I thought extremism and banning things ended with Hitler. Almost every country that has banned guns has turned on its own people.

Why dont you people face facts that its crazy people who need to be taken off the street, and leave normal law abiding people alone.

actually, i found it may be easier for some to figure out what im talking about. hence the "bold", but i would expect you to try to pick a person apart about something totally unrelated to the thread.

the more i think on the whole non lethal idea, id be willing to have that in my schools than nothing at all.

all im trying to do is educate fools like yourself. you see no logical way for something to work , so thereby, it must not be possible.

went back and edited it just for you sweetheart!

Where is the money for national Psychologists, Criminologists, Security Experts; Law Enforcement, Scientists or who ever ....????

We can't even provide basic health care for our people without a bitter partisan 5hitstorm, how in the F**K are you going to fund these studies, the resulting decisions, and the cost of implementation?

Amazing how people will fight against anything related to assisting the general population regarding health care, are now all eager to assist the mentally incompetent when threatened with restrictions on their toys.... (guns)

Please provide a tiny scrap of evidence to support these nonsensical allegations.

Shot in the face by someone who has all your guns, and is heading out to massacre kindergarten kids..... that's your idea of a normal law abiding person??

If she weren't dead, I would want her behind bars.

Call me fool all you wish.... not going to change the reality that I am one of the people who is working at keeping our right to bear arms conversant with the current state of our society. Neanderthal thugs who cannot see that the world has moved on... you are our worst enemy, I am here to try and convince you to either listen, learn and engage... or STFU.

whatever helps you sleep at night. :rolleyes:

Went back and tried to avoid an infraction....;)
Don't make no nevermind to me, we're just discussing.
If you don't get a little hot, then you must not be paying attention.
But thanks for the effort Babe... It is Babe, right???:D

you got it;);)

Just a round about way of saying the second amendment is old fashioned and needs an update. The "im on your side" angle is a nice touch. It still comes off a bit holier then thou.

In the old west you would need five six round guns to equal one gun with a 30 round magazine. This would surely slow a killer down.

Who's standard of crazy do we get to use? Mine? Do we get to bust down doors to find them? Do we mandate that every man woman and child get tested? How often do they get tested? I guess we could do it when you get a picture ID as every person will have to have one (guess that solves the voter fraud issue).

Come on. I am sure you have thought this one through. Lets hear the details of your plan.

The definition of crazy usually is arrived after an action. There are no known defenses of "crazy" except 1984 style monitoring which introduces a bevy of flaws and right restrictions. That only leaves defense from possible actions by crazy people. That in itself is flawed due to the altering of environments and inherent risks involved.

Point is this, since the people that wish harm are hard to pinpoint then all that is left is defense. Removing access to weapons is incorrect and is penalizing the lawful owners of such. That leaves hardening security and education of the threat.

This is nothing more then a brick by brick attempt of disassembling the second amendment then the safety of any school.

I wrote the stuff in the other paragraphs first destracting Me from the obvious. In the case of the recent Murders we don't know who the Guy planned to shoot or even if He had a plan. But, if someone had mannaged to get away duing a Magazine Change it appears that He simply would have shot someone else that came along because there was no one there to stop Him from doing that.


It actually has already been done.
Back in the Civil War Quantrill’s Guerilla Riders besides the Revolvers on their Belt carried a bunch of other Revolvers in Holsters on their Saddle.

I find it difficult to imagine how Children could have gotten away even if a Magazine would have needed to have been changed. A lot of School Rooms only have one Door in and out.

I have not read that a 30 round Magazine was used in this recent Crime but I could have missed that.

Semiautomatic Pistols are extremely fast to change magazines on. When one Magazine is empty the Slide on the Gun is automatically held back. Typically you press a Button and the Empty Magazine falls out, at the same time you are doing that you are have hold of the full Magazine and already have it on the way to the Gun.
You slide it in and depress the Slide Release and a new Cartridge goes into the chamber and the Gun is now loaded.
And, you don't even need to see the Mgazine or Gun to to do that meaning a Person is watching the Target.

In CA they only allow 10 Shots pere Magazine. So in the case of the the recent Murders if He had on ly one gun that would have been 2 Magazine changes.

Changing a Rifle Magazine is slightly slower because the Rifle and Magazine are more cumbersom.

Not an expert but I been in the Army I have some experience with a real Assult Rifle and Automatic Piston.
My Father bought Me My First Rifle when I was about 9 years old and I have done a lot of reading/studying of civilian and Military Firearms as well as Historical stuff.

In the end I can't think of any way this sort of Murder could have been totally prevented because it was evidently planned.
I have mentioned better School Security as a deterent but someone could climb over or cut through most Fences that Schools have and enter the School that way.

Having armed Security Guards might have helped, but there is a risk that one of the Guards might fip out and become a Murder (the same with armed Teachers).
Also if someone knows there is Security Guard they would be the first ones shot.

Of all the things that run through My mind on the best deterrent I can think of is increased School Security that prevents anyone from bringing any Weapons or other illegal stuff into the School.

I understand that you don't understand People who like Guns and participate in Gun Sports label you as an Antigun Nut.
Why have you decided that someone like Myself are others are Gun Nuts; implying insanity.

I can speculate that the so called Gun Nuts can spout all sorts of figures and technical data is that they have a complete interest in their Sport.
Not unlike a lot of Sports Fans do in Base Ball or even Mercedes.
I bet there is a bunch of Gun Lover type Forums that are similar in content to this one with the exception of the Subject Matter.

Old Argument does not equal Invalid Argument.

As far as the "Drug Culture" (no news Media) goes I know more about that then I want to. 2 of the People who where My past Friends (Weed and Pill users when I met them) moved on to Heroin.

The Man Mugged an Old Lady for Drug Money and went to Jail for that. Likely for the rest of his Life as He had previous convictions.
The Women became a Prostitute and also went to Jail for that and later was back on the Streets.

One of My X Girl Friends died of a Heart Attack duing here use of Amphetamines.

One of Her Girl Friends that I knew also died in a Similar Fashion.

This is over 35 years ago but I Myself was one the armed Persons at the buying of some Weed. I was young and Dumb for doing that but that was the first and last time and I walked away from the whole mess.

From what you said I gather that you don't believe illegal drug use of any sort causes any Violence, crime or has altered society in any way. Drug users are just a bunch of "Mellow Folks".

It is those evil law abiding Gun Owners with their detailed technical knowledge that are the threat.

You will know if you are part of the "Drug Culture" pretty much the same way you would know if you are part of a "Base Ball" culture. Almost all of your Friends will be Drug uses, they spend a lot of their time doing things to aquire or use Drugs.
You might here a comment like I did when I was in the Army where one of the Guys noticed and commented that that that when the talked about having fun the sentance saterted off with "I was all F***** Up and******".
Ya the only time they had fun what when the were High.
If you can accept the Drug Stuff from above just try to think of the Law Abiding "Gun Nuts" as a Mellow Bunch of Guys and Gals getting high when the Shoot their Guns.

[QUOTE=Dubyagee;3072162]The definition of crazy usually is arrived after an action. There are no known defenses of "crazy" except 1984 style monitoring which introduces a bevy of flaws and right restrictions. That only leaves defense from possible actions by crazy people. That in itself is flawed due to the altering of environments and inherent risks involved.

Point is this, since the people that wish harm are hard to pinpoint then all that is left is defense. Removing access to weapons is incorrect and is penalizing the lawful owners of such. That leaves hardening security and education of the threat.

This is nothing more then a brick by brick attempt of disassembling the second amendment then the safety of any school.[/QUOTE]


Yes, the fight to maintain freedom is a continuing thing.

This is not any sort of argument or attempt and persuasion.

But, for Myself if My Children were shot or someone kicked the door in and shot and killed My immediate Family or other Family Relatives I would not be blaming the Weapons used.

I would not be wanting to put the Weapons on trial.
All My anger and hatred would be focused on the Person/s who committed the Crime.

I personally believe that the above thoughs are rather natural under the stated cirustances.
But,from reading some of the Comments I have come away believing that those sort of thoughts are considered aberrant by some people.

I think you are crazy and should be taken of the street. ;)

I entirely understand people who like guns, because I am one of them.
What I don't understand is people claiming that they are going to use POS weapons like the bushmaster AR-15 copycat for hunting.... Get real.

I have not intentionally labeled you a gun nut. I do believe that you are clinging to outdated, no longer relevant arguments in presenting your side of the debate.

As for the drug culture, you seem to be lumping casual weed smokers in with speed freaks, junkies and pill heads. That's why I mentioned that our definitions are not the same. I do not consider weed a drug.
Certainly with it's years as an illegal substance, it has been trafficked by real criminals (sounds like you were one of those, as was I, although I never carried any weapons in my efforts of distribution).

Absolutely never claimed this - Illegal drug use causes an enormous amount of crime, and an especially high amount of gun related crime. However, is it the drugs causing the crime, or the fact that they are artificially inflated in price because they are illegal?

Again, never stated anything about legal gun owners being evil in any way.
But their arguments are outdated, narrow minded and often confrontational.
These are not tactics that are going to aid the gun owners in the gun control showdown.

What's a redneck's last words???

Hey Y'all... Watch This!!!:D

Speed Limiters, Too? | Eric Peters Autos

"It is because thoughtless Americans do not discern the commonality – because they have been conditioned to never think in terms of concepts. They have been reduced to a state of bipedal animalism – because they have lost (or never developed) the distinctly human capacity to focus on principles rather than particulars. This, in turn, makes it easy to convince them that a given particular (such as a gun) is “bad” – based on childish arguments that would be washed away in an instant if their brains operated on the conceptual rather than the animal level."

Principles you say? Neigh. That's just tired NRA fluff.

Each victim was shot multiple times.


Well, the more fringe players on the gun rights side claim that gun free school zones are worse than nothing....:rolleyes:
And your argument is getting back to one of the root issues.
Anti-gun people do not want to have their rights and freedoms compromised in order for gun people to keep the status quo.
Both sides seem hell bent of getting ALL of the concessions from the other side, rather than each side yielding to some degree.

This is why nothing of any substance is going to happen. Even though a majority of Americans are willing to entertain some sort of restrictions on guns and or magazine capacities, the extremely vocal fringe on both sides, but particularly on the pro-gun side, won't budge.

Which is why I offered the solutions of safer storage, better screening for new owners, and better security measures at high risk places. How is that taking away anyones rights?
Wouldn't it be better to take it step by step than do nothing at all? Wouldn't it be more aceptable to both sides to make changes gradually rather than sweeping legislation all at once?

I'm on board with all those suggestions.

Unfortunately, because those are reasonable ideas, they will never make it to mainstream dialogue or acceptance, and likely both sides will consider you an evil puppet....

I agree with most of it to the extent that I have My Guns locked up and most of them disembled.
I did that to try to prevent theft and so the Thief would not have an easy time selling the Guns if they manage to get them.

In this particular case that triggered this thread the Mother evidently allowed He Son access to the Guns.
If She had a Safe for Her Guns it was left unlocked or He had a way to get in. Note: I have not read any details on that.

I agree with School Security issues need fixing but what you are going to find out is that no one is going to want to pay for it.
Also you simply cannot secure everywhere.

But, if they were to pass a law saying that you had to have a Safe for your Guns how would that be enforced? Who is to say your Safe is actually locked or who has the combination or Key for it?

Would you want the Police of some other agency to come to your House and to do an inspection?
Would you want to lose part or all of a Days work waiting for someone to come inspect you.
Then there is the Cost of the Safe and if not a DIY you need to pay for installation.
All the above is in reality a deterrent to Gun Ownership.

A lot of good honest People just do not want any Police or Government inspectors in their House period.

I can't comment on an anser to "better screening for new owners" with out knowing what you mean by better screening.
I know that there is a 2 week waiting I think it is every Time you by a Hand Gunhere in CA and that during that time they are supposed to be checking something; I don't know what they check on.

If you are not a Veteren and have your DD214 to show that you were in the Service you have to take a Sefty Course. They assume you were trainded in Gun Safety if you were in the Military.

When you sell one of your own Hand Guns you have to go through a Gun Dealer and the Dealer holds the Gun for the waiting period while the backround check is done.

That is as much as I can remember.

Oddly what has not been commented on is that We all are supposed to have the right to be innocent till We are proven Guilty of something.

But, apparently anti gun ownership Folks don't share that view.

You offer?? You're not even a player in this. Not to offend, but you have nothing to offer because these aren't YOUR rights to dictate how they are exercised...

Those that want their rights lefts alone are being labelled as the "fringe" in this thread. That is by design. To control the discussion the anti gun crowd has to toss around labels while they claim to be the mouth piece of the center.

It an act of desperation due to the fact they know gun control is not the solution. But it has been conveniently attached to a hot topic and they are running with it.

The real question is how much firepower we want to be legal. Freedom vs public safety. Sure in the past multiple six guns were used, so what, in the more distant past multiple muzzle loading pistols were carried. Interesting facts that prove nothing.......

Although it may be a minor point, if a gunman has to stop and reload every ten rounds it gives people a chance to rush him while he is doing it.

Unless there is a change in trends, it will eventually happen. Hitler made it happen to pave the way for taking full control of HIS people. The current regime, unchecked, will do the same thing.

Yeah! Butt out! This thread is for real Americans! You know, patriots who don't mind mopping up a child's brains off of a schoolroom floor once in a while if it means that we can preserve the right to run out to the sporting goods store for a semiauto rifle...for home defense...

Another well-reasoned perspective...

:rolleyes:

Oh sure, Tom! This year it'll be a 10-round limit. Next year, a nine-round limit! Soon we'll be limited to six-round revolvers. It's a slippery slope designed to weaken the ability of true Americans to go into the woods and shoot-up old console TV's with large-magazined semiauto rifles.

That's all you have?

I'm very pleased that you are capable of realizing that!:)

We all have the ability to grow, Larry. Try it sometime!

Not your country, not your rights at risk...therefore it's not your fight.

That's rich coming from a Mexican!

I'm a Mexican??

Wrong punctuation at the end of your sentence. Try a period, or a pair of exclamation points.

Wrong again...

That was a racist attack.

Lets see what happens about it.

I find it arrogant on your part to be lecturing Americans about gun rights when your country has at least one druglord-induced massacre per week. How about cleaning up your own act before giving us Norte Americans unrequested and unwanted policy advice?

Only a bigot would find something racist in that content. You're not a bigot, so I'll assume that you posted that tripe in the throes of some type of eggnog overdose.

Keep assuming with your subtle insults and racist remarks. It states Pa in his location. Whats wrong with being a Mexican?

From racial attacks to attacks of character. First you claim I'm a Mexican, then you claim Dubyagee is drunk.

Keep showing us what you're made of...it's very entertaining.

To you, apparently a great deal! There was nothing disparaging in my mention of his country of origin. You're the one who took it as some form of slight. Why? Do you have prejudiced opinions of people who are Mexican citizens?

He's got major racial issues...

Do you still beat your wife?

I wasn't even thinking of eggnog made with alcohol, I was thing of that rich, heavy eggnog that you can buy in a supermarket. Do they have that where you live?

You are a Mexican. I know that with as much certainty as you know my country of origin!