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.

Days Since Last Shooting II

Status
Not open for further replies.
Re: Days Since Last Shooting II

Put another way, if guns and gun users were as regulated as cars and drivers of cars, that'd make for a great start.
 
Re: Days Since Last Shooting II

Ouch.

<img src="https://i.pinimg.com/736x/08/0f/d5/080fd55da3538fbf8b11849fb340819a--concealed-handgun-hand-guns.jpg" height="300"></img>
 
Re: Days Since Last Shooting II

alfablue said:
The problem of that idea is that if we go by what gun lemmings like you suggest- there should not be ANY safety items in cars. None at all.

Seat belts, crush zones, and air bags save a lot of lives compared to had they not been there.

Why can't we do the same for guns?

YOUR side is that we should do NOTHING. When reduction in harm is so easy. Not elimination, for sure. But the potential harm can be reduced.
Click to expand...

There's a difference in your analogy in that these things to make us safer in cars are all protective equipment for once we're struck by another vehicle or something abnormal causes a single-vehicle accident. Unless we retroactively equip all vehicles with those automated stopping features - crash avoidance, there are no real proactive solutions. Crash avoidance features are the only way to stop someone from inflicting mass damage to a crowd of pedestrians.

The firearm issue's equivalence to everything you've suggested would be to outfit everyone in Kevlar.
 
Re: Days Since Last Shooting II

St. Clown said:
Crash avoidance features are the only way to stop someone from inflicting mass damage to a crowd of pedestrians.
Click to expand...
In front of certain buildings like Fox News HQ they have huge pots with shrubs in them on the sidewalk so that such a collision with the building is avoided.
 
Re: Days Since Last Shooting II

trixR4kids said:
In front of certain buildings like Fox News HQ they have huge pots with shrubs in them on the sidewalk so that such a collision with the building is avoided.
Click to expand...

How does something like that translate to preventing gun deaths? Are we going to encompass all outdoor events in veils of Kevlar?
 
Re: Days Since Last Shooting II

St. Clown said:
How does something like that translate to preventing gun deaths? Are we going to encompass all outdoor events in veils of Kevlar?
Click to expand...
It doesn't, I wasn't really trying to argue against that point or anything obviously. The car comparison that gun nuts like to make is stupid for a number of reasons obviously.
 
Re: Days Since Last Shooting II

trixR4kids said:
It doesn't, I wasn't really trying to argue against that point or anything obviously. The car comparison that gun nuts like to make is stupid for a number of reasons obviously.
Click to expand...

I was using someone else's comparison. Who started it? It felt contrived at best, and far too many issues to ever be considered analogous.
 
Re: Days Since Last Shooting II

St. Clown said:
How does something like that translate to preventing gun deaths? Are we going to encompass all outdoor events in veils of Kevlar?
Click to expand...

we can add bollards between the sidewalk and road when possible to stop cars from driving off the road. Same with outdoor events -- cement barriers and steel bollards can reduce the risk of automobile / crowd interaction

unfortunately we can't do the same for guns at this point. we can't secure an outdoor venue with nearby tall buildings. not possible.

it's going to be a long process. First, we can make it harder to get these kinds of weapons. Ban the sale of all assault rifles. eventually we need to reduce the number in circulation by making it a felony to posses them and offer amnesty for people turning them in

things like the DC sniper will always be possible as long as hunting is legal/allowed and people posses hunting rifles.
 
Last edited:
unofan said:
Put another way, if guns and gun users were as regulated as cars and drivers of cars, that'd make for a great start.
Click to expand...

I joked about this a few days back. Glad to see it's swinging around again.

While I'd be for it, I'm not sure what good a state level FOID card would do in a situation like Las Vegas (or Sandy Hook, or wherever). If all these items were purchased on the up-and-up, and personally modified after the fact, that's something a yearly or every-four-year renewal isn't going to catch.

I too can legally rent a box truck and pick up gardening supplies and gasoline on the way home with it.
 
Re: Days Since Last Shooting II

alfablue said:
No, we can't stop people from killing other people.

But why is it so bad to put in efforts to reduce the amount of harm these people can do? Smaller magazines would have shortened the time each gun could be used. Taking out the mechanism that allowed the guns to fire automatically would have also reduced the number of shots fire. Both would have reduced the number of dead an injured.

Why should we accept HUGE mass murders when they can be reduced by some very simple means?

The goal can never be 0 mass murders, as that is impossible- I agree. And that "goal" should also not be the reason we do nothing.

I'm tired of the "evil is evil" excuse against efforts to reduce how evil someone can be.
Click to expand...

And that is pretty much exactly what I said.
 
Re: Days Since Last Shooting II

geezer said:
There's truth to the idea that evil will find a way to do its work, but that's not the same as accepting or encouraging it. But you reminded me of how someone on here attested to a constant hail of bullets over I-394 that they had to drive through every day. I wonder if that terrorist group was ever shut down? Is it still a war zone down there?
Click to expand...

That was 5mn_Major :rolleyes: :D
 
Re: Days Since Last Shooting II

alfablue said:
YOUR side is that we should do NOTHING. When reduction in harm is so easy. Not elimination, for sure. But the potential harm can be reduced.
Click to expand...

I think you're misrepresenting what several of the people that you perceive to be against you are saying. I think there have been several of us, that post here, and are gun owners, that have already posted that we are in favor of taking some actions to reduce the harm. Several pages ago I listed several things I'd be in favor of, in terms of gun control, that in my opinion would make a positive impact, and they were pretty well received, I thought.
 
Re: Days Since Last Shooting II

Handyman said:
joe probably approves of this theory...
Click to expand...

I hear we don't have any basis for morality because we're not terrified of being tortured for all eternity.

Because that's "character," dontchaknow?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top