- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
0
Posted on 8/4/19 at 12:41 pm to Lasix
quote:
Just terrible news this weekend. I am a supporter of the right to bear arms, however I wonder how it would be if it was one of our loved ones that was gunned down in one of these senseless act. Would it change our perception?
Don't bring empathy into this shite. There's no room for that man.
Posted on 8/4/19 at 12:42 pm to beerJeep
quote:
Why would you think that?
Because you seem to make the leap from not wanting everyone in America to have a assault weapon by their side to you not being able to shoot guns for fun and kill feral hogs. Kinda unstable.
Posted on 8/4/19 at 12:42 pm to fallguy_1978
quote:
I assume we are talking about the semi auto AK and AR style rifles which function exactly like a lot of deer rifles. They just generally hold more ammo.
There are several hunting rifles (see Ruger mini 14) that hold 30 round mags as well.
Posted on 8/4/19 at 12:43 pm to The Pirate King
quote:
It doesn’t matter. As has been proven many times throughout history. You’re operating under the assumption that someone not being able to buy an “assault rifle” would stop them from inflicting as much or more damage.
It absolutely fricking matters. I'll take my chances vs a mass stabber. You can have the mass shooter.
Look, I don't want your guns. I just want some gun supporters to make a better argument than "other things are bad too." It does nothing to actually build support for guns, it simply makes you look like a fool. It's embarrassing.
Posted on 8/4/19 at 12:43 pm to slackster
Does the data actually show that most mass shootings involve rifles?
Found this on reason.com
LINK
Found this on reason.com
quote:
According to the FBI, rifles of all kinds (not just the ones Feinstein wants to ban) accounted for just 3 percent of firearm homicides in 2016, while handguns accounted for 65 percent. The rest of the firearms were listed as shotguns (2.4 percent), "other guns" (1.7 percent), and unspecified (28 percent).
Contrary to the impression left by press coverage highlighting scary-looking rifles, handguns are also the most common choice for mass shooters. A Mother Jones review of mass shootings from 1982 through 2012 found that 66 percent of the weapons were handguns, while just 14 percent would qualify as "assault weapons" under the definition used in Feinstein's 2013 bill.
LINK
Posted on 8/4/19 at 12:44 pm to 632627
quote:I did.
You commented on the intent of the 2nd amendment.
quote:
Anyone that seriously goes out to buy a gun these days to protect themselves against the American government is a fricking loon.
you sound like the guy who just thinks the world is peachy and no body wants to trample on your rights. Keep you head in the sand bird. 
Posted on 8/4/19 at 12:45 pm to YNWA
quote:
Mass shooting #250 this year in the USA. It's not a copycat. It's an epidemic at this point
You’re really going to come in posting this again after saying there were only 3 mass shootings in Mexico? What constitutes a mass shooting in the US, is not what a lot of people would consider a mass shooting because it is defined as one in which multiple people (low as 3) were at least injured in a shooting.
One of those 250 “mass shootings” was Pittsburgh in which there were two seperate shootings in the same night that injured two seperate people and yet that was considered as one mass shooting.
Posted on 8/4/19 at 12:45 pm to mikelbr
quote:
Mass shooters are indisputably and overwhelmingly choosing these particular weapons over 9mm pistols
You got any proof to back upnthat statement?
Posted on 8/4/19 at 12:46 pm to slackster
quote:
It absolutely fricking matters. I'll take my chances vs a mass stabber. You can have the mass shooter.
Look, I don't want your guns. I just want some gun supporters to make a better argument than "other things are bad too." It does nothing to actually build support for guns, it simply makes you look like a fool. It's embarrassing.
You're right.
Posted on 8/4/19 at 12:46 pm to 1BamaRTR
quote:
What constitutes a mass shooting in the US, is not what a lot of people would consider a mass shooting because it is defined as one in which multiple people (low as 3) were at least injured in a shooting.
There are mass shootings in the hood almost daily in this country.
Hell, we had one in BR at Stadium Ultralounge or whatever the hell it's called a few weeks ago.
This post was edited on 8/4/19 at 12:47 pm
Posted on 8/4/19 at 12:46 pm to HailHailtoMichigan!
Get your statistics out of here; this is a place to argue using our emotions and feewings
Posted on 8/4/19 at 12:46 pm to HailHailtoMichigan!
No, but people will just blindly trust whatever their media outlet tells them
Posted on 8/4/19 at 12:48 pm to slackster
quote:
It absolutely fricking matters. I'll take my chances vs a mass stabber. You can have the mass shooter.
What about a large truck bearing down on a crowd of people? What about a homemade bomb?
Are both of those not capable of doing as much or more damage than a rifle? And likely in a shorter period of time.
Posted on 8/4/19 at 12:49 pm to fallguy_1978
quote:
I assume we are talking about the semi auto AK and AR style rifles which function exactly like a lot of deer rifles. They just generally hold more ammo.
Most hunting rifles are bolt action which wouldn’t be near as efficient for what these whackos want to accomplish. There are semi auto deer rifles but they would probably be included in any ban of semi automatic rifles.
I use my larger caliber AR’s as deer rifles and my .223 for hogs or plinking.
Posted on 8/4/19 at 12:50 pm to HailHailtoMichigan!
Let's say we ban "assault style" rifles and now these types of people who will commit this terrible act no longer have access to got Wal-Mart or Academy to buy the AR (let's pretend private sales don't happen as well), what would prevent them from buying a Glock and an extended magazine to commit the same exact crime?
Essentially if you ban AR rifles, you criminalize millions of responsible gun owners. We punish people who commit the crime in this country, not criminalize legal gun owners.
Essentially if you ban AR rifles, you criminalize millions of responsible gun owners. We punish people who commit the crime in this country, not criminalize legal gun owners.
Posted on 8/4/19 at 12:52 pm to Rize
quote:
There are semi auto deer rifles but they would probably be included in any ban of semi automatic rifles.
I use my larger caliber AR’s as deer rifles and my .223 for hogs or plinking.
I have a Winchester semi auto 30-06. And of course my poor little 10-22 would be banned too I guess.
Posted on 8/4/19 at 12:52 pm to ugastreaker
quote:
But this is crazy. Folks need to carry, and actually practice, and be able to hit targets from 30 yards
It lasted less than a minute
Posted on 8/4/19 at 12:52 pm to fallguy_1978
quote:
And of course my poor little 10-22 would be banned too I guess.
Luckily I bought mine in FDE, so it's good.
Posted on 8/4/19 at 12:53 pm to 632627
quote:
In this thread and others people have referenced not wanting to live in other shithole third world countries, because we are safer here. A notion to which I completely agree.
However, why are we then bringing up what happens in these other shithole countries as a justification for us needing guns to protect against our government?
You can’t have it both ways. We’re safer here than certain shitholes because we’ve advanced as a civilization and a culture.
You really dont get that a tyrannical govt can do whatever they want to an unarmed populace?
Page 26 of 45
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News