I'm discouraged...

[Lumpy]

Lumpy, going off the assumption you are discouraged about the conversations you've had, and are dreading more conversations like those, I would propose: don't have them.

Dreading is the word. Here's some recent comments from a message board I participate in that I didn't even have the heart to respond to:

Waiting for the worthless, rotten gun filth -- including the worthless, rotten gun filth on this very Board -- to start circling the wagons in the wake of today's Florida high-school massacre.

I know! Let's just arm all the high-school students. That should solve the problem.

**** gun filth.

I thought I'd check in to see if any of that filth has developed a conscience. I'm not optimistic, because their emotionality shuts down the rational thought and perspective taking necessary for empathetic responding. I would ask that if they do have any humanity, that they try, just once for one second, to block the automatic thinking they've come to rely on to keep their cognitive fear coping structures in place. In that one moment, can they imagine a girl who just got her first valentine at school from a boy in a romantic relationship. Imagine her joy and her hopes and expectations. Then imagine the moments of terror that filled her just before her life came to an end.

What made your fear - and more importantly your maladaptive coping strategy - more valuable than her joy and hopes and dreams?

If you cannot engage your humanity, then answer this: What have you done that would have made Nikolas Cruz less likely to be able to obtain an AR-15?

But I see that one of the biggest gun fetishists here has become a **** moderator! I suspect that suggests something about what this place has become and that I probably haven't been missing anything.

[linksep]

The fact that anyone with no priors can walk into a gun store and buy a semi-automatic rifle with removable magazines means that it's easier to casually commit gun massacres

The fact that anyone with no priors can walk into a gun store U-Haul and buy a semi-automatic rifle with removable magazines rent a FULLY AUTOMATIC truck with a high capacity fuel tank means that it's easier to casually commit gun truck massacres.

The fact that anyone with no priors can walk into a gun store Home Depot and buy a semi-automatic rifle with removable magazines pipe means that it's easier to casually commit gun pipe bomb massacres.

[MJY65]

Yukonjasper: I think you're right that image is an issue. If we had more visibility of things like HS trap league activity, shooting range fun, etc. it would help 'normalize' things.

I absolutely agree about the image, but I'm not sure the photos of clean cut HS kids with wood stocked 870s is going to change people's opinion of the over the top AR toting YouTuber with his "tactical operator's" beard.

[Jack's My dog]

Below are my thoughts from another thread, which I think are pertinent and I was too lazy to retype. I just had a conversation about this with a close friend, who generally respects my thinking, but on this subject I was accused of being a gun lobby puppet, with no feelings and in capable of interpreting statistics in an unbiased manor. When I mentioned the 60k defense per year statistic and broke down the "18 schools shootings" this year, he changed the subject. When I advised him he was attacking me with an ad hominem, regarding how much I cared about those who lost there life, he ended the conversation. Earlier in the conversation I asked him how requiring people to be defenseless against an attack, was a morally superior position to allowing good people a fighting chance, he said it wasn't and continued to accuse me of being uncaring and mindless. I am done being told I am immoral for my belief in 2a rights,

I typically do not start these types of conversations, but I will participate in them. If possible I like to ask more questions than give answers, and let cognitive dissonance do the heavy lifting.

These last few events reminded me of a couple things I ponder from time to time.

1-While I fully understand that people wish to live in a non-violent way, as I do my self,I cannot for the life of me figure out how so many have come to the position leaving innocents defenseless is a morally superior position? How is it morally superior to not be able to/or choose not to protect innocent life with immediate and expedient action?

2-I do not see how the gun control advocates math works out that the pro 2A side is the side of Fear. I have the fear/concern (insert which ever emotion fits your semantics demand) that there is a possibility one or a small handful of people that could potentially be a threat to my life and while statistically the threat is limited, I feel it is prudent to guard against said limited threat.

The pro control side belief is literally everyone is a threat once they have a gun or at least a specific type of gun, or magazine of a certain capacity. It seems to me that my belief that my fellow law abiding citizens should be able to own firearms, demonstrates more faith in the overall goodness of humanity.

[linksep]

There may be some common ground

I doubt it; I only see rational and emotional, thinking and feeling. I can't think of any commonality but if there is some I'd love to learn about it.

[MJY65]

There may be some common ground

I doubt it; I only see rational and emotional, thinking and feeling. I can't think of any commonality but if there is some I'd love to learn about it.

There's a dose of emotion at the extremes of both sides. The common ground is drowned out by the loud voices at the edges. Now, given the choice, I'll take the pro-gun extreme over the anti every time.

[Ghost]

This site seems quite emotional.

Not sure how many have read this but the gun facts document is kind of interesting. I'd like to see them update it as the mass shooter/active shooter section only looks to be updated to 2011. Starts on page 37.

http://www.gunfacts.info/pdfs/gun-facts/7.1/Gun-Facts-7.1-screen.pdf
http://www.gunfacts.info/

[unfitmother]

yukonjasper, are we losing the propaganda war?

I'll amend what I said:

Lumpy, going off the assumption you are discouraged about the conversations you've had, and are dreading more conversations like those, I would propose: don't have them with people on the internet, and be strategic about who you have them with in person.

I agree that being the silent majority is not enough, I think that each one of us should do what we can to help in the ways that best uses our individual strengths. Getting into debates with pro-gun-control people isn't the only way someone can protect the 2A. I have several loaner 22 uppers for people who want to get into shooting rifles, but who can't afford a whole gun at once. I have a spotting scope so that if someone wants to come along when I go to the rifle range, we can take turn spotting for each other. And last year I went through the process of applying to a new range where guests don't have to pay any fees.

[aprilian]

I recently looked into the history of the 2A and was educated about the history in England of taking guns away from just Catholics. It was wise for the founding fathers to include such a protection from an over-reaching Federal Government (which many didn't want to let develop, but were sure that it would).

I completely agree with the 2A's goal of balance between citizen's rights and Governmental desire to control its citizens. However, there are compromises which can be struck between our gun rights and the greater good of society. Some exist today, for example we already have controls on a young person walking in off the street and purchasing a Howitzer or a fully-auto MG. I don't agree with the NRA's party-line of any compromise/change is a start to the loss of our right to have weapons.

As a member of the NRA and a liberal, I ask that you resist the urge to label entire groups with cheap epithets (as above).

Lost in this discussion is the fact that gun-related suicides in the US are significantly higher than in other countries.

I hope that the solution might start with people like Lumpy starting conversations like this one.

[Rip Van Winkle]

If guns were the problem, than a country like Switzerland should be a war zone.

[Lumpy]

On the board I quoted from, I finally worked up the nerve for a response. After a post that repeatedly talked about killing children with a "military weapon", I posted "What's a military weapon?"

The odds are against anyone deigning to give a straight answer. Most likely the responses will be sarcasm, name calling and accusations of hairsplitting.

[Holland&Holland]

I recently looked into the history of the 2A and was educated about the history in England of taking guns away from just Catholics. It was wise for the founding fathers to include such a protection from an over-reaching Federal Government (which many didn't want to let develop, but were sure that it would).

I completely agree with the 2A's goal of balance between citizen's rights and Governmental desire to control its citizens. However, there are compromises which can be struck between our gun rights and the greater good of society. Some exist today, for example we already have controls on a young person walking in off the street and purchasing a Howitzer or a fully-auto MG. I don't agree with the NRA's party-line of any compromise/change is a start to the loss of our right to have weapons.

As a member of the NRA and a liberal, I ask that you resist the urge to label entire groups with cheap epithets (as above).

Lost in this discussion is the fact that gun-related suicides in the US are significantly higher than in other countries.

I hope that the solution might start with people like Lumpy starting conversations like this one.

Where have be labeled entire groups with cheap epithets?

If you do understand the 2nd amendment, then you can understand that we have laws on the books that already have overreached the government's intended authority. It is not the tool, it is the individual that we need to focus on.

I will be the first one to point out that we have done a horrible job in treating mental illness in this country and I work in the healthcare world so I know that is starts with the lack of reimbursements for mental health related treatments. You don't see for profit mental health centers popping up like you do sports medicine orthopedics

Going back to the issue at hand, I can be reasonable and listen to your proposal however I likely will be feeling that your restrictions on ME owning an AR-15 are not something I feel is a valid argument. Now if you want to ask me if I will take a shift at the local high school in a voluntary security role, sure I could be talked into that.

[Bearcatrp]

If guns were the problem, than a country like Switzerland should be a war zone.

These woman don’t take crap from no one. If I’m right, that country has the lowest crime rate. If so, this picture is why! My kind of ladies!

[Ghost]

Interesting info here: (doesn't look like they've updated for this recent one)
https://ballotpedia.org/United_States_school_shootings,_1990-present#School_shootings_by_region

There are no recorded school shootings in Delaware, Idaho, Kansas, Massachusetts, Montana, New Hampshire, New Jersey, Rhode Island, South Dakota, West Virginia, and Wyoming from 1990 to the present.

The breakdown of regional gun violence in K-12 schools is as follows:

Midwest: 43 incidents of gun violence, which resulted in 26 fatalities and 65 injuries
Deadliest incident: Red Lake High School massacre on March 21, 2005, where 16-year-old Jeffrey Weise killed five fellow students, one teacher and a security guard before killing himself.

Northeast: 12 incidents of gun violence, which resulted in 38 fatalities and 21 injuries
Deadliest incident: Sandy Hook Elementary School massacre on December 14, 2012, where 20-year-old Adam Lanza killed 20 children and 6 adults before taking his own life.

South: 75 incidents of gun violence, which resulted in 47 fatalities and 126 injuries
Deadliest incident: Westside Middle School massacre on March 24, 1998, where 11-year-old Andrew Golden and 13-year-old MItchell Johnson killed five fellow students and injured ten others.

West: 55 incidents of gun violence, which resulted in 65 fatalities and 124 injuries
Deadliest incident: Columbine High School massacre on April 20, 1999, where 18-year-old Eric Harris and 17-year-old Dylan Klebold killed twelve students and one teacher, before turning the guns on themselves.

Also here:
http://lawcenter.giffords.org/gun-laws/policy-areas/guns-in-public/guns-in-schools/
These states allow CCW or have no law against carrying:
Alabama - Number of incidents: 3 Number of injuries: 1 Number of fatalities: 1
Alaska - Number of incidents: 2 Number of injuries: 3 Number of fatalities: 2
Hawaii - Number of incidents: 2 Number of injuries: 2 Number of fatailties: 0
New Hampshire - Number of incidents: 0 Number of injuries: 0 Number of fatalities: 0
Oregon - Number of incidents: 7 Number of injuries: 32 Number of fatalities: 6
Rhode Island - Number of incidents: 0 Number of injuries: 0 Number of fatalities: 0
Utah - Number of incidents: 2 Number of injuries: 2 Number of fatalities: 0
Wyoming - Number of incidents: 0 Number of injuries: 0 Number of fatalities: 0

Other than Oregon it looks like those states have it under control

California leads the way with most incidents, followed by Florida

[Holland&Holland]

So msn just posted a cnn video of a guy in New York cutting his AR in half. The problem is he chopped the barrel not the receivers. Can anyone say felony?

Any chance this idiot gets charged, or is it ok now to make an unregistered sbr as long as it is for a liberal political statement?

Any liberals want to comment?