To do the right thing, you might have to Die

jebdad said:
As a hunter, I have never needed a 30 round magazine. I disagree with you home protection statement. Do you think a Ukraine citizen wouldn't appreciation a 30 round mag on their rifle? Do you think such a need is completely out of the realm of possibility in the US?
Click to expand...
Standard issue US Service Rifle mags are 20 round by the way.
 
Humey said:
How about i want 30 round magazine because i want to have fun on the firing range.. I don't think the "just because i want it" argument is nonsense. I find that having to give a reason why someone wants something just plain wrong. I don't need to justify my reasons for wanting something. If i were to buy an AR-15, it wouldn't be for safety or hunting. It would be to go to range and enjoy myself. Its nobody's business what i i do with it or why i want it as long as i use it legally. I am thinking of getting into knife smithing. Big fan of the tv show Forged in Fire and going to take a 2 week course on it. I am not going to make steak knives. I am going to want to make large knives and swords. I am not going to make them for protection or hunting. I am going to make them because they are cool and I want them.
Click to expand...
But that argument has limits too: I want an anti-tank gun because they're cool and make a whooshing sound when I blow a junked car into pieces. Oh, and I want full auto and armor piercing and I want it when I'm 16. Of course there have to be limits on multiple fronts, and there are. But the fact is some guns, some features like extended clips, are far more likely to be involved in the mass events than a deer rifle or duck gun so the limits vary according to where the risks are. For the record, in addition to some sort of restrictions on rapid fire and huge magazines I'd listen to arguments for trigger locks on handguns in homes with kids and red flag laws in general to save the rest of us. If you can make a case for training to insert some elasticity in there I'd listen to that too. None fix everything, but all make a difference.
 
StPaulDad said:
But that argument has limits too: I want an anti-tank gun because they're cool and make a whooshing sound when I blow a junked car into pieces. Oh, and I want full auto and armor piercing and I want it when I'm 16. Of course there have to be limits on multiple fronts, and there are. But the fact is some guns, some features like extended clips, are far more likely to be involved in the mass events than a deer rifle or duck gun so the limits vary according to where the risks are. For the record, in addition to some sort of restrictions on rapid fire and huge magazines I'd listen to arguments for trigger locks on handguns in homes with kids and red flag laws in general to save the rest of us. If you can make a case for training to insert some elasticity in there I'd listen to that too. None fix everything, but all make a difference.
Click to expand...
Of course, there are limits. But that concept can also be used to say that limit is water guns. I am mostly not into the slippery slope conspiracy ideas so I get there should be limitations. Weapons used in a war would be a nice limit. So an anti-tank weapon is a military weapon so people shouldn't be using it for personal reasons. . An AR-15 last time I checked, isn't used by any military in the world. I understand the idea of limiting high capacity magazines, but how many people will be saved if a killer has one 30-round magazine compared to holding three 10-round magazines. Would that have made any difference in the elementary school killings? I guess if by switching magazines, the rifle may have jammed. So in we are hoping a mechanical failure will somehow save the lives of people when the gunman is switching magazines.. Now having said that, i would have to imagine that if a gunman had a 30 round magazine, that would make him really dangerous to cops when they confront the gunman, so i see the other side of the picture also
 
NJROTC-CC said:
Standard issue US Service Rifle mags are 20 round by the way.
Click to expand...
That's not accurate at all.

The Marine Corps uses Gen 3 Magpul Pmags, which are 30-round polymer magazines.
The Army still uses the Enhanced Performance Magazine (EPM), which is a 30-round aluminum magazine.
SEALS use Colt metal (aluminum or steel) magazines in their 30-round and 50-round iterations.
The Air Force just reads golf magazines. ;)
 
THParent said:
That's not accurate at all.

The Marine Corps uses Gen 3 Magpul Pmags, which are 30-round polymer magazines.
The Army still uses the Enhanced Performance Magazine (EPM), which is a 30-round aluminum magazine.
SEALS use Colt metal (aluminum or steel) magazines in their 30-round and 50-round iterations.
The Air Force just reads golf magazines. ;)
Click to expand...
I stand corrected. At one time, 20 round mags were standard. The last time I competed in a NRA service rifle match, the rules were limited to "stand issue" 20 round mags
 
This has been a great thread and I'm glad the debate has been respectful and hasn't needed to be locked down.

At the end of the day, I always struggle with the simple logic that those who are willing to kill are breaking the law. What could possibly make us believe that they would follow gun laws? Or magazine limits?

By simply entering the schools they are violating 'gun-free zone' laws. Clearly, they don't care.

I tend to agree with the limited capacity point that if someone willing to kill and break laws wants to do so, they will just carry more magazines.

Over and over I come back to the absolute breakdown of the family. If you look into the majority of 'mass shootings' you will find that the criminal came from a broken family. Predominantly fatherless families. That cannot be a coincidence.

No matter how hard single parents work to be stellar parents, they still only have one set of eyes and ears to monitor their children's behavior.

I have spent 8 years in a local public high school. I have encountered parents who don't know their kids have burner phones. Parents who have no clue what social media apps provide their kids access to, or whom.

Parents who don't know why their son brought a BB gun to school. Allegedly by accident.

Sadly, I have met kids and spent time with them that I wonder if I might read about in the news one day. Loners, male, reclusive, avoid eye contact and wear their hair over their eyes to further avoid human interaction. Add to that hoods to further hide from interpersonal relationships Socially awkward, immature, angry. Should I report every one of them? Post-Covid that might be 35% of all high school males.

Technology has a role here, too, IMHO. Phones, apps, games, computers, continuous means of streaming, IPads, tablets, where does it end? Kids have access to sites I couldn't possibly imagine or know where to find.

Parents are engaged in these technological activities as well and that further disengages them from active parenting.

My DH traveled out of state for work for over a decade when our kids were young. The demands on me were huge, I was a cook, maid, driver, personal assistant, fan, enforcer at large, you name it. Some days, I turned a blind eye to excessive screen time or a salty attitude. And I had means and a DH who supported us financially.

Not all single parents have the means, spare time, or energy. Extended families contribute, but I have yet to meet a Grandparent who can navigate TicTok or understands what a burner phone is. Or that their grandkid is using THC oil in a device that looks like a lipstick tube in class. ALL DAY. And that kid is 14 (not making it up, experienced this first hand). Excessive marijuana use via vapes in the undeveloped brains has consequences. Marijuana isn't what it used to be. Concentration levels of THC are incredibly high, and via vapes, they can use the product far more often than a traditional 'doobie', most of the time without detection.

The shootings that took place last weekend in Philly and TN involved young adults. I would bet most parents had no idea where they were or that they possessed guns. And I doubt those weapons were obtained through legal channels (not all info has been released, yes I am speculating). Young men in this country need mentors, guidance, and leadership. They need to be held accountable by parents, guardians, schools, and the community for the smallest of illegal transgressions early on. We let too much go by the wayside.

Anyhow, just my 2 cents.
 
THParent said:
That's not accurate at all.

The Marine Corps uses Gen 3 Magpul Pmags, which are 30-round polymer magazines.
The Army still uses the Enhanced Performance Magazine (EPM), which is a 30-round aluminum magazine.
SEALS use Colt metal (aluminum or steel) magazines in their 30-round and 50-round iterations.
The Air Force just reads golf magazines. ;)
Click to expand...
I love the Air Force comment. That was fantastic. Gave me quite a laugh. I think my son who is in the AF, has shot a weapon once in 4 years
 
Heatherg21 said:
At the end of the day, I always struggle with the simple logic that those who are willing to kill are breaking the law. What could possibly make us believe that they would follow gun laws? Or magazine limits?
Click to expand...
Correct. However, gun manufacturers and sellers would not sell guns to 18 year olds if it were against the law. So, the Uvalde shooter, who was 18 would not have been able to walk into a store and legally buy a gun. He might not have been able to figure out how to buy a "black market" gun. It certainly would have been more difficult. Why does anyone care about an 18 year old's right to buy a firearm? I just don't get it. Raise the age to at least 21.
 
Heatherg21 said:
This has been a great thread and I'm glad the debate has been respectful and hasn't needed to be locked down.

At the end of the day, I always struggle with the simple logic that those who are willing to kill are breaking the law. What could possibly make us believe that they would follow gun laws? Or magazine limits?

By simply entering the schools they are violating 'gun-free zone' laws. Clearly, they don't care.

I tend to agree with the limited capacity point that if someone willing to kill and break laws wants to do so, they will just carry more magazines.

Over and over I come back to the absolute breakdown of the family. If you look into the majority of 'mass shootings' you will find that the criminal came from a broken family. Predominantly fatherless families. That cannot be a coincidence.

No matter how hard single parents work to be stellar parents, they still only have one set of eyes and ears to monitor their children's behavior.

I have spent 8 years in a local public high school. I have encountered parents who don't know their kids have burner phones. Parents who have no clue what social media apps provide their kids access to, or whom.

Parents who don't know why their son brought a BB gun to school. Allegedly by accident.

Sadly, I have met kids and spent time with them that I wonder if I might read about in the news one day. Loners, male, reclusive, avoid eye contact and wear their hair over their eyes to further avoid human interaction. Add to that hoods to further hide from interpersonal relationships Socially awkward, immature, angry. Should I report every one of them? Post-Covid that might be 35% of all high school males.

Technology has a role here, too, IMHO. Phones, apps, games, computers, continuous means of streaming, IPads, tablets, where does it end? Kids have access to sites I couldn't possibly imagine or know where to find.

Parents are engaged in these technological activities as well and that further disengages them from active parenting.

My DH traveled out of state for work for over a decade when our kids were young. The demands on me were huge, I was a cook, maid, driver, personal assistant, fan, enforcer at large, you name it. Some days, I turned a blind eye to excessive screen time or a salty attitude. And I had means and a DH who supported us financially.

Not all single parents have the means, spare time, or energy. Extended families contribute, but I have yet to meet a Grandparent who can navigate TicTok or understands what a burner phone is. Or that their grandkid is using THC oil in a device that looks like a lipstick tube in class. ALL DAY. And that kid is 14 (not making it up, experienced this first hand). Excessive marijuana use via vapes in the undeveloped brains has consequences. Marijuana isn't what it used to be. Concentration levels of THC are incredibly high, and via vapes, they can use the product far more often than a traditional 'doobie', most of the time without detection.

The shootings that took place last weekend in Philly and TN involved young adults. I would bet most parents had no idea where they were or that they possessed guns. And I doubt those weapons were obtained through legal channels (not all info has been released, yes I am speculating). Young men in this country need mentors, guidance, and leadership. They need to be held accountable by parents, guardians, schools, and the community for the smallest of illegal transgressions early on. We let too much go by the wayside.

Anyhow, just my 2 cents.you
Click to expand...
you are 100% correct, the problem is how do you fix that.
 
NJROTC-CC said:
Correct. However, gun manufacturers and sellers would not sell guns to 18 year olds if it were against the law. So, the Uvalde shooter, who was 18 would not have been able to walk into a store and legally buy a gun. He might not have been able to figure out how to buy a "black market" gun. It certainly would have been more difficult. Why does anyone care about an 18 year old's right to buy a firearm? I just don't get it. Raise the age to at least 21.
Click to expand...
i agree with you. They should raise it But it only makes sense since he was 18. What if the next guy who does this is 23, then what? I guess it takes care of the 18-20 years olds, but i feel like that is putting Neosporin on a gunshot. Sure it cant hurt, but will really fix anything
 
Humey said:
i agree with you. They should raise it But it only makes sense since he was 18. What if the next guy who does this is 23, then what? I guess it takes care of the 18-20 years olds, but i feel like that is putting Neosporin on a gunshot. Sure it cant hurt, but will really fix anything
Click to expand...
It is actually more sensible and potentially impactful than what my local governor is pushing. We in NJ, already have almost all of the rules anyone else is even thinking about so the next step is to totally outlaw .50 cal rifles in the state.
Actual .50 cal rifles are used for long range target shooting contests and are very rare because the ammo is so freakin expensive. Number of deaths dues to .50 cals in recent memory. . . zero but it makes people happy that they're doing SOMETHING.
NOTE: We're talking about a place where even BB guns require a full-up gun permit so that you don't "shoot your eye out".
 
NJROTC-CC said:
Correct. However, gun manufacturers and sellers would not sell guns to 18 year olds if it were against the law. So, the Uvalde shooter, who was 18 would not have been able to walk into a store and legally buy a gun. He might not have been able to figure out how to buy a "black market" gun. It certainly would have been more difficult. Why does anyone care about an 18 year old's right to buy a firearm? I just don't get it. Raise the age to at least 21.
Click to expand...
A Federal Court in CA ruled it unconstitutional. I guess that's why I see it as a no-starter. And again, I believe they would acquire the weapon illegally.

Barring asking our military to work with police to go door to door and confiscate every existing 'assault weapon' (and the definition that is broad, and most of Congress cannot articulate what they mean by it, or have never spent time around weapons), the guns will stay available to those who want to sell them illegally, steal them, acquire them illegally, etc.

I think the problem is huge, massive. I just don't believe gun laws will fix it. It's my personal opinion, and I know not one that some will agree with or like.
 
NJROTC-CC said:
Correct. However, gun manufacturers and sellers would not sell guns to 18 year olds if it were against the law. So, the Uvalde shooter, who was 18 would not have been able to walk into a store and legally buy a gun. He might not have been able to figure out how to buy a "black market" gun. It certainly would have been more difficult. Why does anyone care about an 18 year old's right to buy a firearm? I just don't get it. Raise the age to at least 21.
Click to expand...
So the one in a million school shooter dictates whether law abiding 18-21 year olds can legally exercise their constitutional right to purchase a weapon for any lawful purpose? Maybe if there were sufficient mental health services, and a connection between mental health treatment, police contacts and the background check system we could avoid the sale to these shooters. The most recent ones to which you are referring were all well known to local law enforcement, but passed the background check because there wasn’t a criminal conviction.

“Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety.” Benjamin Franklin, 1755.
 
Heatherg21 said:
This has been a great thread and I'm glad the debate has been respectful and hasn't needed to be locked down.

At the end of the day, I always struggle with the simple logic that those who are willing to kill are breaking the law. What could possibly make us believe that they would follow gun laws? Or magazine limits?

By simply entering the schools they are violating 'gun-free zone' laws. Clearly, they don't care.

I tend to agree with the limited capacity point that if someone willing to kill and break laws wants to do so, they will just carry more magazines.

Over and over I come back to the absolute breakdown of the family. If you look into the majority of 'mass shootings' you will find that the criminal came from a broken family. Predominantly fatherless families. That cannot be a coincidence.

No matter how hard single parents work to be stellar parents, they still only have one set of eyes and ears to monitor their children's behavior.

I have spent 8 years in a local public high school. I have encountered parents who don't know their kids have burner phones. Parents who have no clue what social media apps provide their kids access to, or whom.

Parents who don't know why their son brought a BB gun to school. Allegedly by accident.

Sadly, I have met kids and spent time with them that I wonder if I might read about in the news one day. Loners, male, reclusive, avoid eye contact and wear their hair over their eyes to further avoid human interaction. Add to that hoods to further hide from interpersonal relationships Socially awkward, immature, angry. Should I report every one of them? Post-Covid that might be 35% of all high school males.

Technology has a role here, too, IMHO. Phones, apps, games, computers, continuous means of streaming, IPads, tablets, where does it end? Kids have access to sites I couldn't possibly imagine or know where to find.

Parents are engaged in these technological activities as well and that further disengages them from active parenting.

My DH traveled out of state for work for over a decade when our kids were young. The demands on me were huge, I was a cook, maid, driver, personal assistant, fan, enforcer at large, you name it. Some days, I turned a blind eye to excessive screen time or a salty attitude. And I had means and a DH who supported us financially.

Not all single parents have the means, spare time, or energy. Extended families contribute, but I have yet to meet a Grandparent who can navigate TicTok or understands what a burner phone is. Or that their grandkid is using THC oil in a device that looks like a lipstick tube in class. ALL DAY. And that kid is 14 (not making it up, experienced this first hand). Excessive marijuana use via vapes in the undeveloped brains has consequences. Marijuana isn't what it used to be. Concentration levels of THC are incredibly high, and via vapes, they can use the product far more often than a traditional 'doobie', most of the time without detection.

The shootings that took place last weekend in Philly and TN involved young adults. I would bet most parents had no idea where they were or that they possessed guns. And I doubt those weapons were obtained through legal channels (not all info has been released, yes I am speculating). Young men in this country need mentors, guidance, and leadership. They need to be held accountable by parents, guardians, schools, and the community for the smallest of illegal transgressions early on. We let too much go by the wayside.

Anyhow, just my 2 cents.
Click to expand...
.
Time for Standard Dress, Hair length, and rules against visible Body art … in all Public and Private schools.

One National standard …
.
 
U.S. Rep. Grace Meng (D-NY) has repeatedly introduced legislation in the House of Representatives to lower the voting age in America to 16 years old. If you think it's easy to manipulate adults into voting one way or the other, it's got to be really easy to get 16-year-olds to believe any cherry-picked data you come up with. Hey, it's on Instragram, it must be true!
 
THParent said:
U.S. Rep. Grace Meng (D-NY) has repeatedly introduced legislation in the House of Representatives to lower the voting age in America to 16 years old. If you think it's easy to manipulate adults into voting one way or the other, it's got to be really easy to get 16-year-olds to believe any cherry-picked data you come up with. Hey, it's on Instragram, it must be true!
Click to expand...
Thats scary. I really hope she is alone in supporting that legislation.
 
The 14th, 19th, and 26th amendments to our Constitution made it so you had to be male and 21-years of age, then 21-years of age regardless of sex, and finally just 18 years of age (in that order). There have been five (5) amendments in my lifetime, so it's not out of the realm of possibility given that it's another way to get into (or stay in) office for all of our wonderful professional politicians.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top