csbrown28
DP Veteran
- Joined
- May 6, 2013
- Messages
- 3,102
- Reaction score
- 1,604
- Location
- NW Virginia
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Undisclosed
I'm guessing that was just a bit of provocation.
It was a typo...
I'm guessing that was just a bit of provocation.
- Taking of a human life without just cause. Protest to show senseless killings need to stop.
- I see no reason to riot. All riots do is hurt innocent people.
Hope your not one that believes the killing of this LEO was justified.
Of course not because these liberal asshats don't think all lives matter. They're probably celebrating the death of Moore by going out and looting a store or something.
As a "liberal asshat", I think all lives matter. Care to help me understand the distinction between the Op and say.....The recent shooting in South Carolina or is bashing liberals just your religion?
You've made many cogent points in the past on other topics, and while I don't always agree I can respect your opinion, but this is just garbage, you're better than that.
Who is arguing that the right to guns being inalienable means kids should shoot uzi's and have guns left out next to them? How would the owner not be culpable for that? Its certainly the law where I am.
Is this what you meant by "run wild"?
BTW-a semi auto uzi with strict supervision is easy to control and mild on the recoil-there are worse choices for kids-but ALL involve adult supervision.
Last week, in pointing out the problems with Jill Lepore’s attempt to undermine the Second Amendment and justify more gun control, I focused on the fact that our right to keep and bear arms is a God-given right. As such, it preceded not only the Second Amendment but also the founding of the United States. In other words: We don’t have the right to keep and bear arms because the Bill of Rights says so; rather, the Bill of Rights says so because the right to keep and bear arms is intrinsic to our very being: it is a right with which we were endowed by our Creator.
Oh, I was just thinking of cases, like the college president that was made to apologize for accidentally thinking that all lives matter, that's all...
Look, gun owners come with a wide array of ideas that they think are acceptable when it comes to gun safety, accountability, self protection and laws they agree and don't agree with.
Are you serious in your question about inalienable rights of gun ownership?
Another example
The Heritage Foundation's take
As far as Uzi's are concerned, while never having shot one, I am very familiar with the characteristics of the bullet variants used well, all but the .41AE. The others 9mm, .22LR, .45ACP are all rounds I use in weapons I own. You mention semi-auto. The weapons in both cases I left links for were full auto. I assume given the recoil the weapons were using the most common variant of the Uzi, the 9mm as we both know 22LR has almost no recoil and its hard to believe that anyone, even a serious gun nut would give an inexperienced kid an Uzi firing .45acp.
If you are onboard with weapon accountability, then we have little to argue about, but every time I bring up changes in gun culture I'm accused of being an extreme liberal who only wants to take away firearms.
It was gun culture run amok that allowed the children in the examples I gave to take apart in the things that they did. These weren't parent's out on a private shooting range in Montana or West Virginia. In the case of the 8 year old boy, it was an event sponsored by the local police chief with lots of people witnessing and instructors around and no one thought to say, "hey, U'm, It's a really bad idea for your 8yo to be shooting a fully auto 9mm Uzi. If anyone had said that, they would have been attacked and reminded of our "rights"..ect, ect....It's crazy and it needs to change.
In the irony of ironies, the father that allowed his son to shoot a fully automatic Uzi that killed him, not only isn't held accountable, but he collects a settlement of $700K (collected from the gun and ammunition manufactures) and writes a book on dealing with grief that sells for $24 a pop on Amazon....
Seriously F-ed up.
Dude, you are talking about a KID, a KID whos father greatly overstated the safety of they weapon. That TRAGEDY is not a justification to curtail my right (which I believe is natural, btw). ALL rights come with responsibility and can be misused even to dangerous effect-if you dont like at least some degree of danger and responsibility, freedom might not be your thing.
Im a Paramedic I can tell you about the things I have personally seen that might lead you to say there is an out of control "car" culture, would you be for banning those?
What I did learn from your post-was that perhaps uzi made a .41AE variant, makes sense as they are Israeli companies.
Will there be crowds in the street brandishing signs that say "All Lives Matter"? Will Sharpton be speaking out against the actions of this black criminal that killed Officer Moore? Will there be a DOJ investigation into the rights of this officer's rights being violated?
How long in this thread before someone stands up for the criminal in this story? I mean long arrest record, and appeared to have a gun in his waistband? I mean, "No probable cause" right? To these people that argue this crap, the officer 'got what he deserved' right? Disgusting....
And third officer killing in six months? But it's not a dangerous job though...:roll:
*sigh*
Just as the hypothetical refusal to cater pizza to a gay wedding triggers death threats, every accident involving a gun demands a call for gun control.
And I keep making the case that crime and gun control have no relationship whatsoever, and accidents can happen with any sport or hobby. In the 60's I knew of a kid who lost the ability to talk because he took a hockey puck in the throat. Ban hockey pucks!
I feel off a mountain years ago, cracked several ribs and tore the ligaments in my knee. Ban the Rockies!
Now let's consider a 23 year old kid in a high powered Porsche with a head full of coke and a belly full of booze going 185Km down I-5.
What the **** do you "control" there that isn't already "controlled"
As is always the case with Amerkan liberals, thinking is not required
Yeah its silly. IIRC in the case of the uzi, the father (a physician) was helping his son shoot a full auto uzi for the first time and it whipped around and hit the boy. Horrible-in every way-but a freak accident. Abusus non tollit usum.
You know where I stand there.
Uzi's should be banned.
Two, the dad should go to jail.
But the US in its wisdom does not ban Uzi's; so like high powered cars and substances, Americans need to learn to live with them.
I am constantly horrified at the demand for gun control as some sort of "safety" idea when in fact it is religion; all the while the real carnage is on US highways.
With the logic of anti-gunism, all roads should be banned, let alone cars, buses, trucks, motor cycles et all
a bit of perspective helps over the fear mongering.
No it just makes it more avoidable. The young officers tragic death in the OP is just more collateral damage done as a consequence of a crazy system
Yes indeed it does.
Last year in the US 126 police officers were killed in the line of duty in the UK we had none.
The same year over a thousand people were killed by police in the US in the UK we had one
You are over 50 times more likely to be killed by your own police force than by terrorists
How so? If the murder rate is general is the same (I assume lower?, im having some trouble finding stats) we can assume that they would find another weapon in lieu of a gun. It would be fair to assume that the rate of katana related murders is higher in Japan, this doesnt mean that the presence of Katanas makes Japan inherently more dangerous. And of course all of this is assuming that all the guns in the U.S would magically disapear once a ban was imposed, which given the U.S´s highly organized traddition of organized crime would appear somewhat unlikely.
Dude, you are talking about a KID, a KID whos father greatly overstated the safety of they weapon. That TRAGEDY is not a justification to curtail my right (which I believe is natural, btw). ALL rights come with responsibility and can be misused even to dangerous effect-if you dont like at least some degree of danger and responsibility, freedom might not be your thing.
Im a Paramedic I can tell you about the things I have personally seen that might lead you to say there is an out of control "car" culture, would you be for banning those?
What I did learn from your post-was that perhaps uzi made a .41AE variant, makes sense as they are Israeli companies.
Yes indeed it does.
Last year in the US 126 police officers were killed in the line of duty in the UK we had none.
The same year over a thousand people were killed by police in the US in the UK we had one
You are over 50 times more likely to be killed by your own police force than by terrorism acts
how many were homicides? how many were accidents? this is important.
you are being generous with 50 times, I think it was 400 times last I calculated
Historically, before or after any gun laws-the UK has always had a lower rate of crime against law enforcement.
The father wasn't the only one overstating the safety of the weapon. The organizers, the range officers, the event organizers and the other parents who also let their children participate overestimated the safety as well. Most of these same people would shoot a dirty look to a parent that let their kid sit in the front seat w/o a seatbelt, but think it's perfectly normal to let a child fire an Uzi.
Insofar as "natural rights' or "god given rights", they are a nice idea, but they don't exist unless other people agree, which means without the agreement of others around you that the rights are "inalienable" or "natural", they are nothing. You must convince your fellow man in the value of the rights you claim are "natural". Which is not to say that I don't support firearm ownership, just that I think there are reasonable limits with regard to responsibility and attitude.
Ahhh the ubiquitous "car" argument. An argument that only helps demonstrate my point. We know that everything we do comes with some risk. Cars like anything else can be abused and we try to put common sense limits on cars. We require licences, insurance, registration impose speed limits, safety tolerances ect....We put more limits on a car than say a bicycle because of the potential danger it poses. The difference between a firearm and a car is one is designed exclusively to project force in an extremely compact and efficient package (pocket sized in some cases), cars are a vital part of our overall lifestyle and economy. If all the cars in the world vanished, modern life as we know it would end.
While a car can project force, that isn't it's design goal. It is designed to ferry around people and objects and we accept the tradeoff between it's utility and the inevitable consequences of misuse. But ever since the car was developed it has gotten safer and safer. Firearms have stated the same and the culture has be come more resistant than ever to social change, either by government or within itself. Frankly I think most of the changes have to come within the culture rather than through legislation. before I'm reminded that crime has fallen, I would challenge the notion that the reason it's fallen cannot be correlated to firearms in any meaningful way. Changes in the crime rate have lots of participating factors.
Not just the UK but every other developed country too . Why do you think that is ?
How about a very different history?
here is the breakdown for the US
National Law Enforcement Officers Memorial Fund: 126 Law Enforcement Officer Fatalities Nationwide in 2014
For the UK here is the all time historical list which is but a tiny fraction of the US totals even allowing for population differentials
List of British police officers killed in the line of duty - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Probably true I'm just going by the figures I've read lately
You