Florida High School Shooting

Page 78 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

jackstar7

Lifer
Jun 26, 2009
11,679
1,944
126
I hear guns are employed somewhere between 100,000 - 1,500,000 times a year in defensive use. It is hard to gauge just how many lives are saved by guns, not really measurable. But trust the number is significant.
I literally don't trust anything you post, regardless of which login you're using.
 

HomerJS

Lifer
Feb 6, 2002
36,752
28,946
136
I hear guns are employed somewhere between 100,000 - 1,500,000 times a year in defensive use. It is hard to gauge just how many lives are saved by guns, not really measurable. But trust the number is significant.
I hear you are more likely to be shot by your own if you have one in the house vs a prep.
 

SlowSpyder

Lifer
Jan 12, 2005
17,305
1,001
126
I literally don't trust anything you post, regardless of which login you're using.

I only use this login. Do you ever tire of being wrong?

The numbers are from posters earlier in this thread, one of them being very anti-2A. It was forcibly removed from my sig, but it is post #1004.

As we told you, post #1004 does NOT say what you quoted, so you cannot use it as a quote in your sig.
admin allisolm
 
Last edited by a moderator:

SlowSpyder

Lifer
Jan 12, 2005
17,305
1,001
126
Doesn't change my point. You are at best, not a reliable source.

Really? I always backup what I say, as I just did. I pulled those numbers from this very thread, one poster which I'm sure you don't doubt. Again, you were wrong in every point you just tried to make against me while simultaneously saying I'm not a reliable source in my posts. I don't know what else to say about that, really.
 

fskimospy

Elite Member
Mar 10, 2006
85,651
50,912
136
I did not say all guns, I said all guns except shotguns. uuu not pedantic because uuu technically its uuu something.

It's one of the most common types of firearms and there are literally millions of them in the US. 'He wants to ban all guns except for those several million' seems like a... rather large omission. lol. You shouldn't use words you don't understand just because you're mad.
 

realibrad

Lifer
Oct 18, 2013
12,337
898
126
It's one of the most common types of firearms and there are literally millions of them in the US. 'He wants to ban all guns except for those several million' seems like a... rather large omission. lol. You shouldn't use words you don't understand just because you're mad.

Sure, so to follow your logic, when someone says they want to ban so 80-90% of something, you cannot say they want to ban all of something.

So, to carry that logic over, was there a Muslim ban when the vast majority of Muslims were not banned? I'm not trying to dig into another topic, but I cannot understand the abstraction of your logic here.

*I guessed at the shotgun numbers based on the number of them manufactured. Seemed close enough.
 

fskimospy

Elite Member
Mar 10, 2006
85,651
50,912
136
Sure, so to follow your logic, when someone says they want to ban so 80-90% of something, you cannot say they want to ban all of something.

So, to carry that logic over, was there a Muslim ban when the vast majority of Muslims were not banned? I'm not trying to dig into another topic, but I cannot understand the abstraction of your logic here.

*I guessed at the shotgun numbers based on the number of them manufactured. Seemed close enough.

I'm baffled at how you're struggling to understand this. If someone wanted to refer to my position as a 'gun ban' I would be fine with it so long as everyone was aware of that large caveat as fundamentally, the purpose is to get rid of a lot of guns. Similarly, the purpose of Trump's travel ban is obviously to limit the number of Muslims coming into the country so it is accurately described as a Muslim ban. If anyone tried to say that policy served to prevent all Muslims from entering the country that would be silly and wrong though.

I want to reiterate how unique you are on here in that you constantly get caught up in these sorts of discussions where you express bafflement at things everyone else grasps easily. I don't understand why this is so difficult for you.
 

realibrad

Lifer
Oct 18, 2013
12,337
898
126
I'm baffled at how you're struggling to understand this. If someone wanted to refer to my position as a 'gun ban' I would be fine with it so long as everyone was aware of that large caveat as fundamentally, the purpose is to get rid of a lot of guns. Similarly, the purpose of Trump's travel ban is obviously to limit the number of Muslims coming into the country so it is accurately described as a Muslim ban. If anyone tried to say that policy served to prevent all Muslims from entering the country that would be silly and wrong though.

I want to reiterate how unique you are on here in that you constantly get caught up in these sorts of discussions where you express bafflement at things everyone else grasps easily. I don't understand why this is so difficult for you.

So I am the only one who misunderstands you. Not the others that you were talking to that also apparently misunderstood you, just me.
 

jackstar7

Lifer
Jun 26, 2009
11,679
1,944
126
I think spy is giving you the benefit of the doubt that you actually misunderstand him. The others purposely misunderstand him to further their rhetorical twisting.

The significance of the difference is really up to you, I suppose.
 

ivwshane

Lifer
May 15, 2000
32,558
15,444
136
How is it complete bullshit and typical of gun nutters? Just a few responses ago that's exactly what fskimospy asked for.

Congrats, you found a forum poster who met your criteria. When talking about changes to laws we normally are talking about the politicians who are actually in charge of making changes. And no, the majority of those that want changes aren't calling for total bans.
 
Last edited:

soundforbjt

Lifer
Feb 15, 2002
17,788
6,040
136

jpeyton

Moderator in SFF, Notebooks, Pre-Built/Barebones
Moderator
Aug 23, 2003
25,375
142
116
He’s “looking into it” means nothing so far, but I never trust anything he says.
I'm fine either way; he's damned if he does (pisses off his base) and damned if he doesn't (blue wave in November). Win win for Democrats.
 

Puffnstuff

Lifer
Mar 9, 2005
16,148
4,848
136
Firearm registration Required:
California
District of Columbia
Hawaii
American Samoa
Guam
Puerto Rico
U.S. Virgin Islands

Firearm registration Partial:
Connecticut
Oregon *

Firearm registration Handguns only:
Maryland
Michigan
New Jersey (kinda with exceptions)
New York
Washington


* The Oregon State Police will maintain a record of firearms sales from FFL holders for a period of 5 years, after such period these records are destroyed.


Given that firearm registration has not been going on since the 1800's.
I think that most are not registered is a safe bet.


.
Irrespective of that I find the ATF data interesting. Look at the amount of domestically produced and imported firearms that have poured into the country over the last several decades.

https://www.atf.gov/resource-center...tates-annual-statistical-update-2017/download
 

Commodus

Diamond Member
Oct 9, 2004
9,215
6,818
136
Don't cheer the bump stock ban recommendation too loudly -- it's pretty much the only thing the NRA was in favor of doing. It's a good step, but the gun lobby still has control over this administration.
 

ivwshane

Lifer
May 15, 2000
32,558
15,444
136
Let's be honest.

There are so many guns on the streets that whatever the politicans do it doesn't matter.

Sure, if your idea of fixing the problem requires an immediate impact on that issue. Back when our government was strong and committed to solving problems they would implement policies that had long term impacts. Now a days though, if people don't see an immediate impact then that means the policy was a failure.
 
Reactions: rise

Thebobo

Lifer
Jun 19, 2006
18,574
7,671
136
If you have time check out this article.

https://agingmillennialengineer.com/2018/02/15/fuck-you-i-like-guns-2/

Posted on February 15, 2018
“Fuck you, I like guns.”

"Edited to add: I can’t thank you all enough for interacting with this post. I am actually surprised that it’s become this popular. This is the first time more than ten people have read anything I’ve written here. I’m probably going to turn off commenting soon because everything that can be said already has been. In general, I’d like to point out that this is an opinion piece. I wrote it on a 15 minute coffee break and posted it unedited. It’s raw, and that’s the whole point. The tone, the language, and the style are intentional. This was written for people like my mostly conservative Army buddies who will never click an article that is titled “Gun control is your friend”, and tend to assume those who support such legislation have never seen a gun before. I’m not a professional writer, nor a particularly prolific blogger until about three days ago. I’m just a person trying to sort it out like everybody else. Thank you for stopping by. I really do appreciate every one of you."


"America, can we talk? Let’s just cut the shit for once and actually talk about what’s going on without blustering and pretending we’re actually doing a good job at adulting as a country right now. We’re not. We’re really screwing this whole society thing up, and we have to do better. We don’t have a choice. People are dying. At this rate, it’s not if your kids, or mine, are involved in a school shooting, it’s when. One of these happens every 60 hours on average in the US. If you think it can’t affect you, you’re wrong. Dead wrong. So let’s talk.

I’ll start. I’m an Army veteran. I like M-4’s, which are, for all practical purposes, an AR-15, just with a few extra features that people almost never use anyway. I’d say at least 70% of my formal weapons training is on that exact rifle, with the other 30% being split between various and sundry machineguns and grenade launchers. My experience is pretty representative of soldiers of my era. Most of us are really good with an M-4, and most of us like it at least reasonably well, because it is an objectively good rifle. I was good with an M-4, really good. I earned the Expert badge every time I went to the range, starting in Basic Training. This isn’t uncommon. I can name dozens of other soldiers/veterans I know personally who can say the exact same thing. This rifle is surprisingly easy to use, completely idiot-proof really, has next to no recoil, comes apart and cleans up like a dream, and is light to carry around. I’m probably more accurate with it than I would be with pretty much any other weapon in existence. I like this rifle a lot. I like marksmanship as a sport. When I was in the military, I enjoyed combining these two things as often as they’d let me.

With all that said, enough is enough. My knee jerk reaction is to consider weapons like the AR-15 no big deal because it is my default setting. It’s where my training lies. It is my normal, because I learned how to fire a rifle IN THE ARMY. You know, while I may only have shot plastic targets on the ranges of Texas, Georgia, and Missouri, that’s not what those weapons were designed for, and those targets weren’t shaped like deer. They were shaped like people. Sometimes we even put little hats on them. You learn to take a gut shot, “center mass”, because it’s a bigger target than the head, and also because if you maim the enemy soldier rather than killing him cleanly, more of his buddies will come out and get him, and you can shoot them, too. He’ll die of those injuries, but it’ll take him a while, giving you the chance to pick off as many of his compadres as you can. That’s how my Drill Sergeant explained it anyway. I’m sure there are many schools of thought on it. The fact is, though, when I went through my marksmanship training in the US Army, I was not learning how to be a competition shooter in the Olympics, or a good hunter. I was being taught how to kill people as efficiently as possible, and that was never a secret.

As an avowed pacifist now, it turns my stomach to even type the above words, but can you refute them? I can’t. Every weapon that a US Army soldier uses has the express purpose of killing human beings. That is what they are made for. The choice rifle for years has been some variant of what civilians are sold as an AR-15. Whether it was an M-4 or an M-16 matters little. The function is the same, and so is the purpose. These are not deer rifles. They are not target rifles. They are people killing rifles. Let’s stop pretending they’re not.

With this in mind, is anybody surprised that nearly every mass shooter in recent US history has used an AR-15 to commit their crime? And why wouldn’t they? High capacity magazine, ease of loading and unloading, almost no recoil, really accurate even without a scope, but numerous scopes available for high precision, great from a distance or up close, easy to carry, and readily available. You can buy one at Wal-Mart, or just about any sports store, and since they’re long guns, I don’t believe you have to be any more than 18 years old with a valid ID. This rifle was made for the modern mass shooter, especially the young one. If he could custom design a weapon to suit his sinister purposes, he couldn’t do a better job than Armalite did with this one already.

This rifle is so deadly and so easy to use that no civilian should be able to get their hands on one. We simply don’t need these things in society at large. I always find it interesting that when I was in the Army, and part of my job was to be incredibly proficient with this exact weapon, I never carried one at any point in garrison other than at the range. Our rifles lived in the arms room, cleaned and oiled, ready for the next range day or deployment. We didn’t carry them around just because we liked them. We didn’t bluster on about barracks defense and our second amendment rights. We tucked our rifles away in the arms room until the next time we needed them, just as it had been done since the Army’s inception. The military police protected us from threats in garrison. They had 9 mm Berettas to carry. They were the only soldiers who carry weapons in garrison. We trusted them to protect us, and they delivered. With notably rare exceptions, this system has worked well. There are fewer shootings on Army posts than in society in general, probably because soldiers are actively discouraged from walking around with rifles, despite being impeccably well trained with them. Perchance, we could have the largely untrained civilian population take a page from that book?

I understand that people want to be able to own guns. That’s ok. We just need to really think about how we’re managing this. Yes, we have to manage it, just as we manage car ownership. People have to get a license to operate a car, and if you operate a car without a license, you’re going to get in trouble for that. We manage all things in society that can pose a danger to other people by their misuse. In addition to cars, we manage drugs, alcohol, exotic animals (there are certain zip codes where you can’t own Serval cats, for example), and fireworks, among other things. We restrict what types of businesses can operate in which zones of the city or county. We have a whole system of permitting for just about any activity a person wants to conduct since those activities could affect others, and we realize, as a society, that we need to try to minimize the risk to other people that comes from the chosen activities of those around them in which they have no say. Gun ownership is the one thing our country collectively refuses to manage, and the result is a lot of dead people.

I can’t drive a Formula One car to work. It would be really cool to be able to do that, and I could probably cut my commute time by a lot. Hey, I’m a good driver, a responsible Formula One owner. You shouldn’t be scared to be on the freeway next to me as I zip around you at 140 MPH, leaving your Mazda in a cloud of dust! Why are you scared? Cars don’t kill people. People kill people. Doesn’t this sound like bullshit? It is bullshit, and everybody knows. Not one person I know would argue non-ironically that Formula One cars on the freeway are a good idea. Yet, these same people will say it’s totally ok to own the firearm equivalent because, in the words of comedian Jim Jeffries, “fuck you, I like guns”.

Yes, yes, I hear you now. We have a second amendment to the constitution, which must be held sacrosanct over all other amendments. Dude. No. The constitution was made to be a malleable document. It’s intentionally vague. We can enact gun control without infringing on the right to bear arms. You can have your deer rifle. You can have your shotgun that you love to shoot clay pigeons with. You can have your target pistol. Get a license. Get a training course. Recertify at a predetermined interval. You do not need a military grade rifle. You don’t. There’s no excuse.

“But we’re supposed to protect against tyranny! I need the same weapons the military would come at me with!” Dude. You know where I can get an Apache helicopter and a Paladin?! Hook a girl up! Seriously, though, do you really think you’d be able to hold off the government with an individual level weapon? Because you wouldn’t. One grenade, and you’re toast. Don’t have these illusions of standing up to the government, and needing military style rifles for that purpose. You’re not going to stand up to the government with this thing. They’d take you out in about half a second.

Let’s be honest. You just want a cool toy, and for the vast majority of people, that’s all an AR-15 is. It’s something fun to take to the range and put some really wicked holes in a piece of paper. Good for you. I know how enjoyable that is. I’m sure for a certain percentage of people, they might not kill anyone driving a Formula One car down the freeway, or owning a Cheetah as a pet, or setting off professional grade fireworks without a permit. Some people are good with this stuff, and some people are lucky, but those cases don’t negate the overall rule. Military style rifles have been the choice du jour in the incidents that have made our country the mass shootings capitol of the world. Formula One cars aren’t good for commuting. Cheetahs are bitey. Professional grade fireworks will probably take your hand off. All but one of these are common sense to the average American. Let’s fix that. Be honest, you don’t need that AR-15. Nobody does. Society needs them gone, no matter how good you may be with yours. Kids are dying, and it’s time to stop fucking around."
 

rise

Diamond Member
Dec 13, 2004
9,116
46
91
Its easy to have no faith in trump, congress and the nra so when I hear trumpo referring to "improving security measures" I just know he's going to start alluding to CCW as a "discussion". Warms my heart.

These kids and their parents aren't going away. I'll be in Boston supporting them on March 24.
 

rise

Diamond Member
Dec 13, 2004
9,116
46
91
and the fla state house taught them kids a valuable lesson, from the gop to them- don't bother, we don't care!
 
sale-70-410-exam    | Exam-200-125-pdf    | we-sale-70-410-exam    | hot-sale-70-410-exam    | Latest-exam-700-603-Dumps    | Dumps-98-363-exams-date    | Certs-200-125-date    | Dumps-300-075-exams-date    | hot-sale-book-C8010-726-book    | Hot-Sale-200-310-Exam    | Exam-Description-200-310-dumps?    | hot-sale-book-200-125-book    | Latest-Updated-300-209-Exam    | Dumps-210-260-exams-date    | Download-200-125-Exam-PDF    | Exam-Description-300-101-dumps    | Certs-300-101-date    | Hot-Sale-300-075-Exam    | Latest-exam-200-125-Dumps    | Exam-Description-200-125-dumps    | Latest-Updated-300-075-Exam    | hot-sale-book-210-260-book    | Dumps-200-901-exams-date    | Certs-200-901-date    | Latest-exam-1Z0-062-Dumps    | Hot-Sale-1Z0-062-Exam    | Certs-CSSLP-date    | 100%-Pass-70-383-Exams    | Latest-JN0-360-real-exam-questions    | 100%-Pass-4A0-100-Real-Exam-Questions    | Dumps-300-135-exams-date    | Passed-200-105-Tech-Exams    | Latest-Updated-200-310-Exam    | Download-300-070-Exam-PDF    | Hot-Sale-JN0-360-Exam    | 100%-Pass-JN0-360-Exams    | 100%-Pass-JN0-360-Real-Exam-Questions    | Dumps-JN0-360-exams-date    | Exam-Description-1Z0-876-dumps    | Latest-exam-1Z0-876-Dumps    | Dumps-HPE0-Y53-exams-date    | 2017-Latest-HPE0-Y53-Exam    | 100%-Pass-HPE0-Y53-Real-Exam-Questions    | Pass-4A0-100-Exam    | Latest-4A0-100-Questions    | Dumps-98-365-exams-date    | 2017-Latest-98-365-Exam    | 100%-Pass-VCS-254-Exams    | 2017-Latest-VCS-273-Exam    | Dumps-200-355-exams-date    | 2017-Latest-300-320-Exam    | Pass-300-101-Exam    | 100%-Pass-300-115-Exams    |
http://www.portvapes.co.uk/    | http://www.portvapes.co.uk/    |