What's new
By:
USCHO Fan Forum

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

  • The USCHO Fan Forum has migrated to a new plaform, xenForo. Most of the function of the forum should work in familiar ways. Please note that you can switch between light and dark modes by clicking on the gear icon in the upper right of the main menu bar. We are hoping that this new platform will prove to be faster and more reliable. Please feel free to explore its features.

2022 MidTerms & State races- who ya got?

Status
Not open for further replies.
And that is irrelevant. I've got shoot ups all over the United States using military style weapons that were banned until gun owners decided they needed them.

Ban them all.
 
ScoobyDoo said:
And that is irrelevant. I've got shoot ups all over the United States using military style weapons that were banned until gun owners decided they needed them.

Ban them all.
Click to expand...

Ban all of what. all guns? or just your "military style " weapons?
 
Drew thinks we should ban them all.

Just so no family has to go through the tragedy of losing a loved one to gun violence. Not a single one.
 
walrus said:
Ban all of what. all guns? or just your "military style " weapons?
Click to expand...

All of them. Until and If the gun community can prove it deserves them again. Which is not likely to happen. The gun owners I know are not responsible or worthy of the power they've been given.
 
ScoobyDoo said:
And that is irrelevant. I've got shoot ups all over the United States using military style weapons that were banned until gun owners decided they needed them.

Ban them all.
Click to expand...

So ban military style weapons. Those are quite a bit different than a Semi-Auto Waterfowl gun... But the waterfowl gun is a "semi-auto" so it must be bad.

Or do you not know/understand the nuance of different hunting firearms when compared to military guns?
 
RaceBoarder said:
So ban military style weapons. Those are quite a bit different than a Semi-Auto Waterfowl gun... But the waterfowl gun is a "semi-auto" so it must be bad.

Or do you not know/understand the nuance of different hunting firearms when compared to military guns?
Click to expand...

You just don't get it do you.
 
ScoobyDoo said:
You just don't get it do you.
Click to expand...

Yep... Tons of mass shootings committed with hunting rifles.

So let's end a pastime of millions of Americans because some stupid/dumb stuff happened. Again, you lump everything as the same...

Capacity limits that I mentioned would get you the goals that you want while leaving hunter's alone. What's wrong with that?
 
ScoobyDoo said:
All of them. Until and If the gun community can prove it deserves them again. Which is not likely to happen. The gun owners I know are not responsible or worthy of the power they've been given.
Click to expand...

Good luck with a complete ban, the gun owners I know and plenty of them have your favorite "military style" weapons are completely responsible and have caused no issues.
 
RaceBoarder said:
Yep... Tons of mass shootings committed with hunting rifles.

So let's end a pastime of millions of Americans because some stupid/dumb stuff happened. Again, you lump everything as the same...

Capacity limits that I mentioned would get you the goals that you want while leaving hunter's alone. What's wrong with that?
Click to expand...

They banned lawn darts. How many people did those kill?

They changed completely the way over the counter medications were packaged. Because how many were killed, exactly?

So, tell me more about guns and how safe they are, and how responsible their owners are.

I never injured anyone with a lawn dart. Why can't I have them?
 
Last edited:
RaceBoarder said:
Yep... Tons of mass shootings committed with hunting rifles.

So let's end a pastime of millions of Americans because some stupid/dumb stuff happened. Again, you lump everything as the same...

Capacity limits that I mentioned would get you the goals that you want while leaving hunter's alone. What's wrong with that?
Click to expand...

I mean, we do things all the time because a handful of people die. We recall peanut butter nationwide because of a possibility of contamination. Guns shouldn't be treated less stringently than fucking peanut butter.
 
As a reasonable step, this country should re-institute the 1994 assault weapons ban that expired in 2004. Then, it should beef up the ATF to enforce said weapons ban. It's not gonna happen though.
 
As long as none of THEIR kids get shot up at school.

lol, only some people died so why change anything? Pathetic
 
LynahFan said:
1. Magazine capacity limits
2. Muzzle energy limits
3. Number of weapons owned limits

None of these limits interfere with hunting.

Pass them now.
Click to expand...

The facts are that responsible gun owners will not do what is necessary to pass laws like that, and we already know that irresponsible gun owners will not do it either. So, we're right back to putting Democrats in charge of everything while the country itself is a sea of Red that buys into everything the orange fuckwop says.

Ban them all. That's where anyone with a brain starts the negotiation at. When ban them all actually has some power than maybe, just maybe what you stated above is the compromise position.
 
RaceBoarder said:
Not from the sampling on this board. DGF, MichVandal, and others have basically said "No Exceptions, PERIOD!". A gun is a gun. Ban them all. Too bad, so sad on your "traditions". Use a bow.

I've been attacked on this multiple times. I also see this reaction outside the board as well.
Click to expand...

First of all: it took quite a few mass shootings to get to that point for them. (I have known DGF for 20 years so I know she wasn't always this militant about it)

Second: you understand that 5 posters on a random message board doesn't prove your point at all and actually proves mine right?

Third: Minnesota is a rock solid Blue State, one of the most reliable Dem states that exists that hasn't had a Red candidate win a statewide election since The Dubya administration. Hunting is a huuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuge deal here. Deer Opener is like a friggin holiday. (not as big as fishing opener but still) The amount of Democratic hunters in this state (not to mention the surrounding states) disproves your entire premise.

Now, do we think that regulations on the type of weapon available need to be upped hardcore...sure we do. If you need an assault weapon to kill a deer then you aren't hunting you are just sad.
 
As a responsible gun owner who has never and will never use my firearm (I own one and have never owned more than 2) in an illegal manner and am as safe and responsible as is possible, I'm still with Scooby on this one. And it goes to the lawn darts thing that Rufus posted too. We are not a responsible enough society to allow or tolerate private ownership of firearms. Period.

Of course I know that we will never ban firearms and/or confiscate anything deemed illegal. I also admit I am somewhat hypocritical about this because I have no intention of giving up my legal firearm as long as it is legal for me to possess it.

I frankly also don't think the most extreme views on gun bans that Scooby and others have actually matter in this debate. We don't fail to enact and enforce reasonable gun laws because a tiny handful of people would glady ban all firearms. We fail to enact reasonable gun laws because we are an irresponsible society of people who often vote like morons in a lot of places. If more people in Texas or Idaho or other states that prevent what the vast majority of people see as reasonable legislation on firearms voted intelligently, maybe we could do something about all the firearm violence and even fewer people would think an outright ban is warranted.
 
RaceBoarder said:
29% of gun owners own 5 or more firearms. So that 30% dictates everything?
Click to expand...

Is it your argument that almost a third of all gun owners is not a statistically significant factor? Lest we forget Trump almost won an election and his polling support wasn't all that much higher than that.

Let me ask you this...lets say 29% of people thought it was ok to just randomly kill people would you say that it wasn't something to worry about since they are a minority of the population?

To piggyback on unos point, when Tylenol had someone putting poison in their products they recalled all of the bottles and instituted higher safety standards on their own. Gun companies have done nothing of the kind...in fact they openly talk against it. (like Big Tobacco) We regulate the hell out of all sorts of things that can put people in danger but God forbid we even look sideways at regulating guns because...reasons? The only reason the "ban them all" crowd exists is because according to the NRA no regulation is allowed period. Well if the choice is between the Wild West and no guns at all I know where I would stand. I think we would all rather have a negotiated middle ground with sensible rules but that is only possible if both parties negotiate in good faith and you can pretend all you want but the people who argue on behalf of the gun owners have no interest in that.

A good friend of mine is a full on gun lover...has had them for years and would never give them up. He chooses to never join the NRA because they do more damage to gun ownership than whatever good they might do. The don't encourage good gun ownership, they dont preach responsibility, hell they dont even listen to their membership who want pretty much what most Dems want. As long as they are the voice of the pro-gun crowd there is no negotiable resolution to this.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top