Started by Charles Austin, February 28, 2019, 06:49:50 AM
Quote from: Harvey_Mozolak on July 09, 2019, 03:37:51 PMfor clarity sake.... an assault weapon (I am not expert on all the names and nuances but one that shoots automatically and has large annunciation capacity for instance, silencers, night sights probably, adaptation for launching grenades) should not be owned or used by folks (other than the military or police types). They should not be used for target shooting or hunting of animals. Now whether a given weapon is proper for large police forces or should be restricted to military use is another issue and for instance a rocket launcher should not be in the police arsenal but brought in specially from/thru/by the military if there is some unique need.
Quote from: The Yak on July 09, 2019, 03:53:07 PMAutomatic weapons are already banned (for those manufactured after 1986) and highly, highly regulated for automatic weapons manufactured before then. That one can just walk in and purchase an automatic weapon is a myth that just won't die. Here's an article that will help you understand the distinctions in the gun control debate as to what current law already says regarding automatic weapons. I've yet to hear someone argue for changing it or making automatic weapons easier to purchase.
Quote from: Harvey_Mozolak on July 09, 2019, 04:28:20 PMI do not think ordinary folks ought to have guns. OK. Certainly not troves of them. And while you may be perfectly correct in what you say... I am going to guess that those who collect bunches of them have calibers other features that they do not need to kill a fox on the farm.
Quote from: Charles Austin on July 09, 2019, 12:47:40 PMSurely people here have heard that the militarization of police forces with combat and assault gear has been a matter of some concern.
Quote from: Harvey_Mozolak on July 09, 2019, 05:51:24 PMI am sorry to have tread in the territory of your expertise on all things to do with weapons, their kinds and calibers and nuances. But your expertise does not make you any more an expert on who should have them and how they are used, and that is your opinion.
Quote from: Charles Austin on July 06, 2019, 11:48:40 PMJames Rustad:You've made it clear over the years that you believe guns are bad. Me:No, I do not believe that guns are universally bad. I just set upStream that I do not disapprove of hunting or target shooting sports. I have cheered on my grandson as he shot with his high school team.James Rustad:About the only change I've seen from you is a hardening of your position.Me:Actually, I think it has softened a bit. I sort of, only sort of understand why people enjoy target shooting with high power weapons. I think it's silly but...James Rustad:Your portrayal of gun owners does not fit with those I've met. But as long as you attempt to portray us as knuckle-dragging, violence-loving, war-like brutes, the more you set yourself up to lose. Me:Where have I ever done that? Show me. I have said here that I think some enthusiasts are Romanced by the "gun culture," And like enthusiasts of many things, are a bit too much in love with their weapons. And frankly, I think some people who believe they have guns for "protection," are kidding themselves. I'm not sure the guns would really give them protection.James Rustad: Keep it up. Meanwhile, those of us who own guns will keep behaving as the normal, peace-loving, law-abiding people we are. Those who might initially buy your portrayal of us will eventually realize that you have led them into deception. That bodes ill for the success of your arguments.Me:I'm not looking for "success" in any argument. I do not believe I will win over anyone here to my way of thinking. But I do feel obliged to let people know how some of us Christians look at the gun issue.
Quote from: Charles Austin on February 15, 2018, 01:34:12 PMRepeal the second amendment. It has served its purpose. Sporting or not, outlaw "those kind" of weapons.Break the political power of the NRA.Find sensible ways to protect hunters.
Quote from: peter_speckhard on October 14, 2013, 08:07:43 PMHarvey, I appreciate he concern. I deleted many comments over many days from Charles and others in this thread. The others wanted to talk about guns. Charles wanted to ridicule them for it, so the comments I deleted had nothing to do with the topic or any topic but were just sarcastic insults and complaints about the sarcastic insults. I don't care about guns and wasn't checking the thread except to deal with complaints about Charles. So I told Charles to quit posting on gun threads, which he continued to do anyway because that's just the kind of guy he is. So I started deleting his comments on gun threads. I know that you and many others share Charles' general view of guns, yet somehow none of you manage to get into incessant little petty spats with everyone else the way Charles does. He ruins more threads than pretty much everyone else put together. He thinks he is treated differently because of his views, but that is observably false. He is treated differently, though, by being allowed to keep posting at all when others with his track record of disruptive posting have long been banned from the forum entirely. He started his own thread on guns, which is fine; that means he doesn't have to post on other gun threads and people who don't want to deal with him can ignore his thread on the subject.
Quote from: Dan Fienen on July 10, 2019, 07:44:14 AMI have long thought that the Left is both more optimistic and more pessimistic than I am. More optimistic in that they believe that they can really create a good approximation of heaven on earth if only allowed to arrange things. And more pessimistic in that they also believe that nothing good can happen unless they are in charge. People simply cannot be trusted to manage their own affairs but need the Leff to rule everything.