Like Tree156Likes

Thread: The Gun Control Debate.......Anybody else seeing this trend?

  1. #376
    Forum Member
    Chenzo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Rural WI
    Posts
    1,253

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by scfire86 View Post
    The GCA of 1968 has been challenged over 200 times. The courts have tossed all of them.
    Point being? I'm not advocating gun ownership for felons. I'm not advocating eliminating the FFL. Hell, I don't even want a fully automatic, legitimate assault weapon (not to be confused with a semi-automatic personal defense rifle such as the AR15) because I don't feel there is any benefit, and it's expensive as hell to shoot. No one is arguing about the GCA of 1968, so why are you bringing it up? Perhaps because you have nothing to back up your current argument?


    Since many of you have stated the changing magazines is so easy, there should be no problem with limiting capacity.
    This as been explained to you in every way possible, and you're either simply ignoring what everyone is saying, or you're just too stupid to comprehend what we're saying. (I'm leaning towards stupid, in case you didn't know)

    There is a difference between gunning down a group of unarmed innocent people, and having fire returned at you.

    Furthermore, you advocate limiting magazine capacity with no evidence to back up your standpoint, but you're not advocating something that has been proven to be effective: Law abiding citizens with concealed carry permits. I can show you story after story, fact after fact, and more evidence than you would have time to read in the rest of your life, of instances where a law abiding citizen with a concealed carry permit ended a situation. But again, that doesn't matter to you because it doesn't fit your agenda, right?



    Yet that has happened. Loughner dropped the mag and allowed time for his potential victims to act. Precisely my point.

    And what point exactly would that be? That you have one case that doesn't even fit your agenda for banning magazine capacity larger than 10 rounds, and you can't seem to understand why that doesn't compare to what you're trying to push?


    You make my point. He had to carry other weapons. Still time for victims to act. Something they wouldn't have had with a larger magazine.

    No one made your point. You talk about twisting words, that's all you've done here.


    I never said the act was an absolute. It's a possibility.

    And that's all you have. Possibility. You haven't provided any facts or evidence that support your claims.


    See above response. We don't know how many people were able to escape the killing spree by getting away while magazine changeout was occurring.

    More speculation on your part without facts or evidence.


    See above response. The school also had numerous armed guards. Using your logic I could say that is not an effective alternative either.

    You've been told repeatedly they were at a different part of the campus. Which, if anything, is only an advocate for more armed guards, or the ability for students to carry concealed on campus. So, thanks for further proving you don't know what you're talking about.


    I used the same data source as yourself when you claim a larger magazine will make you safer.

    And using that data has not proved your claims at all. All it's done is further showed your ignorance and lack of knowledge on a topic


    So let's get rid of all laws since the government can't enforce all of them all of the time.

    How about we use common sense measures to enforce the current laws? Your buddy Joe Biden said we need more gun laws because we don't have the time to enforce the ones we have. How does that work? How does that make sense? What makes you and him think we can enforce new laws when we can't even enforce the ones that are on the books? Liberal logic at it's finest.
    Again, good try. Maybe someday you'll be able to think for yourself. Until then myself and many others will continue to prove your ignorance and lack of knowledge on anything gun related.
    "A fire department that writes off civilians faster than an express line of 6 reasons or less is not progressive, it's dangerous, because it's run by fear. Fear does not save lives, it endangers them." -- Lt. Ray McCormack FDNY

    "Because if you don't think you're good, nobody else will." -- DC Tom Laun (ret) Syracuse

  2. #377
    MembersZone Subscriber

    Join Date
    May 2000
    Location
    SW MO
    Posts
    4,249

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by scfire86 View Post
    Since many of you have stated the changing magazines is so easy, there should be no problem with limiting capacity.
    Nor should there be a problem leaving them be.

    Quote Originally Posted by scfire86 View Post
    Yet that has happened. Loughner dropped the mag and allowed time for his potential victims to act. Precisely my point.
    It happened one single time where someone had time and actually acted. A woman grabbed the magazine he dropped. That hardly proves a point. More times people did not act during a mag change.

    Quote Originally Posted by scfire86 View Post
    You make my point. He had to carry other weapons. Still time for victims to act. Something they wouldn't have had with a larger magazine.
    How did anyone act? I have yet to read a story or citation of anyone who stopped or escaped due to the fact he changed guns or mags. The sole reason he swapped guns was 1) the pump shotgun ran out of shells and 2) the 100-round drum jammed.

    Are you going to use more conjecture and hypothesis of how many escaped while he was swapping? How about something factual.

    Quote Originally Posted by scfire86 View Post
    I never said the act was an absolute. It's a possibility.
    So we should make laws on possibility?

    Quote Originally Posted by scfire86 View Post
    See above response. We don't know how many people were able to escape the killing spree by getting away while magazine changeout was occurring.
    You're right, you're using rationale based upon no facts, just some hypothesis that sounds good.

    Quote Originally Posted by scfire86 View Post
    See above response. The school also had numerous armed guards. Using your logic I could say that is not an effective alternative either.
    The "armed guards" (AKA campus police) were too busy thinking the incident was confined to a single dorm. The school failed, plain and simple. Had they locked down campus and called in assistance to search for the gunman, there is no telling how many may have lived. Potentially all of them.

    Quote Originally Posted by scfire86 View Post
    I used the same data source as yourself when you claim a larger magazine will make you safer.
    So, I should have the burden of proof when you want to take away something from me? That's not how our country operates.

    Quote Originally Posted by scfire86 View Post
    So let's get rid of all laws since the government can't enforce all of them all of the time.
    Never suggested that. Perhaps we should enforce the laws we have on the books instead of passing more laws we can't enforce.

    Every one of these people involved in mass shootings were, by law, restricted from owning a gun. However, they got them anyway.

    The problem here is that certain people aren't interested in actually enforcing the law, they are interested in being on TV and pushing their agenda.
    Chenzo likes this.

  3. #378
    MembersZone Subscriber

    Join Date
    May 2000
    Location
    SW MO
    Posts
    4,249

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Chenzo View Post
    How about we use common sense measures to enforce the current laws? Your buddy Joe Biden said we need more gun laws because we don't have the time to enforce the ones we have. How does that work? How does that make sense? What makes you and him think we can enforce new laws when we can't even enforce the ones that are on the books? Liberal logic at it's finest.
    That would be the same idiot that said a double-barrel shotgun provides better protection than an "assault rifle".
    Chenzo likes this.

  4. #379
    MembersZone Subscriber
    voyager9's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    Southern NJ
    Posts
    2,007

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Catch22 View Post
    That would be the same idiot that said a double-barrel shotgun provides better protection than an "assault rifle".
    DHS disagrees.. Personal Defense Weapons Solicitation
    And in fact they want select-fire for personal defense.
    This announcement is being placed in accordance with the Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) paragraph 5.207. It is a combined synopsis/solicitation for commercial items. 5.56x45mm NATO, select-fire firearm suitable for personal defense.
    Chenzo likes this.
    So you call this your free country
    Tell me why it costs so much to live
    -3dd

  5. #380
    MembersZone Subscriber
    voyager9's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    Southern NJ
    Posts
    2,007

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by scfire86 View Post
    Since many of you have stated the changing magazines is so easy, there should be no problem with limiting capacity.
    Congress is having hearings as we speak.
    Even members of congress disagree with you.
    Grassley on magazine capacity:
    "We hear that no one needs to carry larger magazines than those used to hunt deer, but an attacking criminal, unlike a deer shoots back."
    Chenzo likes this.
    So you call this your free country
    Tell me why it costs so much to live
    -3dd

  6. #381
    Forum Member
    scfire86's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    HB
    Posts
    10,330

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Chenzo View Post
    Again, good try. Maybe someday you'll be able to think for yourself. Until then myself and many others will continue to prove your ignorance and lack of knowledge on anything gun related.
    Let me know when you have something that isn't the normal talking points from your end as well.

    Quote Originally Posted by Catch22 View Post
    Nor should there be a problem leaving them be.
    Those on the receiving end would disagree with you.

    Quote Originally Posted by Catch22 View Post
    It happened one single time where someone had time and actually acted. A woman grabbed the magazine he dropped. That hardly proves a point. More times people did not act during a mag change.
    Something that could have been done after only ten rounds instead of 30. Possibly saving lives.

    Quote Originally Posted by Catch22 View Post
    How did anyone act? I have yet to read a story or citation of anyone who stopped or escaped due to the fact he changed guns or mags. The sole reason he swapped guns was 1) the pump shotgun ran out of shells and 2) the 100-round drum jammed.
    Then you should reread what happened at the Gifford's shooting. I don't know how many people were able to get away because of magazine changeout. Neither do you. You assume it is zero. I don't.

    Quote Originally Posted by Catch22 View Post
    Are you going to use more conjecture and hypothesis of how many escaped while he was swapping? How about something factual.
    See above response.

    Quote Originally Posted by Catch22 View Post
    So we should make laws on possibility?
    This statement makes no sense. Please clarify.

    Quote Originally Posted by Catch22 View Post
    You're right, you're using rationale based upon no facts, just some hypothesis that sounds good.
    I have actual events to prove my point. You need to review the definition of "hypothesis."

    Quote Originally Posted by Catch22 View Post
    The "armed guards" (AKA campus police) were too busy thinking the incident was confined to a single dorm. The school failed, plain and simple. Had they locked down campus and called in assistance to search for the gunman, there is no telling how many may have lived. Potentially all of them.
    Regardless. One of the arguments used by the NRA is that an armed presence deters possible gunmen. That didn't happen at VA Tech. Though I don't see anyone demanding we do away will all armed personnel at educational institutions.

    Quote Originally Posted by Catch22 View Post
    So, I should have the burden of proof when you want to take away something from me? That's not how our country operates.
    I've cited my rationale numerous times. The difference is I believe those seconds may indeed count when one is being shot at by a crazy person. You don't.

    Quote Originally Posted by Catch22 View Post
    Never suggested that. Perhaps we should enforce the laws we have on the books instead of passing more laws we can't enforce.
    Which law will prevent guns being sold in the secondary market?

    Quote Originally Posted by Catch22 View Post
    Every one of these people involved in mass shootings were, by law, restricted from owning a gun. However, they got them anyway.
    True.

    Quote Originally Posted by Catch22 View Post
    The problem here is that certain people aren't interested in actually enforcing the law, they are interested in being on TV and pushing their agenda.
    The bigger problem is the pro-gun side immediately dissolves into hyperbole when confronted with any change in the status quo.

    Quote Originally Posted by voyager9 View Post
    DHS disagrees.. Personal Defense Weapons Solicitation
    And in fact they want select-fire for personal defense.
    Good for them.

    Quote Originally Posted by voyager9 View Post
    Congress is having hearings as we speak.
    Even members of congress disagree with you.
    Grassley on magazine capacity:
    They're allowed their opinions. Just like I'm allowed mine. I saw Giffords' husband's testimony. Very powerful stuff. His comment (and I agree with him) was basically that limiting magazine capacity to 10 rounds, saying that if the Tucson, Arizona, shooter hadn't had 33 round magazines, life would have been spared. Kelly supports gun control but also believes in gun ownership. He later stated that the person who tackled the shooter was almost killed when an armed civilian almost fired his gun, thinking that the tackler was in fact the shooter. Fortunately the would be protector did indeed hesitate.
    Politics is like driving. To go forward select "D", to go backward select "R."

  7. #382
    Forum Member
    Chenzo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Rural WI
    Posts
    1,253

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by scfire86 View Post
    Let me know when you have something that isn't the normal talking points from your end as well.
    You mean like all the facts, evidence, and real-world stories you've been presented with time and time again but refuse to acknowledge and continuously ignore?
    "A fire department that writes off civilians faster than an express line of 6 reasons or less is not progressive, it's dangerous, because it's run by fear. Fear does not save lives, it endangers them." -- Lt. Ray McCormack FDNY

    "Because if you don't think you're good, nobody else will." -- DC Tom Laun (ret) Syracuse

  8. #383
    Forum Member
    Chenzo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Rural WI
    Posts
    1,253

    Default

    http://www.nydailynews.com/news/nati....1251027<br />

    "Chicago honor student Hadiya Pendleton, who participated in Obama inauguration festivities, shot dead just blocks from her school"

    Yep, gun control sure does work...
    "A fire department that writes off civilians faster than an express line of 6 reasons or less is not progressive, it's dangerous, because it's run by fear. Fear does not save lives, it endangers them." -- Lt. Ray McCormack FDNY

    "Because if you don't think you're good, nobody else will." -- DC Tom Laun (ret) Syracuse

  9. #384
    Forum Member
    scfire86's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    HB
    Posts
    10,330

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Chenzo View Post
    You mean like all the facts, evidence, and real-world stories you've been presented with time and time again but refuse to acknowledge and continuously ignore?
    I guess we will have to agree to disagree.

    Quote Originally Posted by Chenzo View Post
    http://www.nydailynews.com/news/nati....1251027<br />

    "Chicago honor student Hadiya Pendleton, who participated in Obama inauguration festivities, shot dead just blocks from her school"

    Yep, gun control sure does work...
    We do know that because of background checks felons have been denied permission to own guns legally. Wouldn't you agree that is a good thing? If you want anecdotes, I can post stories about "responsible" individuals accidentally shooting people or themselves all day long.

    What's your point?
    Politics is like driving. To go forward select "D", to go backward select "R."

  10. #385
    MembersZone Subscriber

    Join Date
    May 2000
    Location
    SW MO
    Posts
    4,249

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by scfire86 View Post
    Those on the receiving end would disagree with you.
    That line again? Do you honestly believe that the victims of these atrocities blame the magazine? Darrell Scott, a father of one of the Columbine victims, says it about as well as anyone I've seen. There is good and evil in this world, it's been that way since Cain and Able.

    Quote Originally Posted by scfire86 View Post
    Something that could have been done after only ten rounds instead of 30. Possibly saving lives.
    If he had dropped his ten-round mag in a location where someone could have grabbed it. If this was a valid argument, why is it he was the only one stopped in this manner?

    Quote Originally Posted by scfire86 View Post
    Then you should reread what happened at the Gifford's shooting. I don't know how many people were able to get away because of magazine changeout. Neither do you. You assume it is zero. I don't.

    See above response.
    I never assumed it was zero. I'm rational enough to understand it could have been several. What I try to work on is facts. The facts are he dropped the mag and someone grabbed it, giving others time to take the guy down.

    I also know, per Giffords husband's testimony, it took him 15 minutes to fire those 30-some rounds. That's two rounds per minute, one every 30 seconds. More than sufficient time to change a mag. That tells me the mag changing made no difference whatsoever. The fact he dropped the mag in a location where someone could act was the factor. That was his first mag swap, so no one escaped during previous swaps.

    Quote Originally Posted by scfire86 View Post
    This statement makes no sense. Please clarify.
    You argued that changing out mags gave the possibility for someone to act and that it wasn't an absolute. Again, I'm working off of facts. The facts are that in ONE mass shooting incident, a person was stopped while in the process of changing out mags, and that is because he dropped the mag and someone got their hands on it.

    Basically, I'm raising the BS flag on that rationale.

    Quote Originally Posted by scfire86 View Post
    I have actual events to prove my point. You need to review the definition of "hypothesis."
    You have one incident. One single time where a mag change impacted the incident in a favorable manner.

    Knowing what a hypothesis is and actually knowing something about the scientific method, this would dictate testing said hypothesis. The hypothesis has been tested, time and time again. Only on one occassion have you found your hypothesis to be true, which means you need to look at your hypothesis.

    If you want to change your hypothesis to "if someone drops their mag, it gives people victims the opportunity to react and stop the shooter" I wouldn't argue with you, as I only know of one case where the shooter dropped a mag and that is exactly what happened.

    Quote Originally Posted by scfire86 View Post
    Regardless. One of the arguments used by the NRA is that an armed presence deters possible gunmen. That didn't happen at VA Tech. Though I don't see anyone demanding we do away will all armed personnel at educational institutions.
    Because rational people look deeper. The reason armed personnel didnt' work at VT is because they didn't act appropriately. The reason armed personnel didn't impact Columbine is because he was at a remote location.

    The NRA has also offered a number of other solutions, like actually enforcing the laws we have now rather than making new ones.

    Quote Originally Posted by scfire86 View Post
    I've cited my rationale numerous times. The difference is I believe those seconds may indeed count when one is being shot at by a crazy person. You don't.
    You're right, I don't. The difference is you base your rationale off of one freak incident, whereas I base mine on several.

    I also have the rationale that laws exist that would have kept the guns out of those people, yet they weren't enforced.

    Quote Originally Posted by scfire86 View Post
    Which law will prevent guns being sold in the secondary market?
    Require background checks for the secondary market, I don't have a problem with that as long as it's accessible. However, statistics show that background checks aren't going to solve that problem. Criminals aren't buying these guns from law-abiding sellers, they're buying them from other criminals. Case in point- William Spengler.

    None of these mass murderers were in legal possession of their firearms. Holmes and Loughner had mental issues and should have been on the NICS list as banned. However, the system in place didn't work. What exactly is a magazine restriction going to do for that? Not a damn thing!

    Quote Originally Posted by scfire86 View Post
    True.
    At least you're rational enough to acknowledge that.

    Quote Originally Posted by scfire86 View Post
    The bigger problem is the pro-gun side immediately dissolves into hyperbole when confronted with any change in the status quo.
    I think you will find that most law-abiding pro-gun folks have no problem with finding new ways to prevent these incidents. However, most have no interest in giving up their rights so that politicians can look like they're doing something by passing legislation when they won't enforce the laws that are already in place.

    We have the laws that would have prevented each and every one of these incidents. You even conceded that none of these men should have been allowed guns by law. How about we address that first. Then we can look at closing the loopholes. If that proves to not do the job, at that point we can start looking at more laws.

    What Feinstein and the anti-gun crowd trying to do is akin to banning lighters because the country has a fire problem.
    SPFDRum and Chenzo like this.

  11. #386
    MembersZone Subscriber

    Join Date
    May 2000
    Location
    SW MO
    Posts
    4,249

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by scfire86 View Post
    We do know that because of background checks felons have been denied permission to own guns legally.

    We also know that many states aren't reporting to NICS like they're supposed to. We also know we're not prosecuting people who violate the law in the process of applying for weapons they aren't allowed to have.

    Just because some have been denied doesn't mean the system is working. Obviously, there's a problem somewhere.

    And to be totally honest and out there, I have no qualms with Obama's executive actions. My issue is that 1) most of those actions shouldn't have even been necessary and 2) they should have been done a long time ago.

  12. #387
    MembersZone Subscriber
    voyager9's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    Southern NJ
    Posts
    2,007

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by scfire86 View Post
    He later stated that the person who tackled the shooter was almost killed when an armed civilian almost fired his gun, thinking that the tackler was in fact the shooter. Fortunately the would be protector did indeed hesitate.
    Almost. But didn't. That's called training. In fact the same person told the tackler to put the gun down before the cops made the same mistake. That has nothing to do with your arguments. Right. Nothing.
    Catch22 and Chenzo like this.
    So you call this your free country
    Tell me why it costs so much to live
    -3dd

  13. #388
    Forum Member
    scfire86's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    HB
    Posts
    10,330

    Default

    I'll let you all have the last word. I think we've pretty much beat this one to death.
    Politics is like driving. To go forward select "D", to go backward select "R."

  14. #389
    Forum Member
    FyredUp's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 1999
    Location
    Rural Wisconsin, Retired from the burbs of Milwaukee
    Posts
    10,301

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by scfire86 View Post
    I'll let you all have the last word. I think we've pretty much beat this one to death.
    You're not "LETTING" us do anything. Just walk away, we know you lost the debate.
    Chenzo and Greg30-06 like this.
    Crazy, but that's how it goes
    Millions of people living as foes
    Maybe it's not too late
    To learn how to love, and forget how to hate

  15. #390
    Forum Member
    Chenzo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Rural WI
    Posts
    1,253

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by scfire86 View Post
    I'll let you all have the last word. I think we've pretty much beat this one to death.
    Shocker, that you're running away for a second time because you can't back your opinion up with facts.

    It's been fun proving how uninformed you are.
    "A fire department that writes off civilians faster than an express line of 6 reasons or less is not progressive, it's dangerous, because it's run by fear. Fear does not save lives, it endangers them." -- Lt. Ray McCormack FDNY

    "Because if you don't think you're good, nobody else will." -- DC Tom Laun (ret) Syracuse

  16. #391
    Truckie
    SPFDRum's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 1999
    Location
    St Paul, MN
    Posts
    2,516

    Default

    But the same city and county don't want law abiding citizens to have the ability to protect themselves...

    Convicted murderer mistakenly freed recaptured in Illinois

    http://www.foxnews.com/us/2013/02/02...se-in-chicago/
    My posts reflect my views and opinions, not the organization I work for or my IAFF local. Some of which they may not agree. I.A.C.O.J. member
    "I ask, Sir, what is the militia? It is the whole people. To disarm the people is the best and most effectual way to enslave them."
    George Mason
    Co-author of the Second Amendment
    during Virginia's Convention to Ratify the Constitution, 1788
    Elevator Rescue Information

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Similar Threads

  1. Anyone else see a trend.....
    By BCmdepas3280 in forum Firefighters Forum
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: 02-16-2006, 02:12 AM
  2. Noticeable Trend?
    By ltoffd in forum Federal FIRE ACT Grants & Funding
    Replies: 12
    Last Post: 09-02-2004, 02:30 AM
  3. Replies: 0
    Last Post: 03-24-2004, 12:11 PM
  4. Disturbing Trend - MUTT x 4
    By RspctFrmCalgary in forum The Off Duty Forums
    Replies: 14
    Last Post: 06-21-2002, 11:42 AM
  5. Disturbing Trend
    By firedog11ku in forum Firefighters Forum
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 12-01-2001, 11:03 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts

Log in

Click here to log in or register