there with a .357 Magnum who knows how to use it.

The tax man doesn’t come and simply haul away whatever they want if they are greeted by a man bearing a rifle.

Do you think your freedoms will last forever now that you are defenseless? LOLOLOLOLOLOL!!!

82

[quote]sufiandy wrote:

[quote]ZEB wrote:
YOU said something on the order of people watching a comic book hero movie at 12:30 in the morning wouldn’t be the proper people to arm.
[/quote]

I said they would be less likely to be armed than other demographics given everyone older than 18 is ABLE to purchase and carry a gun.

If your idea was to issue free guns to everyone when they turn 18 then I was wrong and you were correct, but that also would mean your a bit crazy and a hypocrite since the average person should not carry a gun and giving away free stuff is a little liberal for you.[/quote]

I now agree with TB, you are an idiot.

You have no chance of understanding my very simple original point.

Bye.

83

[quote]ZEB wrote:

[quote]sufiandy wrote:

[quote]ZEB wrote:
YOU said something on the order of people watching a comic book hero movie at 12:30 in the morning wouldn’t be the proper people to arm.
[/quote]

I said they would be less likely to be armed than other demographics given everyone older than 18 is ABLE to purchase and carry a gun.

If your idea was to issue free guns to everyone when they turn 18 then I was wrong and you were correct, but that also would mean your a bit crazy and a hypocrite since the average person should not carry a gun and giving away free stuff is a little liberal for you.[/quote]

I now agree with TB, you are an idiot.

You have no chance of understanding my very simple original point.

Bye.[/quote]

I understand it, you are just unopened to talking to people like me about this issues because you are so bigoted. If you don’t think your solution to this problem may not be as affective as you think and may even have some downsides you are just thinking in too simple of terms to deal with real issues like this.

84

[quote]theBird wrote:
Let go off your guns America!

tweet[/quote]

No thank you, because of:

[quote]orion wrote:
every government in the history of mankind has spiraled into a tyranny.

Well, except for those who were wiped out by tyrannies.

[/quote]

Now I know I stand no chance against the tanks and bombs and better weapons and training. But at least I will go down as a free man, and not bent over with no choice but to be a victim.

I prefer access to the same weapons as my enemy.

85

It doesn’t look a lot like it, but just in case people actually care about the victims and not just espousing their political slant:

http://sphotos-a.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-ash3/547823_930830890768_1446245037_n.jpg

Hopefully, that’ll either make a link or a photo.

86

[quote]kamui wrote:
When everyone owns a wooden club, the bad guys have silex spears
when everyone owns a silex spear, the bad guys have bronze ones
when everyone owns a bronze spear, the bad guys have iron ones
when everyone owns iron weapons, the bad guys have guns.
when everyone will own a gun, the bad guys will simply got deadlier illegal ones.

now, I’m not saying that the carrying of firearms should be outlawed. There is a few good arguments in favor of concealed carry. but deterrence is not the best of them.
It may work for a while, but then the bad guys will adapt, as usual. [/quote]
I thought about a similar concept as well, but what are those “deadlier illegal ones”. You gave specifics for those other iterations. You also used the future for guns - so does something need to be invented?

I only thought of explosives, and that would probably not bring as much enjoyment. Plus they might actually get away with it, and miss out on there 15 minutes of fame. Or some other reason, but explosives exist now - so they’ve gotta have some reason(s) for still choosing guns

I’m sure more advanced weapons are being developed world wide - regardless of gun laws.

87

Wow. On the first page there are actually people arguing for MORE guns.

You know how many people have been killed by assault weapons in australia since they were banned?

Neither do I. Because it hasn’t happened that much. How many times has this happened in the states now? EVERY time you guys go to the supermarket or the movies, you must be wondering if some lunatic is going to shoot the place up!

And yet you still cling to the idea that MORE armed people is the way to go.

You guys be crazy. If he didn’t have a fucking assault rifle and body armour, which was bought completely legally, he would have had to work MUCH harder to do what he did as opposed to walk into a shop and buy them.

But you know, cling to your opinions. TC just wrote about this the other day.

If you don’t change anything, then nothing’s going to change. So keep it up. I guess.

88

Trying for an objective assessment.

  1. The size of the magazine may have been a blessing in disguise. My understanding is he experienced a jam, likely a double feed. It could have been dumb luck, but in my experience the very large magazines springs are going to have a certain pressure pushing up against the rounds. As that pressure changes, it increases the likelihood for there to be a jam. It will usually happen very early, first few rounds you fire off, or very late as you are firing off your last rounds.

Being around this sort of weapon, my personal preference would be loading 20-25 rounds into several 30 round magazines. The amount of time it takes someone with very little practice to tap rack bang is miniscule, far less likely to jam or double feed.

  1. The sort of armor civilians are allowed to purchase is generally better than the best legal pistol round you can get. I think the only vulnerable spot on the guy would have been an abbreviated T, meaning you are going for his eyes down to his throat, rather than from his cranium to his heart.

Not really here to weigh in on gun laws, but I come from a family and background where we really have a lot of respect for weapons and their capabilities. As someone who has always been a safety first guy, I’m not opposed to having something like a 1 time required safety handling class and psych evaluation for those interested in purchasing a weapon.

I don’t understand a would be ban on assault rifles when I know of several hunting rifles or inbetween weapons that would have worked just as well as an AR15 or AR15 knockoff. Just because a rifle has wood grain, and isn’t tactical black or desert, doesn’t mean it isn’t effective.

89

[quote]Sxio wrote:

If he didn’t have a fucking assault rifle and body armour, which was bought completely legally, he would have had to work MUCH harder to do what he did as opposed to walk into a shop and buy them.
[/quote]

I live in a state everything he bought is illegal.

I could get worse weapons before lunch. In fact I would have more trouble withdrawing the cash out of the bank than I would securing a completely illegal weapon.

I mean drug regulations work so well in preventing people from getting high.

[quote]Severiano wrote:
Just because a rifle has wood grain, and isn’t tactical black or desert, doesn’t mean it isn’t effective. [/quote]

Well, if the weapon he used didn’t look like all the ones in the movies (black/desert) then the press wouldn’t be able to have a field day and demonize guns and gun ownership.

What would be the fun in that?

90

[quote]countingbeans wrote:

[quote]Sxio wrote:

If he didn’t have a fucking assault rifle and body armour, which was bought completely legally, he would have had to work MUCH harder to do what he did as opposed to walk into a shop and buy them.
[/quote]

I live in a state everything he bought is illegal.

I could get worse weapons before lunch. In fact I would have more trouble withdrawing the cash out of the bank than I would securing a completely illegal weapon.

I mean drug regulations work so well in preventing people from getting high.

[quote]Severiano wrote:
Just because a rifle has wood grain, and isn’t tactical black or desert, doesn’t mean it isn’t effective. [/quote]

Well, if the weapon he used didn’t look like all the ones in the movies (black/desert) then the press wouldn’t be able to have a field day and demonize guns and gun ownership.

What would be the fun in that?

[/quote]

Yeah, I don’t know that banning assault rifles does a thing, when I can get a semi auto hunting rifle and really achieve the same thing.

I think the magazine really is a non issue when 30 round magazines would have been more reliable, probably wouldn’t have been a, “jam.” Having been a bit of a shooter myself, I don’t get the point of civilians having such large capacity magazines, but then most civilians cant shoot for shit anyhow.

I still think something should come about because of this. If we don’t have a problem with the weapons themselves, we MUST have a problem with the sort of people who end up getting them, and we have to do something more to prevent this sort of thing from happening. I really think a legit psych evaluation could help so long as it doesn’t turn into a joke. It might end up making it more expensive to purchase weapons, but I think given the amount of weapons and the seeming ease for crazy people to acquire them, something has to be done.

91

[quote]sufiandy wrote:

I understand it, you are just unopened to talking to people like me about this issues because you are so bigoted.[/quote]

I am bigoted against morons like you. Other than that I’ve said nothing that has anything to do with bigotry. And the fact that you are using that word is because on several occasions on religious topics I’ve called you bigoted against those of us who believe in God and YOU just can’t let it go. You are quite transparent.

As for the facts of our most recent debate:

Fact: You questioned whether or not people like those who would attend a movie about a comic book hero at 12:30 would be able to obtain a gun and know how to use it.

Fact: I point out to you that the majority of those killed were males between the ages of 18 and 30 the very demographic that is in the military.

Fact: You offer no solution to the problem.

Fact: I did offer a solution to the problem. I said that if more people were armed and knew how to use a gun that perhaps less people would have been harmed by this mad man. And that those who want to perpetrate such a crime may think twice.

Basically you are an idiot unable to follow a simple conversation. But it’s not your fault, it’s mine. I knew this going into the debate. You were spotted long ago for being weak in the intelligence department.

So after we go back and forth a few more times let’s make a deal to put each other on ignore–kay?

92

[quote]ZEB wrote:

[quote]sufiandy wrote:

I understand it, you are just unopened to talking to people like me about this issues because you are so bigoted.[/quote]

I am bigoted against morons like you. Other than that I’ve said nothing that has anything to do with bigotry. And the fact that you are using that word is because on several occasions on religious topics I’ve called you bigoted against those of us who believe in God and YOU just can’t let it go. You are quite transparent.

As for the facts of our most recent debate:

Fact: You questioned whether or not people like those who would attend a movie about a comic book hero at 12:30 would be able to obtain a gun and know how to use it.

Fact: I point out to you that the majority of those killed were males between the ages of 18 and 30 the very demographic that is in the military.

Fact: You offer no solution to the problem.

Fact: I did offer a solution to the problem. I said that if more people were armed and knew how to use a gun that perhaps less people would have been harmed by this mad man. And that those who want to perpetrate such a crime may think twice.

Basically you are an idiot unable to follow a simple conversation. But it’s not your fault, it’s mine. I knew this going into the debate. You were spotted long ago for being weak in the intelligence department.

So after we go back and forth a few more times let’s make a deal to put each other on ignore–kay?

[/quote]

Haha, you’re too easy.

93

[quote]Severiano wrote:
I really think a legit psych evaluation could help so long as it doesn’t turn into a joke. It might end up making it more expensive to purchase weapons, but I think given the amount of weapons and the seeming ease for crazy people to acquire them, something has to be done.
[/quote]

I think we agree, at least in principle.

I don’t have a problem jumping through hoops, and in some ways hoops are good. They will make the road longer for the freaks out there, and they might give up.

Regulating sale isn’t the same as banning the sale. But then again, Jonny law breaker selling this shit out of his trunk (or the US Gov’t for that matter) isn’t going to have many hoops to jump through.

It is a tough situation.

94

[quote]whatever2k wrote:
Good post, and yes the US murder rate has fallen steadily. It is still very high though, compared to other western countries.

2008 numbers.

Mexico having strict gun laws doesent really help though, when most of the guns come across the border from the US.

"The U.S. was the source of at least 70% of 29,284 firearms recovered by authorities in Mexico in 2009 and 2010, according to new U.S. government figures.

The statistics from the U.S. Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives are expected to add to controversy over the U.S. role in fueling drug-cartel violence in Mexico, which has killed more than 40,000 people since 2006."

[/quote]

There are some serious logical flaws in your reasoning. First, what western countries are you trying to compare the US to? There really is no comparison as the US is unique. These types of comparisons are easily manipulated to convince those with limited powers of reasoning into believing they reveal something.

In both size and population the US is a one of the biggest country’s in the world. For example, the US is bigger than the continent/country of Australia. So there are only a handful of countries that are even remotely comparable to the US. There are American states, counties and cities that are bigger than the countries those comparisons are being made against.

Another factor that your reasoning ignores is the war. During times of war more people die from violence than during times of peace. It’s not reasonable to compare the death toll in a country at war against a country at peace.

Now on to your comparison to the UK. A subject I’m real familiar with and you obviously are not and have not taken the time to follow any of my postings on the subject. The UK isn’t as safe as people try to make out. Sure they have less guns but they more than make up for it in other ways. For example in the UK they have over 50,000 glassings a year. In Edinburgh you are more likely to get knifed than anywhere else in the world. Rape is very common. Witness intimidation is widespread.

No the majority of guns in Mexico aren’t coming from the US. Now you are just repeating lies that were disproven long ago. The myth about seventy percent of gun in Mexico are from the US is a bold face lie that came from Hillary Clinton. That percentage is ONLY the guns that are turned over to the US ATF to be verified that they came from the US. What was not being told is that the Mexican authorities only turn over to the US the guns they believe came from the US. The guns the Mexicans don’t believe came from the US they don’t turn over to the US. So of course seventy percent of the guns they believe came from the US did come from the US. But most importantly that figure is not seventy percent of ALL guns. The majority of guns used by criminals come from the Mexican government.

95

[quote]ZEB wrote:
First of all I have a great amount of empathy for the families of the many who were killed in this horrible incident.

Secondly, I’ll take the contrary view to the liberals on this board. I think that more people should be carrying guns if so one of them would have cut this lunatic down before he did as much damage as he did. There were not these types of mass style shootings when gun toting was more popular in the 19th century. If you pulled out your gun with bad intentions you would have multiple guns pointed at you within seconds. [/quote]

What about escalation?

96

[quote]sufiandy wrote:

[quote]ZEB wrote:

[quote]sufiandy wrote:

I understand it, you are just unopened to talking to people like me about this issues because you are so bigoted.[/quote]

I am bigoted against morons like you. Other than that I’ve said nothing that has anything to do with bigotry. And the fact that you are using that word is because on several occasions on religious topics I’ve called you bigoted against those of us who believe in God and YOU just can’t let it go. You are quite transparent.

As for the facts of our most recent debate:

Fact: You questioned whether or not people like those who would attend a movie about a comic book hero at 12:30 would be able to obtain a gun and know how to use it.

Fact: I point out to you that the majority of those killed were males between the ages of 18 and 30 the very demographic that is in the military.

Fact: You offer no solution to the problem.

Fact: I did offer a solution to the problem. I said that if more people were armed and knew how to use a gun that perhaps less people would have been harmed by this mad man. And that those who want to perpetrate such a crime may think twice.

Basically you are an idiot unable to follow a simple conversation. But it’s not your fault, it’s mine. I knew this going into the debate. You were spotted long ago for being weak in the intelligence department.

So after we go back and forth a few more times let’s make a deal to put each other on ignore–kay?

[/quote]

Haha, you’re too easy.[/quote]

And you’re too stupid!

If you could just make sense…once maybe twice a week that would help.

97

[quote]roybot wrote:

[quote]ZEB wrote:
First of all I have a great amount of empathy for the families of the many who were killed in this horrible incident.

Secondly, I’ll take the contrary view to the liberals on this board. I think that more people should be carrying guns if so one of them would have cut this lunatic down before he did as much damage as he did. There were not these types of mass style shootings when gun toting was more popular in the 19th century. If you pulled out your gun with bad intentions you would have multiple guns pointed at you within seconds. [/quote]

What about escalation?

[/quote]

What about psycho’s randomly killing innocent people? That IS the problem what do you propose to do about it?

98

[quote]ZEB wrote:

[quote]roybot wrote:

[quote]ZEB wrote:
First of all I have a great amount of empathy for the families of the many who were killed in this horrible incident.

Secondly, I’ll take the contrary view to the liberals on this board. I think that more people should be carrying guns if so one of them would have cut this lunatic down before he did as much damage as he did. There were not these types of mass style shootings when gun toting was more popular in the 19th century. If you pulled out your gun with bad intentions you would have multiple guns pointed at you within seconds. [/quote]

What about escalation?

[/quote]

What about psycho’s randomly killing innocent people? That IS the problem what do you propose to do about it?[/quote]

We start carrying semi automatics, they buy automatics, we start wearing Kevlar, they buy armor piercing rounds…

99

[quote]roybot wrote:

[quote]ZEB wrote:

[quote]roybot wrote:

[quote]ZEB wrote:
First of all I have a great amount of empathy for the families of the many who were killed in this horrible incident.

Secondly, I’ll take the contrary view to the liberals on this board. I think that more people should be carrying guns if so one of them would have cut this lunatic down before he did as much damage as he did. There were not these types of mass style shootings when gun toting was more popular in the 19th century. If you pulled out your gun with bad intentions you would have multiple guns pointed at you within seconds. [/quote]

What about escalation?

[/quote]

What about psycho’s randomly killing innocent people? That IS the problem what do you propose to do about it?[/quote]

We start carrying semi automatics, they buy automatics, we start wearing Kevlar, they buy armor piercing rounds…[/quote]

Again, other than projecting hypothetical possibilities what is your solution?

100

[quote]ZEB wrote:

[quote]roybot wrote:

[quote]ZEB wrote:

[quote]roybot wrote:

[quote]ZEB wrote:
First of all I have a great amount of empathy for the families of the many who were killed in this horrible incident.

Secondly, I’ll take the contrary view to the liberals on this board. I think that more people should be carrying guns if so one of them would have cut this lunatic down before he did as much damage as he did. There were not these types of mass style shootings when gun toting was more popular in the 19th century. If you pulled out your gun with bad intentions you would have multiple guns pointed at you within seconds. [/quote]

What about escalation?

[/quote]

What about psycho’s randomly killing innocent people? That IS the problem what do you propose to do about it?[/quote]

We start carrying semi automatics, they buy automatics, we start wearing Kevlar, they buy armor piercing rounds…[/quote]

Again, other than projecting hypothetical possibilities what is your solution?[/quote]

It’s not a hypothetical possibility. It’s what would happen if your “solution” took effect. My question precedes yours, so it gets answered first. You answer mine, I answer yours. You’re up. What about escalation?