Hunting Rifles to be Banned...

[AggieDave 6]

Quote

I think it funny that someone from College Station lectures someone from Chicago about the real world.

I grew up just a bit outside of DFW, I lived outside of east St. Louis for a while and lived just outside of OKC for a while too...*shrug* Ok.

That wasn't the point. The point is you lost your temper over a discussion on the internet. I wonder if you loose your temper in your classroom and yell at your students? Well, if you want your students to listen to you and participate in the learning process I would hope you wouldn't.


Seriously, I don't understand people loosing their temper on the internet, its pointless and only proves a lack of tact and understanding.

--"When I die, may I be surrounded by scattered chrome and burning gasoline."

[mnealtx 0]

The grand majority of gun laws only affect the ALREADY LAW ABIDING OWNERS and do NOTHING to deter the criminals who are, by definition, non law-abiding.

So, tell me again just how further bans or restrictions are going to affect criminals?

Mike
I love you, Shannon and Jim.
POPS 9708 , SCR 14706

[flyingferret 0]

Umm, mr. academic... different /= not real

Apparently, College Station is not real? Perhaps Texas is not either.

A truly informed individual might postulate that 'our' version of 'reality' has been shaped and affected by our policies, on guns and other things?

As far as Chicago, etc. Since those places you mention require groups of cops, apparently the citizens there obey the law quite well, eh? So, if we banned guns, they would just mail them back? In reality, I suspect most of their weapons are illegal and unmarked. They are already illegal. Why aren't the cops going to get them? That is a much better question, one that however has a very complex socio-economic answer.

--
All the flaming and trolls of wreck dot with a pretty GUI.

[flyingferret 0]

I think that this says it best, although I guess it applies to all of Speakers Corner

http://www.youfunny.com/images/fp-653a.jpg

--
All the flaming and trolls of wreck dot with a pretty GUI.

[Kennedy 0]

Quote

That is a silly example. There are a lot more drivers than gun toting cowboys.

Of course there are. Most of us are not cowboys.

In the US, there is approximately one firearm for every man woman and child in the country. There is about one handgun for every four or five citizens.

witty subliminal message
Guard your honor, let your reputation fall where it will, and outlast the bastards.
1*

[AggieDave 6]

Quote

There is about one handgun for every four or five citizens.

And its not just 100 people with one hell of an arsenal, there's a LOT of people that own weapons. Some for various reasons, but they still own and shoot for their own reasons.

--"When I die, may I be surrounded by scattered chrome and burning gasoline."

[storm1977 0]

Quote

I think it funny that someone from College Station lectures someone from Chicago about the real world.

You just lost a lot of respect from me with that comment. Pretty ignorant and elitist thing to say!!!
The same type of attitude is what lost your party the election.

-----------------------------------------------------
Sometimes it is more important to protect LIFE than Liberty

[GravityGirl 0]

Quote

The grand majority of gun laws only affect the ALREADY LAW ABIDING OWNERS and do NOTHING to deter the criminals who are, by definition, non law-abiding.

So, tell me again just how further bans or restrictions are going to affect criminals?

I never said anything about FURTHER bans. I was simply reflecting on checks and balances.... balance.

Same goes for both sides. I wouldn't expect gun owners to sit down and just "take it either". Otherwise we would end up.... well... Canada.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Peace and Blue Skies!
Bonnie ==>Gravity Gear!

[PhillyKev 0]

Quote

Otherwise we would end up.... well... Canada.

shudder Somebody hold me....

[GravityGirl 0]

I guess that I was thinking too locally. Because the majority of gun owners in MY town ARE cowboys. Literally.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Peace and Blue Skies!
Bonnie ==>Gravity Gear!

[GravityGirl 0]

Can you pull up a statistic on how many NON gun owners there are in the US?

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Peace and Blue Skies!
Bonnie ==>Gravity Gear!

[mnealtx 0]

Quote

Quote

The grand majority of gun laws only affect the ALREADY LAW ABIDING OWNERS and do NOTHING to deter the criminals who are, by definition, non law-abiding.

So, tell me again just how further bans or restrictions are going to affect criminals?

I never said anything about FURTHER bans. I was simply reflecting on checks and balances.... balance.

Same goes for both sides. I wouldn't expect gun owners to sit down and just "take it either". Otherwise we would end up.... well... Canada.

I know you were, and I apologize if my post sounded otherwise. But I'll bet you dollars to donuts that the next several days will see multiple Brady bunch puppets on the news screaming for more laws, more bans, more restrictions...

Mike
I love you, Shannon and Jim.
POPS 9708 , SCR 14706

[Kennedy 0]

Last I saw those numbers was a little over a year ago in a class I was TAing. I'll see if I can find something vaguely official, though.

If I knew the avergae number of guns per gun owner I could give you an estimate, but I only know the average number of handguns per gun owner (just a little under one per owner).

witty subliminal message
Guard your honor, let your reputation fall where it will, and outlast the bastards.
1*

[metalslug 36]

Quote

I think it funny that someone from College Station lectures someone from Chicago about the real world.

[storm1977 0]

Quote

So, I kinda think kallend made a fair comment.

wow.... I guess I am loosing respect for you too.

What do you know about what Aggiedave has seen or where he has been? What do you know about his life and the things that have happened to him? Or, what does Kallend know for that matter?

Kallends statement was arrogant, and ignorant. It implied no ones life in College Station TX could compare to some ones in Chitown....

It was an asinine statement, no way around it.

-----------------------------------------------------
Sometimes it is more important to protect LIFE than Liberty

[AggieDave 6]

Large well equiped DZ?

Haha...SD Aggieland is a 182 DZ and has been from the start just under 3 years ago. (I know you were just using an analogy, I still thought it was funny).

Quote

It would surely be silly for me to suggest that Dave was ignorant and elitist if he implied that he knows more about skydiving than me, right ?

Actually, the only reason why someone would know more about jumping is experience and learning, not the size and location of the DZ. As per your example, the only things that may be different is that someone from a large DZ may have more experience doing larger formations then someone from a 182 DZ. That doesn't mean they know more about skydiving or are a better skydiver, just a different skydiver.

Implying that people from larger DZs are better skydivers is an arrogant attitude, so I tend to stay away from people in this sport with that sort of attitude.

--"When I die, may I be surrounded by scattered chrome and burning gasoline."

[Kennedy 0]

Well, the most common number thrown around is 90,000,000 gun owners. I think the nubmer is quite a bit higher, but that's good enough for now.

If we use round nubmers, the US census says there are 280,000,000 people in the US, then there would be 190,000,000 non-gun owning residents.

Why do you ask?

edit: to fix numbers for more accurate sources

witty subliminal message
Guard your honor, let your reputation fall where it will, and outlast the bastards.
1*

[genoyamamoto 0]

Quote

Do you find the level of firearms related deaths and injuries in the US acceptable?

If so, at what level would it become unacceptable?

If not, what should be done about it?

http://www.twincities.com/mld/pioneerpress/news/local/10243515.htm?1c

I think the level of ignorance in the this country is unacceptable.

It's funny how when 5 white people get offed by some Loatian guy it gets national news coverage.

But when some black girl in oakland gets blown away in a drive-by shooting it only makes the local news.

Gotta go... plaything needs to spank me
Feel the hate...
Photos here

[lawrocket 3]

Quote

So it's acceptable to you, then, since you gave a flippant reply.

Just collateral damage. Too bad but nothing to get upset about.

Yes, my reply was flippant. That's why I included the language about how the law will be just as effective.

If you note, the initial report is that of the 8 people killed or wounded, there was only gun. I wonder why all of these "hunters" were not armed. SOunds like it made easy pickings for the perp. Kinda like gun control.

Any of these deaths are unacceptable. Drunk driving is unacceptable. Stabbings are unacceptable. White collar crime is unacceptable. When a person commits a crime, it is unacceptable, and society should punish this crime, and not punish those who are not criminals.

My wife is hotter than your wife.

[Kennedy 0]

This story is news specifically because it is not something that happens every day.

News organizations know that one more death to gang violence is not news. No one would tune in; it gets monotonous.

But an immigrant openning fire on several hunters on their own private property? That's news.

Things that happen every day are not interesting for the news. Things that almost never happen are put in the news, then to keep the story up they try to widen the connection between the statistically insignificant event and the lives of as many people as possible.

witty subliminal message
Guard your honor, let your reputation fall where it will, and outlast the bastards.
1*

[flyingferret 0]

Not withstanding some inconsistencies in your analogy, what is it that kallend 'knows more' about? Life? Guns? Crime? I would certainly put my money against the latter, but could be wrong. The crux of the matter is that the first option 'life' is subjective. It is possible that kallend knows more about life in innner city chicago. However, that is a localized point of view and my very well look different from different viewpoints; ie law enforcement, etc.

In my opinion, it was a subjective viewpoint, applied globally with prejudice, a pretty ego-centric practice. As was stated earlier, the majority of American voters are tired of this practice and voted accordingly.

--
All the flaming and trolls of wreck dot with a pretty GUI.

[lawrocket 3]

Yep. And when a black man in Fresno offs nine of his family members, it barely made a ripple, right? It wouldn't have, either, unless police hadn't discovered that he was a polygamist and committed incest.

Or, when a single black man is killed in Texas by dragging him behind a truck, nobody noticed.

And had it not been Artest that jumped into the stands to fight, nobody would have cared, unless it was a white basketball player going after a black fan, right?

IT is a sad commentary about the amount of violence in the inner cities. Listen to Public Enemy albums, if you want some commentary about that. But drive-by's are so common, it just doesn't make news anymore.

My wife is hotter than your wife.

[Nightingale 0]

I think a society where only the criminals have guns would be a pretty scary place. I don't want a criminal breaking into my apartment, knowing that I most probably don't have a gun. Seems like the criminals would get a whole lot bolder when they can be more than fairly certain that their victims can't shoot at them.

[flyingferret 0]

Yep, excellent point. If anyone is really interested, AD and I are in favor of law enforcment. That is a small variance from gun legislation, but with a huge difference. The biggest gaping holes in most 'gun control' legislation are:
1. The double-legislate; ie many items are already illegal, but the argument is made that another law will help.
2. The people committing the crimes don't follow laws, hence the 'crime' part. People intent to commit crimes can easily find illegal guns.

The only real solution would be totally outlaw guns, and the will never happen in the USA, because enforcment would be totally impractical. Even if it did, there are dozens of other deadly weapons (research mass murder in NY club using gasoline).

So, the big nasty right wing advocates allowing citizens to defend themselves with training and empowering the police to act on legislation already there.

--
All the flaming and trolls of wreck dot with a pretty GUI.

[peacefuljeffrey 0]

Quote

Quote

Do you find the level of driving related deaths and injuries in the US acceptable? I don't, that's a MUCH larger issue then gun violence. There are many many many more people killed and injured each year in the US due to automobiles then from firearms.

I agree, and drivers' licenses should be much harder to obtain.

You think that driving deaths would decline just because we made driver's licenses harder to obtain?!

How would that affect the number of people killed or injured by those who drive without licenses?

Driving deaths are not caused necessarily by people who lack driving skills -- they're caused by people being careless or stupid or reckless. This has nothing to do with inadequate training or skill.

-Jeffrey

-Jeffrey
"With tha thoughts of a militant mind... Hard line, hard line after hard line!"