Hitting a target when no one is shooting at you is one thing. Shooting back under fire, and in a crowd is something quite different.I agree, I think the NRA is insane in advocating arming teachers and such, we need less guns in the hands of people not more.
Hitting a target when no one is shooting at you is one thing. Shooting back under fire, and in a crowd is something quite different.I agree, I think the NRA is insane in advocating arming teachers and such, we need less guns in the hands of people not more. Unfortunately, what the NRA wants, the NRA usually gets. They are extraordinarily well organized and tactically effective. There are already some schools in Texas where teachers are armed.
Hitting a target when no one is shooting at you is one thing. Shooting back under fire, and in a crowd is something quite different.I agree, I think the NRA is insane in advocating arming teachers and such, we need less guns in the hands of people not more. Unfortunately, what the NRA wants, the NRA usually gets. They are extraordinarily well organized and tactically effective. There are already some schools in Texas where teachers are armed. I wonder if a class action lawsuit against the NRA might not shake that up a bit, it is very conscious of its finances. If it's supporting policies that put Americans at risk and is unwilling to allow sensible laws to be passed and enforced it may be vulnerable to civil and criminal action. The NRA uses the system effectively to put its agenda across, the same can be done to counter this.
... The NRA uses the system effectively to put its agenda across, the same can be done to counter this.Theoretically, yes. But the NRA uses the system efficiently and effectively in actual practice, and has done so for quite some time, and they have the advantage of the 2nd Amendment, as a bulwark.
VA:
First off the two words “toy" and “play" should never apply to firearmsThey need to be used to describe the attitude of the NRA and their supporters have towards weapons that are designed to do one thing. KILL.
Lois:That was my point. LoisPeople who think there should be no laws against gun ownership often say that if everyone were armed such shootings would not occur because a large number of people would be armed and able to shoot the perpetrator.The problem with that is innocents getting caught in the cross fire. The people who say the above have never been in a gunfight. Fuzzy Logic:Take a look at Bob Munden hitting a target at 200 yards with a small pistol.Hitting a target when no one is shooting at you is one thing. Shooting back under fire, and in a crowd is something quite different.
It’s not just accidental cross-fire. As soon as the first person showed a gun and fired, a dozen or so others would whip out theirs and start firing at every person they saw who had a gun out. If they instituted the everyone carry a gun system, the most efficient technique a terrorist would have is pull out his gun, fire it into the air, then drop to the ground while everyone else starts shooting at anyone who shows a gun.
Occam
They need to be used to describe the attitude of the NRA and their supporters have towards weapons that are designed to do one thing. KILL.No, they're well of that. In fact they have a number of gun safety programs designed to dissuade gun owners from thinking guns are somehow toys. The problem lies with the availability of deadly weapons in the hands of those who have no business owning them. Once again, enforcing the laws, background checks, closing the gun show loopholes, outlawing rapid fire military weapons, silencers, etc. Owning a gun, if you want one should be a process whereby potential owners must take and pass a a stringent safety test, and an extensive background check even before you are allowed to purchase a weapon, especially a handgun. This is what the NRA is blocking. They promote the free and easy way, hence the latest shooting incident. The guy just walked into a nearby gun store and bought one on the spot, no background check. Cap't Jack
Yeah, but if they did that, Cap, they’d significantly reduce the market for guns, and that would make the poor gun and ammunition manufacturers sad. :lol:
Occam
Yeah, reeeeal sad! The cost of ammunition is going way up, in some cases as much as 50 cents a shell. Due to the recent scare, some ammo is unattainable. Want to bring down an industry? Hit em’ hard in the pocketbook.
Cap’t Jack
Yeah, reeeeal sad! The cost of ammunition is going way up, in some cases as much as 50 cents a shell. Due to the recent scare, some ammo is unattainable. Want to bring down an industry? Hit em' hard in the pocketbook. Cap't JackThere you go. Guns don't kill people, bullets do. ;) Tax bullets.
Yeah, but if they did that, Cap, they'd significantly reduce the market for guns, and that would make the poor gun and ammunition manufacturers sad. :lol: OccamIt would also send the NRA into a frenzy. Lois
Who does the NRA really represent, gun owners or the firearms industry?
In the last two decades, however, the deep-pocketed NRA has increasingly relied on the support of another constituency: the $12-billion-a-year gun industry, made up of manufacturers and sellers of firearms, ammunition and related wares. That alliance was sealed in 2005, when Congress, after heavy NRA lobbying, approved a measure that gave gunmakers and gun distributors broad, and unprecedented, immunity from a wave of liability lawsuits related to gun violence in America’s cities. It was a turning point for both the NRA and the industry, both of which recognized the mutual benefits of a partnership. That same year, the NRA also launched a lucrative new fundraising drive to secure “corporate partners" that’s raked in millions from the gun industry to boost its operations.If the NRA is just a lobby group for the gun industry then it has no claim to being an advocate of individual rights, on the contrary. It's helping one sector of the US cause a lot of damage to society at large for profit. There are some extremists fairly high up in the NRA who believe the should be no firearms control at all, how would you feel if your neighbour had a functioning .50 machine gun?
A possible solution they may have to the price of ammunition:
I have no idea how accurate it is, but I’ve seen TV programs in which one of the characters, usually a bad guy, makes his own ammunition by melting and casting lead, and buying the powder (which could be made from raw material chemicals - not a bad idea, because that could be dangerous and blow up, removing one more gun nut. 
).
Occam
The NRA may have these programs, but most of the gun owners I know still think of them as toys.They need to be used to describe the attitude of the NRA and their supporters have towards weapons that are designed to do one thing. KILL.No, they're well of that. In fact they have a number of gun safety programs designed to dissuade gun owners from thinking guns are somehow toys. The problem lies with the availability of deadly weapons in the hands of those who have no business owning them. Once again, enforcing the laws, background checks, closing the gun show loopholes, outlawing rapid fire military weapons, silencers, etc. Owning a gun, if you want one should be a process whereby potential owners must take and pass a a stringent safety test, and an extensive background check even before you are allowed to purchase a weapon, especially a handgun. This is what the NRA is blocking. They promote the free and easy way, hence the latest shooting incident. The guy just walked into a nearby gun store and bought one on the spot, no background check. Cap't Jack
It's not just accidental cross-fire. As soon as the first person showed a gun and fired, a dozen or so others would whip out theirs and start firing at every person they saw who had a gun out. If they instituted the everyone carry a gun system, the most efficient technique a terrorist would have is pull out his gun, fire it into the air, then drop to the ground while everyone else starts shooting at anyone who shows a gun. OccamAnyone with half a functioning brain could figure that out, so it's obvious that no one in the NRA has one. (Not that we didn't know that already.) Lois
A possible solution they may have to the price of ammunition: I have no idea how accurate it is, but I've seen TV programs in which one of the characters, usually a bad guy, makes his own ammunition by melting and casting lead, and buying the powder (which could be made from raw material chemicals - not a bad idea, because that could be dangerous and blow up, removing one more gun nut. :) ). OccamYes, but as soon as it becomes worthwhile to manufacture ammunition, the gun nuts will have created a whole industry with safety measures in place. They won't be doing it the way TV and movie "bad guys" do it. There is no reason they couldn't quickly set up a highly sophisticated black market industry. It's been done many times before. Necessity is the mother of invention--especially criminal "necessity." Lois
... There is no reason they couldn't quickly set up a highly sophisticated black market industry. It's been done many times before. Necessity is the mother of invention--especially criminal "necessity." LoisThat's already happened. http://gizmodo.com/5927379/the-secret-online-weapons-store-thatll-sell-anyone-anything
Anyone who thinks that it’s guns alone that kill people should stand up before an armed firing squad and an array of loaded guns lying on the floor and yell “FIRE.” That should demonstrate perfectly whether it’s guns or people with guns that kill people.
... There is no reason they couldn't quickly set up a highly sophisticated black market industry. It's been done many times before. Necessity is the mother of invention--especially criminal "necessity." LoisThat's already happened. http://gizmodo.com/5927379/the-secret-online-weapons-store-thatll-sell-anyone-anything Yes, there's a whole industry ready and waiting for any kind of law that limits the use of guns. Lois