|
|
|
BigPapaSmurf
SFN Die Hard
3192 Posts |
 Posted - 12/17/2012 : 06:47:07 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by Machi4velli
Originally posted by Kil
Also... When it was written, they were using flintlocks and muskets. Those were good for up to 6 rounds a minute, for the very proficient. Todays guns, and especially semi automatics can unload up to 600 rounds a minute. These are different times...
|
What?! The full auto firing speed for an AK-47 is 600 rounds per minute! You're off by a factor of at least 10 for semi-automatic rifles.
|
Yeah, semis are usually 40-60rpm, autos go up to 1200 now. Never understood a 1200rpm RoF with a 30 round clip.
|
"...things I have neither seen nor experienced nor heard tell of from anybody else; things, what is more, that do not in fact exist and could not ever exist at all. So my readers must not believe a word I say." -Lucian on his book True History
"...They accept such things on faith alone, without any evidence. So if a fraudulent and cunning person who knows how to take advantage of a situation comes among them, he can make himself rich in a short time." -Lucian critical of early Christians c.166 AD From his book, De Morte Peregrini |
 |
|
|
Valiant Dancer
Forum Goalie
USA
4826 Posts |
Posted - 12/17/2012 : 07:06:07 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by On fire for Christ
Originally posted by Dave W.
No, gun restrictions won't stop the mass killings (one of the earliest US school-house massacres was done with dynamite,
|
Well it would certainly make it a lot more difficult. The guns used in this case (and others) were legally purchased. If someone had to obtain something illegally, they may be arrested in the process, or may even be deterred by the process altogether, especially for socially awkward teenagers, with presumably few black market weapons dealer contacts. Also, if someone could only use illegally obtained weapons, it would be far more expensive and their options in terms of choice and ammunition would be far more limited.
|
Dynamite and fertilizer. Plus the guy made his car into a giant fletchette grenade. Three blasts plus his car. Killed 38 kids. Bath, OH, May 1927. Average age of the victims was in the low teens.
However, improving the response time to an active shooter will limit the body count.
School teachers packing since 2008
Depending on law enforcement for responses to shootings will not work. An active shooter kills in seconds. It takes the police minutes to get there.
In both of the recent cases, the weapons used were stolen. How is banning weapons going to stop this? I do not see a valid reason to ban weapons based on the actions of mentally disturbed people who stole weapons?
Why just focus on guns?
Why not ban assault knives?
After all, it's for the safety of the children. |
Cthulhu/Asmodeus when you're tired of voting for the lesser of two evils
Brother Cutlass of Reasoned Discussion |
|
|
|
The Rat
SFN Regular
Canada
1370 Posts |
Posted - 12/17/2012 : 07:11:12 [Permalink]
|
I've heard some saying that we only need to ban automatic weapons, semis are okay. Want to bet? A popular semi-automatic assault rifle is the FN FAL, which I carried for ten years. In just a few minutes I can disassemble it, and by inserting a paper matchstick or even just a folded piece of paper, into the right place, turn it full auto. There are probably other weapons with similar arrangements.
But the biggest problem is not the guns, it's the gun mentality. And how we change that I have no idea.
|
Bailey's second law; There is no relationship between the three virtues of intelligence, education, and wisdom.
You fiend! Never have I encountered such corrupt and foul-minded perversity! Have you ever considered a career in the Church? - The Bishop of Bath and Wells, Blackadder II
Baculum's page: http://www.bebo.com/Profile.jsp?MemberId=3947338590 |
|
|
|
Dave W.
Info Junkie
USA
26020 Posts |
Posted - 12/17/2012 : 08:56:27 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by Valiant Dancer
In both of the recent cases, the weapons used were stolen. |
That glosses over reality a bit, don't you think? Lanza used his mother's legally owned weapons. While they were technically "stolen" because Adam Lanza wasn't of legal age to own weapons himself, it's not like he broke into a gun shop or bought stolen guns in a back alley.Every one of those kids lived. It's still tragic, but it's an orders-of-magnitude smaller tradgedy than what happened in Newtown.
But why not ban big blades? As a teenager, I was under the impression that my state had laws limiting the length of a blade that could be carried. I found out I was wrong when I asked a state trooper about the legalities of wearing a real sword as part of a Halloween costume. But I didn't see anything wrong with those mythical laws, and still don't. If we're worried about child safety, then yes, we should limit knife size, since a smaller blade will generally do less damage than a big one in the hands of a random attacker.
But the question is still about guns. Given the survived/died ratios of these two examples, I'd much prefer mass attackers to be forced to use knives instead of guns. A much larger percentage of the victims live. |
- Dave W. (Private Msg, EMail)
Evidently, I rock!
Why not question something for a change?
Visit Dave's Psoriasis Info, too. |
|
|
|
Valiant Dancer
Forum Goalie
USA
4826 Posts |
Posted - 12/17/2012 : 09:26:41 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by Dave W.
Originally posted by Valiant Dancer
In both of the recent cases, the weapons used were stolen. |
That glosses over reality a bit, don't you think? Lanza used his mother's legally owned weapons. While they were technically "stolen" because Adam Lanza wasn't of legal age to own weapons himself, it's not like he broke into a gun shop or bought stolen guns in a back alley.
|
But he did have to break in to the gun safe and defeat the lock to obtain them. He killed the gun owner and had access to her keys. Had Jimmy Gangbanger tried the same thing, they would have been stymied by the safe and the lock.
Every one of those kids lived. It's still tragic, but it's an orders-of-magnitude smaller tradgedy than what happened in Newtown.
But why not ban big blades? As a teenager, I was under the impression that my state had laws limiting the length of a blade that could be carried. I found out I was wrong when I asked a state trooper about the legalities of wearing a real sword as part of a Halloween costume. But I didn't see anything wrong with those mythical laws, and still don't. If we're worried about child safety, then yes, we should limit knife size, since a smaller blade will generally do less damage than a big one in the hands of a random attacker.
But the question is still about guns. Given the survived/died ratios of these two examples, I'd much prefer mass attackers to be forced to use knives instead of guns. A much larger percentage of the victims live.
|
Oddly enough, small bladed knives ARE subject to bans based on concealability. Switchblades are illegal as well as blades of a length of less than 4 inches carried on ones person. The story also mentions other knife attacks in 2010 where children died from their wounds. |
Cthulhu/Asmodeus when you're tired of voting for the lesser of two evils
Brother Cutlass of Reasoned Discussion |
|
|
|
Dave W.
Info Junkie
USA
26020 Posts |
Posted - 12/17/2012 : 09:47:48 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by Valiant Dancer
The story also mentions other knife attacks in 2010 where children died from their wounds. |
If you're contending that knife mass attacks cause proportionally as many deaths as gun mass attacks, and so we should be arguing for knife bans as loudly as we argue for gun bans (for those of us who do so), you're going to have to provide the numbers. |
- Dave W. (Private Msg, EMail)
Evidently, I rock!
Why not question something for a change?
Visit Dave's Psoriasis Info, too. |
|
|
|
Kil
Evil Skeptic
USA
13476 Posts |
Posted - 12/17/2012 : 11:10:08 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by BigPapaSmurf
Originally posted by Machi4velli
Originally posted by Kil
Also... When it was written, they were using flintlocks and muskets. Those were good for up to 6 rounds a minute, for the very proficient. Todays guns, and especially semi automatics can unload up to 600 rounds a minute. These are different times...
|
What?! The full auto firing speed for an AK-47 is 600 rounds per minute! You're off by a factor of at least 10 for semi-automatic rifles.
|
Yeah, semis are usually 40-60rpm, autos go up to 1200 now. Never understood a 1200rpm RoF with a 30 round clip.
|
I got that figure off of some site. I dunno. But the kid had three semi automatic weapons. And even 40 to 60 rpm are a far cry from what was available when the 2nd amendment was ratified as one of the first ten amendments. He didn't even have an AK 47. I just threw out a rifel that I've heard of. I apologize for that. But as you can see, these are still very different times. Four to six rounds to 40 to 60 is a significant diference, even taking my mistake into account.
http://www.businessinsider.com/what-gun-did-the-sandy-hook-shooter-use-2012-12 |
Uncertainty may make you uncomfortable. Certainty makes you ridiculous.
Why not question something for a change?
Genetic Literacy Project |
|
|
|
Valiant Dancer
Forum Goalie
USA
4826 Posts |
Posted - 12/17/2012 : 13:41:16 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by Dave W.
Originally posted by Valiant Dancer
The story also mentions other knife attacks in 2010 where children died from their wounds. |
If you're contending that knife mass attacks cause proportionally as many deaths as gun mass attacks, and so we should be arguing for knife bans as loudly as we argue for gun bans (for those of us who do so), you're going to have to provide the numbers.
|
No, I'm saying that knives and other weapons are used more often than guns in crimes but they just don't get the press.
Victimization reports
In the above reports (Table 9 specifically), there are only 10% more gun related crimes than knife related crimes. However, that isn't the whole story.
The difference in total crimes come to a .7% difference.
In cases where the weapon used was neither a gun nor a knife, the number is higher than gun related crime.
Now when the total number of firearms in the US is taken into consideration (approximately 80 million households) these "gun control" measures seek to punish gun ownership by the vast majority of legal gun owners. |
Cthulhu/Asmodeus when you're tired of voting for the lesser of two evils
Brother Cutlass of Reasoned Discussion |
|
|
|
Dave W.
Info Junkie
USA
26020 Posts |
Posted - 12/17/2012 : 15:21:38 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by Valiant Dancer
Victimization reports
In the above reports (Table 9 specifically), there are only 10% more gun related crimes than knife related crimes. However, that isn't the whole story.
The difference in total crimes come to a .7% difference. |
I don't know which numbers in that table you're looking at, but when the offender was a stranger between 2005 and 2010, gun crime was 10.4% of all violent crime, and knife crime was 6.7%. There were 257,446 guns crime on average during each of those years, and 165,855 knife crimes, so gun crime was 55% more frequent than knife crime.
And knife crime leads to less death on a per-crime basis.| In cases where the weapon used was neither a gun nor a knife, the number is higher than gun related crime. |
In the column from which I pulled the above numbers, "other weapon" and "unknown" added together were 9.4% of all violent crime, or less frequent than gun crime.| Now when the total number of firearms in the US is taken into consideration (approximately 80 million households) these "gun control" measures seek to punish gun ownership by the vast majority of legal gun owners. |
Yeah, if you're going to talk about measures like licensing, registration, inspection and identification as "punishment," then we won't be seeing eye-to-eye on this, ever.
In 2009, there were 10.8 million motor vehicle accidents. With 209 million licensed drivers that same year, clearly the hoops one needs to jump through to own and operate a car in the U.S. are simply punishing the vast majority of drivers who don't cause accidents.  We "punish" them by forcing them to show a bare minimum of competence, that their equipment is functional, that they've got insurance, and by forcing them, when they buy new cars, to get ones with most of the latest safety features. Do you think the per-driver accident rate would go up or down if we did none of these things, and merely did a background check and a waiting period for buying cars?
If "punishing" 80 million gun-owning households can prevent even just a handful of deaths, it's worth it, in my opinion. On the balance, for this question, is a single fifth-grader's life on one side, and inconveniencing 80 million households on the other. I know which side I'd give more weight to. I consider death to be a far greater "punishment." |
- Dave W. (Private Msg, EMail)
Evidently, I rock!
Why not question something for a change?
Visit Dave's Psoriasis Info, too. |
|
|
|
On fire for Christ
SFN Regular
Norway
1273 Posts |
Posted - 12/17/2012 : 18:28:48 [Permalink]
|
You can kill someone with your bare hands. The issue is damage control and damage limitation. How many people have the expertise to make a fertilizer bomb? The instructions are available online, sure, but it's quite a difficult and impractical process. Which is why terrorists don't use it. Also it's quite conspicuous, (especially if you live with your parents). You can't ban fertilizer anyway, people need fertilizer, so it's irrelevant to the discussion. I don't see why people need handguns. There are alternative ways to defend your home.
In both of the recent cases, the weapons used were stolen. How is banning weapons going to stop this? I do not see a valid reason to ban weapons based on the actions of mentally disturbed people who stole weapons? |
Stolen? You mean the guns were legally owned by his mother and he "stole" them from his own house? Are you really asking how gun control would prevent this? Answer: Because there wouldn't be a gun to steal. I think any small child wouldn't even need to ask this.
Because it's EXTREMELY easy for 1 person to kill many people with a gun. A dazzlingly stupid question even a lamb would be embarrassed to ask.
|
 |
|
|
|
Machi4velli
SFN Regular
USA
854 Posts |
Posted - 12/17/2012 : 21:30:09 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by On fire for Christ
I don't see why people need handguns. There are alternative ways to defend your home.
|
Like what? What about the elderly or disabled? |
"Truth does not change because it is, or is not, believed by a majority of the people."
-Giordano Bruno
"The greatest enemy of knowledge is not ignorance, but the illusion of knowledge."
-Stephen Hawking
"Seeking what is true is not seeking what is desirable"
-Albert Camus |
|
|
|
Dr. Mabuse
Septic Fiend
Sweden
9687 Posts |
Posted - 12/18/2012 : 03:45:06 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by Kil
Four to six rounds to 40 to 60 is a significant diference, even taking my mistake into account. |
Remember that the "four rounds a minute" number is for an expert flintlock-rifleman.
An expert handling a semi-automatic should be able to get off 2-3 shots per second, I know I can with the training pistol at my gun club.
|
Dr. Mabuse - "When the going gets tough, the tough get Duct-tape..."
Dr. Mabuse whisper.mp3
"Equivocation is not just a job, for a creationist it's a way of life..." Dr. Mabuse
Support American Troops in Iraq:
Send them unarmed civilians for target practice..
Collateralmurder. |
|
|
|
Valiant Dancer
Forum Goalie
USA
4826 Posts |
Posted - 12/18/2012 : 07:13:21 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by Dave W.
Originally posted by Valiant Dancer
Victimization reports
In the above reports (Table 9 specifically), there are only 10% more gun related crimes than knife related crimes. However, that isn't the whole story.
The difference in total crimes come to a .7% difference. |
I don't know which numbers in that table you're looking at, but when the offender was a stranger between 2005 and 2010, gun crime was 10.4% of all violent crime, and knife crime was 6.7%. There were 257,446 guns crime on average during each of those years, and 165,855 knife crimes, so gun crime was 55% more frequent than knife crime. |
And you left off the portion where the victim knew their attacker. The data was split between stranger and known. You have to add them together.
And knife crime leads to less death on a per-crime basis.| In cases where the weapon used was neither a gun nor a knife, the number is higher than gun related crime. |
In the column from which I pulled the above numbers, "other weapon" and "unknown" added together were 9.4% of all violent crime, or less frequent than gun crime.
|
By strangers only. You forget the non-stranger element.
For all classes of assialiant, gun crime adds up to a shade under 7% of all crime and knife crime adds up to 6.3% of all crime. Since more crime is committed by people known to the victim, it skews the data when just focusing on stranger crime.
| Now when the total number of firearms in the US is taken into consideration (approximately 80 million households) these "gun control" measures seek to punish gun ownership by the vast majority of legal gun owners. |
Yeah, if you're going to talk about measures like licensing, registration, inspection and identification as "punishment," then we won't be seeing eye-to-eye on this, ever.
|
Not talking about that. Talking about punishing legal gun owners with confiscation of legally purchased arms. You are talking about banning firearm ownership.
In 2009, there were 10.8 million motor vehicle accidents. With 209 million licensed drivers that same year, clearly the hoops one needs to jump through to own and operate a car in the U.S. are simply punishing the vast majority of drivers who don't cause accidents. We "punish" them by forcing them to show a bare minimum of competence, that their equipment is functional, that they've got insurance, and by forcing them, when they buy new cars, to get ones with most of the latest safety features. Do you think the per-driver accident rate would go up or down if we did none of these things, and merely did a background check and a waiting period for buying cars?
If "punishing" 80 million gun-owning households can prevent even just a handful of deaths, it's worth it, in my opinion. On the balance, for this question, is a single fifth-grader's life on one side, and inconveniencing 80 million households on the other. I know which side I'd give more weight to. I consider death to be a far greater "punishment."
|
Great, then you are for "punishing" all legal drivers by confiscating their cars. Especially those big, scary SUVs. After all, it's for the children. |
Cthulhu/Asmodeus when you're tired of voting for the lesser of two evils
Brother Cutlass of Reasoned Discussion |
|
|
|
BigPapaSmurf
SFN Die Hard
3192 Posts |
Posted - 12/18/2012 : 07:45:03 [Permalink]
|
When did Dave say "confiscate the weapons" VD? He said "licensing, registration, inspection and identification".
The car analogy was simply pointing out that we gladly allow and rightly demand "licensing, registration, inspection and identification" for vehicles, so why would it be such a big deal for firearms?
|
"...things I have neither seen nor experienced nor heard tell of from anybody else; things, what is more, that do not in fact exist and could not ever exist at all. So my readers must not believe a word I say." -Lucian on his book True History
"...They accept such things on faith alone, without any evidence. So if a fraudulent and cunning person who knows how to take advantage of a situation comes among them, he can make himself rich in a short time." -Lucian critical of early Christians c.166 AD From his book, De Morte Peregrini |
|
|
|
Dr. Mabuse
Septic Fiend
Sweden
9687 Posts |
Posted - 12/18/2012 : 07:57:14 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by Machi4velli
Originally posted by On fire for Christ
I don't see why people need handguns. There are alternative ways to defend your home.
|
Like what? What about the elderly or disabled?
|
They will have to learn Tae-Kwon-Do just like everybody else. Shesh...
 |
Dr. Mabuse - "When the going gets tough, the tough get Duct-tape..."
Dr. Mabuse whisper.mp3
"Equivocation is not just a job, for a creationist it's a way of life..." Dr. Mabuse
Support American Troops in Iraq:
Send them unarmed civilians for target practice..
Collateralmurder. |
|
|
 |
|
|
|
Well regulated militias
