Anti-Gun Protest at GLOCK

[44 AMP]

All I'm trying to say is that for the average person a gun is the most destructive thing available. A person who is emotionally unbalanced can reach for a gun and do the deed. Whereas if they have to manufacture an explosive you're looking at some time, time to stop and think. Plus pulling it off is tricky too, you have to manufacture or obtain a detonator, you need a timer, etc.

I understand your point, and agree, in part. For the average person, guns are the most destructive thing easily available. Of course, gasoline and matches are pretty easily available too....

But it isn't the average person that is committing the mass killings.

Look at some news from Asia. Guns are not common, but knives, swords and machetes are. There are many, many reports over the years of mass murders (sometimes over two dozen) commited by sword or machete wielding berserkers. The killer of all those children at Sandy Hook could have done it with a machete. Do you think the end result would have been significantly different if the killer had to run a little bit to catch fleeing victims? I don't.

 

[Lucifyr_Sam]

Would they? That would be convenient if they did.. or would it? Try throwing a water balloon at a wall and see how much water gets on the floor.. throwing a...

Its well known that panicking people trying to exit a room crowd around doors. They don't get in a line or anything...

I used to occasionally splatter other kids by throwing water balloons and hitting the wall over their heads. You don't have to hit someone directly with a water balloon to get them wet.

I'll keep other observations to myself b/c the mod doesn't want them discussed.

Do you think the end result would have been significantly different if the killer had to run a little bit to catch fleeing victims?

Yeah, the idea that that Sandy Hook could only have been committed by a supposedly specialized weapon is absurd. Children are pretty much helpless, which is one of the things that makes Sandy hook so horrific. Yet it could only have been done with a "high power assault rifle"....

 

[JohnKSa]

I would happily let them take every glock off the street if they promised no more gun laws for 1000 years. Whos with me.

You'd start off with no Glocks and a promise and end up with no Glocks and no promise...

It's always the same. You give a little and get nothing. It happens again, and again. Pretty soon you've given a LOT and still gotten nothing.

 

[Tickling]

I agree with you 44 AMP and you also Lucifyr_Sam, you don't need firearms to commit mass murder. But I do think they are the easiest way to maximize fatalities. We use the recent Chinese school attack where 23 children were stabbed a lot around here.. but we tend to forget that there were zero fatalities (http://www.foxnews.com/world/2012/12/19/security-video-stabbing-spree-at-chinese-school-shows-pupils-fleeing-in-panic/).

I guess it's true that we aren't dealing with average or "normal" people.. but then again some or even most of these people were normal enough until afterwards when people connected the dots. Plus history shows humanity to be fairly violent in general.. innocent life, compassion, mercy and fair play are fairly new ideals.. but now I'm getting into the whole nature/nurture debate..

I totally agree that these protesters are misplacing their anger and energies. You can't blame the tool for the sins of the person behind it. But, to argue that guns are not part of the problem is to argue from a position of weakness and is going to make us lose. Until they sell hand grenades and military-grade detonators alongside firearms, guns remain the surest and most convenient way to kill people. That's all I'm trying to say.

 

[scrubcedar]

Tickling let's just take your arguments for a second. Let's say the laws of physics have changed and there are no explosive powders of any kind that work.
Do you have any doubts that something just as dangerous would have been invented in it's place?
"Arms" is the word used in the Constitution. They did not use the word "firearms". They did not use the word "musket", nor did they use any specific of any kind.

Guns
are
not
the
Problem

Go watch the big battle scene in "The Patriot" notice how many people Mel Gibson and the bad guy use edged/hand weapons on. Understand that in the real world of the 1700's all of them that had much more than a scratch probably died from infection.
Guns are not the only, or even the best way to kill large numbers of humans. Even if they were suddenly to vanish, something else would be invented in their place, maybe something worse.

 

[flybuddy]

Their statements included:

“Glock and this industry makes millions and millions of dollars because they intentionally flood communities with these handguns and we are saying enough is enough,” activist Rev. Markel Hutchins said.

“The blood of our children is running in our streets,” activist Rev. Timothy McDonald said.

They ought to blame themselves due to the Presidential election results. If THEY didn't elect Obama, there would be a lot less handguns "flooding communities"

 

[BIGR]

Those people are living in a fantasy world.

Speaking of Glock. I got my Model 31 on Thursday and I must say it is nice. Can't wait to get some range time with it.

 

[Texshooter]

After the cameras left, or were turned off, the Prez (I believe that was his title) of Glock did, indeed, come out and meet with the group.

"Be glad to discuss any issues you have, try to communicate, blah blah"

The protestors, I am quite sure, did not really want a Company rep to come out.

 

[Tickling]

Tickling let's just take your arguments for a second. Let's say the laws of physics have changed and there are no explosive powders of any kind that work.
Do you have any doubts that something just as dangerous would have been invented in it's place?

Do I misunderstand you, or is your argument that in an alternate universe there are no guns/bombs and therefore we invent the giant-gaping-holeminator? Ah, I see where you're going, tools change but the problems stay the same, right? That's good, you know what you wi- wait.. that's an ignoratio elenchi.

If in the alternate universe we invent the bunny-feather-tickle Deathray, and said BFT gun is the easiest way to destroy large numbers of people, then it's still the easiest way to destroy large numbers of people... that sounds like my argument.. guns are currently the easiest way to kill large numbers of people (for your average psycho).

I
Never
Said
Guns
Were
The
Problem.

I said they were part of the problem..

Go watch the big battle scene in "The Patriot" notice how many people Mel Gibson and the bad guy use edged/hand weapons on. Understand that in the real world of the 1700's all of them that had much more than a scratch probably died from infection.

Sharp pointy objects have undoubtedly killed more people than firearms ever will.. but that doesn't make them the ultimate mass-murder tool. I don't see how an actors portrayal of experts in colonial warfare, fighting people who were there to fight (instead of say, scattering in a thousand directions), and using weapons that take minutes to reload, has to do with mass murder today. Unless you're trying to make the subtle point that the tool of mass murder is always changing and thus can't be blamed for the result?

I agree. My argument has always been simply that firearms currently allow the easiest access to the greatest number of casualties. I'm not trying to assign blame to what amounts as an innocent bystander (firearms), any more than I'm blaming large table-knives for all those people Mel Gibson killed .

 

[scrubcedar]

"the tool of mass murder is always changing and thus can't be blamed for the result"
That's the point of the whole post Tickling.

The tool is irrelevant. explosive powders, flammable substances, poison gasses, these things do exist. They're not going away.

Frank Herbert wrote a book called "the white plague" it was about a scientist who worked with genes having his wife and daughter killed. He invented a virus to kill only females. It pretty much wiped out the human race. We are very close already to people being able to do exactly that. I'd rather those scientists use guns rather than their skills wouldn't you?

Take the guns away from them, force them to get better with explosive's, and they will. The death tolls will rise immediately afterwards.

This is very much on topic with this thread. Let's say these idiots shut down Glock. Does it solve the problem? Only a simpleton believes that.

Water flows. If you Dam a stream to stop the erosion from it, it works temporarily, then a waterfall comes over the top and causes more damage than the stream every could. The replacement could be much, much worse than what we have now.
You have to address the problems with the individuals who use the tools
I'm going to give you the opportunity to have the last word. I know I've spoken the truth, if it doesn't convince you, I can't help you.

 

[Tickling]

I've been off the boat with the fancy WiFi, so I haven't had a chance to reply.

I thank you for trying to help me And I really mean it, I am literally surrounded by Anti's and I've used your arguments.

My argument got off its original point and after looking at where it went and thinking about it, I frankly have to admit I was wrong. I still hold that firearms win out for ease and convenience for rampage murder.

As for mass murder, which we mostly argued about, yeah I was totally wrong. Me and the only American doctor on board talked about it, and between us we came up with a dozen ways an average person could commit mass murder without explosives, safer, than using a gun and easier and cheaper..

Which very much destroys my "guns are part of the problem" argument. I'll have to rethink it, so for now, I yield the field to you sir.

 

[Flopsweat]

Thanks for playing Devil's Advocate. It's good to hear an apposing viewpoint without all of the hate and bile, and really discuss the issue.

 

[KBP75]

Anti-gun protest

I guess all the anti-gun protesters would feel so much better if all the murders were done with sucide bombs like done in the Middle East. Why do these morons think that guns are the problem? Look at Chicago with some of the most restrictive gun regulations in the nation! If strict gun control worked, Chicago would not have one of the highest gun related murders in the nation!