What are Gun Owners Afraid of?

[TheVictors]

First off, it seems to me that you and M&B09 have put a disturbing amount of careful consideration into the merits of one gun over another for shooting unarmed kindergarteners at close range. Very disturbing.

Second, I believe that Lanza had access to a number of different types of guns including shotguns, but he selected the bushmaster with a high capacity clip. But I am sure if he had put a little more thought into it, like you have, he would have selected one of the shotguns.

Third, there must be reasons that assualt weapons were invented and perfected over the years, and are used by the military. What could those reasons be? Let me make a wild guess that they were invented and perfected for use in military assualt situations where having a reliable, light weight, yet powerful, weapon that can kill as many of the enemy as possible in the shortest amount of time were important considerations.

Great post and accurate.

The depiction of guns as these neutral devices intended for some good purpose is laughable. There is certainly a correlation between the exposure to guns and violence and the glamorization of guns that contributes to the mass shootings. There is a reason the murderer in Aurora didn't run into the theater with a knife or candlestick just as there is a reason this more recent massacre wasn't a result of someone wielding a baseball bat.

Harris & Klebold played video games for months and months and months practicing for Columbine and then executed their massacre as experienced veterans armed with weopans they'd virtually used thousands of times.

It's a fucking problem. Glamorizing guns and coming up with all these excuses to rationalize their existence is all bullshit. The increased availability of guns and depiction of violence using guns has most definitely caused more massacres like the ones that keep happening.

It's time to stop acting like guns are the fucking victim.

 

[lostleader]

First off, it seems to me that you and M&B09 have put a disturbing amount of careful consideration into the merits of one gun over another for shooting unarmed kindergarteners at close range. Very disturbing.

Second, I believe that Lanza had access to a number of different types of guns including shotguns, but he selected the bushmaster with a high capacity clip. But I am sure if he had put a little more thought into it, like you have, he would have selected one of the shotguns.

Third, there must be reasons that assualt weapons were invented and perfected over the years, and are used by the military. What could those reasons be? Let me make a wild guess that they were invented and perfected for use in military assualt situations where having a reliable, light weight, yet powerful, weapon that can kill as many of the enemy as possible in the shortest amount of time were important considerations.

First off, I have been around guns all my life. I am by no means an expert but hold a lot of knowledge that most do not. This type of subject gets people to make uneducated decisions, have knee jerk reactions, and to speak on subjects that the know very little about. To say that I have put thought into harming anyone is asinine and only someone grasping at straws.

Judging anything by its looks is a total mistake and usually things are not what they appear. This is my biggest issue with all of this. Gun manufactures started putting civilian model AR rifles because they are efficient. Easy to maintain and easy to shoot. If they are going to take them out of the hands of civilians than Law enforcement and Military personal shouldn't have them either. "Whats good for the goose is good for the gander"

I never heard that Lanza had choices of weapons, It is my understanding he had 1 bushmaster .223 and 2 handguns. He is a product of society that watches movie, plays video games, and sees all the crap they spew out on tv. Them media (all of it) paint the picture of guns as bad horrible weapons of mass destruction. He was never held accountable, and never had the world kick his ass. Kids today are raised that way, we allow everyone to win, everyone to get a prize, everyone to do what they want cause we dont want hurt feelings. We live in a society of "Political Correctness" (a communist term coined in Russia) that thinks I have to give a shit if your feelings are hurt. Well this is the product of that, welcome to the new generation that is running this country. We have turned into a bunch of Pussies and its a matter of time before it bites us all hard. Instead of protecting ourselves we will limit what the "bad" guys can get and hope that works. It won't!

 

[lostleader]

Great post and accurate.

The depiction of guns as these neutral devices intended for some good purpose is laughable. There is certainly a correlation between the exposure to guns and violence and the glamorization of guns that contributes to the mass shootings. There is a reason the murderer in Aurora didn't run into the theater with a knife or candlestick just as there is a reason this more recent massacre wasn't a result of someone wielding a baseball bat.

Harris & Klebold played video games for months and months and months practicing for Columbine and then executed their massacre as experienced veterans armed with weopans they'd virtually used thousands of times.

It's a fucking problem. Glamorizing guns and coming up with all these excuses to rationalize their existence is all bullshit. The increased availability of guns and depiction of violence using guns has most definitely caused more massacres like the ones that keep happening.

It's time to stop acting like guns are the fucking victim.

Then monitor what your kid watches on tv and take the fucking video games away.

Be a parent and do your fucking job and quit fucking with mine. The lack of responsibility of a parent for their kid is not my problem, and I wont be limited for it.

Edit: Congratulations all this nonsense you finally got me to go off the deep end.

 

[tinselwolverine]

Then monitor what your kid watches on tv and take the fucking video games away.

Be a parent and do your fucking job and quit fucking with mine. The lack of responsibility of a parent for their kid is not my problem, and I wont be limited for it.

Edit: Congratulations all this nonsense you finally got me to go off the deep end.

Thanks for the edit deputy.

you saved me the trouble of responding to your points.

You really are off the deep end, deputy.

Edit: and now I have to make an edit. you're not off the deep end. your response to Vic was just off the deep end.

 

[Diggler Cometh]

Actually, I would disagree with that. A remington 870 holds 5 shells, and reloading it isnt as easy as slamming a new magazine on it. No way you cause as much carnage in these sorts of situations. For one thing victims have a chance to run or rush the shooter when he reloads

Nah, a 12 gauge and dropping it for pistols after you're empty is damn effective in an enclosed area. spray and stun and clean them up...

Also a lot of your 20+ rd mags will jam if they aren't specifically from that manufacturer. Also only use brass cuz steel casings jam the hell out of ARs..#themoaruknow

 

[Thumb]

Actually, I would disagree with that. A remington 870 holds 5 shells, and reloading it isnt as easy as slamming a new magazine on it. No way you cause as much carnage in these sorts of situations. For one thing victims have a chance to run or rush the shooter when he reloads

This is technically wrong.

It depends on which shell length the 870 is chambered for.

If it's chambered for standard 2 3/4" shells, then it's 4 in the magazine and one in the chamber. But if it's chambered for 3" shells you can fit 5 in the mag, and one in the chamber. And if it's chambered for 3 1/2" supermag, I believe it's either 6 or 7 in the mag, and 1 in the chamber.

Assuming you're using 2 3/4 shells.

Not to mention you can get them with extended magazine tubes.

 

[TheVictors]

Then monitor what your kid watches on tv and take the fucking video games away.

Be a parent and do your fucking job and quit fucking with mine. The lack of responsibility of a parent for their kid is not my problem, and I wont be limited for it.

Edit: Congratulations all this nonsense you finally got me to go off the deep end.

1. I/We do and what responsible parent does not?
2. I honestly trust you - LostLeader - as a Father, for sure
3. Promise you won't ever shoot and kill a child with your guns.

 

[tsmith7559]

so it appears this kid was watching violent videos games prior to the rampage.
What if he didnt have a gun available? Do you think he keeps playing? or does he stab his mother, get into the car and plows through rows of kids waiting for the buses outside the school?
One will find a way when you're filled with evil

 

[tsmith7559]

Great post and accurate.

The depiction of guns as these neutral devices intended for some good purpose is laughable. There is certainly a correlation between the exposure to guns and violence and the glamorization of guns that contributes to the mass shootings. There is a reason the murderer in Aurora didn't run into the theater with a knife or candlestick just as there is a reason this more recent massacre wasn't a result of someone wielding a baseball bat.

Harris & Klebold played video games for months and months and months practicing for Columbine and then executed their massacre as experienced veterans armed with weopans they'd virtually used thousands of times.

It's a fucking problem. Glamorizing guns and coming up with all these excuses to rationalize their existence is all bullshit. The increased availability of guns and depiction of violence using guns has most definitely caused more massacres like the ones that keep happening.

It's time to stop acting like guns are the fucking victim.

Columbine was suppose to be a bomb exploding in the cafeteria....they didnt wire it properly, but if they did the deaths would have been 500+. So at that point a gun would have been meaningless. Evil will find a way

 

[lostleader]

1. I/We do and what responsible parent does not?
2. I honestly trust you - LostLeader - as a Father, for sure
3. Promise you won't ever shoot and kill a child with your guns.

My post wasn't meant directly towards you just more of a rant of the way parenting in this country is going.

I may not be a perfect parent, but my kid and the one on the way will be monitored as long as I possibly can. I love my kid(s) unconditionally, and do the best to make sure he(they) will better the world in some way.

No I would never hurt a child, this is a asinine thing to post towards me. I would never hurt anyone, unless they pose a threat towards me, my family, or in the line of duty.

 

[tsmith7559]

My post wasn't meant directly towards you just more of a rant of the way parenting in this country is going.

I may not be a perfect parent, but my kid and the one on the way will be monitored as long as I possibly can. I love my kid(s) unconditionally, and do the best to make sure he(they) will better the world in some way.

No I would never hurt a child, this is a asinine thing to post towards me. I would never hurt anyone, unless they pose a threat towards me, my family, or in the line of duty.

"""this is a asinine thing to post towards me"""

yes it was

 

[lostleader]

Thanks for the edit deputy.

you saved me the trouble of responding to your points.

You really are off the deep end, deputy.

Edit: and now I have to make an edit. you're not off the deep end. your response to Vic was just off the deep end.

My response could of been a lot more PC. However its not that far off, if you look around at the way kids are being brought up. I stand by what I said.

My major problem with all of this is the way people are judging on looks. I do not own an AR, or anything with a high capacity magazine. (Although I went to buy one last night, just couldn't justify $1200.) I think its wrong that the people who tend to make the most noise are the most misinformed, and if anyone speaks out against there point the get hammered for not caring for the loss of life. This incident has more weight because of where it happened, and because of the lives that were lost. I completely understand that and no one was more upset about this than I, but I can't blame the tool. Kind of like 9/11 I didn't hate planes 9/12.

I agree something has to be done, but the plans I hear the media talking about are nonsense and wont fix anything. Action has to be taken, but taking the wrong action can be worse than doing nothing.

 

[lostleader]

Actually, I would disagree with that. A remington 870 holds 5 shells, and reloading it isnt as easy as slamming a new magazine on it. No way you cause as much carnage in these sorts of situations. For one thing victims have a chance to run or rush the shooter when he reloads

tactical shotguns can hold up to 9 and extensions can be added. Loading a shotgun is not that hard and with the potential of 9 hits per shot the "carnage" can be fairly great. Thankfully they don't look as cool.

 

[byco42]

"Assault rifles" are the villainous mechanism that we can focus on to assuage our outrage.

Somehow, if they are banned, everything will be all right again. The 1994-2004 ban, by all relevant studies, "did not reveal any clear impacts on gun violence". And I think the guy in Wyoming would feel comfortable having a weapon with an effective range of 440 yards and he should not have to surrender that comfort because some nut-job in Connecticut uses one to spray paint a classroom.

And government agencies, of course, are exempt, because they need to match the firepower of the people who will have them and use them in commission of crimes or in confrontation with such individuals, which is relatively rare. The real irony here is that if the same provisions to the 1994 law are applied, people who have them legally will not have to surrender them, so this is all window dressing anyway.

Which makes me wonder what the fuss is all about: it changes nothing--no change in gun ownership, or change in gun crime statistics.