Gun Control

[MoValley John]

I don't support a weapons ban. I've got some problems with the AR-type weapons and big clips. Those were designed as offensive weapons and they're not that great in a defensive situation.

I'm also not big on the argument that civilians need their weapons to protect them from an overstepping and tyrannical government. Using weapons in that wituation will always result in firing on (and possibly killing) law enforcement personnel.

What would the attitude be on liability insurance for owners of firearms? Just like we've got for owner/operators of vehicles. If a weapon registered to you is used to injure or kill someone, your liability insurance pays the medical bills and any pain and suffering that might be awarded - just like liability insurance on vehicles.

Maybe an idea worth looking at. That said, just like losers who don't keep their auto insurance current, why would a criminal buy a policy. Legal gun owners are responsible for very few gun deaths. How do you amortize risk?

[MoValley John]

Great read.

http://crimeresearch.org/2014/03/comparing-murder-rates-across-countries/

[MoValley John]

Awesome read.

https://mises.org/blog/mistake-only-comparing-us-murder-rates-developed-countries

[MoValley John]

I've posted some good stuff. Pretty reliable, too. No NRA stuff.

More pie charts anyone?

[pie n eye]

Besides the hilarious jokes (sarcasm) about the murder of innocent people, that line of reasoning doesn't make sense.

Trucks were created to transport people and goods from one place to another.

Guns were created to kill.

Sure a vehicle can be a weapon but that's not its primary purpose.

Yeah you can go to the shooting range or a field and take target practice but thats not what we're talking aboout. Guns were created to kill.

Trucks \= Guns.

[MoValley John]

Besides the hilarious jokes (sarcasm) about the murder of innocent people, that line of reasoning doesn't make sense.

Trucks were created to transport people and goods from one place to another.

Guns were created to kill.

Sure a vehicle can be a weapon but that's not its primary purpose.

Yeah you can go to the shooting range or a field and take target practice but thats not what we're talking aboout. Guns were created to kill.

Trucks \= Guns.

It wasn't supposed to make sense. It was to point out the idiocy of the gun control movement.

I don't care the intended purpose of an object, almost anything can be used as a killing weapon, a golf club, a bed post, kitchen chemicals or even a spoon. The fact of the matter, and yes, I am the only one that has posted sourced facts, is that banning guns does nothing to curbing violence. Spend a few minutes reading my links, they don't support the notion that gun control fixes anything- and none of them are from the NRA.

Gun control legislation is a feel good position not based on facts. Hate, anger, greed, distrust and jealousy are some of things that spur violence, not the recreational shooter. Recreational shooters take good care of their guns, protect them and buy licenses and permits that help maintain the wilderness and wildlife. Mass shootings, car bombs, trucks careening into people are all things that are currently happening in the country with the most restrictive gun laws. And France is also the European leader in the underground gun trade. Gun control ain't doing ****.

But the beret wearing, wine drinking Frenchman smugly believes gun control is working. All the while, terrorism is ripping his country apart. The terrorists have found the weak underbelly, the country where the honest citizens disarmed. Nice work, France.

[pinstripers]

What would the attitude be on liability insurance for owners of firearms? Just like we've got for owner/operators of vehicles. If a weapon registered to you is used to injure or kill someone, your liability insurance pays the medical bills and any pain and suffering that might be awarded - just like liability insurance on vehicles.

For God's sake.......

[wufan]

I don't support a weapons ban. I've got some problems with the AR-type weapons and big clips. Those were designed as offensive weapons and they're not that great in a defensive situation.

I'm also not big on the argument that civilians need their weapons to protect them from an overstepping and tyrannical government. Using weapons in that wituation will always result in firing on (and possibly killing) law enforcement personnel.

What would the attitude be on liability insurance for owners of firearms? Just like we've got for owner/operators of vehicles. If a weapon registered to you is used to injure or kill someone, your liability insurance pays the medical bills and any pain and suffering that might be awarded - just like liability insurance on vehicles.

Do you think the insurance company in Nice is planning on paying the medical bill?

[MoValley John]

http://mobile.nytimes.com/2014/09/14/sunday-review/the-assault-weapon-myth.html

[SB Shock]

I've got some problems with the AR-type weapons and big clips. Those were designed as offensive weapons and they're not that great in a defensive situation.

Not great in defensive situations? LOL.

[DwShock]

AR-type weapons and big clips

Don't you mean Magazine?

Put a clip of bullets on an AR and it's not going to fire. And it would look silly.

[MoValley John]

Don't you mean Magazine?

Put a clip of bullets on an AR and it's not going to fire. And it would look silly.

I reserve pointing out ignorance on the difference between clips and magazines for Shock Khan.

[MoValley John]

attachment.jpg

Should this weapon be banned?

[shock]

.

[shock]

[ATTACH=CONFIG]3850[/ATTACH]

Should this weapon be banned?

Should this one?