Re: Pro-gun article
 

[quote=RedskinRat;1002866]Cars are designed for transportation, look at how many people are killed by the misuse of them. Still readily available, still not banned.[/quote] You miss the point. Handguns are specifically designed to cause injury/death to another human being. Cars are not.

[quote=]You can also use a handgun as a deterrent, don't even need to fire a shot. Check under the desk of any 24 hour local market.[/quote] They are a detrrent because they have the threat to kill someone. Youre proving my point. Guns are designed to injure/kill other human beings.

Re: Pro-gun article
 

[quote=Alvin Walton;1002870]No I wouldnt be fine.
It wouldnt make a big enough bang to suit me.
It wouldnt give me a proper understanding of how it would work in a combat situation.
It wouldnt blow up milk jugs the way I like.
It wouldnt explode tannerite properly.
It wouldnt do a lot of things I like.

Thats like asking me if I wanted to stop doinking Kate Upton and do Ellen Degeneres instead.[/quote]

Who cares about guns doing the things "you like?" Don't you think it would be worth sacrificing some of the things you liked, if only allowing rubber bullets would prevent even one child from dying of an accidental gunshot?

Re: Pro-gun article
 

[quote=BigHairedAristocrat;1003867][COLOR="Red"]Who cares about guns doing the things "you like?[/COLOR]" Don't you think it would be worth sacrificing some of the things you liked, if only allowing rubber bullets would prevent even one child from dying of an accidental gunshot?[/quote]

[COLOR="Red"]Obviously I do (and a few million other non bleeding hearts that would concur)....but if you dont want my/our vote to count then do something about it....comrade.[/COLOR]

I'll buy rubber bullets when they outlaw automobiles and swimming pools.

Re: Pro-gun article
 

Thankfully, the Senate rejected the knee-jerk gun bill.

Re: Pro-gun article
 

[quote=BigHairedAristocrat;1003866]You miss the point. Handguns are specifically designed to cause injury/death to another human being. Cars are not. [/quote]

You say I miss the point yet clearly you're the one 'not getting it'. Look at the numbers for vehicular deaths and injuries. They are NOT designed to KILL. Think about that. [B][U]NOT DESIGNED TO KILL.[/U][/B] Now look at the numbers again.

That many deaths from something [U][B]NOT DESIGNED OR INTENDED TO KILL. [/B][/U]

Getting it yet?

[quote=BigHairedAristocrat;1003866]They are a detrrent because they have the threat to kill someone. Youre proving my point. Guns are designed to injure/kill other human beings.[/quote]

Yet they don't have to be used for the deterrent to work. Have you thought about your position on this at all? Serious question.

Re: Pro-gun article
 

[quote=BigHairedAristocrat;1003867]Who cares about guns doing the things "you like?" Don't you think it would be worth sacrificing some of the things you liked, if only allowing rubber bullets would prevent even one child from dying of an accidental gunshot?[/quote]

Rubber bullets kill too.

Re: Pro-gun article
 

[quote=Monkeydad;1003876]Thankfully, the Senate rejected the knee-jerk gun bill.[/quote]

But Petulant One will keep trying until the Liberal polls are validated.

Next up: Executive order.

Re: Pro-gun article
 

That executive order would create some serious civil unrest.
I hope the Hawaiian Kenyan is not that stupid.

Re: Pro-gun article
 

[quote=Alvin Walton;1003887]I hope the Hawaiian Kenyan is not that stupid.[/quote]

He's far from stupid, but he is colossally arrogant.

Re: Pro-gun article
 

I just wish this President would get as angry when Americans are murdered in Benghazi and Boston as he does when his bills are defeated (by his own party). He blew a gasket yesterday in the Rose Garden.

[QUOTE=Monkeydad;1003929]I just wish this President would get as angry when Americans are murdered in Benghazi and Boston as he does when his bills are defeated (by his own party). He blew a gasket yesterday in the Rose Garden.[/QUOTE]

That's a great point!

Re: Pro-gun article
 

[quote=RedskinRat;1003881]Rubber bullets kill too.[/quote]

they can yes, but its much less likely.

Re: Pro-gun article
 

In 2010, under the current gun control laws, 48,000 felons attempted to illegally (because they aren't allowed) purchase firearms. Only 44 prosecutions came from those known attempts.

More gun control? Use the rules already on the books, FFS!

Re: Pro-gun article
 

[quote=RedskinRat;1003877]You say I miss the point yet clearly you're the one 'not getting it'. Look at the numbers for vehicular deaths and injuries. They are NOT designed to KILL. Think about that. [B][U]NOT DESIGNED TO KILL.[/U][/B] Now look at the numbers again.

That many deaths from something [U][B]NOT DESIGNED OR INTENDED TO KILL. [/B][/U]

Getting it yet?[/quote]

Youre not getting it. Numbers have nothing to do with anything. By your logic, Hearts are designed to kill because heart attacks kill more people than guns and car accidents.

Cars kill alot of people due to a number of factors, ranging from poor maintenance, drivers not paying attention, bad weather, etc. But the automobile is not a weapon. its a transportation tool that is dangerous if not used properly.

Handguns ARE weapons specifically designed to kill or injure another human being. You may use it for target practice, but that doesnt change the reason guns exist.

[quote]Yet they don't have to be used for the deterrent to work. Have you thought about your position on this at all? Serious question.[/quote]

If you dont plan on using the gun, and only want it to serve as a deterrent, then you dont need ammo at all. In fact, you dont even need a real gun. You could just have a prop gun.

The more you type, its obvious that there is no logic to your position. You just want to argue that you should have guns because you enjoy them and want to be prepared to shoot someone if they mess with you. That seems to be your position. its one i dont respect or agree with. I think Handguns are inherrently evil devices and society would be safer as a whole if they were illegal.

Re: Pro-gun article
 

[quote=RedskinRat;1003979]In 2010, under the current gun control laws, 48,000 felons attempted to illegally (because they aren't allowed) purchase firearms. Only 44 prosecutions came from those known attempts.

More gun control? Use the rules already on the books, FFS![/quote]

I want two fairly simple changes.

1) Anyone who sells a gun is responsible for doing a full background check on the individual. Any time someone buys a gun, a background check should be run and gun registered to person X.
2) Any time THAT WEAPON is used in a crime, that person has a certain amount of responsibility for said crime. I don't want to see them take full responsibility, but there are penalties for your weapon being used in a criminal fashion. Another crime on this is anyone found with an unregistered weapon also faces a charge and the weapon is confiscated.

These changes would in turn make sure that only people that fulfill all the requirements for gun ownership are able to purchase them, and that those people are responsible for the way that weapon is used.

I don't feel as if either of those are overbearing. People can still have their guns, they just have to go through a background check and gun registration.