Could a Aussie tell us how your Government confiscated your guns?

[toppop52]

Do you have the facts to back that statement up? Not saying it isnt true-just wondering.

That's based on a war game scenario program that involved mostly non military programers with little inside knowledge but a big agenda.
My son has designed, along with his team, both a radar and sonar that detects submarines in the wakes of aircraft carriers from a very long distance, as well as other equipment. He assures me that other than a full on nuclear exchange, our navy will survive and thrive, most certainly against Canada.

 

[IslandTractor]

The Virginia shooting only involved pistols, the Connecticut shooting involved stolen weapons. The only single common denominator in these three was the mental condition of the shooters. Yet so many people want to ban weapons, but little talk about mental health issues, reporting and treatment. I guess it's a good thing they weren't able to kill that many people with automobiles, or they'd be wanting to ban those. Oh wait? What if the firearms weren't available and they still wanted to make their statement, maybe they could use automobiles, or bombs. Anyone wanting to make that kind of statement will find a way. What about acceptable levels of death? If it's not a mass shooting, everyone accepts other deaths, by any means, as "well, that kind of stuff happens"

And the Georgia mother that shot the home invader with a pistol while protecting her children is alright, but if she used a semi-automatic, she would have been wrong. or would it have been better in your small world if she let the invader do what he wanted?

No. The common factor was semi automatic weapons, designed specifically to kill people efficiently. Not hunting rifles, not target rifles, not breach loading shotguns, not steak knives, not hammers, not baseball bats, not bombs, not automobiles. Semi automatic firearms specifically optimized for killing humans, which is exactly what almost all lunatics choose to make their statement.

 

[TomSeller]

Toppop52 quote
She never said that. The quote was, "They're our next-door neighbors, and you can actually see Russia from land here in Alaska, from an island in Alaska."
Which if one had a clue, one would already know. Katie and apparently others, don't have a clue.

She never said what? My post says "after Palin said she could see Russia from Alaska", which is basically what you said she said.

As far as Palin goes, sorry but I never was a fan. At least Paul Ryan was a credible VP candidate who knew his stuff.

 

[IslandTractor]

I don't think you get my point, dead is dead. You could just as easily say after someone commited a crime with a baseball bat that they need to break the link between lunatics and Louisville Sluggers.

If lunatics displayed an almost universal preference for baseball bats it would make sense to break that link. They don't. They choose the far more efficient and effective semi auto firearms that are almost as easily to buy as a Louisville Slugger.

 

[wcampbell47]

Shoot anyone in the back as they are leaving your residence or business and you had better be prepared to defend yourself in court. Texas is possibly the only place this would fly, and even there I know it has been tested for this very thing.

But if you want to test your luck based on the ignorance of the law, by all means go first.

You are right about Texas! Recently our legislators removed the stipulation in the law of a duty to flee if your home was invaded. Sanity prevailed and did away with that stipulation.

 

[k0ua]

No. The common factor was semi automatic weapons, designed specifically to kill people efficiently. Not hunting rifles, not target rifles, not breach loading shotguns, not steak knives, not hammers, not baseball bats, not bombs, not automobiles. Semi automatic firearms specifically optimized for killing humans, which is exactly what almost all lunatics choose to make their statement.

Well the Civil war, was not fought with semi-auto's, they were armed principally with single shot muzzleloading firearms with a few lever action repeaters, mostly on the Yankee side. 620,000 dead. World War 1 with 16 million dead, all nations armed with bolt action mostly 5 shot repeaters.. The British cheated and used 10 shot bolt action repeaters. World War II, military deaths only about 23 million the Germans and Russians , and British all armed with bolt action repeaters. Americans used the deadly semi-auto 8 shot repeater. Now not saying many of those deaths weren't to other causes.. Disease probably number 1 in civil war and maybe WW1, and artillery in Civil War and WW1, and also in WW1 the water cooled machine guns certainly played a role. And in WW2 all sides supplemented their bolt action guns with machine guns, sub-machine guns and a few actual Assault Rifles (on the German side). But to say that the Semi-automatic is what it takes to be optimized for killing humans, I don't think so. I think you can kill humans very effectively by lesser means. And I have history on my side. The point is that semi-auto firearms have been used with great effectiveness in killing humans, and so have many many other firearms and methods that have nothing to do with firearms. My other point is this. You have started by focusing on the Assault Rifle, and even now you are trending to any Semi-automatic firearm as being "bad" and must be gotten out of our hands. And you are placing them in a group that you wish to segregate as just being too dangerous for civilian hands. I mean after all they are "weapons of war" and" No-one needs one". and so on. I do not believe you will stop. When I am referring to "you" I am referring to all that think like you. As you pointed out yourself, if Louisville sluggers were the whole point of this discussion, and were used in the last 3 mass murders, you would be all for placing restrictions or even an outright ban on Louisville sluggers. This is how you think. You think that banning an object that is deadly and has been used repeatedly to commit mass murder should be banned. You actually think by doing this, it will "help" to curb "baseball bat crime" You cannot imagine how ludicrous that logic sounds to me. You say the common factor was semi automatic weapons. I say the common factor were mentally disturbed individuals.

James K0UA

 

[daugen]

People don't have the right to imply others are un American because they think differently. Or to hope their family suffers the tragedy of a home invasion. That is not right.

Hard to disagree with that. Perhaps we should ratchet this down a bit. Need to make our points without getting personal or hurtful.
I value Roy's opinion enough to give him the benefit of the doubt that he was just trying to make a point. Not that I agree with him all the time.
Because I'm an Eastern Liberal Democrat, Lord help us, one of those... and my background is different from his. But we have much in common.
Which is the fun part of this forum. So I expect to disagree at times with Roy. That's ok. If we all agreed, we sure wouldn't be online here very often.

 

[TomSeller]

Ok, I will untwist my skivvies. Just seemed awful harsh. Meanwhile I am going back to tractor threads. This is a nice site all in all.

 

[RadarTech]

Ok, I will untwist my skivvies. Just seemed awful harsh. Meanwhile I am going back to tractor threads. This is a nice site all in all.

This is where we have to mention the unwritten TBN rule.

Pictures or it didn't happen..... But in the case of skivvies we will let you off with a warning THIS TIME ONLY!!!

 

[clemsonfor]

911 killings killed thousands not hundreds just to make things clear. I agree with your point though.

Also there are more killing in Chicago each year, a city with a hand gun ban by the way, than in Iraq!! So you have a better chance to be shot walking around Chicago than a uniformed soilder in Iraq!