Lammycat Posted February 12, 2013 Share Posted February 12, 2013 Rocket launchers are hand guns, in a sense. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Hixter Posted February 12, 2013 Share Posted February 12, 2013 Rocket launchers are hand guns, in a sense.This is a rocket launcher: Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Lammycat Posted February 12, 2013 Share Posted February 12, 2013 There are also hand-held rocket launchers that can take down planes and shit. Hence, a hand weapon, or "hand gun" if you will. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Hixter Posted February 12, 2013 Share Posted February 12, 2013 There are also hand-held rocket launchers that can take down planes and shit. Hence, a hand weapon, or "hand gun" if you will.And they use explosive warheads, not inert chunks of lead. Not at all a handgun. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Lammycat Posted February 12, 2013 Share Posted February 12, 2013 Whatever. I want one. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Hixter Posted February 12, 2013 Share Posted February 12, 2013 Whatever. I want one.Likewise. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Hixter Posted February 12, 2013 Share Posted February 12, 2013 Looks like Dorner has been spotted again in Big Bear. Carjacking and a shootout with a Fish & Game officer. Live audio from the scene says there's gunfire and 2 officers down. http://losangeles.cbslocal.com/live-video/ Quote Link to post Share on other sites
kidsmoke Posted February 12, 2013 Author Share Posted February 12, 2013 I don't think Dorner's going to make it off the mountain alive, unless he's somehow taken into custody, but that seems unlikely...I think he'd commit suicide if he had no other choice. Police are all over all roads into the mountain. He may be holed up in a cabin now. Hope those 2 officers are ok! Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Hixter Posted February 12, 2013 Share Posted February 12, 2013 I don't think Dorner's going to make it off the mountain aliveI agree, Dorner's a goner -- probably by his own hand. Good riddance. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
lost highway Posted February 13, 2013 Share Posted February 13, 2013 Protecting myself and my loved ones from other people intent on launching lead pellets at us is the most valuable thing in the world to me. And right after this we lose the thread of why does it actually matter? Are you suggesting that those of us who don't have a weapons cache in our homes don't value the safety of ourselves and our loved ones? Are you certain you are any safer? How does this impassioned family-man stance meet, or mask the priorities of a collector with a hobby, i.e. someone who thinks it's fun? What would you really give up if you didn't have them? Would your life be emptier somehow? Would your safety and confidence melt away? Would you lose on some important passion that makes your life more fulfilling? Quote Link to post Share on other sites
kidsmoke Posted February 13, 2013 Author Share Posted February 13, 2013 One of the 2 San Bernardino officers attacked today in Big Bear has now been confirmed to have died of his injuries. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Hixter Posted February 13, 2013 Share Posted February 13, 2013 Are you suggesting that those of us who don't have a weapons cache in our homes don't value the safety of ourselves and our loved ones? I don't have a weapons cache, but I choose to own firearms to protect myself, my family and my neighbors against violent criminals. It doesn't matter to me in the slightest if you choose to remain unarmed, but don't infringe on my right to self-protection. Are you certain you are any safer?I am certain that I'd rather face armed assailants with a firearm rather than my fists. What would you really give up if you didn't have them? Would your life be emptier somehow? Would your safety and confidence melt away? Would you lose on some important passion that makes your life more fulfilling?As far as I'm concerned, that kind of condescending blather has no place on a friendly forum where people gather to discuss a band that they enjoy. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
ih8music Posted February 13, 2013 Share Posted February 13, 2013 I support existing laws that make it illegal for mentally ill people, drug users and criminals to buy firearms, not adding more laws that impact the 99% of Americans who don't use their firearms to commit crimes while rolling off the backs of street criminals who ignore current laws and will do the same if new laws are enacted. Guns on the streets are obtained by 2 primary means: theft (already illegal) and personal sale. But we're not talking about gun show sales in most cases: the majority are purchased legally by straw buyers who pass background checks and then sell them to bad guys for a cash bonus. Such sales are already illegal and there is no reason to believe that Joe Gangster will suddenly feel compelled to comply with a new law.So you think the status quo is a-ok. Gotcha. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Hixter Posted February 13, 2013 Share Posted February 13, 2013 So you think the status quo is a-ok. Gotcha.I think existing gun laws cover pretty much everything. Additional laws added "to save our children" are poorly thought out and serve as little more than political posturing rather than actually making us safer. To sum it up: bad guys will always be bad guys and good guys will always be good guys. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Lammycat Posted February 13, 2013 Share Posted February 13, 2013 Maybe, just maybe, though....bad guys could find it more cumbersome to be bad. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Hixter Posted February 13, 2013 Share Posted February 13, 2013 Maybe, just maybe, though....bad guys could find it more cumbersome to be bad.Please explain how people who already obtain, carry and use firearms illegally will suddenly find themselves compelled to follow the laws that they've been ignoring for decades. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Lammycat Posted February 13, 2013 Share Posted February 13, 2013 If firearms, in general, were harder to get there would be less firearms to acquire, legally or illegally. Reduction? I don't know maybe I'm way off. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Hixter Posted February 13, 2013 Share Posted February 13, 2013 If firearms, in general, were harder to get there would be less firearms to acquire, legally or illegally. Reduction? I don't know maybe I'm way off. There are almost 300 million firearms in this country -- almost one per person -- so I can't see anything making them even marginally more difficult to acquire. Maybe a street gun would cost $25 to $50 more? Marijuana has been illegal for decades, but how difficult is it to acquire? Would another layer of laws make it more difficult to buy? I doubt it. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Lammycat Posted February 13, 2013 Share Posted February 13, 2013 Too many firearms, apparently! Plus, weed is legal in several states. I see your point but just because you dig the right to bear an arm of whatever magnitude doesn't quell the fact that the USA obviously has a big problem with guns. That's a fact regardless of which side of the fence you land on. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Hixter Posted February 13, 2013 Share Posted February 13, 2013 I see your point but just because you dig the right to bear an arm of whatever magnitude doesn't quell the fact that the USA obviously has a big problem with guns. Some people (a small percentage of the population) have decided to ignore gun laws and they are the source of the problem. Enacting new laws that will only affect the law-abiding citizens is pointless and will not reduce gun crimes. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
ih8music Posted February 13, 2013 Share Posted February 13, 2013 To sum it up: bad guys will always be bad guys and good guys will always be good guys.Awesome insight. Why should anything be illegal then? Criminals, by definition, don't obey laws so all laws are useless, right? Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Lammycat Posted February 13, 2013 Share Posted February 13, 2013 So no new laws to curb gun ownership because the bad guy will always be a bad guy? Horeseshit. It's a step. Unfortunately for responsible gun owners, this is the same as one bad apple spoils the bunch scenario. There is a problem with guns. It's not the responsible gun owners' onus. But it's still a fact. What is your solution? Quote Link to post Share on other sites
uncool2pillow Posted February 13, 2013 Share Posted February 13, 2013 Enacting new laws that will only affect the law-abiding citizens is pointless and will not reduce gun crimes. This is a point that's been brought up before, but the experience of the U.K. shows that this statement is simply inaccurate. We just aren't anywhere close to going down the same road as them and I'm not sure we should. The U.K. pretty much did away with firearms. Period. It has saved lives. Period. These are points that are simply true and cannot possibly be debated by reasonable people. One could argue that it has created other problems. There is a lot of evidence that it emboldens burglars to break into homes while the homeowners are at home. The right to bear arms can empower both the good guys and the bad guys. I do not own a gun, but understand why Hixter feels it provides him with protection. Frankly, I appreciate that we have the right to bear arms so the "bad guys" are a bit uneasy. They don't know if I have a gun or not. And that provides ALL of us with an extra bit of security. Even the staunchest advocates of gun control have to see that. But we also have to admit that this right comes with a hefty price in lost lives. The laws on the books need to be enforced, but Congress needs to enable them to be enforced and the NRA and their friends in Congress are a roadblock to that. Other laws can be passed within the realm of still protecting the 2nd Amendment. Hixter and other gun advocates might not like those laws, and might not even abide by them, but they may do enough good to be worth exploring. Done rambling for now. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Hixter Posted February 13, 2013 Share Posted February 13, 2013 Why should anything be illegal then? Criminals, by definition, don't obey laws so all laws are useless, right?Why should we enact more laws if the previous laws are roundly ignored? Seems like a waste of time to me. So no new laws to curb gun ownership because the bad guy will always be a bad guy. What is your solution? Enforce the laws that are already on the books. Don't make criminals out of law-abiding citizens just because current laws are ignored by bad guys. Go after the bad guys instead. There is a lot of evidence that it emboldens burglars to break into homes while the homeowners are at home. Absolutely. And I'm not willing to be disarmed so that it might happen to me. I follow the law and I don't hurt other people. I can not count on the police to protect me 24/7, so I must protect myself. Any attempt to diminish my ability to protect myself makes me less safe. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
uncool2pillow Posted February 13, 2013 Share Posted February 13, 2013 Absolutely. And I'm not willing to be disarmed so that it might happen to me. I follow the law and I don't hurt other people. I can not count on the police to protect me 24/7, so I must protect myself. Any attempt to diminish my ability to protect myself makes me less safe. I just wish you and other gun advocates acknowledged more honestly other parts of my argument. The U.K. pretty much did away with firearms. Period. It has saved lives. Period. But we also have to admit that this right comes with a hefty price in lost lives. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.