Unlimited "Guns, Fuck Yeah!" Thread

[Mesozoic Mister Nigel]

One man's "try" is another man's "complete fucking waste of time"

I'm with LMNO - the key to this is to work on banning (read "eradicate") this national fixation you guys have with blowing the living piss out each other.

I don't agree with the NRA's "guns don't kill people" schtick. Guns do kill people and quite effectively too but they do need human intervention to work their magic.

Given that you can't prevent guns (just trust me on this) maybe there's avenues worth exploring that would reduce the homicidal intent that causes the guns to kill people?

Reducing economic inequality reduces crime of all kinds. But I'm a filthy librul socialist, so....

In social science circles, that's pretty widely regarded as the one thing that would have a major effect on violence and crime. Not "Fixing the economy", which is something that is well outside the scope of any single country's legislation, but simply reducing income inequality to reduce both poverty, and to reduce stress on those I am starting to refer to as "pre-poor", ie. the middle class.

Yea, during the Xmas break i read a book called The Spirit Level that posited that very strongly, after many years of research

And which will, like the mountains of other research on the subject, continue to be ignored by bureaucrats whose primary interest is not in policies that will better the lives of people, but in policies that will get them funded or re-elected.

[Pope Pixie Pickle]

One man's "try" is another man's "complete fucking waste of time"

I'm with LMNO - the key to this is to work on banning (read "eradicate") this national fixation you guys have with blowing the living piss out each other.

I don't agree with the NRA's "guns don't kill people" schtick. Guns do kill people and quite effectively too but they do need human intervention to work their magic.

Given that you can't prevent guns (just trust me on this) maybe there's avenues worth exploring that would reduce the homicidal intent that causes the guns to kill people?

Reducing economic inequality reduces crime of all kinds. But I'm a filthy librul socialist, so....

In social science circles, that's pretty widely regarded as the one thing that would have a major effect on violence and crime. Not "Fixing the economy", which is something that is well outside the scope of any single country's legislation, but simply reducing income inequality to reduce both poverty, and to reduce stress on those I am starting to refer to as "pre-poor", ie. the middle class.

Yea, during the Xmas break i read a book called The Spirit Level that posited that very strongly, after many years of research

And which will, like the mountains of other research on the subject, continue to be ignored by bureaucrats whose primary interest is not in policies that will better the lives of people, but in policies that will get them funded or re-elected.

Maybe, as some of these shootings happen when kids get hold of parents firearms, there should be an assessment of the storage facility of guns and ammo before they are sold. Kind of like animal shelters assess suitability of a property before homing animals...

[P3nT4gR4m]

perhaps tp was referring to your comment that it would "take you a few more minutes to fill that hay bale .. full of lead".
since the AWB still allowed for standard capacity mags (and thus no additional reload time), your statement would seem to imply the increased rate of fire that an automatic would have is what you meant.

incidentally, the numbers indicate that there are *way* less hits with a given amount of ammo when using fully automatic fire.
it's those semi-automatics, with their inherent 'assault-aiming', that is so deadly.
what we need to do is require fully automatic weapons be the standard.
y'know...for the children.

You just don't understand.  Assault rifles are magickle death devices that "mow down 20 children with a single pull of the trigger", and if we'd just outlaw them, there'd be no more murders, male-pattern baldness, or heartbreak of psoriasis.

TGRR,
Arguing the RWHN Way™.

Both of these. Particularly the fact that RWHN kept referring how assault rifles can kill everything in 5 seconds, though IIRC the bolded was a direct quote.

And what does the name of a bill have to do with the fact that you think assault rifles = instant child death? Oh right, nothing. Way to not address the actual issue again!

The quote was from Ratatosk, but it pretty much sums up that entire side of the argument.

Ahh ok, but yea, that's the general idea I was getting from his arguments with how quickly everyone will die because of assault weapons.

Besides, pulling facts out of your ass without actually verifying anything is how we're supposed to argue this right?

Also, given these startling statistics http://www.childdeathreview.org/nationalchildmortalitydata.htm I still vote that we ban motor vehicles, swimming pools, bath tubs, lakes, puddles, food, small objects, shoe laces, ropes, ties, cleaning chemicals, swimming, pillows, stuffed animals, real animals, bicycles, bags, and buckets because wrapping everything in bubble wrap is the only way to save the children! Except that we should probably ban bubble wrap, because they might suffocate if they get all caught up in it

Yeah, we'll get around to that, definitely but the people demand the banning of things with "assault" in the title first. This will pave the way to an eventual ban on the other things you, quite rightly, point out are dangerous to our children. Banning the word "assault" is the first step on the road to newspeak a safer world for our children to die in.

[The Good Reverend Roger]

Maybe, as some of these shootings happen when kids get hold of parents firearms, there should be an assessment of the storage facility of guns and ammo before they are sold. Kind of like animal shelters assess suitability of a property before homing animals...

They do?

Not here, they don't.

[Anna Mae Bollocks]

Maybe, as some of these shootings happen when kids get hold of parents firearms, there should be an assessment of the storage facility of guns and ammo before they are sold. Kind of like animal shelters assess suitability of a property before homing animals...

They do?

Not here, they don't.

I think the breed-specific rescues do here. Kind of like a home study before people adopt kids.
Something about the idea of people walking around my living quarters before I can have a cat or a box of shells rubs me the wrong way, though.

[The Good Reverend Roger]

Maybe, as some of these shootings happen when kids get hold of parents firearms, there should be an assessment of the storage facility of guns and ammo before they are sold. Kind of like animal shelters assess suitability of a property before homing animals...

They do?

Not here, they don't.

I think the breed-specific rescues do here. Kind of like a home study before people adopt kids.
Something about the idea of people walking around my living quarters before I can have a cat or a box of shells rubs me the wrong way, though.

HAR!  Animal rescue for snobs.  I didn't know that, because I've always just gone to the pound and picked out a mutt. 

[Salty]

I don't like this topic, it makes me say dumb things. Bad topic! Bad! *whacks with rolled up newspaper*

[Elder Iptuous]

how 'suitable' do the new home have to be when the animal only has like a week or so before they give them the sleepy shot as it stands?

[The Good Reverend Roger]

how 'suitable' do the new home have to be when the animal only has like a week or so before they give them the sleepy shot as it stands?

I've been doing a bit of googling, and a lot of the breed-specific places are no-kill.

Still, it seems pretty fucking silly.

[Elder Iptuous]

huh.
interesting.
like you, i've always taken mutts.  they get short shrift, and they're generally more fit/smarter from my experience.
(although Corndog had to survive through parvo...)

[Don Coyote]

Anybody else thinking of ads for guns using the format of the animal shelter/rescue commercials?

[Juana]

how 'suitable' do the new home have to be when the animal only has like a week or so before they give them the sleepy shot as it stands?

I've been doing a bit of googling, and a lot of the breed-specific places are no-kill.

Still, it seems pretty fucking silly.

I dunno, pitbulls and shit are probably less likely to be adopted than others. So I can see why they exist.

[Anna Mae Bollocks]

how 'suitable' do the new home have to be when the animal only has like a week or so before they give them the sleepy shot as it stands?

I've been doing a bit of googling, and a lot of the breed-specific places are no-kill.

Still, it seems pretty fucking silly.

A lot of them are pretty surreal: http://www.reignhailsheltierescue.com/adoption-contract.html

[Pope Pixie Pickle]

Maybe, as some of these shootings happen when kids get hold of parents firearms, there should be an assessment of the storage facility of guns and ammo before they are sold. Kind of like animal shelters assess suitability of a property before homing animals...

They do?

Not here, they don't.

They did that when my mum adopted her mutt.

[The Good Reverend Roger]

Maybe, as some of these shootings happen when kids get hold of parents firearms, there should be an assessment of the storage facility of guns and ammo before they are sold. Kind of like animal shelters assess suitability of a property before homing animals...

They do?

Not here, they don't.

They did that when my mum adopted her mutt.

Yeah, but this is the USA.  Need another 16 dogs?  None of my fucking business.  Roll the truck up and we'll load 'em.