Search results

  1. FriedCFour

    The efficacy (or lack thereof) of Gun Control

    By what definition of mass shooting? The definition I am guessing you are using, number shot, probably 3+, means the vast majority of mass shootings are gang bangers duking it out which gun control is highly unlikely to affect given the sheer and increasing ease at which illegal weapons can be...
  2. FriedCFour

    The efficacy (or lack thereof) of Gun Control

    I dont believe the actions of a scant few individuals should be used to punish and restrict millions, and we have many regulations already in place and oversight as well. I absolutely trust Tom Dick and Harry, much more than I do the fed and the peoples republic of California. Frankly mass...
  3. FriedCFour

    The efficacy (or lack thereof) of Gun Control

    But you made a claim that the firearm homicide rate is a reflection of a cultural issue in relation to firearms. Doesnt the fact that we kill loads more people that Europe each year even without firearms involved mean the problem is with crime and murder as a whole?
  4. FriedCFour

    The efficacy (or lack thereof) of Gun Control

    What do you think about our inordinate number of knife, hand, blunt object etc. Homicides, given that even if all gun related homicide disappeared today, we would still have an inordinate number of homicides? The problem is I dont trust my state in the fucking slightest not to make it as hard...
  5. FriedCFour

    The efficacy (or lack thereof) of Gun Control

    You are correct I over shot it. Thought australia had a smaller pop than it did.
  6. FriedCFour

    The efficacy (or lack thereof) of Gun Control

    You got real lucky with one. Literally stopped by a karate kid who acted quickly, otherwise it more than likely would have breached ten deaths. Cairns child killings killed 8, melbourne car attack killed 6. Why are you ignoring the arson and the family killings? Is a mass killing not as bad when...
  7. FriedCFour

    The efficacy (or lack thereof) of Gun Control

    Whys that? Their only real use is to make it so that if you are hunting in an area with people within a mile of you you can do so without scaring the hell out of them. A lot of countries with stricter gun laws and legal hunting allow suppressors just fine. If you want to have an illegal...
  8. FriedCFour

    The efficacy (or lack thereof) of Gun Control

    I know. Automatics are illegal and you cant even get a suppressor without going to the ATF. It sucks.
  9. FriedCFour

    The efficacy (or lack thereof) of Gun Control

    Thats part of it but the rounds grandfathers design was because its optimized for the average combat distances. Its good for about 2-300 meters out. Lethality isnt much a factor since it doesnt matter if the guy is dead or incapacitated so much.
  10. FriedCFour

    The efficacy (or lack thereof) of Gun Control

    Kind of. Its not allowed for deer depending on the state but it is allowed for boar and coyote typically. Definitely a no on big game like Elk as far as I'm aware. There's some myth that 5.56 is high powered, but that's bs. Assault rifles fire intermediate cartridges which means it is between a...
  11. FriedCFour

    The efficacy (or lack thereof) of Gun Control

    Well thats fairly easy. For that just look at FBI murder statistics by weapon. You will find that AR-15s are less likely to end a life than household objects like hammers are.
  12. FriedCFour

    The efficacy (or lack thereof) of Gun Control

    I dont believe that it is ever correct for the government to mass confiscate property under pain of imprisonment because of the actions of a few individuals. Pointing a gun at someones head and forcing them to disarm when they have done nothing wrong but keeping all the protection for yourself...
Back
Top