Recent Shooting and Discussion

[TrailHunter]

Agreed. I live in an extremely gun-friendly state (NV)...at least for now but that is changing fast. I don't like some of CA's gun laws because I don't feel they are narrowly tailored to serve a legitimate purpose (i.e. worrying about the way certain firearms look). I also think it is far too difficult to get a CCW in California. That said, I think it is far too easy to get a CCW in Nevada. Quite frankly, 1/3 of the people in my class had no business picking up a weapon, much less carrying one out in public. I have no issues with living in a "shall-issue" state, but I think the minimum proficiency level to CC should be substantially greater than it is in Nevada.

Exactly! I’ve done my part... training, classes, practice, maintenance, safety etc... and yet there are incompetent people living in other states that can Carry, while I can’t. So I have to often make an unfortunate decision when visiting dangerous or unknown areas.... Be judged by 12 or carried by 6...

 

[A.J.]

Ahh, the slippery slope. A few honest questions then. Are you against the general ban on the possession and ownership of full auto firearms? What about the possession of C4 or its equivalent? What about grenades and/or grenade launchers? Why stop there? Are you against civilian ownership of "gunships"? (aka, weaponized aircraft)

I agree crazy will find a way to be crazy. But I fail to see the logic in saying that there is no benefit to society in reasonable controls.

In my opinion we already have " reasonable controls " I never said there was "no benefit to society in reasonable controls". Unfortunately the entire subject has become the topic of discussions because of the tool that crazy used this time and has become the poster child for furthering the anti-gun crowds effort to disarm us. The slippery slope analogy is accurate. If this kid had driven a pickup truck through the cafeteria at lunch time would we still be debating the effectiveness of more stringent gun control?


Sent from my iPad using WAYALIFE mobile app

 

[Jackal01]

Your willing to bet the house on that?...good luck. I'm not promoting a ban on any weapon...only reasonable control. But if you keep insisting on not doing anything, you're going to let others with no dog in the fight write the legislation...and I would bet on that.

I suppose I'm a different breed as I don't agree with any further regs other than enforcing what is on the books already. Weak judges, weak DAs, weak justice system. Poor mental health diagnosing. Poor home life. Weak parents afraid to discipline. All that are the issues. Not the gun. Not the magazine. Not the bullets. Not the accessories. I believe my born, God given rights to be absolute. My right to protect myself existed before the United States was ever a thought. It doesn't matter to me who agrees or disagrees with that. No government or person has a say in my liberty that I was born with.

 

[Maineiac]

I suppose I'm a different breed as I don't agree with any further regs other than enforcing what is on the books already. Weak judges, weak DAs, weak justice system. Poor mental health diagnosing. Poor home life. Weak parents afraid to discipline. All that are the issues. Not the gun. Not the magazine. Not the bullets. Not the accessories. I believe my born, God given rights to be absolute. My right to protect myself existed before the United States was ever a thought. It doesn't matter to me who agrees or disagrees with that. No government or person has a say in my liberty that I was born with.

I agree 100%. I would however be open to 2 week waiting list for any firearm, and also a psychological exam on any with any sort of police report on them (besides speeding and shit)

Sent from my Pixel XL using WAYALIFE mobile app

 

[JAGS]

Again, the point is being missed...

In the early 1900's, a groundswell grassroots movement led to the 18th amendment of the Constitution ...the prohibition of all alcohol in the United States. This lasted thirteen years, until another amendment, the 21st amendment repealed it. Can you imagine having a beer in the US was against the law?...doesn't sound reasonable, does it.

You are about to witness another groundswell grassroots movement in our country....and gun owners are in the minority in the voting population.

Instead of arguing whether the cause is mental illness, or guns are only tools, you better start thinking about making concessions to keep some ownership of guns in some form before they are successful in removing all guns from private ownership.

Would I be okay with making it extremely difficult to purchase AR platform style weapons in order to keep our hunting rifles, shotguns and handguns?...of course I would be okay with that.

Would I be okay with a more involved process which may take considerable more time to purchase a gun so a comprehensive background check can be performed including accessing a Federal database which may include criminal and mental health background information?...of course I would be okay with that

Even these measures will not completely stop the insanity we are currently experiencing in this country...but it might just prevent one or more of these mass shootings...and of course I would be okay with that.

I would prefer more reasonable gun regulation than another amendment to the Constitution...

I agree with Brute that reasonable concessions by lawful gun owners are long overdue. While I personally think the likelihood of a constitutional amendment is extremely low, and a forced governmental take back of weapons is even lower, that is besides the point in my book.

A thorough background check has zero effect on my ability to be a lawful gun owner. I'm happy to do it. The "inconvenience" to me is meaningless, especially if the check actually keeps even one whack job from obtaining a firearm and using it in the commission of a crime of any kind. Even if it doesn't keep a single whack job from using a firearm in the commission of a crime, I find it to be a small price to pay in exchange for maintaining the ability to possess a firearm.

No "right" is absolute, plain and simple. It doesn't take much of a change in the U.S. Supreme Court to see that state-imposed restrictions could become the norm. (It's always ironic to listen to the far right talk about state's rights on every issue but reasonable gun control). Hell, a liberal Supreme Court could very easily define "arms" in a way that immediately renders the sale and possession of semi-automatic, detachable magazine firearms unlawful. There would be no need to pursue the Article Five process.

[emoji122][emoji122][emoji122][emoji122][emoji122]

Thanks for getting this back to rational discussion. The chest pounding by the fringes was getting to be too much. [emoji106]

 

[Goldeneagle1LC]

I have to disagree with both Sharky and Brute. Rights are absolute. The only limit the founders put on them were when the exercise of a right impacted someone else's ability to exercise their rights. Murder for example is illegal because it impacts the right to life. the fact that we have allowed restrictions to be placed on these rights doesn't mean it is right. if you want to marry 15 different women and they want to marry you who is the government to tell you yes or no? As for compromising with the anti-gunners, what are they going to give me? you are both what in the gun community is reffed to as a Fudd because you only care about what impacts you, I don't mean that offensivly. Brute said he is ok with restrictions as long as his hunting rifles aren't impacted. That's easy for him to say because it won't impact him at all. Selling out your fellow gun owners to keep something you already have isn't compromise. Sharky doesn't like the slippery slope argument but history is cold hard fact. Gun control has only gotten tighter since 1934. At no point has any gun control legislation given anything back to the people. That is why it must be resisted at any point. We agree that you cant stop crazy. As for the efficiency of the weapons 150 rounds is only 10 rounds of 12ga 00 Buck. Also consider that he only killed 17 with that number of shots that doesn't say a lot for the round in the hands of some one that doesn't know what they are doing. in LV the shooter had over an hour before the door was breached, he easily could have done that much damage with a bolt action rifle. Maybe more considering he was at the extremity of the 5.56's range. I think we could make a huge step forward if we remove those that are a threat to society from society until they are no longer a threat. if you are too dangerous to own a gun you are too dangerous to do many other things as well.

 

[A.J.]

[emoji122][emoji122][emoji122][emoji122][emoji122]

Thanks for getting this back to rational discussion. The chest pounding by the fringes was getting to be too much. [emoji106]

I thought everyone was being pretty rational. Opinions differed and were discussed but I think we can all still go wheeling together on any given weekend. [emoji3]


Sent from my iPad using WAYALIFE mobile app

 

[Sharkey]

In my opinion we already have " reasonable controls " I never said there was "no benefit to society in reasonable controls". Unfortunately the entire subject has become the topic of discussions because of the tool that crazy used this time and has become the poster child for furthering the anti-gun crowds effort to disarm us. The slippery slope analogy is accurate. If this kid had driven a pickup truck through the cafeteria at lunch time would we still be debating the effectiveness of more stringent gun control?

Where was the slippery slope when the controls you find to be reasonable were instituted?

Sadly, Florida’s events bring the issue of guns back to the forefront of the discussion. Again, I believe it was just the how and not the why. But I would be foolish to conclusively say that in the absence of a firearm, this particular kid would have found a way to kill 17 people. Could he have? Of course. Would he have? There is no way to know. Either way, I’m hardly against guns or lawful and responsible ownership. I’m against responsible gun owners (like myself) burying their heads in the sand and acting like no possible good can come from examining whether our present society could benefit from any other firearm regulations.

Perhaps if we, as lawful and responsible gun owners, were willing to lead the discussion on additional reasonable controls, it would take most of the wind out of the sails of the anti-firearm people when tragic events like this do happen.

 

[Sharkey]

I suppose I'm a different breed as I don't agree with any further regs other than enforcing what is on the books already. Weak judges, weak DAs, weak justice system. Poor mental health diagnosing. Poor home life. Weak parents afraid to discipline. All that are the issues. Not the gun. Not the magazine. Not the bullets. Not the accessories. I believe my born, God given rights to be absolute. My right to protect myself existed before the United States was ever a thought. It doesn't matter to me who agrees or disagrees with that. No government or person has a say in my liberty that I was born with.

What, exactly, is your absolute, born, God-given right? I’m being serious so please don’t just give me the coined “to keep and bear arms” because that is not only an incomplete recitation of the 2A, it is a statement without any kind of clear definition at all.

If we are to take you at your word, then you believe you have a God-given right to use whatever the hell you want to do whatever the hell you want. For that matter, you have the God-given right to say whatever you want wherever you want, and to practice whatever religion you want in any manner that you choose. Is that really what you believe?

 

[JAGS]

I thought everyone was being pretty rational. Opinions differed and were discussed but I think we can all still go wheeling together on any given weekend. [emoji3]


Sent from my iPad using WAYALIFE mobile app

This has nothing to do with wheeling or friendships. I can separate the two.

There are a lot of fringe opinions. Those generally are not "rational" in bringing about change. They are good at stirring the pot. Don't get me wrong, I enjoy stirring the pot, but I also liked seeing brute and sharkey bring it back in a little.

For me personally and having two kids nearly starting high school, this is a bit more important than say a grumper grill.

 

[Maineiac]

What, exactly, is your absolute, born, God-given right? I’m being serious so please don’t just give me the coined “to keep and bear arms” because that is not only an incomplete recitation of the 2A, it is a statement without any kind of clear definition at all.

If we are to take you at your word, then you believe you have a God-given right to use whatever the hell you want to do whatever the hell you want. For that matter, you have the God-given right to say whatever you want wherever you want, and to practice whatever religion you want in any manner that you choose. Is that really what you believe?

He said his God given right was to defend himself.

Sent from my Pixel XL using WAYALIFE mobile app

 

[Sharkey]

I have to disagree with both Sharky and Brute. Rights are absolute.

So then you are all for the legalization of heroin for personal use, correct? I mean, as long as the user doesn’t do anything to anyone else while using, correct?

 

[A.J.]

Where was the slippery slope when the controls you find to be reasonable were instituted?

Sadly, Florida’s events bring the issue of guns back to the forefront of the discussion. Again, I believe it was just the how and not the why. But I would be foolish to conclusively say that in the absence of a firearm, this particular kid would have found a way to kill 17 people. Could he have? Of course. Would he have? There is no way to know. Either way, I’m hardly against guns or lawful and responsible ownership. I’m against responsible gun owners (like myself) burying their heads in the sand and acting like no possible good can come from examining whether our present society could benefit from any other firearm regulations.

Perhaps if we, as lawful and responsible gun owners, were willing to lead the discussion on additional reasonable controls, it would take most of the wind out of the sails of the anti-firearm people when tragic events like this do happen.

I don't think responsible gun owners (like myself) are burying their heads in the sand. As you stated above the discussion is too much about the how. The real problem as I stated previously is a complicated one about our culture and mental health. I'm not so sure discussion on additional reasonable control would take any wind out of the sails. I might actually agree with a few of them (age limit, better background checks) however I think it will only bolster the anti-gun crowds resolve and stoke the fire. For what it's worth. My analogy of driving a vehicle into the cafeteria wasn't arbitrary. It has happened already and got far less media attention. To be fair that particular nut job also went through the room and shot several women with his Glock pistol after he drove into it.




Sent from my iPad using WAYALIFE mobile app

 

[Sharkey]

He said his God given right was to defend himself.

Sent from my Pixel XL using WAYALIFE mobile app

Actually, he used the word “rights” which is plural. Anyway, what does that even mean? To defend yourself by any means, no restrictions?

 

[A.J.]

This has nothing to do with wheeling or friendships. I can separate the two.

There are a lot of fringe opinions. Those generally are not "rational" in bringing about change. They are good at stirring the pot. Don't get me wrong, I enjoy stirring the pot, but I also liked seeing brute and sharkey bring it back in a little.

For me personally and having two kids nearly starting high school, this is a bit more important than say a grumper grill.

I too have kids in school. One just graduated hs last year and my son is in middle school. My sister is a teacher and my mother a retired teacher still substituting at 74 years old. My father, my sister and myself are also all competitive shooters. This stuff hits close to home for me too. I am truly not trying to stir the pot. Just joining the discussion and sharing my opinions. All good here. I am enjoying hearing others views as well.


Sent from my iPhone using WAYALIFE mobile app

 

[WJCO]

Wow. This is quite the thread. I agree with some and disagree with some. Also some I agree and disagree with at the same time, lol.

My biggest fear is that ANY more regulation does in fact infringe on responsible gun owners and is dangerous when their is corruption in the government. I am not in favor of any additional regulation. However, would it hurt me to wait 2 weeks to get a gun? Nope. Would it hurt me to have a limited mag? Probably not, but I would have to reload more often during practice...

But that's not the point. I really do feel that Sharkey's statement (that he's posted multiple times) gets to the root of the issue: Why did this happen? VS How can we fix it?
Our culture doesn't value others, that's the issue. If EVERYBODY was forced to own a gun or EVERYBODY was prohibited to own a gun, sadly in this culture, I think violent crimes would be no different.

 

[dpetersen1988]

I have to say their are alot of mixed emotions on hear but i ultimately agree with ed and sharkey, besides that infringing on peoples rights and creating more laws is only going to make the problem worse and if you think guns will be much safer and in the right hands by doing that you are sadly mistaking. When i was in high school we never had this issue and never heard of this shit, after school we would go to the river or the shooting range, now a days you have kids eating laundry detergent, playing video games that rape people and show how to be violent and commit crimes, these are all things that have turned these individuals into who they are with that being said no more laws on guns and i encourage everyone to obtain there ccw and have some sort of plan because it's already becoming another civil war and if something doesn't happen fast it will go full float.

 

[JAGS]

I'll just put this here. Seem fitting and fairly true in many "discussions" taking place everywhere.





***I have no idea who the person is. Anything else they may have posted. Nor what political affiliations they may have.

 

[Sharkey]

I don't think responsible gun owners (like myself) are burying their heads in the sand. As you stated above the discussion is too much about the how. The real problem as I stated previously is a complicated one about our culture and mental health. I'm not so sure discussion on additional reasonable control would take any wind out of the sails. I might actually agree with a few of them (age limit, better background checks) however I think it will only bolster the anti-gun crowds resolve and stoke the fire. For what it's worth. My analogy of driving a vehicle into the cafeteria wasn't arbitrary. It has happened already and got far less media attention. To be fair that particular nut job also went through the room and shot several women with his Glock pistol after he drove into it.

I don’t necessarily disagree, and I’m not saying your head is in the sand. I just think the risk of doing nothing as gun owners is greater than the risk of trying to lead the discussion with some reasonable changes.

And before Vegas, the only double digit murder in Nevada was with a vehicle.

 

[Sharkey]

This has nothing to do with wheeling or friendships. I can separate the two.

There are a lot of fringe opinions. Those generally are not "rational" in bringing about change. They are good at stirring the pot. Don't get me wrong, I enjoy stirring the pot, but I also liked seeing brute and sharkey bring it back in a little.

For me personally and having two kids nearly starting high school, this is a bit more important than say a grumper grill.

I hate to tell you this, but you should be much more fearful of alcohol and cars (and not even at the same time) with respect to your soon to be high school kids than you are of guns.