Raider5678

Where did I deny kids were being assaulted? Where did I deny that kids are being systematically murdered by psychopaths? Where did I blame anything I don't understand on someone else? Point it out.

What am I denying? What am I deflecting? What am I gaslighting? How did I demonstrate it? Explain, please. My poor little gun lobby brain can't understand it.

That makes no sense.

It has a lot to do with resolving it though. If you label every gun an assault rifle even if it's not, you're going to be met with a lot more resistance when trying to regulate guns.

Have genetics been linked to pedophilia?

Huh. Sounds fair enough to me then. Alright, to clear something up. Gun owners who think guns make people safer, do not generally believe more guns means less gun violence. If you try to tell them they're idiots for thinking that, they'll laugh at you. Or in your mind, shoot at you because they're crazy. They don't draw correlations between guns and gun violence because it's obvious. More guns are equal to more gun violence. What they DO draw a correlation to is the crime in general(Minus the gun parts). Home invasions while people are still home, robberies, etc. If you compare most European countries, it's not that hard of a claim to see. Let's take France. Total crimes per 1000: 61.03 United States: 41.29 If you look at Germany: 78.89 That's a fairly large difference. In total crime. However, as always, that's not the total picture. http://www.nationmaster.com/country-info/compare/France/United-States/Crime Violent crime in the U.S. is more common, so are murders, etc, etc. Yet, crime per 1000 people is also significantly lower. With fewer victims of crime per 1000. There's actually a lot of interesting statistics on there. I hate the idea of shooting someone, but in the event of a catastrophe, natural disaster, social break down, etc. Having a semi-automatic weapon could be extremely useful. Looting during a natural disaster VERY often turns deadly. Walking down the road with a semi-auto discourages robbery attempts, Etc. The presence of a weapon more times than not will do more to steer someone away then actually having to shoot at them. Another thing is a tyranical government(stay with me). Many people on this forum believe the current administration to be fascist. So, in the event that it somehow turns into a dictatorship... And before you say civilians could NEVER defeat the military(this is very true. We'd be mowed down like the French charging the German MG's in WW1) Civil wars aren't usually fought between the military vs civilians, it's usually loyalists vs revolutionaries. Some military on both sides, some citizens on both sides. Either way, it's safe to say that while a civil war would be going on, it wouldn't be a bad idea to have a weapon. And a hunting rifle seems less than ideal. Because there'd be no police, you'd have to worry about attacks, and there'd be a lot less infrastructure. So, the other reason besides "bragging rights" is the idea it's better to have it and not need it, then to need it and not have it. We should have ample protections on guns. I fully and 100% agree with you. However, we don't agree on the usage of a semi-auto. I believe it's versatile, and a useful weapon to have in many instances. Even if it's not needed right at this moment.

1. You're right, my bad. I thought I said he had fully automatic weapons, not a semi-automatic AR-15. 2. You specifically said I was in denial about my friends committing illegal activities. Not the "big picture". 3. No, I'm not choosing to ignore the statistics about mental health. Only 4% of Americans have serious mental health problems. In effect, almost everyone has mental health problems these days. But that doesn't put them at psychopath level, or mass murder level. Surely I don't need to point out that you technically just tried painting 18% of Americans as dangers to society simply because they had mental health problems. And the fact I choose not to believe that doesn't put me in denial. You specifically only focused on fire rate. Seems fair to me. Erasing an amendment is not something I feel should be taken as lightly as that. The end of habeas corpus? I didn't hear of that. It's "over the top and sensational" to try and paint 18% of Americans as mass murders. That's what I find a bit odd. You should lose the "us vs them" mentality. Ultimately it leads to more confusion then it does good. And no, he didn't suggest that all people who owned firearms are completely stable for their entire lives. He didn't even mention it. However, you, on the other hand, DID suggest that 18% of Americans should be viewed as potential mass murders. Because you know. That guy with Alzheimer's. Might be deadly. At that point, I'd be advocating for a government overthrow. Forget gun restrictions.

I was starting to think I was actually the one who was making irrational arguments.

Yes. If you're going by the regulation he said. Two of the four collectors I know collect flintlocks and muzzleloaders. Sure, they sound dangerous but you're not really going to use them in a mass shooting. They shouldn't be limited. I'd have a three- staged gun license program. Issued by a psychiatrist and a background check. Must be renewed every 4 years. Stage one isn't very intensive, you can own a hunting rifle. Unlimted amount. Stage two is more intensive, you can own non-semiautomatic pistols and shotguns. Unlimited amount. Stage three is the most intensive. You can own semiautomatic weapons. Unlimited amount. You can also own extended clips, bump-stocks, etc. It'd keep the guns out of the hands of those with serious mental illnesses. Which, in almost every case, the mass shooter was already known for having major mental illnesses. So they wouldn't have been able to purchase a gun. Does this sound unreasonable to you? Edit: Because, checking with my father, he agree's that's a reasonable sounding system. So if you'd agree, then it appears we have agreement on both sides.

1. Alright, I'm going to make an argument that you're going to initially see as a strawman. I ask only of you to read through the whole thing to see what I'm getting at. Collecting guns don't cause mass murders. I'm sure we can agree on that. It's the people using the gun in the wrong way that does the harm. However, if fewer people had guns, including those who used them correctly, fewer people would be able to use them incorrectly. I'm sure we can agree on that as well. So, it makes logical sense to have regulations on guns. I'm sure we can agree on that as well. Just because owning guns can provide a sense of enjoyment, doesn't mean we can allow it to infringe upon other peoples rights. More than 13,000 people die a year from guns. We can't justify fun or relaxation in exchange for life. I'm sure we can agree on that as well. We need better gun regulations because it can help save lives. Do you agree we've used logic to arrive at this conclusion? No. It's because I don't naturally assume the worst of people. Just because I don't believe that my friends who collect guns are illegally peddling guns doesn't mean I'm in "denial". It doesn't work that way.

No, they don't. And the fact you can pull some random guy from the internet doesn't exactly make me believe many gun owners are either crazy, and if they aren't they're headed that way. As far as I know, they're not peddling weapons to an unstable public. Last I checked, a fully automatic AR-15 is not a semi-automatic AR-15. There is a distinction. Okay? I said it's not an automatic rifle, not that it wasn't an assault rifle.

1. I know 4 people who own more than 100 guns each. Seem fairly reasonable to me. One owns a gun store. Nice guys. You should meet them sometime and tell me how crazy you think they are. 2. 30 rounds per minute is HARDLY an assault rifle. The m16, the U.S. military issue assault rifle, can fire700- 950 rounds per minute. On semi-auto, it can fire 60 per minute. Twice as fast as a semi-auto. Not sure where you see 50% speed as fully auto. That guy had a fully automatic weapon. Not an AR-15. In which case, check out my sick assault rifle. What rights have we lost again? Just for clarification. And this is what people I know call unreasonable regulations

I live in an area where I can't name a single person adult who doesn't own a gun. At least 3/4 of the kids I know above 10 own guns as well(technically their parents own them, but they're "theirs" the same way they might have a phone) And I know iNow already answered this, but I'll answer again. The biggest reason for owning guns are hunting. Everyone I know has a rifle. Most boys/girls get their first rifle around 10 and go hunting with their dad. So the biggest reason for owning a gun is hunting. So, reason number 1: Hunting. The second reason is a sport. Every year, there are usually 5-6 shooting events held by farmers or people with plenty of land. Most are clay pigeon shoots, but there are others like target shooting, etc. There are small prizes, but it's usually more about the shooting then the prizes(which are like a plate of fudge or something). So, reason number 2: Sporting. Now, reason 2 is where you get to the AR-15. I know of only 2 people who have one, and both of them keep them locked up tight. They get them out for target shooting even for clay bird shoots, so others can have fun shooting it. I've shot it. Something about watching a paper target get shot every time you pull the trigger(Their's aren't fully automatic. I've never seen a fully automatic gun) is satisfying. It's also like a bragging right. Which leads to reason number 3. Collecting. I know of 4 collectors in my valley. 2 of them collect old guns like flintlocks, musket loaders, etc. The other two collect modern guns. I've even seen the gun the Israeli army uses(I didn't get a chance to shoot it). So there are five main reasons: 1. Hunting. 2. Sports. 3. Collecting. 4. Bragging/showing off. 5. Self-defense (About 15 people in my church have a concealed carry from what I've heard. Nobody I know of has an open carry. I've never seen anyone other than a trooper carrying a pistol in the open.) Hopefully, that helps clarify the reasons for owning guns. Now I will admit, just this summer I heard of the first shooting accident in the valley my entire life. A teenager was shot when his friend(who wasn't local) thought the gun was unloaded, pointed it at him, and pulled the trigger after they had gone hunting. It ripped straight through his abdomen(rifles at close range will go right through typically) but it missed all the vital organs I believe. He survived and made a full recovery already. But, universally, the first rule instilled into everyone I know who uses a gun is: Never. Point. It. At. Anyone. General rules are(I'm sure Moon has heard these before): 1. Never point it at anyone. 2. Never look down the barrel. 3. Always assume it's loaded. 4. Keep your finger off the trigger until you're going to shoot. 5. Keep the safety on until you're going to shoot. There are more, but these are instilled into kids as much as the ten commandments.

I live in an area where I can't name a single person adult who doesn't own a gun. At least 3/4 of the kids I know above 10 own guns as well(technically their parents own them, but they're "theirs" the same way they might have a phone) And I know iNow already answered this, but I'll answer again. The biggest reason for owning guns are hunting. Everyone I know has a rifle. Most boys/girls get their first rifle around 10 and go hunting with their dad. So the biggest reason for owning a gun is hunting. So, reason number 1: Hunting. The second reason is a sport. Every year, there are usually 5-6 shooting events held by farmers or people with plenty of land. Most are clay pigeon shoots, but there are others like target shooting, etc. There are small prizes, but it's usually more about the shooting then the prizes(which are like a plate of fudge or something). So, reason number 2: Sporting. Now, reason 2 is where you get to the AR-15. I know of only 2 people who have one, and both of them keep them locked up tight. They get them out for target shooting even for clay bird shoots, so others can have fun shooting it. I've shot it. Something about watching a paper target get shot every time you pull the trigger(Their's aren't fully automatic. I've never seen a fully automatic gun) is satisfying. It's also like a bragging right. Which leads to reason number 3. Collecting. I know of 4 collectors in my valley. 2 of them collect old guns like flintlocks, musket loaders, etc. The other two collect modern guns. I've even seen the gun the Israeli army uses(I didn't get a chance to shoot it). So there are five main reasons: 1. Hunting. 2. Sports. 3. Collecting. 4. Bragging/showing off. 5. Self-defense (About 15 people in my church have a concealed carry from what I've heard. Nobody I know of has an open carry. I've never seen anyone other than a trooper carrying a pistol in the open.) Hopefully, that helps clarify the reasons for owning guns. Now I will admit, just this summer I heard of the first shooting accident in the valley my entire life. A teenager was shot when his friend(who wasn't local) thought the gun was unloaded, pointed it at him, and pulled the trigger after they had gone hunting. It ripped straight through his abdomen(rifles at close range will go right through typically) but it missed all the vital organs I believe. He survived and made a full recovery already. But, universally, the first rule instilled into everyone I know who uses a gun is: Never. Point. It. At. Anyone. General rules are(I'm sure Moon has heard these before): 1. Never point it at anyone. 2. Never look down the barrel. 3. Always assume it's loaded. 4. Keep your finger off the trigger until you're going to shoot. 5. Keep the safety on until you're going to shoot. There are more, but these are instilled into kids as much as the ten commandments.

So it wasn't aimed at youtube, uber, etc, it was saying we had to start fighting differently?

1. That's a good way to lose all credibility. 2. While we're at it, we should also sue every bar that has ever sold alcohol to someone who then proceeded to hit someone while drunk. Sue every liquor store that has ever sold alcohol to someone who then gave it to minors. And then sue facebook for people posting stupid stuff on it. Then sue Instagram..... you get the idea. Justice does not include guilty by association in my opinion.

You're right. That was uncalled for. I'm sorry.

I'm sorry. Could you point out to where I said there was one? I fail to see it.

To many people, the benefit of owning a gun far outweighs the risk of having it. With "Better to have it and not need it, then to need it and not have it." being another common phrase. But again, arguments like this are what they point to. If you decide that since guns have no other purpose than killing(as you have, in the part I've quoted) then there really is no reason to keep guns around. Which leads to the "I don't want to take your guns away. But I just think you shouldn't be allowed to have them because they have no benefit, only a cost. And the cost is human life." Additionally, there's a cultural divide there. What you don't see as a benefit, many people do. What you see as accidents due only because of guns, are what many people see as carelessness around guns.

But we must be willing to show compassion. If we had found the tumor before we executed him, we could have removed it, told him he was cured and released him! Then we could have monitored him, and if he happened to rape another child then we can assume it didn't work that way in him. But maybe it's true for the next pedophile. And then, when we find someone who after getting their tumor removed, doesn't rape another child, we can send the findings to the media, and they'll tell everyone pedophiles are caused by tumors. Typically how these case studies go anyways. They get 1 positive and the media says it's 100% true in the headlines. Which is pretty much all anyone ever reads.

When you start saying they WANT mass shootings to happen, it's on the verge of conspiracy. That is something I feel you should be highly careful with, because it's easy to get sucked into the "big government/big business" conspiracies. I know many people who say that Democrats want mass shootings because it gives them a reason to try and take guns away. Do I believe Democrats want mass shootings? Of course not. Do I believe the NRA wants mass shootings? Of course not. Another thing that's commonly pointed out is that guns kill 1,300 kids every year. While accidental posioning kills 42,000 people, with 41% being children, that comes out to 17,000 every year. At which point they argue, it'd do a lot more good to encourage people to lock up both guns and chemicals, rather then tell gun owners they're idiots and gonna kill themselves.

Search function didn't show it. But that's a bit iffy. Link?

That's true, but Zapatos wasn't calling for execution that I know of. He was saying it's not always about nurture and support. That's a prime example. Although, I'm not sure you can really link a tumor to being a pedophile and a serial killer.

More along the lines of my opinion, is how are you going to do that? Is it compassionate to say "We're compassionate to you. But we're still locking you away for life." I mean, let's take the crime that originally started this all off. Those two boys. They had premeditated the murder of a child and spent the day trying to kidnap one to kill. How would you show your compassion and understanding there? Or how about a more touchy subject. If a man rapes a young girl, are you still willing to try to show him compassion and understanding? Do you blame a lack of nurture? It sounds well and good to say you're willing to try and be compassionate to these people. But trying to apply it in principle isn't exactly simple. So where would you start? Let's say you didn't have to worry about any legal things at all. You could decide they don't have to go to jail at all if you'd like. How would you go about it?