Mass shooting at mosque in New Zealand (Please no videos)

TIDE-HSV · Mar 21, 2019

The devil is always in the details. In the end, there's no real, basic difference between a semi-auto hunting rifle and a semi-auto "assault rifle," other than cosmetics. They each fire one shot for each trigger pull. Our ban was in effect for ten years - 1994-2014 and studies showed no impact on homicide rates. Magazines were limited to ten cartridges. The problem with that is that manufacturers simply designed around the cosmetics. The only tack I can see which would make a difference would be to outlaw all semi-autos, forcing unhappy hunters to use bolt or lever-action rifles. If capacities were then limited to five cartridges, self-contained, no detachable mags, then you'd start to make a dent in the number of people who could be shot at once. Sure, a mass murderer could bring multiple weapons, as they do now, but you'd make a real dent in the rate of fire. I think these are actions which could be taken without violating the 2nd amendment, as it's been interpreted...

cbi1972 · Mar 21, 2019

TIDE-HSV said:
The devil is always in the details. In the end, there's no real, basic difference between a semi-auto hunting rifle and a semi-auto "assault rifle," other than cosmetics. They each fire one shot for each trigger pull. Our ban was in effect for ten years - 1994-2014 and studies showed no impact on homicide rates. Magazines were limited to ten cartridges. The problem with that is that manufacturers simply designed around the cosmetics. The only tack I can see which would make a difference would be to outlaw all semi-autos, forcing unhappy hunters to use bolt or lever-action rifles. If capacities were then limited to five cartridges, self-contained, no detachable mags, then you'd start to make a dent in the number of people who could be shot at once. Sure, a mass murderer could bring multiple weapons, as they do now, but you'd make a real dent in the rate of fire. I think these are actions which could be taken without violating the 2nd amendment, as it's been interpreted...

Interpretations which would significantly impair the citizen soldier's capability to offer meaningful resistance are in my mind incorrect. Never mind unhappy hunters.

crimsonaudio · Mar 21, 2019

cbi1972 said:
Interpretations which would significantly impair the citizen soldier's capability to offer meaningful resistance are in my mind incorrect. Never mind unhappy hunters.

And of course it would be career suicide for many of the politicians involved (see 1994).

IMALOYAL1 · Mar 21, 2019

outlaw all semi-autos, forcing unhappy hunters to use bolt or lever-action rifles. If capacities were then limited to five cartridges, self-contained, no detachable mags..

Too much common sense to ever gain traction.

92tide · Mar 21, 2019

cbi1972 said:
Interpretations which would significantly impair the citizen soldier's capability to offer meaningful resistance are in my mind incorrect. Never mind unhappy hunters.

real citizen soldiers don't need no high capacity rifles. they have mad tiki torch skills and an unlimited supply of torches in their mom's garage

TIDE-HSV · Mar 21, 2019

cbi1972 said:
Interpretations which would significantly impair the citizen soldier's capability to offer meaningful resistance are in my mind incorrect. Never mind unhappy hunters.

Well, for starters, what's in your and my mind matters not at all. What I outlined above is really not far off our expired assault weapon ban. IOW, it's constitutional. Enhanced background checks need to be enacted also, even though that wouldn't have caught Paddock. My views on the 2nd Amendment have evolved, based on the continuing mass murders. I'm willing to accept what I would not have a few years back...

twofbyc · Mar 21, 2019

TIDE-HSV said:
Well, for starters, what's in your and my mind matters not at all. What I outlined above is really not far off our expired assault weapon ban. IOW, it's constitutional. Enhanced background checks need to be enacted also, even though that wouldn't have caught Paddock. My views on the 2nd Amendment have evolved, based on the continuing mass murders. I'm willing to accept what I would not have a few years back...

Problem is, the way it’s written, it’s open to interpretation. On this one, I don’t think our Founding Fathers were as precise as they could have been; then again, I’m not sure they anticipated the advanced weaponry we see today.
The ultimate question is: with what exists today, would they have drawn any line at all, as to what citizens could own? Would they think it’s OK for me to own an RPG? That’s an “arm”, in the strictest sense. So is an anti-tank missile.
And the answer is: no one knows. Everybody has their opinion, but reality is our Constitution has been amended before. That’s part of change, something that is anathema to millions in this country.

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

Bazza · Mar 21, 2019

92tide said:
New Zealand bans military-style rifles, prime minister says days after mosque attacks that left 50 dead

i guess oz didn't get the memo that they can't talk about gun control in response to these events

Oz?

Oh and thank goodness for more gun control measures.....I'm SURE they will address the problem satisfactorily........

TIDE-HSV · Mar 21, 2019

twofbyc said:
Problem is, the way it’s written, it’s open to interpretation. On this one, I don’t think our Founding Fathers were as precise as they could have been; then again, I’m not sure they anticipated the advanced weaponry we see today.
The ultimate question is: with what exists today, would they have drawn any line at all, as to what citizens could own? Would they think it’s OK for me to own an RPG? That’s an “arm”, in the strictest sense. So is an anti-tank missile.
And the answer is: no one knows. Everybody has their opinion, but reality is our Constitution has been amended before. That’s part of change, something that is anathema to millions in this country.

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

Limitations on assault weapons have already been upheld, so certainly a ban on RPGs would be. The wild card is Kavanaugh, who has extraordinarily broad views on gun rights...

92tide · Mar 21, 2019

Bazza said:
Oz?

Oh and thank goodness for more gun control measures.....I'm SURE they will address the problem satisfactorily........

yeah, got my colonies mixed up. should have said the kiwi's didn't get the memo. regardless, gun control has worked quite well in australia.

anyway, nice that you are able to find the humor in how another country decides to deal with a mass murder of their people.

twofbyc · Mar 21, 2019

TIDE-HSV said:
Limitations on assault weapons have already been upheld, so certainly a ban on RPGs would be. The wild card is Kavanaugh, who has extraordinarily broad views on gun rights...

I agree - only problem is, it’s up to Congress. That means nothing happens.
The “millions” I referred to are most likely card-carrying Republicans and/or NRA members, and their “paid for” legislators aren’t going to let it happen.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

92tide · Mar 21, 2019

Bazza said:
Oz?

Oh and thank goodness for more gun control measures.....I'm SURE they will address the problem satisfactorily........

here's some non-gun control stuff for you

'It hurt so bad': Indiana teachers shot with plastic pellets during active shooter training

An active-shooter training exercise at an Indiana elementary school in January left teachers with welts, bruises and abrasions after they were shot with plastic pellets by the local sheriff’s office conducting the session....
“They told us, ‘This is what happens if you just cower and do nothing,’” said one of the two teachers, both of whom asked IndyStar not to be identified out of concern for their jobs. “They shot all of us across our backs. I was hit four times.

“It hurt so bad.”

Bamabuzzard · Mar 21, 2019

IMALOYAL1 said:
Too much common sense to ever gain traction.

The sad thing in all of this is, there are literally millions of gun owners in this country who do the right thing, shoot guns for fun, and enjoy the hobby of collecting and shooting fire arms. Exponentially more than those who do the wrong thing. Shooting guns truly is fun. Yet, before it's all said and done (may take years), a lot of that will be taken away from them because a small fraction of people. Because the moment someone in the small fraction group starts using bolt and/or lever action firearms to do what they're going to do anyway (and trust me they will). Then those will be taken away as well.

You see it in all facets of life beginning as a child in grade school through adulthood. The majority getting punished for the actions of a few. That's basically people's natural response when looking for solutions to problems.

MattinBama · Mar 21, 2019

92tide said:
real citizen soldiers don't need no high capacity rifles. they have mad tiki torch skills and an unlimited supply of torches in their mom's garage

Flameless Candles Will Not Replace Us!

Solar Outdoor Lighting Will Not Replace Us!

TIDE-HSV · Mar 21, 2019

Bamabuzzard said:
The sad thing in all of this is, there are literally millions of gun owners in this country who do the right thing, shoot guns for fun, and enjoy the hobby of collecting and shooting fire arms. Exponentially more than those who do the wrong thing. Shooting guns truly is fun. Yet, before it's all said and done (may take years), a lot of that will be taken away from them because a small fraction of people. Because the moment someone in the small fraction group starts using bolt and/or lever action firearms to do what they're going to do anyway (and trust me they will). Then those will be taken away as well.

You see it in all facets of life beginning as a child in grade school through adulthood. The majority getting punished for the actions of a few. That's basically people's natural response when looking for solutions to problems.

It's just really not possible, and I've shot them all, even a bump stock. You can't do with a semi-auto what you can do with one with a bump stock. (And he could do it only because his target was as large as a parking lot.) You can't do with a bolt action what you can do with a semi and you can't do with a lever what you can do with a bolt. You can't stop it, but you can certainly cut the number of casualties...

81usaf92 · Mar 21, 2019

twofbyc said:
Problem is, the way it’s written, it’s open to interpretation. On this one, I don’t think our Founding Fathers were as precise as they could have been; then again, I’m not sure they anticipated the advanced weaponry we see today.
The ultimate question is: with what exists today, would they have drawn any line at all, as to what citizens could own? Would they think it’s OK for me to own an RPG? That’s an “arm”, in the strictest sense. So is an anti-tank missile.
And the answer is: no one knows. Everybody has their opinion, but reality is our Constitution has been amended before. That’s part of change, something that is anathema to millions in this country.

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

I think the problem with how the constitution was written was the fact that at the time there really wasn’t much hope the 13 states would stay together under a very strict Constitution because the Articles had problems with giving the federal government enough power to survive. The Whiskey and Shay’s rebellions illustrate that. I believe our forefathers thought we would have enough sense to make the BOR more black and White once things went on. I think they underestimated future generations will to do so.

FWIW I’ve changed my opinion on the second amendment somewhat in the last few years as well. But I fear we waited a little too late to make any non radical changes because we have two radical sides drowning out any sensible discussion.

92tide · Mar 22, 2019

https://twitter.com/abc/status/1108086949724606465

https://twitter.com/NWPinPDX/status/1108086949724606465?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw%7Ctwcamp%5Etweetembed%7Ctwterm%5E1108086949724606465&ref_url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.balloon-juice.com%2F2019%2F03%2F21%2Fmeanwhile-in-new-zealand%2F

Bamabuzzard · Mar 22, 2019

TIDE-HSV said:
It's just really not possible, and I've shot them all, even a bump stock. You can't do with a semi-auto what you can do with one with a bump stock. (And he could do it only because his target was as large as a parking lot.) You can't do with a bolt action what you can do with a semi and you can't do with a lever what you can do with a bolt. You can't stop it, but you can certainly cut the number of casualties...

It's very possible to carry a bolt action firearm into a crowd and kill people. Will it shoot like the semi-auto's? Nope. But simply because semi-auto's and bump stocks get banned doesn't mean people who want to kill others will stop trying. They may not kill near as many, but the narrative being discussed won't be "He only killed three or four." The narrative will be "We're still having school shootings" and the next predictable human nature response will be "If he didn't have availability to guns at all then this would have never happened." This is too easy to predict.

CharminTide · Mar 22, 2019

Bamabuzzard said:
Will it shoot like the semi-auto's? Nope. But simply because semi-auto's and bump stocks get banned doesn't mean people who want to kill others will stop trying. They may not kill near as many, but the narrative being discussed won't be "He only killed three or four." The narrative will be "We're still having school shootings" and the next predictable human nature response will be "If he didn't have availability to guns at all then this would have never happened." This is too easy to predict.

*Boxing bell sound*
And for its 45th consecutive victory in this tournament: the Slippery Slope!

Just to be clear, your narrative here is that you agree these measures would save lives, but you oppose them anyway. You would rather make your stand now rather than then, and are okay with the fact that more people will die because of that choice.

Bamabuzzard · Mar 22, 2019

CharminTide said:
*Boxing bell sound*
And for its 45th consecutive victory in this tournament: the Slippery Slope!

Just to be clear, your narrative here is that you agree these measures would save lives, but you oppose them anyway. You would rather make your stand now rather than then, and are okay with the fact that more people will die because of that choice.

My "narrative" is it is unfortunate how much power the vast minority seems to always have that normally results in taking things away from the majority who do things the right way. And as I said in my earlier post, punishing the majority because of the small fraction group is the most common human response that you can see from childhood, grade school, the workplace, social situations, all the way up the line. That's all I'm pointing out. That may not bother you and that's fine. But simply because it doesn't bother you, and you're more than willing to have something taken away from you by the government because of what someone else in an extraordinarily small group does. That's your right. But, I don't agree with that thought process.

Also, you can poke fun at the slippery slope concept all you want. But more times than not. The progression of human decisions follows that exact pattern. It's why the "Slippery Slope" term became a cliche.

Mass shooting at mosque in New Zealand (Please no videos)

Senior Administrator

Hall of Fame

Administrator

All-American

TideFans Legend

Senior Administrator

Hall of Fame

TideFans Legend

Senior Administrator

TideFans Legend

Hall of Fame

TideFans Legend

FB Moderator

Hall of Fame

Senior Administrator

TideFans Legend

TideFans Legend

FB Moderator

Hall of Fame

FB Moderator

TideFans.shop - NEW Stuff!