ANOTHER school shooting. -Florida-

[wildbill]

What I don't get is we here in Canada have lost thousands of lives to the current opioid crisis in the last few years alone, but yet it seems people are more obsessed with the people in the states, truly sad, sure it's bad what happened down there but, to turn a blind what's going here, well no doubt it ain't gettin better.

[MK2750]

Originally Posted by Scott h

If that bad guy didn't have a gun he would be nothing. Some people need a weapon to make themselves feel like a man.

So we will just make a law that bad guys can't have guns and all will be fine in la la land.

[MK2750]

Originally Posted by wildbill

What I don't get is we here in Canada have lost thousands of lives to the current opioid crisis in the last few years alone, but yet it seems people are more obsessed with the people in the states, truly sad, sure it's bad what happened down there but, to turn a blind what's going here, well no doubt it ain't gettin better.

Kids are over dosing in the states as well but there is no political gain in sensationalizing it. The media are puppets to the Liberals here and Democrats down south. If it doesn't advance their agenda they ignore it.

[Newview01]

Originally Posted by Scott h

If that bad guy didn't have a gun he would be nothing. Some people need a weapon to make themselves feel like a man.

Right. Got it.

[covey ridge]

Originally Posted by 2 Tollers

Leave the 2nd out of this one. No deflection. Try to stay focused on my point with the press.

How do you get the press to help get these situations under control. Yes sure they will point to the first amendment but if they have a soul they should be willing to help. Or has the US press gone to far and they cannot be pulled back to a sense of reasonableness in helping in a focused way to solve a problem. Multiple groups have to work together.

I think that every single issue that the US deals with is not done with a sense of reasonableness. No one is really interested in working together. Everything seems to be pick a side, dig in and don't budge. The press is no different. The issues are not as important as maintaining your paid position. I think that the entire system is infected and corrupted from the top down. No matter who is in power, there will be a resistance and that includes the media.

I no longer watch the US news for the news but I do tune in from time to time for the entertainment. I think that they have past the point of no return and there is no hope to be of one mind other than an all out attack on the US by a foreign power.

Other than that, I think each event with large numbers of people slaughtered, will only serve for some sicko to do greater numbers of death and tragedy.

[covey ridge]

Originally Posted by MK2750

Wow! You have absolutely no clue when it comes to firearms do you.

I knew you were a little bit touched after reading your arguments to ban hunting but your insane fear of objects tops that.

I made no suggestion that hunting should be banned! Go back and read exactly what I posted. So you say I am touched because I do not share your point of view! Well then I will think of that as a complement.

I have no fear of tools or objects but just a fear of those who may use them to slaughter people. If you think that makes me insane I will also think of that as a complement coming from you.

Here is to banning spears for hunting restricting those who are allowed to buy and possess an AR.

[Newview01]

Originally Posted by covey ridge

I have no fear of tools or objects

So why the call to ban certain tools/objects?

[covey ridge]

Originally Posted by bobalong

You really have no clue do you, that is sort of the premise for law enforcement everywhere.

I have no clue what you are talking about? I have no problem with the cops having guns. I do have a problem with those wannabe good guys with guns.

[covey ridge]

Originally Posted by hal53

In the mid-late 90's (?) one o the gun writers for Outdoor Life wrote an article on the "black rifles". The gist of it basically was that this type of gun had no place in a "sportsmans" gun cabinet and nothing but trouble would come from the growing popularity of these with the general public, All was good until the day the magazine hit the newsstands and the big guy from Colt contacted the big guy at Outdoor Life and reminded him how many advertising dollars Colt spent on the magazine. The writer was fired and in the ensuing months the magazine published articles on how "fun" these guns were to own, shoot and hunt with. Pretty much sums it up.........

That was Zumbo who blogged that ARs should not be used for coyotes. It was the end of his career.

I am not a gun writer so either liking ARs or not will do nothing for my career.
As a side to that I would bet that I shot coyotes with an AR with a 20 round magazine way before most here even knew what an AR was.

[fitzy]

Originally Posted by Newview01

So why the call to ban certain tools/objects?

Just a question but do you think an M249 should be available to the public at Wal-Mart? Should there be any restrictions on its sale? Or should it not be available to the general public?

[rem338win]

Originally Posted by covey ridge

That was Zumbo who blogged that ARs should not be used for coyotes. It was the end of his career.

I am not a gun writer so either liking ARs or not will do nothing for my career.
As a side to that I would bet that I shot coyotes with an AR with a 20 round magazine way before most here even knew what an AR was.

Makes a bona fide expert right there then.

How about you start talking about the real problem: ignoring public mental health concerns and how to deal with persons making overt threats?

[covey ridge]

Originally Posted by rem338win

Makes a bona fide expert right there then.

How about you start talking about the real problem: ignoring public mental health concerns and how to deal with persons making overt threats?

Bona fide expert? You mean like the self proclaimed experts here on this thread? I am just one with an opinion that is different from many here.

Just my opinion but a lot of what I see here is just the doctrine of protection of self interest and has little to do with caring for the victims of these all too frequent shootings.

Maybe you should make a note of all of those who think that there is no place for ARs in civilian society and those who do not share your opinion and petition for us to be banned from this forum?

[dmcbride]

Lots of guns that would cause just as much damage as an AR that are easier to get. Banning is just a simple way of ignoring the actual problem.

[hal53]

Originally Posted by covey ridge

That was Zumbo who blogged that ARs should not be used for coyotes. It was the end of his career.

I am not a gun writer so either liking ARs or not will do nothing for my career.
As a side to that I would bet that I shot coyotes with an AR with a 20 round magazine way before most here even knew what an AR was.

You missed the entire point of the post....again....

[covey ridge]

Originally Posted by hal53

In the mid-late 90's (?) one o the gun writers for Outdoor Life wrote an article on the "black rifles". The gist of it basically was that this type of gun had no place in a "sportsmans" gun cabinet and nothing but trouble would come from the growing popularity of these with the general public, All was good until the day the magazine hit the newsstands and the big guy from Colt contacted the big guy at Outdoor Life and reminded him how many advertising dollars Colt spent on the magazine. The writer was fired and in the ensuing months the magazine published articles on how "fun" these guns were to own, shoot and hunt with. Pretty much sums it up.........

Zumbo was right and a lot of trouble did come with the growing popularity of those rifles.

An as far as Outdoor Life Magazine goes they went with the $$$money$$$$

A good example of a gun company with $$$$money$$$$ telling a magazine what they could print.

Have I missed some subliminal point that you were trying to make?

[bobalong]

Originally Posted by covey ridge

Just my opinion but a lot of what I see here is just the doctrine of protection of self interest and has little to do with caring for the victims of these all too frequent shootings.

?

Your problem is that because you and other anti-gunners claim to care for the victims by blaming the AR you think that makes you some kind of hero. The fact is that people who do not want to ban the AR care just as much for the victims or more, we just know that blaming the AR is ludicrous.

You are just another anti-gun groupie that doesn't really understand what the hell is going on so you blame a gun. A gun that you seem to believe can think, plan and kill all on its own, do you understand how completely asinine that opinion is?

[covey ridge]

Originally Posted by dmcbride

Lots of guns that would cause just as much damage as an AR that are easier to get. Banning is just a simple way of ignoring the actual problem.

It is just that the AR through no fault of its own has gained a certain notoriety and has become the weapon of choice of sickos. I wonder if the mystique of the AR in the mind of those sickos is triggering a blaze of destruction or blaze of glory image that lead to acting out?

There is nothing good or bad but thinking makes it so.

[MK2750]

Originally Posted by covey ridge

I made no suggestion that hunting should be banned! Go back and read exactly what I posted. So you say I am touched because I do not share your point of view! Well then I will think of that as a complement.

I have no fear of tools or objects but just a fear of those who may use them to slaughter people. If you think that makes me insane I will also think of that as a complement coming from you.

Here is to banning spears for hunting restricting those who are allowed to buy and possess an AR.

Please tell us what it is about the AR that scares you.

Is it the shape, the color, the function? And why are other shotguns and rifles that share these same characteristics not scary to you?

I do get it. I have an unexplainable dislike for creepy clowns and most members of the spider family but in no way would I try to force my phobias on to others.

[covey ridge]

Originally Posted by bobalong

Your problem is that because you and other anti-gunners claim to care for the victims by blaming the AR you think that makes you some kind of hero. The fact is that people who do not want to ban the AR care just as much for the victims or more, we just know that blaming the AR is ludicrous.

You are just another anti-gun groupie that doesn't really understand what the hell is going on so you blame a gun. A gun that you seem to believe can think, plan and kill all on its own, do you understand how completely asinine that opinion is?

Anti-gun groupie? Just seem like a label meant to shut down discussion. I will not let that one stick. Enjoy the rest of your day

[covey ridge]

Originally Posted by MK2750

Please tell us what it is about the AR that scares you.

Is it the shape, the color, the function? And why are other shotguns and rifles that share these same characteristics not scary to you?

I do get it. I have an unexplainable dislike for creepy clowns and most members of the spider family but in no way would I try to force my phobias on to others.

What is there about what I said that scares you?

[brendan's dad]

I think the middle ground between both arguments is that there needs to be better "checks and balances" on "who" has the ability to access "any" type of firearm

Facts that most people can agree on:

1. All firearms will kill (AR15 or a Cooey 22)
2. Violent persons and persons involved in criminal activities should not have firearms
3. Person with mental issues that are prone to violent and irrational behavior should not have firearms
4. There should be a minimum age before possession of a firearm is considered lawful
and
5. Firearm ownership and possession should have some level of training and that training should be updated on a regular basis.

These are the common arguments and from both sides of the fence.

Some of these issues can be address with legislation, some can be addresses with more accountability in health care and law enforcement, and some are a combination of both.

I don't believe banning a certain firearm will eliminate the problem. But it is hard to argue that certain firearms are not more "effective" in a active shooter scenario, so I can see persons looking at certain firearms and saying why are they available to the general public. There is a reason hundreds of military's choose the AR15 pattern rifle or similar. They are not going into battle with a Marlin 30-30. Sure they could they kill the enemy with a Marlin 30-30? But given the same circumstances and time frame they will kill more of the enemy with an AR15.

Cruz had I believe 7 minutes to kill 17 and wound several others. The tragedy would have been just as devastating if 7 would have been killed. Would there have been that big of a difference if Cruz had a bolt action, or pump action, or a 5 round mag, or a.......... Nobody can say for sure, but I think most people will side with the camp that it "MAY" have made a difference. Are for those closely effected by this incident, that "MAY" is all they see or care about.

I believe that if the hard core anti-gun persons and the hard-core NRA type gun guys don't put aside their ultra left and ultra right agenda's and allow the law makers, health care, and authorities to make effective change, then we will see more and more victims and eventually these issues WILL become more common even here in Canada.

[Newview01]

Originally Posted by fitzy

Just a question but do you think an M249 should be available to the public at Wal-Mart? Should there be any restrictions on its sale? Or should it not be available to the general public?

Well we're not talking M-249s here are we.

Covey specifically stated he does not fear tools/objects, but yet refuses to comment on why he wishes to ban a certain object based on it's appearance/function. There are many other objects that are just as destructive, but they are not on his chopping block. Why?

[Newview01]

Originally Posted by brendan's dad

I think the middle ground between both arguments is that there needs to be better "checks and balances" on "who" has the ability to access "any" type of firearm

Facts that most people can agree on:

1. All firearms will kill (AR15 or a Cooey 22)
2. Violent persons and persons involved in criminal activities should not have firearms
3. Person with mental issues that are prone to violent and irrational behavior should not have firearms
4. There should be a minimum age before possession of a firearm is considered lawful
and
5. Firearm ownership and possession should have some level of training and that training should be updated on a regular basis.

These are the common arguments and from both sides of the fence.

Some of these issues can be address with legislation, some can be addresses with more accountability in health care and law enforcement, and some are a combination of both.

I don't believe banning a certain firearm will eliminate the problem. But it is hard to argue that certain firearms are not more "effective" in a active shooter scenario, so I can see persons looking at certain firearms and saying why are they available to the general public. There is a reason hundreds of military's choose the AR15 pattern rifle or similar. They are not going into battle with a Marlin 30-30. Sure they could they kill the enemy with a Marlin 30-30? But given the same circumstances and time frame they will kill more of the enemy with an AR15.

Cruz had I believe 7 minutes to kill 17 and wound several others. The tragedy would have been just as devastating if 7 would have been killed. Would there have been that big of a difference if Cruz had a bolt action, or pump action, or a 5 round mag, or a.......... Nobody can say for sure, but I think most people will side with the camp that it "MAY" have made a difference. Are for those closely effected by this incident, that "MAY" is all they see or care about.

I believe that if the hard core anti-gun persons and the hard-core NRA type gun guys don't put aside their ultra left and ultra right agenda's and allow the law makers, health care, and authorities to make effective change, then we will see more and more victims and eventually these issues WILL become more common even here in Canada.

Some great ideas.

I think what a lot of the pro-gun people realize that if they give an inch, the government will take a mile. All other countries that have given in to control are an example.

[Newview01]

How about this. A Columbine survivor pushing for concealed carry. That sure goes against the narrative. I wonder what social justice punishment he is about to endure.

https://m.washingtontimes.com/news/2...carry-schools/

DENVER — Some students are calling for tougher gun-control laws after escaping last week’s horrific massacre in Parkland, Florida, but another school-shooting survivor is going in a different direction.

Colorado House Minority Leader Patrick Neville, who attended Columbine High School at the time of the 1999 mass shooting, has again introduced legislation to remove limitations on concealed carry in K-12 schools.

[vcmm]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rFYZHLuxXZ8

It's not the type of firearm, It's the user

[fitzy]

Originally Posted by Newview01

Well we're not talking M-249s here are we.

Covey specifically stated he does not fear tools/objects, but yet refuses to comment on why he wishes to ban a certain object based on it's appearance/function. There are many other objects that are just as destructive, but they are not on his chopping block. Why?

Ok now I'm specifically asking you if an M249 should be readily available to the general public?

[fitzy]

Originally Posted by vcmm

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rFYZHLuxXZ8

It's not the type of firearm, It's the user

https://youtu.be/vQcE6CW91UU

[brendan's dad]

Originally Posted by vcmm

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rFYZHLuxXZ8

It's not the type of firearm, It's the user

That is for sure....

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VAG8XGrOOS4

[dmcbride]

Originally Posted by covey ridge

It is just that the AR through no fault of its own has gained a certain notoriety and has become the weapon of choice of sickos. I wonder if the mystique of the AR in the mind of those sickos is triggering a blaze of destruction or blaze of glory image that lead to acting out?

There is nothing good or bad but thinking makes it so.

I don't think a sicko is going to decide to not go on a shooting rampage because an AR is banned.

[Addy]

All law abiding citizens should have the right to bare arms, there is wiggle room there to define what type of arms any joe blow can bare. I tend to lean towards total freedom personally, but I also understand we are not all made equal, in every way shape and form. Our civilization is suffering from a mental health issue not a gun issue, we must address that but instead the left and the powers that be keep on pushing this anti gun agenda, another bandaid solution by irrational thinking people.