Barack Obama vows to pursue gun measures in wake of latest massacre - Polidicks

[QUOTE=HkSniper;36941343]Yes. I am. What makes a firearm more powerful than an axe when it comes to damage dealt upon a successful hit?[/QUOTE] i'm just constantly double reading this in order to make sure i'm getting it correctly. first of all, you need to be a very fit person in order to start swinging an axe around with any decent capability for damage. an axe needs martial art. then when it comes to damage dealt upon "a successful hit" an axe doesn't have the capabilities for penetration or deep internal injuries. you have to just start hacking away at someone.

[QUOTE=Raidyr;36941405]More training than is required to turn a rifled tube towards a man-sized target and pull the trigger.[/QUOTE] Firearms having moving parts. Chances to jam. Other mechanical problems that can occur. Those require more experience than swinging an axe around and hitting people with it.

[QUOTE=yawmwen;36941359]Again, that's incredibly arbitrary and illogical. Your argument falls apart as soon as its contested because you aren't willing to apply your logic consistently to other comparable issues. I really thought this was going to be a lot harder.[/QUOTE] utorrent and copyright infringement is nowhere near a comparable issue. your argument is so stupid i don't even know how to respond

Holy fuck this entire thread is a massive septic tank of ignorance. Those who claim "assault" rifles aren't practical for sports, hunting or home defense have their heads up the arse just as much as the HERP LET'S GIVE GUNS TO EVERYONE crowd. I'd support some form of gun control in the US as long as it's written by someone who know what he's talking about, and not the frigging Brady Campaign. Better background and mental checks? Perhaps some sort of certificate saying "This dude isn't insane and has a clean criminal record, let him buy some boomsticks"? Sure, why not. Banning shit because it looks evil and therefore must be dangerous? No. This is just dumb as hell.

[QUOTE=HkSniper;36941406]It's cumbersome, genius. Now you are really grasping at straws.[/QUOTE] Not if you stand back a little bit in a sufficiently open area, as people don't tend to go near the muzzle of a firing gun.

I mean one of the huge bonuses to guns was that you could pull any guy off the street and teach him to use a gun in a couple hours, while training a soldier to use a sword or axe took a great deal of time.

[QUOTE=jimhowl33t;36941428]Holy fuck this entire thread is a massive septic tank of ignorance. Those who claim "assault" rifles aren't practical for sports, hunting or home defense have their heads up the arse just as much as the HERP LET'S GIVE GUNS TO EVERYONE crowd. I'd support some form of gun control in the US as long as it's written by someone who know what he's talking about, and not the frigging Brady Campaign. Better background and mental checks? Perhaps some sort of certificate saying "This dude isn't insane and has a clean criminal record, let him buy some boomsticks"? Sure, why not. Banning shit because it looks evil and therefore must be dangerous? No. This is just dumb as hell.[/QUOTE] ^^ Pretty much sums up my thought on it.

[QUOTE=Raidyr;36941405]More training than is required to turn a rifled tube towards a man-sized target and pull the trigger.[/QUOTE] I'd like to point out, however easy as it seems, shooting a firearm requires a bit of skill in order to operate and fire accurately When I went to the shooting range for the first time, I thought it was as easy as point and shoot but I was wrong; I missed at least 50% of the shots that I thought I would land and I needed knowledge in the weapon to operate it smoothly

[QUOTE=yawmwen;36941431]I mean one of the huge bonuses to guns was that you could pull any guy off the street and teach him to use a gun in a couple hours, while training a soldier to use a sword or axe took a great deal of time.[/QUOTE] Because typically if you were expected to go into combat with a sword - you would likely be facing off others who have extended training and experience with the weapon. If you decided to take a sword out on the streets - how many people do you really think today have training, experience, let alone are even CARRYING a sword? Shooting a firearm in a stressful situation is not as easy as you may think. It's not as easy as simply strolling in and squeezing off a few rounds.

[QUOTE=Ziron;36941399] homles probably wouldn't have killed as many people if he went on an axe or knife rampage in the movie theater[/QUOTE] that's exactly the point though [quote]he's still cause the same amount of chaos and upset citizens across the country[/quote] but on the flip side, he wouldn't have caused the crazy push for gun control. remove the ability for guns to be used in massacres, and you'll find they'll be targeted a lot less. seems like a reasonable assumption to me.

[QUOTE=Lachz0r;36941421]utorrent and copyright infringement is nowhere near a comparable issue. your argument is so stupid i don't even know how to respond[/QUOTE] You don't know how to respond because you literally have no rebuttal. Keep telling yourself its a stupid argument so you can feel intellectually superior, if you want, but don't try and tell everyone else that you have any shred of logical consistency when you are unable to apply the same logic to an issue that goes against your party ideology.

[QUOTE=Lachz0r;36941421]utorrent and copyright infringement is nowhere near a comparable issue. your argument is so stupid i don't even know how to respond[/QUOTE] The point he's trying to make is the one I'm after about how original purpose and actual usage don't have to be the same thing, I think

[QUOTE=jimhowl33t;36941428]Holy fuck this entire thread is a massive septic tank of ignorance. Those who claim "assault" rifles aren't practical for sports, hunting or home defense have their heads up the arse just as much as the HERP LET'S GIVE GUNS TO EVERYONE crowd. I'd support some form of gun control in the US as long as it's written by someone who know what he's talking about, and not the frigging Brady Campaign. Better background and mental checks? Perhaps some sort of certificate saying "This dude isn't insane and has a clean criminal record, let him buy some boomsticks"? Sure, why not. Banning shit because it looks evil and therefore must be dangerous? No. This is just dumb as hell.[/QUOTE] I think the problem with gun control is that like many issues it is the people who have extreme views who have the loudest voices.

[QUOTE=yawmwen;36941452]You don't know how to respond because you literally have no rebuttal. Keep telling yourself its a stupid argument so you can feel intellectually superior, if you want, but don't try and tell everyone else that you have any shred of logical consistency when you are unable to apply the same logic to an issue that goes against your party ideology.[/QUOTE] call me once copyright infringement starts getting people killed

[QUOTE=Kill001;36941445]I'd like to point out, however easy as it seems, shooting a firearm requires a bit of skill in order to operate and fire accurately When I went to the shooting range for the first time, I thought it was as easy as point and shoot but I was wrong; I missed at least 50% of the shots that I thought I would land and I needed knowledge in the weapon to operate it smoothly[/QUOTE] Nobody is talking about operating and firing accurately though. We aren't creating a hypothetical test about which weapon is the best. It's just simply perposterous to say that an axe is a more effective weapon than an assault rifle in 2012.

[QUOTE=HkSniper;36941446]Because typically if you were expected to go into combat with a sword - you would likely be facing off others who have extended training and experience with the weapon. Shooting a firearm in a stressful situation is not as easy as you may think. It's not as easy as simply strolling in and squeezing off a few rounds.[/QUOTE] Certainly much easier than swinging a sword. I mean, yea, as time went on military theory began evolving and hours of drill were incorporated into professional training. However, the difference between a minuteman and a professional soldier was a lot smaller than an armed peasant and a knight. [editline]26th July 2012[/editline] [QUOTE=thisispain;36941462]call me once copyright infringement starts getting people killed[/QUOTE] So then you are willing to strip someone of liberty only when it is convenient for you to do so?

[QUOTE=Kill001;36941445]I'd like to point out, however easy as it seems, shooting a firearm requires a bit of skill in order to operate and fire accurately [/QUOTE] compared to an axe it's incomparable. in modern civil conflicts they give children automatic weapons and the children can cause huge amounts of damage just by holding down the trigger in an enclosed area. an axe you need to hack away and physically do the damage yourself. a gun shoots a projectile with lots of kinetic energy that does all the work for you.

[QUOTE=Raidyr;36941468]Nobody is talking about operating and firing accurately though. We aren't creating a hypothetical test about which weapon is the best. It's just simply perposterous to say that an axe is a more effective weapon than an assault rifle in 2012.[/QUOTE] that wasn't my point, I was simply clearing up the common misconseption of firearms being easy to use, and contrary to the popular assumption, they aren't; they require practice much like a sword or bow and arrow

Honestly I want to stop the gun debate right here and listen to more of HkSniper talking about how axes are more effective weapons than assault rifles.

[QUOTE=DarkMonkey;36941455]The point he's trying to make is the one I'm after about how original purpose and actual usage don't have to be the same thing, I think[/QUOTE] Exactly. Zyklon B was originally supposed to be a pesticide, but instead it wound up being used to gas everyone the Nazis didn't like. Despite it's noble intentions, Zyklon B has forever been tainted as a weapon and fell out of use as a pesticide. That proves to me that the intention for something doesn't mean that's what it will always be forever.

[QUOTE=Kill001;36941486]that wasn't my point, I was simply clearing up the common misconseption of firearms being easy to use, and contrary to the popular assumption, they aren't; they require practice much like a sword or bow and arrow[/QUOTE] if by "much like" you mean "much less" the skill required to fire a gun at a mansized target is [B]hugely [/B]less than with a bow and arrow. I wish people would stop submitting their Skyrim experience as actual facts.

[QUOTE=thisispain;36941485]compared to an axe it's incomparable. in modern civil conflicts they give children automatic weapons and the children can cause huge amounts of damage just by holding down the trigger in an enclosed area. an axe you need to hack away and physically do the damage yourself. a gun shoots a projectile with lots of kinetic energy that does all the work for you.[/QUOTE] you can shoot all that kinetic energy and it won't do much unless you hit your targets; why do you think during the Rwandan conflict, militias ran with machetes along with rifles?

[QUOTE=yawmwen;36941478] So then you are willing to strip someone of liberty only when it is convenient for you to do so?[/QUOTE] i don't even understand how the metaphor relates to your argument. i don't really want to strip anyone of liberty, i just think people who sell guns are more interested in selling guns and get people scared about violence so they can buy more guns. i don't even care about the people on this forum and their guns, they are so not even the issue and they can keep them.

[QUOTE=Kill001;36941504]you can shoot all that kinetic energy and it won't do much unless you hit your targets; why do you think during the Rwandan conflict, militias ran with machetes along with rifles?[/QUOTE] Why do you think firearms have usurped melee weapons as the primary weapons in society over the past 100 years? Because their advantages outweigh their disadvantages compared to axes, swords, and bows.

[QUOTE=thisispain;36941449]that's exactly the point though but on the flip side, he wouldn't have caused the crazy push for gun control. remove the ability for guns to be used in massacres, and you'll find they'll be targeted a lot less. seems like a reasonable assumption to me.[/QUOTE] Things like the amount of people killed isn't as important as the idea behind the crime. People would still be freaking out and getting upset if Holmes started shanking people with a knife, blew up an IED or went on HKSniper's metal as fuck axe rampage. The idea that someone killed innocent people watching a movie for no good reason is what sticks in people's heads.

[QUOTE=Kill001;36941504]why do you think during the Rwandan conflict, militias ran with machetes along with rifles?[/QUOTE] well actually militias ran with machetes because they were on drugs and believed in weird superstitions involving immortality.

It looks like both sides agree that there needs to be stricter regulations. So what exactly is everyone arguing about?, because now it seems like neither group is specifically arguing for outright banning (that is unless I am mistaken).

[QUOTE=Raidyr;36941497]if by "much like" you mean "much less" the skill required to fire a gun at a mansized target is [B]hugely [/B]less than with a bow and arrow. I wish people would stop submitting their Skyrim experience as actual facts.[/QUOTE] I'm using actual personal expeience; it is true with the advent of gunpowder muskets quickly replaced weapons of antiquity however people also need to stop basing their bias off of counterstrike and modern warfare; there's a reason why professional militaries train continuously with rifles and there's a reason why they have marksmanship courses - firearms are not easy to use as people assume them to be

[QUOTE=Ziron;36941523]Things like the amount of people killed isn't as important as the idea behind the crime. [/QUOTE] i just think in that case everyone would win. except the people who want to shoot machine guns into watermelons, but liberty has a cost. [editline]26th July 2012[/editline] [QUOTE=imptastick;36941534]So what exactly is everyone arguing about?[/QUOTE] i'm just waiting for the next HkSniper post, where he'll probably say we should ban pens because the same thing happens when you stab someone in the eye with a pen.