| FORUMS |
Show ALL Forums
Posted In Forum:
Ask A Girl
Ask A Guy
Dating & Love Advice
District Of Columbia
Event Hosts forum
Health & Fitness
Plentyoffish Get Togethers
Poems And Quotes
Prince Edward Island
Recipes & Cooking
Sex and Dating
Technology and computers
Volunteer Moderators Only
Posted: 12/19/2012 9:42:06 AM
The "gun" debate is interesting. One problem I see all the time, and I mean no offense to anyone, is people that know little about guns debate with limited understanding. To be fair, everyone knows guns can be dangerous and any (real) gun can kill. Here is some general knowledge base. Note, I am not a gun expert.
I suppose you think fully automatic weapons should be legal.
Technically, I believe automatic weapons (defined as fully automatic - multiple fire and chambering per ONE trigger pull - commonly known as machine guns) are illegal. You may only own a fully automatic / machine gun that was manufactured and registered with the BATF before May 19, 1986. Fully auto weapons manufactured after that date are restricted for Military and Law Enforcement use only.
Assault weapons(mostly rifles) has no fixed definition in the gun world. For example, being a semi-automatic (ONE firing and chambering per trigger pull) does not make any gun an assault weapon. Having a short rifle barrel, pistol handle on a rifle, folding stock (concealment), high magazine capacity, ... does make an "assault weapon".
BUT, lets look at this practically. As far as a danger in mass shooting, any semi-auto is basically the same. For example, one can fire, say 15 rounds, as quick as one can manipulate the multiple trigger pulls - IT DOES NOT MATTER IF YOU ARE USING A GLOCK SEMI-AUTO HANDGUN OR A BUSHMASTER AR15 "assault rifle". Got it? No? Think how fast you can repeatedly click your mouse - does it matter if the mouse is ball, optical or wireless? No, it is just your finger. Same with semi-auto weapons. Again, 15 bullets are going to fly out at very close to the same speed. The difference is the Bushmaster bullets are going to go a bit faster and farther with more accuracy.
So what is a big difference in semi-auto weapons? One major difference is the magazine capacity. The "assault weapon" rifles can hold more rounds / bullets - somewhere around 30 is factory standard for the Bushmaster (I have seen some 90 round magazines). A semi-auto handgun high capacity can hold around 15 rounds (15 round magazines are illegal in CA). Again, what is the difference? Well in the case of mass shooting, the difference is, say, the 5 seconds it takes to change magazines. Now do the math. Not much difference between shooting 60 rounds using whatever semi-auto weapon - assault or other wise !!!!! The key is semi-auto weapons, spits lead quickly.
Another major difference is concealment. A handgun can be carried and concealed easier than a rifle. Again, this has nothing to do with any definition of "assault weapon", as many semi-auto handguns are NOT classed as assault weapons. Yet, a folding rifle stock to make the rifle easier to conceal, makes it an "assault weapon". Logical?
One last difference is range. I'll use a practical example here. My son can "plug a quarter coin" at 200+ yards using a rifle with scope and bench rest. Or hit a bowling pin at 300+ yards. In general, no handgun will come close to this accuracy. So rifles have a "sniper" factor. Scary to think anyone with limited experience can accurately scope you out from 200+yards with a quality rifle.
What is the answer? Ban "assault weapons"? Sure get rid of the military looking weapons with folding stock, pistol grip, super high capacity magazines, short barrels, .... But that still leaves plenty of semi-automatic weapons - handguns and rifles - that are JUST AS DEADLY in a mass shooting. Yet, I believe this will be done. And fine by me as I personally think these guns are useless.
Ban all semi-automatic weapons? Well it ends up I can reload a revolver in 5 seconds using a revolver speed loader (google it) - and a revolver is not considered a semi-automatic nor assault weapon. Even bolt action hunting rifles hold multiple rounds, but can only be shot as fast as one can use the bolt action (again 1 second between rounds). My hunter friends / relatives in CO and AL, that I have talked too, have NEVER seen anyone hunt with a semi-auto rifle. Yet, semi-auto handguns are standard in personal protection. And semi-automatic "assault" rifles are a standard requirement in the military and police.
What do I think should be done? Sorry, I have NO good opinion or answers. First, in this case, the mental shooter could have done the same horror using the two semi-auto handguns he was carrying. The only difference would have been the number of magazine reloads.
Second the "genie" is already out of the bottle - meaning all types of guns are already out there is significant numbers. No practical way to recall all these weapons. And yet that maybe the only solution - but not going to happen.
Third, require every gun owner to go to class. Funny, to purchase and use the gun, requires no training. But, before I get a hunting license (tag) I am (was) REQUIRED to attend a class and get a hunter training certificate!
Lastly, enforce the gun laws we have. Every weapon must be registered to it's owner. Hold every owner responsible for their weapon. Real background checks (not the spot checking with time limit they do now). Require weapons to be locked up and stored safely. Keep weapons out of children and the mentally ill hands.
Posted: 12/19/2012 6:20:37 AM
A news organization talked with a close neighbor and found this rumor.
The mom was filing for conservatorship and was planning to have her son "committed". He found out. This would explain his hatred for his mother as well as his life.
Posted: 12/18/2012 10:18:07 AM
I believe the bottom line is that it is against the law for the mentally ill to own or be in possession of firearms. Mom broke the law - paid with her life.
Responsible gun owner lock their weapons away from children, visitors, the mentally ill, and thieves.
Whats with all the tattoos and piercings?
Posted: 6/6/2012 12:45:10 PM
If you ask people who have many tattoos, they readily admit it is an addictive behavior.
What would you think of someone who broke up with you based on this, after 2 months?
Posted: 5/10/2012 12:54:18 PM
This is a sign of the times. Also, being in designer / property value centric California doesn't help. I have read profiles that say "I own a house, so I'll only date you if you own a house". Most folks around 50 have divorce/child support in their history. And I have found, in general, women divorce better than men financially. Yes, I think values change as people go through experiences and get older. And men and women have different values - Venus vs. Mars. Is it right? Yes? No? It is certainly a good debate.
It would be nice to meet someone who values you, well, just for you.
One of my favorite sayings explains this perfectly -
"You can easily judge the character of others by how they treat those who they think can do nothing for them."
Perhaps its time
Posted: 5/3/2012 7:45:47 PM
Have any of your ex's met an untimely death?
Where can you get a POF lie detector for age and body type? I am in no way shallow, but I'm older, have aged well, and am very active. I would like my mate to be able to enjoy the things I enjoy.
My question; When you first meet someone for the first time and it is obvious they are not the age, shape or even look like their picture, how do you gracefully escape? I'm too much of a gentleman to offend anyone, but being a gentleman is starting to be costly.
Show ALL Forums