IS Forum
Forum Index Register Members List Events Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Help

Go Back   International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » Social Issues & Current Events
 


Welcome to the International Skeptics Forum, where we discuss skepticism, critical thinking, the paranormal and science in a friendly but lively way. You are currently viewing the forum as a guest, which means you are missing out on discussing matters that are of interest to you. Please consider registering so you can gain full use of the forum features and interact with other Members. Registration is simple, fast and free! Click here to register today.
Reply
Old 10th January 2013, 09:34 AM   #441
Giz
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Posts: 8,709
Originally Posted by Polaris View Post
Bringing AR-15s into a school less than a month after Sandy Hook is an appropriate time to panic.
I thought they walked "near" a school (still likely to cause panic).

I wonder how close they got. There's often a local ordinance against carrying within a certain distance of a school
Giz is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 10th January 2013, 09:37 AM   #442
Unabogie
Philosopher
 
Unabogie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Portland, OR
Posts: 9,692
This has an interview with the two ********.

http://www.kptv.com/story/20548025/m...and-to-educate
Unabogie is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 10th January 2013, 09:43 AM   #443
Polaris
Penultimate Amazing
 
Polaris's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Posts: 11,396
Originally Posted by Unabogie View Post
Thank you.
Not a problem. I do think there's room for reasoned debate and compromise here. Nessie's proposals are sensible too.

Originally Posted by Giz View Post
I thought they walked "near" a school (still likely to cause panic).

I wonder how close they got. There's often a local ordinance against carrying within a certain distance of a school
That was my first thought, too. It was raised early in the "arm the teachers" nonsense that gun-free-zones (i.e., schools) are armed-resistance-free-zones by default.

And this isn't the first case of this since Newtown, school or not. One dolt in NY (IIRC) was walking around his neighborhood park with some kind of black rifle slung over his shoulder. Similar 911 calls and hilarity ensued.
__________________
"There's vastly more truth to be found in rocks than in holy books. Rocks are far superior, in fact, because you can DEMONSTRATE the truth found in rocks. Plus, they're pretty. Holy books are just heavy." - Dinwar

"Let your ears hear this beautiful song that's hiding underneath the sound," Ed Kowalczyk.
Polaris is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 10th January 2013, 09:44 AM   #444
Nessie
Penultimate Amazing
 
Nessie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 15,720
Can you walk about openly carrying other weapons?
__________________
Audiophile/biker/sceptic
Nessie is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 10th January 2013, 09:55 AM   #445
Unabogie
Philosopher
 
Unabogie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Portland, OR
Posts: 9,692
Originally Posted by Giz View Post
I thought they walked "near" a school (still likely to cause panic).

I wonder how close they got. There's often a local ordinance against carrying within a certain distance of a school
It's about 4 blocks from the Sellwood middle school. They were walking up and down 13th, which is where those shops are.
Unabogie is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 10th January 2013, 10:18 AM   #446
DavidJames
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Front Range, CO
Posts: 10,493
Originally Posted by Giz View Post
It seems that you need to work on swaying the population to your way of thinking.
I've changed my position from not liking our gun culture but agnostic on the 2nd amendment to now wanting serious changes. Actually, what I would like is an honest interpretation of the 2nd amendment, not the wet dream as envisioned by the NRA and Ted Nugent we have now.
Originally Posted by Giz View Post
The only "educating" they achieved was to reinforce peoples pre-existing worries about gun nuts.
Indeed, as do a healthy percentage of gun nuts posts on this forum. At some point people need to realize the "pre-existing worries" are justified and prevalent enough to warrant serious action to eliminate the gun culture mentality.
__________________
For 15 years I never put anyone on ignore. I felt it important to see everyone's view point. Finally I realized the value of some views can be measured in negative terms and were personally destructive.
DavidJames is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 10th January 2013, 10:21 AM   #447
Cylinder
Philosopher
 
Cylinder's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Arkansas
Posts: 6,062
Originally Posted by Giz View Post
I thought they walked "near" a school (still likely to cause panic).

I wonder how close they got. There's often a local ordinance against carrying within a certain distance of a school
It's actually federal law -

18 USC 922

Quote:
(q)(2)

(A)It shall be unlawful for any individual knowingly to possess a firearm that has moved in or that otherwise affects interstate or foreign commerce at a place that the individual knows, or has reasonable cause to believe, is a school zone.

(B)Subparagraph (A) does not apply to the possession of a firearm—
(i)on private property not part of school grounds;

(ii)if the individual possessing the firearm is licensed to do so by the State in which the school zone is located or a political subdivision of the State, and the law of the State or political subdivision requires that, before an individual obtains such a license, the law enforcement authorities of the State or political subdivision verify that the individual is qualified under law to receive the license;

(iii)that is—
(I)not loaded; and

(II)in a locked container, or a locked firearms rack that is on a motor vehicle;

(iv)by an individual for use in a program approved by a school in the school zone;

(v)by an individual in accordance with a contract entered into between a school in the school zone and the individual or an employer of the individual;

(vi)by a law enforcement officer acting in his or her official capacity; or

(vii)that is unloaded and is possessed by an individual while traversing school premises for the purpose of gaining access to public or private lands open to hunting, if the entry on school premises is authorized by school authorities.
School Zone is defined in 18 USC 921:

Quote:
(a)

(25)The term “school zone” means—

(A)in, or on the grounds of, a public, parochial or private school; or

(B)within a distance of 1,000 feet from the grounds of a public, parochial or private school.
__________________
If you will not fight for the right when you can easily win without bloodshed ; if you will not fight when your victory will be sure and not too costly; you may come to the moment when you will have to fight with all the odds against you and only a precarious chance of survival. There may even be a worse case. You may have to fight when there is no hope of victory, because it is better to perish than live as slaves. - Winston Churchill, The Gathering Storm
Cylinder is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 10th January 2013, 10:23 AM   #448
Ranb
Penultimate Amazing
 
Ranb's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: WA USA
Posts: 10,927
Originally Posted by Nessie View Post
It was an epic fail in terms of gun owners behaving responsibly. It also shows an outcome if the NRA had their way and loads more people carried guns. It would mean a tyranny of gun owners frightening people who chose to live their lives without guns.
That is the default behavior of a person with a gun? I don't think so. I have not found that to be the case were I live, is it like that where you live? I have seen open carry by civilians and police, but never have I ever seen anyone carrying legally and using that gun to frighten anyone.

There is a difference between an armed person frightening someone and someone being frightened because they have an unreasonable fear of firearms.

Ranb
Ranb is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 10th January 2013, 10:42 AM   #449
Unabogie
Philosopher
 
Unabogie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Portland, OR
Posts: 9,692
Originally Posted by DavidJames View Post
I've changed my position from not liking our gun culture but agnostic on the 2nd amendment to now wanting serious changes. Actually, what I would like is an honest interpretation of the 2nd amendment, not the wet dream as envisioned by the NRA and Ted Nugent we have now.
Indeed, as do a healthy percentage of gun nuts posts on this forum. At some point people need to realize the "pre-existing worries" are justified and prevalent enough to warrant serious action to eliminate the gun culture mentality.
I've had the same conversion. I used to be pretty certain that we should not ban guns, even if I agreed with things like background checks and restrictions on gun types and capacities. But in speaking with gun advocates, I've lost my sense that the majority of gun owners are responsible and trustworthy. I get the sense that they value their own gun rights far more than they value my rights to be left alone by their guns and that they are dealing with severe paranoia and hero fantasies.

In short, they are the last people I'd trust with guns.
Unabogie is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 10th January 2013, 10:50 AM   #450
Nessie
Penultimate Amazing
 
Nessie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 15,720
Originally Posted by Ranb View Post
That is the default behavior of a person with a gun? I don't think so. I have not found that to be the case were I live, is it like that where you live?
People would report someone openly carrying a gun and it is a crime here.


Quote:
I have seen open carry by civilians and police, but never have I ever seen anyone carrying legally and using that gun to frighten anyone.
Apart from those two in Portland.


Quote:
There is a difference between an armed person frightening someone and someone being frightened because they have an unreasonable fear of firearms.

Ranb
True. I take it you think the unarmed should be the ones to get used to seeing lots of armed people?
__________________
Audiophile/biker/sceptic
Nessie is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 10th January 2013, 12:40 PM   #451
shawmutt
Squirrel Murderer
 
shawmutt's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Posts: 2,037
Sam Harris chimes in with answers for his critics. He makes one point in particular that I would like to bring up:

Quote:
Ironically, the danger that men pose toward women is my primary reason for thinking that guns should be legal and available to responsible adults. As someone who was raised by a single mother, and as the father of little girl, I tend to view all questions of self-defense through the lens of what will enable a woman to protect herself from a man who is bent upon raping and/or killing her.
http://www.samharris.org/blog/item/f...+by+Sam+Harris
shawmutt is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 10th January 2013, 12:59 PM   #452
Unabogie
Philosopher
 
Unabogie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Portland, OR
Posts: 9,692
And holy crap, this is my nephew's school.

http://www.kget.com/news/local/story...M1cMh7ASg.cspx

Quote:
10:00 A.M. UPDATE:
Sheriff's officials say two people have been shot at Taft High School. We are also told someone has been taken into custody.

Kern County Fire officials say one victim received only minor injuries and refused treatment at the scene, the other person was airlifted to Kern Medical Center with unknown injuries.
Unabogie is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 10th January 2013, 01:13 PM   #453
triforcharity
Banned
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 13,961
Originally Posted by Nessie View Post
I am. When I say need I mean need.
No, because you're using broad brushes. Kinda like when you accused me of this same need.

Originally Posted by Nessie View Post
Er, no you evidence your claim.
I'll talk to some friends, would you like me to post the results?
triforcharity is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 10th January 2013, 01:19 PM   #454
triforcharity
Banned
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 13,961
Originally Posted by Unabogie View Post
Two ******** shut down an elementary school. People frantically dialed 911 thinking there's another shooting rampage happening, and it's all because gun nuts wanted to "educate" the public.
I agree, dumb move, and only added a negative opinion, as opposed to being constructive.

Originally Posted by Unabogie View Post
It worked. I now know you guys are *********** nuts.
So, again, back to the broad brushes. Care to actually address my point from the previous post? Or is it illogical.....

Originally Posted by Unabogie View Post
And you don't care how we feel about that and think the normal people are the freaks?
No, I don't care that you don't like us. I really don't.

Originally Posted by Unabogie View Post
You're making it harder and harder to worry about your rights since you don't care about my right to be free from your guns.
You mean your illogical hatred of them based on the actions of a few?

Oh, and not to be rude or anything, but I wasn't aware that because you don't like something, means that others around you cannot enjoy them. I wasn't aware there was a clause somewhere that said I should be inconvenienced because you're offended by something. Tough ****.
triforcharity is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 10th January 2013, 01:22 PM   #455
triforcharity
Banned
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 13,961
Originally Posted by Unabogie View Post
By the way. If all you normal, law abiding, responsible gun owners would have reacted with horror at this incident instead of snark and hand waving, I'd have a lot more confidence that there was such a thing as normal, law abiding, responsible gun owners.
Perhaps you'll cite where it says that I should react with horror because two idiots did something stupid. Is there some kind of horror chart I should follow?

Myself, stank, and I'm sure others reacted similarly. Dumb, stupid move. Not smart. Dumbasses.

Do you want me to cry? I did after Sandy Hook.
triforcharity is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 10th January 2013, 01:24 PM   #456
Cainkane1
Philosopher
 
Cainkane1's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: The great American southeast
Posts: 9,008
Ms. Feinstein lacks credability. Years ago when a serial killer named Richard Remirez was raping and murdering women in the bay area she announced publickly that the police had the shoeprints of the murderer. Ramirez promptly tossed them into the bay.

Feinstein is an idiot.
__________________
If at first you don't succeed try try again. Then if you fail to succeed to Hell with that. Try something else.
Cainkane1 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 10th January 2013, 01:30 PM   #457
Unabogie
Philosopher
 
Unabogie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Portland, OR
Posts: 9,692
Originally Posted by Cainkane1 View Post
Ms. Feinstein lacks credability. Years ago when a serial killer named Richard Remirez was raping and murdering women in the bay area she announced publickly that the police had the shoeprints of the murderer. Ramirez promptly tossed them into the bay.

Feinstein is an idiot.
Richard Ramirez killed in the San Fernando valley, not the bay area.
Unabogie is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 10th January 2013, 01:31 PM   #458
triforcharity
Banned
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 13,961
Originally Posted by Unabogie View Post
I made myself arbiter of my own standards, thank you very much.
And mine are much lower when it comes to horror and outrage.

Originally Posted by Unabogie View Post
At least you're saving your name calling for the two guys and not me, unlike Triforcharity.
Bull ****. Nowhere did I call you a name, now did I? But, you're welcome to report any of my posts and we'll see.

Originally Posted by Unabogie View Post
They can't be charged with anything, because the NRA passed open carry laws all over the country.
The NRA didn't pass laws, the local and state lawmakers did. Hence, why we call them "lawmakers".

Originally Posted by Unabogie View Post
And since they could carry, they did, eschewing any concern for "how we feel about it".
No, that wasn't my point. My point was I don't care that you're horrified by this action. I'm not horrified, or outraged. I'm irritated. Sorry that I don't rise to your level. I'll try harder.

Originally Posted by Unabogie View Post
The point must be made that in a normal society, the fact that you don't brandish weapons in a normal shopping area "because you can" is just common sense and common decency.
Brandish =/= carry around. For your reading pleasure.

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/brandish

And I agree, I don't like the idea of open carrying of a firearm, with a few exceptions.

Originally Posted by Unabogie View Post
Then you can make the case that you don't need laws against it, since no one would ever do something so insane. And yet last month people did it in Connecticut, they did it at Obama rallies, and they did it here in my neighborhood (where I go ride my bike).
You're equating someone carrying a firearm, with gunning dozens of people down? Your priorities are so ****** up...




Originally Posted by Unabogie View Post
So now I support abolishing open carry laws, since your right to open carry is conflicting with my right to not have insane gun nuts carrying guns around me and my family.
Poisoning the well.....

But, your right to not be offended, irritated or scared of something doesn't exist. But, you're welcome to show me where I can find that.....
triforcharity is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 10th January 2013, 01:34 PM   #459
triforcharity
Banned
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 13,961
Originally Posted by Polaris View Post
Bringing AR-15s into a school less than a month after Sandy Hook is an appropriate time to panic. I don't think that's too irrational. These two guys are dumber than stones for doing this, and do their (and my) side no good by doing it.

If they wanted to educate, they should have arranged for a uniformed policeman to do the educating - or at the absolute least, accompany them.
I don't think they brought it INTO the school. That is a crime in, well, everywhere. If they brought it into the school, it would be a violation of The Gun-Free School Zones Act of 1995. They'd have been arrested and charged with a crime. Guaranteed.
triforcharity is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 10th January 2013, 01:47 PM   #460
Ranb
Penultimate Amazing
 
Ranb's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: WA USA
Posts: 10,927
Originally Posted by Nessie View Post
True. I take it you think the unarmed should be the ones to get used to seeing lots of armed people?
Of course. I have never alarmed anyone when walking around opening armed; at least I had no reason to think anyone was alarmed. What is the big deal? If these guys were not breaking any laws, there's no reason that anyone should be alarmed.

Ranb
Ranb is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 10th January 2013, 01:47 PM   #461
Nessie
Penultimate Amazing
 
Nessie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 15,720
Originally Posted by triforcharity View Post
No, because you're using broad brushes. Kinda like when you accused me of this same need.
Considering the bile spilled in the gun control threads, being accused of needing a gun when you only want a gun barely rates on the upsetometer.


Quote:
I'll talk to some friends, would you like me to post the results?
No just evidence your claim please.
__________________
Audiophile/biker/sceptic
Nessie is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 10th January 2013, 01:53 PM   #462
Nessie
Penultimate Amazing
 
Nessie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 15,720
Originally Posted by Ranb View Post
Of course. I have never alarmed anyone when walking around opening armed; at least I had no reason to think anyone was alarmed. What is the big deal? If these guys were not breaking any laws, there's no reason that anyone should be alarmed.

Ranb
OK, so how do you plan to make sure only decent, sensible, law abiding citizens are the ones carrying the guns?
__________________
Audiophile/biker/sceptic
Nessie is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 10th January 2013, 01:59 PM   #463
Ranb
Penultimate Amazing
 
Ranb's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: WA USA
Posts: 10,927
By enforcing the laws we already have and stricter mental health screenings included with background checks. Simply punishing the vast majority of people who will never abuse the guns they own is not the right way to do it.

Ranb
Ranb is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 10th January 2013, 02:05 PM   #464
Nessie
Penultimate Amazing
 
Nessie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 15,720
Originally Posted by Ranb View Post
By enforcing the laws we already have and stricter mental health screenings included with background checks. Simply punishing the vast majority of people who will never abuse the guns they own is not the right way to do it.

Ranb
My thoughts on the matter are criminals and illegal gun dealers need to be put away for very long prison terms, no sales without background checks and there need to be proper background checks for all firearms holders. Are we in agreement on that?

Do you think such actions count as punishing the lawful gun owners, or are they sensible actions that cause some extra cost and inconvenience for the benefit of all?
__________________
Audiophile/biker/sceptic
Nessie is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 10th January 2013, 02:20 PM   #465
Polaris
Penultimate Amazing
 
Polaris's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Posts: 11,396
Originally Posted by Nessie View Post
My thoughts on the matter are criminals and illegal gun dealers need to be put away for very long prison terms, no sales without background checks and there need to be proper background checks for all firearms holders. Are we in agreement on that?

Do you think such actions count as punishing the lawful gun owners, or are they sensible actions that cause some extra cost and inconvenience for the benefit of all?
No argument here. It's the outright reactionary bans I think most of us gun nuts object to - with or without the accusations and loathing.
__________________
"There's vastly more truth to be found in rocks than in holy books. Rocks are far superior, in fact, because you can DEMONSTRATE the truth found in rocks. Plus, they're pretty. Holy books are just heavy." - Dinwar

"Let your ears hear this beautiful song that's hiding underneath the sound," Ed Kowalczyk.
Polaris is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 10th January 2013, 02:25 PM   #466
Cylinder
Philosopher
 
Cylinder's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Arkansas
Posts: 6,062
Originally Posted by Nessie View Post
My thoughts on the matter are criminals and illegal gun dealers need to be put away for very long prison terms, no sales without background checks and there need to be proper background checks for all firearms holders. Are we in agreement on that?

Do you think such actions count as punishing the lawful gun owners, or are they sensible actions that cause some extra cost and inconvenience for the benefit of all?
That's simple. Open the NICS. The seller simply gets a SALE/NO SALE, the potential buyer gets a notification of the check in the mail (to help eliminate identity theft) including the specific reason for the denial when appropritate (to help eliminate record errors). The vast majority of gun rights advocates would agree with this. BATFE would defecate a manmade rectangular parallelpiped composed of conglomorate minerals to give up that much power, though.
__________________
If you will not fight for the right when you can easily win without bloodshed ; if you will not fight when your victory will be sure and not too costly; you may come to the moment when you will have to fight with all the odds against you and only a precarious chance of survival. There may even be a worse case. You may have to fight when there is no hope of victory, because it is better to perish than live as slaves. - Winston Churchill, The Gathering Storm

Last edited by Cylinder; 10th January 2013 at 02:35 PM.
Cylinder is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 10th January 2013, 02:28 PM   #467
StankApe
Banned
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Posts: 4,628
Originally Posted by Unabogie View Post
By the way. If all you normal, law abiding, responsible gun owners would have reacted with horror at this incident instead of snark and hand waving, I'd have a lot more confidence that there was such a thing as normal, law abiding, responsible gun owners.
I'm not a gun owner bub..... so there goes yer little theory
StankApe is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 10th January 2013, 02:38 PM   #468
shawmutt
Squirrel Murderer
 
shawmutt's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Posts: 2,037
Originally Posted by DavidJames View Post
I've changed my position from not liking our gun culture but agnostic on the 2nd amendment to now wanting serious changes. Actually, what I would like is an honest interpretation of the 2nd amendment, not the wet dream as envisioned by the NRA and Ted Nugent we have now.
Indeed, as do a healthy percentage of gun nuts posts on this forum. At some point people need to realize the "pre-existing worries" are justified and prevalent enough to warrant serious action to eliminate the gun culture mentality.
Did you change your positions from the following?

a. No logical argument for gun ownership
b. All citizens are potential criminals
c. Gun owners are making up for small penises
d. Men are much more passionate about their guns
e. Gun owners choose target shooting over life (3. #271)
shawmutt is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 10th January 2013, 04:48 PM   #469
Metullus
Forum ľ-Wit Pro Tem
 
Metullus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 5,214
Originally Posted by Unabogie View Post
Richard Ramirez killed in the San Fernando valley, not the bay area.
Richard Ramirez killed in SF as well. IIRC the shoe issue was a huge deal since there had been only one or two pairs of that particular type and size sold and thus could be used to ID the killer.
__________________
I have met Tim at TAM. He is of sufficient height to piss on your leg. - Doubt 10/7/2005 - I'll miss Tim.

Aristotle taught that the brain exists merely to cool the blood and is not involved in the process of thinking. This is true only of certain persons. - Will Cuppy
Metullus is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 10th January 2013, 05:54 PM   #470
thaiboxerken
Penultimate Amazing
 
thaiboxerken's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Posts: 32,635
Originally Posted by triforcharity View Post
Actually, that's secondary.

It's to minimize the amount of magazines a soldier has to carry, thereby freeing up space for other necessities.
according to who? Reload time and frequency diminishes ROF, meaning less people killed. Also, time reloading is when a gunman us more susceptible to neutralization.
__________________
1. He'd never do that. 2. Okay but he's not currently doing it. 3. Okay but he's not currently technically doing it. 4. Okay but everyone does it. 5. He's doing it, we can't stop him, no point in complaining about it. 6. We all knew he was going to do it which... makes it okay somehow. 7. It's perfectly fine that's he's doing it.
thaiboxerken is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 10th January 2013, 05:56 PM   #471
thaiboxerken
Penultimate Amazing
 
thaiboxerken's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Posts: 32,635
Originally Posted by shawmutt View Post
http://www.thetruthaboutguns.com/201...for-civilians/

"The primary reason the military adopted the M-16 in 5.56 is because of the LOW recoil, and amount of ammo that a warrior can carry into battle. The .223 is the smallest the military would adopt at the time."
So they can carry more ammo in order to dish out more death. Okay, thanks.
__________________
1. He'd never do that. 2. Okay but he's not currently doing it. 3. Okay but he's not currently technically doing it. 4. Okay but everyone does it. 5. He's doing it, we can't stop him, no point in complaining about it. 6. We all knew he was going to do it which... makes it okay somehow. 7. It's perfectly fine that's he's doing it.
thaiboxerken is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 10th January 2013, 05:57 PM   #472
StankApe
Banned
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Posts: 4,628
Originally Posted by thaiboxerken View Post
according to who? Reload time and frequency diminishes ROF, meaning less people killed. Also, time reloading is when a gunman us more susceptible to neutralization.
This is the part where you dream of using you silly kung fu skill to run 30 yards, knock the gun out of his hand and get him in a head lock, all without getting shot.

isn't this the same accusation you have made about gun owners responding to a home invasion?
StankApe is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 10th January 2013, 06:00 PM   #473
thaiboxerken
Penultimate Amazing
 
thaiboxerken's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Posts: 32,635
Originally Posted by StankApe View Post
Dude, de-caf, seriously
He had a valid reason to be upset. Just because you think carrying a death machine on your person is fine doesn't mean everyone else should think so too.
__________________
1. He'd never do that. 2. Okay but he's not currently doing it. 3. Okay but he's not currently technically doing it. 4. Okay but everyone does it. 5. He's doing it, we can't stop him, no point in complaining about it. 6. We all knew he was going to do it which... makes it okay somehow. 7. It's perfectly fine that's he's doing it.
thaiboxerken is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 10th January 2013, 06:03 PM   #474
thaiboxerken
Penultimate Amazing
 
thaiboxerken's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Posts: 32,635
Originally Posted by Nessie View Post
I know, I was talking about the ones who feel a need for a gun to protect themselves.

In any case please evidence your claim most have a want for a gun and not a need.
I agree with tri inn this case. Most gun owners don't have a need for them.
__________________
1. He'd never do that. 2. Okay but he's not currently doing it. 3. Okay but he's not currently technically doing it. 4. Okay but everyone does it. 5. He's doing it, we can't stop him, no point in complaining about it. 6. We all knew he was going to do it which... makes it okay somehow. 7. It's perfectly fine that's he's doing it.
thaiboxerken is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 10th January 2013, 06:06 PM   #475
thaiboxerken
Penultimate Amazing
 
thaiboxerken's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Posts: 32,635
Originally Posted by Giz View Post
It seems that you need to work on swaying the population to your way of thinking.

Do you think that your recent posts are conducive to that?




FWIW, my 2c on these guys:

They hurt their own cause. The only "educating" they achieved was to reinforce peoples pre-existing worries about gun nuts.
Seems that the public reaction reflects his way of thinking.
__________________
1. He'd never do that. 2. Okay but he's not currently doing it. 3. Okay but he's not currently technically doing it. 4. Okay but everyone does it. 5. He's doing it, we can't stop him, no point in complaining about it. 6. We all knew he was going to do it which... makes it okay somehow. 7. It's perfectly fine that's he's doing it.
thaiboxerken is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 10th January 2013, 06:07 PM   #476
shawmutt
Squirrel Murderer
 
shawmutt's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Posts: 2,037
Originally Posted by thaiboxerken View Post
He had a valid reason to be upset. Just because you think carrying a death machine on your person is fine doesn't mean everyone else should think so too.
Oooh...a DEATH MACHINE! I'm liking this more and more. I'm like Darth Vader, Voldemort, and World War II all wrapped up in one big badass package.
shawmutt is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 10th January 2013, 06:08 PM   #477
thaiboxerken
Penultimate Amazing
 
thaiboxerken's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Posts: 32,635
Originally Posted by StankApe View Post
This is the part where you dream of using you silly kung fu skill to run 30 yards, knock the gun out of his hand and get him in a head lock, all without getting shot.

isn't this the same accusation you have made about gun owners responding to a home invasion?
What happened to Gifford's shooter again? How was he taken down and when?
__________________
1. He'd never do that. 2. Okay but he's not currently doing it. 3. Okay but he's not currently technically doing it. 4. Okay but everyone does it. 5. He's doing it, we can't stop him, no point in complaining about it. 6. We all knew he was going to do it which... makes it okay somehow. 7. It's perfectly fine that's he's doing it.
thaiboxerken is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 10th January 2013, 06:09 PM   #478
shawmutt
Squirrel Murderer
 
shawmutt's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Posts: 2,037
In other news, I've been to six stores and I can't find a single box of 9mm ammo, and I need four by Saturday for a class. THANKS A LOT FEINSTEIN--#1 ammo seller.

I could dig into my personal stash...but then I won't be as prepared for the zombies.

Why the hell didn't I buy a .40? Plenty of that ammo...Hmmm...maybe I'll go gun shopping instead!

Last edited by shawmutt; 10th January 2013 at 06:11 PM.
shawmutt is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 10th January 2013, 06:11 PM   #479
StankApe
Banned
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Posts: 4,628
Originally Posted by shawmutt View Post
Oooh...a DEATH MACHINE! I'm liking this more and more. I'm like Darth Vader, Voldemort, and World War II all wrapped up in one big badass package.
You should have your own theme music!
StankApe is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 10th January 2013, 07:06 PM   #480
triforcharity
Banned
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 13,961
Originally Posted by thaiboxerken View Post
according to who?
Every service member in my family and extended family. But, lemme guess, they're wrong and you're right....

Originally Posted by thaiboxerken View Post
Reload time and frequency diminishes ROF, meaning less people killed.
No, ROF translates to the other guy not being able to come out of cover. Fire superiority.

Originally Posted by thaiboxerken View Post
Also, time reloading is when a gunman us more susceptible to neutralization.
Incorrect. Reloading is done from cover and concealment. Not out in the open, at least 99% of the time. So, you're wrong again.

So, go get your facts right, then come back.
triforcharity is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Reply

International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » Social Issues & Current Events

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 01:29 AM.
Powered by vBulletin. Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

This forum began as part of the James Randi Education Foundation (JREF). However, the forum now exists as
an independent entity with no affiliation with or endorsement by the JREF, including the section in reference to "JREF" topics.

Disclaimer: Messages posted in the Forum are solely the opinion of their authors.