Hotrod2
Well-Known Member
What is labeled as a 30-06 looks like a 22 round. I've also never seen a 12 gauge round to resemble a rifle round.
Gun control is coming
- Thread starter UncleBuck
- Start date
cannabineer
Ursus marijanus
It is somebody’s idea of humor, if implying that people who care about gun violence are completely ignorant about cartridges were funny.
left to right:
.50BMG
.30-06 Sprg
.308 Nato
.223 Rem
.22LR
Sir Napsalot
Well-Known Member
What? People do hunt with handguns
Budley Doright
Well-Known Member
Yes they do! And as for your “what”? We were discussing the intended use and design of handguns, which is to kill/injure people. Did you purchase you Beretta to go deer hunting? Asking for a friend.
Last edited:
7CardBud
Well-Known Member
Quite a bit of that in the anti crowd. My favorite one is of a lady describing how Barrett rifles could fire anti material rounds capable of tracking heat signatures and down aircraft by locking on to the engines.
My guess was they were trying to say that a Barret rifle was just a dangerous as a laser guided shoulder fire rocket system, so they should be banned.
Roger A. Shrubber
Well-Known Member
who gives a flying fuck...why do people who want to masturbate to their gun collection have such a fetish about what you call the shit psychopaths use to murder people with? you can call your gun Cletus, and it still just makes school kids dead.
Sir Napsalot
Well-Known Member
Well I certainly didn't buy it to kill or injure people
Roger A. Shrubber
Well-Known Member
but that is exactly what most people DO buy a pistol for...some are hunters, some are genuinely interested in target shooting, but the VAST majority buy them for home or personal protection...which makes their primary use killing another human being.
cannabineer
Ursus marijanus
Abusus non tollit usum; we’re bandying about dogma. Thus my pushback coupla days ago.
Roger A. Shrubber
Well-Known Member
you can use a pitchfork to move hay, or turn soil...or stab people.
you can use a shovel to dig a hole, or beat someone to death with...and then dig a hole.
you can use duct tape to hold ducts together, or someones mouth shut.
if you have a very keen eye and ear protection, you can drive nails in with a pistol, or remove nails already driven in, or drill a sloppy hole that may take unexpected tangents. or you can kill shit with it...
you can kill someone with a piece of paper if you're determined enough.
it's just so much fucking easier with a weapon designed solely for that purpose, because that IS what they're designed for, even target variants are just ways to extend the range and accuracy of a tool intended to take lives.
i own two pistols, and don't delude myself about their purpose in my life.
to kill people who threaten me or mine with death.
very happily, it hasn't come up yet.
cannabineer
Ursus marijanus
That is the sort of sweeping generalization that keeps me posting here.
I have a .454 Casull revolver. It is a piss-poor design for killing people. It is specifically designed to hunt large andor dangerous game animals.
Yes, most handguns are designed for combat or police use, which means intended for killing or wounding humans. But not all, and I resist the overapplication of category as simplistic.
Bad premises make for bad policy.
I don’t want the oddball handguns, like my revolver or a Hämmerli single-shot free pistol ( as used in the Olympics) lumped in with the 9mm carry weapons.
Roger A. Shrubber
Well-Known Member
then you're setting up any regulation to fail...
The gun industry, lobbyist, and lunatic gun owners will pry any loophole open big enough for circus elephants to fornicate in.
That's the sole purpose of the gun lawyers that get paid astronomical amounts by the gun industry, so they can continue to make money from murder.
To pervert the law, to bend rules to within microns of the breaking point, to argue inapplicable, illogical, inappropriate points and then make leaps of logic that would make flying squirrels envious to connect them with the murderous engines of death the people they represent manufacture.
The only real reason i own a handgun is to potentially kill someone who is trying to harm me or my family. i do enjoy target shooting, but when i'm target shooting, i realize that it is practice for if and when i am forced to use it against someone else with a gun, looking to harm me or mine.
If they all go, i have no problem letting mine go as well.
Drop That Sound
Well-Known Member
Here's mine..
cannabineer
Ursus marijanus
This strikes me as the slippery slope argument.
Fogdog
Well-Known Member
I strongly disagree but don't feel inclined to argue with somebody who falls for the belief that a theory must be true in all cases for it to be true. Because a hand gun can be used to kill a pig, does not disprove the statement that virtually all handguns are designed to kill people.
cannabineer
Ursus marijanus
Mischaracterization of what I’m saying. Reinforces my perception that we are bandying about dogma.
It’s the difference between
“most handguns are made to kill people”
and
“handguns are made to kill people”.
The difference should not be swept under the rug in order to satisfy a sentiment.
Fogdog
Well-Known Member
You've said before that you sleep with a gun nearby. I don't know what else you'd plan to use that gun for.
Fogdog
Well-Known Member
Nope. I'm not mischaracterizing what you are saying at all. So few handguns are designed for a different purpose than killing people it's absurd to refer to them as a counter to the claim that handguns are designed to kill people.
Let's at least own up to it and be honest about why people want them.
bk78
Well-Known Member
Maybe to turn off a light he forgot on?
cannabineer
Ursus marijanus
Most is not all. The oversimplification is irreducibly a falsehood.
Intelligent nondogmatic gun policy needs to accommodate that fact imo. I retract the bit about mischaracterization. A theory is not true if it has exceptions. The theory needs to be aligned with them. That is not something for which one “falls”, suggesting that it is incorrect and that I am wrong to believe it.
To ignore the exceptions is dogma and not realism.