You meet the nicest people at the gun range...

What does my comprehension have to do with the availability of ammo? A 3rd grader could comprehend the point that you were trying to make, and would probably find it equally ludicrous. "Gun people are nice people" Such a profound statement you make.

- - - Updated - - -

I quoted you directly from your original post. What you would like is irrelevant on a debate forum. If you don't like people disagreeing with your incorrect assertions, perhaps a different forum would be easier on your delicate sensibilities.

 

Pathetic attempt at deflection. Your reading comprehension is everything here - and that's me being generous, the alternative being you are intentionally and repeatedly misrepresenting my position. Ah, (*)(*)(*)(*) it: You are intentionally and repeatedly misrepresenting my position. Stop it.

What you quoted has no rational relation to what you attempted to attribute to me or my position. Your attribution is a non sequitur, an illogical conclusion, and simply factually wrong.

I'm asking you politely to stop intentionally misrepresenting my position. I could be less polite if you prefer. It makes no difference to me - you are the one making yourself look stupid.

You can disagree with me all you want. What you can't do is intentionally misrepresent my position - repeatedly, as you have done here, leastways not if you wish to have even a shred of credibility. Perhaps a different forum would be easier on your pathetic reading comprehension and/or logical acuity.

 

Then you should not use the word want.

We differ on this point. I don't think the state should be the party to determine what is necessary, but rather a free citizen.

I know exactly what it means. I reject its premise prima facie. And you are trying to conflate violence and firearms - sneaky, but I'm not taking your bait. A firearm is an inanimate object. If you want a monopoly on violence, you'll need to do better than that.

A state that enforces its will on its citizens does not have citizens. It has, instead, subjects.

King George would not argue with you one bit.

Lucky for us. But the North Koreans are not so lucky, are they? To live under Kim's monopoly of violence.

Tell that to the citizens of Paris.

And when that fails?

You have an awful lot of faith in the benevolence of your state masters. I prefer to live as a free citizen of this constitutional republic. I have less faith than you, apparently. But still... you meet the nicest people at the gun range.

Not sure that's even a sentence let alone what it's trying to say.

But they WILL have weapons. The bad guys - if they want them - they will have them.

 

How so? My statement has just about the same amount of credibility that yours does. Of course, I said it to make a point. The point is, the statement itself doesn't mean jack(*)(*)(*)(*) because its just me saying something from my experience. I may very well have met really nice gulag guards, but we all know that the gulags were not nice places; the people who ran them were not nice people, and this is obviously a disproportionate and misrepresenting claim. It'd be like going to a White Supremacist organization, getting treated very nicely by everyone there, and then assuming that the majority White Supremacists are nice people. Whereas every charity even you go to has a bunch of rude people, and so you then conclude that White Supremacists organisations house the nicest people and volunteers at charities house the rudest people.

 

ANY administration is REQUIRED to address situations of this magnitude and investigate possible solutions. Just because Hillary or Obama is not responsible for the deaths doesn't mean we should ignore the issue.

 

There's a message from fantasyland. Look. We already know that the Agenda is Confiscation. If you were concerned about denying access to those with a history of bad behavior, those who were convicted would serve their complete sentence, on weapons charges. This is certainly NOT happening. Instead, over 70% of all persons who are arrested for gun crimes have previous violent convictions, and over 80% of all who are arrested for murder have killed before.
Oh- and these are not the kind you find at the local gun range.

 

I just wish that gun owners and those not owning guns would work together to minimize these needless deaths.

 

Why are you putting it on gun owners to fix this? I've never fathered a fatherless child, who later grew up to be a gang banger. I'm not a judge or attorney, or even a cop.
If the libs who are so determined to improve the society we live in, they would lay off of trying to criminalize the Constitution, and concentrate on keeping violent criminals from committing violent crimes.
We know from statistics that there is a 70% chance that a first time violent offender will offend again.
We know from statistics that there is an 80% chance that a first time murderer will kill again.
Bring back Capital punishment. There's an EXCELLENT start.

 

Wow. There has been a drought in .22LR ammo for years now. Here in Las Vegas, it's basically impossible to find. I was in a Walmart today where I used to get it, and only found .22 shorts.
If you don't know about the gun environment, maybe you shouldn't have a whole lot to say about it.

 

How many people from the hood do you see on a golf course ?

Last year Turners Outdoor Sports had a sale, the first 100 Ruger 10/22's would be sold for just $100. No camping out but the lines started forming two hours before the stores opened. They opened the doors at 9 AM and nobody rushed to the counter, a line formed without any one telling the customers to form a line. No shoving, no cutting in line, it was like back when America was great, before political correctness was shoved up America's butt.

 

This thread is revealing something that doesn't get talked about very much. The "gun culture" is indeed a culture, and one that some find hard to understand.
It's been a part of mankind since mankind began. Before firearms existed, it was recognized that there were men of letters, and there were men of arms. Until relatively recent times, each understood that the other was needed to keep a nation intact.
The "first world" as we know it has existed for only a century or so. 100 years ago in America, there were still "savages" on the frontier. Since then, the majority of people in industrialized nations have come to live in cities, and have grown complacent about the need for self defense.
Those of us who are men of arms are well aware of the tradition, and the protocol of arms. We are very well behaved amongst ourselves.
Where I go shooting, it's a kind of free for all place. There is no authority. People set up wherever they please. They shoot whatever gun they want to, at whatever target they choose. I've been going there for 7 years now, and there has NEVER been an accidental shooting. I can walk up on a group of shooters, carrying an AR-15 and a Glock, and everyone is polite. A friend of mine goes out there, collecting fired brass with his 72 year old wife, and they are perfectly safe, even when there are 200 or more shooters all over the place. This is the gun culture.
To be fair, I can't stand to hang around in an office environment.

 

I've always had positive experiences on the range.

 

What are you going on about? I wrote that I would have wanted a gun too if I lived in the USA 400 years ago.

I do. Just like we ban dangerous stuff all the time. The state is in the business of denying its citizens stuff that can be a danger to others. Unfortunately it also deems it necessary to decide on things that aren't.

From this response it does not seem you have a very good grasp on the notion of monopoly of violence.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Monopoly_on_violence
The Bundy cases and the many tragic shootings and standoffs show exactly that your state has a problem with this. Something that should worry all American citizens.

What? Every state in the history of man has forced it's will on its citizens. Someone will always disagree with something the state does or rules. We are all subjects of the law whether we like them or not.

Ask Somalis or Afghanis whether they would want a state with a monopoly of violence. Or any other failed state where people live in fear.

What a cheap and disgusting comment. The French state still enjoys a monopoly of violence. <Rule 3>

You better hope it doesn't- Because when it did we had Mussolini and Hitler as a result.

My state masters? You mean my neighbours, friends and myself who run for public office? The state is you. You are the state. I never understood why some people have this idea that the state is an evil entity made up of evil people. It is a democracy. The people you voted for. Run for office if you think they are so bad.
You meet the nicest people in jails. they are all civil and walk in lines.
Your comment wasn't intelligent when you made it the first time and it still isn't.

Foreign invaders have a hard time subjugating even the most primitive people. Your country should know better than most. I think maybe you don't get it because your psyche was hurt by the many failures at just that.

Bad guys don't where I come from. It is true though that letting people get weapons for centuries has doomed your country to perpetual violence and at some point you will become a failed state. If you aren't already in many places.

 

Just sightly over a year and a half ago all ammo. circa Sandy Hook, was scarce, not any more as shelves are full again, and you still cannot find 22 unless you want to pay a kings fortune for it.

 

What law would you enact to prevent the next Sandy Hook?

 

But you need to understand it's society's fault that these bad guys behave badly. So therefore, it's not fair to punish only them. You have to punish society as well.

- - - Updated - - -

Since you completely ignored Joe's point, what is your solution?

 

Yes indeed and that is why the first thing a totalitarian government does is to confiscate guns " for your own good".

 

Weird... Since Hitler relaxed gun laws and Mussolini never restricted them. What totalitarian governments did so?
Fascists in Italy and Germany had these youth organisations where kids fired weapons and trained with them to make them into good soldiers for their inevitable wars of aggression their ideologies promoted.
Americans and history. You neither have one nor seem to read it.

 

That has always been my experience - at the range, at a gun shop, basically any time I'm around law-abiding gun owners. You never see anyone with their pants around their knees...

 

I don't trust the safety habits of strangers at the range. I'd rather shoot outside on private land without having to worry about other peoples' muzzle awareness.

 

I shoot in a similar spot sometimes - an abandoned quarry on national forest land. We draw a "firing line" in the dirt and about every 20 minutes or so, somebody yells "cease fire." By mutual agreement, we all holster our weapons, approach our targets, make the necessary adjustments, and not a single person even thinks about handling a firearm until all are safely back on the hot side of the line. You'll find every kind of person shooting there - old, young, black, white, even a few cops from time-to-time. There is a sense of both personal and collective responsibility and also a makeshift camaraderie as guys will come by who want to check out your new Glock because they've been thinking of buying one. "You want to put a few rounds downrange with it?" "Sure." Here you go...

Or when I go to the gun store... or the gun club... Well, it's just not like this:

[video=youtube;1stTPHebdIs]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1stTPHebdIs[/video]

 

Maybe this was a local issue for you guys.

I digress. Every time I go into our local sporting range I see someone who I don't think should operate a tooth brush much less a firearm. Wanting to be armed is not a civic virtue.

 

Wanting to be armed doesn't depend on your approval.

 

I'm all for going after criminals and the mentally disturbed. What is your problem? Oh yea, blame the inanimate object. I see the deaths of these children any child as a very disturbing tragedy, but when a child is killed in a car wreck by a drunk driver I don't blame the alcohol or the car, I blame the reckless bastard who drank too much and then got behind the wheel.

 

Nope it doesn't. It also doesnt not make someone nice, as asserted in the OP.