Bump stocks for guns

main-qimg-5acde324bed58ada7d3d3e819f358d2b-c
Dangerous? It has a brain, so yes.

171219-megan-hill-ar-1750_0ac98e71eca3fcb50f13387f679185c6.nbcnews-ux-2880-1000.jpg


Dangerous?
 
Last edited:
Eventhorizon said:
Ok. Did you have a question or did you simply want to make this statement?

If you dont mind let me ask you a question. Lets say that one day you are unlucky enough to have your life threatened by a stranger or strangers. Your not in a position to get away from them and theres no one around who you can be sure of getting a call of help to before they potentially end your life. What do you consider your options to be?
Next, the same situation except you have a loved one with you.
In either situation calling for help is either impossible or highly unlikely to do anything other than get you killed. Can you go over your thoughts on these scenrios?
Click to expand...
I responded to your post with my thoughts, like in a discussion.

I’d think I’d better fight them.
 
Sloe Djinn said:
I responded to your post with my thoughts, like in a discussion.

I’d think I’d better fight them.
Click to expand...
Well, someone who is threatening your life or multipule people who are will likely kill you. End of story. Now imagine a significant other, family member who is female. Lets drop all the PC crap for a second and recognize that most women confronted by an average man will not be able to fight back in a way that leave them even close to uninjured. Weapons involved or not. Or...give her a knife. Maybe she can scare the attacker? Maybe scream really loud? Or maybe she pulls out a gun that shes trained with and drops the pieces of shit? Theres no garuntee she will but she has a much better chance of this than if she only has a knife. Or maybe its only her right to be a victim? Maybe thats all anyones right is.
 
Last edited:
The fact that this is even a political issue, the president wants to arm teachers, and politicians are owned by the NRA....I give up.

One thing though: Will the government offer financial assistance to poor people who can't afford a gun? If only financially stable people can protect themselves in Grand Theft Auto: Old White Man edition, isn't that a problem? If Trump wants to play G.I. Joe or Cops and Robbers, he needs to waste more of our country's money. Every citizen will have a weapon at his or her disposal! Beautiful.

Screw medical insurance. Get shot, bleed out.
 
I feel so old. American culture today:

1. The president cannot spell middle school vocab words. I mean, think about that.
2. He is basically a Bubba born into money. And I mean the Bubba stereotype. A crass, immoral, sleazy con artist.
3. He was elected. He is enabled. Basically, no one refused a dangerous, corrupt, unstable man the highest political office here.

I'm still shocked.
 
Eventhorizon said:
Well, someone who is threatening your life or multipule people who are will likely kill you. End of story. Now imagine a significant other, family member who is female. Lets drop all the PC crap for a second and recognize that most women confronted by an average man will not be able to fight back in a way that leave them even close to uninjured. Weapons involved or not. Or...give her a knife. Maybe she can scare the attacker? Maybe scream really loud? Or maybe she pulls out a gun that shes trained with and drops the pieces of shit? Theres no garuntee she will but she has a much better chance of this than if she only has a knife. Or maybe its only her right to be a victim? Maybe thats all anyones right is.
Click to expand...

I think this poor woman needs to move, asap.

 
just me said:
An M-16 is a full auto Class III weapon and is highly regulated IN THE LAWS YOU WILL NOT READ.
Click to expand...

I was referring to the AR-15, you know, the weapon that was used in the Parkland shooting...and yes, it should be banned from civilian use, like the M-16. Maybe you should read these posts more carefully.
 
Eventhorizon said:
Well, someone who is threatening your life or multipule people who are will likely kill you. End of story. Now imagine a significant other, family member who is female. Lets drop all the PC crap for a second and recognize that most women confronted by an average man will not be able to fight back in a way that leave them even close to uninjured. Weapons involved or not. Or...give her a knife. Maybe she can scare the attacker? Maybe scream really loud? Or maybe she pulls out a gun that shes trained with and drops the pieces of shit? Theres no garuntee she will but she has a much better chance of this than if she only has a knife. Or maybe its only her right to be a victim? Maybe thats all anyones right is.
Click to expand...

Sure, a gun would likely be the most effective deterrent currently available though it wouldn't ensure survival. To put an extra twist to it so long as we're dealing in hypotheticals, what would you say if that same lady went on to snap and shoot up a school? Who's lives were more valuable then? As a side note, her attackers should probably also get guns to ensure their safety.

I believe in responsible gun ownership in general, though I'm not convinced that anyone needs stuff like anti-materiel rifles or SAWs. It's not a bad thing to discuss all options, and I think that prohibiting or avoiding certain ones is flat out irresponsible (and only serves to be divisive) no matter how much you (or I) may disagree with it. You just provided a decent example of where a gun could be beneficial. Was that so hard?
 
Wyote said:
This whole thread
Click to expand...

I miss the good old days when death metal was cause for hand wringing. I think one kid commited suicide.

Well...hell! Now school shootings are commonplace. If teachers carry guns and a kid is unloading his massive magazine, is the teacher supposed to shoot the student? Dunno why, but that doesn't sit well with me.

And I'm just supposed to trust a teacher's judgment?

Guns and pitbulls aren't the problem. It's our culture. I don'y think this stuff would be an issue if we valued pro-social behavior in the U.S. We do not. If we feel no moral obligation toward other citizens, we objectify them at best, or treat them as subhuman vermin at worst.
 
Eventhorizon said:
Emotional? Not at all.
By threatening to take away someone's ability to defend themselves you are threatening their life...
Click to expand...
I'm completely at a loss as to how you can deny that emotion is at play here.

Apart from that though I want to say thank you because I do believe that you really want me to be able to protect myself. The problem is that you're trying to limit the ways in which I can actually do that, and I don't think you get that.
 
Wildfire said:
I am really confused by this too and it's something I want to understand.
Click to expand...

I think a lot of times it's people that have confidence in the current government but fear the unforeseeable future which is potentially a threat to their personal safety. It's a logical concern and historically speaking, statistically likely.

To me personally though, I find it hilarious that you as an individual think you stand any sort of chance against a government that turns against you. It will annihilate you if it wants to, no matter how much prepping you do.

If shit goes down, you're going down too unless you've got resources and connections. Guns are irrelevant in that scenario unless you are fighting off other panicked citizens, which in that case guns could be helpful. The idea that citizens owning guns somehow puts fear into the government and today's military is adorable. And totally incorrect.
 
Wyote said:
I think a lot of times it's people that have confidence in the current government but fear the unforeseeable future which is potentially a threat to their personal safety. It's a logical concern and historically speaking, statistically likely.

To me personally though, I find it hilarious that you as an individual think you stand any sort of chance against a government that turns against you. It will annihilate you if it wants to, no matter how much prepping you do.

If shit goes down, you're going down too unless you've got resources and connections. Guns are irrelevant in that scenario unless you are fighting off other panicked citizens, which in that case guns could be helpful. The idea that citizens owning guns somehow puts fear into the government and today's military is adorable. And totally incorrect.
Click to expand...
I see it much the same way. Our armed forces would have to choose us over our government.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top