(02-02-2014 03:28 PM)UofMemphis Wrote:  

(02-02-2014 03:22 PM)smn1256 Wrote:  

(02-02-2014 03:10 PM)UofMemphis Wrote:  

(02-02-2014 03:08 PM)smn1256 Wrote:  

(02-02-2014 03:04 PM)UofMemphis Wrote:  So let's legalize all drugs...since making something illegal clearly doesn't work.

Sure. I'll take my kid into a field and teach him how to shoot targets.

You can take your kid into a field and teach him how to shoot heroin.

Do we have a deal?

So your for the full legalization of drugs? Just want to get that on record.

No, I'm not for the full legalization of drugs. How many crimes were committed in the name of drug addiction as opposed to gun addiction?

More people died from drug overdoses than gun shots, either intentional, accidental, or suicide. In 2010 62% of all gun deaths were suicides. In 2010 there were more than 38,000 overdose deaths with most of them being accidental.

http://smartgunlaws.org/gun-deaths-and-i...tatistics/
/

And there were 31,672 deaths from firearm injuries in 2010...are you saying ones "better" than the other.

No, neither one is good, but they are the numbers. The suicide by gun skews the numbers because that was the chosen method by someone intent on doing it, without a gun they would have done something different. The accidental overdose rate should alarm you because some people just wanted to get high or feel good and died - the need to take drugs killed them. Can't put a trigger lock on a heroin needle.

31672 v 38000 doesn't seem too different to me...oh, my gun has no trigger lock.

(02-02-2014 03:39 PM)UofMemphis Wrote:  31672 v 38000 doesn't seem too different to me...oh, my gun has no trigger lock.

Take away the suicides and the gun deaths drop to a little over 12k. Not good, but still better than 38,000 overdose deaths.

I'm just saying I'm no enemy of guns...I simply think everyone who buys a gun should pass a universal background check...and assault style weapons should be police/military only...folks are welcome to disagree...but I think a lot of people have that same opinion.

Doesn't make it right or wrong...it's just an opinion.

(02-02-2014 03:48 PM)UofMemphis Wrote:  I'm just saying I'm no enemy of guns...I simply think everyone who buys a gun should pass a universal background check...and assault style weapons should be police/military only...folks are welcome to disagree...but I think a lot of people have that same opinion.

Doesn't make it right or wrong...it's just an opinion.

OK, that's cool. But some people like to buy high end/high performance stuff just so they can look at it. Jay Leno has tons of expensive cars that make no sense to most of us, but he has them. Since some of those cars were made before many safety laws were enacted they can be pretty deadly in a crash. Should they be banned?

Also, why do police departments need assault rifles and not the people they're supposedly protecting? If an assault rifle is needed in stopping a threat I'd much rather have it handy than wait until the police show up and decide one is needed. There's nothing different between a cop and myself when it comes to a common sense approach to firearms and self defense.

(02-02-2014 02:46 PM)Kronke Wrote:  You have no issue with the M-14, while it fires the same caliber and has the same rate of fire as your so-called "assault weapons", and now have expanded your argument to the legality of a piece of plastic and a spring.

Boy, oh boy.

If there is no difference between the two weapons, then what is all the complaining about?

(02-02-2014 03:37 PM)smn1256 Wrote:  

(02-02-2014 03:28 PM)UofMemphis Wrote:  

(02-02-2014 03:22 PM)smn1256 Wrote:  

(02-02-2014 03:10 PM)UofMemphis Wrote:  

(02-02-2014 03:08 PM)smn1256 Wrote:  Sure. I'll take my kid into a field and teach him how to shoot targets.

You can take your kid into a field and teach him how to shoot heroin.

Do we have a deal?

So your for the full legalization of drugs? Just want to get that on record.

No, I'm not for the full legalization of drugs. How many crimes were committed in the name of drug addiction as opposed to gun addiction?

More people died from drug overdoses than gun shots, either intentional, accidental, or suicide. In 2010 62% of all gun deaths were suicides. In 2010 there were more than 38,000 overdose deaths with most of them being accidental.

http://smartgunlaws.org/gun-deaths-and-i...tatistics/
/

And there were 31,672 deaths from firearm injuries in 2010...are you saying ones "better" than the other.

No, neither one is good, but they are the numbers. The suicide by gun skews the numbers because that was the chosen method by someone intent on doing it, without a gun they would have done something different. The accidental overdose rate should alarm you because some people just wanted to get high or feel good and died - the need to take drugs killed them. Can't put a trigger lock on a heroin needle.

Your suicide caveat doesn't hold much water. While guns have little affect on the number of attempts, they have a very, very significant affect on the lethality of the attempt. So the actual number of suicide deaths due to firearms (the number we should care about) is much higher than other methods because someone using a firearm is far more likely to actually die.

I wish people would stop approaching gun control as an all or nothing issue. It seems as though most reasonable people should be able to agree that gun laws which help keep guns out of the hands of criminals, mentally unstable people, and kids are good. The left also need to accept that the goal should be to keep guns out of the hands of criminals, mentally unstable people, and kids.

(02-02-2014 04:01 PM)UM2001GRAD Wrote:  Your suicide caveat doesn't hold much water. While guns have little affect on the number of attempts, they have a very, very significant affect on the lethality of the attempt. So the actual number of suicide deaths due to firearms (the number we should care about) is much higher than other methods because someone using a firearm is far more likely to actually die.

While guns are lethal for suicides, they are not always successful. If a person absolutely wanted to make sure their suicide was successful they could throw themselves off a building or inject a massive quantity of heroin. I think guns are just an easier way to do it and can be done on an impulse without much planning.

(02-02-2014 04:01 PM)UM2001GRAD Wrote:  I wish people would stop approaching gun control as an all or nothing issue. It seems as though most reasonable people should be able to agree that gun laws which help keep guns out of the hands of criminals, mentally unstable people, and kids are good. The left also need to accept that the goal should be to keep guns out of the hands of criminals, mentally unstable people, and kids.

While I agree with your statement, the lone wolf mass murderer commits far less murders than the cumulative total of gang related murders. I think the best improvement that can be made in relation to gun deaths should start there.

(02-02-2014 03:56 PM)Fitbud Wrote:  

(02-02-2014 02:46 PM)Kronke Wrote:  You have no issue with the M-14, while it fires the same caliber and has the same rate of fire as your so-called "assault weapons", and now have expanded your argument to the legality of a piece of plastic and a spring.

Boy, oh boy.

If there is no difference between the two weapons, then what is all the complaining about?

Just trying to clarify what exactly UofM is trying to ban. Ultimately, just like most other clueless gun-grabbers, it turns out to be what he considers "scary looking".

He'll undoubtedly run from that statement, but he has yet to prove otherwise, i.e. why a M-14 is okay, but an AR-15 isn't. He gave some BS about how one is more modifiable, but that doesn't hold water. If we're talking cosmetically, that does nothing to enhance the weapon. Functionally, (he said something about how it's too easy to modify them to full auto), that is already illegal without proper permits, and even still, I've NEVER heard of a mass shooting where someone altered an AR-15 to fire as such.

(02-02-2014 04:56 PM)Kronke Wrote:  

(02-02-2014 03:56 PM)Fitbud Wrote:  

(02-02-2014 02:46 PM)Kronke Wrote:  You have no issue with the M-14, while it fires the same caliber and has the same rate of fire as your so-called "assault weapons", and now have expanded your argument to the legality of a piece of plastic and a spring.

Boy, oh boy.

If there is no difference between the two weapons, then what is all the complaining about?

Just trying to clarify what exactly UofM is trying to ban. Ultimately, just like most other clueless gun-grabbers, it turns out to be what he considers "scary looking".

He'll undoubtedly run from that statement, but he has yet to prove otherwise, i.e. why a M-14 is okay, but an AR-15 isn't. He gave some BS about how one is more modifiable, but that doesn't hold water. If we're talking cosmetically, that does nothing to enhance the weapon. Functionally, (he said something about how it's too easy to modify them to full auto), that is already illegal without proper permits, and even still, I've NEVER heard of a mass shooting where someone altered an AR-15 to fire as such.

lol, one of those gun grabbers who puts on a gun to go to work...I don't care what a gun looks like, they're far too easy to modify...all you need is a drill press, ball bearings, and a kit from online.

You can't modify what you can't buy...

Where did I mention mass shootings? Quote that for me...I'll wait.

(02-02-2014 05:54 PM)UofMemphis Wrote:  lol, one of those gun grabbers who puts on a gun to go to work.

So, only you get to have one.

(02-02-2014 08:30 PM)Smaug Wrote:  

(02-02-2014 05:54 PM)UofMemphis Wrote:  lol, one of those gun grabbers who puts on a gun to go to work.

So, only you get to have one.

See post #2

(02-02-2014 08:35 PM)UofMemphis Wrote:  

(02-02-2014 08:30 PM)Smaug Wrote:  

(02-02-2014 05:54 PM)UofMemphis Wrote:  lol, one of those gun grabbers who puts on a gun to go to work.

So, only you get to have one.

See post #2

I didn't call you a gun-grabber. You did.

(02-02-2014 08:49 PM)Smaug Wrote:  

(02-02-2014 08:35 PM)UofMemphis Wrote:  

(02-02-2014 08:30 PM)Smaug Wrote:  

(02-02-2014 05:54 PM)UofMemphis Wrote:  lol, one of those gun grabbers who puts on a gun to go to work.

So, only you get to have one.

See post #2

I didn't call you a gun-grabber. You did.

Huh? I never said you did and no I didn't...the person I quoted did.

(01-31-2014 08:47 PM)UofMemphis Wrote:  but I see no need/reason for a citizen to have something like an AK-47, AR-15, Tec-9 style assault weapon

I also fully support carry permits...but I think guns and bars don't mix (see TN)

#1 -

#2 - I know you guys hate facts, but VA's violent crime dropped 20% the year after guns were allowed in bars.