Why We Should Never Compromise On Gun Rights

[Tsing Tao]

# we both know perfectly well that if Cocaine and meth can make it across the border then grenades can as well. They are banned and mobsters and cartels know perfectly well that all hell will break lose if they use them. Hence they won't..the ban works perfectly well.

The ban only works because grenades don't fit the need. I'm sure if people really wanted grenades, they'd get them. But why try to get a complicated, rare and expensive type of hammer when you can get a normal one that does the job at the local Home Depot? It's about desire, not the ban.

# so according to your logic why don't we then allow ordinary citizens to build their own pipe bombs and what have you, after all criminals can build them easily as well. Your logic flies against common sense and facts. You try to build your entire web of argument on the thesis that ordinary citizens should have the right to be at least as heavily armed as criminals yet at the same time you acknowledge that criminals have arsenals at their disposals that others don't. Probably because you know that challenging the status quo would be impossible in this particular regard on self built bombs. But logically according to your argument it should follow that everyone should be able to "self defend" with home made explosive devices.

Just because you can't follow my logic doesn't mean it flies against common sense and facts. If you want to have a discussion with me, try to be a bit more civil. If you want to have an argument, we can do that too. Your call.

We don't allow citizens to build pipe bombs because pipe bombs have but one use - to kill and blow something up. You can't make an argument that building a pipe bomb is for defense. You can however, make the argument that what you call an assault rifle is used for defense. Additionally, there aren't millions and millions of pipe bombs out there in circulation already.

#why is the term assault rifle a stupid term? It's well defined and a broadly accepted term even by the NRA.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Assault_rifle

Did you even read the article you just quoted? Let me paste something for you, from your link at wikipedia:

The U.S. Army defines assault rifles as "short, compact, selective-fire weapons that fire a cartridge intermediate in power between submachine gun and rifle cartridges."[16] In a strict definition, a firearm must have at least the following characteristics to be considered an assault rifle:[2][3][4]

• It must be capable of selective fire.

I only listed the very first criteria because to continue would be a waste of time. Selective fire, you obviously don't understand. This means it can be semi-automatic, burst or auto. Automatic weapons are essentially illegal and have been for a very, very long time. What you keep referring to as an "assault rifle" is not an assault rifle. That's a media and pro gun control mistake that keeps being perpetuated.

# Obama could not go further because of Republican opposition in the house(s) . I think we all know that.

Bullshit. Many democratic politicians are against comprehensive gun control. Harry Reid was notoriously a big supporter of the NRA.

#There is a reason that New York has become a much safer city that most large American cities. You argue as if you have proof that there is zero correlation between this fact and legislation re guns introduced in NY. Please provide proof if you in fact alluded to that. I have not heard of such.

We're talking about the same New York City? Safer city than what? Detroit? Ok, you got me there.

Google the NY SAFE Act for the comments on the ban I referred to. Do your homework.

Canada has a massive weapons stock and still banned many types of guns and gun violence dropped. Switzerland has one of the highest gun ownership per capita in the world and yet one of the lowest crime rates with gun involvement because of its strict gun laws.

Canada did not have hundreds of millions of guns in circulation. They also have a very different demographic. Switzerland is an argument FOR gun ownership, proving that the more guns you have does not affect your safety - it has to do more with the mental health system than the firearm.

Perhaps the right way to handle this problem is not restriction of ownership but restrictions on the types of ammunition, gun appliances, ways they are acquired, carrying of firearms, and the carrying of firearms. I honestly don't know the answer and so do you not know the answer. I just wanted to understand several holes and contradictions in your base argument.

There are no holes in my argument as made - there are only holes in your understanding of it. Welcome to ET P&R.

 

[destriero]

#There is a reason that New York has become a much safer city that most large American cities. You argue as if you have proof that there is zero correlation between this fact and legislation re guns introduced in NY. Please provide proof if you in fact alluded to that. I have not heard of such.

Chicago. Born and raised (Kenilworth). Chicago's gun laws are even more Draconian than NYC. The difference, as I see it, is that NYC PD have modeled their response teams around the French GIGN. Chicago is a mish-mash of beat-cops and 20 minute SWAT response.

You cannot legally own of possess a handgun in Chicago. >90% of firearm crime is the result of illegally-possessed handguns/revolvers.

 

[bone]

I don't need tickets to the Super Bowl or the World Series - I need a pass to Shot Show.

 

[NoodleStrudle]

I guess that civil war will last like 1.25 days. Just looking at those who would defend them till the end and those who want them banned. 2nd amendment is the most ridiculous one ever put in any law code in any modern industrialized civilization. If the government goes rogue and attacks with AI trained drones and robots and laser cannons and stealth fighters you will pull your AR15? Lol

I have probably 30 AR mags and 15 MP5 mags. Govt would be forced to retroactively criminalize the mags. We'd have a Civil War. Gun nuts love them mags!

 

[destriero]

I guess that civil war will last like 1.25 days. Just looking at those who would defend them till the end and those who want them banned. 2nd amendment is the most ridiculous one ever put in any law code in any modern industrialized civilization. If the government goes rogue and attacks with AI trained drones and robots and laser cannons and stealth fighters you will pull your AR15? Lol

You can lol all you like. I am not going to fight mag-confiscation. I would comply with a reasonable measure.

I can assure you that if you were tasked with knocking on my door to confiscate my legally-obtained firearms that you would shit yourself before you could say, "Hello" and that I would not be greeting you while holding a firearm.

To call the 2A an anachronism is an understatement. "Well regulated militia" is not an accurate reflection of our society and what the framers envisioned.

I like mechanical things. I like mechanical things that can protect my family in a wealthy neighborhood targeted by burglars.

But, "The bullets are out of the gun" so to speak w.r.t. interpretation of an >200yo Amendment. Blackpowder guns.

‘I come in peace. I didn’t bring artillery. But I’m pleading with you, with tears in my eyes: If you fuck with me, I’ll kill you all.’ James Mattis

 

[NoodleStrudle]

Of which one conveniently happened last week? How lucky we all are

The LV shooter was Asperger's. He had no use for the guns other than a necessary tool for the job. Tsing and I are not the profile. It's the guy with cheap-ass clone M4s and SKS' that do the minimum amount of research and training to enforce their deranged motives.

I can attest that I've never brandished (lifetime) other than two attempted home invasions/burglaries. I have been in three fights in the last ten years. Two of those times I was carrying concealed.

 

[NoodleStrudle]

Again, you are contradicting.yourslelf. If this was true then we indeed can safely ban all non hunting rifles and semi automatic handguns. After all regular handguns do the job perfectly fine. "But why try to get a complicated, rare and expensive type of hammer when you can get a normal one that does the job" ?

Another total contradiction of yours is your argument why pipe bombs should not be allowed.they have the only intend which is to kill. And so do assault rifles in the hands of ordinary citizens. That there are crazies out there who want to shoot and blow up all sorts of stuff on some shooting ranges I grasp. But banning such would be a totally legitimate sacrifice in exchange for taking killing devices out of peoples' hands.

The ban only works because grenades don't fit the need. I'm sure if people really wanted grenades, they'd get them. But why try to get a complicated, rare and expensive type of hammer when you can get a normal one that does the job at the local Home Depot? It's about desire, not the ban.

.

 

[destriero]

Again, you are contradicting.yourslelf. If this was true then we indeed can safely ban all non hunting rifles and semi automatic handguns. After all regular handguns do the job perfectly fine. "But why try to get a complicated, rare and expensive type of hammer when you can get a normal one that does the job" ?

I have a Smith & Wesson Model 327 Performance Center revolver. It's SOTA. Eight shots of .357 mag. I can shoot eight into one ragged hole at 50 feet. Maybe a 1" group with .357. 3/4" with .38 Spl.

Yeah, it will do the job.

 

[NoodleStrudle]

BS on Switzerland. I used the country as example that comprehensive regulation and control surrounding ALL ASPECTS of gun ownership have a highly beneficial effect on low gun crimes and violence. You knew exactly the point I try to make.

Re New York would you argue NY is less safe than Miami, Atlanta, Chicago, St Louis, Kansas City, Houston, Oakland, .....?

The ban only works because grenades don't fit the need. I'm sure if people really wanted grenades, they'd get them. But why try to get a complicated, rare and expensive type of hammer when you can get a normal one that does the job at the local Home Depot? It's about desire, not the ban.



Just because you can't follow my logic doesn't mean it flies against common sense and facts. If you want to have a discussion with me, try to be a bit more civil. If you want to have an argument, we can do that too. Your call.

We don't allow citizens to build pipe bombs because pipe bombs have but one use - to kill and blow something up. You can't make an argument that building a pipe bomb is for defense. You can however, make the argument that what you call an assault rifle is used for defense. Additionally, there aren't millions and millions of pipe bombs out there in circulation already.



Did you even read the article you just quoted? Let me paste something for you, from your link at wikipedia:

The U.S. Army defines assault rifles as "short, compact, selective-fire weapons that fire a cartridge intermediate in power between submachine gun and rifle cartridges."[16] In a strict definition, a firearm must have at least the following characteristics to be considered an assault rifle:[2][3][4]

• It must be capable of selective fire.

I only listed the very first criteria because to continue would be a waste of time. Selective fire, you obviously don't understand. This means it can be semi-automatic, burst or auto. Automatic weapons are essentially illegal and have been for a very, very long time. What you keep referring to as an "assault rifle" is not an assault rifle. That's a media and pro gun control mistake that keeps being perpetuated.



Bullshit. Many democratic politicians are against comprehensive gun control. Harry Reid was notoriously a big supporter of the NRA.



We're talking about the same New York City? Safer city than what? Detroit? Ok, you got me there.

Google the NY SAFE Act for the comments on the ban I referred to. Do your homework.



Canada did not have hundreds of millions of guns in circulation. They also have a very different demographic. Switzerland is an argument FOR gun ownership, proving that the more guns you have does not affect your safety - it has to do more with the mental health system than the firearm.



There are no holes in my argument as made - there are only holes in your understanding of it. Welcome to ET P&R.

 

[NoodleStrudle]

Then the laws are not enforced. How long have guns been banned in Chicago?

Chicago. Born and raised (Kenilworth). Chicago's gun laws are even more Draconian than NYC. The difference, as I see it, is that NYC PD have modeled their response teams around the French GIGN. Chicago is a mish-mash of beat-cops and 20 minute SWAT response.

You cannot legally own of possess a handgun in Chicago. >90% of firearm crime is the result of illegally-possessed handguns/revolvers.