Gun control: more divisive than reason

Post Reply New Topic

It hasn't happened, despite frequent 'warnings' that it is imminent. Hence "proposed"... I think we both agreed that manufacturers are the ones to benefit the most from that hysteria.



I don't really like that term as I find it to be misapplied and slippery in general ("Assault weapons")



I didn't think you tough gun lovers were so sentimental I'm not sure what the ideal solution to that is but there is no reason your family shouldn't be able to keep that weapon, its clearly an heirloom



Obviously it isn't information of the same calibre as a national registry but nonetheless I find it hilarious on some level. What I think is great about their database is the NRA's stance on collecting information on gun owners. According to the NRA, that is like two steps away from FEMA concentration camps, so collecting data on gun owners that sympathize with them seems counter-intuitive to their messages on registries given how easily that information could be taken by the government.

I'm starting to like this guy

Then a rifle is better.


Even if one is driving for no particular destination, he is doing so for some purpose (say entertainment). Simply carrying a gun is not using a gun, having a car parked in the garage is not using the car. That is what the article tries to confuse.

Yeah, but the people who actually believe that scenario are the same people who believe in FEMA camps.


Totally agreed, but I don't really have a better term for guns that lawmakers think look scary - which is the only accurate definition I can come up with for what lawmakers call "assault weapons". Rather than say all that, I choose to use their words in quotes so it's plain to see that I'm mocking their stupidity.



I don't know anyone who has a gun collection of any kind that doesn't have some type of heirloom gun. Even apart from that example, I have a revolver that my step-father gave to me as a birthday present that is literally the only thing that I own that I actually consider irreplaceable.



At a high level it seems hypocritical, but if you know how marketing lists are created, you'd understand that the data the NRA collects for marketing purposes is almost useless in determining who is a gun owner. To illustrate the point, lets look at some of the probable sources for the list:

- NRA members. Well, duh. People who are (or were) members of the NRA may or may not own guns, but they certainly have an interest in guns. The thing to remember here though is that people have volunteered their information to the NRA. If someone tells the NRA that they are a gun owner, and is then upset that the NRA knows that they are a gun owner - then that person needs a lobotomy, followed by a castration for the betterment of mankind.

- People who have attended an NRA event, or been to an NRA-partnered shooting range. You can't really infer gun ownership from whether or not someone has been to an NRA event, or even if they've been to a shooting range (I've taken plenty of non-gun-owner friends to shooting ranges before).

- Subscribers to Guns & Ammo, Concealed Carry Magazine, etc. I think it's fair to say they have an interest in guns.

- Military veterans' lists. Well, you can be sure that they've at least been around guns - but still not a good indication of gun ownership.

- Registered Republican Males ages 16 through 30 in states that don't have strong gun control. Absolutely no indication whatsoever that they have any interest in guns - but they fit the target demographics of the NRA's primary pool of first time members, so they're worth sending some brochures to.

Even though we have a pretty well targeted list for marketing purposes - it's still incredibly noisy for purposes of actually identifying gun owners.

True, but I didn't want to confuse the issue further by getting into sheet metal fabrication, I mentioned CNC because 3D printing had come up, and small CNC tools are the best comparison to make to that technology. I'm really surprised when I hear so many people freaking out about 3D printing when we've had CNC for years, and it can work in any material that can be cut; the only barrier up to now has been the price point.

Sheet metal is even easier, I think it was Larry Corriea that used to work in the NFA firearms field and described in detail the time he and a few business associates rented some time with an extrusion press (like what they use to make gutters) and turned out several thousand magazines over the course of a weekend. Then of course there's the ever popular AK build party...

Rifles aren't always allowed for hunting.



Yeah. Have fun with that circular logic. Explosives and guns are fundamentally two different things, just the same as rifles and knives are two different things. If you feel like debating the issue, go start an "explosives control" thread and I'm sure the interested parties would love to weigh in.



So you don't want gun control because they're dangerous, but because people use them to kill other people. Am I understanding you correctly?



I assure you the article was certainly not talking about people hit by cars that were parked in garages. Nor was it talking about people not shot by people carrying, but not using, guns. So, once again, I have no effing idea what you're talking about. You might as well be writing Chinese.

FYI and all, the government does come and take your firearms and whatever they deem as illegal.

The only reason that it's only "proposed" is that the people backing these things can't get the votes, as you'd plainly see in the link I gave you. Dianne Feinstein (former concealed carrier, present hypocrite) openly said ”If I could have gotten 51 votes in the Senate of the United States for an outright ban, picking up every one of them – ‘Mr. and Mrs. America, turn ‘em all in!’ – I would have done it. I could not do that.”. Barrack Obama supported state legislation to ban the manufacture, sale and possession of handguns while a state senator, called DC and Chicago's handgun bans "model legislation" for the rest of the country, and has recently pointed to England and Australia as examples of where we should be going. Shall I go on?



SJC addressed the NRA's marketing database, but riddle me this: What have government firearms registries historically been used for? Hint: It doesn't involve solving crime.



You're a mind reader now? Also, I'm a firm believer in backing up accusations with evidence, so please post an example of me claiming that someone who does know what they're talking about doesn't, simply because they disagree with me, or retract your statement. I happen to hold an esoteric credential in a highly misunderstood subject, it's not arrogant to insist that people understand what they're talking about if they wish to be taken seriously, maybe you feel otherwise.



Try to write more clearly. Also, kindly refrain from speaking about my internal thought process and assigning opinions to we which I don't hold.

Yeah - this is starting to get ridiculous. I have no interest in participating in a cat fight.

He's also a Muslim socialist from Kenya, too. Don't worry though, nobody is going to come and take your toys. In fact, Australia should look to America for what to do about guns, because no other country has it as well figured out



Obviously its the first step towards getting you all in concentration camps because your love of freedom is such a threat to the Illuminati



You never say things directly, you choose to make passive aggressive swipes at people rather than have to answer for your comments. It doesn't take psychic abilities to pick up on. This is twice in as many days you've engaged in this exact behaviour towards me.



Which credential is that? Aren't you a delivery driver?



You're joking, right? I never once said anything about politicians. You said that. You. I very, very clearly stated manufacturers. There was nothing ambiguous about it. Follow your own advice as you wrote in the quote below, please



Be less predictable and stop hiding behind indirect insults

This thread will be locked if the snide insults and personal attacks don't stop immediately.

Good argument, very convincing.



Another winner from the Vig man! Are you sure you're not a professional at this?



Oh? You mean that time I mentioned your name the same sentence as trolling, after you posted about how annoying you think gun people are in a thread I had originated? That was silly of me, I should have just linked some of your posts and skipped the insinuations, you make a much better case for yourself than I do.

I also don't see any examples of me calling someone ignorant because they're disagreeing with me rather than because they're ignorant; when can I expect that?



So you remember that I used to be a delivery driver, which I haven't been in a while so haven't mentioned in years, and yet you somehow "forgot" that I have an AS degree in gunsmithing from one of only two schools that offer it in the US, which I mention often. That's quite a tricky memory you go there, you ought to have that checked out.



This was your original statement:


I asked you if you were implying that the leading proponents of gun control were really just trying to manipulate the market, which is hardly an unfair question given the statement.

As to "hiding behind indirect insults", would you rather I just call you an idiot and a moron, like you regularly do to people you argue with?

Wish granted.