High-Capacity Assault Weapons Topic

Posted by furry_nipps on 12/19/2012 10:47:00 AM (view original):
Posted by MikeT23 on 12/19/2012 10:32:00 AM (view original):
The guys stockpiling clips.   There's really no reason to do it.

Although I do understand the point.  Someone intent on evil will find a way.   If it's stealing a gun, they'll steal a gun.  But they'll have to go door to door to get a bucketful of clips.   And the clips will hold 10 rounds.  Everyone will still get to own their guns but it will be more difficult to stockpile unnecessary clips.
But are these the guys doing this? Like I said at least in these recent attacks minus james holmes they haven't even owned any gun.
If you have to register clips, you can limit how many someone can own.   If they only hold 10 rounds, the shooter will need a bunch of them.   While it's not the guy committing the crime, the guy stealing the guns will have to hit several places to get the ability to have a thousand rounds at his disposal.  Or carry 20 guns and we know that's not what's happening.
12/19/2012 1:19 PM
<sarcasm>

Good news.  Joe Biden's on the job.

</sarcasm>
12/19/2012 1:31 PM
Thread closed as problem is obviously solved.
12/19/2012 1:44 PM
12/19/2012 2:57 PM
12/19/2012 4:08 PM
Posted by MikeT23 on 12/19/2012 1:19:00 PM (view original):
Posted by furry_nipps on 12/19/2012 10:47:00 AM (view original):
Posted by MikeT23 on 12/19/2012 10:32:00 AM (view original):
The guys stockpiling clips.   There's really no reason to do it.

Although I do understand the point.  Someone intent on evil will find a way.   If it's stealing a gun, they'll steal a gun.  But they'll have to go door to door to get a bucketful of clips.   And the clips will hold 10 rounds.  Everyone will still get to own their guns but it will be more difficult to stockpile unnecessary clips.
But are these the guys doing this? Like I said at least in these recent attacks minus james holmes they haven't even owned any gun.
If you have to register clips, you can limit how many someone can own.   If they only hold 10 rounds, the shooter will need a bunch of them.   While it's not the guy committing the crime, the guy stealing the guns will have to hit several places to get the ability to have a thousand rounds at his disposal.  Or carry 20 guns and we know that's not what's happening.
I don't think you need thousands, but these shooters won't be able to 'waste' them if they only came into a place with 20 bullets. That still would have been enough to kill a lot of people. Most shooters *do* come in with multiple guns, but end up usually only using one. This would just switch to them actually using the other couple they bring. Having 30 shots is still the ability to do far to much damage in a public place. If they want to do more like I said once the bullets are out it isn't like they couldn't pull of a knife or something to do more damage. If people want to kill there is nothing anyone could put in place to stop it. If the schools had practiced some emergency stuff the numbers could have been lower. In oregon, over 60 shots were fired with 10,000 people in one place and only 2 died. Why? Because everyone ran. They hid. Its harder to hit em all when they move. The kids just bundled up. I think a major issue that is being over looked is the that there was no plan in place if this happened. It could have saved tons of lives. Some may say why would 6 year olds need this, but I remember in school we practiced drills for fire, earthquakes, lock downs etc. We also had to write up a meeting place with family if we all had to run and evacuate the school where our safety place would be that we would wait for them at.
12/19/2012 9:05 PM

You're giving 6 year olds a lot of credit to not panic.   Shooter walks in, blasts teacher and kids freeze.    If you disagree, walk up to a man with his 6 y/o.   Drop the man with a sucker punch.   Watch the child's reaction.   He's not running.

Limit the ability of the shooter to only fire off ten rounds before changing clips and you limit the damage.  Limit the number of clips and you limit damage.

12/20/2012 7:50 AM
I think I am so lucky to have been playing games on a site where so many people are experts on the behavior of socio/psychopaths and children.  I am pretty sure Joe Biden started here when the Prez tasked him with solving the psychopath mass murderer problem in our country. 
12/20/2012 10:27 AM
If you think it's possible to train a group of 6 y/o to react properly when bullets are flying around the room, I'd like to see the study you're reading.  
12/20/2012 12:18 PM
Have not been following this thread and I'm not going to go back and read all of it.
First thing that needs to happen is for the media to NOT release the killers' name. Too many quacks are seeing that they can "make the news" if they go ballistic and kill a bunch of innocent people. The "make a name for myself" kind of thinking and have my name all over the news so everyone knew who I was BS gives them extra motivation to do something like this. Notority is what they are after and the stupid media is giving it to them.
Second, we need to redesign schools so every exit can be secured with solid doors with multiple locks and no glass that can be shot out to gain easy access. Metal detectors should be installed to give extra warning of possible guns. After students are assembled the only way into the school is through the front office where the principal has to release locks for anyone to enter. They also should be trained to keep a weapon and how and when to use it for extra security.
12/20/2012 4:43 PM
As I've been thinking about this as the week has gone on, I've realized that the biggest part of the overall problem is the love of guns that is so deeply ingrained in American culture and society.

I've gone on record in this thread as saying that a total ban on guns is neither practical nor necessary.  It's also unconstitutional.  But just for kicks, I've tried to do a "what if" in my mind about a total ban on guns.  I couldn't do it because I couldn't get past the fact that even with a total ban on guns, the demand would still be there.

Some of the national discussion on gun control this week has mentioned other countries in which guns have either been totally banned, or greatly restricted.  Depending on the source of information, results in those countries have either been "very effective" or "completely ineffective"  The difference in the characterization of these results varies almost entirely due to the agendas of the persons or groups providing and interpreting the data.

But I don't think we can look at other countries and compare their results to what our results would be because it's not going to be an apples-to-apples comparison.  I don't think that there's any other country in which the love and need for guns so so deeply ingrained as it is in America.

A guy I work with, in his late 40's, moved here to the U.S. from the Netherlands around 3 years ago, and we discussed this briefly the other day.  He just doesn't understand the gun culture here in the U.S., and why gun owners are so deeply passionate about their absolute right and need to own guns.

Back on point: that's a big part of the problem, one that really hasn't been touched upon in the national discussion.  Why do American's hold on to the Second Amendment's "right to bear arms" as such a sacred and inalienable right as we do?  What, if anything, can or should be done to move away from our NEED to have guns from an inalienable right to "just" a privilege (as it is in most of the rest of the civilized world)?

12/20/2012 5:27 PM

AND VERY FEW SIGN UP TO DEFEND AMERIKA WITH GUNS


BRING BACK THE DRAFT, YE CAN PLAY WITH WEAPONS ALL THE TIME

PRETEND YER A MINUTEMAN

12/20/2012 5:51 PM
Would you buy that many of us believe in the Constitution?  That we respect our forefathers who fought and died for it?   That we respect the people who fight, and die, for these same rights now?  Would you also accept that it's easier to say "No, you can never have that" than "Hey, gimme that back?"

I thinks it's less of a gun problem than a society problem.  I have guns that haven't been fired in 20 years.   I don't expect my guns to actually take a human life.  Hell, they aren't likely to take any life of any kind.   However, if I thought for one moment that an all out gun ban would prevent mass killings, I'd take them to the police tonight.  

But, just like in every country that greatly restricts gun ownership, people who want guns will get guns.   This isn't speculation, it's a simple fact.
12/20/2012 5:53 PM
NO
12/20/2012 6:03 PM
I think Americans only believe in the Constitution when it's morally convenient for them. 

1920's - Oh, alcohol is prohibited?  Well, that's stupid, so I'll drink anyway.  We'll even glamorize bootleggers (like Kennedy)
2010's - Oh, so now you're gonna make a national gun law?  Well, that's stupid, so I'll get my guns elsewhere.
12/20/2012 6:06 PM
◂ Prev 1...13|14|15|16|17...54 Next ▸
High-Capacity Assault Weapons Topic

Search Criteria

Terms of Use Customer Support Privacy Statement

© 1999-2024 WhatIfSports.com, Inc. All rights reserved. WhatIfSports is a trademark of WhatIfSports.com, Inc. SimLeague, SimMatchup and iSimNow are trademarks or registered trademarks of Electronic Arts, Inc. Used under license. The names of actual companies and products mentioned herein may be the trademarks of their respective owners.