• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Alec Baldwin Killed More People Than My Guns Have

Bodie

Member
Because they're hypocrites. They don't actually support safe gun storage.

You can't be serious with that, so regardless of all the programs, training, and advocacy to safety they are actively involved in they secretly hate gun safety.
What would be the motivation to oppose it? More gun accidents means less argument they have for gun ownership, so please tell me what that argument serves other than a personal drive by hit piece on the NRA that makes zero sense.
What does the NRA have to gain by that?
 

Wildswanderer

Veteran Member
Because hunting generally isn't the issue.

The gun problem in your country is mostly:

- suicide
- deliberate homicide
- "defensive" use of firearms

(And keeping guns for the last point fuels the other two points)
Defense isn't homicide. And most homicides are with illegally possessed guns. And suicides would have just used another method anyway and should never be included in gun violence deaths.
 

Revoltingest

Pragmatic Libertarian
Premium Member
You can't be serious with that, so regardless of all the programs, training, and advocacy to safety they are actively involved in they secretly hate gun safety.
What would be the motivation to oppose it? More gun accidents means less argument they have for gun ownership, so please tell me what that argument serves other than a personal drive by hit piece on the NRA that makes zero sense.
What does the NRA have to gain by that?
Some people are very dedicated to their anti-NRA prejudice.
To be unencumbered by inconvenient facts is useful.
 

Guitar's Cry

Disciple of Pan
Are you familiar with your Remington 550? I wonder, because
you seem to equate it to the 22 LR target rifles I spoke of, eg,
Remington 40X, BSA Martini.
Yours is a light weight semi-auto rifle, typically scoped, &
suitable for hunting small game.
Mine are much larger much heavier single shot rifles with
iron sights designed for shooting particular paper targets,
& utterly unsuited for hunting...too heavy, single shot,
no field of view in sights.

You claimed "all guns" are designed to kill. I provided
counter-examples.

Note: You only specified .22 LR. ;-)
 

Revoltingest

Pragmatic Libertarian
Premium Member
Note: You only specified .22 LR. ;-)
Nope, I was more specific, ie, about my target rifles.
Most of my target rifles were 22LR.
They'd be deadlier used as clubs than to shoot anyone.
Most people are unfamiliar with target rifles.
Many are very different from those designed
to kill something.

BTW, this doesn't apply to all my target rifles. My
Springfield M1A Supermatch (308) was indeed
designed to kill, being the civilian version of the M14.
I've since sold it to a friend who uses it for hunting.
(He likes it cuz he trained with an M14 as a marine.)

I no longer shoot. I'm so bad at it compared to the
days I competed that it's tedious & discouraging.
 

Revoltingest

Pragmatic Libertarian
Premium Member
It did show that he was a bit ignorant of the AR15. But he was correct about a shotgun being a superior weapon for self defense.
He advised...
"[If] you want to keep someone away from your house,
just fire the shotgun through the door."

There is no context wherein this advice should be given.
 

Heyo

Veteran Member
You can't be serious with that, so regardless of all the programs, training, and advocacy to safety they are actively involved in they secretly hate gun safety.
What would be the motivation to oppose it? More gun accidents means less argument they have for gun ownership, so please tell me what that argument serves other than a personal drive by hit piece on the NRA that makes zero sense.
What does the NRA have to gain by that?
"The" NRA is the lobbying group of the gun manufacturers, at least at the top. They oppose any law that could, even potentially or in the future, limit gun sales. (And gun safety does that as 1. money you have to spend on a safe is money you can't spend on guns; and 2. paranoid people want their gun loaded under their pillow. If they can't have that, they wouldn't buy a gun.)
That doesn't mean that all NRA members are in on the lobbying. Many are concerned about safety and would even welcome stricter gun laws.
 

Bodie

Member
Does Biden sell guns as well?

I remember Bill Clinton and Obama were very useful in that department as well whenever they said something about guns and there was good reason, people were afraid that they would not be able to legally own certain firearms so to grandfather in their legally purchased and constitutionally protected right they bought them in droves.
Gun sales went down in the Trump years:

"Obama's exit from the White House seems to have provided some Americans relief about the security of their Second Amendment rights. Since President Donald Trump won election in November, gun sales appear to be going down. In December 2016, for example, a popular time for gun sales as Christmas presents, the FBI conducted just 2.8 million backgrounds checks. The year before, the FBI conducted 3.3 million background checks around Christmas. Gun sales so far this year appear to have dropped by 17 percent."

source: Gun Sales Down After Obama Boom Years

So the gun-totin', truck drivin' (with those metal testicle things hanging from the back), White supremacist Trump supporters bought less guns during his years? I would think some would support this, but no matter.
As a side question, why would any NFAC member actively support or vote for Joe Biden? I support the NFAC because they are legally exercising their right as Americans and they are actively teaching gun safety and responsible ownership. of course they did have some accidents that were fully preventable during marches, luckily no innocent bystanders got hurt. DO NOT LOCK AND LOAD UNTIL READY TO FIRE


NFAC site:
Training | Black NFAC

Why would an NFAC member support or vote for Joe Biden who made a campaign point of banning "assault rifles"? it just wouldn't make sense

 

Guitar's Cry

Disciple of Pan
Nope, I was more specific, ie, about my target rifles.

Most people are unfamiliar with target rifles.
Many are very different from those designed
to kill something.

BTW, this doesn't apply to all my target rifles. My
Springfield M1A Supermatch (308) was indeed
designed to kill, being the civilian version of the M14.
I've since sold it to a friend who uses it for hunting.
(He likes it cuz he trained with an M14 as a marine.)

I no longer shoot. I'm so bad at it compared to the
days I competed that it's tedious & discouraging.

Fair enough. I am unfamiliar with the types of target rifles you specified.

I would still argue that target rifles are based off of weapon design.
 
Top