Support NeoGAF

[Easy_D]

Yes, we should encourage something that that has already proven to be ineffective based on emotion, anger, ignorance, and misinformation rather than actual facts and statistics. Great idea!

Wait, encouraging a dialogue about something people refuse to even talk about is bad now? I uh, what. Am I missing something? Emotion is a powerful thing, if the gun fantatics understood the pain victims of gun violence carry with them, maybe they could be reasoned with.

 

[Piggus]

Wait, encouraging a dialogue about something people refuse to even talk about is bad now? I uh, what. Am I missing something?

A bunch of people supporting something without doing any research whatsoever is hardly what I would call a dialogue. It's a lot easier to talk about this specific subject when people take the time to understand what it actually does and whether or not it was an effective piece of legislation while it was in effect for 10 years.

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

http://fivethirtyeight.com/features/guns-like-the-ar-15-were-never-fully-banned/

http://www.feinstein.senate.gov/pub...?File_id=b531daeb-a954-41f8-a21c-268cceccb4c4

I'm sorry, but I just find it pathetic that people are trying to make themselves feel better by focusing on something that will have virtually no impact on mass shootings or gun violence in general. This is nothing but feel-good legislation.

 

[Magni]

I've gone back and forth on a new AWB. I've fired various assault rifles, they're deadly in that they are ridiculously easy to use/aim. It felt like I had auto-aim on in a video game. That said, as mentioned in this thread, the overwhelming amount of gun deaths and injuries are caused by hand guns, not rifles. And the reason for the high kill count was not just the gun used, but the size of the magazines, which is not an exclusive thing to rifles (there are high capacity magazines for pistols and shotguns).

To me, rifles make sense for hunting, shotguns for home defense (at least, more than rifles or handguns - you're still more likely to do harm than good with a gun at home), and handguns only for recreational or competitive target shooting. All make sense for collecting, sure. But the two things that don't make any sense are high capacity magazines of any kind, along with ammo stockpiling.

You don't need hundreds of rounds at home. You don't need a dozen 30-round magazines. Banning and recovering those would make a much bigger impact on mass shootings than just banning semi automatic rifles.

Banning both open and concealed carry for handguns (only usable at the range) would also help, but that's not happening for at least a couple more administrations...

It's not really even close to being based of the AR-15 platform though, it's closer to an AK in terms of operation, it just uses the AR mags(like every other carbine length rifle made in the west) and ergonomics.

Sigs are a pretty rare choice for a terrorist nutjob though cause they are a good 2-3x the price of your average entry level AR or AK.

Money doesn't really matter when you're about to die.

 

[GravityMan]

I guess you missed the response where I said I have little kids in my neighborhood and I don't want the coyotes getting ballsy. Or are you implying a 5 year old potentially getting mauled by a coyote as a part of nature as well?

Also, the biggest magazine I own for my rifle is 10 rounds. I don't need a 30 round mag to kill vermin.

People here are calling you out because you are trying way too hard and jumping through silly hoops in your attempt to justify your need and desire to own guns (which is S.O.P. for right-wing gun nuts btw).