Don't click or your IP will be banned


Hittin' The Web with the Allman Brothers Band Forum
You are not logged in

< Last Thread   Next Thread ><<  1    2    3    4  >>Ascending sortDescending sorting  
Author: Subject: Jimmy Kimmel Comments on Guns Last Night

World Class Peach



Karma:
Posts: 5822
(5827 all sites)
Registered: 7/4/2004
Status: Offline

  posted on 10/4/2017 at 07:49 PM
quote:

Let's see Jimmy start saying that Liberal Hollywood and Silicon Valley should stop glamourizing violence.


Oh you are good very good.....

 

____________________
"Any man who thinks he can be happy and prosperous by letting the
Government take care of him; better take a closer look at the American Indian." -Henry Ford

 

World Class Peach



Karma:
Posts: 5125
(5124 all sites)
Registered: 4/18/2002
Status: Offline

  posted on 10/4/2017 at 08:33 PM
quote:
quote:
quote:
quote:
quote:
quote:
quote:
"President Trump is visiting Las Vegas on Wednesday, he spoke this morning, said hes praying for those who lost their lives. You know in February, he also signed a bill that made it easier for people with severe mental illness to buy guns legally," Kimmel said in his monologue. "Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, Speaker of the House Paul Ryan, a number of other lawmakers who wont do anything about this because the NRA has their balls in a money clip, also sent their thoughts and their prayers today, which is good. They should be praying. They should be praying for God to forgive them for letting the gun lobby run this country, because it's so crazy."

https://www.yahoo.com/gma/jimmy-kimmel-calls-congress-over-inaction-gun-con trol-090009528--abc-news-topstories.html
[Edited on 10/3/2017 by robslob]



OK, I'll bite. Which bill did he sign to let mentally ill people purchase firearms? Links please.






Here you go:

Http://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/trump-signs-bill-revoking-obama-era-gun -checks-people-mental-n727221



So you're talking about the "Implementation of The NICS Improvement Amendments Act of 2007".
Have you read it, or taking at face value an article with a misleading title?

The act went in opposition of U.S.C. Title 18, Part 1, Chapter 44, Section 922, g, 4.
It would basically call for the Social Security Administration to list as "mentally ill" anyone who needed help with basic things such as balancing a checkbook, instead of reporting those who have been adjudicated by a court of law as being mentally ill. It would have nominally violated the HIPAA rights of disabled recipients, and the 2nd, 5th, and 14th amendment rights of the recipient.
it really would have been the true definition of denying a right without due process.
Those who have been adjudicated by a court as mentally ill were not given the right to purchase and own firearms, so the title is factually false.


So, you think somebody who doesn't have enough mental capacity to balance a checkbook should have the right to buy guns? Seriously, you care less for the safety of innocent people than you do about guns.


Good response there. There are plenty of people out there who can't do some things that we take for granted, or think as menial tasks, but are not mentally ill. Are you for labeling people mentally ill and denying them a constitutional right because they can't balance a checkbook without going through due process?


I'm saying we shouldn't allow them deadly weapons unless they can prove they are mentally competent. The world is dangerous enough withour crazy people having guns.


So you approve not having rights until you can prove mental competency?

 

____________________
All photos posted of family, friends, and places, including those of historic ABB value, by this poster are copyrighted by the poster, or posted by permission of the copywriter.
None of those photos may be reproduced for commercial gain.

 

Ultimate Peach



Karma:
Posts: 3631
(3626 all sites)
Registered: 12/27/2003
Status: Offline

  posted on 10/4/2017 at 08:55 PM
quote:
So you approve not having rights until you can prove mental competency?


Not having rights? How about not having a gun until you can prove you can deconstruct and assemble your weapon of choice, demonstrate shooting and safety compliance, and pass the same psychological exams our police force use on recruits to test for this very thing. Surely that would decrease some deaths, if even the accidental ones, and only lets our finest men and women have the easiest of access to whatever it is they please. The ones who struggle with the aforementioned measurements can still excercise their 2nd amendment right, once they step up and prove themselves worthy of operating one of the greatest and most powerful tools ever. To disrespect some sort of testing is to disrespect all of our biggest cities' police forces who rely on them to protect and serve.

 

Ultimate Peach



Karma:
Posts: 3870
(3881 all sites)
Registered: 12/18/2004
Status: Offline

  posted on 10/4/2017 at 09:01 PM
quote:
quote:
So you approve not having rights until you can prove mental competency?


Not having rights? How about not having a gun until you can prove you can deconstruct and assemble your weapon of choice, demonstrate shooting and safety compliance, and pass the same psychological exams our police force use on recruits to test for this very thing. Surely that would decrease some deaths, if even the accidental ones, and only lets our finest men and women have the easiest of access to whatever it is they please. The ones who struggle with the aforementioned measurements can still excercise their 2nd amendment right, once they step up and prove themselves worthy of operating one of the greatest and most powerful tools ever. To disrespect some sort of testing is to disrespect all of our biggest cities' police forces who rely on them to protect and serve.




None of that is in the Constitution. Nope, I checked. Nothing about efficiency, mental stability, background checks. Nothing. How dare you think that common sense is more important than owning an arsenal.

 

Peach Head



Karma:
Posts: 194
(194 all sites)
Registered: 5/31/2013
Status: Offline

  posted on 10/4/2017 at 09:14 PM
quote:
quote:
The people that say, "you will never be able to prevent someone who snapped from hurting people," are exactly right. HOWEVER, why then do we leave the most common and simple way of doing that on a large scale so easily accessible?

Almost anybody can figure out how to point a gun and squeeze the trigger (it's just like a video game). Not that many (in a fit of mental insanity, especially) can go through all the steps of building a successful bomb on a truck.

But, if someone flips out and they already own multiple machine guns, it is pretty easy to go out and hurt a lot of people.

We have had bombings, but we do not have an epidemic of bombings. We have had car attacks, but we do not have an epidemic of car attacks. It is hard to hurt 600 people in an acid attack. It is hard to hurt 600 people in a knife attack. It would be hard to hurt 600 people by throwing hammers out of a 32nd story window before the cops can kill you. There a very few ways to do this much damage while you are committing suicide without machine guns.

Reasonable gun policy is not the "beginning of confiscating all guns" anymore than security checks at airports is the end of airplanes. It is simply doing something to address a deadly problem, INSTEAD OF DOING NOTHING.

There is a constitutional right to "bear arms" and we can continue to debate what was meant by that, but suggesting that James Madison was talking about machine guns is pretty flimsy.

Giving up something that you enjoy for the betterment of society is called civilization...





What machine guns are you talking about? If he had some then he had either gone through almost a year of multiple background checks, license checks, fees, fingerprinting, and very costly transfer fees.

Misinformation is one thing that goes rampant after an incident like this. There have been no reports of machine guns being used. There are reports of an aftermarket item called a SlideFire. This effectively makes the rifle push forward against your finger with forward recoil from the stock. The rifle can then be fired at it's cyclic rate, if you practice with it for a while. It does not make the rifle a machine gun or an assault rifle. To me, it's just a way to burn through ammo. It's not effective of putting rounds on target, but it does help you spend more money on ammo.

The shooter was from 900 to 1200 feet away from where the bullets hit, he wasn't aiming at anyone in particular, just doing a "spray and pray" in my opinion.

Now, for a question. did the Founding Fathers set up the 1st Amendment for TV, Radio, Movies, DVD, CD, VHS, cassette, photography, internet, or for Facebook, Snap-chat, Google, Instagram, and other social media venues? It's about your comment on James Madison.


Look, you know what I meant when I said "machine gun". I don't care if I am technically correct or not. I do not care to know about the differences between classes of guns other than ones that are used for reasonable purposes and ones used to commit mass murder or make some loser feel like he has more power than his little ego tells him everyday. I am talking about guns that some P.O.S. can use to shoot 600 people in a matter of a few minutes. I don't care how they were modified or any of the other stuff that doesn't have any relevance to the innocent dead and injured people.

And... No, I don't think James Madison was talking about VHS or DVD or anything else we use without harming people today. HOWEVER, I doubt he was talking about child pornography either, yet that has since been correctly banned to protect innocent lives.

 

Peach Extraordinaire



Karma:
Posts: 4506
(4574 all sites)
Registered: 4/13/2002
Status: Offline

  posted on 10/4/2017 at 10:09 PM
quote:
quote:
quote:
The people that say, "you will never be able to prevent someone who snapped from hurting people," are exactly right. HOWEVER, why then do we leave the most common and simple way of doing that on a large scale so easily accessible?

Almost anybody can figure out how to point a gun and squeeze the trigger (it's just like a video game). Not that many (in a fit of mental insanity, especially) can go through all the steps of building a successful bomb on a truck.

But, if someone flips out and they already own multiple machine guns, it is pretty easy to go out and hurt a lot of people.

We have had bombings, but we do not have an epidemic of bombings. We have had car attacks, but we do not have an epidemic of car attacks. It is hard to hurt 600 people in an acid attack. It is hard to hurt 600 people in a knife attack. It would be hard to hurt 600 people by throwing hammers out of a 32nd story window before the cops can kill you. There a very few ways to do this much damage while you are committing suicide without machine guns.

Reasonable gun policy is not the "beginning of confiscating all guns" anymore than security checks at airports is the end of airplanes. It is simply doing something to address a deadly problem, INSTEAD OF DOING NOTHING.

There is a constitutional right to "bear arms" and we can continue to debate what was meant by that, but suggesting that James Madison was talking about machine guns is pretty flimsy.

Giving up something that you enjoy for the betterment of society is called civilization...





What machine guns are you talking about? If he had some then he had either gone through almost a year of multiple background checks, license checks, fees, fingerprinting, and very costly transfer fees.

Misinformation is one thing that goes rampant after an incident like this. There have been no reports of machine guns being used. There are reports of an aftermarket item called a SlideFire. This effectively makes the rifle push forward against your finger with forward recoil from the stock. The rifle can then be fired at it's cyclic rate, if you practice with it for a while. It does not make the rifle a machine gun or an assault rifle. To me, it's just a way to burn through ammo. It's not effective of putting rounds on target, but it does help you spend more money on ammo.

The shooter was from 900 to 1200 feet away from where the bullets hit, he wasn't aiming at anyone in particular, just doing a "spray and pray" in my opinion.

Now, for a question. did the Founding Fathers set up the 1st Amendment for TV, Radio, Movies, DVD, CD, VHS, cassette, photography, internet, or for Facebook, Snap-chat, Google, Instagram, and other social media venues? It's about your comment on James Madison.


Look, you know what I meant when I said "machine gun". I don't care if I am technically correct or not. I do not care to know about the differences between classes of guns other than ones that are used for reasonable purposes and ones used to commit mass murder or make some loser feel like he has more power than his little ego tells him everyday. I am talking about guns that some P.O.S. can use to shoot 600 people in a matter of a few minutes. I don't care how they were modified or any of the other stuff that doesn't have any relevance to the innocent dead and injured people.

And... No, I don't think James Madison was talking about VHS or DVD or anything else we use without harming people today. HOWEVER, I doubt he was talking about child pornography either, yet that has since been correctly banned to protect innocent lives.


They avoid addressing the topic by playing word games...Our legislators have made it clear that the right to own assault weapons is greater than the right to the safety of our children and all innocent people....Their actions speak loudly or in this case inaction....

 

____________________
Believin' is alright just don't believe in the wrong thing....Sonny Boy Williamson

 
E-Mail User

Peach Head



Karma:
Posts: 194
(194 all sites)
Registered: 5/31/2013
Status: Offline

  posted on 10/4/2017 at 10:22 PM
"New York v. Ferber, 458 U.S. 747 (1982), is a precedential decision given by the United States Supreme Court, which ruled unanimously that the First Amendment right to free speech did not forbid states from banning the sale of material depicting children engaged in sexual activity, even if the material was not obscene.[1]"

--------------------------------------------------------------------------- ----------------------------------------------------------
That's just quickly from wikipedia, but as you can see, people use the Bill Of Rights to argue in favor of some really bad stuff. But, anything can be regulated to protect innocent people............even if some other American enjoys it.

 

World Class Peach



Karma:
Posts: 5822
(5827 all sites)
Registered: 7/4/2004
Status: Offline

  posted on 10/5/2017 at 09:50 AM
Assault weapon what does it mean? does it mean a gun that is black and scary looking? does it mean a weapon used in war? I think the later so, if that is the criteria then lets have a adult look at war weapons lets start with the Brown Bess a single shot flintlock muzzle loader used in the revolutionary war it at that time was a assault weapon, but it was also used and adapted to civilian use, just like the lever action Winchester, and the WW! Mauser, bolt action that has become the most used action in gun history, then also the M1Garand a semi auto that has been copied and adapted to civilian use and now it is the AK 47 and the M16 adapted as the AR15 for civilian use. You see they were all assault weapons at one time or another the only difference is they are in your generation and most of you know nothing about them and hence you think they are scary.

They are just improvements over the last weapon used by the military, now they are made of plastic and Aluminum and are anodized instead of wood that breaks and swells when wet and get beat all to hell and they no longer rust, and they are modular you can make one fit anyone so even kids learning about guns can shoot them, you see they are vastly superior to the old steel and wood guns and they are just the next evolution in hunting and target weapons adapted from the military....

 

____________________
"Any man who thinks he can be happy and prosperous by letting the
Government take care of him; better take a closer look at the American Indian." -Henry Ford

 

Peach Extraordinaire



Karma:
Posts: 4506
(4574 all sites)
Registered: 4/13/2002
Status: Offline

  posted on 10/5/2017 at 10:10 AM
quote:
Assault weapon what does it mean? does it mean a gun that is black and scary looking? does it mean a weapon used in war? I think the later so, if that is the criteria then lets have a adult look at war weapons lets start with the Brown Bess a single shot flintlock muzzle loader used in the revolutionary war it at that time was a assault weapon, but it was also used and adapted to civilian use, just like the lever action Winchester, and the WW! Mauser, bolt action that has become the most used action in gun history, then also the M1Garand a semi auto that has been copied and adapted to civilian use and now it is the AK 47 and the M16 adapted as the AR15 for civilian use. You see they were all assault weapons at one time or another the only difference is they are in your generation and most of you know nothing about them and hence you think they are scary.

They are just improvements over the last weapon used by the military, now they are made of plastic and Aluminum and are anodized instead of wood that breaks and swells when wet and get beat all to hell and they no longer rust, and they are modular you can make one fit anyone so even kids learning about guns can shoot them, you see they are vastly superior to the old steel and wood guns and they are just the next evolution in hunting and target weapons adapted from the military....


More thumb violins music coming....rhetoric.....Why can't I have a tank??? or a bazooka or an anti aircraft gun...that's just an improvement on the musket??? how far was a musket accurate??? could it kill from 500 yards away and mow down 500+ people from one shooter?? without reloading after every shot...did a musket have belts drums and magazines full of high caliber projectiles???

No....we regulate many things within our amendments...like ya can't yell fire when there isn't one

We can't buy tanks or bazookas or anti-aircraft guns...or cannons...they're all improvements on the musket

I'm fine with assault weapons put in the same category as tanks, bazookas and anti-aircraft guns...because that is what they are intended for



[Edited on 10/5/2017 by goldtop]

 

____________________
Believin' is alright just don't believe in the wrong thing....Sonny Boy Williamson

 
E-Mail User

Ultimate Peach



Karma:
Posts: 3631
(3626 all sites)
Registered: 12/27/2003
Status: Offline

  posted on 10/5/2017 at 11:11 AM
Rydethewind, are you against people having to demonstrate complete responsible operation of a firearm before exercising their 2nd amendment right, and what are your thoughts on our police forces subjecting recruits to psychological evaluations prior to hire?
 

World Class Peach



Karma:
Posts: 5103
(5103 all sites)
Registered: 7/18/2010
Status: Offline

  posted on 10/5/2017 at 05:27 PM
Blowing out your eardrums and going deaf from a gun habit does not strike me as responsible gun ownership.




 

Peach Head



Karma:
Posts: 194
(194 all sites)
Registered: 5/31/2013
Status: Offline

  posted on 10/5/2017 at 08:16 PM
quote:
Assault weapon what does it mean? does it mean a gun that is black and scary looking? does it mean a weapon used in war? I think the later so, if that is the criteria then lets have a adult look at war weapons lets start with the Brown Bess a single shot flintlock muzzle loader used in the revolutionary war it at that time was a assault weapon, but it was also used and adapted to civilian use, just like the lever action Winchester, and the WW! Mauser, bolt action that has become the most used action in gun history, then also the M1Garand a semi auto that has been copied and adapted to civilian use and now it is the AK 47 and the M16 adapted as the AR15 for civilian use. You see they were all assault weapons at one time or another the only difference is they are in your generation and most of you know nothing about them and hence you think they are scary.

They are just improvements over the last weapon used by the military, now they are made of plastic and Aluminum and are anodized instead of wood that breaks and swells when wet and get beat all to hell and they no longer rust, and they are modular you can make one fit anyone so even kids learning about guns can shoot them, you see they are vastly superior to the old steel and wood guns and they are just the next evolution in hunting and target weapons adapted from the military....


Again, none of your little game of semantics helps the nearly 600 dead or injured people in Las Vegas. I don't care what you call any of these tools of mass murder, this guy used them to hurt 600 people in ten minutes. How can you say these are great things to have available in our society?

 

World Class Peach



Karma:
Posts: 5125
(5124 all sites)
Registered: 4/18/2002
Status: Offline

  posted on 10/6/2017 at 11:33 AM
quote:
quote:
So you approve not having rights until you can prove mental competency?


Not having rights? How about not having a gun until you can prove you can deconstruct and assemble your weapon of choice, demonstrate shooting and safety compliance, and pass the same psychological exams our police force use on recruits to test for this very thing. Surely that would decrease some deaths, if even the accidental ones, and only lets our finest men and women have the easiest of access to whatever it is they please. The ones who struggle with the aforementioned measurements can still excercise their 2nd amendment right, once they step up and prove themselves worthy of operating one of the greatest and most powerful tools ever. To disrespect some sort of testing is to disrespect all of our biggest cities' police forces who rely on them to protect and serve.



Do you know if all those officers who passed your mental tests can fully disassemble, properly clean and lubricate, and reassemble their service weapons?

What about those who could are physically unable to do so would you deny them the right to defend themselves? How about the one handed man that lives in a gang area? How about his right to defend himself?

Are you willing to just let them go by the wayside?

 

____________________
All photos posted of family, friends, and places, including those of historic ABB value, by this poster are copyrighted by the poster, or posted by permission of the copywriter.
None of those photos may be reproduced for commercial gain.

 

World Class Peach



Karma:
Posts: 5125
(5124 all sites)
Registered: 4/18/2002
Status: Offline

  posted on 10/6/2017 at 11:33 AM
quote:
Blowing out your eardrums and going deaf from a gun habit does not strike me as responsible gun ownership.






That is why you wear hearing protection.

 

____________________
All photos posted of family, friends, and places, including those of historic ABB value, by this poster are copyrighted by the poster, or posted by permission of the copywriter.
None of those photos may be reproduced for commercial gain.

 

Ultimate Peach



Karma:
Posts: 3631
(3626 all sites)
Registered: 12/27/2003
Status: Offline

  posted on 10/6/2017 at 12:00 PM
quote:
Do you know if all those officers who passed your mental tests can fully disassemble, properly clean and lubricate, and reassemble their service weapons?


They go through firearm training, which is the point. You have great points, but your side-step strategy of just asking additional questions, instead of answering mine, is ineffective.

quote:
What about those who could are physically unable to do so would you deny them the right to defend themselves? How about the one handed man that lives in a gang area? How about his right to defend himself?


LOL, what is your point? Why couldn't a one-handed man fire a gun responsibly? Oh, you are focusing on semantics to detract from the point of my post - not working on me.

quote:
Are you willing to just let them go by the wayside?


I'm not going to give you the respect of answering your questions when you completely avoided addressing my point. Address the point of my post, and I'll gladly do the same for you.

 

World Class Peach



Karma:
Posts: 5125
(5124 all sites)
Registered: 4/18/2002
Status: Offline

  posted on 10/6/2017 at 12:11 PM
quote:
quote:
Assault weapon what does it mean? does it mean a gun that is black and scary looking? does it mean a weapon used in war? I think the later so, if that is the criteria then lets have a adult look at war weapons lets start with the Brown Bess a single shot flintlock muzzle loader used in the revolutionary war it at that time was a assault weapon, but it was also used and adapted to civilian use, just like the lever action Winchester, and the WW! Mauser, bolt action that has become the most used action in gun history, then also the M1Garand a semi auto that has been copied and adapted to civilian use and now it is the AK 47 and the M16 adapted as the AR15 for civilian use. You see they were all assault weapons at one time or another the only difference is they are in your generation and most of you know nothing about them and hence you think they are scary.

They are just improvements over the last weapon used by the military, now they are made of plastic and Aluminum and are anodized instead of wood that breaks and swells when wet and get beat all to hell and they no longer rust, and they are modular you can make one fit anyone so even kids learning about guns can shoot them, you see they are vastly superior to the old steel and wood guns and they are just the next evolution in hunting and target weapons adapted from the military....


More thumb violins music coming....rhetoric.....Why can't I have a tank??? or a bazooka or an anti aircraft gun...that's just an improvement on the musket??? how far was a musket accurate??? could it kill from 500 yards away and mow down 500+ people from one shooter?? without reloading after every shot...did a musket have belts drums and magazines full of high caliber projectiles???

No....we regulate many things within our amendments...like ya can't yell fire when there isn't one

We can't buy tanks or bazookas or anti-aircraft guns...or cannons...they're all improvements on the musket

I'm fine with assault weapons put in the same category as tanks, bazookas and anti-aircraft guns...because that is what they are intended for



[Edited on 10/5/2017 by goldtop]


Goldtop, you've got to get out more.
Yes, you can own a tank. angelfire.com/hero/cade/company.html

Anti-aircrfat gun, sure https://www.calguns.net/calgunforum/showthread.php?t=459912

Bazooka, why not. https://www.ima-usa.com/products/original-u-s-m20-a1-b1-3-5-inch-super-bazo oka-launcher-inert-rocket?variant=26172821701

I own a cannon, a very small one, but it works. If you check out government auctions some interesting things come up, such as a Minute Man missile.

Oh, you can also buy assault weapons if you go thorough the same background criteria you would have to pass to own the tank.

The firearms sold to the general public are not assault rifles.

 

____________________
All photos posted of family, friends, and places, including those of historic ABB value, by this poster are copyrighted by the poster, or posted by permission of the copywriter.
None of those photos may be reproduced for commercial gain.

 

World Class Peach



Karma:
Posts: 5125
(5124 all sites)
Registered: 4/18/2002
Status: Offline

  posted on 10/6/2017 at 12:29 PM
quote:
quote:
So you approve not having rights until you can prove mental competency?


Not having rights? How about not having a gun until you can prove you can deconstruct and assemble your weapon of choice, demonstrate shooting and safety compliance, and pass the same psychological exams our police force use on recruits to test for this very thing. Surely that would decrease some deaths, if even the accidental ones, and only lets our finest men and women have the easiest of access to whatever it is they please. The ones who struggle with the aforementioned measurements can still excercise their 2nd amendment right, once they step up and prove themselves worthy of operating one of the greatest and most powerful tools ever. To disrespect some sort of testing is to disrespect all of our biggest cities' police forces who rely on them to protect and serve.



OK, here is your complete post and the answers for it.
1) To show competency in disassembly and reassembly of the firearm you would first have to purchase it and practice under the supervision of an armorer since I doubt police agencies will have a copy of every firearm available to the general public.
2) Shooting and safety compliance classes I will gladly tell legislators to put my tax money to. People need to know how to correctly place rounds on target and what shoot-don't shoot stands for. Again, you would have to own the weapon for training since different firearms handle differently, even ones of the same make and model, not to mention sights are never set the same.
3) Who would administer the psychological tests? Would that be government officials, doctors, clerks, administrative assistants? What criteria would they use? How are the tests working? Seems there have been a lot of unwarranted police shootings of unarmed civilians lately.
4) Our finest? I guess you've never heard of the 14th Amendment?

Have I answered all your questions?

 

____________________
All photos posted of family, friends, and places, including those of historic ABB value, by this poster are copyrighted by the poster, or posted by permission of the copywriter.
None of those photos may be reproduced for commercial gain.

 

World Class Peach



Karma:
Posts: 5125
(5124 all sites)
Registered: 4/18/2002
Status: Offline

  posted on 10/6/2017 at 12:37 PM
quote:
quote:
Do you know if all those officers who passed your mental tests can fully disassemble, properly clean and lubricate, and reassemble their service weapons?


They go through firearm training, which is the point. You have great points, but your side-step strategy of just asking additional questions, instead of answering mine, is ineffective.

quote:
What about those who could are physically unable to do so would you deny them the right to defend themselves? How about the one handed man that lives in a gang area? How about his right to defend himself?


LOL, what is your point? Why couldn't a one-handed man fire a gun responsibly? Oh, you are focusing on semantics to detract from the point of my post - not working on me.

quote:
Are you willing to just let them go by the wayside?


I'm not going to give you the respect of answering your questions when you completely avoided addressing my point. Address the point of my post, and I'll gladly do the same for you.


How is a one handed man going to disassemble/reassemble a firearm?

Also, I'm not sidestepping. I am asking questions that you obviously haven't thought of, or you just don't care about people defending themselves.

 

____________________
All photos posted of family, friends, and places, including those of historic ABB value, by this poster are copyrighted by the poster, or posted by permission of the copywriter.
None of those photos may be reproduced for commercial gain.

 

Ultimate Peach



Karma:
Posts: 3631
(3626 all sites)
Registered: 12/27/2003
Status: Offline

  posted on 10/6/2017 at 01:49 PM
quote:
OK, here is your complete post and the answers for it.
1) To show competency in disassembly and reassembly of the firearm you would first have to purchase it and practice under the supervision of an armorer since I doubt police agencies will have a copy of every firearm available to the general public.
2) Shooting and safety compliance classes I will gladly tell legislators to put my tax money to. People need to know how to correctly place rounds on target and what shoot-don't shoot stands for. Again, you would have to own the weapon for training since different firearms handle differently, even ones of the same make and model, not to mention sights are never set the same.
3) Who would administer the psychological tests? Would that be government officials, doctors, clerks, administrative assistants? What criteria would they use? How are the tests working? Seems there have been a lot of unwarranted police shootings of unarmed civilians lately.
4) Our finest? I guess you've never heard of the 14th Amendment?

Have I answered all your questions?


Yes. Thank you!

My comments about taking apart and re-assembling a gun wasn't meant to be taken literally, but an example of how knowledgeable a gun owner should be before purchase, IMO. The practice can can occur at local ranges, or with family members. I'm not pretending to have the logistics and implementation ironed out, but if we want to do it, we can.

As for the competency exams, the same people who administer the police tests - that group should expand. We both probably agree that 99% of our cops are good ones who don't murder suspects. I like that percentage. I don't think 99% of our gun owners are competent in knowledge, safety, and stability. We need to get there though.

So agree about knowledge and safety exams. That's a huge first step, and a perfect compromise. Why can't we put that into action? Why does the anti-gun control crowd oppose that? Do you hold the NRA and right-wing politicians partly accountable for not being able to get this done?


 

World Class Peach



Karma:
Posts: 5125
(5124 all sites)
Registered: 4/18/2002
Status: Offline

  posted on 10/6/2017 at 02:03 PM
quote:
quote:
OK, here is your complete post and the answers for it.
1) To show competency in disassembly and reassembly of the firearm you would first have to purchase it and practice under the supervision of an armorer since I doubt police agencies will have a copy of every firearm available to the general public.
2) Shooting and safety compliance classes I will gladly tell legislators to put my tax money to. People need to know how to correctly place rounds on target and what shoot-don't shoot stands for. Again, you would have to own the weapon for training since different firearms handle differently, even ones of the same make and model, not to mention sights are never set the same.
3) Who would administer the psychological tests? Would that be government officials, doctors, clerks, administrative assistants? What criteria would they use? How are the tests working? Seems there have been a lot of unwarranted police shootings of unarmed civilians lately.
4) Our finest? I guess you've never heard of the 14th Amendment?

Have I answered all your questions?


Yes. Thank you!

My comments about taking apart and re-assembling a gun wasn't meant to be taken literally, but an example of how knowledgeable a gun owner should be before purchase, IMO. The practice can can occur at local ranges, or with family members. I'm not pretending to have the logistics and implementation ironed out, but if we want to do it, we can.

As for the competency exams, the same people who administer the police tests - that group should expand. We both probably agree that 99% of our cops are good ones who don't murder suspects. I like that percentage. I don't think 99% of our gun owners are competent in knowledge, safety, and stability. We need to get there though.

So agree about knowledge and safety exams. That's a huge first step, and a perfect compromise. Why can't we put that into action? Why does the anti-gun control crowd oppose that? Do you hold the NRA and right-wing politicians partly accountable for not being able to get this done?



We used to have marksmanship and safety classes in schools here until some groups complained about it. Hell, some people don't even want the Eddie Eagle videos that teach kids not to touch a firearm unless an adult is with them. The videos teach Don't touch, get away, and tell an adult. Some folks don't want anything to do with the NRA even if it's safety training. They go crazy about being indoctrinated into the "gun mindset".
We first have to get over that hurdle so kids can learn gun safety.
The biggest reason small children die due to firearms is that they are curious. If a child has the training and sees a gun, they know it's dangerous, they know to not touch, they know to tell an adult, and they don't die due to someone not teaching them those few rules.

 

____________________
All photos posted of family, friends, and places, including those of historic ABB value, by this poster are copyrighted by the poster, or posted by permission of the copywriter.
None of those photos may be reproduced for commercial gain.

 

World Class Peach



Karma:
Posts: 5103
(5103 all sites)
Registered: 7/18/2010
Status: Offline

  posted on 10/6/2017 at 02:10 PM
quote:
Blowing out your eardrums and going deaf from a gun habit does not strike me as responsible gun ownership.

quote:
That is why you wear hearing protection


Ya think?

Nah, that permanent ringing in your ears is the liberty bell.

Better to blast yourself deaf and bellyache about silencers:

quote:
Silencers....in Europe every gun is sold with one the reason is to quiet the noise from the guns to save peoples hearing they do NOT make a gun silenced they just make them to a decibel that does not damage the human ear , they are far far from silent the U.S should have them available for sale with any gun purchase if that had been law i would still be able to hear.










 

World Class Peach



Karma:
Posts: 5125
(5124 all sites)
Registered: 4/18/2002
Status: Offline

  posted on 10/6/2017 at 02:18 PM
quote:
quote:
Blowing out your eardrums and going deaf from a gun habit does not strike me as responsible gun ownership.

quote:
That is why you wear hearing protection


Ya think?

Nah, that permanent ringing in your ears is the liberty bell.

Better to blast yourself deaf and bellyache about silencers:

quote:
Silencers....in Europe every gun is sold with one the reason is to quiet the noise from the guns to save peoples hearing they do NOT make a gun silenced they just make them to a decibel that does not damage the human ear , they are far far from silent the U.S should have them available for sale with any gun purchase if that had been law i would still be able to hear.




I still laugh at the old tv shows where the bad guy screws a silencer on a revolver.

 

____________________
All photos posted of family, friends, and places, including those of historic ABB value, by this poster are copyrighted by the poster, or posted by permission of the copywriter.
None of those photos may be reproduced for commercial gain.

 

World Class Peach



Karma:
Posts: 5103
(5103 all sites)
Registered: 7/18/2010
Status: Offline

  posted on 10/6/2017 at 02:38 PM
A potato on the muzzle is good in a pinch.
 

World Class Peach



Karma:
Posts: 5125
(5124 all sites)
Registered: 4/18/2002
Status: Offline

  posted on 10/6/2017 at 02:49 PM
quote:
A potato on the muzzle is good in a pinch.


Only if you want a blown barrel with shrapnel going all over the place.
I've seen rifles and shotguns that had mud in the muzzle. Not a pretty sight, and the damage done to the shooter
was anything from just burns on the hand to blindness and head injury.

 

____________________
All photos posted of family, friends, and places, including those of historic ABB value, by this poster are copyrighted by the poster, or posted by permission of the copywriter.
None of those photos may be reproduced for commercial gain.

 

Peach Head



Karma:
Posts: 194
(194 all sites)
Registered: 5/31/2013
Status: Offline

  posted on 10/6/2017 at 05:00 PM
quote:
quote:
A potato on the muzzle is good in a pinch.


Only if you want a blown barrel with shrapnel going all over the place.
I've seen rifles and shotguns that had mud in the muzzle. Not a pretty sight, and the damage done to the shooter
was anything from just burns on the hand to blindness and head injury.


Sounds like you are hanging with the trained and responsible gun owners the NRA is always bragging about.

 
<<  1    2    3    4  >>  


Powered by XForum 1.81.1 by Trollix Software


Privacy | Terms of Service
The ALLMAN BROTHERS BAND name, The ALLMAN BROTHERS name, likenesses, logos, mushroom design and peach truck are all registered trademarks of THE ABB MERCHANDISING CO., INC. whose rights are specifically reserved. Any artwork, visual, or audio representations used on this web site CONTAINING ANY REGISTERED TRADEMARKS are under license from The ABB MERCHANDISING CO., INC. A REVOCABLE, GRATIS LICENSE IS GRANTED TO ALL REGISTERED PEACH CORP MEMBERS FOR The DOWNLOADING OF ONE COPY FOR PERSONAL USE ONLY. ANY DISTRIBUTION OR REPRODUCTION OF THE TRADEMARKS CONTAINED HEREIN ARE PROHIBITED AND ARE SPECIFICALLY RESERVED BY THE ABB MERCHANDISING CO.,INC.
site by Hittin' the Web Group with www.experiencewasabi3d.com