~happiness is a warm gun~AKA~gun control~

[Socratoad]

Originally Posted by Clutch Munny

Not a big deal! No serious apology is necessary.

Well... not to harp on it, but actually there wasn't much truth in it. That was my point. I don't think that such observations have to be made or taken very personally (though why I think this, when they so often are, is a good question).

Again, no apology is necessary. And I'm already good buddies with one bosom, which, could it but testify, would surely extol my attentiveness. I'm always looking to add friends, though.

Thanks

I meant pertaining to the places and experience I've had. Not my conclusions as presented

[Dingfod]

Now, isn't this thread a warm and fuzzy place? Awwww.

[Socratoad]

Glad you noticed warren, but seriously I don't enjoy playing the role of a creep. It makes it so damned difficult to look in the mirror

[Dingfod]

I have to creep up to the mirror to even see myself, a sudden look can scare the hell out of me.

[viscousmemories]

These discussions always get too convoluted for my taste. For example why do threads on the subject of gun control so often turn into an argument about gun abolition?

Is there really anyone seeking to abolish all private gun ownership? It seems to me most people are fine with people having rifles and shotguns for target practice and hunting. So isn't the real argument is about whether there should be restrictions on handguns and "assault rifles"? (And I know "assault rifle" is a somewhat ambiguous term, so for my purposes consider a 30/30 a hunting rifle, and an M16-A2 an assault rifle). Is there anyone who thinks handguns and assault rifles should not be regulated?

[Darren]

Originally Posted by warrenly

Pretzels have no utility value except for choking, they are almost 100% carbohydrates, empty calories, valueless. I cannot count how many times I've jabbed a hole in the roof of my mouth with the sharp point of a broken pretzel, they should be outlawed and the grain they are made with fed to the animals I'm going to shoot and eat instead.

From GWB's cold, dead hands!

[Darren]

Originally Posted by ApostateAbe

The Jews in Nazi Germany didn't know it, which is why Hitler's gun ban wasn't even necessary. The Jews never had guns in the first place.

Guns didn't help the Warsaw Ghetto uprising much. Many countries were first defeated by the German military before the Jewish sectors of the population were identified and deported. It wasn't the absence of guns but the Jewish communities' vulnerability as a minority which was fatal for them under Nazi rule.

[Dingfod]

Originally Posted by viscousmemories

Is there really anyone seeking to abolish all private gun ownership?

It seems to me that Farren and others were making that argument.

(And I know "assault rifle" is a somewhat ambiguous term, so for my purposes consider a 30/30 a hunting rifle, and an M16-A2 an assault rifle).

Yes it is ambiguous. I have a Remington Model 7400 .30-06 semi-automatic rifle that can fire all five rounds as fast as I can pull the trigger five times. Because it has a removeable magazine clip, it is possible to fit it with a 10 round magazine clip instead. I could even tape together several of them so I could switch rapidly. Does that make my rifle an assault rifle? Not by any legal definition, it doesn't have a pistol grip or a magazine that contains more than 10 rounds. It has more than twice the bullet energy at any range than the 5.56mm M16-A2 (which, being selectable to 3-shot burst fully automatic, makes it a real assault rifle), making each round fired from my rifle far more accurate and deadly than the puny Colt rifle. It makes me wonder, why the distinction?

Is there anyone who thinks handguns and assault rifles should not be regulated?

I think I've been more or less making that argument, however, I don't think they should be totally unregulated because I firmly believe there should be a training and proficiency requirement to gun ownership and also I'm not against registration or background checks. These viewpoints are why I've failed to join the NRA. What I am not arguing for is the 2nd Amendment of the U.S. Constitution allowing the average person to posess machine guns, mortars, grenades, anti-tank weapons, bombs, and other weapons of mass mayhem being necessary to prevent a tyranical government. Even though that was most likely the intent of the founding fathers, it is a bit of an outdated concept these days.

[Farren]

Originally Posted by warrenly

It seems to me that Farren and others were making that argument.

Do you recall me sayng I'm all for nuanced laws and citing some situations that might warrant carefully considered ownership? My take is that "every citizen has the fundamental right to carry a firearm regardless of circumstance" is a foolish and disharmonious idea.

[Dingfod]

Originally Posted by Farren

Do you recall me sayng I'm all for nuanced laws and citing some situations that might warrant carefully considered ownership? My take is that "every citizen has the fundamental right to carry a firearm regardless of circumstance" is a foolish and disharmonious idea.

OK, I shouldn't have named you. That was my impression at first though. You did clarify. Sorry.