Hooknswoop

So, according to this cdc report, mass shootings, ar-15's, and concealed carry are not a problem. Buy back programs and assault weapon band are ineffective. This must be why John and others are attacking the player and not the ball. Derek V

Yep, reading it now. Interesting study. Derek V

I actually want to discuss the issue. This CDC study is important for discussing the issue. Derek V

OK, so the CDC study is true? Derek V

Is the study true or not? Derek V

These 7 points, are they true, partially true, or false? Derek V

Derek V

1 of these 3 things is a constitutionally protected right. Derek V

Not trying to win an arms race. If someone plans to murder me and does a bit of homework, I'm screwed. Guns doesn't change that. Either side of the equation. I'm not trying to outgun everyone else. I'm taking responsibility for my and my family's safety. I am not going to rely on a cell phone to protect me. For gun control, the low hanging fruit is gone. To make any sort of significant impact on annual firearm fatalities, it would require a large restriction on he 2nd amendment. That is why you are not seeing anyone put forth solid ideas to limit firearms related fatalities. We are at the point of diminishing returns. Derek V Derek V

I'm not claiming there is a problem. Therefore I am not going to look for solutions. This is an emotional based argument. Would you substitute your family in the fatal car accident for your ability to drive your car? Why are you for protesting funerals? You must be for protesting funerals if you are pro 1st amendment. This is silly and emotion-based arguments. It does nothing to move the conversation forward. If you want to have a serious discussion, I will discuss the issue. If you want to just going to the sensational route, I'm not going to bother. Derek V

Thank you for moving the conversation forward. Background check for anyone looking to purchase a gun We have that in Colorado. It is unenforceable and has done nothing, except to place undue burden on legal gun owners. -No limit to how many or what types of guns you can own I agree with the current limits in most states. For example, the only limit I would change in Colorado is the magazine limit. This one is also unenforceable and has had no impact expect to place undue burden on legal gun owners. -Mandatory safety classes specific to the type of firearm you are purchasing I'm not completely opposed to this. As long as the cost associated with the training does not prevent the poor from legally buying a firearm. These types of requirements have been used in the past to limit freedoms. -Safety class instructors are trained to spot red flags in their students behavior and are able to delay the purchase of the gun until an investigation can be completed This is a very broad and vague proposal. I like it, but the details would need to be ironed out. There is a lot of room for abuse. There could be limited effectiveness when an instructor is motivated to generate a reputation for passing very one to generate more revenue from more students. How many fatalities would these changes have prevented in the last year? Thank you again for moving the conversation forward. Derek V

A well thought reply. Fair question. They give me the ability to defend myself, my family, and my home. I refuse to be a helpless victim. 911 is great, but for when it is not enough, I will be able to protect myself. Derek V

Anyone? Derek V

What do you propose? Derek V

OK, so it is only your opinion that the gains are small and the loses are huge. OK. I don't agree. Where does the conversation go from here? Realize that if you want to discuss limiting my constitutionally guaranteed rights, it is going to take a lot more that an opinion that they should be restricted. We are not going to repeal or restrict the 1st amendment because of a few groups protesting funerals. It is part of the price we pay for the 1st amendment. I am not for protesting funerals because I am for the BOR's any more than I am for mass murder because I am for the BOR's. Derek V

OK (for at least the third time in this thread), how? Oh, this is good. I am defending mass murder? Because I'm not jumping on the "We must do SOMETHING!" train? Let's me be perfectly clear; I am against murder, mass murder, medium murder, ALL murder. I have asked you 3+ (now 4+) times in this thread alone, what do you propose? I am willing to discuss ways to decrease the number of firearm related fatalities each year in the US. I keep trying to move the coversation forward. You refuse to discuss solutions. Derek V

How many is too many? (What is the goal?) What do you propose? How will what you propose get us to the goal? Derek V

Nothing? Maybe America is not ready to talk about guns. "We have to do something!!!!" "OK, what?" ...... "Good talk." Derek V

Exactly this. Derek V

What are they proposing then? And still 30k-ish die every year. We could probably cut that in half by adopting the German standards of training and licensing. We could cut again by at least half if we restricted driving to only essential, approved trips. I have never heard anyone suggest such restrictive and burdensome ideas. I have not heard a single suggestion that would have a large impact on firearm fatalities with minimal restrictions on the 2nd amendment. All the low hanging fruit is gone. I do not trust anti gun people after they passed the magazine limit and universal background check laws in Colorado. Restrictions with zero benefits. Derek V

This is an emotional argument, not a logical argument. Quantify the problem. How many is too many? What are you proposing? What will the impact be in what your proposing? How will it restrict the 2nd amendment right and how will it reduce incidents? Derek V

Quantify what is gained and what is lost. You say it as a fact that the gains are small and the costs are high. How did you come to this conclusion? What are the gains? What are the losses? What makes you right and so many others wrong? Derek V

What do you mean by expanded background checks? Colorado passed a law requiring background checks for private sales of firearms. It is not enforce because there is no way to enforce it. It is a burden on citizens with no benefit to society. I have an AR-15. I was trained to use it in the military. I am very comfortable with it. The onus is not on me to justify my constitutional rights. I do not need to justify why my right to free speech is necessary. Do some people abuse their right to free speec? Yes. People protesting a soldiers funeral pisses me off. I do not react emotionally and suggest repealing the first amendment because "one protest at a military funeral is one too many". We pay a price as a society for our rights as well as other freedoms. Tell me how many deaths you are willing to accept before you would ban cars and driving? Put a number of fatalities per year that freedom is worth to you. How many? 30,000? 50,000? 100,000? How many deaths before you would say "too many"? How would you arrive at the number? How would you determine the value of being able to drive your car versus the value of human life? Derek V

There is a lot of poor ideas in this thread, but this one is dangerous. The default position is not belly flying when free flying. Derek V

I am a fan of the Skyhook, I have them on both of my rigs. I would be concerned about why she could not pull the cutaway handle. Mard, RSL, no RSL is moot if she cannot pull the cutaway handle, even if she can pull it with both hands. Not criticizing, just thinking some research into the cutaway issue is appropriate in addition to the RSL & MARD discussion. Maybe using a hanging harness set up where she can use her gear, including the risers. Derek V