Opponents Protest in Face of NRA Silence on Sandy Hook Shooting

  • Thread starter Thread starter HansTrappist
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Blacksword said:
Yep. At WACO! A compound full of crazies who were themselves armed to the teeth, a nutty doomsday cult. Can you confirm for me? Are you saying that the Waco incident makes you really fear that the government is going to come kill you? I just want to be sure thatā€™s the inference youā€™re making.
Click to expand...
I donā€™t disagree that the adults at this ā€˜compoundā€™ - oh right, they were evil so they live at a compound - had nutty religious ideas. But the siege of Waco was an assault on freedom. There is nothing illegal with owning weapons. Oh that is right, it should be so if you have them while legal you are a threat and lunatic. The goal was to bring in for questioning a person who lived there which could have been done when the guy ran or walked outside of their property which he did regularly as I recall. Anyway the death of those children was completely unnecessary and the religious beliefs of their parents is no reason for them to have been murdered. If you research the incident youā€™ll find the government vilified the victims of its murderous acts just as they always do. You are of course not obliged to believe the lies.

And no it does not make me fear the government any more than I would have otherwise. I know governments tend towards evil. Is that really something people can doubt? All Waco does is offer another piece of evidence for this.
 
exnihilo said:
Was my description inaccurate? Didnā€™t a lot of people die? Didnā€™t the North invade the South, burn down whole cities, dissolve the states, replace them with military districts ruled oppressively? Does your friend have an aversion to historical facts?

This is not mass of course since Iā€™m Protestant, but I do know of guns being carried to church services. So Iā€™m sure they are there and obviously not a problem. No churches are not gun free zones.
Click to expand...
Your description is highly inaccurate, being a biased, simplified, and very crude description of what was a complex, fluid, and multi-faceted conflict. It fails to take into account the legal issues at stake of whether states had the right to leave the Union once in, the pattern of escalation of violence and conflict on both sides of the Mason-Dixon Line for some time prior to the Warā€™s official beginning, the invasions of Confederate forces onto Union soil (Gettysburg for instance was Not exactly Confederate territory), or, most egregiously, the human rights issue of central importance in the War: the purported right to own other human beings. But this is off-topic, so continue it elsewhere if you wish.
 
SamH said:
You can jump cover and move 10 feet before a person can work a slide action about 8". Does the NFL know about you? :rolleyes:

As a warning - please donā€™t try this - youā€™ll be the first one shot.
Click to expand...
As an observation, three adults can run 10 feet or so in a matter of a couple of seconds, and yes, thatā€™s a good deal faster than a deranged, non-professional kid could possibly reload a shotgun, and much much faster than he could hope to shoot all three of them.:mad:
 
SamH said:
So now its funny?

Good to know the type of people that post here.
Click to expand...
Yeah thatā€™s where I was going with that post:rolleyes:. Way to keep the discussion intellectually honest. Is this where it descends into ad hominem, or can we be grown ups here?
 
Prodigal_Son1 said:
I would think law abiding citizens would have nothing to hide and ready to provide support anyway necessary.

Have you missed some of the suggestions Iā€™ve posted? What is objectionable, to a law abiding citizen?
Click to expand...
Canā€™t have a discussion about your suggestions, theyā€™re far too reasonable as a starting point of meaningful dialogue. Itā€™s easier to lob verbal bombs from both sides of the trench on these topics!
 
Blacksword said:
As an observation, three adults can run 10 feet or so in a matter of a couple of seconds, and yes, thatā€™s a good deal faster than a deranged, non-professional kid could possibly reload a shotgun, and much much faster than he could hope to shoot all three of them.:mad:
Click to expand...
Uh huh. I wouldnā€™t recommend testing that theory. Especially since you have no way of knowing if they are carrying other weapons.
 
SamH said:
Agreed. So why impose more laws on the law abiding?
Click to expand...
Itā€™s all a moot point.

Conneticut already had an ā€œassault weapons banā€ on the books, modeled after the 1994 Federal ban:

CGS 53ā€“202
Registration required for assault weapons purchased before October 1, 1993. There is a de facto registry of handguns maintained by the Department of Public Safety as any handgun transfer, be it from a dealer or private party, must be accompanied by an authorization number issued by the DPS and a form containing personal and weapon identification (DPS-3-C) must be submitted to DPS and local police. This form is collected and maintained on all long guns purchased from FFL dealers as well, however is not required for the transfer of long guns between private partiesā€¦
Click to expand...
Partial ban (selective fire weapons, some .50 BMG variants, an enumerated list of specific restricted features and certain brands of semi-automatic assault weapons and weapon ā€œtypesā€.)
Click to expand...
ct.gov/dps/lib/dps/special_licensing_and_firearms/assault_weapons.pdf

Itā€™s an emotionally driven argument.
 
Some food for thought as I weary of this:

ā€œOne failed attempt at a shoe bomb and we all take off our shoes at the airport. Thirty-one school shootings since Columbine and no change in our regulation of guns.ā€ -John Oliver
 
Blacksword said:
Some food for thought as I weary of this:

ā€œOne failed attempt at a shoe bomb and we all take off our shoes at the airport. Thirty-one school shootings since Columbine and no change in our regulation of guns.ā€ -John Oliver
Click to expand...
Did I mention there was already an assault weapons ban in 1999, when the Columbine shootings occured? šŸ¤·
 
philial said:
Just curious - are churches gun - free zones? If not, how many on this forum carry a gun to mass? And if not, why not?
Click to expand...
Iā€™m a CHL holder in Texas yes I carry to Mass. When Concealed Handgun Licenses where first issued in Texas churches were Gun Free Zones. Texas Clergy got upset demanding they change the law. How dare the State telling Texas Clergy what they could or could not carry on their property.

Churches in Texas must put up what is called 30 06 sign stating the statute that guns are not allowed on church property. Or a Minister or Priest can tell an individual I donā€™t want you to carry a gun on church property then there is no need for the 30 06 sign.

The Diocese of Austin has said nothing about carrying or not carrying to Mass.
 
Blacksword said:
Some food for thought as I weary of this:

ā€œOne failed attempt at a shoe bomb and we all take off our shoes at the airport. Thirty-one school shootings since Columbine and no change in our regulation of guns.ā€ -John Oliver
Click to expand...
Well I think that is a dumb response to that very suspicious incident and try to avoid flying at all costs in part because of that and other indignities. You could hide stuff in a hat rather than a shoe. These responses are all knee jerk and ineffective which only leads to more ineffective rules. And Iā€™m all for changing the regulation of guns to bring them back, legally, to schools so they are not killing fields.
 
Dawnia said:
Uh huh. I wouldnā€™t recommend testing that theory. Especially since you have no way of knowing if they are carrying other weapons.
Click to expand...
I think trying it out to save the lives of children would be worth the gamble. The point is you have a much better chance at subduing the assailant in this scenario than you do when heā€™s packing an assault rifle with a thirty round clip, which is no chance at all!

And you act like heā€™s going to be some level headed professional killer to see that in the midst of reloading heā€™s being rushed by several people, drop the shotgun, pull handguns and shoot them all in a matter of two or three seconds! Again, please, these shooters arenā€™t James Bond, theyā€™re deranged kids with no professional military experience in almost every shooting like this.
 
Cavman said:
Columbine happened when? In1999. Smack in the middle of the original assault-weapons ban.
Click to expand...
Not to mention, Conneticut had its own AWB version on the books last Friday.

These things work incrementally. Iā€™m no conspiracy theorist, but after the ban, the calls will come for confiscation of existing guns that violate the ban (and said high capacity magazines). Why should you be able to keep contraband? What good is a ban if there is so many loopholes?

For the record, this is a ā€œclipā€:

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stripper_clip

This is a ā€œmagazineā€:

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Magazine_(firearms
 
Cavman said:
Columbine happened when? In1999. Smack in the middle of the original assault-weapons ban.
Click to expand...
And what type of weapons did they use? Weā€™re they semi-automatics? How large a clip? Again, this is a case for smarter legislation, not none at all. What youā€™re saying is akin to the obese person making a terrible, half-hearted and uneducated effort at diet and exercise to lose weight and then when seeing no change saying ā€œexercise and diet donā€™t workā€.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top