I totally agree, except I don't think not firing a gun at the range or not hunting is a way of showing empathy either.mjc0961 said:snip
I totally agree, except I don't think not firing a gun at the range or not hunting is a way of showing empathy either.mjc0961 said:snip
well they've been blaming Dynasty Warriors as wellSageRuffin said:Besides, I was always more of a melee person anyway.
Well... fuck.teh_Canape said:well they've been blaming Dynasty Warriors as wellSageRuffin said:Besides, I was always more of a melee person anyway.
so yeah =P
see? these media guys truly cover all scenarios, don't theySageRuffin said:Well... fuck.teh_Canape said:well they've been blaming Dynasty Warriors as wellSageRuffin said:Besides, I was always more of a melee person anyway.
so yeah =P
Granted, I don't play DW but I know the implications behind it.teh_Canape said:see? these media guys truly cover all scenarios, don't theySageRuffin said:Well... fuck.teh_Canape said:well they've been blaming Dynasty Warriors as wellSageRuffin said:Besides, I was always more of a melee person anyway.
so yeah =P
So that's 5 shots per minute for the first minute, which assumes he is even accurate considering he's using a smoothebore musket and is able to load while running after his now fleeing targets.wombat_of_war said:a very experienced soldier could load and fire 4 times a minuteGonzoGamer said:I can't play CoD with just knives. I get my ass kicked already.
I can appreciate the sentiment but wouldn't it be a lot better to get people to stop shooting REAL guns for a day? If they can get that to happen, I'll stop shooting digital guns for a day.
I still find it interesting that people insist that this is EITHER a gun control issue OR a mental health issue when it's obviously both.
How long would it have taken a mentally ill person to shoot 27 people back when the 2nd amendment was written?
Define "assault rifle." I have a feeling you're thinking of something that isn't really available to the average un-certified civilian. You probably also have a different definition of "automatic" than I do.DataSnake said:Interesting fact: Eric Harris and Dylan Klebold's original plan for the Columbine massacre was to set off homemade bombs in the school cafeteria during lunch and just use their guns to mop up the survivors. That's not how it ended up going, because they sucked at making bombs. Had they just been able to buy some C4 at their local Wal-Mart's sporting goods department, that massacre would have been far, far deadlier. Since they had to make their own, and they sucked at it, the death toll stayed in the teens instead of breaking triple digits. Also, WHAT THE FUCK DOES A CIVILIAN NEED AN ASSAULT RIFLE FOR? It's total overkill for hunting, a shotgun is more than adequate for home defense, and it's not the kind of thing you can carry everywhere just in case you get mugged.Nieroshai said:Given the amount of preparation he went through, it isn't unreasonable to say he could've taken the time to whip up homemade explosives and stuffed them in the car. Guns are by no means the most deadly, devastating, or easy-to-obtain weapons out there. The first WTC bombing cost the bomber less than the price of a Glock. A man in China committed a similar slaughter to Newtown, but he did it with a knife. Just as many casualties, with an even more hardcore police force simply not arriving on time. Should we ban knives? Knives were invented by our ancestors to hunt and to wage war, and then they tied them to sticks and called them spears. Surely we live in a society where knives are obsolete? I see cooking shows where scissors are used instead to cut meat, and Cuisinarts are used to dice vegetables. Of course not, but you see where this is going.
I don't recall saying anything about automatic weapons, but I'm pretty sure the term means weapons capable of firing multiple rounds off a single pull of the trigger, such as an AK47, an MP5 or an M4. I'd define an assault rifle as a semi-automatic, full-auto or select-fire (as opposed to bolt, lever or pump action) rifle or carbine (though for the purposes of this discussion I'd also include SMGs and machine pistols), generally with a high-capacity clip and/or a pistol grip.Nieroshai said:Define "assault rifle." I have a feeling you're thinking of something that isn't really available to the average un-certified civilian. You probably also have a different definition of "automatic" than I do.
You're reacting with the same blanket statement that you seem to think the other side has. Pegging someone as believing this isn't any different from someone actually believing it.Baresark said:People seem under the impression that if someone has a gun they are going to kill someone. That is simply untrue.
By that argument, we don't need murder laws, either. I mean, psychopaths exist anyway. Can't dictate rules of society simply because they exist.You can't dictate the rules for an entire society because psychopaths exist.
He could have had the same success with a cricket ball, but the odds are long against. Could he have had the same success with a snub nose? Yes, but not likely. Have you ever handled a Bushmaster or AR-15 knockoff as opposed to a snub nosed compact? I have. Very different results. But then, this should be evident. The reason that the military uses the AR-15 as opposed to a snubbie is because the type of gun ISN'T irrelevant.But he could have had the same "success" in his endeavor if he had a small snub nose pistol.
Please don't assume what my ideas on gun control are simply because I thought your argument was terrible. Don't put words in my mouth simply because I disagree with the integrity of your platform. You don't like the thought of being considered a nutjob, based on your statements; why would you then "pay it forward," so to speak?you and I have very different idea of what that actually means.
Which makes it a lot easier for criminals to get them. In terms of an arms race, that's a really bad deal.but criminals will have them, which is the impetus for people who aren't criminals to have them