Just a Comment

Status
Not open for further replies.

Old Crazy

Explorer
Oct 13, 2007
481
94
Stinking Creek, NJ
Here's my take. The country is awash in high-powered guns that goes way, way beyond home defense or hunting.

The gun Adam Lanza used was an AR-15 which is typically chambered for a .223 caliber that fires a 55 grain bullet. To put that in perspective, a 9mm handgun usually fires a 115 grain or a 124 grain bullet. People buy AR-15's because they are a low powered gun with light recoil, which makes them easier to handle and more accurate to shoot. Most people are not skilled enough to accurately hit their target with a high powered rifle or a high powered handgun.

The second amendment wasn't written to grant Americans the right to home defense or hunting. Using arms for self-defense and to hunt for food is an inalienable right that predates the constitution. The purpose of the Second Amendment is for citizens to be armed in the defense of the country and to act as a restraint against government tyranny. And it has worked brilliantly! The Communists, the Nazi's and Imperial Japan all concluded that they could never invade the United States mainland because as Tojo put it, "There would be a gun hiding behind every blade of grass." I can understand why politicians who want to "fundamentally transform" America are fearful of an armed citizenry and will exploit every tragedy to achieve their ends of a disarmed America.

It's a state of extreme paranoia...an insidious undercurrent of people who have dreams of fighting their own government over perceived transgressions.

You mean like these paranoids?

"What country can preserve its liberties if their rulers are not warned from time to time that their people preserve the spirit of resistance. Let them take arms."
Thomas Jefferson

"Firearms stand next in importance to the constitution itself. They are the American people's liberty teeth and keystone under independence … from the hour the Pilgrims landed to the present day, events, occurrences and tendencies prove that to ensure peace, security and happiness, the rifle and pistol are equally indispensable … the very atmosphere of firearms anywhere restrains evil interference — they deserve a place of honor with all that's good."
George Washington

"The great object is that every man be armed." and "Everyone who is able may have a gun."
Patrick Henry
"Those who hammer their guns into plowshares will plow for those who do not."
Thomas Jefferson
"The best we can help for concerning the people at large is that they be properly armed."
Alexander Hamilton

the more guns that are available, the more killing we'll have. Period.

Just the opposite is true. The areas of the country that have the strictest gun control have the highest murder rates. "More Guns, Less Crime" by John Lott is a scholarly examination that exhaustively refutes the assertion that the crime rate is directly commensurate with the availability and access to guns.
If you really think that everyone could be responsible and keep things locked up tight and out of the hands of mentally ill people, then you are living in a dream world.

I don't think everyone who owns a gun will be responsible, just like I don't think everyone who drinks alcohol will be responsible, or rides a bicycle will be responsible. What I don't want to do is diminish the liberties of 300 million people to try and stop a few irresponsible people with a so-called assault weapons ban that will in no way address the problem of mass shootings and serve no other purpose than to allow politicians to puff out their chests and say they did something about it.

Also, just because you can cite an instance where the ban did not stop somebody, you have know way of knowing how many similar instances were stopped because of the ban.

What I do know is that the assault weapons ban in place in the state of Connecticut did not stop Adam Lanza. I also know that legally owned firearms are used 2.5 million times a year to stop a crime.
 

ecampbell

Piney
Jan 2, 2003
2,848
972
The AR 15 is nothing but a hopped up 22 caliber varmit gun. It is not suitable for hunting large game. States have hunting laws which state the minimum size round for the game being hunted. They do not want wounded animals running around, you shoot it, it goes down.

The irony of all this is now there will be even more guns and ammo, not because citizens fear the tard with an AR 15, but because they fear their own government.
Also alot more carry permits.
 

ecampbell

Piney
Jan 2, 2003
2,848
972
Yep, a hopped up 22.
Read one of the comments in your link:
Comment
.22 can sometimes be worse as once it enters the body it tends to bounce around in there and go all over the place, where as a .223 tends to go straight through…so if vital organs are missed, you can still survive.
It's still a varmit round, no stopping power.
BTW I shoot 223 and wouldn't use it on a deer. Unless it hit bone it would pass right through and keep going..

Remember the statement that started this:

"Here's my take. The country is awash in high-powered guns that goes way, way beyond home defense or hunting."

This statement is just plain wrong. There are higher powered guns than the AR 15 that are required for proper hunting of large game.
 

bobpbx

Piney
Staff member
Oct 25, 2002
14,337
4,467
Pines; Bamber area
You mean like these paranoids?

You conveniently leave out the advance of technology, and those good gentlemen were unable to forecast the type of future weapons that would be available and in the hands of people who not only might want to control the government (against the wishes of the majority)--they might even want to control you.
 

ecampbell

Piney
Jan 2, 2003
2,848
972
You mixed apples and oranges when you brought hunting into it.

"The country is awash in high-powered guns that goes way, way beyond home defense or hunting. "
 

manumuskin

Piney
Jul 20, 2003
8,588
2,506
60
millville nj
www.youtube.com
That thing is kicking him like a shotgun.What size shell does that thing shoot?I could stick the butt end of a 16 on my nose and pull the trigger and it wouldn't knock my glasses off.
If the govmint could reduce us all to guns like that where you have to reload after every shot then they wouldn't have to fear us as they obviously do.
 

46er

Piney
Mar 24, 2004
8,837
2,143
Coastal NJ
That thing is kicking him like a shotgun.What size shell does that thing shoot?I could stick the butt end of a 16 on my nose and pull the trigger and it wouldn't knock my glasses off.
If the govmint could reduce us all to guns like that where you have to reload after every shot then they wouldn't have to fear us as they obviously do.

That is a cartridge developed by the A-Square company for use by professional hunting guides as backup for their clients. It is .577 caliber. The companies web site with ballistic tests;

http://a-squareco.com/

And contrary to a previous post, no special permits are required for purchase. A very strong shoulder might be :D
 

bobpbx

Piney
Staff member
Oct 25, 2002
14,337
4,467
Pines; Bamber area
Let me get this straight, you seem to think that if we remove all of the " assault weapons " we will create a more responsible society. How is that going to work ?

Awww, shucks. I'm sure I could be like Old Crazy and scour the internet for comments and cobble them into something coherent on the subject. But I'm going to now let this subject lie fallow. You, Ed, Al, 46'r, Dogg, and Gibby think different from me. We'll never agree on this subject.
 

dragoncjo

Piney
Aug 12, 2005
1,537
245
42
camden county
I like the NRAs idea of putting police, at least one, in schools. We have security in all sorts of places that doesn't really need it. However our schools which carry an entire generation of kids have no protection other then the teachers in the classroom. I think having a policemen on rotation in all schools would be a great asset. I know in my town we have about 20 policemen, most of which drive around in circles and lift weights at the gym. I'm sure it wouldn't hurt their lifting regimen to spend some times in the local high schools and elementary schools.
 

46er

Piney
Mar 24, 2004
8,837
2,143
Coastal NJ
I like the NRAs idea of putting police, at least one, in schools. We have security in all sorts of places that doesn't really need it. However our schools which carry an entire generation of kids have no protection other then the teachers in the classroom. I think having a policemen on rotation in all schools would be a great asset. I know in my town we have about 20 policemen, most of which drive around in circles and lift weights at the gym. I'm sure it wouldn't hurt their lifting regimen to spend some times in the local high schools and elementary schools.

An ex-prez once felt the same way.

http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Journalism/2012/12/21/Flashback-Clinton-Cops-in-Schools
 

manumuskin

Piney
Jul 20, 2003
8,588
2,506
60
millville nj
www.youtube.com
Awww, shucks. I'm sure I could be like Old Crazy and scour the internet for comments and cobble them into something coherent on the subject. But I'm going to now let this subject lie fallow. You, Ed, Al, 46'r, Dogg, and Gibby think different from me. We'll never agree on this subject.
Ditto! Different worldviews going on here. We see the world through different colored glasses and our drummers play different tunes,I will never like Chicago:)
 

dogg57

Piney
Jan 22, 2007
2,912
375
Southern NJ
southjerseyphotos.com
69.jpg
 
  • Like
Reactions: Old Crazy

GermanG

Piney
Apr 2, 2005
1,126
451
Little Egg Harbor
My knee-jerk reaction is to join the crowd claiming that the average citizen does not need the type of rifle such as the one used in the recent shooting. But I have two problems with that viewpoint. One is that there are countless individuals who feel the same way about the guns that I do use for hunting and home defense, which are all fairly traditional weapons, many even loading from the front. In these days of vastly-stocked supermarkets and even mail-order food, nobody “needs” to hunt, fish or even pick blueberries in the woods. The “need” argument can lead down a slippery slope and too many people use the “nobody needs” argument in place of “I don’t need or want”.

The other point is regarding the Second Amendment. As frightening a concept as it is to many people, there can be no other educated interpretation of the amendment than it guaranteeing our ability to defend ourselves from a potentially tyrannical central government. There can be no other explanation for placing that amendment in the Bill of Rights, before the Constitution had even been ratified and the black powder smoke had barely cleared from an armed rebellion against our own government. The Founding Fathers who feared a new federal government insisted on this and the other guarantees in the Bill of Rights as a condition of ratification. If this interpretation is indeed correct, weapons such as the so-called assault rifles would the ones most protected. We are a long way from that time and have never had a majority of our population feel the need to overthrow our government. One can debate whether the Second Amendment has outlived its usefulness if they like but there can be no question of its intent. Our Constitution has the ability to evolve built into it, but it should be amended carefully and hesitatingly. It was amazingly well thought out and is what separates us from most other nations and has served us well since its inception.
 

Gibby

Piney
Apr 4, 2011
1,640
442
Trenton
We'll never agree on this subject.

Bobpbx, please don't think any less of me because I don't agree with all that you have to say. After all what do I know? I joined this forum because we all share an enthusiasm and love for the Pine Barrens. I have learned much along the way and hopefully others were able to learn or discover something from the minute pieces I have offered. I don't want my political view on one subject to polarize anyone on this board and to have them upset, that isn't why I joined.:)
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top