Orlando Gay Night Club Shooting

[Elmer]

12 minutes ago, boogielicious said:

My Dad served in the military and achieved the highest marksmanship level in the military in boot camp. He owned many guns from muskets to hunting rifles. He taught me how to shoot when I was 10. He would have never owned an AR-15 because it serves no purpose other than it's intended military use.

My brother owned an AR-15 but got rid of it after Sandy Hook. Said the same thing.

For the record my FIL, a Marine, tunnel rat, combat vet & purple heart recipient walked away from (actually called and canceled) his membership to the NRA.
After years he said they did not speak for him, they speak for manufactures.

He still owns side arms and rifles & goes to the range. But he has told me that assault rifles are for killing people, and you dont need one! 

I defer to his opinion on the matter!

[newtogolf]

1 minute ago, boogielicious said:

Liberals focus on doing something including possibly more restrictions or better background checks or more mental health services. Conservatives are being conservative and not wanting to do anything or so it seems from the outside. Status quo is not working. 

Let's make the efforts to improve mental health services, let's enforce a death penalty for clear cut violent crime offenders, let's require the Federal Government do their job properly and if all that still doesn't work, we can discuss restricting our rights to own certain guns.  

[saevel25]

Just now, newtogolf said:

Let's make the efforts to improve mental health services, let's enforce a death penalty for clear cut violent crime offenders, let's require the Federal Government do their job properly and if all that still doesn't work, we can discuss restricting our rights to own certain guns.  

Would you then support a federal health care program that gave families funding to give the mentally sick family members the ability to get them proper treatment? 

Psychiatric help is not cheap. To improve this service you need to give people the means to get it. 

[boogielicious]

2 minutes ago, Elmer said:

For the record my FIL, a Marine, tunnel rat, combat vet & purple heart recipient walked away from (actually called and canceled) his membership to the NRA.
After years he said they did not speak for him, they speak for manufactures.

He still owns side arms and rifles & goes to the range. But he has told me that assault rifles are for killing people, and you dont need one! 

I defer to his opinion on the matter!

Same with my Dad and brother. They both dropped their membership when the NRA got political.

 

1 minute ago, newtogolf said:

Let's make the efforts to improve mental health services, let's enforce a death penalty for clear cut violent crime offenders, let's require the Federal Government do their job properly and if all that still doesn't work, we can discuss restricting our rights to own certain guns.  

Agree. Also include State and local. In this day an age with instant communication, it is baffling that we can't coordinate these groups. The perp in Orlando supposedly tried to buy body armor and was reported. Why didn't that send out a giant red flag to the Orlando PD? A visit may have prevented this.

[Jeremie Boop]

43 minutes ago, Elmer said:

"People who want to ban guns are not gun owners, so for them, they have no problem sacrificing a Constitutional right because they don't exercise it. "

I should remind you that Abolitionist did not own slaves!!!!

 

 

https://www.boston.com/news/politics/2016/06/15/seth-moulton-cover-ny-daily-news-anti-assault-rifle

Anyone who equates slave ownership and gun ownership or puts the two in the same sentence loses all credibility with me.

26 minutes ago, boogielicious said:

My Dad served in the military and achieved the highest marksmanship level in the military in boot camp. He owned many guns from muskets to hunting rifles. He taught me how to shoot when I was 10. He would have never owned an AR-15 because it serves no purpose other than it's intended military use.

My brother owned an AR-15 but got rid of it after Sandy Hook. Said the same thing.

An AR-15 is not an military rifle, and it is not an assault rifle. Stop perpetuating this falsehood.

[Lihu]

39 minutes ago, boogielicious said:

Or he has a great deal of experience and understands that these weapons don't belong in civilians hands. There are many "Libs" in the military. All my friends who served are. You dishonor their service when you denigrate them will comments like this.

Agree, that's true, and I'm sure he didn't mean for it to come off that way. However, I'm not so sure I would generalize that the entire ex-military population are anti gun.

Remember that hunting rifles starting from the 1930s and on were military style weapons at the time of the Spanish American war and the beginning of WWI. Technology evolves. A gun ban would be just like forcing everyone to use one of these:

 

36 minutes ago, xcott said:

I have said the same things for years now, this incident has nothing specifically to do with it.

That was pretty obvious.

 

34 minutes ago, xcott said:

I own many guns and I'd be ok if any of them were banned. 

I'm not going to ask for make and models and what rounds (grain and type) you typically shoot, but what you said is easy if you don't have a lot invested in them.

I have pretty much off the shelf stuff and a ban really wouldn't affect me too much, but I know people who have invested a lot of money and would be devastated with a ban just because their expensive rifles happen to match some arbitrary and politically motivated description of an assault style weapon.

[Elmer]

13 minutes ago, newtogolf said:

Stop the dramatics, we're not talking about slavery, we're talking about an inanimate object that cannot hurt anyone unless it's in the hands of someone that wishes to do others harm.  

Why aren't you in favor of an automatic death penalty for anyone that commits a violent crime with a gun?  You're on the wrong side if you don't support a death penalty and reform of how mentally ill people are treated in our country.  

Automatic Death penalty would be tough to institute. Considering the lengthy appeal process out laws have in place. If you are asking for people to be dragged to the street and shot on the spot after the judge declares "guilty" that is a little to SS Gestapo for me!
You want Death penalty for felony murder convictions? Or just violent crimes with a gun? Because you commit a violent crime while in possession of a gun and still have it considered a "violent crime, with a gun". either way fine by me. However Death penalty has always been left to states and not all participate. 
Are you suggestion the Federal Govt issue mandate a "death penalty" law for all states to follow. Because that sounds like a states rights issue.

As far as slavery goes, there are no dramatics involved. The south from the founding of Union to Seccession screamed and championed ownership of property and even called it God's will.

"If slavery be a sin, it is not yours. It does not rest on your action for its origin, on your consent for its existence. It is a common law right to property in the service of man; its origin was Divine decree." 
~Jefferson Davis

3 minutes ago, Jeremie Boop said:

Anyone who equates slave ownership and gun ownership or puts the two in the same sentence loses all credibility with me.

I have a feeling I lost credibility with you going back to the Drumpf incident.
but If you cannot see the argument and parallels, It has not thing to do with credibility!

[boogielicious]

13 minutes ago, Jeremie Boop said:

Anyone who equates slave ownership and gun ownership or puts the two in the same sentence loses all credibility with me.

An AR-15 is not an military rifle, and it is not an assault rifle. Stop perpetuating this falsehood.

Not according to the inventor.

http://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/family-ar-15-inventor-speaks-out-n593356

Quote

"Our father, Eugene Stoner, designed the AR-15 and subsequent M-16 as a military weapon to give our soldiers an advantage over the AK-47," the Stoner family told NBC News late Wednesday. "He died long before any mass shootings occurred. But, we do think he would have been horrified and sickened as anyone, if not more by these events."

 

[Lihu]

46 minutes ago, Dave2512 said:

I don't own any that have potential to be banned and I don't believe certain bans open Pandora's Box for deeper bans. When the POTUS says the FEDS aren't coming for my legally owned guns I have a lifetime of ownership that says I can believe that. Nobody wants my ancient 30-30 and the half dozen handguns I have are mostly six-shooters.

Those were military weapons in the 1870s, don't you think only the military should be allowed to use and keep those?

Especially that military grade 30-30 in the middle of the picture!

The 5.56 on the left looks so tiny!

 

7 minutes ago, boogielicious said:

Not according to the inventor.

http://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/family-ar-15-inventor-speaks-out-n593356

 

Technically, that's the family of the inventor speaking through an "interpreter".

[Dave2512]

22 minutes ago, Jeremie Boop said:

An AR-15 is not an military rifle, and it is not an assault rifle. Stop perpetuating this falsehood.

The family of the man that invented it disagrees with you.

http://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/family-ar-15-inventor-speaks-out-n593356

[boogielicious]

3 minutes ago, Lihu said:

Those were military weapons in the 1870s, don't you think only the military should be allowed to use and keep those?

Especially that military grade 30-30 in the middle of the picture!

The 5.56 on the left looks so tiny!

 

Technically, that's the family of the inventor speaking through an "interpreter".

Of course you know more than them, right?

[Lihu]

Just now, boogielicious said:

Of course you know more than them, right?

No, but we really don't know what the inventor would have actually said.

[Dave2512]

3 minutes ago, Lihu said:

Those were military weapons in the 1870s, don't you think only the military should be allowed to use and keep those?

Especially that military grade 30-30!

The tiny 5.56 on the left looks so tiny!

Rocks were military weapons of the past too. Are you really going to deny technology has improved the efficiency of firearms?

[Jeremie Boop]

15 minutes ago, Elmer said:

As far as slavery goes, there are no dramatics involved. The south from the founding of Union to Seccession screamed and championed ownership of property and even called it God's will.

"If slavery be a sin, it is not yours. It does not rest on your action for its origin, on your consent for its existence. It is a common law right to property in the service of man; its origin was Divine decree." 
~Jefferson Davis

I have a feeling I lost credibility with you going back to the Drumpf incident.
but If you cannot see the argument and parallels, It has not thing to do with credibility!

Owning a person and owning a weapon are somehow similar? The lines of connection between the banning of slavery and banning weapons are so weak and tenuous as to be laughable. 

14 minutes ago, boogielicious said:

Not according to the inventor.

http://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/family-ar-15-inventor-speaks-out-n593356

 

5 minutes ago, Dave2512 said:

The family of the man that invented it disagrees with you.

http://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/family-ar-15-inventor-speaks-out-n593356

The inventor's family said that, not the inventor. Small distinction.  

"After many conversations with him, we feel his intent was that he designed it as a military rifle," his family said, explaining that Stoner was "focused on making the most efficient and superior rifle possible for the military."

Or in other words, they are guessing at what his intent was and he never actually said those words. To me, that's a bit important.

The United States military uses weapons like the M-16 and the M4 that both look like an AR-15 but provide both fully automatic fire and three-round burst fire – both of which are not possible with an AR-15. The family can say whatever they want, but it doesn't change the fact that the AR-15 isn't used in the military and it is not an assault rifle.

 

At this point I am done with this conversation, the lines of logic and continual miss-classification of the AR-15 as an assault/military rifle by people prove that there's no reason to continue replying.

Edited June 17, 2016 by Jeremie Boop

[boogielicious]

Just now, Jeremie Boop said:

Owning a person and owning a weapon are somehow similar? The lines of connection between the banning of slavery and banning weapons are so weak and tenuous as to be laughable. 

The inventor's family said that, not the inventor. Small distinction.  

"After many conversations with him, we feel his intent was that he designed it as a military rifle," his family said, explaining that Stoner was "focused on making the most efficient and superior rifle possible for the military."

Or in other words, they are guessing at what his intent was and he never actually said those words. To me, that's a bit important.

The United States military uses weapons like the M-16 and the M4 that both look like an AR-15 but provide both fully automatic fire and three-round burst fire – both of which are not possible with an AR-15. The family can say whatever they want, but it doesn't change the fact that the AR-15 isn't used in the military and it is not an assault rifle.

So I suppose he invented it and the M16 for target shooting cans in his backyard. The AR-15 became the M16. That was his design intent. His family, who have made a great deal of money off both designs, knows exactly what it was designed to do. 

[Dave2512]

2 minutes ago, Jeremie Boop said:

The inventor's family said that, not the inventor. Small distinction.  

"After many conversations with him, we feel his intent was that he designed it as a military rifle," his family said, explaining that Stoner was "focused on making the most efficient and superior rifle possible for the military."

Or in other words, they are guessing at what his intent was and he never actually said those words. To me, that's a bit important.

It's a bit more than a guess when they recall actual conversations. We can't completely discount what they say simply because it's second hand.

[boogielicious]

I'm heading out for a while gents, so continue on without me. Be civil to each other. We are, after all, on this forum for the same reason.  I'll check back in later.

[newtogolf]

52 minutes ago, saevel25 said:

Would you then support a federal health care program that gave families funding to give the mentally sick family members the ability to get them proper treatment? 

Psychiatric help is not cheap. To improve this service you need to give people the means to get it. 

Yes, if they can demonstrate they are legal citizens, don't have the means to pay for it themselves, they waive their right to own a firearm while under treatment and funding only covers those that are considered a real threat to others or themselves.  

Mental illness is a problem for all of society, I'd much prefer to see the real problem addressed than the instrument that is used in only 11% of the mass shootings.