Can we have a rational discussion about guns and why the typical arguments for gun control and its implementation won't work?

[TankTop5]

Look at the laws prohibiting access by felons possessing guns- how well is that working?

It doesn’t work and will never work. Passing more laws won’t make bad people stop being bad people and doing bad things. As I’ve said many time American citizens own half the guns on planet earth and jumping up and down whining about it will do zero to change that either nor will more laws. I personally believe we need true healthcare reform with mental health as a core component. It won’t solve all our problems but I think it has the biggest chance to make an impact

 

[highfigh]

A friend of mine is head of SWAT so I’ll ask him but I don’t think there’s any situation that a Glock switch would improve tactically considering you are responsible for every round that leaves your weapon. Many other tools better for the job like an MP5 if want full auto and control of the weapon which many law enforcement agencies do have along with full auto M4’s.

Justbover a week ago there was a possibility active shooter situation two blocks from my house, about 100 cops all with short barrel M4’s and suppressors. I don’t personally see the need for full auto but suppressors are great. Law enforcement can actively engage a subject without hearing protection and be able to easily hear commands and communicate… shoot, move, communicate.

edit add: the only purpose for a pistol in a gunfight is to get to your rifle.

edit 2: there are no law enforcement agencies anywhere in the United States that use a Glock switch. I guess it could be possible. A couple possess them just to see what they do, but no, none of them would ever use one. That’s the official response from the head of the local SWAT team.

If a suspect is on the move and they really need to be stopped, full auto can make that happen more quickly- hopefully, nobody and nothing explosive will be behind them. In extreme situations, like multiple shooters at high vantage points, multiple LEO can engage them more effectively than they could with pistols.

I know a former Special Agent In Charge for the DEA and he didn't like the Glocks as much as many do- when firing an extreme number of rounds, the plastic deformed but that was at the range and they were training for severe situations like busting up drug manufacturing operations in Central & South America.

Undercover work could benefit from the switch, though- can't very well carry a rifle into those situations.

 

[highfigh]

It doesn’t work and will never work. Passing more laws won’t make bad people stop being bad people and doing bad things. As I’ve said many time American citizens own half the guns on planet earth and jumping up and down whining about it will do zero to change that either nor will more laws. I personally believe we need true healthcare reform with mental health as a core component. It won’t solve all our problems but I think it has the biggest chance to make an impact

That has been my point all along- if someone doesn't want to be told what they can/can't do, laws don't matter.

I was looking for a window last week and when I asked why the price had increased so drastically, I paused and said "Oh, right- COVID". I then added "And people who don't want to work, work well....". The woman helping me mentioned the way people are behaving on the streets and I followed that by placing my cell phone on the counter. She asked why I did that and I said "I'm waiting for it to hurt someone". We laughed, but she agreed.

As I have posted, the stigma surrounding mental health need to end. I think most people have known someone who had clear mental health problems of some kind and on the sidelines, they talk, but nothing is done about it. I posted about a guy who got a job at Gander Mountain so he could buy more guns and ammo- the discount was just icing on the cake. I would never want to be in the same place as that guy AND any kind of weapon, loaded or not. His lack of control over his temper makes him dangerous.

 

[TankTop5]

If a suspect is on the move and they really need to be stopped, full auto can make that happen more quickly- hopefully, nobody and nothing explosive will be behind them. In extreme situations, like multiple shooters at high vantage points, multiple LEO can engage them more effectively than they could with pistols.

I know a former Special Agent In Charge for the DEA and he didn't like the Glocks as much as many do- when firing an extreme number of rounds, the plastic deformed but that was at the range and they were training for severe situations like busting up drug manufacturing operations in Central & South America.

Undercover work could benefit from the switch, though- can't very well carry a rifle into those situations.

A Glock switch could help an undercover blend in but if ever used you better know what’s behind the target because those rounds are going everywhere! Again not something issued or used in any official capacity.

 

[highfigh]

A Glock switch could help an undercover blend in but if ever used you better know what’s behind the target because those rounds are going everywhere! Again not something issued or used in any official capacity.

And the backstop really shouldn't be people. A NYC shootout resulted in ~9 unintended victims in the area because the officers couldn't hit the suspects.

 

[TankTop5]

And the backstop really shouldn't be people. A NYC shootout resulted in ~9 unintended victims in the area because the officers couldn't hit the suspects.

To be fair NYPD used 12lb trigger pull weight and frangible ammo that overpenetrates and breaks apart. Most of the hits on innocent bystanders was from pieces of bullets. Since that incident, they have moved to standard 5 pound triggers and hollow points, which don’t over, penetrate and dump all their energy into the target. This is the problem with legislators who know both about guns creating regulations and laws regarding them.

 

[Dude#1279435]

You aren't recognizing the fact that info about machine gun access for civilians has been posted. It IS possible to buy them, but because most PEOPLE can't be trusted with them, it's harder to buy them. Again, people are the problem but you refuse to acknowledge it.

People are the problem, and machine guns are also the problem. If you say people are only the problem, hypothetically you could justify people having possession of machine guns on the basis that Well I'm a responsible gun owner. Because Jimbo likes shooting his machine gun around on his farm doesn't make him a terribly level headed or responsible gun owner.

 

[Dude#1279435]

Look at the laws prohibiting access by felons possessing guns- how well is that working?

Well you need to have a plan, and how you prevent felons from getting guns in private or the black market I dunno. UMHC (Universal Mental Health Care) I imagine doesn't sit too well with too many Americans due to the cost. But anyway I don't think we should drop BC on what I assume is major retail sellers of guns. If they can get a gun, at least in theory they have to try a little harder than just throwing your money down and an ID.

 

[Dude#1279435]

To simplify this dumb conversation, because you do not intend to kill someone with a machine gun still doesn't mean I think you're a moral or sensible gun owner. Mmkay.

 

[highfigh]

To be fair NYPD used 12lb trigger pull weight and frangible ammo that overpenetrates and breaks apart. Most of the hits on innocent bystanders was from pieces of bullets. Since that incident, they have moved to standard 5 pound triggers and hollow points, which don’t over, penetrate and dump all their energy into the target. This is the problem with legislators who know both about guns creating regulations and laws regarding them.

Yeah, legislators.....they know everything- just ask them.

 

[highfigh]

People are the problem, and machine guns are also the problem. If you say people are only the problem, hypothetically you could justify people having possession of machine guns on the basis that Well I'm a responsible gun owner. Because Jimbo likes shooting his machine gun around on his farm doesn't make him a terribly level headed or responsible gun owner.

The guns isn't a problem on its own- it needs an idiot to use them to kill people in order for them to be part of the problem. Otherwise, they're just objects.

You can't know how level-headed Jimbo is unless you talk to him- your opinion doesn't matter if you haven't. Again, you're assuming if he does nothing bad with his gun(s). Wasting ammunition isn't 'bad', it's just expensive.

If someone is granted approval to own a machine gun, it means that their background is good enough to consider them a responsible gun owner.

 

[highfigh]

Well you need to have a plan, and how you prevent felons from getting guns in private or the black market I dunno. UMHC (Universal Mental Health Care) I imagine doesn't sit too well with too many Americans due to the cost. But anyway I don't think we should drop BC on what I assume is major retail sellers of guns. If they can get a gun, at least in theory they have to try a little harder than just throwing your money down and an ID.

I would prevent violent felons being released as easily and early as they are- that alone,. would save a lot of lives. Mental health counciling in jails and prisons would help, too. Personally, I think the Federal Government could fund increased mental health, but they would have to stop or reduce their waste of taxpayer money. They piss money away faster than sailors on shore leave for the first time in five years.

Who said BCs need to end? I haven't seen anyone in this discussion post that and again, someone can't just plop money on the counter and walk out without a background check but the application process still exists for them- if they're in good standing they can carry it out sooner.

 

[highfigh]

To simplify this dumb conversation, because you do not intend to kill someone with a machine gun still doesn't mean I think you're a moral or sensible gun owner. Mmkay.

Who made you the one to decide?

 

[TankTop5]

Who made you the one to decide?

And that’s the problem, everyone wants to control everyone else. Criminals have earned the judgement but we can’t just run around stripping rights based on fear. Bad things will happen and we need to do a better job at dealing with these people but we can’t put bubble wrap on everything because “we” know what’s best for everyone else.

 

[highfigh]

And that’s the problem, everyone wants to control everyone else. Criminals have earned the judgement but we can’t just run around stripping rights based on fear. Bad things will happen and we need to do a better job at dealing with these people but we can’t put bubble wrap on everything because “we” know what’s best for everyone else.

Performance-based loss of rights, the opposite of merit raises and career advancement. That implies that someone will hold them accountable, though. The courts aren't, members of government are talking about letting people out of prisons, allowing shoplifting and other crimes, handouts for illegals and de-funding the police; with that kind of bullshyte, how long do you give civilization before we have total chaos?

We have laws that cover who can own weapons, who can't and to some extent, what can be purchased- if the criminal justice system would keep violent criminals out of society, lives would be saved but they seem to be more concerned with the feelings of those who are incarcerated. They have nothing but time when they're in prison- I would think their own curiosity might make them wonder how they could advance their lives and stop adding to the cumulative time served, but I guess street cred is more important. They could learn to read if they can't, become better with Math, learn job skills (I know that some do these) and become useful members of society but that imposes my thinking on people who don't agree.

However, we have governments for a freaking reason- we don't need a nanny state, but ours needs to re-learn that they work for us and that their approval rating is pretty damned bad. People need to be able to change their minds about politicians and if the ones they voted for can't do the job, someone else needs to replace them.

 

[William Lemmerhirt]

To simplify this dumb conversation, because you do not intend to kill someone with a machine gun still doesn't mean I think you're a moral or sensible gun owner. Mmkay.

But that’s your own POV.
As mentioned, spending time talking to gun owners and enthusiasts might give you wider perspective.
It seems like you think all gun owners are like this guy

Nothing is further from the truth. As far as BC’s? How many mass shootings were the very first offense of the perpetrator?
As for jimbob, if he wants an MG to shoot the hell out of old junk on his farm, WGAF!!!!! It’s not hurting anyone, and why does it make him retarded? Maybe you’re retarded since you don’t want to shoot some stuff(not people) with a MG.
Btw. Real question. Have you ever shot a gun? You should know that it can be very rewarding. I love target shooting, but have no interest in shooting up a mall, or school or taking my MG to town. Why is your scope(no pun intended) so narrow? And why is it the only lense you can see through? Do you know anything about being a “sensible gun owner? I doubt since it seems you think all gun owners are unhinged lunatics that just can’t wait to kill everyone.
Do also think locking your car keeps out the bad guys?

 

[Dude#1279435]

But that’s your own POV.
As mentioned, spending time talking to gun owners and enthusiasts might give you wider perspective.
It seems like you think all gun owners are like this guy

Nothing is further from the truth. As far as BC’s? How many mass shootings were the very first offense of the perpetrator?
As for jimbob, if he wants an MG to shoot the hell out of old junk on his farm, WGAF!!!!! It’s not hurting anyone, and why does it make him retarded? Maybe you’re retarded since you don’t want to shoot some stuff(not people) with a MG.
Btw. Real question. Have you ever shot a gun? You should know that it can be very rewarding. I love target shooting, but have no interest in shooting up a mall, or school or taking my MG to town. Why is your scope(no pun intended) so narrow? And why is it the only lense you can see through? Do you know anything about being a “sensible gun owner? I doubt since it seems you think all gun owners are unhinged lunatics that just can’t wait to kill everyone.
Do also think locking your car keeps out the bad guys?

Ah yes "sensible" is using a machine gun. It's a military weapon, and because your intent isn't equal to a killer, doesn't make it not dumb. The killer is the top of Mt Stupid; the regular gun owner using a machine gun is down on the lower valley of Mt Stupid. Please stop trying to justify a machine let alone the normalization of it compared to other more sensible guns. In that way, you could also say Ripleys combination of MG/grenade launcher/flame thrower is ok on the basis well I'm not trying to hurt anyone. Thankfully on the "new" production of MG the Feds banned them.

 

[Trell]

This thread just gets dumber and dumber.

 

[William Lemmerhirt]

Ah yes "sensible" is using a machine gun. It's a military weapon, and because your intent isn't equal to a killer, doesn't make it not dumb. The killer is the top of Mt Stupid; the regular gun owner using a machine gun is down on the lower valley of Mt Stupid. Please stop trying to justify a machine let alone the normalization of it compared to other more sensible guns. In that way, you could also say Ripleys combination of MG/grenade launcher/flame thrower is ok on the basis well I'm not trying to hurt anyone. Thankfully on the "new" production of MG the Feds banned them.

Ok. I didn’t know if you’d actually answer any of my questions. So you don’t want a conversation, just rhetoric. Good work.

Have you ever shot a gun?

 

[William Lemmerhirt]

This thread just gets dumber and dumber.

Just because you stopped in.