Las Vegas Shooting

Discussion in 'World News, Current Events & Politics' started by brickmii82, Oct 2, 2017.

  1. Quantumcat

    Quantumcat Dead and alive

    Member
    12,382
    6,724
    Nov 23, 2014
    Australia
    Canberra, Australia
    @VartioArtel rifles are needed for target shooting. I've been on a target range once. A shotgun wouldn't cut it :-p I don't think rifles are all that bad (at least the one I used) as it takes like 30 seconds to even load the bullet in and pull all the different levers and things.
     
  2. VartioArtel

    VartioArtel Member

    Newcomer
    41
    41
    Oct 3, 2012
    United States
    >Target shooting.

    Read: A hobby. Which I've made clear in my posts I do not view under any circumstances as a legitimate reason for a rifle.

    Also, what you're describing sounds like a American Revolution era rifle, which is barely longer range than a normal handgun.

    Edit: You know what you can use on a target range though? A handgun. Unless you speak those over 100 feet away, but again, that's more a military shooting range, not something you ever need as a civilian.
     
    Last edited by VartioArtel, Oct 7, 2017
    felix.200 and TotalInsanity4 like this.
  3. Quantumcat

    Quantumcat Dead and alive

    Member
    12,382
    6,724
    Nov 23, 2014
    Australia
    Canberra, Australia
    It's still a rifle. I'm against guns more than anyone else in this thread, but using them for sport in a controlled way I view as fine(it was pretty much exactly like archery). It's when regular people start feeling scared and thinking a cupboard full of guns will make it better that I have a problem (now any criminal will have a gun, police are scared and more likely to shoot, civilians get killed by police, domestic violence people have easy access to guns, people who want to go on homicidal rampages have easy access to guns...)
     
  4. VartioArtel

    VartioArtel Member

    Newcomer
    41
    41
    Oct 3, 2012
    United States
    See. That's the thing: owning these rifles is one thing. Being able to borrow them from a federally managed location for a shooting range for practice is another. I don't want civilians to 'own' these rifles, as in to be able to take them home, prepare them as they please, prepare ammo for them, etc. I do not mind them being able to borrow them at a set location like you do the play-guns used at your state faire, for example.

    What you suggest would be the latter. So the point comes full circle: why should you be allowed to own a rifle? The answer still is: you shouldn't. Hunting's a valid reason but again, those should be managed by hunting associations, which I'd rather prefer Federally managed.
     
    Last edited by VartioArtel, Oct 7, 2017
    felix.200 and TotalInsanity4 like this.
  5. Quantumcat

    Quantumcat Dead and alive

    Member
    12,382
    6,724
    Nov 23, 2014
    Australia
    Canberra, Australia
    What about hunting?
     
  6. VartioArtel

    VartioArtel Member

    Newcomer
    41
    41
    Oct 3, 2012
    United States
    Literally editted that in a moment before you replied:
    "The answer still is: you shouldn't. Hunting's a valid reason but again, those should be managed by hunting associations, which I'd rather prefer Federally managed."

    Much like a shooting range, you don't need to keep a rifle at home, and hunting requires you need to report your kills (or so I'd hope!) to help keep track of when to cull the hunters to prevent over-hunting.

    Why would you need a rifle at home, when you're not hunting at home? In an essence, hunting is more a job than something you'd do at home. Do you take your forklift home? How about your price tag sticker generator used at stores? Those are two examples I could give to make relative terms.

    Edit: And that's why I've never seen 'hunting' as an excuse to 'owning' a rifle, as much as they should be maintained and stored by hunting associations.
     
  7. Hanafuda

    Hanafuda GBAtemp Advanced Maniac

    Member
    1,942
    712
    Nov 21, 2005
    United States

    Yes, much oppressions. Much Russias. So much.
     
    barronwaffles likes this.
  8. Flame

    Flame Me > You

    Member
    GBAtemp Patron
    Flame is a Patron of GBAtemp and is helping us stay independent!

    Our Patreon
    4,072
    5,537
    Jul 15, 2008
    said the white rich man. how ironic
     
  9. Quantumcat

    Quantumcat Dead and alive

    Member
    12,382
    6,724
    Nov 23, 2014
    Australia
    Canberra, Australia
    You can't leave your rifle out in the forest. It doesn't make sense. Where do you propose they keep them?
    I don't think it makes sense to have hunters report kills - that would be a massive administration burden, plus, if the idea is to preserve vulnerable species, having a ban on killing those vulnerable species would be easier. Here, I'm not sure on the laws exactly, but I believe you can shoot all the rabbits and wild pigs you want (they are pests) but you're not allowed to shoot any native species (even though the government has to do an annual kangaroo cull).
     
  10. Hanafuda

    Hanafuda GBAtemp Advanced Maniac

    Member
    1,942
    712
    Nov 21, 2005
    United States

    Tell me how more oppressed you are than last year.
     
    barronwaffles and DarthDub like this.
  11. VartioArtel

    VartioArtel Member

    Newcomer
    41
    41
    Oct 3, 2012
    United States
    Answered this before:
    =-=-=-=-==-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
    But it's something they do do. In fact:
    http://www.gon.com/news/game-check-is-mandatory


    http://www.dec.ny.gov/outdoor/8316.html

    Basically put:
    'Hunters are required to report the harvest of deer, bear, and turkey within 7 days of take. You may report your harvest using one of these methods:'

    Hunters are expected to basically report anything you'd kill with a rifle anyhow: bears and Deer.

    =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-

    Tl;Dr: it's not that huge a stretch if there was a revision to hunting so that you had to leave your rifles at the hunting association closest to you. Also removing rifles from public hands would reduce (not eliminate) the # of poachers anyhow, as Rifles would be harder to come by.
     
    Last edited by VartioArtel, Oct 7, 2017
    felix.200 likes this.
  12. TotalInsanity4

    TotalInsanity4 GBAtemp Supreme Overlord

    Member
    8,004
    8,028
    Dec 1, 2014
    United States
    Under a rock
    Kind of like what Switzerland does with their military. I agree
     
  13. gnmmarechal

    gnmmarechal Seriel's Original Stalker

    Member
    GBAtemp Patron
    gnmmarechal is a Patron of GBAtemp and is helping us stay independent!

    Our Patreon
    4,919
    3,139
    Jul 13, 2014
    Portugal
    https://gs2012.xyz
    >he's not Muslim so he's either a lone wolf or has mental issues

    wew logical fallacies
     
  14. TotalInsanity4

    TotalInsanity4 GBAtemp Supreme Overlord

    Member
    8,004
    8,028
    Dec 1, 2014
    United States
    Under a rock
    Do you... do you hear that?... that whistling noise?? I think I just saw the point fly right over your head!
     
  15. gnmmarechal

    gnmmarechal Seriel's Original Stalker

    Member
    GBAtemp Patron
    gnmmarechal is a Patron of GBAtemp and is helping us stay independent!

    Our Patreon
    4,919
    3,139
    Jul 13, 2014
    Portugal
    https://gs2012.xyz
    I'm not an idiot and I know what the point was. Was just poking fun at that particular sentence.
     
    DarthDub and TotalInsanity4 like this.
  16. SG854

    SG854 GBAtemp Advanced Fan

    Member
    909
    955
    Feb 17, 2017
    Jamaica
    What? I never said that. Stop making up crap I never said. Your response has no ground on reality.

    So expanding mens roles in society is gross? Not having strict gender roles to provide is gross? When did I ever say increasing women role in society was a bad thing. I didn't. No where I said that. What I said is that since we increased women roles we should also increase mens roles and give them more options and more purpose in life.

    Your completely missed the whole entire message because you were focusing on something I never said. Didn't you notice that I said girls were affected too? I mentioned that it leads to higher risk of being pregnant as teens for girls, girls suffer from mental and emotional health too from not being in intact families.

    They've been studying the impact of the family and child delinquency since the 1800's and the impact of single mother homes. It not about women taking place in society you idiot, its about the children. Doing whats best for the kid, and having equal custody rights so that your kid gets what is needed to properly develop into adulthood. Discipline comes from the home. Majority of inmates grew up in fatherless homes. I never said men shoot because women are taking their place in society you idiot, the underling message is that children, male and female, do poorly socially and economically coming from broken families. It starts at the home.

    Being in an intact family leads to better mental health and physical health of the kids. They have fewer learning disabilities.

    Children growing up with single moms are more likely to need treatment for emotional and behavioral problems. Also here.
    Father involvement leads to better health for kids. Children do better growing up with married parents.

    Children who grow up with both parents have better upward mobility economically. Also here and here.

    The current welfare system discourages single moms to establish a 2 parent household, because if the women is married and living with the biological father she can get a reduction and loose her welfare benefits. Children who grow up on welfare are more likely to be on welfare themselves. Children do poorly economically growing up in single parent homes. Poverty leads to more crime. Especially gun violence.

    Father absence leads to more sexual activity younger and leads to higher rates of teen pregnancy for girls.

    Children of single families have higher rates of drug use.

    Growing up with both parents leads to higher reading scores, they do better on most academic measures, and do better on social competence. Kids who grow up without a dad are less likely to go to college.

    It about the kids. But stupid dumb ass feminist groups like the National Organization for Women (NOW) are trying to prevent equal custody rights for fathers because they are delusional.
     
    Hanafuda and TotalInsanity4 like this.
  17. the_randomizer

    the_randomizer The Temp's official fox whisperer

    Member
    23,367
    11,302
    Apr 29, 2011
    United States
    Dr. Wahwee's castle
    Here's my unpopular opinion. everyone has a right to defend people they love, i.e. family, friends, etc from credible threats of violence. In fact, the state I live in is a Castle Doctrine state and civilians have a right to stand their ground if:

    - They know they or those around them on their premises are in danger of serious bodily harm or death
    - The assailant enters by stealth or by tumultuous noise with intent to cause serious harm or death
    - The one defending gives a verbal warning they are about to use lethal force on the premises

    With that being said, no one should ever need an automatic or semi-automatic firearm, like, at all, for self defense. Responsible ownership of a simple handgun with a few bullets is more than enough for those who are competent and mentally stable enough to know what to do and what not do with a firearm to keep those they love safe. There needs to be a stronger vetting process to make sure those who do have to prove they are sound mind and know safety, etc when operating a handgun. Again, if people want to go after me for this opinion, or call me out, so be it. Not all guns should be banned, but all automatic and semi-automatic guns are unnecessary to use for self defense.

    Yes, we need to make it harder for people who are prone to going batshit crazy from ever owning any kind of weapon, granted, but where do we draw the line as far as controlling how and who is able to obtain simple firearms?
     
    Last edited by the_randomizer, Oct 7, 2017
    rileysrjay likes this.
  18. TotalInsanity4

    TotalInsanity4 GBAtemp Supreme Overlord

    Member
    8,004
    8,028
    Dec 1, 2014
    United States
    Under a rock
    I apologize, I clearly misread your post. This entire thread has kind of put me on edge
     
  19. rileysrjay

    rileysrjay GBAtemp's official vinsclone speedster!

    Member
    1,049
    1,877
    Apr 2, 2016
    United States
    Central City
    I have to disagree on the revolution part of your response. I think you underestimate how many people have rifles and shotguns and how important the second amendment is to them. Yes there wasn't a "revolution" when automatic guns got banned, and I doubt it would happen if the government banned the devices the killer used in the Vegas shooting. I would say that from personal experience probably the majority of guns owned here in the us are either shotguns and rifles. How many had automatic guns in the us before the ban? I'd imagine not many since they aren't that practical and people wouldn't tend to use them. But rifles and shotguns? Pretty much everyone I know has multiple rifles or shotguns in their family household for hunting and self defense. And pretty much everyone I know that owns a rifle or shotgun would fight back if the government tried to take away their rifles, shotguns or even pistols and handguns. Plus as @Subtle Demise mentioned earlier, I've also heard there's a portion of the military that has vowed to fight back if the government tries to takes away civilian guns or takes away or infringes upon any of the laws in the Constitution and the bill of rights.
     
    Last edited by rileysrjay, Oct 7, 2017
    Subtle Demise likes this.
  20. Quantumcat

    Quantumcat Dead and alive

    Member
    12,382
    6,724
    Nov 23, 2014
    Australia
    Canberra, Australia
    This makes no sense. Do you think there's going to be an office at the entrance to every forest? Hunting is usually done in remote areas. Some friends of mine who kill wild pigs for farmers in far north Queensland are operating on farms that are thousands of acres. Having to travel an extra couple of hundred or thousand kilometres to also do a round trip to see hunting association offices is ridiculous. The nearest town to some of these places is 500km away and the nearest neighbour like 100km away (no way is an office going to be set up nearby and be manned).
     
    Last edited by Quantumcat, Oct 8, 2017