Oklahoma hospital shooting

#276
#276
Septic said:
Lots of weapons are already banned from civilian use and purchase. I mean, I can't buy a M16... Is that a violation of an inalienable right?

There's no right or wrong answer, I'm just curious where other folks would be on compromising voter ID requirements with AR15 age limits. Sounds like you're open to compromise, you're the first.
Click to expand...

You absolutely can buy an M16 if you have the money for one.
 
  • Like
Reactions: UT_Dutchman and McDad
#277
#277
NorthDallas40 said:
I’d guess they would be more shocked at what a spineless, responsibility avoiding, cesspool of human nature our population has become. Which I think enables the behavior you’re trying to leverage frankly. Remember these guys settle far less offenses than the crap we see daily on the news with firearms at 10 paces.
Click to expand...

What behavior am I trying to leverage? Compromise?
 
#278
#278
Septic said:
You'll have a hard time convincing me that our founding fathers did what they did with clear foresight of mass civilian and school murders.
Click to expand...
we will never know the answer to that...but we do know its orginal intentions and what was allowed to be owned by the population was equal to that owned by the government. Also im pretty sure the inventor of the wheel didnt forsee them being part of a vehicle mowing down innocnetz either...and now we are back to the mentally ill will use whatever item to acheive thier desired goal of killing
 
#283
#283
Septic said:
FFS. Where did I say anything about banning AR's?

This is why it's such a chore to try and hold a conversation with you and why you're probably ignored by more people in this forum than any other. You move goal posts, insist you didn't and then blame the other person for not having the discussion you've straw manned. The problem is that you do this without even trying to squeeze in a cogent argument.

Bye Felicia.
Click to expand...

You compared it to purchasing an M16, which you claimed was banned. But that’s fine. Let’s just talk about limiting it, if that’s what you prefer.

What does limiting ARs accomplish?
 
#284
#284
NorthDallas40 said:
It isn’t a ban. It’s a tax.
Click to expand...

the tax is an effective ban.

In the same way that legislators could tax ammunition so heavily it'd be an effective 2a violation.

Want to stop drive by gang or mass shootings by teenagers, easy - make a 9mm round $500. I think you'd agree that the tax would be a circumventing of the 2a, effectively.
 
#285
#285
Pepe_Silvia said:
There are 630,000 machine guns in private hands in the US so I wouldn't say it's an effective ban.
Click to expand...

You can't buy a M16 manufactured after 86 and without a license that costs between $25k-$50k.

Unless ya'll are saying that they could do the same with all rifles and handguns, I mean - it wouldn't be a "ban." Is this what you're telling me?
 
#286
#286
Septic said:
the tax is an effective ban.

In the same way that legislators could tax ammunition so heavily it'd be an effective 2a violation.

Want to stop drive by gang or mass shootings by teenagers, easy - make a 9mm round $500. I think you'd agree that the tax would be a circumventing of the 2a, effectively.
Click to expand...
Not really. In fact I believe we’ll see a challenge to NFA1934 in my lifetime based on current legislation trends. It’s quite clear enough people refuse to punish law abiding citizens by the unlawful behavior of criminals.

After all NFA1934 came into being due to an emotional response to the St Valentine’s Day Massacre. Who really GAF if a bunch of mobsters or gang bangers kill each other?
 
#287
#287
NorthDallas40 said:
Not really. In fact I believe we’ll see a challenge to NFA1934 in my lifetime based on current legislation trends. It’s quite clear enough refuse to punish law abiding citizens by the unlawful behavior of criminals.

After all NFA1934 came into being due to an emotional response to the St Valentine’s Day Massacre. Who really GAF if a bunch of mobsters or gang bangers kill each other?
Click to expand...

Given the temperature of the gun control debate getting hotter on AR's, I think you're going to be dead and gone before NFA1934 or the FOPA ever see's the Resolute desk for signature.
 
#288
#288
Septic said:
You can't buy a M16 manufactured after 86 and without a license that costs between $25k-$50k.

Unless ya'll are saying that they could do the same with all rifles and handguns, I mean - it wouldn't be a "ban." Is this what you're telling me?
Click to expand...

No, I'm saying your original statement about not being allowed to buy an M16 was false. The NAF shouldn't exist but it doesn't ban the possession of a machine gun.

Not sure where you're getting the 25k-50k number. It's a $200 tax stamp.
 
  • Like
Reactions: UT_Dutchman, Rickyvol77 and McDad
#289
#289
Septic said:
Given the temperature of the gun control debate getting hotter on AR's, I think you're going to be dead and gone before NFA1934 ever see's the Resolute desk for signature.
Click to expand...
Maybe. But it’s hard to argue the longer term trend once the short term emotional baggage is spent on individual incidents. Just like it will be this time.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Pepe_Silvia
#290
#290
Pepe_Silvia said:
No, I'm saying your original statement about not being allowed to buy an M16 was false. The NAF shouldn't exist but it doesn't ban the possession of a machine gun.

Not sure where you're getting the 25k-50k number. It's a $200 tax stamp.
Click to expand...

Yeah, you go pick up a M16 for $200 stamp plus cost down at the local guns and golf shop - report back on your success.
 
#291
#291
The funny thing about the “fully automatic” hysteria is that the military doesn’t use it often.
There’s just not enough control and it wastes ammo.
We use simi-auto almost exclusively.

then there’s the SBR vs Pistol stupidity.
 
  • Like
Reactions: marcusluvsvols and NorthDallas40
#292
#292
Septic said:
well, I guess that would be said about any issue in these forums.

The journey begins with empathy and a common goal to fix the issue, there doesn't seem to be a willingness by either side to do that. Not really.

I find it funny however, that my position of both sides need to work together is being solely attacked and ridiculed by one side. The no compromise folks are why it will be virtually impossible to move past this with anything meaningful.
Click to expand...

Oh c'mon. You're far more self aware than this post.

We discuss and argue things with vigor here. But when you (in this case) hit the feelz button, you're going to get pushback. You do it yourself with other discussions. Not saying it is right; it just is.

The one side fighting you have offered common ground in this and other threads. Culture, family units, mental health, and drug usage has been in the discussion. My contribution is offering to make these crazed killers anonymous...rob them of their notoriety.

I hope you consider working to become someone in a position to start the journey. It seems to be an important subject for you.
 
  • Like
Reactions: marcusluvsvols
#293
#293
Septic said:
the tax is an effective ban.

In the same way that legislators could tax ammunition so heavily it'd be an effective 2a violation.

Want to stop drive by gang or mass shootings by teenagers, easy - make a 9mm round $500. I think you'd agree that the tax would be a circumventing of the 2a, effectively.
Click to expand...

Make a voting fee twice as much.
 
#295
#295
Septic said:
Well, then you get your guns and we as a 'developed society' have more school shootings. win, win?
Click to expand...

No it’s not a win , can we at least talk about making schools a hard target . The government has no problem doing that when there’s an attack like after 9/11 , with the airports and stupid homeland security . We should make schools a death trap to anyone trying to harm our kids and teachers .
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: marcusluvsvols and NorthDallas40
#296
#296
0nelilreb said:
No it’s not a win , can we at least talk about making schools a hard target . The government has no problem doing that when there’s and attack like after 9/11 , with the airports and stupid homeland security . We should make schools a death trap to anyone trying to harm our kids and teachers .
Click to expand...

Sure, i think hardening targets is a good idea - but that doesn't do anything to address the root of the problem.
 
  • Like
Reactions: marcusluvsvols
#297
#297
Septic said:
Sure, i think hardening targets is a good idea - but that doesn't do anything to address the root of the problem.
Click to expand...

This part you and I agree on that’s a good start , after making schools a hard target it “ should “ have and effect of the number of school shootings . Now we can move onto root problems , for me the one question that I always come back to is , what happened ? We didn’t have school shooting while I was growing up , it was something that even the most horrible , broke minded person didn’t even do . So what changed ? It wasn’t the availability of guns we know this so that’s out of the debate , what was it that we need to figure out and correct that started us on this path to the insane idea of shooting a bunch of innocent kids was cool ?
 
  • Like
Reactions: marcusluvsvols
#299
#299
0nelilreb said:
for me the one question that I always come back to is , what happened ? We didn’t have school shooting while I was growing up
Click to expand...


The 24/7 "news" network. And no, I'm not taking aim at any one of them specifically.

If you want to get yourself or your cause as much infamy and notoriety as possible, go after the most innocent and blameless among us. Ta-da! Your name and face are now plastered all over every channel, website, etc and people are talking about you, you, you!

Unfortunately, you're probably dead at this point, but you've got name recognition now.

The best thing we can do news-wise is focus on the victims and their families and give the perpetrator zero airtime. Deny him his blaze of glory. Unfortunately, that doesn't sell ads.
 
  • Like
Reactions: marcusluvsvols, 0nelilreb and MemphisVol77
#300
#300
NorthDallas40 said:
Which is crazy MFers with guns… right?
Click to expand...

Yes, this has always been my position.

But while the root of the issue is the crazy's, the ease of the unfettered access to their instrument of choice must also be open for discussion.

When the no compromise 2A crowd get serious about mental health initiatives instead of just acknowledging it's the 'real' problem and when the anti 2A crowd recognizes that gun control "W3 NeEd gUNZ coNt0L LaWZn0W!" legislation only affects the law abiding, perhaps then we can have a real discussion. Otherwise, both sides will keep talking past each other, dying on philosophical hills while kids keep dying in class rooms.

Positions shouldn't be absolute and the only goal should be doing everything as a society possible to protect life.
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top