Not specifically but since I'm skeptical of the Gooberment to much of anything well, you hardly need to convince me that more gun laws or laws of any kind won't do the trick.Quote:
Originally Posted by bae
Printable View
Not specifically but since I'm skeptical of the Gooberment to much of anything well, you hardly need to convince me that more gun laws or laws of any kind won't do the trick.Quote:
Originally Posted by bae
Oh it's perfectly understandable why any 22 year old is depressed. If they didn't get a college education then the job prospects are bleak, they may just end up working service for life. Or if they did get a college education, they might still be in school because good luck getting classes at state schools, or they went into crazy debt for private schools. All for jobs that aren't there when they graduate and were never all that great to begin with (but at used they used to kind of provide a middle class living). Oh and by the way we've trashed the planet, and there is a very good chance the human race has already signed on to it's early extinction, maybe you'll be lucky enough to witness it, plan on ever worsening conditions, droughts, etc, don't even think about bringing kids into this nightmare ... But still very few become crazy psycho killer.
I use the word clip because that is what we used to call them in the old days and have not changed my terminology. I served in the army from 1965 to 1968. The army was just changing from the M14 to the M16. I qualified with both. I only qualified as a sharp shooter. Later when I was assigned to 24th infantry division I was assigned to a machine gun crew and qualified with an M60 machine gun. My MOS was aircraft electrician but when you are assigned to an infantry division you are an infantry men first and a aircraft electrician second.Quote:
Originally Posted by bae
At that time no body took the time to call a clip a magazine. It took too long to say if you needed one in a hurry. But that was real life in the army at that time. My brother was in the army at the same time in Vietnam and I was in Germany. In Vietnam they sure did't take the time to call a clip a magazine in the heat of a fire fight but that is real life in war.
He was a door gunner on a Huey.
So you are 50 years out of date on tactics, technology, and terminology. Got it. Your "you only need 10 rounds" bit tells us that too.
Q: why do police officers no longer generally carry revolvers, but rather modern semi-automatic pistols with standard-size magazines in the 15-20 round range?
Q: what is the standard training protocol taught in today's firearms academies for using that number of rounds effectively?
I maintain you are trotting out the "I was in the Army, so I'm a firearms expert", when in fact, your facts are...few on the ground.
BAE I am out of hear. Please carry on with playing with your gun, if you know what I mean.
Lovely how you find it necessary to attack the sexuality of someone you disagree with. Telling though.Quote:
Originally Posted by freein05
Bae,
For me personally, the most frustrating thing to come out of this is how so few people actually know anything about what gun laws are in place, how they work and whether and how they are enforced, as well as what guns are categorized as what and how the standards are different based on the gun in question AND the state itself (and sometimes county).
Everyone acts like it's all one standard thing across the board. And, as if there are no controls, or as if the controls that they say they want don't already exist.
And then, when you point out what those laws are, or the other complexities of the law (5th amendment, 14th amendment), you get attacked as if you don't know anything, don't care about the issue, or are somehow "part of the problem."
Part of hte problem is just bare ignorance. (And I'm not talking about anyone on here specifically, mostly people on FB both national and internationals with whom I speak). So many statements are literally just knee-jerk emotional responses, and if you just bring up a counter statement, it's like you are evil and get attacked. It's so annoying!
Today, it happened three times:
1. I'm so glad I live in a country with gun control, unlike the US! Perhaps they'll now come into the modern era. -- "The US has a myriad of gun control laws, which fall in alignment -- right down the middle -- with european gun laws. In fact, many of the laws in NZ are the same in California, and probably several other states (links!).
2. "Every time this happens, the US reacts exactly the same -- plenty of talk about gun control, but no action, no changes in the laws." I pointed out changes in the laws since columbine, which is the first that I can remember, and the wikipedia page actually had several others listed, so I linked that as well.
I obviously need to "go and polish my gun collection." Forget the fact that I don't own any guns and never have, and have only had the most miniscule opportunity to hold, let alone shoot, one.
3. One person asserted that he's frustrated that whenever he talks about these things from different angles (ie, that he believes in basically looking at the laws we have and see which ones are working and whihc ones aren't and why, and then adapt based on our current knowledge rather than emotions) that he gets accused of not advocating for "gun control!" and wanting 'all guns to be accessible" -- which is clearly not true.
I pointed out frustrated agreement, which lead to being considered some sort of "right wing nut job with no clear agenda other than to kill children."
Yes, that's exactly what I am. You are so right.
No, the reality is that I am a liberal, but I want to take a balanced approach to these things that takes into consideration not only fact-based research (as I posted early on), but also our own political and cultural history around guns and gun ownership, as well as an understanding of the technologies themselves (about which I know very little, btw). And from there, come up with laws that balance all of this information into functional, easy-to-enforce policy for the welfare of our society.
Duh.
Making the rounds on FB. Rather intense, it's an instructional vid about how to respond to an active shooter situation. Made by the city of Houston.
http://m.youtube.com/#/watch?v=5VcSw...%3D5VcSwejU2D0
Hey folks,
it's unnecessary to play dirty here, whether it be bae's comments about to free about being out of date, with the implication that s/he has an invalid stance, or free's comments back. Please, if disrespect is entering the fray, it's time for a breather, IMHO.
thanks.
Sorry Red, that won't fly. It is not "playing dirty" to point out that his facts simply aren't, and that at best he is out of date, and really, his conclusions about those specific points *are* invalid, as evidenced by the curriculum at almost every modern-day training facility in this country.
If facts are "disrespectful", well...
There is simply no equivalence to me pointing out factual problems relatively gently, and him attacking my sexuality.