Stories That Make You Shake Your Head At The World

[5fouls]

15 minutes ago, mrflynn03 said:

Autos and semi autos have been around for over 100 years.

Yes. They were.  But, they were not readily available to the general public as they are today.  And, please understand, I'm not dismissing the mental health component of this.  But, I would think we can all agree it would be easier to restrict the sale of automatic weapons than it would be to cure someone with mental illness.

[IUFLA]

1 minute ago, 5fouls said:

Yes. They were.  But, they were not readily available to the general public as they are today.  And, please understand, I'm not dismissing the mental health component of this.  But, I would think we can all agree it would be easier to restrict the sale of automatic weapons than it would be to cure someone with mental illness.

Automatic weapons are already illegal

[5fouls]

8 minutes ago, IUFLA said:

So taking something away from me while "allowing" me to keep something else when both are protections provided to me under our Constitution is "common ground?"

When the Constitution was written, the government had the same type of firepower the citizenry did. The 2nd amendment was written so the common man could protect himself from "enemies foreign and domestic."

And that includes a tyrannical government...

I've already stated to you that someone skilled in firearms could exact the same hell with a handgun that they could with the weapons you want to take away...

Of course if that was the case, what would you propose after the first suicidal nut went into a school with a handgun or 2 and performed the same monsterous act?

I think I know that answer... 

How many school shooters have been skilled in firearms?  Their profiles are anything but that.  They NEED the automatic weapon to do the damage they are doing.

But, let's say the next shooter is, in fact, former military.  Heck, let's make him/her Special Forces.  If he can get 4-5 additional rounds off with an automatic for every one they get off with a regular handgun, doesnt it stand to reason that it proportionately, at least partially, reduces the ultimate toll before help can arrive?

Of course it does.

Edited March 29, 2023 by 5fouls

[5fouls]

5 minutes ago, IUFLA said:

Automatic weapons are already illegal

I left off 'semi'

[IUFLA]

3 minutes ago, 5fouls said:

How many school shooters have been skilled in firearms?  Their profiles are anything but that.  The NEED the automatic weapon to do the damage they are doing.

But, let's say the next shooter is, in fact, former military.  Heck, let's make him/her Special Forces.  If he can get 4-5 additional rounds off with an automatic for every one they get off with a regular handgun, doesnt it stand to reason that it proportionately, at least partially, reduces the ultimate toll before help can arrive?

Of course it does.

You need to brush up on your knowledge of firearms...

As I said above, in most cases automatic weapons are illegal to own.

Semi-automatic weapons, like the one Audrey Hale used, shoot the same as a semi-automatic pistol or handgun... 1 trigger pull, 1 shot... 

So by your definition, they'd take my 3 handguns as well

Edited March 29, 2023 by IUFLA

[5fouls]

6 minutes ago, IUFLA said:

You need to brush up on your knowledge of firearms...

As I said above, in most cases automatic weapons are illegal to own.

Semi-automatic weapons, like the one Audrey Hale used, shoot the same as a semi-automatic pistol or handgun... 1 trigger pull, 1 shot... 

So by your definition, they'd take my 3 handguns as well

So, you're going to dismiss the larger magazine size?  

[NotIThatLives]

57 minutes ago, 5fouls said:

I know this was not directed at me, and I certainly am not someone who is considered liberal.  However, I will offer a middle ground solution, and it will be summarily dismissed, or ignored, by those who feel differently.  No middle ground coming from that direction.

My solution.  Let people keep their handguns they use for protection.  Let people keep their shotguns and hunting rifles.  Those are the types of weapons our forefathers had in mind when the constitution was written.  

However, outside of law enforcement and the military. ban and criminalize the sale and possession of the types of weapons these school shooters are using to kill children.  Other than protecting a 'right' that was given in our constitution (which we all know did not consider this type of world), what does the average Joe gain from ownership of these weapons?

The constitution had the foresight of protection from enemies foreign and domestic.  It seems nearly impossible that there would ever be an attempt at an occupation in the United States but it is also to fight a tyrannical government.   But as Joe said we have jets and nukes.  

I don't own any type of assault weapon but I owe multiple that are semi auto.  They can do the same damage without the stigma.  

What are we doing about mental health?  There is seemingly more resources than ever before and less results.  Why are we so broken?

[Lostin76]

3 hours ago, HoosierFaithful said:

Sure seems like we trust teachers to play armed guard but we don’t trust them to do much else. 

Evergreen quote here. I also thought we couldn’t trust teachers to decide what kids read and learn. 

But sure, let’s arm then and trust them with a gun. 

I love how again we are focused on mental health and social media. Like other countries also don’t have those same challenges. That MUST be the problem. Can’t be the number of guns we have in this country. Let’s continue to wring our hands and wonder we are such a failure at this. 

It’s pretty much the exact same chart for auto deaths. Again, the US is a massive, embarrassing outlier. Pretty much anything that can’t be solved with common sense and compassion for others, we fail. 

 

[IUFLA]

Just now, 5fouls said:

So, you're going to dismiss the larger magazine size?  

I can buy a 30 round magazine for all 3 of my handguns... Irrelevant...

I'll offer some middle ground though... Anyone over 18 but less than 21 would need a "co-signer" that would take on the co-responsibility of owning and using an AR-15 or other semi-automatic rifle... 

[NotIThatLives]

11 minutes ago, Lostin76 said:

Evergreen quote here. I also thought we couldn’t trust teachers to decide what kids read and learn. 

But sure, let’s arm then and trust them with a gun. 

I love how again we are focused on mental health and social media. Like other countries also don’t have those same challenges. That MUST be the problem. Can’t be the number of guns we have in this country. Let’s continue to wring our hands and wonder we are such a failure at this. 

It’s pretty much the exact same chart for auto deaths. Again, the US is a massive, embarrassing outlier. Pretty much anything that can’t be solved with common sense and compassion for others, we fail. 

 

OK, so who gets to own a gun?  Just the police or government?  

Isn't it Switzerland that every household has a rifle?  Why no radical consistent gun violence?

[NotIThatLives]

14 minutes ago, IUFLA said:

I can buy a 30 round magazine for all 3 of my handguns... Irrelevant...

I'll offer some middle ground though... Anyone over 18 but less than 21 would need a "co-signer" that would take on the co-responsibility of owning and using an AR-15 or other semi-automatic rifle... 

I like that and add a waiting time.  

[5fouls]

I've said my peace and am bowing out of the conversation.  A few of my questions went unanswered, probably because they cant be answered while maintaining a specific position.

The reality is that this topic will continue to be divisive, with firm lines drawn in sand.  Meanwhile, children will continue to be gunned down, and those that do survive will have emotional scars for life.

I feel for that young girl on the bus in the image posted earlier.  Will she ever be able to get rid of the memories of that day?  That's on us.  

[IUFLA]

38 minutes ago, Lostin76 said:

I also thought we couldn’t trust teachers to decide what kids read and learn. 

Not solely, at least these days... 

It's not only my responsibility but my right to know and understand the curriculum that's being taught and being paid for with my tax dollars... I also have the right to protest when I don't agree with said curriculum...

I put 3 kids through the public school system in Florida and Illinois, and was always engaged in their learning...

But to be honest, I doubt I'd have my child in a public school these days... 

 

[Lostin76]

18 minutes ago, NotIThatLives said:

OK, so who gets to own a gun?  Just the police or government?  

Isn't it Switzerland that every household has a rifle?  Why no radical consistent gun violence?

It’s above my pay grade. But if it was up to me, we would restrict some sales and make those sales more difficult. We can’t just give them away like candy. And people who have been convicted of violent crimes, lose the privilege of owning a gun. 

And this will make me even more unpopular here, but I’m not convinced the police need to be as armed as they are. They are killing a good portion of our populace with their quick triggers, immature emotions, and inferiority complexes. They don’t need to be armed like soldiers to play Candy Crush and sit in front of the donut shop. 

But it really doesn’t matter what I think, b/c nothing will change. 

And if Switerzerland has one rifle per household, that’s still a LOT less per person than the one and only outlier on the chart I posted. If I didn’t live in a place where I don’t need a gun, like if I lived upstate in the boonies, I would own a rifle or a shotgun. I’m not necessarily anti-gun, but we need some freaking guardrails here. We are going pear shaped very quickly on this. 

 

[rico]

1 hour ago, 5fouls said:

I've said my peace and am bowing out of the conversation.  A few of my questions went unanswered, probably because they cant be answered while maintaining a specific position.

The reality is that this topic will continue to be divisive, with firm lines drawn in sand.  Meanwhile, children will continue to be gunned down, and those that do survive will have emotional scars for life.

I feel for that young girl on the bus in the image posted earlier.  Will she ever be able to get rid of the memories of that day?  That's on us.  

What questions went unanswered?  

[5fouls]

1 hour ago, rico said:

What questions went unanswered?  

I said I was out above, but since you asked and I respect you as a poster.

Other than protecting a 'right' that was given in our constitution (which we all know did not consider this type of world), what does the average Joe gain from ownership of these weapons?

But, I would think we can all agree it would be easier to restrict the sale of automatic weapons than it would be to cure someone with mental illness.

How many school shooters have been skilled in firearms?

 If he can get 4-5 additional rounds off with an automatic for every one they get off with a regular handgun, doesn't it stand to reason that it proportionately, at least partially, reduces the ultimate toll before help can arrive?

_______________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Okay, the second one may not technically be a question, but it is an important discussion item.  Nobody offered a counter-argument.

And, on the last one, the answer I received was that both regular and semi-automatic required the trigger to be squeezed each time.  My question wasn't about the process to fire the gun, rather the number of rounds tha could be fired in the same amount of time each time.

 

[rico]

14 minutes ago, 5fouls said:

I said I was out above, but since you asked and I respect you as a poster.

Other than protecting a 'right' that was given in our constitution (which we all know did not consider this type of world), what does the average Joe gain from ownership of these weapons?

But, I would think we can all agree it would be easier to restrict the sale of automatic weapons than it would be to cure someone with mental illness.

How many school shooters have been skilled in firearms?

 If he can get 4-5 additional rounds off with an automatic for every one they get off with a regular handgun, doesn't it stand to reason that it proportionately, at least partially, reduces the ultimate toll before help can arrive?

_______________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Okay, the second one may not technically be a question, but it is an important discussion item.  Nobody offered a counter-argument.

And, on the last one, the answer I received was that both regular and semi-automatic required the trigger to be squeezed each time.  My question wasn't about the process to fire the gun, rather the number of rounds tha could be fired in the same amount of time each time.

 

I really don't know what the average person gains from those weapons if they aren't a game hunter.

Yes.  It would be easier to legislate guns than fix mental illness.

How many were skilled?  I dunno.  But I would highly doubt any won any marksmanship awards.

And yes.  It would stand to reason that way about the rounds.

 

[IUFLA]

And, as I greatly respect both @rico and @5fouls as posters on the board, in the immortal words of Jules Winfield, "Well allow me to retort." 

14 hours ago, rico said:

I really don't know what the average person gains from those weapons if they aren't a game hunter.

Ask anyone from Venezuela what you would lose. Doesn't the fact that a totalitarian regimes first order of business when they take power is disarming the populace alarm you?

14 hours ago, rico said:

Yes.  It would be easier to legislate guns than fix mental illness.

So let's not fix the actual problem? Between over medicating our young people and the willingness of some to sacrifice their innocence for a really f'ed up political agenda, it's no wonder we have the issues we have today...

14 hours ago, rico said:

How many were skilled?  I dunno.  But I would highly doubt any won any marksmanship awards.

Once you learn the basics of any firearm, you don't have to be particularly skilled, especially in a close up environment where no one has the ability to fight back 

14 hours ago, rico said:

And yes.  It would stand to reason that way about the rounds.

No, it really doesn't... As I said numerous times in this thread, my semi-automatic hand guns fire bullets at the same rate my semi-automatic rifles do... One pull of the trigger, one bullet. My wife and I go shooting a lot. As a novice, she's much more adept at changing magazines out in a handgun than she is on the rifles. That point is moot.

It actually alarms me that our individual rights (and I won't put that in quotes because it's not something that I just perceive... They're real) are so lightly taken by some. Do you feel the same way about other rights as set forth in the Constitution? Speech? Press? Religion? All of those rights have been paid for in blood many times over...

I did offer an idea to limit the sale semi-automatic rifles to 18-21 year olds, (and if we're going to ask an 18 year old to basically fight and die for the rights I outlined above, that's only fair) since that seems to be the age group going into schools and killing children. I'd also say that medical information like the use of psychotropic drugs and/or in a physician's care over mental issues should be part of a background check. I'm all for keeping any firearm out of the hands of a dangerous person, but that's going to take work and compromise. 

And I'll get off my soapbox repeating a question that I asked before and never got an answer to...

You ban "assault weapons" and the day after, one of these nuts goes into a school with 2 handguns, like the Virginia Tech shooter did, and kills 30+ people... What then? 

Edited March 30, 2023 by IUFLA

[rico]

@IUFLA, I was answering @5foulsquestions from my standpoint.  It does in no way mean I am in favor of any new gun legislation or new bans.  

I also realize that "curing" mental health is not going to happen.

I stand by my solution to make schools like military bases or prisons.  Walls, razor wire, electric fences, etc. all the way around them with one entry/exit point with a guard shack.  Or something of that ilk.  Active military men/women being used.  If protecting the kids while at school is the goal then this would greatly go a long way in achieving that.

 

[Reacher]

18 minutes ago, IUFLA said:

And, as I greatly respect both @rico and @5fouls as posters on the board, in the immortal words of Jules Winfield, "Well allow me to retort." 

Ask anyone from Venezuela what you would lose. Doesn't the fact that a totalitarian regimes first order of business when they take power is disarming the populace alarm you?

So let's not fix the actual problem? Between over medicating our young people and the willingness of some to sacrifice their innocence for a really f'ed up political agenda, it's no wonder we have the issues we have today...

Once you learn the basics of any firearm, you don't have to be particularly skilled, especially in a close up environment where no one has the ability to fight back 

No, it really doesn't... As I said numerous times in this thread, my semi-automatic hand guns fire bullets at the same rate my semi-automatic rifles do... One pull of the trigger, one bullet. My wife and I go shooting a lot. As a novice, she's much more adept at changing magazines out in a handgun than she is on the rifles. That point is moot.

It actually alarms me that our individual rights (and I won't put that in quotes because it's not something that I just perceive... They're real) are so lightly taken by some. Do you feel the same way about other rights as set forth in the Constitution? Speech? Press? Religion? All of those rights have been paid for in blood many times over...

I did offer an idea to limit the sale semi-automatic rifles to 18-21 year olds, (and if we're going to ask an 18 year old to basically fight and die for the rights I outlined above, that's only fair) since that seems to be the age group going into schools and killing children. I'd also say that medical information like the use of psychotropic drugs and/or in a physician's care over mental issues should be part of a background check. I'm all for keeping any firearm out of the hands of a dangerous person, but that's going to take work and compromise. 

And I'll get off my soapbox repeating a question that I asked before and never got an answer to...

You ban "assault weapons" and the day after, one of these nuts goes into a school with 2 handguns, like the Virginia Tech shooter did, and kills 30+ people... What then? 

I was going to add my 2 cents, but  you covered it all better than I could. Well said.

[cthomas]

I'm not and will never be a gun owner. It's my individual choice. I'm also not about to tell anyone else what he or she should do. Guns are currently the tool of choice for the disturbed individuals who feel the need to express themselves by killing innocent people. The problem to me has always been the perpetrators. We, as a nation, always make these incidents political and go for an easy, visible, grandstanding solution. As jarring as school shootings are, I am as appalled by the daily stories right here in Indianapolis of teenage young men killing each other. Something is broken in our society and we had better figure out how to address it pretty soon. Whatever the social problem is, I guarantee the fix won't come from politicians.

[IUFLA]

Just now, rico said:

@IUFLA, I was answering @5foulsquestions from my standpoint.  It does in no way mean I am in favor of any new gun legislation or new bans.  

I also realize that "curing" mental health is not going to happen.

I stand by my solution to make schools like military bases or prisons.  Walls, razor wire, electric fences, etc. all the way around them with one entry/exit point with a guard shack.  Or something of that ilk.  Active military men/women being used.  If protecting the kids while at school is the goal then this would greatly go a long way in achieving that.

 

Understand that, brother... My initial thought was to give my own answers to the questions you answered. No slight intended... 

 

[jv1972iu]

15 minutes ago, cthomas said:

I'm not and will never be a gun owner. It's my individual choice. I'm also not about to tell anyone else what he or she should do. Guns are currently the tool of choice for the disturbed individuals who feel the need to express themselves by killing innocent people. The problem to me has always been the perpetrators. We, as a nation, always make these incidents political and go for an easy, visible, grandstanding solution. As jarring as school shootings are, I am as appalled by the daily stories right here in Indianapolis of teenage young men killing each other. Something is broken in our society and we had better figure out how to address it pretty soon. Whatever the social problem is, I guarantee the fix won't come from politicians.

"Free will, it is a bitch."   John Milton

[rico]

20 minutes ago, IUFLA said:

Understand that, brother... My initial thought was to give my own answers to the questions you answered. No slight intended... 

 

I will tell you that I asked my Dad about gun control.  His thoughts were that no one should have semi-automatic weapons and that includes the police.  He thought repeating rifles/shot guns and revolvers should be all that is allowed.  Of course he is a "Winchester '73" fan.

[IUFLA]

7 minutes ago, rico said:

I will tell you that I asked my Dad about gun control.  His thoughts were that no one should have semi-automatic weapons and that includes the police.  He thought repeating rifles/shot guns and revolvers should be all that is allowed.  Of course he is a "Winchester '73" fan.

I'll say this...

If that became the case (and it won't simply because the SCOTUS, in its current makeup, is going to strike down any prohibitive gun legislation) in addition to fentanyl, other drugs, and people flooding unfettered across our border, you could add semi-automatic weapons...

And whose hands would those wind up in?