Crime Maine shooting - 18 dead

They're tools used to provide personal protection. They're tools used in sporting hobbies like hunting and shooting competitions. They're tools used to protect valuable assets.

An assault weapon for protection? Must be a very insecure country. I live in Mexico. Never needed a gun.

Any downsides?

With all of the privately owned firearms in the US if they were truly causing more harm than good you'd know it.

Sorry, I don't see how the joy of owning a weapon outweights the killing of innocent civilians.
 
Yes. Serious question.

I was under the impression you had some education or sufficient information to discuss this . . . gun free zones are the most common target for these types of shootings. Why? Because they're the locations with the least amount of resistance because visitors are prohibited from carrying a firearm to protect themselves. Except folks bent on doing others harm don't care and choose those locations carry out their evil act.

Just imagine how bad the shooting in the video below would've been had the security guard not been armed.

 
An assault weapon for protection?

What are you calling an assault weapon? Regardless, I want whatever weapon gives me the best advantage to protect myself and my family.

Must be a very insecure country. I live in Mexico. Never needed a gun.

Why do you think owning a firearm means someone feels insecure? Most of us don't buy them for the sole purpose of shooting another person.

Any downsides?

Nope. Not for a responsible person.


Sorry, I don't see how the joy of owning a weapon outweights the killing of innocent civilians.

I don't think caving into the emotional pleas of others is justification for blaming others and trying to further infringe on our rights.
 
I was under the impression you had some education or sufficient information to discuss this . . . gun free zones are the most common target for these types of shootings. Why? Because they're the locations with the least amount of resistance because visitors are prohibited from carrying a firearm to protect themselves. Except folks bent on doing others harm don't care and choose those locations carry out their evil act.

Just imagine how bad the shooting in the video below would've been had the security guard not been armed.



So, more guns less mass shootings. Is that the argument?
 
Vehicles are necessary for civilians, assault weapons aren't. Vehicles are used for transportation, weapons are used to kill.

Big difference.

Can you explain why it's bad logic?

Because it is necessary to shoot and kill in some situations, both animals and or a person.

Because you are basing you view on how something looks rather then it operation.

Unless you propose to ban all semi auto weapons as assault weapons.
 
So, more guns less mass shootings. Is that the argument?

Sigh.

Defensive gun use is a thing. Improved physical security and the possibility of patrons being armed to protect themselves act as deterrents.
 
What are you calling an assault weapon? Regardless, I want whatever weapon gives me the best advantage to protect myself and my family.

Any weapon that can kill many people in few seconds.

Why do you think owning a firearm means someone feels insecure? Most of us don't buy them for the sole purpose of shooting another person.

I meant unsafe. I'm pretty sure the large majority of americans do not need guns.

Nope. Not for a responsible person.

Not everybody is responsible. If assault weapons are allowed, then you must accept the consequences that come with it.

I don't think caving into the emotional pleas of others is justification for blaming others and trying to further infringe on our rights.

Maybe it's a silly right that you don't need in the first place.
 
I'd say it's more unfair to get killed by a nutjob that shouldn't of had that power to begin with.

It's more unfair to be enjoying yourself in a gun free zone with absolutely no means to protect yourself or no on-site security to deter said nutjob.

What's the saying?

Life ain't fair.
 
So why do they need them?

If something is causing more harm than good then maybe reconsider?

Because guns are used in self defense approximately 1.5 to 2.5 million times a year in self defense with the overwhelming majority of the time never being fired.

The exact number is debatable. The 1.5 come from a study by the Clinton administration and the 2.5 is from an NRA study.

Then you have the hunting numbers as it is the main supporter of game management including the money needed to keep wild life population protection and preservation.

That doesn't include sport target sports.

Then there is the strongest reason the 2nd amendment and its purpose.
 
Any weapon that can kill many people in few seconds.

I see you've picked up the gun control skill of making stuff up to fit your view pretty quickly.

I meant unsafe. I'm pretty sure the large majority of americans do not need guns.

Has nothing to do with need.


Not everybody is responsible. If assault weapons are allowed, then you must accept the consequences that come with it.

Which is exactly why we're fighting tooth and nail against ignorant gun control folks from trying to institute more of their ridiculous restrictions.

And please, look of what the actual definition of an "assault weapon" is . . .

Maybe it's a silly right that you don't need in the first place.

Wow. This conversation has been a complete waste of time.
 
An assault weapon for protection? Must be a very insecure country. I live in Mexico. Never needed a gun.

Any downsides?



Sorry, I don't see how the joy of owning a weapon outweights the killing of innocent civilians.
Don’t cartel members run your country bro?
 
Sigh.

Defensive gun use is a thing. Improved physical security and the possibility of patrons being armed to protect themselves act as deterrents.

More guns to defend themselves from.... guns. Seems like a nice way to de-escalate things.

Seeing the US has the most weapons per capita, it should be one of the countries with the least mass shootings in the world. Am I wrong?
 
It's more unfair to be enjoying yourself in a gun free zone with absolutely no means to protect yourself or no on-site security to deter said nutjob.

What's the saying?

Life ain't fair.
My point was that the "fair/unfair" argument is a terrible one. We're talking about high powered weapons that are easily obtainable that are used to kill people, and we're talking about what's "fair"? How does one even make that argument in the face of a story like this where 18 people were murdered?

How does a person with mental illness that wants to kill others and themselves get deterred by another guy with a gun when his whole mission is to kill and get killed?

I'm not even of the mind that things need to be flat out banned, per se, but these arguments that are often used don't hold water. There's way too much of a lax gun culture in the US with people thinking of guns as toys and extensions of their manhood.
 
I see you've picked up the gun control skill of making stuff up to fit your view pretty quickly.



Has nothing to do with need.




Which is exactly why we're fighting tooth and nail against ignorant gun control folks from trying to institute more of their ridiculous restrictions.

And please, look of what the actual definition of an "assault weapon" is . . .



Wow. This conversation has been a complete waste of time.

I see no argument here.
 
Back
Top