LOCKED - Want to read something terrifying?

[00Dawg]

Right now you don't. The problem comes when the guys doing the monitoring change stances/sides/opinions compared to you, and over time something that was acceptable becomes unacceptable, and then it becomes illegal, and suddenly you're facing legal charges.
I could easily see this happening with "hate speech" in a European-style manner.

 

[Maroon Eagle]

Actually, that's not true. Oregon's colleges and universities cannot ban guns on their campuses on their own.

Link to Oregonian article: Here

 

[jethreauxdawg]

Beat me to it

Never anticipated it...

The second ammendment is there to protect the citizens from the government, foreign and domestic.

Let's take away everyone's gun, we can trust the government to protect us. Good ole govt would never oppress it's citizens. That has never happened before, anywhere**

 

[Shamoan]

the illegal drug laws have really kept our nation sober as a gofer. making laws that cannot be enforce seem to be working great.**

 

[Strike.sixpack]

Just for information about countries with stricter gun laws, studies have not prove that this is the case and in fact in many of those countries violent crime rates have escalated. Even above our rates. This is a study that Harvard did on the idea that more guns means more gun related deaths and compared with Eupore and their laws. Russia has a complete gun ban and yet they are by far the most violent. The U.K. increase of vilolent gun crimes after their gun ban is staggering and their rates have blown pass the US. The study actually shows that our rates are on the decline and it is believed that more states allowing conceal permits have actual helped reduce our rates. There is a lot more about social behavior and psychological medications given to the young driving these school shootings than gun control. It's just a tool to drive agendas, on both sides of the debate. However, if the constitution didn't confirm that the government would not infringe on our right, and make no mistake the constitution was not giving us the right to bear arms it was the government agreeing to not infringe on the right of the people to do so, then there would be no debate.

http://www.law.harvard.edu/students/orgs/jlpp/Vol30_No2_KatesMauseronline.pdf

 

[Felonious Junk]

Does your neighborhood militia have tanks, Apaches, F16s, and a navy equipped with aircraft carriers etc..? If not, good luck with your constitutional right to an uprising.

 

[BELdog]

So, do we only want to rent cars? Purchase cigarettes and alcohol in single servings? Yes, guns were built to be effective killing machines. No one can honestly argue that. Sports cars were built for speed. Speed makes a vehicle inherently more dangerous. It serves no useful purpose. This is the same argument applied to semi auto rifles such as the AR-15.

 

[JungRebel]

If I had to guess I would say damn near every post in that thread is sarcastic and disbelieving that the OP would do what he said he'd do.

 

[mstateglfr]

Your view of guns is so farcical, it isn't even worth debating.

I would like to know what you think my view on guns is. You don't know if I own guns, what guns I own, if I hunt, if I have shot, if I currently go to a range, etc etc etc. Yet you have decided my view on guns is a farce? Based on what, a couple of posts in a thread where I mention guns are a tool to destroy things and cars are made to transport goods and people?
Yeah, wow I am out on a limb of the absurd tree, aren't I?

 

[xxxWalkTheDawg]

Terrible post.
You are comparing a tool whose sole reason for existing is to destroy other things, with activities/tools whose reasons for existing range from moving goods and people to self enjoyment.

What do shotguns, hunting rifles, pistols, and pellet guns exist for? And true or false, popular hunting rifles shoot more destructive and longer range ammunition than AR style rifles.

Its moot anyway. This guy used handguns.

 

[aTotal360]

What does that matter and why even look at it from that standpoint?

 

[mstateglfr]

Why would cars only be rented? Is it because I suggested that a gun range could rent guns to shoot? Again, cars are not built to be killing machines. They are built to transport goods and people. When a mistake happens, a car turns into a killing machine. The difference is that when a gun is properly used, its a killing machine and when a mistake happens, its still a killing machine.
See the difference?

As for sports cars(mass produced and sold at dealerships) specifically, yes they are built for speed, but more accurately they are built for acceleration. When used properly, a sports car is no more or less dangerous than a minivan even though it can accelerate faster. The faster acceleration is not more dangerous on its own.
Any car made in 2015 can reach speed limits and well beyond, whether its a sports car or not. They aren't built and in demand for top end speed, they are built and in demand because they express an attitude and feeling that appeals to some drivers. That does not make them inherently more dangerous.
To tie this back to guns since you want to keep trying to support the terrible example made by that other poster- a gun is made to destroy. a sports car is made to display a lifestyle and attitude that the owner wants. My high school girlfriend had a turbocharged Mitsubishi Eclipse Spyder. It was the ultimate teen girl car and accelerated absurdly quickly. It was not more inherently dangerous than my Ford Taurus as each was ultimately made to do the same thing- transport us. When properly used, each car safely transported people. Compare that to a gun which when properly used, destroys. See the difference?

The example that other poster made is bad, no matter how many clarifications are made to it.

 

[KurtRambis4]

You're right

guns aren't that big of a deal in other industrialized nations...bombs are.

 

[mstateglfr]

What do shotguns, hunting rifles, pistols, and pellet guns exist for? And true or false, popular hunting rifles shoot more destructive and longer range ammunition than AR style rifles.

Its moot anyway. This guy used handguns.

I don't follow what your point is. Those are all guns which exist to destroy. They destroy in different ways, but they destroy. Also, I have no idea which is more destructive- a hunting rifle or an AR rifle.

All that has nothing to do with my criticism of the poster who compared driving a car to shooting a gun.

 

[KurtRambis4]

This^ is the problem,

not guns. It's a societal problem with the youths and young adults. Guns are but a tool.

Automatic weapons have been around for a long time now in this country, but these occurences have just happened over the las 20 years or so.

 

[KurtRambis4]

Everyone needs to red Lott's "More Guns, Less Crime" as well

nt

 

[tommyboy1520]

Does your neighborhood militia have tanks, Apaches, F16s, and a navy equipped with aircraft carriers etc..? If not, good luck with your constitutional right to an uprising.

Mine does. It's why I live where I live.

 

[fishwater99]

Really..
Drugs are illegal in the US, but it's not hard at all to buy weed, cocaine or heroin if you have the money.

Alcohol was illegal during prohibition, people didn't stop drinking just because it was against the law.

 

[KurtRambis4]

This doesn't even make sense*

*

 

[Sapsdawg]

I would rather fear my neighbor than my government. Look at the murder rates in Britain and Ireland with very strict gun bans. Not much different than the US. There are many things that cause this problem that would take a long time to discuss, but the availability of guns is not the cause of this. It is certainly a symptom, but not the cause. You will still have mass violence and probably more random if you had to use other devices (pressure cooker bombs). Focus on the causes and you see results. Ban guns and you've done nothing but make yourself feel better. You also realize the police in this country do not have a legal obligation to protect you from anything. If you call 911 and they don't respond...tough ****. You can sue civilly and probably win, but fat lot of good that does you after the fact. There won't be any criminal penalties and no deterrence to not responding next time.

Finally, if you want to ban guns, get together a coalition to amend the constitution because it is your right whether you like it or not.

 

[dorndawg]

This most recent one had 3 handguns and an "assault rifle", which I presume to be an ar-15.

 

[JungRebel]

All I'm saying is the thread is not that terrifying except for the OP. It's no surprise that when someone uses a medium—the Internet—which countless others have used to cry wolf on to make a threat like this that it is met with "#betalivesmatter" and what appears to be encouragement. I'm sure there are some sick 17's on there but I wouldn't say there was a community of people supporting the OP like one of the first responders to this thread said.

 

[Strike.sixpack]

Does your neighborhood militia have tanks, Apaches, F16s, and a navy equipped with aircraft carriers etc..? If not, good luck with your constitutional right to an uprising.

Why do you think the 2nd amendment is just about a militia? Historically and legally is has been upheld that it is a right that the government will not infringe upon to the private citizens as well. That has nothing to do with an uprising or militia.

 

[aTotal360]

I'd rather error on the side of caution. Assuming there isn't a community of violent morons out there supporting this **** is not the kind of assuming I would be comfortable doing.

 

[dawgstudent]

This thread had a good life. I let it go for a little bit.