Gun Rights: Should you be allowed to own an RPG? - Page 4 - Miata Turbo Forum - Boost cars, acquire cats.

Welcome to Miataturbo.net   Members
 


Current Events, News, Politics Keep the politics here.

Reply
 
 
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 08-08-2012, 09:37 AM   #61
Crumple Zone Tester
iTrader: (7)
 
mgeoffriau's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Jackson, MS
Posts: 7,647
Total Cats: 444
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by samnavy View Post
People who have never considered how they will react to a crisis... any crisis, will almost always do what everybody around them is doing. Men will run as fast as they can, and women will either freeze, hide, or run screaming.
Good post.

This is my favorite story about the warrior/shepherd mentality.

MYREPUBLICA.com - News in Nepal: Fast, Full & Factual
mgeoffriau is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-08-2012, 09:52 AM   #62
AFM Crusader
iTrader: (18)
 
olderguy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Wayne, NJ
Posts: 4,416
Total Cats: 81
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by budget racer View Post

The analogy that I keep coming back to is: you stick a bunch of kids in a room with a box of magic markers. You tell them that they can play with the markers but that they are not allowed to write on the walls. Inevitably, some kid is going to write on the wall. How long will you allow this to go on until you take back all of the markers? Or, can you find another method to ensure that the wall doesn’t get written-on when the kids have control of the markers?
Corporal punishment in front of the others for the magic marker offender and summary public execution for the mass shooter by firing squad would go a long way toward deterring this behavior.
olderguy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-08-2012, 09:56 AM   #63
Elite Member
iTrader: (8)
 
Ryan_G's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: Tampa, Florida
Posts: 2,539
Total Cats: 151
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by budget racer View Post
The analogy that I keep coming back to is: you stick a bunch of kids in a room with a box of magic markers. You tell them that they can play with the markers but that they are not allowed to write on the walls. Inevitably, some kid is going to write on the wall. How long will you allow this to go on until you take back all of the markers? Or, can you find another method to ensure that the wall doesn’t get written-on when the kids have control of the markers?
Analogies like this are retarded. You have completely changed the underlying circumstances behind the situation in a terrible analogy that people tend to use in arguments when they do not really understand the underlying principles of the argument. You can take the markers away from the kids whenever the hell you want because you gave them the markers and you still own them. The governement did not give me my gun and has no arbitrary right to take it away.

The other reason your analogy is stupid is because the kid is writing on the wall not other children. If one kid decided to write on someone else I can sure as hell guarantee that others would retaliate. Now when do you think said kid is most likely to write on another child (assuming that being written on himself would not be welcomed so as to compare to the general feeling people have of being fired upon), when he is the only one who has a marker or when every child in the room has a marker?

You are also assuming that by "banning" guns you are actually completely restricting access to guns. All that really ends up happening is those who abide by the law no longer have access to firearms while criminals who purchase their weapons illegally already have continued access through the same channels they already were using anyway. Not to mention if one kid did write on the wall or another child I would only take away his marker, not everyone's markers.

You are correct in stating that most attackers do utilize guns because they are easily obtained and can be operated with little training or knowledge. They are easy but not necessarily the most effective option. You are falsely assigning the choice of weapon with the cause of the event. If you remember, the Colorado shooter also rigged his apartment with large amounts of explosives that were only rendered ineffective because they were already aware of them when they got there. If guns were outlawed do you really think someone who had thoughts of mass murder would not resort to simple devices like molotov cocktails, knives, or nail bombs. All of which can be made by a 5th grader with supplies purchased at a hardware or grocery store?
Ryan_G is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-08-2012, 10:07 AM   #64
Crumple Zone Tester
iTrader: (7)
 
mgeoffriau's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Jackson, MS
Posts: 7,647
Total Cats: 444
Default

The analogy works alright so long as we amend it to include the fact that the room is already stocked with pens, pencils, crayons, buckets of paint and brushes, and spraypaint cans.

Will taking away everyone's markers stop the wall-writing? Should we expect it to?
mgeoffriau is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-08-2012, 10:11 AM   #65
Elite Member
iTrader: (8)
 
Ryan_G's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: Tampa, Florida
Posts: 2,539
Total Cats: 151
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by olderguy View Post
Corporal punishment in front of the others for the magic marker offender and summary public execution for the mass shooter by firing squad would go a long way toward deterring this behavior.
I feel it is a common misconception that the death penalty is a deterant for crime. The kinds of crimes that warrant the death penalty are either committed by those who do not fear death or live with the threat of death from their enemies at all times (i.e. drug lords or war criminals). Those that would normally be deterred by death but commit these crimes anyway are in a state of mind during the event in which the threat of the death penalty is the last thing they are thinking about.
Ryan_G is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-08-2012, 10:42 AM   #66
Senior Member
iTrader: (1)
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: North Jersey
Posts: 721
Total Cats: 0
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ryan_G View Post
Analogies like this are retarded.
You are quick to overreact to my statements. I am not interested in arguing about gun control, because frankly, it appears that I’m on your side. I truly want to hear reasonable, sound solutions to the problem – specifically regarding mass shootings using legally attained assault weapons and tactical handguns. Both from the left and the right.

Admittedly, my analogy is simple and can be easily picked apart (as you have graciously proven). My point is that society as a whole can not be trusted. So how do you keep the walls clean?

Olderguy – thanks for reading my post and answering accordingly. I’m sure that everyone is in favor of a stricter and more consistent justice system. While I don’t think it will stop the existence of lunatics, I would hope that it has a long-term overall effect on improving societal behavior and may reduce the creation of troubled minds.

Brain – perfect answer….very effective. (sarcasm)
budget racer is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-08-2012, 10:46 AM   #67
Elite Member
iTrader: (7)
 
samnavy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: VIRGINIA BEACH, VA
Posts: 6,002
Total Cats: 174
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by budget racer View Post
Sam, yes I am referring to the prevention of mass shootings. Now don’t get confused, I’m not anti-gun. Not even close. I support the right for any sane, law-abiding citizen to arm themselves with practically any level of weaponry.
I understood that you weren't anti-gun, and your question is completely valid. However, it's an old discussion, and I answered it. There is no way to simultaneously uphold a law-abiding citizens RTKBA, and prevent mass shootings by a person who has the willingness to do it. It is a fantasy of the anti-gun crowd that they can prevent this kind of thing. No amount of the current types of additional legislation will ever prevent what happened in that theater. This is why the goal of the major anti-gun players is the complete banning of all types of firearms.

Quote:
Originally Posted by budget racer View Post
I don’t claim to be a psychologist or any type of gun expert.….but I don’t buy the argument that the shooter would find another method (pipe bombs, etc) of harm. Because they don’t. They choose assault weapons and tactical handguns.
You must be very careful of the use of the word "they". The use of assault weapons in violent crime is extremely rare, it's under 2% of all gun-crime if my statistics serve, and less than .1% of all gun-related deaths. When you refer to "they", you cannot lump all regular criminal activity in with statistical anomaly of a mass-shooter. I don't think you were trying to do this, but if you're interested in reducing overall gun crime, Assault Weapons play almost no role. If you're interested in preventing Mass-Shootings with assault rifles, you would need to eliminate or confiscate all of them, and those shooters would simply move on to other type of firearms. It's true that some mass-shooters have used semi-automatic rifles, but even more have used shotguns, bolt-action rifles, and pistols of all types and calibers.

And of course some shooters choose assault weapons and semi-automatics for mass-killings. They are readily available to all types of people. It's pretty obvious why they are an excellent platform for the taking of life.

However, you are a fool if you think that banning assault weapons will have any effect on gun crime, mass shootings, or criminal activity in general. And you are equally more of a fool if you think that the complete banning of all firearms in the US (as if the libs could wave a magic wand and they'd all disappear) would have any positive effect on crime or mass murder. Just ask England, Germany, Australia, etc.

Quote:
Originally Posted by budget racer View Post
The analogy that I keep coming back to is: you stick a bunch of kids in a room with a box of magic markers. You tell them that they can play with the markers but that they are not allowed to write on the walls. Inevitably, some kid is going to write on the wall. How long will you allow this to go on until you take back all of the markers? Or, can you find another method to ensure that the wall doesn’t get written-on when the kids have control of the markers?
Again, a fairly useless analogy. You cannot legislate bad behavior out of those intent on committing it. To suggest that the average "law-abiding" American, with no criminal history, who is a good person and has made a personal decision to own a firearm for whatever reason, will SUDDENLY and without warning, turn into a deranged lunatic shooting up his neighborhood, is to suggest that all legal gun owners are potential mass-shooters... that we are by our very nature, ticking time bombs. Again, this is the exact rhetoric the anti-gun crowd plays the media to. They want you to believe that every firearm in the country is a potential machine of death and blood, and that only truly deranged people want to own them.

You don't think you've fallen into their trap, and you think you are truly pro-2A, but when you get down to it, you want to take my guns. Where will you draw the line when the anti-weenies get strong enough to control the government into coming after your SUV, or your second child, or your cigarettes, or your swimming pool, or... they will come and take whatever you let them. Ps... they will always come with a real good reason why you "don't need that". Don't let them.
samnavy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-08-2012, 11:26 AM   #68
Boost Czar
iTrader: (61)
 
Braineack's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Chantilly, VA
Posts: 72,497
Total Cats: 1,706
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by samnavy View Post
Just ask England, Germany, Australia, etc.

let us.

Attached Thumbnails
Gun Rights: Should you be allowed to own an RPG?-gunownershipviolentcrimeeng1.gif  
Braineack is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-08-2012, 11:26 AM   #69
Boost Czar
iTrader: (61)
 
Braineack's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Chantilly, VA
Posts: 72,497
Total Cats: 1,706
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by samnavy View Post
Just ask England, Germany, Australia, etc.

let us.




and then there's this:




and an interesting read: http://www.saf.org/journal/14/GunCon...ndtheWorld.htm
Attached Thumbnails
Gun Rights: Should you be allowed to own an RPG?-gunownershipviolentcrimeeng1.gif  
Braineack is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-08-2012, 11:35 AM   #70
Junior Member
iTrader: (3)
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: Ridgecrest CA
Posts: 444
Total Cats: 44
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by samnavy View Post
There's a question I'd like to ask rhetorically... let's say there had been a SEAL, Green Beret, SWAT member, or regular old Marine... basically anybody in the audience who some serious quick reaction training and the mental discipline to establish a tactical solution. Do you think a SEAL would let the fact that he wasn't carrying stop him from trying to take down an active shooter... and succeeding?

Anybody in my list above would not have been one of the scared-to-death panicking-running-for-their-lives-completely-unable-to-defend-themselves citizens getting gunned down as they tried to run out the door. If anybody in that list had been armed, I guarantee you the incident would have gone much differently.

People who have never considered how they will react to a crisis... any crisis, will almost always do what everybody around them is doing. Men will run as fast as they can, and women will either freeze, hide, or run screaming.

I have a metric ***-ton of Anti-Terrorism training. I've been to 2 schools and been credentialed in addition to yearly refreshers.. Having done my tour working the flight-deck, my mass-casualty scenario training is also pretty extensive, and while I haven't ever been put to the test like those people in the theater, I've had those moments where I felt like running, but the training not only told me to stay put, but gave me the ability to process that staying put was not only safest for me, but put me in a position to be safe for others. The psychology of "mass-panic" is well-documented. What is equally well documented is the difference military (or military-style) training makes during an event like that.

As Hustler intoned, simply being able to hit a paper target at a range does not constitute the type of "firearms training" that allows a person to react offensively during a mass-shooting. You also need the mental and tactical discipline not to become a victim before you can engage the shooter.
Also agree 100%. I served 13 years as a munitions/aircraft maintenance officer in the Air Force (got out last Nov). I loved that Level II AT training CBT . However, the techniques are so ingrained I find myself using them whenever I travel. Also, I know I'll be able to put on chem gear until the day I die.
czubaka is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-08-2012, 11:36 AM   #71
Elite Member
Thread Starter
iTrader: (2)
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Central Florida
Posts: 3,284
Total Cats: 178
Question

Quote:
Originally Posted by samnavy View Post
There's a question I'd like to ask rhetorically... let's say there had been a SEAL, Green Beret, SWAT member, or regular old Marine... basically anybody in the audience who some serious quick reaction training and the mental discipline to establish a tactical solution. Do you think a SEAL would let the fact that he wasn't carrying stop him from trying to take down an active shooter... and succeeding?

Anybody in my list above would not have been one of the scared-to-death panicking-running-for-their-lives-completely-unable-to-defend-themselves citizens getting gunned down as they tried to run out the door. If anybody in that list had been armed, I guarantee you the incident would have gone much differently.
Sam - How many of the theater attendees were active or retired military?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ryan_G View Post
You are also assuming that by "banning" guns you are actually completely restricting access to guns. All that really ends up happening is those who abide by the law no longer have access to firearms while criminals who purchase their weapons illegally already have continued access through the same channels they already were using anyway.
[...]
If guns were outlawed do you really think someone who had thoughts of mass murder would not resort to simple devices like molotov cocktails, knives, or nail bombs. All of which can be made by a 5th grader with supplies purchased at a hardware or grocery store?
I largely agree with this line of thinking (especially that prohibition does not equal eradication) but I sometimes wonder. Where do criminals obtain their firearms? How many of those illegally obtained firearms were obtained by "straw purchases" or stolen from an otherwise legal buyer or owner? If you eliminate the latter, do you significantly impact the former?


I don't know. I don't know enough about the statistics on gun violence in countries that have significant civillian restrictions.
Scrappy Jack is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-08-2012, 11:39 AM   #72
Boost Czar
iTrader: (61)
 
Braineack's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Chantilly, VA
Posts: 72,497
Total Cats: 1,706
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Scrappy Jack View Post
Sam - How many of the theater attendees were active or retired military?

at least one:

Quote:
Jon Blunk had served in the Navy and was planning to re-enlist. On Friday, the 26-year-old took his girlfriend, Jansen Young, to see the "Dark Knight" -- when the assault began, Young says he saved her life. "Jon just took a bullet for me," Young said in an interview on "Today". "He knew and threw me on the ground, and was like, 'We have to get down and stay down.'"

While Holmes walked up and down the aisles shooting, Young says her boyfriend was a constant presence, pushing her further under the seats and out of the line of fire. Finally, as the shots slowed, she crawled out and attempted to pull up Blunk by the shoulder, but he didn't move.
Braineack is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-08-2012, 12:08 PM   #73
AFM Crusader
iTrader: (18)
 
olderguy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Wayne, NJ
Posts: 4,416
Total Cats: 81
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ryan_G View Post
I feel it is a common misconception that the death penalty is a deterant for crime. The kinds of crimes that warrant the death penalty are either committed by those who do not fear death or live with the threat of death from their enemies at all times (i.e. drug lords or war criminals). Those that would normally be deterred by death but commit these crimes anyway are in a state of mind during the event in which the threat of the death penalty is the last thing they are thinking about.
There is no "fear of death" fostered by the US justice system. Were there to be, I am sure that some of the people you mention would think twice. If someone goes out to commit murder on a small or grand scale, they know it will be years of incarceration before they even come to trial, and then maybe life in a nice cell or sanitarium with three meals a day for the rest of their lives. Look what just happened with the shooter in Arizona.

Jared Lee Loughner Pleads Guilty to 2011 Tucson Shooting | NewsFeed | TIME.com

As I said, summary(immediate) public executions by firing squad will make a lot of murderers think twice.
olderguy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-08-2012, 12:38 PM   #74
Boost Czar
iTrader: (61)
 
Braineack's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Chantilly, VA
Posts: 72,497
Total Cats: 1,706
Default

Quote:
The 40-year-old Army veteran strode into the Sikh Temple of Wisconsin shortly before Sunday services and opened fire with a 9 mm pistol. The dead included temple President Satwant Singh Kaleka, who was shot as he tried to fend off the shooter with a butter knife.
butter knife.
Braineack is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-08-2012, 01:19 PM   #75
Elite Member
iTrader: (6)
 
blaen99's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Seattle, WA
Posts: 4,112
Total Cats: 27
Default

Although I'm obviously pretty anti-gun control (See my first post in this thread, my only concern is liability. If that is answered, then I don't care if you own anti-tank weaponry.), it is silly to argue the death penalty is a deterrent.

Deterrence: States Without the Death Penalty Have Had Consistently Lower Murder Rates | Death Penalty Information Center

The death penalty is pretty well known to either not act as a deterrent, or being completely unclear (See Death penalty deter killings? Study says evidence unclear - Los Angeles Times as a reference) as to whether it has any effect at all. The crime statistics however argue clearly against it - and isn't that what one would care about when trying to argue deterrence?

Secondly, please remember that the death penalty is more expensive even than life in prison.
blaen99 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-08-2012, 01:21 PM   #76
Miotta FTW!
iTrader: (24)
 
Splitime's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Chicagoland, IL
Posts: 4,286
Total Cats: 25
Default

< Lives in the suburbs of Chicago.

It is an illegal gun playground for criminals due to their lack of fear. Lack of fear due to stupid over imposing gun laws.

Don't judge us just because we are from this area...
Splitime is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-08-2012, 01:22 PM   #77
Boost Czar
iTrader: (61)
 
Braineack's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Chantilly, VA
Posts: 72,497
Total Cats: 1,706
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by blaen99 View Post
it is silly to argue the death penalty is a deterrent.

Deterrence: States Without the Death Penalty Have Had Consistently Lower Murder Rates | Death Penalty Information Center

The death penalty is pretty well known to either not act as a deterrent, or being completely unclear (See Death penalty deter killings? Study says evidence unclear - Los Angeles Times as a reference) as to whether it has any effect at all. The crime statistics however argue clearly against it - and isn't that what one would care about when trying to argue deterrence?

I don't believe that's a fair assesment. We don't really have the death penalty.

Attached Thumbnails
Gun Rights: Should you be allowed to own an RPG?-executerssss.jpg  
Braineack is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-08-2012, 01:24 PM   #78
Senior Member
iTrader: (3)
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Mass.
Posts: 816
Total Cats: 41
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Braineack View Post
let us.




and then there's this:




and an interesting read: http://www.saf.org/journal/14/GunCon...ndtheWorld.htm
If you subscribe to the Donohue-Levitt hypothesis, then your above graph is showing the results of Roe vs. Wade AND NOT gun ownership (though it could play a part since nothing happens in a vacuum).

I'd argue an overhaul of national drug laws would reduce homicides far more than gun controls laws ever could.

poverty>incentive for crime>crime related homicide

You're not going to stop the crazies, nor should you waste effort in trying to do so since they are outliers within the statistics. I do, however, believe cartridge size laws for semi-automatics are not necessarily a bad thing since self protection for the 'normal' citizen shouldn't require a hundred rounds. Only the anti-government libertarians can convince themselves they have a use for a hundred round clip ... Obama might go Assad on all of us

-Zach
thasac is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-08-2012, 01:29 PM   #79
Boost Czar
iTrader: (61)
 
Braineack's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Chantilly, VA
Posts: 72,497
Total Cats: 1,706
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by thasac View Post
I'd argue an overhaul of national drug laws would reduce homicides far more than gun controls laws ever could.

There always causalities in the war on drugs, bro.
Braineack is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-08-2012, 01:32 PM   #80
Elite Member
iTrader: (6)
 
blaen99's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Seattle, WA
Posts: 4,112
Total Cats: 27
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by thasac View Post
If you subscribe to the Donohue-Levitt hypothesis, then your above graph is showing the results of Roe vs. Wade AND NOT gun ownership (though it could play a part since nothing happens in a vacuum).

...

-Zach
This is actually a really good argument that I haven't thought about before wrt gun control...

I don't know if Roe v. Wade has any goddamn thing to do with it, but I'd totally be on board with the drug war causing all sorts of havoc. Really, if you exclude the Roe v. Wade stuff in your post, I'm completely on board with what you are saying.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Braineack View Post
I don't believe that's a fair assesment. We don't really have the death penalty.
So, Samnavy's argument in favor of the death penalty is a pipe dream because we don't have it? The...140-some people in Texas who were innocent and executed didn't really get executed?
blaen99 is offline   Reply With Quote
 
 
Reply

Related Topics
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Turbo 1995 Miata Low mileage Clean Tekel Cars for sale/trade 29 02-05-2016 04:16 PM
IT Pros: HELP! Al Jazeera something something Brighthouse Account sixshooter Insert BS here 11 09-01-2015 10:51 AM
Who's Idea was it to give cops taser guns RicanmiataRacer Insert BS here 10 03-04-2007 02:07 PM
Is the SMT6 comparable to the Emanage Blue/Emu/MS? Mex Prefabbed Turbo Kits 1 09-28-2006 04:15 PM
FS: Turbo XS H34 BOV BrokeEnthusiast Miata parts for sale/trade 1 09-06-2006 10:16 PM


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -4. The time now is 09:18 PM.