New Zealand gunmen kill 49 people at two mosques
- Thread starter The Berean
- Start date
Hadn't, but I agree after a fashion. Some guns are designed to no good or justifiable purpose. I have the same contempt for them that my grandfather did watching idiots going "hunting" with shotguns they fired like quick draw artists.
Don't tell Nick this but those Colt AR15 and Remington models similar? They are born bad. They should be M16 rifles in the military, with good parents, the military people who need them. I been around guns and
hunting for 60 years and the guns that make sense are hunting rifles and handguns. Along with shotguns make for dual purpose defense weapons. In the hunting camps of the 50s and 60s you be laughed out of camp having a AR 15 and shooting .223 at dear.
The whole idea behind these 'assault like' rifles is a modern conception , which looks plain goofy to anyone my age who really lived as a hunter. Hunting is the main distinction for owning guns, and definitely for owning more than one gun.
I should have went out and played bingo tonight. I do not feel much like a movie?
Idolater
"Foundation of the World" Dispensationalist χρ
What's interesting is that New Hampshire has 'Constitutional Carry' and no restrictions on magazine capacity or anything like the restrictions from the old Federal Assault Weapon Ban in 1994-2004 here.
It's interesting because NH's murder rate is also 1 (like Sweden).
Which means that New Hampshire, in which you can freely tote assault weapons around in public, is safer than Germany, the U.K., France, Finland, and Canada.
So shouldn't we therefore, rationally, try to improve our safety, by implementing NH's gun laws across this whole country right now, post haste?
Apparently not. Supra.
Idolater
"Foundation of the World" Dispensationalist χρ
Maybe murderers and rapists are born bad, but not guns.
New Hampshire is homogeneous, by race and class. Violence rises with poverty when it confronts a wealthy and more respected class and by race when people see themselves as different based on appearance. This is the biggest mitigating factor. The weather might play a role, yet that is more complex to state reasons why. It would be different in Texas and California.
Oh, they are and that is taken for grated. The information is guns are also born bad; since we do not value rights for guns as individuals, we might wish to abort the bad ones?
Idolater
"Foundation of the World" Dispensationalist χρ
Standard issue service rifles and carbines are not those.
Idolater
"Foundation of the World" Dispensationalist χρ
I suppose one whose chamber explodes when fired, due to too thin metal used, could be said to be born bad. A gun that hurts its shooter more than its target is a bad gun.
Hogwash.
Idolater
"Foundation of the World" Dispensationalist χρ
I know Nick M preferred another chambering for his AR, I think but am not 100% certain that this round is his favorite for that pattern gun:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/6.8mm_Remington_SPC
It'd be much better for hunting than the 5.56 NATO round in standard ARs.
No. A gun created to mimic a military issue for civilians is a gun made to no good purpose.
We fundamentally disagree.
The second Amendment isn't about hunting.
Idolater
"Foundation of the World" Dispensationalist χρ
Some global statistics (by nation):
Civilian gun ownership worldwide has either no effect on murder rates, or, the higher civilian gun ownership is, the lower is murder rate. But it is definitely not true that the more civilian gun ownership, the more the murders. That is just false.
Population density, has nothing to do with murder rate. The densest populations and the sparsest, are equally likely to have the same murder rate.
And, there is no interaction between civilian gun ownership and population density either, wrt murder rate.
Idolater
"Foundation of the World" Dispensationalist χρ
Right. And it never EVER was.
So the police should stick with lever actions, revolvers, and pumps?
Nope.
I'll tell you when I'm wrong.
You said nothing even close to that. :idunno:
And this is also irrelevant. Some vehicles make it easier to kill more people.
And when you ban lorries, Nice-like incidents become more unlikely.
Your assertion is that more rules make certain actions more difficult to perform. As we've been through this numerous times, you'd think you'd know what the response will be: Taking away an item makes its use more difficult. That's not being challenged.
And counties that ban cars cut traffic deaths.
We know that murderers won't turn to a spatula as a weapon of choice
And yet, if you live in Plano, Texas. :idunno:
Idolater
"Foundation of the World" Dispensationalist χρ
I'm surprised that you don't think that innocent people (e.g. innocent law enforcement officers) can use selective fire rifles and carbines for good and justifiable purpose.
Sometimes it's necessary to suffer a little pain in order that the truth might be shared.
However, if you keep talking about it, I'm going to have to start teasing you.